The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: 1994

  • PMQT – 25 January 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Beith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 25 January.

    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. Beith : Will the Prime Minister confirm that at the time of the general election, when he promised tax cuts, he knew that the Government were forecasting a public sector borrowing requirement of £28 billion and that tax increases would be a likely part of the Conservative strategy to deal with that? Surely he is not asking us to accept that the important fact escaped his notice and was not drawn to his attention.

    The Prime Minister : If I had expected to have to raise taxes after the election, I would not have expressed the contrary view. The right hon. Gentleman fails to take into account two prospects–first, the length of the recession and, secondly, demand-driven expenditure. It is an oddity for the right hon. Gentleman to say what he has said, because the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) recently said :

    “We are going to have to find a new language which expresses taxation, not as a burden, but as an opportunity.”

     

    Q2. Mrs. Lait : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 25 January.

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

    Mrs. Lait : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming yesterday’s CBI survey, which shows that orders and output are growing at the strongest rate since 1989? Is that fact not exemplified by Long Products, a company in my constituency, which now exports 85 per cent. of its output and has recently won orders from countries as diverse as Indonesia and Kuwait? Does not that company’s success and the CBI survey show that, thanks to the Government’s sound economic policy, the United Kingdom economy is the motor leading to European recovery? [Interruption.]

    The Prime Minister : I am pleased to hear such a welcome for our recovery on both sides of the House. As my hon. Friend says, there is a remarkably encouraging set of results across the board. Those results tend to support the figures previously released, which show manufacturing output up by about 2 per cent. on a year earlier. Critically, the survey also sets out the expectation of a growth in output and orders in the months immediately ahead. Car output and retail sales are already rising quite sharply, and the EC, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the International Monetary Fund all expect this country to have the fastest growth of any of the EC countries in 1993 and 1994.

    Mrs. Beckett : Will the Prime Minister now admit that all the promises that he made on taxation at the time of the last election were a total deception and that he should apologise to the British people?

    The Prime Minister : No. There was no deception in what I said at the time of the election. Events have forced us to raise taxes, and I regret that, but it has been necessary to raise taxes to ensure that we cut the borrowing requirement and provide the opportunity for sustained growth with low inflation over the medium term. I believe that we have to take the decisions that will safeguard the future of the British economy in the years immediately ahead. It was not an easy decision, not one which we would have wished to take, but it was the right decision and Governments cannot duck the right decision.

    Mrs. Beckett : But why should people take the Prime Minister’s word for any of those reasons, when the Conservatives claim to be the party of low crime and it is the party of high crime? They claim to be the party of low tax, when everybody now knows that it is the party of high tax. Why should the Prime Minister be believed when he makes excuses?

    The Prime Minister : I think that the right hon. Lady will have some difficulty in persuading the nation that, in any given circumstances, the Labour party, or indeed the Liberal Democrats, would have lower taxation than a Conservative Government. I invite the House to recall what has occurred in recent years to prove that point.

    We cut the basic rate of income tax from 33p to 25p, and the Labour party voted against it. We cut the top rate from 83p to 40p, and the Labour party voted against it. We lowered the starting rate to 20p, and the Labour party voted against it. We cut corporation tax, and the Labour party–[Hon. Members :– “Voted against it.”] It voted against it.

    Mrs. Beckett : The fact is that, after all those lines from the Prime Minister, people are still paying more tax. Everyone is paying more tax. What is the point of all that wriggling, when the figures that we have forced the Government to reveal tell the truth? The country now faces the biggest tax hike in British history and it is time for the Prime Minister to own up that, from April, the Government will squeeze every British family until the pips squeak.

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Lady disinters a few old cliches, but if she thinks that she can resurrect the tax record of that old rogue who was Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time she has a tough job. The right hon. Lady misses an essential point which is vital to the British taxpayer. Despite the tax increases, which I acknowledged a few moments ago, net take-home pay at all levels of income has risen substantially and the spending pattern and the living standards of everyone in the nation indicate that fact. Of course, we might, I suppose, have been able to keep taxes lower if there had been further reductions in expenditure. I would just like to know which reductions in expenditure that we have imposed have had support from a single Opposition Member in recent years.

    Mr. Lamont : Will the Prime Minister treat the posturing of the Labour party on taxes with the absolute contempt that it deserves? Is not it the case that taxes had to be increased to reduce borrowing, and that was responsible, whereas the Labour party wanted much higher taxes to finance much higher spending, which would have left borrowing at the same level and would have simply meant higher interest rates, more unemployment and no recovery?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. Interruptions are very time consuming.

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend is entirely right and I agree with every word he said.

     

    Q3. Ms Walley : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 25 January.

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

    Ms Walley : What has the Prime Minister to say to one of my constituents in Stoke-on-Trent, North a woman of 71? She wrote to me saying that she has a heart condition and that her husband has had a colostomy. They are unable to go out and unable to afford to heat their home. As the Prime Minister thinks that he has a question about VAT on fuel and as he is raising these taxes at the moment, will he tell us why there is so much incompetence and bungling in his Government that he has failed to raise £1.5 billion from uncollected taxes? Why is he making my constituents pay in fuel bills for uncollected taxes? [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Lady must be heard; she must not be shouted down. Has the hon. Lady completed her question?

    Ms Walley : Yes, Madam Speaker.

    Madam Speaker : Did you hear the question, Prime Minister?

    The Prime Minister : I believe that I did hear the question, Madam Speaker. It was quite clear.

    On the hon. Lady’s first point on value added tax on fuel, as she knows, my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor has introduced a very generous package to help people who are in particular need. I strongly suspect, although I cannot be sure of all the details of the hon. Lady’s constituent without further information, that she would be a beneficiary of that. I certainly hope that that will prove to be the case. As for the collection of taxation, it is our policy to make sure that taxes right across the board are fully collected. I wish, in terms of taxes and rents, that that was also the position of some local authorities on which the hon. Lady has served.

    Mr. Barry Porter : When will my right hon. Friend be able to report to the House on his recent conversations with the President of the Republic of Lebanon? Is it not appropriate to congratulate the President on the period of peace and stability after years of difficulty? Will he also emphasise to British industry and commerce that there are now enormous opportunities in the Lebanon?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right about the record of President Hariri. I had the opportunity to have a conversation with him yesterday. I have no doubt from our conversation that there are significant business interests for this country in the Lebanon. In view of my hon. Friend’s remarks, I will arrange for a written answer to be tabled, setting out the details of our discussion.

     

    Q4. Mr. Byers : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 25 January.

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

    Mr. Byers : Does the Prime Minister recall the 1992 Conservative election manifesto, which stated, “We are pledged to cut tax rates”? How does the right hon. Gentleman reconcile that promise to the electors with the freezing of personal allowances, the increase in national insurance contributions and the extension of VAT to domestic fuel? Does he accept that it is now becoming increasingly clear that the Conservative election victory was founded on deceit, distortion and misrepresentation?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is quite mistaken about that. The fundamental responsibility of any Government is to maintain sound money and the right conditions for a growing economy. That sometimes means that one has to raise taxes when one would prefer not to. We have had to do that, as I indicated to the right hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett) some moments ago. I do not suppose that we wished to raise taxes in 1981, but it led to years of sustained growth and improvement for the British economy, and I strongly suspect that the Budgets of 1993 will do precisely the same.

    Mrs. Browning : Given the encouraging signs from industry this week about recovery, particularly in manufacturing, will my right hon. Friend confirm that he will not seek an EC agreement for an energy tax to be imposed on industry, as advocated this morning on Radio 4 by the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) on behalf of the Liberal Democrats?

    The Prime Minister : I can see that there is some purpose in listening to Radio 4. I am interested in that information. I find it extraordinary that the Liberal Democrats should have advocated VAT on fuel, opposed VAT on fuel, claimed to be environmentalists and claimed not to be dealing with the environment, and now this morning we apparently have the latest example of utter double-dealing from them. On doorstep after doorstep we are used to it, and clearly it is becoming more and more apparent to people across the country.

     

    Q5. Mr. Wigley : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 25 January.

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

    Mr. Wigley : May I ask the Prime Minister to look again at the impact of the imposition of VAT on fuel on the disabled, the chronically sick and many pensioners? Is he aware that, for many of those people, the bill for fuel each week may be £20 or £30 and that the effect of VAT may be an increase of £3, £4 or even £5? Is he further aware that the £1 compensation announced by the Chancellor does not go anywhere near towards meeting that? In those circumstances, will he please introduce a compensation package specifically for those people by way of a heating allowance?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman, who is a tireless campaigner on behalf of the disabled, and has been for many years, will know that heating allowances in their original form were introduced by the Conservative Government to help people who were in difficulties. I agree with him about the need to help the most vulnerable people over higher fuel bills. That is why 5 million disabled people will get extra help with VAT on fuel and that extra help will arrive before their fuel bills arrive. I believe that that is a substantial amount of help which will be of great assistance.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 24 January 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 24th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Life-supporting Treatment

    Mrs. Ann Winterton : To ask the Prime Minister if the letter of 22 December from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State on the withdrawal of life-supporting treatment following receipt of an advance directive from a patient represents the policy of Her Majesty’s Government; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health sought to explain the current legal position on advance directives.

    Her Majesty’s Government acknowledge the right of individuals to draw up advance directives. People have a right, emphasised in the patients charter, to consent, or withhold consent, to treatment. Advance directives assist patients in the exercise of their legal rights and so ensure their lawful treatment.

    The House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics is examining this area, and is due to report soon. The Government will consider the Committee’s findings very carefully.

     

    Downing Street Dinner

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister if the invitations extended to political journalists to attend dinner at 10 Downing Street on 13 January stated that the proceedings would be on lobby terms.

    The Prime Minister : It is not my practice to discuss the nature of invitations to private events.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Pendry : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his engagements for Wednesday 19 January; and if he will name the individuals he met.

    The Prime Minister : I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.

     

    Jetstream Aircraft Ltd.

    Mr. Foulkes : To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has received personally on the future of Jetstream Aircraft Ltd.; what action he has taken; and if he will now agree to meet hon. Members with Ayrshire constituencies to discuss the aircraft.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 19 January 1994] : I have received representations from several hon. Members about Jetstream. The points raised are being pursued by the Departments responsible. Ministers at the DTI and I have discussed such matters with right hon. and hon. Members on a number of occasions. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Industry met a group of hon. Members to discuss Jetstream in November. I am generally willing to consider requests for meetings from hon. Members on departmental issues if and when they have exhausted contacts with the responsible Ministers.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 21 January 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 21st January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Mr. Gerry Adams

    Dame Angela Rumbold : To ask the Prime Minister if a response has yet been made to the letter he received from Mr. Gerry Adams dated 7 January; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : I received an unsigned letter on Mr. Adams’s headed notepaper, dated 7 January 1994, last week. I have placed in the Library a copy of that letter and of a reply from my private secretary which was sent on 20 January. Mr. Adams seeks to open issues for renegotiation by pointing back to a position which he asserts the Irish Government put forward in June last year. The joint declaration of 15 December was the result of many months of discussion between the United Kingdom and Irish Governments. It is a fair and balanced statement of constitutional principles and political realities, which safeguard the interests and aspirations of both sides of the community. As the Taoiseach and I have made clear, there can be no question of renegotiation of the joint declaration.

     

    Back to Basics

    Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister what are the implications of the Government”s “Back to Basics” policy for his office during 1994.

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the scope and effectiveness of his “Back to Basics” social policy.

    Mr. Rendel : To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what working definition of “back to basics” he uses; and what he has done in the past three months to implement the policy.

    The Prime Minister : “Back to basics” is intended to ensure that Government policies are based firmly on the common sense values of the British people and, in particular, that they encourage individual responsibility. The “back to basics” policy is especially important in such areas as education, law and order, and the provision of public services, but it applies across a range of other Government policies as well.

     

    Paymaster-General

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will set out the Departments to which the Paymaster-General has been attached since 1979.

    The Prime Minister : The Departments to which the Paymaster-General has been attached are listed.

    Date and Department to which responsible

    April 1976 to May 1979 – Department of Education and Science

    May 1979 to January 1981 – None

    January 1981 to September 1981 – None

    September 1981 to June 1983 – None

    June 1983 to September 1984 – Not applicable : post vacant

    September 1984 to September 1985 – None

    September 1985 to June 1987 – Department of Employment

    June 1987 to July 1989 – Her Majesty’s Treasury

    July 1989 to July 1990 – Her Majesty’s Treasury

    July 1990 to November 1990 – Her Majesty’s Treasury

    November 1990 to April 1992 – Northern Ireland Office

    April 1992 to date – Her Majesty’s Treasury

    Note : Except where noted, responsibility for Customs and Excise held by other Treasury Ministers.

    Included responsibility for Customs and Excise.

    Responsibility for Customs and Excise passed to the Economic Secretary in 1988.

    General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

    Dr. Lynne Jones : To ask the Prime Minister what are the procedures which apply in (a) the United Kingdom Parliament and (b) the European Parliament on the ratification of the Uruguay round of the GATT.

    The Prime Minister : The Government intend to present a White Paper to Parliament on the results of the Uruguay round later this year. The agreements will also be laid before Parliament, as with other international agreements. The European Community decision approving the results of the round will also be subject to United Kingdom parliamentary scrutiny in the usual way. The European Parliament is likely to be consulted, but the procedure used will depend on the treaty provisions which apply.

     

    Habitats

    Mr. Morley : To ask the Prime Minister whether he intends that all Secretaries of State should have a duty to comply with the requirements of the European Union directive 92/43 EEC on the conservation of natural habitats of wild fauna and flora; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : The Secretaries of State will have duties, both general and specific, as appropriate and commensurate with the requirements of the directive.

     

    International Year of the Family

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister what steps the Government are taking to encourage and promote the International Year of the Family.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Eccles (Miss Lestor) on 6 December 1993, Official Report, columns 29-30.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 20 January 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 20th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Councils of Ministers

    Q5. Mr. Barnes : To ask the Prime Minister what proposals he has made, in the light of the decisions of the European Councils in Edinburgh 1992 and Brussels 1993, to increase the transparency and accountability of decision making, including the recording of votes of each member state, at meetings of European Community Councils of Ministers; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : We supported the Council decision of 6 December on the publication of Council votes; and we shall routinely provide to Parliament all consequent published information, which will be made available in the Library of the House. We have also encouraged the Danish and Belgian presidencies in holding a number of open Council sessions.

     

    Honours List

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister what is (a) the number of each honour granted in the new year’s honours list and (b) the number of each such honour was awarded to (i) public servants, (ii) civil servants, (iii) officers of the armed forces, (iv) other members of the armed forces and (v) for political services.

    The Prime Minister : My honours recommendations for the new year list contained 970 names. The breakdown of awards is as follows :

    |Number

    ——————————-

    Life Peer |2

    Privy Counsellor |2

    CH |3

    Knight |30

    GCB |1

    KCB |2

    CB |14

    GCMG |1

    CMG |2

    DBE |3

    CBE |98

    OBE |241

    MBE |571

    Around 180 awards were granted to public servants–people working, for example, in health, education, the police, the fire service, public transport and local government–and 170 awards to state servants, including civil servants. These awards were given for their work as public and civil servants. Some of the awards given for voluntary work may also have gone to public or state servants, but it is not possible to identify these. Forty-nine awards went to individuals either for their political or for their political and public service. Awards to members of the armed forces are the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence.

     

    Value Added Tax (Domestic Fuel)

    Ms Jowell : To ask the Prime Minister how many representations he has received (a) in favour of and (b) against the imposition of value added tax on domestic fuel.

    The Prime Minister : I have received a substantial number of representations on this subject.

     

    Arms Sales Register

    Mr. Frank Field : To ask the Prime Minister if he will report what progress he has made in establishing the register of arms sales announced after the European Council meeting on 8 May 1991.

    The Prime Minister : I called for a United Nations register of conventional arms transfers at the Luxembourg European Council on 8 April 1991.

    The United Nations General Assembly voted on 9 December 1991 to establish such a register, covering seven major weapons systems, with first returns due on 30 April 1993. The United Kingdom submitted its return to the United Nations Secretary-General on 29 April 1993. The return covered arms imports and exports for the calendar year 1992, including background information; a copy was placed in the Library of the House.

    The report of the United Nations Secretary-General, published last October, included returns from some 80 countries.

    The United Kingdom will seek to build on this successful start to the initiative to improve its effectiveness; we will be represented on a United Nations panel of experts shortly to discuss the operation and expansion of the register.

     

    Mr. Frank Machon

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what record his Office has of telephone conversations held between his predecessor and Mr. Frank Machon of Glasgow in (a) October 1988, (b) February 1989 and (c) March 1989.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave to him on 18 January 1994, Official Report, column 456.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 January.

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

     

    Iraq

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what medical evidence he has received from the doctor accompanying the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath) on his recent visit to Iraq, from Harvard medical school, and from the hon. Members for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galloway) and for Linlithgow; and if he will reconsider his policy on United Nations sanctions against Iraq.

    The Prime Minister : We have received various reports about the health conditions in Iraq and are aware that they continue to deteriorate. No medical evidence was passed to us by the doctor accompanying the right hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath) on his recent visit to Iraq.

    Medical supplies have never been subject to sanctions. Our quarrel is not with the people of Iraq but with Saddam’s regime.

    The Security Council again concluded on 18 January that there were no grounds for lifting sanctions against Iraq.

     

    British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body

    Mrs. Ann Winterton : To ask the Prime Minister what public funds are currently made available (a) through the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and (b) through other channels to finance the British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body ; what has been the level of such fundings in each of the years since it commenced; what is the purpose of those funds; what information he has relating to the expenditure by that body upon travel, hotel accommodation and refreshments in each of those years; by whom that expenditure was incurred; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 17 January 1994] : The British-Irish Inter-Parliamentary Body is funded jointly by the British Government, through a grant in aid from Her Majesty’s Treasury administered by the British group of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and by the Irish Government’s Department of Foreign Affairs. The body was established in 1990 to provide a forum for British and Irish parliamentarians to discuss Anglo-Irish relations. Twenty-five Members of Parliament and 25 members of the Oireachtas belong. Two plenary conferences are held each year, one in the United Kingdom and one in Ireland. There is a steering committee and four separate committees tasked to study and prepare reports on a range of issues including political, economic, social, cultural, educational and environmental matters. Since 1990 British Government expenditure has been as follows :

    | £

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

    1989-90

    Total expenditure |46,757

    Accommodation |7,006

    Travel/transport |1,442

    Refreshments |8,489

    1990-91

    Total expenditure |64,998

    Accommodation |639

    Travel/transport |10,826

    Refreshments |2,539

    1991-92

    Total expenditure |98,310

    Accommodation |16,150

    Travel/transport |23,280

    Refreshments |11,214

    1992-93

    Total expenditure |78,352

    Accommodation |9,616

    Travel/transport |13,798

    Refreshments |4,814

    1993-94

    Final expenditure figures for the year are not yet available but are forecast to fall within the budget.

     

    Correspondence

    Mr. Tyler : To ask the Prime Minister when he will reply to the letter of 18 January 1993 from the hon. Member for North Cornwall on the subject of compensation for Gulf war widows; and if he will give reasons for the delay.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 18 January 1994] : As the hon. Member knows, he has received replies from my principal private secretary and from me. I am aware, however, that a decision is awaited on the matter at issue and I hope that conclusions can be reached shortly.

  • PMQT – 20 January 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 20th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Oppenheim : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 January.

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

    Mr. Oppenheim : Will the Prime Minister join me in paying tribute to the courage of British troops who have fought so bravely for their country, particularly in Iraq? Does my right hon. Friend share the widespread sense of revulsion in the country at the behaviour of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galloway) in going to Iraq and saluting the man responsible for perpetrating such unspeakable and appalling atrocities against his own people and also at the actions of other Opposition Members who, by their actions, have given succour to terrorists?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend and I believe that the whole House will think that the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galloway) was foolish in his action. There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has inflicted suffering on the Shias and the marsh Arabs, is oppressing the Kurds and denying basic human rights, has victimised British citizens and is failing to comply with United Nations Security Council resolutions. There is, frankly, nothing to be said for him and nothing should be said for him, by any Member of the House.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the huge tax increases to be imposed this year and next year will check economic recovery?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. and learned Gentleman had taken the trouble to listen to my right hon. and learned Friend, he would have heard him say that the recovery is now

    “strong enough not to be stopped”.

    I remind the right hon. and learned Gentleman of the facts. The economy has now grown more than 2 per cent. in 12 months and has grown for six successive quarters. Retail sales have grown 4 per cent. in the last year and car production, manufacturing output and export volumes are all up. With low inflation and low interest rates, there is no doubt whatsoever that recovery is under way.

    Mr. John Smith : I note that the Prime Minister does not deny that the Chancellor said that the tax increases would check economic recovery. Does not he understand that, as new tax codes arrive in homes all over Britain, people are now seeing the full impact of those increases on their personal standards of living? Why cannot the Prime Minister understand that increases equivalent to 7p on income tax are bound to hit family budgets for six?

    The Prime Minister : I reiterate to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that the economy is growing stronger daily. It is growing and it will continue to grow.

    Perhaps the right hon. and learned Gentleman could remind the House where tax rates stood when he left office. Investment income was taxed at 98 per cent., top-rate income tax was 83 per cent., corporation tax was 52 per cent. and the basic rate was 33 per cent. The right hon. and learned Gentleman is in no position to talk about taxing, either in the past or today. He complains about the spending reductions made in the public expenditure round. Would he keep those reductions? Would he tax to restore them?

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister recall saying, during the general election campaign,

    “Greater taxation would kill recovery stone dead”?

    If that was true then, why is not it true now–or is this just one of the many things that the Prime Minister finds it easy to forget ever having mentioned?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. and learned Gentleman wants to discuss the question of forgetting things, let me point out that he may have forgotten the words of Lord Desai, whom he sacked for telling the truth. Lord Desai said :

    “It is good for the Labour party to have debate about alternatives, competing policy mixes, provided that no one thinks that adopting them or not will make the slightest difference to the actual reality.”

    The right hon. and learned Gentleman has no economic policy whatever and he cannot hide behind that for ever.

    Dame Jill Knight : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is deplorable for a woman holding the post of headmistress to deny her pupils the chance of seeing one of the greatest English plays ever written by the greatest English playwright, on the ground that it depicts heterosexual love? Will my right hon. Friend join me in deploring that example of political correctness?

    The Prime Minister : I think that my hon. Friend has spoken for not only the majority of people in the House, but the majority of people in the country. As for the wider question of politically correct ideology, there is no doubt that it is widely unpopular among parents, who want schools to teach their children the basics of English language, English history and all the subjects that will equip them for a proper adulthood.

    Mr. Ashdown : On the subject of listening– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I want some order in the House before we make any further progress.

    Mr. Ashdown rose– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I shall have to start naming Members–[Hon. Members :– “Hear, hear!”]–on both sides of the House. This is an abuse of very precious time.

    Mr. Ashdown : On the subject of listening to the Chancellor, did the Prime Minister by any chance hear him say on radio this morning that he did not recognise the difference between spending and investment? Could that be the reason why Britain consistently languishes near the bottom of the class of the 22 advanced countries when it comes to investing in education and our future?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman clearly failed to understand what my right hon. and learned Friend had to say this morning. If he examined the text more carefully, he might be able to ask a more credible question on another occasion.

    Sir Fergus Montgomery : Does my right hon. Friend accept that, despite the professional whingers, the vast majority of people want to see more deregulation, unnecessary regulation ripped up and bossy bureaucracy banned and that they want unnecessary form-filling for the sake of form- filling to be a thing of the past?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right, not just for people but also, of course, for business and for many voluntary bodies as well. There is no doubt that the growth of regulation, from the European Community, from this House and from local government, has grown outrageously over the last 25 years and it is necessary to get rid of the regulations. If I had the support of the Opposition in doing that I should be delighted, for we will be introducing a Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill which will produce the biggest bonfire of unnecessary regulations that the House has ever seen. We will see then which Lobby Labour Members are in.

     

    Q2. Mr. Mike O’Brien : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 January.

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

    Mr. O’Brien : As parliamentary adviser to the Police Federation, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the criticisms of his Police and Magistrates Courts Bill from the police, chief constables and former Home Secretaries such as Lords Whitelaw and Carr, who say that the Bill comes dangerously close to politicising the police? Will he now seek all-party agreement on the Bill and stop introducing things such as the Sheehy report and the Bill which, in the face of rising crime, are undermining police morale?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman will have to do better than that if he wishes to keep his new job. One of the aims of the reforms is to put a much greater breadth of experience on to police authorities and, as the hon. Gentleman may know, the intention is to bring the experience of many leading members of the community–head teachers, business men, doctors and others–on to police authorities. The police welcome that and they also welcome the increased individual authority given to chief constables, neither of which points was mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

    Mr. Gale : Will my right hon. Friend join me in applauding today’s launch of the guaranteed pensioners income bond? Will he accept that the 30 per cent. of my constituents in Thanet, North who are over the retirement age will welcome the Government’s recognition of those who have worked hard all their lives, not to be a burden on the state but to be able to provide for their old age themselves?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. The new bond will be widely welcomed because it will give pensioners a guaranteed return on their savings month in, month out. The other essential element, especially for people on fixed incomes and those who are retired, is to ensure that the value of their savings is not eroded by inflation. By keeping inflation low, we are helping every pensioner on a fixed income. Not since 1946 has there been such a successful period for inflation as the last 12 months and we intend to keep inflation at a very low level.

     

    Q3. Mr. Betts : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 January.

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

    Mr. Betts : Does the Prime Minister accept that, in pursuing its disgraceful housing sales policy which disadvantaged so many people in housing need, Westminster council must have annually reported that policy to the Government in its housing investment programme submission? Does he agree that the Government must specifically have approved all the subsidies for the cash incentive scheme under which Westminster emptied its houses and that the Government must also have given a specific consent to the disposal of all properties for which a general consent did not exist under the Housing Act 1985? Will the Prime Minister therefore give a clear and comprehensive statement to the House of what knowledge his Government had of those policies and what specific approvals his Ministers and his officials gave to that council to enable those policies to be put into practice?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman clearly is in some dispute with his Front Bench about Labour policy. The hon. Gentleman refers to the disgraceful policy of selling council houses. For much of the past two years, Opposition Front Bench spokesmen have been trying to pretend that they are in favour of selling council houses. [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The Prime Minister must be heard. [Interruption.] Order. I shall not proceed until there is some order in the House.

    The Prime Minister : As I was saying a moment ago, the hon. Gentleman had better be clear about whether his party is in favour of selling council houses or not, for there is a great difference between what he said and what spokesmen on the Front Bench have been saying. The reality is that hundreds of thousands of people in the country are home owners today because we gave them the freedom to be so, and that policy is undoubtedly correct.

  • Mr Major’s Letter to Gerry Adams – 20 January 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s letter to Gerry Adams, dated the 20th January 1994. The letter was written on behalf of John Major and signed by Roderic Lyne. The letter was issued to the press on the same day.

    [Dear Mr Adams,]

    The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to the letter dated 7 January which, though unsigned, is on your headed notepaper.

    As you know, the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach made their Joint Declaration on 15 December. It is the responsibility of the two Governments and reflected intensive work between them in the preceding weeks.

    Your letter seeks to reopen issues for renegotiation by pointing back to a position you say the Irish Government put forward in June last year. Both the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach have made clear that there can be no question of renegotiation of their Joint Declaration. It provides a balanced framework for peace and democracy which recognises the interests and aspirations of both main traditions that exist in Ireland. That text, and only that text, is what is at issue.

    You announced that you were writing to the Prime Minister. In the circumstances, the Prime Minister has decided to make this letter and that received from your office publicly available.

    [Yours sincerely]
    [Roderick Lyne]

  • PMQT Written Answers – 18 January 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 18th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Iraq and Iran

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what record has been kept of representations made to the Prime Minister by members of the public in regard to Iraq since 1985.

    The Prime Minister : Records of representations from members of the public in the form of correspondence on this and other topics that have been received by my office since November 1990, and to which I or my office have replied, have been retained. No records exist prior to April 1989.

     

    Scott Inquiry

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if any request has been made by (a) Lord Justice Scott or (b) members of the public to Her Majesty’s Government to permit cameras and tape recorders to be taken into and used in the Scott inquiry.

    The Prime Minister : The procedures of the Scott inquiry are a matter for Lord Justice Scott.

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has received and from whom in the last six months that the terms of reference or the workings of the Scott inquiry into arms for Iraq should be modified or changed.

    The Prime Minister : In the last six months I have answered a written question from the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) concerning a change to the procedures of the inquiry, and a letter from the hon. Member for Coventry, South-East (Mr. Cunningham) seeking an extension to the inquiry’s terms of reference. I have received no other requests for changes.

     

    Christmas Cards

    Mr. Bayley : To ask the Prime Minister how many official Christmas cards were sent out in 1993 by (a) himself, (b) civil servants and (c) staff of Government agencies working in or to his office; and how much these cards cost (i) to buy, (ii) to post and (iii) in staff time to sign, address and place in envelopes.

    The Prime Minister : The information as requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

     

    Arms Sales

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what records are held at 10 Downing street of a telephone conversation made between his predecessor and Mr. Frank Machon in regard to arms sales in January 1989.

    The Prime Minister : As far as I am aware, there have not been any conversations and there are no records.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

     

    Channel Tunnel Rail Link

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish a full list of all statements he has made, and/or press notices issued by his Department, which referred to a possible completion date for the channel tunnel rail link, the dates on which each such statement was made and the possible completion date which was mentioned.

    The Prime Minister : I have not made any such statements.

     

    Crossrail

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish a full list of all statements he has made and/or press notices issued by his Department, which referred to a possible completion date for the crossrail project, the dates on which each such statement was made and the possible completion date which was mentioned.

    The Prime Minister : I have made no statements nor has my Department issued any press notices which referred to a possible completion date for the crossrail project.

     

    Broadcasting Acts

    Mr. Madden : To ask the Prime Minister what information he has received from the Irish Republic concerning its decision not to renew section 31 of the Irish Broadcasting Act 1960; when he received copies of guidelines issued to the staff of Irish broadcasting organisations following the non-renewal of section 31; what action he proposes concerning section 10 of the Broadcasting Act 1990; what representations he has received concerning households in the United Kingdom receiving television and radio broadcasts originating in the Irish Republic and observing different broadcasting requirements; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : The Irish Government’s announcement of their decision was made immediately available to us, together with relevant background information. So far as the United Kingdom Broadcasting restrictions are concerned, I refer to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) on 17 January, Official Report, column 369. I have not received any representations concerning the reception of broadcasts originating in the Irish Republic.

  • PMQT – 18 January 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 18th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q1. Mr. Enright : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to visit South Elmsall.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : I have no immediate plans to do so.

    Mr. Enright : With the closure of Frickley colliery, one in three men in South Elmsall is now out of work, which is extremely serious. Will the Prime Minister promise to back Wakefield district council’s bid for coalfield area funds so that it can co-operate, as it has successfully before, with the local chamber of commerce, British Coal Enterprise and others to produce a regeneration programme, which is so desperately needed? Wakefield council has shown that it can do it sensibly and sensitively and I ask that it be given the opportunity.

    The Prime Minister : I understand the difficulties that face the hon. Gentleman and those of his constituents presently without work. I am delighted that unemployment has fallen in his constituency in recent years, but I recognise the serious problems that exist there. I do not believe that the hon. Gentleman’s constituency will specifically benefit from the coalfield area fund, but a wide range of help will be available. In the hon. Gentleman’s area alone, £4 million will be available for an industrial and commercial development programme, and £3 million will be provided to training and enterprise councils for training and business support. As the hon. Gentleman will know, intermediate area status has been granted. Regional enterprise grants have been extended and, in addition, in excess of £2.5 million of European structural funds has been granted to the Wakefield area. We shall continue to keep those under review and do all that we can to help miners who have lost their jobs.

     

    Engagements

    Q2. Mr. Rathbone : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Mr. Rathbone : Will my right hon. Friend spare a moment today to congratulate police and Customs on the co-ordinated job that led to the seizure of £50 million worth of cocaine in Manchester recently? Is he in a position yet to announce how the Government will co-ordinate Government departmental activity to give new impetus to the Government’s own efforts to counter drugs misuse?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend touches on a vital point, which is of great concern to this Government and across Europe. The fight against drugs involves all of us–police, customs, parents and Government–and we must all play our part in stepping up the campaign against those who deal in that trade. I welcome the seizure of cocaine to which my hon. Friend refers and congratulate all those involved in it. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary announced before Christmas that the Government are setting up a drugs unit, the purpose of which will be to ensure that the policies of all Departments are co-ordinated to improve co-ordinated action against the general problem of drugs.

    Mr. John Smith : Can the Prime Minister tell us whether by any chance he received a memorandum around the time of the Budget from the Treasury informing him that freezing income tax allowances for two years in succession would force 400,000 low-paid people into income tax for the first time? Was he aware that his Budgets would have that result?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, take-home pay for people in all strands of income has risen materially over recent years–by 40 per cent. plus for those on average earnings since 1979 and by 30 to 40 per cent. for those on half-average earnings. The right hon. and learned Gentleman might also recall that it fell between 1974 and 1979 for single people and for couples without children, and barely rose for couples with children.

    Mr. John Smith : That was hardly an answer to my question. If the Prime Minister cannot answer that question may I ask him whether anyone told him that the tax changes in those Budgets would put the equivalent of 7p on income tax and that a typical family would have to pay another £1,330 over the next two years, or are those things that he preferred not to know about?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. and learned Gentleman was not entirely satisfied with the first answer, let me tell him further that even after the Budget there will be half a million fewer taxpayers next year than there were in 1979. Tax rates have fallen dramatically over that period and low inflation means that freezing personal allowances will cost basic rate taxpayers 34p a week when compared with inflation. He mentioned people on low incomes, but he neglected to mention family credit, child care allowance, the uprating in child benefit and the fact that the real take-home pay of families on average earnings will be 40 per cent. higher than when his party was last in government.

    Mr. John Smith : May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to make a special effort of memory? I know that it is hard for him with all these papers crossing his desk all the time, but can he not struggle to recall his repeated promises to the British people that he would not increase income tax or national insurance and that he would not extend the scope of value added tax? Is not the breaking of those promises the reason for justified public cynicism and anger at this discredited Government?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is beginning to sound like a very worn record. It is absolutely clear that the standard rates of tax under the Conservative party have dropped dramatically since the Opposition were in government and, in any given circumstance, the rate of taxation under any Conservative Government would be lower than under any Labour Government at any time.

     

    Q3. Mrs. Ann Winterton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Mrs. Winterton : Bearing in mind the interest presently shown by the press in the lives of the politicians, does my right hon. Friend agree that the press itself should show the same honour and integrity that it expects of others?

    The Prime Minister : Madam Speaker,– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I am as anxious as anyone to hear the response to that question.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend might think that ; I could not possibly comment.

     

    Q5. Mr. Mudie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Mr. Mudie : The Prime Minister will be aware that at permanent secretary level he was advised that the aid package to the Malaysian power station was a bad buy, uneconomic and an abuse of the aid system, yet he still instructed that the aid should be given. In view of the fact that it will cost the British taxpayer more than £230 million, does he consider that to be good judgment, and if so, why is he refusing to allow Members of the House to see papers relating to that decision?

    The Prime Minister : The Government made a commitment to the Pergau project in 1989 personally to the Malaysian Prime Minister. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I decided in 1991 to proceed, both to honour the commitment made by my predecessor and in the wider context of maintaining billions of pounds of British exports to Malaysia–exports of £5 billion since 1982, and doubled exports between 1988 and 1992. To have withdrawn the contract would have put British jobs at risk. It is about time that the Opposition took a consistent position on these things. How does the hon. Gentleman reconcile his party’s call for lower unemployment with his criticism of this project? The British Government are backing British business and achieving orders abroad and all the hon. Gentleman can do is carp and criticise. Does he want jobs for British workers or does he not?

    Mr. Kynoch : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the latest figures for manufacturing output show further significant growth? Does he agree that that represents further proof that the United Kingdom is leading Europe from recovery into a period of sustained growth?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I can certainly confirm that to my hon. Friend and the basis of this is the record that we have on inflation, the fact that we have been able to bring interest rates down and the fact that it is now clear to everyone that the British economy is recovering and growing–recovering more comprehensively and growing more rapidly than any other economy in western Europe.

     

    Q6. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Mr. Winnick : Is the Prime Minister aware of the concern felt by so many people at the amount of financial sleaze in this country arising from Government policies and attitudes? Is he further aware that the one “back to basics” attitude that people desperately want and crave is the restoring of integrity to public life? Is it not clear that they will not get that from the Government?

    The Prime Minister : I agree entirely about the necessity for integrity in public life. The hon. Gentleman and other Opposition Members have sought to take a moral stand about standards in public life. I do not object to that. It is also necessary for those Opposition Members to look at their own colleagues who spread smear and innuendo on a week-by-week basis with a complete disregard for the truth. Smear and innuendo are the hallmarks of political cowardice and they have become the trademark of the Opposition.

    Dr. Liam Fox : Will my right hon. Friend congratulate Rover Cars on its 9 per cent. increase in sales last year many of which were exported through Royal Portbury docks in my constituency? Is he aware that their production output outstripped Mercedes Benz in a difficult market and that neither the success of Rover nor Royal Portbury docks would have been possible without the privatisation programme which only the Conservative party would have had the courage to champion?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend both about the remarkable success of Rover Cars which I hope and expect will continue in future, and the success of privatisation both specifically and generally. It has been remarkable. What we now see in the motor car industry–in Rover and other parts of the industry–is that it has made the most remarkable turn around in recent years and soon will be a net exporter of motor cars. It is quite different from the old days a few years ago when Red Robbo and others were wrecking the entire industry.

     

    Q7. Ms Quin : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Ms Quin : Is it not the case that the only clear message that the Prime Minister gave to the public yesterday when he was questioned by the Scott inquiry was, “Don’t ask me, I’m only Prime Minister?”

    The Prime Minister : I suggest that, in due course, the hon. Lady reads the six hours of detailed evidence that I gave. She might then regard her remarks of a moment ago to be just a touch inadequate.

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q9. Mr. Luff : To ask the Prime Minister whether he plans to make an official visit to Worcester.

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

    Mr. Luff : If my right hon. Friend were to visit Worcester– [Interruption.] would he join me in welcoming the decision by two of the teacher trade unions to drop their boycott of national curriculum tests? Does he agree that that sets an excellent example for the other teacher trade union–the National Union of Teachers–to follow?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I very strongly agree with that. I very strongly agree with the two teacher trade unions that have decided to drop their boycott. It would be of immense help, not just to the profession of teaching but, essentially, to the children in the classroom, if the NUT were to take precisely the same action so that the tests can proceed. I believe that there is no justifiable reason for the boycott in the future. There was little, if any, justification before ; now there is none. The NUT should follow the leadership of the other two unions.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 14 January 1994

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

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Data Protection

    Mr. Cohen : To ask the Prime Minister whether he will make arrangements for the Data Protection Registrar to inspect relevant contracts with suppliers of IT services that involve the use of personal data held by his Department in order to check whether all appropriate arrangements in relation to the Data Protection Act 1984 have been made, and whether such contracts make provisions for the registrar to make random inspections in order to check the suppliers’ compliance in with the eighth data protection principle.

    The Prime Minister : My office has not placed any contracts with suppliers of IT services that involve the use of personal data held by my office.

     

    Civil List

    Mr. Alan Williams : To ask the Prime Minister what is the annual financial value of the inflation-proofing built into the civil list; and by what amounts that has exceeded the sum required for annual indexation based on the actual cost of living in each year since the new civil list was introduced.

    The Prime Minister : There is no inflation-proofing built into the civil list. While the £7.9 million fixed annual payment took account of the average rate of inflation for the years 1979-1989, if actual inflation falls below this level the household is not in a position to spend the surplus but is expected to carry it forward to the end of the 10- year period. This was made quite clear in paragraph 12 of the 1990 report of the Royal Trustees–HC 629–which reads : “If cost inflation is lower in overall terms than the rate assumed in paragraph 11, the Royal Trustees would expect the Royal Household to carry forward a surplus at the end of the decade, for use in the next period.”

    Civil list expenditure to date under the new arrangements has fallen well below the actual rate of inflation.

    Mr. Alan Williams : To ask the Prime Minister what account is taken of the inflation-proofing element in the annual refund of civil list money relating to those who have been removed from the civil list.

    The Prime Minister : As set out in the report of the Royal Trustees- -paragraphs 21 to 23 of HC464, 11 February 1993–Her Majesty the Queen now reimburses the Consolidated Fund for the full cost of all the parliamentary annuities paid to members of the royal family except the Queen Mother and the Duke of Edinburgh. The reimbursement for 1993 has already been received. The annuities are fixed sums and the question of inflation does not arise.

     

    Scott Inquiry

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister (1) whether he has provided Lord Justice Scott with all documents requested for use by the inquiry;

    (2) what documents he has submitted to Lord Justice Scott in advance of his appearance before the inquiry.

    The Prime Minister : The only request I have received is for a written statement, which I submitted on 12 January.

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what guidelines he has issued to Ministers in regard to which questions on the involvement of the United Kingdom in arms and military equipment exports to Iraq since 1985 may be substantively answered while the Scott inquiry is still sitting.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Warley, West (Mr. Spellar) on 7 June 1993, Official Report, column 14.

     

    Mr. Frank Machon

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what record he has of telephone calls made by Mr. Frank Machon of Glasgow to officials at 10 Downing Street between September and the end of December 1993.

    The Prime Minister : None.

     

    Radio Broadcast

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a transcript of his interview with “The World this Weekend” broadcast on Radio 4 on 2 January.

    The Prime Minister : No, it is not my policy to do so.

     

    The Union

    Mr. Nicholas Winterton : To ask the Prime Minister whether he intends to make it his policy that the county of Cambridgeshire, or any other similar area in England, Scotland or Wales, will be permitted to secede from the Union should the majority of the residents of that county agree freely and concurrently with a majority of the residents of any other foreign country that they wish to do so; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 12 January 1993] : For my own part, I whole-heartedly support the continuation of the Union in its present form. The question of secession arises only in the context of nations rather than areas within the different jurisdictions. The majority of people in each of the constituent parts of the United Kingdom wish to maintain the Union.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 13 January 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 13th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    GCHQ

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting with trade union leaders on 20 December 1993 regarding trade union recognition of GCHQ.

    The Prime Minister : I met representatives of the civil service unions to discuss trade union membership at GCHQ at their request, following a series of discussions they had held with officials. I explained that the Government’s overriding objective remained to ensure the maintenance of continuous operations at GCHQ necessary for the protection of national security. In that context it was necessary also to ensure that the staff were not subject to potential conflicts of loyalty.

    Against that background, however, I indicated that the Government were prepared to enable the Government Communications Staff Federation, the registered trade union for GCHQ staff, to affiliate to the Council of Civil Service Unions, subject to conditions to guarantee its continuing independence. This would have allowed the staff of GCHQ to be represented in discussions between the Government and the unions on matters affecting the civil service generally in a way in which they are not at present. The national trade unions have indicated that they do not regard this as acceptable. There are no plans for further meetings, but the Government remain willing to discuss any further proposals that the unions may wish to put forward.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what were his official engagements for Wednesday 12 January.

    The Prime Minister : I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, in addition to my duties in this House.

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 13 January.

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

     

    Petitions

    Mr. Spearing : To ask the Prime Minister what is the policy of Her Majesty’s Government in respect of responses to parliamentary petitions ; and if he will review current practice.

    The Prime Minister : Individual Departments respond as they see fit to parliamentary petitions. I have no plans to review current practice.