The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: 1989

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Labour Statistics – 4 May 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Labour Statistics on 4th May 1989.

    Mr. John Greenway To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the fall in registered unemployment since June 1987.

    Mr. Bellingham To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the fall in registered unemployment since June 1987.

    Mr. Major Unemployment in the United Kingdom has fallen by 939,000 since June 1987.

    Mr. Robert G. Hughes To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the growth in total employment since June 1987.

    Mr. Major Total employment in the United Kingdom has increased by 1,152,000 since June 1987.

  • Mr Major’s Parliamentary Answer on the CBI – 4 May 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s response on the CBI, made on 4th May 1989 in the House of Commons.

    Mr. Cran To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he next intends to meet the director general of the Confederation of British Industry; and what will be discussed.

    Mr. Major My right hon. Friend meets the director general of the CBI from time to time, and a wide range of matters are discussed.

    Mr. Cran Does not my right hon. Friend agree that British management must continue to resist excessive wage claims such as we are beginning to see, if for no other reason than the need to continue to improve our international competitiveness? Does he agree, further, that management must show leadership and ensure also that their own snouts are not too deeply in the pay trough?

    Mr. Major I am not sure that I would put the second part of my hon. Friend’s question in precisely that way, but I certainly agree with the underlying sentiment. I do not defend unjustifiably high salary increases, whether for directors or for the work force. That should be clear. On his substantive point, there must be a clear danger to industry and competitiveness if wage costs outstrip productivity growth. It is an important function of management to make sure that they do not.

    Mr. Robert Sheldon When the right hon. Gentleman meets the director general, will he explain to him something that he himself seems to be reluctant to accept – that is, how he hopes to reduce the balance of payments to a reasonable level with a high pound and high interest rates?

    Mr. Major I am bound to say to the right hon. Gentleman, in terms of the strength of sterling, that it is a matter of record that some of the countries with the strongest exchange rates over a lengthy period – Japan springs immediately to mind – have an extremely good exporting performance.

    Mr. Jack When my right hon. Friend next meets the CBI, will he discuss the encouraging trends towards higher levels of exports from the United Kingdom? Will he give industry every assistance to increase the amount and value of our exports?

    Mr. Major We are certainly delighted to see the increasing trend in exports. We wish that to continue. The most important thing that we can do for industry, whether in regard to exports or internal sales, is to get firm control of inflation. That is central to our policy.

    Mrs. Fyfe When the Minister next meets the director general of the CBI, will he place on the agenda the concern of the Equal Opportunities Commission about the taxation of workplace nurseries? Will he further tell the tigress that her cubs were better looked after than the vast majority of working women’s children are after 10 years of the tigress being at No. 10?

    Mr. Major That may well be a matter that the director general would wish to discuss. I shall bear the hon. Lady’s comments in mind.

  • Mr Major’s Parliamentary Answer on Private Medical Treatment – 4 May 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s response on Private Medical Treatment (Tax Relief), made on 4th May 1989 in the House of Commons.

    Mr. Allen McKay To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent representations he has received concerning his proposal to offer private medical tax relief.

    Mr. Major A number.

    Mr. McKay If the word “targeted” is not to appear as an emotional word giving the appearance of efficiency coupled with compassion, will the Minister explain to the House – and possibly to Back Bench Conservative Members, to whom it has not been explained sufficiently – how, under the guise of cutting child benefit and targeting those in greater need, he can logically at the same time advocate a policy of giving tax relief to those on medical insurance, as that seems to be targeted to the better off?

    Mr. Major The hon. Gentleman is entirely wrong about the proposal being targeted to the better off. The proposal before the House that I have no doubt we will debate shortly in Committee on the Finance Bill, to provide tax relief for medical insurance premiums, tackles a real problem. In a ring fence way it will help many elderly people who wish to continue medical insurance cover on retirement but who are unable to do because they have lost the benefit of the employer scheme. At the moment of retirement their income tends to fall and their premium tends to rise. We are seeking to retain the capacity for these people to sustain and retain the medical insurance they have previously had. That is entirely fair and reasonable, and I support it thoroughly.

    Mr. Neil Hamilton Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the likely savings in public expenditure will exceed the cost to the Treasury of the tax relief itself when it is fully running? Has my right hon. Friend noticed that the Labour Members are celebrating a decade of Thatcherism by trying to ditch their own vote-losing policies and adopt a pale pink version of ours? How long will it be before they adopt this policy also?

    Mr. Major It is certainly true that, as my hon. Friend said, the Opposition have learnt that there is a sea change in attitude in this country, and they tend to tack behind it. It will certainly be another decade or more before they are remotely likely to form a Government of any sort. I reiterate what I said a moment ago. I agree that this measure is likely to prove a very good bargain for the taxpayer.

    Mr. Madden How can the Chief Secretary justify poor pensioners having to apply for means-tested benefits when rich pensioners who apply for medical tax relief will not even have to fill in an application form?

    Mr. Major The justification is that we provide benefits for those pensioners who need them. The hon. Gentleman should welcome that.

    Mr. Robert G. Hughes Will my right hon. Friend confirm that this move affects a relatively small number of people who have been receiving tax relief on private medical insurance? Does he agree that they with to continue with private medical insurance, but are mystified about why Opposition Members wish to deny it to them, and regard the Opposition’s announcements as mean-minded and rather tawdry?

    Mr. Major It is certainly true that, at the moment, a small number of pensioners are eligible to benefit – about 600,000 to 700,000. There is no mystery about the Opposition’s hostility to private provision and self-provision. It is traditional.

    Mr. Chris Smith Has the Chief Secretary seen the response of the Royal College of Nursing, which describes the proposal as having no economic, social or medical justification? Instead of providing tax subsidies to those few who are rich enough and well enough to benefit from private medical insurance, should not the Government spend the money on basic, desperately needed improvements to the Health Service as a whole, for the benefit of all pensioners?

    Mr. Major The hon. Gentleman might have been on a different planet for the past year. He may not have noticed that, in the last public expenditure round, the National Health Service had its largest ever increase in resources, of £2.5 billion. A further £2.5 billion was agreed last year for next year’s increase in the National Health Service provision, and that is before we re-examine the matter in the public expenditure round next autumn. The Labour party never provided remotely the same amount of facilities for the National Health Service.

  • Mr Major’s Parliamentary Answer on Rates Increases – 4 May 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s response on Rates (Increases), made on 4th May 1989 in the House of Commons.

    Mr. Harry Greenway To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the impact on the real personal disposable income of (a) pensioners and (b) others, of the latest rates increases; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr. Major The information available on the domestic rate poundage as set by local authorities in England for 1989–90 indicates that average domestic rate bills have risen by 9.3 per cent. There is no information available on likely movements in real disposable income for particular groups between 1988–89 and 1989–90.

    Mr. Greenway Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that high rates, which occur so often in Labour areas such as Ealing – where rates this year have gone up by no less than 32 per cent., added to the 65 per cent. increase of two years ago – damage pensioners and everybody else, including industry and employment? Although I welcome the fact that pensioners get pension increases well in line with inflation, they are severely damaged by the way in which the Labour party squitters their money away in great expenditure. Does my hon. Friend join me in that view?

    Mr. Major The message that my hon. Friend gives me is that he regards Ealing council as a loopy council. I am happy to join him in that condemnation. My figures for the rate increases were slightly different from those given by my hon. Friend. My understanding is that Ealing has budgeted to raise its spending by 16 per cent. in 1989–90, and the domestic rate bills have risen by 31 per cent. following a 72 per cent. rates increase only two years ago. That shows a substantial disregard for pensioners, who are in fact protected by the substantial rate rebates that we have provided for them.

    Dr. Marek Could the explanation be that this 9.3 per cent. increase that will have adverse effects on pensioners, as mentioned by the Chief Secretary, is brought about by the fact that, at current prices, rate support grant in 1987–88 was £10,059 million, and in 1988–89 it was only £9,687 million? Local authorities had no alternative but to make up for this increase in Government taxation in order to preserve services. Is this not yet another reason why taxation as a percentage of GDP is higher now under a Tory Government than it ever was under the previous Labour Administration, and why the Tory Government are the Government of high taxation.

    Mr. Major If the hon. Gentleman believes that, I despair for him. He will never persuade anyone else to believe that. He speaks for the party of high taxation, as I speak for the party of low taxation. I will explain to him why rates go up so much, and disproportionately, in Labour-controlled authorities. It is because they waste a good deal of their money, and they do not control it properly. It is as straightforward as that.

    Sir Anthony Grant If the daft proposals for rate reform, of a local income tax and capital value proposed by the Opposition were implemented in my constituency – and I think in that of my right hon. Friend – the burden would be more than twice as much as the community charge. Does my right hon. Friend agree?

    Mr. Major I understand that. That is not a unique proposition for, if many of the policies of the Opposition were carried out, the tax burden generally would go up dramatically for taxpayers as well.

  • Mr Major’s Parliamentary Answer on Investment and Consumption – 4 May 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s response on Investment and Consumption, made on 4th May 1989 in the House of Commons.

    Mr. Brazier To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the rate of growth of (a) total investment and (b) total consumption over the past seven years.

    The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. John Major) In the seven years to 1988, total consumption grew, in real terms, by 25 per cent., while total investment grew over twice as fast – by 54 per cent.

    Mr. Brazier Does my right hon. Friend agree that total investment has grown so much faster than consumption not only as a result of the level of confidence that business feels in the Government’s economic policy, but as a reflection of the fact that there is some remaining over-manning from the grotesque levels that we inherited when we took office? Does my right hon. Friend further agree that it is a healthy feature of economies at this stage of development, such as those just ahead of us like America and Japan, that employment moves as a result of investment from manufacturing to the service sector?

    Mr. Major My hon. Friend is right about the confidence of industry. As my right hon. Friend said a moment ago, total investment is now higher as a proportion of gross domestic product than it has been for many years. On the future of manufacturing industry in particular, the Department of Trade and Industry investment intentions survey forecasts further investment growth in 1989 of 11 per cent. My hon. Friend is right on over-manning, but he should observe that not only has it fallen in many industries, but has done so at the same time as employment has grown in the service industries and in other industries.

    Mr. Beith Does the Chief Secretary realise that few people outside his own supporters – and not all of those – believe that the enormous switch in capacity from consumption to export will take place on a scale sufficient to wipe out our balance of trade deficit? Does he find it possible to believe that that will happen when world trade is expected to slow down? He is presuming that exports will rise 4 per cent. a year faster than imports.

    Mr. Major Invariably, there are Doubting Thomases about. We shall have to wait and see. Exports have been doing extremely well in recent years and there is every sign that that will continue. The hon. Gentleman will welcome that when it comes about for it will be a considerable achievement by British exporting industry.

    Mr. Soames Is my right hon. Friend able to quantify the proportion of the trade deficit that is accounted for in inward investment?

    Mr. Major There is a substantial amount of capital inward investment, which reflects, to a large degree, the confidence of external investors in the management of the British economy. On the balance of trade, a substantial part of the growth in the trade gap relates to the growth of investment in goods for production and investment.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Manufactured Goods (Trade) – 2 May 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Manufactured Goods (Trade) on 2nd May 1989.

    Mr. Mullin To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his latest estimate for the balance of trade in manufacturing for the current year.

    Mr. Major I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) on 19 April, at column 168.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Balance of Payments – 2 May 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Balance of Payments on 2nd May 1989.

    Mr. John Evans To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are his criteria for deciding when it would be appropriate to revise his estimate of the balance of payments deficit for the current year.

    Mr. Major As usual, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will publish his next forecast with the 1989 Autumn Statement.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on Investment Capital (Annual Return) – 28 April 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on Investment Capital (Annual Return) on 28th April 1989.

    Mr. Nicholas Bennett To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give the estimated annual return on investment capital for each year since 1970.

    Mr. Major The information requested is as follows:

    Net real rate of return (1) for non-North sea industrial and commercial companies

    Year | (per cent.)
    1970 8.9
    1971 9.2
    1972 9.5
    1973 8.9
    1974 5.3
    1975 4.2
    1976 4.3
    1977 6.7
    1978 7.1
    1979 5.6
    1980 3.8
    1981 2.8
    1982 4.0
    1983 4.9
    1984 5.6
    1985 7.2
    1986 8.9
    1987 10.2

    (1) Net operating surplus on United Kingdom operations as a percentage of net capital stock of fixed assets before investment and tax at current replacement cost.

    Source: Department of Trade and Industry: published in “British Business” on 30 September 1988.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Trade Deficit – 28 April 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Trade Deficit on 28th April 1989.

    Mr. Tony Banks To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his latest estimate for the balance of trade deficit in the current year.

    Mr. Major I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Derbyshire, North-East (Mr. Barnes) on 19 April at column 168.

  • Mr Major’s Written Parliamentary Answer on the Finance Bill – 27 April 1989

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s written Parliamentary Answer on the Finance Bill on 27th April 1989.

    Mr. Neil Hamilton To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the notes on those clauses of the Finance Bill to be taken in Committee of the whole House will be made available to hon. Members.

    Mr. Major Yes. The appropriate notes on clauses were placed in the Vote Office earlier today.