The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Category: 1995

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Kremlin Banquet – 9 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech at a banquet given by the Russian President at the Kremlin on 9th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President,

    We have gathered here in Moscow today for the final European commemoration of the end of the War in Europe 50 years ago.

    The British people saw the war through from beginning to end – the commemorations across Britain on Sunday witnessed deep emotions.
    Our two countries’ shared endeavour during the war was exemplified in the Arctic convoys, as British forces from all the Services fought alongside their allies to sustain your war effort. The reunion of our veterans in Murmansk and Archangel will have been a moving occasion. In Western Europe the horrors of war gave way to reconciliation and co-operation. Yet Europe stayed divided for over four decades.

    Tonight in Moscow we bow our heads to those sacrifices 50 years ago. But we also rejoice that Europe is no longer divided; that a new democratic Russia is reclaiming its European identity; and that at last we are working together to realise the lost opportunities of 1945. This time we have to get it right.

    Mr President,

    May I propose a toast:

    To the memory of those who fell in war that our countries today might live together in peace.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Memorial Complex at Poklonnaya Gora – 9 May 1995

    Below is Mr Major’s speech at the opening of the Memorial Complex at Poklonnaya Gora on Tuesday 9th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President,

    Fifty years ago in Berlin Marshal Zhukov and his British, American and French colleagues accepted the capitulation of the Nazi regime. The war in Europe was over.

    This new memorial complex reminds us of the losses of the Soviet peoples in that war. Their sacrifices were on a scale it is still hard to grasp today. The civilian losses in Leningrad alone exceeded the total British military losses for the whole war.

    The British poet W H Auden wrote:

    “To save your world you asked this man to die:

    Would this man, could he see you now, ask why?”

    I believe that he would not. All those sacrifices were worthwhile. He would understand.

    Mr President,

    Political leadership has passed to a generation too young to have fought in that war. We face instead the responsibility of peace. Having banished the divisions of the past, we must let not even the shadow of a new division fall across Europe. We need to forge a chain of new relationships binding us together in a durable peace. We together share a responsibility to spare our peoples the suffering of conflict, within as well as beyond our national borders.

    To this end we in Britain see a continuing need for relationships and institutions which have served us well. But other mechanisms will be needed too. Britain is looking for a complete system of partnerships in which partnership with Russia must be a central component.

    Mr President,

    Some 50 years ago, our countries came together in the common endeavour of war. 50 years later, our responsibility is to work together in a shared responsibility of peace. We work to shape the European institutions of the next century. To become partners in prosperity. And to build for the future a Europe free from hate and fear.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with John Bruton – 9 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview with John Bruton in Moscow on Tuesday 9th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me just, by way of introduction, say a word or two about the talks that the Taoiseach and I have had this afternoon. We have taken the opportunity of both being here in Moscow to discuss a range of issues and I will elaborate upon those in a moment. But I would like to say, before I do, that this afternoon’s discussions have been another further illustration, if one would need it, that the relationship between the British government and the Irish government is as good, as sound and as close today as I believe it has been at any stage in the past and I am delighted that that is so and I believe the Taoiseach feels precisely the same way about it.

    We touched upon a range of matters this afternoon, let me run through those we dealt with and then you may wish to ask a few questions about them. We looked at the agenda for the forthcoming European Council at Cannes and we discussed a range of issues, most noticeably the problem faced right across Western Europe on drugs, the sort of issues that are going to be discussed at the Cannes Conference. We took a further look ahead to the Intergovernmental Conference itself. Clearly there are a range of issues, institutional questions and other issues as well, and we had a very preliminary discussion about that and agreed that we would resume bilateral discussion about that at our next formal bilateral summit. We have not agreed a date for that but we would expect it to be probably before the middle of September and our officials will now look and see if they can find a specific date for it. This is part of a series of bilaterals that we have agreed to have, two a year alternately in Dublin and London, and thus far they have proved extremely worthwhile and extremely productive.

    We discussed the present situation in the talks about Ireland. I was able to say to the Taoiseach that our talks with the Loyalist Paramilitaries are proceeding extremely well, we are very happy with the developments there have been thus far and those of course are continuing.

    I also confirmed to the Taoiseach that Michael Ancram will meet Sinn Fein tomorrow, for the first occasion upon which there have been discussions at Ministerial level between Sinn Fein’s representatives and a representative of the British government. I expect these talks to go on for some time, there are a range of matters that we will need to discuss there. The purpose of these talks is to reach sufficient agreement to enable Sinn Fein to enter into all-party political talks, that is the objective, we wish to help and ease Sinn Fein into bilateral political talks in due course.

    Clearly that does mean dealing with a range of issues, most obviously it means dealing with the question of decommissioning of arms, and we have made it clear in the past that it will be necessary for Sinn Fein to agree that decommissioning will take place, to agree the modalities of decommissioning, and then to move forward to some practical demonstrations. And that is not just the question of the British government saying that needs to be done, the reality is that unless that is done the other political parties will not engage in bilateral talks. To move forward to bilateral talks is essential if we are going to carry this process as far forward as we wish to and we will enter into those talks with Sinn Fein in the hope that we will be able to satisfactorily move Sinn Fein from the present position into a position where the other political parties will be happy to engage in dialogue with them.

    That is a broad brush outline of the matters we discussed this afternoon, the Taoiseach may wish to add something and then we will take any questions you may have.

    MR BRUTON:

    As the Prime Minister said, we discussed the drugs issue which is a major problem in Europe and in both our countries and we are anxious to see action taken both individually and at a European level to deal with this scourge which is affecting the livelihoods and happiness of so many families in our two countries.

    We are also very keen to see the Intergovernmental Conference work, to see the European Union enlarge in an effective way and we discussed in a preliminary fashion some of the issues that will be coming up at Cannes and later on in Majorca in the lead-up to the Intergovernmental Conference on these questions.

    I welcomed very much what the Prime Minister said to me, as he has now said to you, the fact that the British government is working, as is the Irish government, to a situation where all parties will take part in discussions with both governments and with all other parties on the same basis. Obviously a number of important issues remain to be resolved before one can reach that point, but what is very clear is that it is the intention of Her Majesty’s government and the Irish government to seek to achieve that objective as soon as is feasible. Obviously patience will be required, a willingness to understand the concerns of the other side of the table will be required from all participants, but we believe that that requirement will be met.

    QUESTION:

    You said that there was a question-mark over the talks which start tomorrow, because you have put a challenge to Sinn Fein about whether they would condemn the violent demonstration in Londonderry. They did not condemn those people who took part in that demonstration. Why have you decided to go ahead with the talks anyway?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I set out in the House of Commons on Thursday that there are much wider issues at stake. The interests of the people of Northern Ireland are to try and see this process through and I think that is the thing that weighs most heavily on my mind. As I set out in the House of Commons last week, I think we need to look at those wider interests, we need to ensure that nothing artificially puts a block upon the prospects of progress. I have no doubt that the demonstration there was in Derry last week was not Derry people, I don’t think Derry need feel any concern about their own particular position. It was an organised demonstration, it was silly. I hope from that that Sinn Fein have learned it was silly, I think it has been very widely condemned from many sources. Let us see if they are now prepared at those talks to make the sort of progress that they have been talking about. Mr Adams has been saying for a long time that he would like to make progress, that he would like these peace talks to proceed. Well now he has the opportunity, his colleagues have the opportunity, face to face with a British Minister, to look at the issues that they know and we know and everybody in Ireland knows need to be resolved if we are to carry this matter forward. I think that is the most important issue.

    QUESTION:

    Before the ceasefire you once said in the Commons that your stomach would turn at the prospect of talks with the IRA, looking back do you now regret having said that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, John, because if you look back and read what I said at the same tine and you see the complete quote, you will see that what I said, I was referring to talks while murder, bombing and violence was continuing, and if you look back at what I said in the House of Commons and look at the whole quote and not a partial quote you will see that is what I said.

    QUESTION:

    On the question of decommission, the Prime Minister has been quite specific that he still needs to see progress, he needs to see modalities in position before Sinn Fein can take part in talks with other people. Are you in agreement on that position?

    MR BRUTON:

    I think there has got to be serious progress made on the issue of getting the guns out of politics and putting them out of commission. This is not just a requirement of the government, it is a requirement of the other parties with whom the settlement must be reached. It is not practical to think in terms for example of Sinn Fein sitting down on the basis of equality with the Unionists and reaching an agreement with them while guns are still in commission, that is the reality that the government recognise, it is not a requirement imposed by the government as such, it is a reality there which has to be met anyway, this is obvious that decommissioning has to be dealt with very seriously on the agenda of these talks. And we will both be looking for discussions to take place not just on the principle of decommissioning but also on exactly how it is going to be done in some detail. But as we have stressed on several occasions the decommissioning of arms is not the only item on the agenda, there are other items as well and we want to see progress on those too.

    QUESTION:

    But does it have to be decoupled from the question of demilitarisation which Sinn Fein don’t want to do?

    MR BRUTON:

    I believe that a satisfactory basis has now been reached for discussions between Sinn Fein and the British government, all the background has now been satisfactorily covered and we have reached a formula upon which the discussions can now take place and it is a question of getting down to business now, discussing the whole range of issues that are important here, not just decommissioning of arms, also the issues of policing, the position of prisoners, the possible releasing of prisoners in due course, an issue which I mentioned to the Prime Minister during the course of our discussions, and the recognition of the mandate of the parties involved, the ability of parties to make representations to Ministers, all of these are issues that now need to be dealt with in a constructive spirit. There is not one item on the agenda, but it would be entirely wrong to under-estimate the importance of getting rid of the guns.

    QUESTION:

    Martin McGuinness has apparently said that there would be no surrender of arms this side of a political settlement, can you comment on that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the place to have discussions like that is in the discussions and not here with you and nor with Mr McGuinness making statements outside. I think often things are said for public consumption. The reality is to test whether those things are meant or not. Sinn Fein say to me, say to everyone, that they want to move forward with their democratic mandate. You cannot move forward with a democratic mandate with a gun in your hand. So the reality is that in the discussions the gun is going to have to come out of Irish politics, everyone understands that. So I think people should be less concerned about statements made for public consumption and look at what practical progress can be made in discussions. The discussions are there for practical progress, I think no-one is in any doubt about what needs to be done, it has been self-evident, the Northern Irish political parties are clear about it, the British government is clear about it, the Taoiseach has made his position clear, the Vice-President of the United States yet again made the American position clear, the position of the churches in Northern Ireland collectively is entirely clear. So we are now entering into talks in which the old oratory I hope can be thrown to one side and pushed aside, now we are reaching a situation where we need to see what actions can be taken and in Northern Ireland it is going to be actions in the future that matter, not the words of the past.

    QUESTION:

    The Taoiseach mentioned the release of prisoners, do the British accept the early release of convicted terrorists?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have a British legal system, I cannot change the British legal situation, that is the situation now and that has always been the situation and I certainly cannot discuss that today.

    QUESTION:

    The ceremony this morning in Red Square was billed in advance as a parade of veterans, there were clearly more than veterans there this morning, including possibly some soldiers who fought in Chechnya, does this disturb you at all?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think there were boys there, very young men there who clearly were not veterans, there were some youngsters there who were 15 or 17 who I think came from some of the Academies in Moscow, I am not aware of any veterans that were being there, but I simply don’t know.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible] serving soldiers, I spoke to them.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That is not a matter I am aware of and it is not a matter I can comment on at the moment. You told me that, I was not aware of that.

    QUESTION:

    I understand the Russians [inaudible] would be strictly veterans only?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We were not expecting Chechnyan veterans there, that is certainly the case, I don’t know whether there were or not, I certainly have not heard that there were.

    QUESTION:

    In your bilateral talks with President Yeltsin, did you bring up Chechnya and were you satisfied with what he said to you?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes I did bring up Chechnya, we discussed a range of matters, Chechnya, NATO, bilateral matters, a number of other things, and they were very satisfactorily discussed. The substantive part of the discussion was about NATO and we had discussed this at some length when President Yeltsin visited me at Chequers some months ago and we returned to those discussions again this morning and I think they were very worthwhile and very productive. We also look forward to the G7/G8 meeting in Halifax later this year and looked at some of the issues that we may discuss there. So although it was a good deal briefer than many of our meetings because there were a lot of other events for us to attend today, we managed to cover quite a lot of ground.

    QUESTION:

    What did you say to him about Chechnya and what did he say to you?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I made it clear, I think people understand the British government’s position about Chechnya, we have emphasised that again. We also made it clear that it is very important to keep the OSCE heavily involved in Chechnya and President Yeltsin assured me that that would be the case.

    QUESTION:

    Did you discuss the expansion of NATO?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The Russian position is as it has been for some time, the Russians are concerned about the expansion of NATO and clearly what concerns the Russians is that there is going to be a very sudden and very dramatic expansion of NATO, right across Central and Eastern Europe and the Russians are self-evidently worried about that. I was able to say to President Yeltsin that we don’t envisage a dramatic and sudden remarkable expansion of NATO, that this is a progressive evolutionary expansion and that, at the same time we will be building up with the United States and other countries the Partnership in Peace Initiative and clearly within that there is a very special place for Russia because Russia is quite apart in terms of its size and its military importance of any of the other nations. And I think many of the concerns that I understand abound here in Russia, I understand why those concerns are there but I think many of them are a mis-reading of what is actually proposed in terms of the future of NATO and we were able to talk about this morning.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 9 May 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 9th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May 1995.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is currently on an official visit to Moscow as part of the VE day commemorations.

     

    Bank Holidays

    Mr. Foulkes: To ask the Prime Minister which of his Ministers has responsibility for designation of bank holidays in (a) Scotland, (b) England, (c) Wales and (d) Northern Ireland.

    The Prime Minister: Bank holidays are designated in the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971. Power to vary the specified dates or to designate additional dates is exercisable by Her Majesty by royal proclamation or in the case of Northern Ireland by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. By virtue of the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s overall responsibility for the 1971 Act, the Treasury currently co-ordinates advice on any designations for royal proclamation in consultation with other Departments as necessary.

     

    St. Paul’s Angels’ Nursery

    Mr. McNamara: To ask the Prime Minister if he expects to make a further visit to St. Paul’s Angels’ nursery before September.

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

     

    Public Records

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will introduce legislation to prohibit individuals, acting in a private capacity, from charging for the reproduction of any document or other material produced directly or indirectly in the service of the Crown.

    The Prime Minister: No. Such legislation is not necessary. It is already the law, under section 163 of the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988, that Crown copyright subsists in any work made by an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of his or her duties.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish the whole of the correspondence with the Churchill family and their advisers relating to the expenditure of £13.5 million on the purchase of public and other records created during Sir Winston Churchill’s periods of office as well as the records of all meetings of the commission with the Churchill Trust to discuss the matter.

    The Prime Minister: No, it is not my normal practice to publish private correspondence.

    Contrary to the impression given in the question, no public records were purchased. The national lottery memorial fund funded the purchase of non-state papers; the Government have transferred the state papers so that the whole archive is preserved, intact, at Churchill College.

     

    Historical Documents

    Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Prime Minister what special training is given to persons who have responsibility for assessing the historical significance of documents held by his Department.

    The Prime Minister: Training and assessing the historical significance of departmental records is carried out under guidance of the Keeper of Public Records. It is provided in a number of different ways, including courses on the appraisal of records and through conferences and seminars arranged by the Public Record Office.

  • PMQT – 9 May 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 9th May 1995. Tony Newton responded on behalf of John Major.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Jon Owen Jones: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton): I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is currently in Moscow on an official visit as part of the VE day commemorations.

    Mr. Jones: Does the Leader of the House have any sympathy for a perplexed and lonely young man, Mr. John Richards, the last remaining Tory councillor in Cardiff, who only eight years ago was part of a ruling group with more than 30 colleagues? While Mr. Richards looks around and tries to find out what has happened to his colleagues, how does the Leader of the House explain that calamity? Does he think that– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order.

    Mr. Jones: Does he think that on Thursday, the electorate showed that they have the same opinion of the Government as Will Carling has of the Rugby Football Union?

    Mr. Newton: My sympathy is with the people of Cardiff for what is about to be inflicted on them.

    Mr. Hunter: Bearing in mind the commemorative theme of the past few days, and in anticipation of the Government’s meeting tomorrow with Sinn Fein, will my right hon. Friend reassert that the Government will not bow to the IRA, will never surrender to IRA tyranny and will never seek appeasement with the evil of the IRA, but will remain resolute and resist all that Sinn Fein-IRA has stood for over the years?

    Mr. Newton: I can certainly give my hon. Friend the assurance he seeks. As he will know, it has repeatedly been made clear that we were not prepared to agree to Ministers joining the exploratory talks with Sinn Fein until it accepted that position and the need for a serious dialogue about decommissioning.

    Mr. Prescott: Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that Thursday’s local elections were a disaster for the Tories and a triumph for Labour? Does he agree with his right hon. Friend the Member for Brent, North (Sir R. Boyson), that the Government should stop lecturing and start listening to the British people, beginning tomorrow with the London hospital debate?

    Mr. Newton: The best thing that I can say to the right hon. Gentleman is that I have been studying with interest a report in The Guardian of 6 May under the heading,

    “Record haul of seats for reborn left”,

    which is followed by a quotation by the then Leader of the Opposition claiming that it shows the result of the next general election. That was in 1990.

    Mr. Prescott: The House will note that the right hon. Gentleman avoided the question on the London hospitals. Is not the simple truth that, 50 years ago, the Tories voted against the creation of Labour’s national health service and that, in the past five years, they have closed more than 300 hospitals and will vote tomorrow to close some more? Is not that why one can never trust the Tories when they say that the national health service is safe in their hands?

    Mr. Newton: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health will set out very clearly in tomorrow’s debate a policy, the purpose of which is to create a modern pattern of hospital and primary care provision in London. That is what it will do. As to capital schemes, I remind the right hon. Gentleman that, since 1980, more than 800 schemes, each worth £1 million or more, have been completed. That is roughly one a week. At present, there are more than 300 such schemes at the planning, design or construction stage, and that is the biggest sustained hospital and health service development programme in our history.

     

    Q2. Mr. Congdon: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Congdon: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the imposition of a national minimum wage would destroy jobs? Is it not an act of political cowardice to talk about bringing in a minimum wage while not having the courage to specify its level?

    Mr. Newton: I very much agree with my hon. Friend. I think that it was the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) who acknowledged that a minimum wage would destroy jobs. Although that has been acknowledged, no figure has been given. All we know is that jobs would be destroyed, and it is time that the Opposition told us how many.

    Sir David Steel: The Leader of the House is a regular tourist in Scotland. Therefore, will he welcome as much as we do this morning’s decision by the Court of Session in Edinburgh that British Rail cannot axe its services at the end of May without going through the full consultation procedure? Will he make sure that Government money is there to maintain those services?

    Mr. Newton: The right hon. Gentleman rather exaggerates my activities as a tourist in Scotland, although I recall meeting him at a fete in his constituency a couple of years ago. I understand that an application for judicial review has been heard and that the court has ruled that British Rail may not withdraw the service until the statutory closure procedure has been completed. It is for the British Railways Board and ScotRail to consider what action to take in the light of the full written judgement, and it would not be right for me to comment further at this stage.

     

    Q3. Mrs. Peacock: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mrs. Peacock: Will my right hon. Friend join me in sending thanks to Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother for her role 50 years ago in supporting King George during the dark and difficult days of the war? Will he also join me in warmly thanking her for her tremendous support and activity during the VE celebrations over the weekend?

    Mr. Newton: My hon. Friend speaks for the whole House. Over the weekend there has been an outstandingly successful series of events of remembrance, reconciliation and hope for the future. They reminded us of the contribution that was made by our service men and service women and many civilians to the effort of 50 years ago. As my hon. Friend says, it has reminded us not least of the contribution that was made by the late King and Her Majesty the Queen Mother during the war and by Her Majesty the Queen over so many years since then.

     

    Q4. Mr. Wilson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Wilson: Since the threat to overnight rail services between Scotland and England arises directly from Government policies, many of us think that it is precisely for the Leader of the House to answer in respect of what happened in the Court of Session this morning. What does it tell us about this Government that the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Secretary of State for Transport were both prepared to conspire in a deceit that has been found to be illegal as well as immoral?

    Will the Leader of the House give an undertaking that the letter and the spirit of today’s judgment will be respected by the Government? Does he accept that this excellent decision will give fresh heart to campaigners throughout the country, who see similar threats to their vulnerable services in what the Government are doing to the railway industry?

    Mr. Newton: As I have already said, it is now obviously right for the terms of the judgment to be properly and carefully considered, but I also remind the hon. Gentleman that the decision to withdraw this service was a commercial matter for British Rail, and that representations, of a kind to which he will no doubt wish to contribute, about all sleeper services can be made when the Franchising Director consults on the passenger service requirement later this month.

    Mr. Streeter: Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating the French people, who on Sunday rejected socialism and elected a right-wing President? Does not that show– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman must be heard.

    Mr. Streeter: On Sunday, the French people rejected socialism and elected a right-wing President. Does not that show that all over Europe people recognise that, while left-wing politicians offer sound bites, Conservative policies work?

    Mr. Newton: I certainly wish to welcome the election of the new President, and I think everyone would wish to send him this country’s good wishes in his new job. My hon. Friend is right to say that one of the factors in that election will have been the extent to which socialist policies are coming under criticism throughout Europe. Indeed, the French Employers’ Federation has said:

    “the excessive level and poor structure of taxes on business add to production costs, slowing down investment and job creation.” It is exactly the policies that have now been rejected in France that right hon. and hon. Labour Members would now want to impose on Britain.

     

    Q5. Mr. Jamieson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Jamieson: Is the Leader of the House aware that, following last Thursday’s meltdown of Tory support in the south-west, particularly in the constituency of the hon. Member for Plymouth, Sutton (Mr. Streeter), 55 out of 60 councillors on Plymouth city council are Labour members, and the only bodies that the Conservatives control in the region are the quangos? Is not the message from last Thursday’s elections that there is now an unbridgeable gap between the electorate and the Government? The only way in which that can be bridged is by having a general election.

    Mr. Newton: Earlier, I extended my sympathy to the people of Cardiff; I will now extend my sympathy to the people of Plymouth.

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q6. Mr. Simon Coombs: To ask the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to Swindon.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend has no current plans to do so.

    Mr. Coombs: Does my right hon. Friend agree that companies in Swindon and elsewhere would rather stick with a Government who have firmly rejected the concept of a national minimum wage than run the risk of supporting a party that might introduce a national minimum wage at a level so low that it would be meaningless, or at a level that would imperil employment and run the risk of reducing companies’ investment in training?

    Mr. Newton: I agree with my hon. Friend that the people of Swindon and, no doubt, the people of every town in the country would not wish to go down a path that will undermine employment, heap new costs on business, undermine the economic recovery, undermine our capacity to attract overseas investment, and undermine our ability to defend Britain’s interests in Europe.

    Mr. Pike: As the Leader of the House’s job includes presentation of Government policy to the people of Swindon– [Interruption.] Ah, I know, Madam Speaker–

    Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Member for Swindon (Mr. Coombs) widened the question, but I do not want questioning to go too wide.

    Mr. Pike: As it is the right hon. Gentleman’s job to present Government policy, does he accept that either his presentation has failed or the policy has failed? Will he tell the people of Swindon what change of policy he now proposes–or does he intend to go?

    Mr. Newton: I would tell the people of Swindon–and, indeed, those represented by the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Pike)–that, when unemployment is falling by 1,000 a day, when we are enjoying the most sustained period of low inflation for more than 30 years, when export volumes have risen by 12.5 per cent. in a year and when for two successive years ours has been the fastest-growing major European Union economy, one thing is certain: the policies are succeeding.

     

    Engagements

    Q7. Mr. Waterson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 9 May.

    Mr. Newton: I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Waterson: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the VE day commemorations throughout the country at the weekend were extremely moving? Does he also agree that we have had 50 years of peace in Europe because this country has maintained strong defences, and has refused to listen to the voices of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament members and sympathisers in the Labour party?

    Mr. Newton: I agree with my hon. Friend on both counts. As I said earlier, the celebrations themselves were an outstanding and impressive success; and there is no doubt that the fact that we were able to have them rests on the firmness of this country’s defence policy over the years–a policy that has frequently not been supported by the Labour party.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at German State Ceremony – 8 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech at the German State Ceremony at the Schauspielhaus in Berlin on Monday 8th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Herr Bundespraesident, Herr Bundeskanzler, Ladies and Gentlemen,

    This week, in London, in Paris, in Moscow and here in Berlin, we are turning our minds back 50 years to remember those on all sides who fell in the last War and to remember the day that peace came to Europe. I said “the last War” and I said that because I believe that for our countries gathered here today it was the last time that we will ever fight one against another. [Applause]

    Many have contributed to this: Churchill and de Gaulle, Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy, Konrad Adenauer who rebuilt Germany and you, Herr Bundeskanzler, who have led it so long and have seen it reunited in peace and in freedom.

    Fifty years ago Europe saw the end of 30 years that had contained not one but two world wars. The slaughter in the trenches, the destruction of cities and the oppression of citizens; all these left a Europe in ruins just as did the 30 Years War some centuries before.We are commemorating the end of this European tragedy in our great cities. We must not forget the past but here in Berlin this evening I would like to think not of the past but of the future.

    In September last year, we met here in this wonderful theatre and we did so to bid farewell to the Allied Forces that had guarded Berlin for 40 years. I would like to recall a phrase I used on that occasion: “If we are wise, Europe stands today on the threshold of a New Age of Reason. We have before us new possibilities of peace, freedom and friendship that we have never had before.”

    The first age of reason, the enlightenment, brought new confidence to Europe. The wars of religion were replaced by reason and tolerance. Superstition was replaced by science. Newton gave us laws of nature, Bach laid the foundations of music, Montesquieu taught us the spirit of the law and Adam Smith explained the laws of the market.

    In those days Europe was awakening from the darkness of the mind. Today, Europe is emerging from a century of violence and ideology. Traumatised in the first half of this century by brutality and destruction, Europe has lived the second half of this century half frozen in a trance. We are, as it were, still rubbing our eyes after 1989 wondering if it can be real but thankfully it is real.

    What do I mean by a new age of reason? First, I mean an end to dogma and ideology. Fascism and communism lie behind us. The two great enemies of reason have been defeated not just by armies but by more powerful ideas, freedom and democracy and by reason itself.
    Freedom means freedom to think, to choose, to question. The European tradition is of pluralism, scepticism and debate. Today, the authoritarianism of the mind is gone, I hope and pray, for ever. We can now look forward to a Europe of open minds.

    A new age of reason will be the new age of the individual. The tyrannies that we have overcome were erected in the name of race, state or of history. With the first enlightenment came the ideas of freedom and of democracy. Today, we have escaped from the ideologies of race and the state. The individual for us these days is the measure of all things. Freedom is always freedom of the individual; responsibility is always individual responsibility. Freedom of choice, equality before the law, open minds and a just and open society, these are at the heart of our European traditions and it is this that will help us build the Europe that lies ahead of us.

    A new age of reason means a new international society.

    The Europe of today has come a long way from the Europe of the first 30 Years War but the threats and dangers of extremism or violence, military and civil, have not gone altogether. Today, we no longer need the old system of coalitions to contain national ambitions, the old system of the balance of power. We now bring our different histories and traditions together in pursuit of common goals. This is not an easy process. There have been, and there will be, setbacks but I cannot believe that we will ever again revert to the old way of doing things.

    We can be proud that out of the ruins of war we have built a system of cooperation never known before in all the long history of the world: the United Nations – struggling towards law and justice; NATO – the only lasting peace-time alliance; the European Union – that unique blend of integration and cooperation across national boundaries and the one essential rule of this system is that we settle our differences by discussion and by compromise, by reason and never again by violence. [Applause]

    Ladies and Gentlemen, the war whose end we remember was fought for the freedom of the individual against the tyranny of the state, for the freedom of the mind against the tyranny of ideology and the peace we have built in these fifty years is built on the foundation of a new international society.

    If our international society is based on reason, it is also based on friendship, friendship between our peoples who were once in dispute and war and personal friendship amongst ourselves and amongst all our citizens.

    The first Age of Reason came as the men of ideas – Hume and Voltaire – led us out of the darkness of the mind. In the last 50 years we have lived through a political enlightenment. We owe a debt to those who have led us out of political darkness. We are all their inheritors and we have a responsibility to use that inheritance wisely. Our chance today is that we may be able to make a reality of Kant’s vision of a Perpetual Peace.

    The price of that peace will be perpetual vigilance. Freedom and peace are not to be had as gifts. We will need courage and commitment to defend what we have created in these 50 years of peace but I believe that we are justified in having confidence that it can and that it will be done.

    Civilisation is a partnership between the dead, the living and those who are not yet born. We have a debt to those who died in the War and we have a debt to those who built the peace. Those debts can properly be repaid only to the next generation. For them we must build a world of open minds, of individual freedom and responsibility; and for them we must strengthen and extend the New International Society. Herr Bundespraesident, for me these will be the pillars of the New Age of Reason. [Applause]

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Paris – 8 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in Paris on Monday 8th May 1995.

    INTERVIEWER:

    What is your first reaction to the election?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Firstly, let me say that I have enjoyed working with President Mitterrand for a number of years now; he is a man of very great courage, he has made a very formidable contribution to his country over many years and I think people will recognise that.

    Of course, I look forward to working with Jacques Chirac. I have known him for a number of years. I like him. I think he is a man of very great qualities and I think he will be a fine President of France.

    INTERVIEWER:

    Now that in Europe we have many more prime ministers, presidents or heads of state who did not really participate in the War, do you think that the arrival of M. Chirac with you and other men of your generation is going to change anything in Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Both our countries have a very strong sense of history, there is a continuum and although we are essentially post-War – we didn’t go through the War as adults – I think the impact of the War has been built into the nations since then so I wouldn’t expect any stark and sudden changes but of course policy evolves, the direction of individual countries evolves and of Europe of a whole so of course things will change.

    INTERVIEWER:

    Do you think that in Europe you are going to have a better understanding with M. Chirac than with M. Mitterrand and his team?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have enjoyed working with President Mitterrand; we have occasionally had our differences, they have always been dealt with with great charm but I think there are many ways in which Jacques Chirac and I will see Europe in the same way and I very much look forward to working with him.

    INTERVIEWER:

    What kind of man is M. Chirac in your opinion?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    He is outgoing, he is warm, he is witty. He cares very much about what he does and he acts in response to the things that he most cares about so I think it will be a very exciting time. Working with him will be fun, of that I have no doubt at all.

    INTERVIEWER:

    With regard to the commemoration which is taking place today in Paris and the role of your country compared to our country during the War, what kind of thoughts do you have?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think what everyone will be thinking about today is that here we are in France, the day after the election of a new President of France, and if Britain, France, the United States and the Allies hadn’t worked together, hadn’t fought together, hadn’t won together, then we would not today, be celebrating the election of a new democratic President of France so I think we will look back at what the previous generation achieved in order that this generation and subsequent generations can live the sort of democratic life we have become used to. We owe a very great deal to that generation.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview with Al Gore – 6 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in London with US Vice-President Al Gore, on Saturday 6th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am delighted to welcome the Vice-President here this morning. We have had the opportunity of continuing our discussions in Washington just a few weeks ago; we covered a wide range of subjects and perhaps I may firstly say how delighted I am to see the Vice-President here for these commemorations this weekend; he is very welcome indeed and I look forward to seeing great deal of him over the next day or so.

    VICE-PRESIDENT GORE:

    Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister. In many ways, this was a seamless continuation of a discussion that we had in Washington a short time ago. Of course, I would like to emphasise on this occasion what a great honour it is for me personally to be able to represent my country at the VE-Day commemorations and to remember on behalf of all Americans the hours when Britain stood alone against the forces of evil threatening all civilisation and to celebrate the partnership that won that war and to honour those who sacrificed everything for our freedom.

    It is a moving experience to read into the details of the tremendous sacrifices that were made and it is a true honour to take part in it.

    In our discussions, we talked about a great number of subjects including the Prime Minister’s important meeting coming up shortly with President Yeltsin in Moscow which will immediately precede President Clinton’s meeting with President Yeltsin and of course, since we are singing off the same page of music on all security issues virtually without exception, it is always valuable to talk together about the details of what is in our interests so it was a very productive discussion on that and other issues.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me just add a word or two on the substance of what we discussed:

    As the Vice-President said, we look forward to the agenda for the discussions I will have with President Yeltsin next week and the lengthy discussions that President Clinton will have with him the following day, a substantial agenda there and I think we found ourselves in complete agreement upon all the substantive issues.

    We also spent some time on a matter that I know is of great interest to the Vice-President and also to the Government here and that is the public sector reforms and David Hunt was able to join us and set out many of the reforms that we are undertaking. The same nature of change is taking place in the United States and we had the opportunity of comparing notes on that.

    We were able to look at a number of other issues: clearly, the developing situation in Bosnia; the development in the discussions on Northern Ireland was another matter we touched on this morning and a range of lesser items; I won’t go into detail on them at this stage but will respond to any questions you may have but it was, as it is always is when we meet the Vice-President, a very worthwhile and a very enjoyable occasion.

    QUESTION:

    May I ask the Vice-President if he is in a position to put any more pressure on Sinn Fein to take part in a meaningful decommissioning of arms in Northern Ireland?

    VICE-PRESIDENT GORE:

    Yes. We believe it is essential and we will make that point over and over again. As President Clinton said when Prime Minister Major was in Washington, we believe that is essential to the success of all-party talks and to the success of the process that Prime Minister Major and Prime Minister Bruton and Prime Minister Reynolds before him have got under way and I want to again say how impressed all Americans have been with the tremendous courage shown by Prime Minister Major in moving this process to the stage it has now reached and a willingness on the part of Sinn Fein to seriously discuss decommissioning is absolutely key at this stage and we will be urging them in every possible way to engage in such talks.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If I could just add a point to that, we certainly discussed that and the Vice-President has just made his views very clear and I think that it is extremely helpful and I am very grateful for that.

    We also discussed the forthcoming Washington Conference which I hope is going to lead to a good deal of investment both in the north and in the south and that sort of investment, that growth of economic prosperity, that growth of opportunity that will remove, I think, many of the reasons why so many young people in the past have joined the paramilitaries on both sides is of immense importance so we look forward to that conference being a very great success and I am sure it will be.

    VICE-PRESIDENT GORE:

    The response, incidentally, among American businesses to this upcoming conference toward the end of this month has been extraordinary. You are going to see quite an outpouring from the business community seeking to seize the significant opportunities for investment in Northern Ireland and in the border counties of the Republic. We are very excited about it and looking forward to it.

    Mr. Prime Minister, you made reference to our work on re-inventing government or “public sector reform” as I believe you often refer to it here. I want to compliment David Hunt on the work that you and he have done here. I have already got an appointment – I believe next week – in Washington to talk with Mr. Hunt. We have learned a great deal from what has gone on here and we are making progress also. It is high time that some of the reforms that have been successful in private corporations are applied thoroughly to the public sector and we are learning from one another on the best ways to do that.

    QUESTION:

    I would like to ask you about the local elections now you have had time to think about them and there have also been surveys in the press and the BBC saying that party chairmen are unhappy about disunity and blaming that for the results. What is your response to that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I dealt with most of those matters standing here yesterday and my response today would be the same as yesterday, I have nothing further to add to that. Clearly, they were very unsatisfactory election results, I make no secret about that and I made that perfectly clear yesterday. We will have to consider and reflect upon those results and see how we take matters forward.

    What I was seeking to emphasise yesterday is that there are some long-term strategic goals that we believe are very much in the interest of our prosperity in the future and we must clearly seek to achieve those goals. That doesn’t mean we are going to brush aside without consideration the concerns that people express, of course not, that is not the way of democratic politics and it is not in my instinct so of course we will consider those very carefully.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at VE Day Commemorations – 6 May 1995

    Below is Mr Major’s speech at the 50th anniversary of VE Day Commemorations at the opening ceremony at Hyde Park on Saturday 6th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Your Majesty, your Royal Highness, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    Fifty years ago today, Europe was still at war. For many servicemen, it remained a time of danger and hardship. War continued to rage in the Far East. As one eyewitness to the celebrations on VE night said: “for me, as for tens of thousands of others, the war started again at the end of leave”.

    But here in London that weekend there was a great sense of expectation. Outside St Paul’s, as bell ringers stood ready to start the peal of thanksgiving, the crowds gathered spontaneously.

    Today, fifty years on, as we commemorate those events, our thoughts are of thanksgiving and remembrance.

    There is much to remember:

    – those who were lost,

    – those who returned wounded,

    – those who were scarred by years of captivity,

    – those whose lives were irreparably changed by loss.

    But for many, there was the sheer joy of reunion, as our servicemen and women came home.

    Today, above all, we give thanks for the quiet bravery and decency of those men and women who defeated a tyranny beyond imagination, and in so doing, enabled future generations to enjoy the blessings of freedom, democracy and peace.

    It is very easy to take these for granted. When we have them, they sound like comfortable abstractions. But when you have to fight to regain them, as so many did, they become very real.

    At the end of the war, there was a famous cartoon. It was an illustration of a wounded soldier, standing amid the rubble of war, holding out the laurel leaves of peace in Europe, saying “here you are, don’t lose it again”. In that single picture were the hopes of millions.

    The responsibility for us, who have grown up since the war, is not to forget that plea. It is our responsibility to keep faith with those who fought to prevent future wars.

    The institutions which have grown up since 1945 – the United Nations, NATO and others – may be imperfect. Conflict still erupts around the globe. But they represent a consistent effort to find a better way to resolve disputes than by war. An effort to build on a common faith in democracy and freedom.

    Tomorrow, in St Paul’s, leaders of countries which fought so bitterly in Europe will join with Second World War veterans to reaffirm that faith, in a service of reconciliation.

    The Veterans have a special place in these commemorations. But it is right that the whole nation should join in. The war was a national struggle in which everyone played their part.

    The Merchant Navy was our lifeline to the outside world. The Bevin Boys, the Women’s Land Army, and many who had never been in a factory before, kept wartime production going. The emergency services mobilised to fight the Blitz. Thousands opened their homes to children evacuated from the cities.

    Sometimes, those who speak of the wartime sense of community go on to say it couldn’t happen now. I don’t believe that. In the lesser conflicts of the Falklands and the Gulf the same national spirit was evident. This country hasn’t changed. Nor have its instincts.

    This weekend, all over the country, people are taking part in local commemorations and events to mark VE Day.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Jean Chretien – 6 May 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview in London with Canadian Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, on Saturday 6th May 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is a pleasure to welcome the Prime Minister again to London. We have had the opportunity of a lot of bilateral discussions over the last year or so and they are always very worthwhile and very productive occasions. I will invite the Prime Minister to say a word or two first, I will then follow that up and then we will take a few questions. If I could just say at the outset, we will need to be fairly brief, we both have to be in black tie and best bib and tucker and elsewhere before too long.

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    Thank you, Prime Minister. It was another good discussion. We discussed mainly the G7 and Bosnia where we have to work together. We want to make a success of the G7 and we are preoccupied about the situation in the former Yugoslavia; we are there with troops and we are very keen to work to have peace and to make sure that our soldiers can perform the task they have got and we are looking forward to meeting again in Halifax.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, Mr. Brittan has been saying in Ottawa that there has been a breach in Canadian/European relations following the halibut war. Do you think it is a breach that cannot be healed or repaired?

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    There is no breach that can’t be healed or repaired. Leon Brittan is speaking for the European Union. I think you know that there was the occasional ruckus between ourselves and our European partners over that issue. Now I hope that is behind us and I an sure my European partners would wish to put it behind us as speedily as possible.

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    I would like to take the occasion to thank the people of Great Britain for the great support that they have given to us during this episode. Probably one of the proudest moments since became Prime Minister was when the British fishermen were on TV with the Canadian flag; it gave me a lot of pleasure that day and I would like to say thank you to your people for that.

    QUESTION:

    You talked about Bosnia. I wonder whether you spoke about the possibility of having to pull troops out if things escalate there, under what conditions that might be necessary and how it might be accomplished.

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    We discuss Bosnia a lot both when we meet and over the telephone. We have been working very closely over Bosnian policy and our relative troops contributions; Canada has made a remarkable contribution there and kept in very close touch as well so yes, we did discuss the present situation.

    Clearly, what has happened in Croatia is very disturbing. We certainly need the ceasefire to continue and there is a real danger that if the war were to escalate in Bosnia generally that the position of the protection forces in Bosnia could become impossible. It is not my wish to see that nor the Prime Minister’s; we think that the troops there, with humanitarian aid and other matters, have done and are doing a remarkable job, many people are alive who wouldn’t be but for them but they are not equipped to be in the middle of a full-scale war and the position that we have both taken is that if the war were really to erupt there are circumstances in which the protection forces could not safely be left there. That is the position and has been for a long time but the Prime Minister may wish to add something to that.

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    Well said, Prime Minister!

    QUESTION:

    [In French]

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    [In French]

    QUESTION:

    Do you fear that there may come a point where we would have to withdraw our troops?

    PRIME MINISTER CHRETIEN:

    It is always possible that there will be a circumstance where we will have to withdraw. We have said that many times and the Prime Minister just mentioned that a minute ago.

    QUESTION:

    As well as the things that you seem to be in great agreement on, can you tell me whether you have managed to come to an agreement on that vexed pension issue which comes up annually or biannually?

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    We had the opportunity of a further discussion.

    QUESTION:

    And how did it go?

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    It was, as ever, good-natured, frank, worthwhile and to be continued.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, can I ask you for your reaction today to the speech of Chancellor Kohl in which he equated the suffering of the Germans during the War with that of the [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER MAJOR:

    I haven’t seen any speech that Helmut has made today. I will certainly look at it but I am not commenting on a speech I have not yet seen.