Category: 1994

  • PMQT Written Answers – 15 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 15th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Scott Inquiry

    Sir Thomas Arnold : To ask the Prime Minister whether it will be for Lord Justice Scott to decide on the timing of the publication of his report.

    The Prime Minister : As I said when I announced the terms of reference for the inquiry, Official Report, 16 November 1992, columns 74- 75, Lord Justice Scott will be entirely free to decide on the publication of his report. The inquiry will report to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

     

    Tigris and Euphrates Valleys

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he had with President Clinton during his visit to the United States from 27 February to 1 March on malnutrition-related disease in the valleys of the Tigris and Euphrates.

    The Prime Minister : We are in regular contact with the United States about Iraqi issues in general.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

     

    Public Interest Immunity Certificates

    Mr. Alex Carlile : To ask the Prime Minister if he will instruct the relevant Department to place in the Library copies of all telexes made the subject of public interest immunity certificates in the case of Mr. Lorrain Osman; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : No. It would not be in the public interest to disclose the contents of classified documents concerning the international relations of the United Kingdom.

    Mr. Darling : To ask the Prime Minister how many public interest immunity certificates he has signed in each year since 1990.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) on 3 March 1994, Official Report, column 803.

     

    Constituency Visits

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister how much notice his Office gives to hon. Members prior to visits made to hon. Members’ constituencies.

    The Prime Minister : My Office contacts all hon. Members whose constituencies I visit as part of my regional tours. In the light of security arrangements which have to be made for these visits, advance notice for hon. Members may have to be restricted to 24 hours.

     

    Council of Europe and Western European Union

    Dame Peggy Fenner : To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the information bulletin on the activities of the United Kingdom delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Assembly of Western European Union, which has been sent to him.

    The Prime Minister : I have done so.

  • PMQT – 15 March 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 15th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Ms Eagle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 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.

    Ms Eagle : On top of all the tax increases that he will impose in April, how can the Prime Minister justify the new insurance premium tax, which will hit hardest those who live in areas of high crime, such as my constituency? Is not the truth that, while Labour is tough on crime and on the causes of crime, the right hon. Gentleman’s Government are tough just on the victims of crime?

    The Prime Minister : We seek to be tough on the people who perpetrate crime. I believe that that should be the ambition of every hon. Member. We have raised taxes for the reasons that I have previously set out in the House, and we have chosen to spread the load in the way that we think is most appropriate. Those are the measures that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor set out. If the hon. Lady opposes tax increases, I trust that she will indicate where she would cut expenditure.

    Mr. Dicks : In the light of the mortar attacks at Heathrow airport, which is in my constituency, will my right hon. Friend tell the IRA that there is no place for it at the peace table, and will he institute a shoot- to-kill policy in Northern Ireland to enable the security forces to eliminate all IRA terrorists in the Province?

    The Prime Minister : The attacks on Heathrow airport demonstrated once again the IRA’s callous disregard for the safety of ordinary members of the public and its disregard for the words that its own members utter from time to time. The whole House will regard the IRA’s action as totally despicable. It is certainly the case that it cannot bomb its way back to the negotiating table, either now or at any stage in the future. However, I am not sure that I can endorse the particular measure that my hon. Friend proposes.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister think it satisfactory that, in the space of a single year, the amount spent on cars by health service trusts has increased by 65 per cent. to a total of nearly £25 million?

    The Prime Minister : One of the purposes of health service trusts is to enable their managers– [Interruption.] If hon. Members listen, they will get their answer. One of the purposes of trusts is to enable managers, across the whole range of their activities, to determine how best to use the resources at their disposal. The growth in the number of trusts, the improvement in services and the rise in the number of patients treated demonstrate the trusts’ increasing success.

    Mr. John Smith : Perhaps we should test the situation by individual examples. Is the Prime Minister aware that the St. James’s University hospital trust has increased its car bill by more than 200 per cent. and that in the case of Kingston hospital the increase is 250 per cent? Is that the Government’s order of priorities? Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that most people in the country want to see money spent on patients and not on cars?

    The Prime Minister : The overall priority, on which the right hon. and learned Gentleman would be best advised to concentrate, is whether more patients are being treated, either in individual hospitals or in hospitals in general. I cannot carry in my head the details of individual expenditure in every health authority, and neither can the right hon. and learned Gentleman. What I can say is that it is right to devolve responsibility rather than to centralise it, as he would do, and that it is right to take action administratively to increase and improve the patient service that is offered. More patients are being treated and they are being treated better, with a wider range of operations and treatment than ever before.

    Mr. John Smith : Does not the Prime Minister understand that hardly a day goes by without further evidence of waste and inefficiency in the health service, introduced as a result of the Government’s changes? Does not he appreciate that, whatever he can or cannot hold in his head, it is the daily experience of both patients and staff that the health service is being undermined by this gross misallocation of priorities?

    The Prime Minister : I do not recall the right hon. and learned Gentleman ever mentioning any of the inefficiencies in expenditure that occurred prior to these reforms. He was perfectly prepared to condone them at that stage ; we are trying to put them right. That is the reason for the changed management structure and devolvement of responsibility. The right hon. and learned Gentleman’s question shows that he remains an unreconstructed centralist and is unwilling to trust people with devolved responsibilities.

    Mr. Sykes : To turn to far more important matters, is my right hon. Friend aware of the widespread pleasure and relief in Scarborough, Whitby and other seaside resorts following the Government’s action yesterday to curb the rising tide of benefit hostels on our English coasts?

    The Prime Minister : It is certainly true that that is the case in Yorkshire, but the problem is in Blackpool, Bournemouth and many other parts of the country as well. My hon. Friend and many of my other hon. Friends have campaigned extremely hard to have it solved. I believe that the announcement made by my hon. Friend the Minister of State yesterday will be welcomed by hoteliers, residents and taxpayers who feel that they have been taken for a ride for too long. Not only will it prevent the problem spreading, but the licensing scheme that we are examining may also deal with the problem that currently exists.

     

    Q2. Mr. Alton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Alton : With only 3 per cent. of people north and south of the Irish border expressing any support for the pursuit of violence, does not the Prime Minister believe that this vindicates the patient approach that he has taken towards the pursuit of peace in Northern Ireland? In that context, does not he believe that he should raise with the Taoiseach the use of the political defence as a way of justifying murder and terrorism and as an argument against extradition in the Irish courts? Will he also consider the possibility of the creation of an interlocutor or mediator to pursue the course of peace in Northern Ireland?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the support that he has consistently given to our attempts to secure peace in Northern Ireland. I agree with him that the extradition arrangements need to be strengthened. That is why I welcome, in particular, the new Irish extradition Bill which will make the arrangements between our countries more logical and more straightforward.

    As I indicated a moment ago, on the hon. Gentleman’s first point there will be no negotiations with Sinn Fein before a permanent end to the IRA’s violence. I do not intend that we should be shifted from our present course. I believe that it has the overwhelming support of people in the island of Ireland and that it has huge support both in this country and abroad. The Taoiseach and I intend to press ahead with our talks in the hope that we will be able to find a peaceful future for Ireland.

     

    Q3. Dr. Liam Fox : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Dr. Fox : Does my right hon. Friend agree that British interests in Europe have always been better represented by Conservatives than by socialists or Liberals? Will he assure the House that the protection of British interests in Europe will lie at the heart of our position in the current negotiations on the widening of Europe and on qualified majority voting?

    The Prime Minister : I do believe that it is important that this country plays a full part in the European community and exercises its influence both on behalf of the people in this country and on behalf of Europe as whole. We have sought for a long time to have enlargement, and we are very much in favour of it. The negotiations are very nearly complete. The present discussions between the Twelve are about the institutional changes that will accompany the enlargement. Like many other states, we attach importance to qualified majority voting, but I think that it is right to consider very carefully the effect on QMV of an increase in membership. What we need to ensure is that democratic legitimacy and the rights of minorities are sustained within the European Union. That is what my right hon. Friend will be seeking to do in his negotiations.

     

    Q4. Mr. Miller : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Miller : Does the Prime Minister agree that the short-term policies of banks and financial institutions undermine the recovery of manufacturing companies such as Rover? Does that reflect a lack of confidence in his Government, or is it nothing to do with him?

    The Prime Minister : I think that the hon. Gentleman will see from most of the statistics now being produced that manufacturing industry is in fact recovering and it is recovering rather well. It is increasingly– [Interruption.] There is no point in the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller) waving his finger. If he will give me time, I shall get to his question if he can bear to be patient for a second. Banks are seeking to provide resources for appropriate lending. The question of lending to Rover is of course something that Rover pursues with its own bankers and not with anyone else. [Interruption.] It is interesting to see that the hon. Gentleman would have Government Ministers determine individual bank loans to individual companies. I am pleased to see another indication of the centralism that the right hon. and learned Gentleman was attempting to shrug off a moment ago.

     

    Q5. Mr. Roger Evans : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Evans : Given the importance of the construction industry to the economy as a whole, does my right hon. Friend agree that the latest figures for private orders are excellent news for British firms and British jobs?

    The Prime Minister : Construction orders are now at a very high level ; higher than they have been for some years. New housing starts are still up and I trust that they will continue. Confidence is growing and a large part of this is, of course, related directly to the economic policies that enabled us to reduce interest rates–I am perfectly happy to accept responsibility for that.

     

    Q6. Mr. Simpson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Simpson : Is the Prime Minister aware that last year in Nottingham, 1,090 households faced repossession and that, in the same year, the city was allowed to build a grand total of only 12 houses for rent? Is there any practical advice and help that the Prime Minister is able to offer to the 99 per cent. of households caught in the terrible truth between his rhetoric and repossession, or is it yet another matter that is not of his concern?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that, as the economy recovers and interest rates have fallen, the number of repossessions is also falling and falling quite distinctly. What of course is also necessary in providing rented accommodation is that local authorities, notably Labour local authorities, should fill up the property that they have and not leave large numbers of voids and empties in many parts of the country.

     

    Q7. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 March.

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

    Mr. Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend accept the need to reduce public borrowing? Is he aware that Ealing Conservative council has now repaid £75 million of the £158 million borrowed between 1986 and 1990 by the then Labour council, and that Birmingham, Hackney and Manchester have debts higher than many third world countries? [Interruption.] All Labour-controlled councils.

    Hon. Members : Name them.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friends are tempting me to name them, but I fear that it would take up the rest of today’s Question Time and all of Thursday’s. I congratulate Ealing on reducing its debt. However, my hon. Friend was being characteristically generous in naming only three Labour authorities. He could have named substantially more. I know that the Labour party has a lot to say to us from time to time about third world debt. It is about time that it did something about fourth-rate Labour authorities that build up debts as large as, if not larger than, third world debt itself.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 14 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 14th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    No. 10 Downing Street (Costs)

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister what is the budget for the running cost for the Prime Minister’s residence at 10 Downing Street for 1994-95; and what was the running cost of 10 Downing street over the last 14 years.

    The Prime Minister : Figures on a consistent basis are not available. In 1980-81, recorded spending on 10 Downing Street and Chequers on the votes of the Cabinet Office, OPSS, was £1,745 million. In 1981- 82, charges were introduced for the use of Ministry of Defence aircraft. Including those charges, spending was £2,415 million in 1981-82 and £2,700 million in 1982-83. In 1983-84, charges were introduced by the Property Services Agency for buildings and services. Including those charges, spending was £3,026 million in 1983-84. In 1984-85, charges were introduced for use of the Government car service and for service personnel at Chequers. Including those charges, spending was £3,787 million in 1984-85 and £4,406 million in 1985-86. In 1986-87, the cost of office services was included in the No. 10 budget. Including those costs, spending since then has been as follows :

    Year |£million

    —————————

    1986-87 |4.963

    1987-88 |5.418

    1988-89 |6.554

    1989-90 |7.669

    1990-91 |8.226

    1991-92 |8.664

    1992-93 |9.866

    An outturn for 1993-94 will be available shortly ; it is likely to be around the same level of spending as in 1992-93. The provisional budget for 1994-95 is £9.486 million.

     

    Back to Basics

    Mr. Grocott : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) of 21 February, Official Report, column 849, what has been the total expenditure to date by the Government on the Government’s “back to basics” policy; and how many departmental staff are currently working on the Government’s “back to basics” policy.

    The Prime Minister : As “back to basics” applies across a range of Government policies, the information which the hon. Gentleman requests could be supplied only at disproportionate cost.

     

    Jimmy Young Programme

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the transcript of his interview of the “Jimmy Young Programme” on BBC Radio 2 broadcast on 7 March; and if he will make a statement on new policy positions announced in the interview.

    The Prime Minister : No. The objectives of this Government remain unchanged.

     

    10 Downing Street (Jewellery)

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister when the last independent audit of the 10 Downing Street jewellery inventory took place; who carried out the audit; and what were the findings.

    The Prime Minister : There has been no such audit in recent years, although the items are and have been available for inspection by the auditors in the Cabinet Office or in the National Audit Office. I am satisfied that all the items concerned are in safe-keeping in Number 10.

     

    Ministers

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish a list of the number of Ministers in each Department with the numbers of Ministers in each corresponding Department in the period 1964 to 1970; and how the responsibilities of the respective Departments have altered.

    The Prime Minister : Current information on the number of Ministers in each Department can be found in the “List of Ministerial Responsibilities”, a copy of which is in the Library of the House. The responsibilities of Departments and the numbers of Ministers changed during the period 1964-1970. Tables of Ministerial office holders were published regularly in Hansard.

     

    Cornwall

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on ministerial responsibility for Cornwall.

    The Prime Minister : The Government are collectively responsible for all regions of the United Kingdom.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the Canning House Group – 10 March 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the Canning House Group, held in London on Thursday 10th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    One of the great delights of expressing your view as a politician is that you can always be sure it will be accurately reported [laughter and applause] I had some experience of this recently as you will have read. I had actually rowed out to the centre of the Serpentine, the boat stalled and I appeared to be stranded. Clearly, I did the only thing that any self-respecting politician could do in the centre of the Serpentine, I got out and I walked across the waves right to the shore! There was a good story the next day in most of the papers – “Major can’t swim!” [applause].

    David, I am delighted to be here on the 50th anniversary of Canning House not in Canning House but on that very remarkable anniversary of Canning House. This occasion and indeed the House itself commemorates a very great Conservative and one who had this country’s strategic interests earlier and more comprehensively defined than any of his contemporaries. Not for nothing was he called “The eagle in the dovecot of British politics”.

    He and I have quite a lot in common: we have both held the offices of Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister. There is, however, one difference if I may to which I would draw to your attention: he was Foreign Secretary for a long time and Prime Minister for a very short time [applause] I was Foreign Secretary for a few months and you can complete the thought for yourselves!

    Canning’s mother, of course, like mine, earned her living at one time on the stage; she was the second wife of an actor. He faced in those days the sort of thing that can only happen in the 19th century, a remarkable amount of hostility to many of his policies, but he came through. He fought a duel with Castlereagh, a former War Minister though I, for the avoidance of doubt, should confirm to you all that my relationship with present and past War Ministers is extremely warm.

    Mr. President, this year is also the 500th anniversary of the Treaty of Tordesillas, an important treaty, one under which the lands of the New World were divided between Spain and Portugal and Canning House was established of course to promote our relations with both the countries of Iberia and those of Latin America and I hope this evening our Spanish and Portuguese friends will forgive me if I concentrate tonight on our relationship with Latin America.

    Canning’s name is a remarkable name in British history but like that of Cecil Rhodes, Thomas Raffles, George Curzon is a British name probably better known abroad that it is at home, in his case of course in Latin America and I don’t find it remotely surprising that he was revered there. He was a staunch supporter of countries in the region as they strove for independence many years ago and the independence of those young Latin American countries brought remarkable opportunities, opportunities for British men and for British trade. A large number of young men from Britain crossed the Atlantic to try their luck, British firms built roads, railways, they invested in shipping, in mining, in telegraphs, in cables, our trade relations with the new nations grew steadily from those early beginnings right up to the turn of this century and yet curiously after the Great War, for whatever reasons, the British presence in Latin America steadily year upon year began to decline and that relative decline went on for quite a few decades. In the ’80s of course, there was the trauma of the Falklands conflict and the Latin American debt crisis but I believe in the last few years things have begun to change and change quite dramatically.

    Latin America itself is changing. The region has enjoyed a political renaissance over the past decade every bit as striking as its economic recovery. It has become a serious player on the world stage. We saw that, for example, in the Uruguay Round negotiations last year, at the Rio Conference on the Environment the year before and at the growing Latin American contribution to United Nations peacekeeping operations in areas throughout the world.

    The relations of the whole of Europe with Latin America are changing; technology, greater ease of travel and mass communications, all have brought Latin America and Europe closer in trade and cultural and diplomatic terms than they have ever been before and for my own country Britain’s relations with Latin America are changing as well.

    It is for Britain a vast and expanding market, a continent rich in many ways, rich in resources and richer still I believe in opportunities for the future. There is a greater potential for political and economic cooperation than most people I believe have yet begun to grasp and equally a greater potential for two-way trade between the United Kingdom and the countries of Latin America and it is those opportunities, particularly perhaps the trading opportunities, that I wish to dwell on for just a few minutes this evening.

    One thing I passionately believe: the last decade has seen the most remarkable changes in this country but I believe the current decade and the decade beyond that will see the pace of change in a world that becomes economically more competitive as year succeeds year bring ever greater changes and amongst those changes will be an increasing need for this country to be competitive. If we are not competitive, we will not succeed. There are no world markets out there waiting instinctively to buy from us simply because we are British. If we are the best they will buy from us, if we are the most economic they will buy from us, if we can deliver on time they will buy from us and in this competitive world we need to look to every corner of the globe for those markets and I believe the prospects in Latin America are mouth-watering. [Applause].

    Mr. President, I wouldn’t deny to this audience for a second the fact that the last four years have been difficult, difficult for us here in the United Kingdom and difficult in truth for most of the world’s economies. The chill of economic recession has seemed from time to time to be almost everywhere but in fact that is not wholly true. There are bright spots and amongst them Latin America shines particularly brightly.

    In Latin America, economic expansion now exceeds population growth, inflation is down, tight fiscal and monetary policies help stabilise economies, structural reforms of a sort undreamed of fifteen or so years ago to labour laws, in privatisation, incentives to inward investment have improved competitiveness right across the whole region. Trade liberalisation even before December’s GATT success has brought growth right across the continent and the overall picture shows a clear and continuing upward trend. The World Bank estimates that GDP in the region could grow at up to 3.9% a year up to and including the turn of the century.

    In Britain, too, after the traumatic period through which we have passed, I believe the outlook is bright, indeed far brighter I suspect than many people have yet begun to imagine, certainly brighter than it has been for some time. We are now clearly out of the recession and we have come out of it with prospects a good deal better than before. We have succeeded in getting inflation down and keeping it down, we have brought unemployment down and we have pushed GDP up – it is in fact now back up to where it was at the peak of the boom in the late 1980s. Growth has exceeded expectations; it is set to be 2.5 to 3% this year, not of course as fast as some of the fastest-growing Latin American economies but faster than anywhere else in Europe as it was in the year just past, as it will be this year and as we expect it to be next year as well and so both Britain and Latin America have every reason to look up and look forward with confidence, to look up, to look outwards and to look to one another for a greater trade and investment flow in the years ahead.

    Mr. President, I mentioned some moments ago the British entrepreneurs who recognised the opportunities which Latin America had to offer in George Canning’s day. I am delighted that British businessmen today are showing the same enthusiasm for that continent as their forbears. It is interesting to see what has begun to happen. In Brazil, British firms increased exports last year by over 50%, we have continuing high levels of investment there. To the south, the Chilean and Argentinean governments are supporting a private venture to construct a gas supply link across the Andes. At the turn of the century, British companies helped to build and operate the rail link across the Andes and today British Gas is taking the same route happily supplying gas to Chile.

    Two years ago in the trip you mentioned, David, I visited amongst other place Colombia, the first serving prime minister I think ever to have visited that country and there right on the edge of the mountains in Colombia I saw how BP are helping the Colombians develop the Cusiana oilfield and I know from discussions earlier this evening over drinks out there how much that development has prospered in the period since I last saw it – probably two or three billion barrels worth and some of the highest-quality crude in the world and we have just signed an investment promotion and protection agreement with Colombia which I hope will encourage far more companies to follow the BP example.

    In Mexico, we see North West and Severn Trent International who both have won significant contracts to provide water Services in Mexico City. Communications are good, not only good but they are getting better; last year, British Airways opened new routes to Buenos Aires, Mexico and Chile to add to existing services in Venezuela, Colombia and Brazil and in each of those circumstances British firms are working closely with Latin American partners.

    In 1993 we increased our exports to Latin America by nearly a third and in line with our investment performance worldwide, the highest as a share of GDP, Britain placed over a billion pounds of new investments each year for the last decade in Latin America.

    Those figures are beginning to be impressive but the reality is that the prospects far outmatch anything that has been achieved thus far and there is the prospect of us doing far better still. In terms of exports to Latin America, we still don’t match our main competitors and British firms should make the most of developed businesses and trading structures which Latin America offers.

    These are countries that understand trade, they know about trade, they have a thriving private sector. Government policy in Latin America now welcomes market access for foreigners, they recognise that regulation and intervention will deter investment so I believe that British companies can be increasingly confident of doing business in Latin America and they can be confident when they seek to do so that they will have the backing of the British Government in those ventures.

    Mr. President, I dare say many – perhaps most – of the people here this evening will have seen the recent “Economist” survey of Latin America. “Under construction” – that is what the headline said – “Under construction” and below is a picture of frenzied construction work against a backcloth of the Andes. Still under construction perhaps but what a building is emerging in Latin America and it is good to know that British firms are a part of that process but it isn’t a one-way process. The way is equally open for Latin American business to come to the United Kingdom and I believe there are many and good reasons why they should seek to do so. Perhaps of all European nations, we here in Britain welcome inward investment from all over the world. We have a liberal trade and investment policy. We have the lowest business taxes in Europe and the most far-reaching labour reforms.

    I don’t find it remotely surprising that more American and Japanese companies have chosen to invest in the United Kingdom than in any other countries and there is plenty of room for Latin American companies to join them for Britain is an ideal base for operations in Europe.

    Let me give potential investors a practical reason why that is so: if you look at the cost of operating in a country, consider for example the social on-cost of investing in a European nation. The social on-cost of investing in Germany, France or any Community nation other than the United Kingdom is for each employee about 50% of the cost of that employee; in Japan and in the United States it is 25% which gives them a sharp competitive edge; here in the United Kingdom it is about 30%, not quite as good as America and Japan but markedly better than the rest of the European Community and it is precisely for that reason that I believe we are absolutely right to say “No!” to the increased social regulation that the European Community would seek to impose upon the United Kingdom economy [applause] so let me say to our friends in Latin America much as we look forward to greater trade between us and investment in your countries, you too are welcome to invest in the United Kingdom.

    Let me say secondly about the United Kingdom that we are firm believers in bringing trade barriers down and indeed several of you here this evening spoke to me in one sense about that outside over drinks. We have worked consistently to make sure that the European Union is as open as possible to the outside world. I don’t want to see a “Fortress Europe” closing its doors to any part of the world. I don’t think that is right economically, I don’t believe it is right in trade terms and I certainly don’t believe it is right politically for the future and so we are pressing on all fronts to make sure that the Single Market doesn’t mean an exclusive, closed club for a small number of rich nations.

    I believe this country fought as hard as any country in the world for a successful outcome to the Uruguay Round, by far the most far-reaching deal in the history of GATT but of course our friends in Latin America fought hard for that outcome too, in particular Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Uruguay as members of the Cairns Group. I lost count of the number of occasions I was phoned by the Cairns Group to try and persuade the Europeans to have a positive approach across Europe to reaching a satisfactory conclusion in the Uruguay Round so the Latin American commitment to reaching a GATT settlement was frankly invaluable and I am most grateful for the support that they gave to us but what we now need now that GATT Round has been concluded is to work together to make sure that the deal that was concluded is now implemented and implemented as speedily as possible to ensure that lower tariffs, fewer quotas and better conditions for investment become a reality and we must keep our markets open and resist protectionist measures.

    When I was in America just a few days ago, I agreed with President Clinton that we would seek to bring forward the commencement of the GATT deal from the middle of next year to the beginning of next year if that was negotiable. It isn’t of course in the gift of the United States and the United Kingdom alone but I believe we should seek to do that if it is at all possible.

    Mr. President, I spoke a little of the economic changes in Latin America but I have to say although their economic success is remarkable what is equally remarkable is the astonishing political renaissance which has grown up alongside that economic recovery. I wonder, even amongst this audience of businessmen many of who are long familiar with Latin America, who of them would have guessed when the debt crisis exploded in 1982 that a whole decade of political renewal was at hand? Not, I suspect, very many and yet one by one the Latin American nations have put their faith in democratic structures from Peru in 1980 to Nicaragua in 1990 and by the end of the decade we had seen several nations conduct successful constitutional elections not once but twice and in some cases three times, democracy becoming established as an intrinsic part of the political landscape and so the political prospects are better there now than ever they have been before and wherever you look throughout the region there are signs of greater democracy and greater stability; old hostilities and suspicions have eased or disappeared and they have given way to political and economic cooperation.

    The success of the peace process in Central America is impressive, the recognition of Belize by Guatemala is welcome, particularly with our long relationship with Belize. It is encouraging to see the leaders of Argentina and Chile working closely to establish a firm basis for future cooperation. These are changes few would have imagined a decade ago and they illustrate the impressive speed of economic and political change right across the continent.

    Mr. President, that greater democracy, that greater stability is what will underpin Latin America’s continuing economic growth. I believe the future of the region looks extremely bright. Britain and British firms can contribute to that future. We have a joint interest in political stability, in the security of our investments and in a thriving and growing trading partnership. The GATT deal we forged will reinforce those links and freer trade will continue to bring us closer together.

    There is a role of course for Canning House. Canning House can play an important part in promoting Britain’s relations with Latin America; it has links with politicians, with businessmen, with academics and with other key figures right throughout the Latin American world and it has established over the years a reputation of which it can be justly proud.

    I am aware that David Montgomery and his colleagues have chosen this landmark anniversary to launch an appeal to enable Canning House to press ahead with its work and I warmly wish them well in that endeavour. I am certainly happy to confirm that the Government will be continuing its financial support to Canning House next year. [Applause].

    Mr. President, I know that you have decided to stand down from your post at the end of this month. That has nothing to do with our continuing financial support. [Laughter]. You have worked ceaselessly for Canning House for over thirty years, you are known, David, throughout Latin America as a good friend of the region and as an energetic promoter of links with this country. I believe both countries owe you a remarkable debt of gratitude and I for one am delighted that Pat Limerick will be following you for I have no doubt he will be a worthy successor. [Applause].

    Let me offer you one brief thought in conclusion for I know that the raffle upon how long I was going to speak at the table over there is reaching a climax! It is easy to tell, looking at them, who has got 16 minutes! Looking around this room this evening, this thought strikes me: I wonder what George Canning would have made of this particular occasion. Certainly he could never have possibly envisaged the Latin America of today but when he said in 1826: “I called the New World into existence to redress the balance of the Old!” he was perhaps more prophetic than he knew. Latin America’s economic growth is fast making it a major player on the international stage. It has, I believe, a great deal to offer Britain and a great deal to offer the Old World and I hope – and here I think after the passage of nearly a century and three-quarters that George Canning would have said the same – Britain has a great deal to offer Latin America.

    Canning, of course, is not here this evening but looking around this room at the trade, at the investment and the political contacts that span between this country and Latin America, I suspect that Canning’s legacy is here in this room and for that I believe we should be grateful and I hope we can build on it for the future. [Applause].

  • PMQT Written Answers – 10 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 10th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Public Interest Immunity Certificates

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister if he will bring forward legislation to bring public interest immunity certificates within statute law and parliamentary scrutiny.

    The Prime Minister : The Government will consider carefully any comments or recommendations Lord Justice Scott makes on this issue when his report is completed.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 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 this House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

     

    Sir Peter Levene

    Dame Angela Rumbold : To ask the Prime Minister what arrangements have been made to ensure that there is no conflict of interest between Sir Peter Levene’s appointment as chairman of Canary Wharf and his position as the Prime Minister’s efficiency adviser.

    The Prime Minister : Sir Peter Levene will take no part in Government consideration of any issue which could involve a conflict of interest for him. There will be a review every six months of any prospective issues which could raise such a conflict so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

     

    Official Gifts

    Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 22 February, Official Report, column 162 , what happens to moneys raised from the sale of official gifts received by recent Prime Ministers.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 9 March 1994] : Gifts of small value are the property of the Prime Minister; the use of the proceeds from the sale of any such items is therefore a matter for the Prime Minister of the day to determine. Both my predecessor and I have made it our practice to donate all proceeds to charity. If any gifts from the official inventory were sold, the proceeds would accrue to official funds.

     

    Office Costs

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister what was the annual total cost of the Prime Minister’s office in each year (a) between 1974 and 1979 and (b) since 1990.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 11 January 1994] : Figures on a consistent basis are not available.

    Information on the total costs of the Prime Minister’s office is not available before 1979-80. Spending in 1979-80 is recorded as £1.409 million, but that did not include charges for : the use of MOD aircraft; the use of buildings and for services supplied by the Property Services Agency and its successors; the use of the Government car service; the service personnel at Chequers; or for office services supplied by the Cabinet Office.

    The present No. 10 budget now includes charges for all these services. On that basis, the total annual cost for the completed financial years since 1990 has been as follows :

    Year |£ thousands

    ————————————

    1990-91 |8,226

    1991-92 |8,664

    1992-93 |9,866

    These figures show payments made in the years in question. In some cases, this may relate to expenditure incurred in the previous financial year.

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister when the hon. Member for Walsall, North will receive a reply to his question of 11 January, relating to expenditure of his Office.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 8 March 1994] : I have done so.

  • PMQT – 10 March 1994

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


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. McFall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 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. McFall : Now that the Minister for open government has given an entirely new meaning to the phrase, “lying in state”, does the Prime Minister agree that the democratic process is undermined if Ministers imply that concealing the truth from the House is acceptable? Does he accept that it is a lie that the former Prime Minister, Lord Callaghan, ever lied to this House? If so, will he apologise to the former distinguished Prime Minister for that slur?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman may regret, on reflection, the way in which he phrased his question– [Interruption.] If hon. Members do not regret it, I believe that they should. The hon. Gentleman knows very well that it is not the case now, nor has it been in the past, that Ministers willingly mislead this House, and no one has suggested that that is the case.

     

    Q2. Mr. Patrick Thompson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Thompson : Bearing in mind the fact that, last night, the IRA launched yet another vicious terrorist attack endangering the lives of hundreds of innocent civilians, were not the Opposition, at exactly same time, voting against the very measure which our security forces need to combat this evil? Are not the Opposition soft on terrorism and soft on crime?

    The Prime Minister : I believe that the attack that was launched yesterday on Heathrow airport by the IRA will receive and deserve universal condemnation. It was an unjustifiable attack and will make no difference whatever to the search for peace in Northern Ireland. But I believe that it should lead to every part of this House uniting on firm action against terrorism.

    Mr. John Smith : With the issue of Ministers telling the truth now a matter of public debate, does the Prime Minister appreciate that what most undermines the credibility of his Administration is the blatant deception practised at the last election when the Conservative party promised to cut taxes? Since then, they have imposed the largest tax increase in Britain’s peacetime history.

    The Prime Minister : I shall turn directly to that point, but I must say that I am extremely surprised that the right hon. and learned Gentleman should pursue that matter on the day after a mortar attack at Heathrow and on the very day on which the Cabinet has been considering sending more troops to Bosnia to deal with an international problem. [Interruption.] I have made the point. The right hon. and learned Gentleman seems to think that these things do not matter. I think that people throughout the country will take a different view. [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The House must come to order.

    The Prime Minister : On the specific point raised by the right hon. and learned Gentleman, taxation rose precisely because we kept our promises to protect the elderly, the vulnerable and the sick through the long recession. The recession lasted longer than we or other forecasters had imagined, and in order to sustain policy and bring down interest rates it was necessary to close borrowing. That was a responsible attitude. It was the right attitude. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman understood the first thing about economics, he would support it, not attack it.

    Mr. John Smith : To come very directly to the point, does the Prime Minister deny that before the election he promised to cut taxes and he is now putting them up?

    The Prime Minister : I have made it perfectly clear to the right hon. and learned Gentleman why it was necessary to raise taxation, although we had hoped not to do so. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman wants to consider taxes, he might look at the more recent figures of council taxes which show clearly how much more expensive Labour authorities and Liberal authorities are than Conservative authorities. Perhaps the right hon. and learned Gentleman would comment on that.

    Mr. John Smith : Having regard to the Prime Minister’s feeble excuse for breaking his promise at the election, does he not remember telling the Los Angeles Times in his celebrated interview last year :

    “I said [to colleagues] the day after we won the election . . . Within the next 12 months the government will be the most unpopular we have seen for a long time.’”

    He went on to say, “I was staggeringly prescient.” Will the Prime Minister explain how he could know about the state of the economy the day after the election but not know before polling day?

    The Prime Minister : I shall go back further than that for the right hon. and learned Gentleman. I made it absolutely clear on the day that I became Chancellor of the Exchequer that we would take whatever action was necessary to restrain inflation and put the economy on secure and steady growth. We have done that, including maintaining monetary policy with interest rates at a high level right through the election, because it was in the interests of the British economy to do so. That is responsible government. I am sorry that the right hon. and learned Gentleman does not understand that.

     

    Q3. Lady Olga Maitland : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Lady Olga Maitland : With the council elections approaching, does my right hon. Friend agree with me that what council tax payers want are efficient services at the lowest possible cost? Does he agree that it is the Conservative councils who deliver this, not the Labour councils and not the Liberal councils, such as the one that I have in Surrey?

    The Prime Minister : I not only agree with my hon. Friend ; it is what the statistics now becoming available on council tax charges show. At present, as my hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Planning announced yesterday, Conservative councils that have now declared their council taxes come out, on average, at £129 less than Labour councils and £73 less than Liberal councils. It is clear who costs one more in the shires–it is Labour. It is clear who costs one more in the mets–it is Labour. It is clear who costs one more in London–it is Labour. No matter where one looks, Labour councils and–so as not to disappoint the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown)–Liberal councils, cost one more.

     

    Q4. Mr. David Marshall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Marshall : Is the Prime Minister aware that his recent morale-boosting visit to Scotland has resulted in his party achieving a record low in the polls of 13 per cent? Does he appreciate why the Scots are once more uttering the refrain :

    “Will ye no’ come back again”

    and again, and again?

    The Prime Minister : As it happens, the hon. Gentleman is typically inaccurate. The data were before I visited Scotland.

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q5. Sir Anthony Grant : To ask the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to the Imperial War museum at Duxford.

    The Prime Minister : I know from private visits what a magnificent place the Duxford museum is. I can well understand the pride of my right hon. Friend in having it in his constituency. I hope that I may be able to pay an official visit at some time in the future.

    Sir Anthony Grant : Will my right hon. Friend note that the United States air force flew from Duxford during the last war with much loss of life and, in particular, flew on the D-day operation? Will he give his support to the American air museum being created there, either by visiting Duxford or by inviting the Americans concerned to visit him? It would be extremely good for Anglo-American relations.

    The Prime Minister : I should like to visit Duxford again. I shall take an opportunity to do so and to look at the museum’s plans. My hon. Friend is entirely right about the significant contribution of the US air force to the D-day landings. We have a continual debt of gratitude to them. It is right that we should celebrate the 50th anniversary and remember the heroism of the troops and the sacrifices that they made so that we can enjoy the liberties that we exercise in the House.

     

    Health Issues

    Q6. Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister what proportion of his time he devotes to health issues.

    The Prime Minister : A lot.

    Mr. Hughes : In that case, given that one of the most obvious implications of the Government’s policies for health services in London is that they plan to run down the hospital that the Prime Minister described as the flagship, and that the main building–a state of the art building costing £140 million–will never come into use, in all seriousness will the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State take a little extra time to listen to a proposal that keeps both Guy’s and St. Thomas’s as hospitals, saves the taxpayer money, reduces embarrassment and, above all, saves patients’ lives?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman knows that the changes to the health service in London are long overdue; they have been long sought by many people. We have won support inside and outside the health service for tackling that particular problem, not least from Opposition Front-Bench spokesmen. As for the problems of Guy’s and St. Thomas’s, the hon. Gentleman will know that the clinicians at both hospitals believe that patient care will be improved by concentrating services on one site, not two. It is not just the Government’s view, but that of the doctors involved. Thanks to the determination to embrace change, the Guy’s and St Thomas’s trust will have a secure future and its buildings, old and new, will be used fully, effectively and appropriately in the best interests of patients, medical teaching and research.

     

    Engagements

    Q7. Mr. Sumberg : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Sumberg : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the considerable concern in my constituency and throughout the country about the activities of television cable-laying companies? Pavements are uprooted, roads closed and businesses disrupted all with the objective of getting doubtful television programmes into our homes. Is it not time that we found a better way of organising these matters?

    The Prime Minister : I recognise the concerns of my hon. Friend. Of course it is important that all those with the right to undertake street works should keep disruption to a minimum. He will know that there are duties to do so written into the terms of the licence issued by the Department of Trade and Industry. My hon. Friend will also know that in those areas where cables are laid, about one quarter of all homes subsequently decide to participate in cable television. That has led to investment across the United Kingdom of well over £1 billion.

     

    Q8. Mr. Martyn Jones : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Jones : Will the Prime Minister find time today to check on a transcript of the “Today” programme earlier this week, when his right hon. and learned Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, suggested that he would not be Prime Minister after November, or after the autumn ? If that is the case, will he make sure that his right hon. and learned Friend is incorrect, as he is such a good asset to us in the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : I seem to recall cheap questions like that before the previous election. I am still here and the Opposition are still there.

     

    Q9. Mr. Bellingham : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 10 March.

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

    Mr. Bellingham : Further to the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North (Mr. Thompson), does my right hon. Friend agree that the IRA-Sinn Fein must now be treated with complete contempt? Does he further agree that unless it signs the declaration tomorrow, it should forfeit its opportunity to be part of it?

    The Prime Minister : I think that every hon. Member of the House will have nothing but contempt for the IRA’s behaviour. With the attacks that it has made, both in Northern Ireland and at Heathrow yesterday, it has demonstrated again its disregard for human life and for opinion on both sides of the community. I believe that my hon. Friend misunderstands the long-term purpose and import of the declaration that I signed with the Taoiseach in December. It sets out a series of principles on which we hope and intend to try to build a permanent peace for Northern Ireland.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 8 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 8th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Ministerial Offices

    Mr. Boyes : To ask the Prime Minister how many bottles of (a) whisky and gin and (b) sherry and port were consumed by his private offices in 1993-94.

    The Prime Minister : Disaggregated information of this sort could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

    Mr. Boyes : To ask the Prime Minister what was the cost of new furniture for his private office during the year 1993-94.

    The Prime Minister : Such purchases are included within my Office’s overall administration expenditure, which is published every year in the annual report.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

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

     

    Official Gifts

    Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 22 February, Official Report, column 162, what happened to those gifts of small value presented to former Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher and not required by her on leaving office.

    The Prime Minister : Gifts of small value are the property of the Prime Minister, not the Government. The retention or disposal of such items is therefore a matter for the Prime Minister concerned.

     

    Malaysian Protocol

    Mr. Alan Williams : To ask the Prime Minister how many Cabinet meetings were held between the signing of the Malaysian protocol in March 1988 and 28 June 1988.

    The Prime Minister : It remains the Government’s practice not to give details of Cabinet or Cabinet Committee meetings.

    Mr. Alan Williams : To ask the Prime Minister on what date he was first made aware of the references to civil aid and arms’ sales in the Malaysian protocol of March 1988.

    The Prime Minister : On 12 May 1988, in my capacity as Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

  • PMQT – 8 March 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 8th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Ward : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 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. Ward : Will my right hon. Friend ensure that the Department of Health examines carefully the Audit Commission report published today, which shows that £425 million could be saved on the national health service drugs bill if doctors reassessed their prescribing requirements?

    The Prime Minister : We spend something over £15 billion a year on drugs in the primary care sector, so it is in everyone’s interests to have cost-effective prescribing. As the report shows, our general practitioners are among the most cost-effective prescribers in the world, although I believe that there is still room for improvement.

    Mr. John Smith : At a time when, regrettably, there are so many innocent victims of crime, why are the Government intent on pushing through, in less than four weeks from now, a major weakening of the criminal injuries compensation scheme by substituting a crude tariff system for the proper assessment of damages suffered by victims? Is the Prime Minister aware that a police officer who was seriously injured in a criminal attack was awarded £121,000 last year under the existing scheme, but would be entitled to only £7,500 under the new scheme? What justification can there be for that?

    The Prime Minister : I do not have those precise figures in front of me, but we are seeking to change and make more efficient and effective the criminal injuries compensation scheme. It has met with many delays, while the amount of compensation was determined. We are seeking to produce a better, more effective and more efficient scheme that provides for speedier compensation.

    Mr. John Smith : I notice that the Prime Minister did not attempt to justify the change that will result. May I ask him directly why future loss of earnings and future costs of medical care are to be excluded completely from damages when, in the case of badly injured people, those are perhaps the most important losses? Is it not bad enough that crime has doubled under the Government without making the victims pay for it?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman knows that the actions that we have taken against crime have been effective and efficient and have often been opposed by him and his party. I need no lectures from him about crime. What we are seeking to do is to make a more effective and efficient system fairer between both the recipient of assistance and the taxpayer.

    Mr. John Smith : So that the Prime Minister understands the issue involved, may I remind him of the case of Mrs. Slater, a young wife with two children who saw her husband murdered at her front door? She was awarded £137,000 under the existing scheme. Under the Prime Minister’s proposals that lady would get £17,000. Why should she lose £120,000 in a Government cost-cutting exercise? We hear constantly from the right hon. Gentleman about the victims of crime. Unless he withdraws the scheme he will be guilty of hypocritical humbug.

    The Prime Minister : We have one of the most generous systems of assistance in the world in terms of criminal injuries compensation, as the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows. We are seeking to make sure that it is more efficient and more effective and that the compensation is paid more speedily than at any stage in the past. The right hon. and learned Gentleman and his hon. Friend the shadow Chancellor were saying recently that they would enter into no more spending commitments until they knew how those commitments could be met. Has the right hon. and learned Gentleman broken his own edict yet again?

     

    Q2. Mr. Luff : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

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

    Mr. Luff : Does my right hon. Friend agree that one sure way of improving performance in our schools is to publish examination results? Is he aware that at the weekend the Labour party pledged that it would scrap such performance tables, depriving parents in Worcestershire and the rest of the country of information that they need and deserve when taking important decisions about their children’s future?

    The Prime Minister : I have no doubt that publishing that information acts as a spur to higher standards. It also throws the spotlight on the quality of teaching in many schools. I regret very much that Labour Members wish to remove this right, that they do not trust parents with the information and therefore wish to keep them in the dark. But it is not a question just of performance tables. In the same speech, the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) promised to scrap grant- maintained schools, thereby removing from hundreds of thousands of parents the right that the Government have given them. And it is not just the Labour party : the Liberals would join in the introduction of that repressive legislation.

    Mr. Ashdown : There will be a warm welcome for the Government’s decision this morning to respond to General Rose’s request for reinforcements in Bosnia and, indeed, for the fact that this afternoon the United Nations has taken control of Tuzla airport. As the job in Bosnia is not to reinforce failure but to strengthen success, is it not now vital that other nations follow Britain’s lead and would it not be helpful if the United States were to do so?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. Gentleman has said, we have been leading diplomatic efforts to help the United Nations to secure reinforcements. As I told the House a few days ago, we are prepared to provide more forces proportionately as part of a wider international effort. The right hon. Gentleman is right about Tuzla airport : an important objective has been met. This will assist the aid operation, and we shall provide an aircraft specially to take aid into Tuzla.

    Mr. Colin Shepherd : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Commonwealth as a whole has a great contribution to make to the causes of peace, democracy and stability, especially in southern Africa at this very sensitive time? As we approach Commonwealth day, will my right hon. Friend reaffirm the United Kingdom’s commitment to the Commonwealth?

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to do so. At both the last two Commonwealth conferences we proposed reforms to make the Commonwealth a good deal more relevant and bring it up to date. Relationships within the Commonwealth are better than they have been for many years. As my hon. Friend referred to South Africa, let me say that many of us look forward to that country’s first democratic elections which will be held in April and, I hope, to South Africa’s wishing to return to the Commonwealth in due course.

     

    Q4. Mr. McKelvey : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

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

    Mr. McKelvey : Will the Prime Minister explain why, in 1994, it is necessary for my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood (Dr. Berry) to introduce a private Member’s Bill to provide basic civil rights for the disabled? Will the right hon. Gentleman seriously consider backing that humane Bill so that it may become part of the law of the land?

    The Prime Minister : As I have indicated on other occasions, the Government have done a great deal for disabled people–rightly so–and we certainly intend to do more. The hon. Gentleman will be aware of the changes on access, on social security, on education– [Interruption.] If Opposition Members will wait, they will get an answer. The hon. Gentleman will be aware also of the changes in relation to employment. It is a rolling programme. We share the aim of eliminating discrimination against disabled people. We have put in place a number of measures to do this. Of course we shall examine carefully the Bill of the hon. Member for Kingswood (Dr. Berry). There will be a debate on Friday, after which I hope that the Bill will go into Committee for detailed examination of its provisions, what it would achieve, what it would mean, what it would cost and those parts of it that are appropriate.

    Mrs. Gorman : Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that during the 1960s and 1970s the Labour party spent a great deal of taxpayers’ money on overseas aid, but achieved very little benefit for the people of this country in return ? Will he take pride in the fact that nowadays, under a Conservative Government, we make sure that the British taxpayer and work force benefit from our policy of linking trade with aid ?

    The Prime Minister : We have a very high-quality aid programme, a small portion of which is linked, under the aid and trade provisions, with trade with appropriate countries. Aid and trade provision has existed since the late 1970s. It is appropriate, it works well both for the recipient countries and for British exporting prospects, and I look to see it continue.

     

    Iraq

    Q5. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he had with President Yeltsin about United Nations action in Iraq.

    The Prime Minister : I did not specifically raise this subject with President Yeltsin during my recent visit, but Russian policy is in line with our own on this subject. We are in contact on a day-to-day basis with Russia and with our other G7 colleagues on this particular matter.

    Mr. Dalyell : May I thank the Prime Minister for making time to see me in his room last Thursday about the appalling malnutrition and infant mortality problem in the valleys of the Tigris and the Euphrates? Since disease knows no boundaries and since there is the likelihood of a sweltering summer, can he do anything about the urgently needed water filtering and pumping equipment and the list of much-needed pharmaceuticals that I handed to him on that occasion?

    The Prime Minister : I understand and respect the hon. Gentleman’s long-standing concern for the people of Iraq, which he sees as quite distinct from the present leadership of the Government of Iraq. I share his concern about the people there. Since April 1991, we have spent more than £60 million on aid for Iraqi citizens, including food, essential medicines, heating supplies and help with agricultural projects. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we will continue with our aid programme and with the exemptions for food and medicines from the embargo, and that I will look at the specific point that he raised with me.

     

    Engagements

    Q6. Mr. Spring : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

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

    Mr. Spring : Can my right hon. Friend confirm that manufacturing output rose by some 1.1 per cent. in January, well above expectations, and that in difficult world trading conditions it is the policies of low inflation, low interest rates and low corporate taxation that has made Britain a beacon of success in the world? [Hon. Members :– “That’s a hard one, John.”]

    The Prime Minister : Just relax. My hon. Friend is entirely right. There is no doubt that the manufacturing figures today show that manufacturing output is sharply up. That is very encouraging, and it was considerably above expectations. We have seen a strong export performance particularly to non-Community countries in recent months, but equally to many European Community countries, despite the fact that their markets are in recession and are reducing in overall size. I am delighted that we are making more and selling more at home and selling more abroad.

     

    Q7. Rev. Martin Smyth : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 8 March.

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

    Rev. Martin Smyth : Is the Prime Minister aware of the answer that I was given on 1 March, which showed that during the past three years some 13 rescue operations have been carried out by Royal Navy and Royal Air Force aircraft in the territorial waters of the Irish Republic? Will he impress on Mr. Reynolds the importance of extending such co-operation to save the lives of innocent people, especially from terrorism, as the forces co-operate with the Crown forces?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. We are constantly reviewing the co-operation with the Garda and with other elements of the security forces in the Republic of Ireland. Co-operation today is better than it has been at any stage in the past and I will continue to seek further improvement. There is a regular and good liaison specifically between the United Kingdom search and rescue authorities and the Irish marine emergency services which specifically includes a regular exchange of information and participation in the appropriate joint committees, so I believe that the liaison is extremely good at present. Of course, I will seek to ensure that that remains good and is improved wherever possible.

    Mr. Peter Ainsworth : Will my right hon. Friend remind his G7 colleagues that there are really only three ways in which Governments can help to foster jobs–the promotion of sound finances, the deregulation of national economies and the encouragement of maximum flexibility in labour markets?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is quite right. If we wish to have jobs that last rather than temporary jobs, we need free trade, competitive industries and a flexible labour market. That is what we have now attained and that is, I believe, the principal reason why we are the only country in the European Union where unemployment is falling and seems to be on a firm downward trend.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 7 March 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 7th March 1994.


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Northern Ireland

    Mr. Frank Field : To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the main differences between the agreement between the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume) and Mr. Gerry Adams and the Downing Street declaration; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : The Downing Street declaration was the result of work between the two Governments, which began when I first met Mr. Reynolds shortly after he became Taoiseach in February 1992. I have seen no document purporting to be an agreement between the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume) and Mr. Adams, save for their published statements.

     

    Quangos

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister if he will hold all paid members of Government quangos liable to surcharge in the same way as elected councillors.

    The Prime Minister : The Government have no powers to surcharge paid members of non-departmental public bodies in the same way as elected councillors and have no plans to seek such powers. Public bodies are already able to apply disciplinary sanctions, including seeking prosecutions where appropriate.

     

    Ministers

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 14 February, Official Report, column 770, if he will list the five Cabinet Ministers who have served in the armed forces.

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the President of the Board of Trade, the Lord Privy Seal and the Secretary of State for National Heritage, and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland have all done national service.

     

    Jewellery

    Mrs. Clwyd : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 28 February to the hon. Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) Official Report, column 579, if he will list the items of jewellery on the official inventory of No. 10 Downing Street.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 4 March 1994] : I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Newham, North-West (Mr. Banks) on 3 March, Official Report, column 804.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 3 March 1994

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


    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Nursery (Official Visit)

    Q8. Mr. Corbyn : To ask the Prime Minister what further plans he has to visit a children’s nursery.

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

     

    Milton Keynes

    Q10. Mr. Butler : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to visit Milton Keynes.

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

     

    Public Interest Immunity Certificates

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister how many public interest immunity certificates he or his predecessor have been asked to sign in each year since 1979; how many he or his predecessor declined to sign; and if he will make a statement on his policy of signing public interest immunity certificates.

    The Prime Minister : No central record has been kept of the number of public interest immunity certificates put to Ministers since 1979, and a search of all the records in No. 10 would involve disproportionate cost. I do not recall being asked to sign such a certificate and it is unlikely that either I or my predecessor would have been asked to sign one since immediate responsibility for the relevant documents or information would normally rest with the head of a separate Department.

     

    USA (Official Visit)

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what matters were discussed, and what decisions taken, during his visit to the United States of America.

    The Prime Minister : We discussed current international issues, and established a wide measure of agreement on points for joint United Kingdom-United States action. These included sending a joint British-American civil planning mission to Sarajevo; continuing support for the process of democratic and economic reform in Russia; steps to promote the process of democratic reform in South Africa; reaffirmation of United States support for the joint declaration on Northern Ireland; and support for Governor Patten’s policies on Hong Kong.

     

    Lords Lieutenant

    Mr. Gordon Prentice : To ask the Prime Minister who pays for the ceremonial dress worn from time to time by the Lords Lieutenant of England.

    The Prime Minister : On appointment, Lords Lieutenant are offered a contribution from public funds towards the cost of the ceremonial uniform worn on their official engagements.

     

    Official Gifts

    Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 28 February, column 579, if he will place in the Library a copy of the official inventory of items given to Prime Ministers.

    The Prime Minister : A variety of gifts are received from heads of government, heads of state and others. They are all handled in accordance with “Questions of Procedure for Ministers”. It is not considered appropriate to provide a list.

    Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister if he will give details of the official gifts he has presented on the official visits abroad he has made since November 1990.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 2 March 1994] : No. The customary practice is to give official gifts to heads of government, heads of state and small numbers of officials on the occasion of each visit to a country, but it is not considered appropriate to give details of these.

     

    Engagements

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

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

     

    St. Winwaloe’s Day

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister what plans Her Majesty’s Government have to celebrate St. Winwaloe’s day.

    The Prime Minister : None.

     

    Malaysia

    Sir David Steel : To ask the Prime Minister what offers of aid to Malaysia were discussed during his visit to Malaysia in September 1993; and what were the amounts involved for each potential project.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 28 February 1994] : There was no substantive discussion of aid offers during this visit. However, I attended the unveiling of a plaque at the Connaught Bridge power plant for which the Government had provided £23,485 million aid and trade provision support. I was also present at the signature of a document between the Kuala Lumpur international airport Berhad and the Anglo-Japanese airport consortium, on the role the consortium would play in the Kuala Lumpur airport project.

     

    St. David’s Day

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister what plans Her Majesty’s Government have to celebrate St. David’s day.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 1 March 1994] : My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Wales held a reception on the eve of St. David’s Day, to mark the occasion.

     

    Cabinet Meetings

    Mr. Kenneth Baker : To ask the Prime Minister where the handwritten records of the Cabinet Secretary of each Cabinet meeting are kept; and how far back such records go.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 2 March 1994] : The Cabinet Secretary’s notebooks, which contain the handwritten records of each Cabinet meeting, have been preserved since 1947. They are retained in the Cabinet Office with the approval of the Lord Chancellor under section 3(4) of the Public Records Act 1958.

     

    Air Miles

    Mr. Hoyle : To ask the Prime Minister what rules apply to the use of air miles credited to Ministers undertaking official journeys.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 2 March 1994] : I have recently made it clear that I do not believe that Ministers or officials travelling on Government business, necessarily paid for from public funds, should make private use of air miles which may arise as a result of that expenditure. There is no objection to re-applying the benefits of these schemes to travel on Government business.