The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: 1992

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with President Yeltsin – 30 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview with President Boris Yeltsin, given in London on Thursday 30th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Good Afternoon everyone. President Yeltsin and I have had four hours of talks this morning and over lunch, some of it in very restricted session and some of it with other Ministers.

    As you may recall, my first contact with President Yeltsin was at the height of the August coup and some of you may remember that at that time I came out into Downing Street to report that conversation.

    Britain at that time was the first country to denounce the coup. I wanted on that day in August to draw the world’s attention to the courage of President Yeltsin and his followers in the White House. They fought for their lives and for the future of democracy in their country.

    It is therefore a particular pleasure to welcome President Yeltsin here today as President of Russia. Today we have made new progress in building a new relationship between our two countries.

    We have always had shared interests, now we have shared values as well, the shared values of democracy, a free economy and a commitment to peace and to stability.

    I was glad to have the opportunity today to welcome the arms control initiative taken by President Bush and by President Yeltsin. I expressed our very strong support for further moves towards deterrence at lower levels. I also assured the President of our intention to maintain only a minimum nuclear strategic force, threatening no-one.

    Today, we have been able to give a practical and important expression to the new relationship between our two countries. I will mention ten points to illustrate that.

    We have signed this morning a joint declaration. This commits our two countries to a relationship of friendship as partners in the international community. It commits us to the peaceful settlement of disputes, to the control of weapons of mass destruction and to non-proliferation. We propose to turn this declaration into a formal treaty on the relations between our two countries in the near future. It will be the first such treaty of such substance between Britain and the Soviet Union since the mid-1770s.

    Secondly, Britain is determined to help democracy in Russia. It has already done a great deal to provide assistance to Russia and the new Commonwealth and it proposes to do more. Amongst some of the measures taken already was Britain’s share of Community aid at 300 million; a Know-How Fund already committed to over 50 projects; the provision of animal feed grain, particularly to St Petersburg; medical assistance; and a financial training assistance programme under which there will be places for 1,000 Russians with British financial insurance and legal firms.

    Thirdly, Britain was the first country to propose Russian membership of the International Monetary Fund and to propose an April deadline for that membership. We will continue to press for that, we believe it is urgent and important that that matter is concluded.

    Fourthly, we took the lead in negotiating a debt deferral agreement for Russia and the other republics. We have also taken the lead in the Group of Seven to urge further assistance for Russia, possibly in the form of a rouble stabilisation fund.

    Fifthly, and in the context of an IMF programme, I can announce today our readiness to make available this year a total of 280 million in medium term export credit cover and investment insurance for Russia and the other republics.

    Sixthly, Britain will propose in the European Community an improved trade and cooperation agreement with Russia. We propose to make this one of the priorities of our Presidency in the second half of this year.

    Seventh, we have agreed to cooperate on handling surplus Soviet nuclear weapons and safeguarding nuclear materials and we will be sending a technical mission to Moscow to assess the immediate needs at first hand.

    Eighthly, we have agreed to cooperate in other defence fields, including the transformation required to ensure the restructuring, control and financing of armed forces in a democratic society. I have offered to second a small number of MOD officials to the Russian Ministry of Defence.

    Ninthly, the President and I discussed the problems of expertise in the field of weapons of mass destruction and the President told me of the steps he is taking against the risks of proliferation. We will have further discussion about how best we can help the Russian republic and the other republics to use the talents of their scientists to the cause of peaceful development.

    And the tenth point is this. President Yeltsin and I have agreed to establish a secure telephone link between his office and mine. I do not see this as a crisis hotline, I do see it as a line upon which we can reflect the growing number of shared issues and interests that we will wish to discuss.

    Let me also mention, I have invited President Yeltsin to pay an official visit to Britain later this year and I am delighted to say he has accepted.

    This afternoon we both fly to New York for a meeting of the Security Council which will demonstrate Russia’s role as a lynchpin in the Council’s role as peace-keeper and peace-maker. The keynote of the meeting that we have had today, the President and I and our colleagues in parallel meetings, has been an aspect of friendship and of partnership. I am confident that that is also going to be a hallmark of tomorrow’s meeting of the Security Council.

    I very much look forward to my further discussions with President Yeltsin and I will now invite him to say a few words to you.

    PRESIDENT YELTSIN:

    Mr. Prime Minister, Ladies and Gentlemen:

    First of all, I would like to express my gratitude to the Prime Minister for his very good idea which he put across to me over the telephone recently to pay a visit to this country. Indeed, we established our first contact on August 19 1990 and it was really a matter of great pride for me to hear him address me at this most difficult time for Russia. He expressed his political support and he expressed his personal support, which will not be forgotten in our developing and new relationship between Russia and the United Kingdom, between the new Russia and Britain.

    I don’t really have anything to add to the enumeration of the ten points which were just described by the Prime Minister with regard to our discussions in private and in plenary. I can only add that Russia has shaken off the communist shackles and has finally embarked upon the civilised road of development, the road of democracy, human rights, civilised market economy and various forms of ownership including private ownership and we shall not abandon that road.

    The economic reform which has just started in Russia was five years overdue and indeed, we are going through hard times right now. We shall overcome all the difficulties that we are facing though the difficulties we are facing with the liberalisation of prices have fallen mostly on the poorer population. We are sure that by the end of this year we shall achieve some stabilisation of our economy, levelling of prices and improved living conditions for our people.

    Despite the seemingly economic cares and the forecasts by the economists that our economy would shrink by 15%, last year it had sunk only by 2.2%. Russia is a great country and it will dampen all small storms and smaller earthquakes. The only thing that can impede our progress would be general unrest and general unrest would happen if our reforms fair. Should the reforms fail, we shall face a new leadership which will reverse the progress that we have so far achieved and Russia will fall into the abyss which had been fixed for 74 years. Therefore, not only Russia and the people of Russia but the entire world community as well as the United Kingdom are interested in the success of our reforms and we are grateful to the Prime Minister for his understanding on that score.

    Tomorrow, the Security Council of the United Nations is to meet and for the first time ever the Security Council will meet at the level of Heads of State or Government; that was the initiative and the proposal’ by the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr. Major, and he will be chairing that meeting on the last day of the chairmanship of the United Kingdom of the Security Council. I can only promise that we shall always match the support that: will be given to us to promote our economic reform.

    I have accepted the invitation which the Prime Minister has kindly extended to me to pay an official visit to this country in the first half of this year and in my turn, I extended that invitation to him to pay an official visit to Russia in the second half of this year and I am delighted to report that he has accepted that invitation.

    I would like to thank the mass media for turning out here in such great numbers. Thank you so much for coming. I would like to thank the Prime Minister for the substantive discussions that we have held and for the positive and interesting attitude that he has displayed. We believe – and I think we share this – that our relations will in future be based on frankness and honesty because this will make it possible for us not to conceal from each other either things positive or negative.

    I am saying goodbye to the Prime Minister and Mrs. Major. We shall be seeing each tomorrow in New York and I thank you for your attention.

     

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

    QUESTION:

    Do you believe that the world is as secure a place now with Boris Yeltsin and the Commonwealth of Independent States as it was with Mikhail Gorbachev and the Soviet Union?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes. I have no doubts about President Yeltsin’s commitment to carry on the work that was going on before in terms of disarmament and especially the disarmament between the two super-states. I think the President’s conviction is clear. He has reiterated that to me this morning and I accept that.

    PRESIDENT YELTSIN:

    I would like to add a few words. President Bush on 28 January and myself on 29 January, made statements about global cuts and the destruction of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons. Mr. Major and I have discussed these matters today during our talks and Mr. Major has put forward his position which I respect and we shall not blow up this matter out of proportion in the mass media.

    QUESTION:

    Regarding the IMF application for the Russian Federation. How feasible is that? How difficult is it? How feasible is rouble stabilisation?

    And for Mr. Yeltsin, if possible: he spoke teasingly last night of talking to you about redirecting his missiles. Have you now agreed to point Russian missiles away from the United Kingdom?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me deal firstly with the question of the IMF and rouble stabilisation:

    I believe that it is very important that Russia soon becomes a full member of the IMF. We have stated that as our conviction for some time; we have urged our colleagues in the IMF to move in that direction; and the Chancellor has particularly urged that a conclusion for that be reached speedily and not later than April so it is necessary and we will press it and I am sure that we will be successful.

    As far as rouble stabilisation is concerned, again, Norman Lamont pressed that matter particularly at the G7 meeting of Finance Ministers last week. There are many difficulties to overcome but it is our conviction in the United Kingdom that this is both necessary and desirable and that in due course the international community will come to it. We shall certainly continue to press the case for that in the weeks and months ahead.

    PRESIDENT YELTSIN:

    On the first question, I would like to add a few words as well: with the Prime Minister’s active support, I am sure that Russia will become a full member of the International Monetary Fund not later than this April.

    On your second question, we must indeed change our military doctrine. In the past, the United States, the United Kingdom and Europe in general were regarded as our potential enemies. That doctrine has to be changed and the missiles retargeted and the missiles that remain after the cuts and destruction will be used only as a deterrent.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in New York – 30 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview on Thursday 30th January 1992, on his arrival at his New York hotel.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Good evening! Thank you for being here this evening.

    We have tomorrow an extremely unusual event. I think tomorrow will be the first time in well over forty years that the Security Council has met for an Extraordinary Meeting at Heads of Government level. I believe it is justified for a number of reasons:

    It has been an extraordinarily turbulent time in the world over the last year or so; there are a vast number of matters we need to discuss: disarmament, non-proliferation; it is an excellent opportunity to introduce President Yeltsin as a member of the Permanent Five and, of course, for the new Secretary-General, Boutros Ghali, to attend his first meeting of the Security Council but above all at our meeting tomorrow, apart from the exchanges of views that we will have on a vast range of matters, I hope we will be able to remit from the Security Council to the Secretary-General a remit for him to examine the role of the United Nations and in particular its special role of peace-keeping and peace-making. There does seem to me to be an opportunity for the United Nations to play a much higher profile, pro-active role in the future than it has done in recent years and I very much hope that will be one of the outcomes of tomorrow’s meeting.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, will the meeting be able to offer Mr. Yeltsin anything more than just kind words?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think the meeting tomorrow is about Mr. Yeltsin’s immediate difficulties; I think that is more a matter for the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank rather than the Security Council tomorrow which will be more concerned with peace and disarmament matters. The British believe that it will be necessary, as soon as the Russians become members of the International Monetary Fund, to offer quite significant help but I don’t think that is a particular matter for discussion at the meeting tomorrow.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, how firm will the United Nations be able to be on the issue of human rights and democracy not only in the Soviet but in China, for example?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That, again, is not the purpose of the meeting tomorrow. I am sure it is a matter that will be raised in some of the speeches tomorrow; it will also be a matter that will be raised in the substantial amount of bilateral contact there will be; it is certainly a matter that I intend to raise in some of my bilateral discussions but I do not think, again, that that is the primary matter that we have in front of us tomorrow.

    The primary matter we have in front of us tomorrow is effectively the role of the United Nations, how it can become more pro-active, what it can actually as a peace-maker, as a broker between dissentient nations; that is the matter that I think principally colleagues on the Security Council will wish to discuss tomorrow.

    QUESTION:

    The Germans feel left out – rightfully so?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The Germans are not at this moment a member of the Security Council but they are a very important nation. I had the opportunity before coming here today to have a couple of conversations with Chancellor Kohl; I am aware of his views; I have no doubt that Chancellor Kohl has spoken to other people.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, on Security Council matters, we are waiting for a follow-up Resolution on Libya to show the international community’s response to terrorism at Lockerbie. Can you tell us when we can expect some sanctions proposed by Britain, France and America?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the follow-up Resolution is a little way away yet; it certainly won’t come tomorrow. My guess – and it can only be a guess – is that it is likely to come towards the end of February but there is a great deal of work to be done before it is ready but I do believe there will be a follow-up Resolution and that it is necessary.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, I know you have mentioned it briefly, but some people are saying tomorrow is really a large photo-opportunity. What do you think will essentially make it more than that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t believe that that is the case. As I said a moment ago, this is the first occasion in fact for 47 years that the Heads of Government of the Security Council have been tempted here to an Extraordinary Meeting of this sort. They have come here because there are matters of real substance that it is necessary for us to discuss. There has been a revolution in the attitude and possibilities of what the United Nations can do over recent years and I will give you several reasons for that:

    – the status of the United Nations improved dramatically because of the key role it played during the Gulf dispute;
    – the activities of Mr. Picot, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative, in terms of dealing with the hostages was another reason to build up the status of the United Nations;
    – in many parts of the world they are acting in one form or another in a peace-making role.

    It is not all that long ago that the United Nations role was largely confined to sending along observers. Now that is no longer the case; there is a great deal more they can do. We have a new Secretary-General, we have a Permanent Five that are working in harmony in a way we haven’t previously seen in the past. For many years, the Permanent Five was a forum in which dissentient views were expressed; now, views of assent are increasingly expressed and that opens an opportunity that simply has not been there before to look at the United Nations and see how rapidly we can move towards the instincts and aspirations its founders had so many years ago. Tomorrow is another small step in that direction.

    QUESTION:

    Do you think it might turn out to be a celebration of a new world order which could yet turn out to be fragile?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Everyone, I think, is pleased at the way in which matters developed over the past year in the former Soviet Union, the collapse of communism in a regime that has been discredited in most of the outside world for generations but it survived in strength and was a threat to us in the West – that has gone. That, I think, is a cause for quiet satisfaction.

    I think President Bush was entirely right to say the Cold War is over and the Cold War has been won by the West but it isn’t an occasion tomorrow for drinking glasses of champagne and patting ourselves on the back. We have to look forward. We have a different situation now; no longer that grisly stability of confrontation between East and West – it isn’t the same now. We do have a series of different problems arising, different problems in the Middle East, different problems in Europe – one only has to look at Yugoslavia – and other potential problems and trouble-spots in different parts of the world. We have to come to grips with that and decide how we deal with it. There is no other forum other than the United Nations than can pick up these problems and act as an international broker in times of difficulties. I believe, therefore, that anything we can do to improve cooperation within the United Nations and the status and authority of the United Nations is something well worth doing and I believe that will be the view of everyone who attends tomorrow.

  • Mr Major’s Statement on the Visit of President Yeltsin – 30 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s statement on the visit of President Yeltsin, issued on Thursday 30th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    President Yeltsin and I have had over four hours of talks, some of it in very restricted session, some with other Ministers.

    My first contact with President Yeltsin was at the height of the August coup. Some of you may remember that I came out into Downing Street to report that conversation. Britain was the first country to denounce the coup. I wanted, on that day in August, to draw the world’s attention to the courage of President Yeltsin and his followers in the White House. They fought for their lives and for the future of democracy in their country.

    It is a particular pleasure to welcome President Yeltsin today as President of Russia. Today we have made progress in building a new relationship between our two countries. We have always had shared interests. Now we have shared values as well. The shared values of democracy, a free economy and a commitment to peace and stability.

    I was glad to have the opportunity today to welcome the arms control initiative taken by President Bush and President Yeltsin. I expressed our strong support for further moves towards deterrence at much lower levels, based on the most stable systems. I assured him of our intention to maintain only a minimum strategic deterrent force, threatening no one.

    We have given a practical and important expression today to our new relationship. I will mention ten points.

    1. We have signed a joint declaration this morning. This commits our two countries to a relationship of friendship as partners in the international community. It commits us to the peaceful settlement of disputes; to the control of weapons of mass destruction and to non-proliferation. We propose to turn this Declaration into a formal Treaty on the relations between our two countries in the near future.

    2. Britain is determined to help democracy in Russia. It has already done a great deal to provide assistance to Russia and the new Commonwealth.

    – Britain’s share of EC aid is £300 million;
    – Know-how fund of £50 million already committed to over 50 projects (including improvement of bread distribution in Moscow);
    – £20 million feed grain package to St. Petersburg;
    – Medical assistance of £2 million;
    – Financial sector training initiative: there will be places for 1,000 Russians with British financial, insurance and legal firms.

    3. Britain was the first country to propose Russian membership of the IMF and to propose an April deadline for that membership. We will press for that.

    4. We took the lead in negotiating a debt deferral agreement for Russia and the other republics. We have also taken a lead in the Group of 7 to urge further assistance for Russia, possibly in the form of a rouble stabilisation fund.

    5. In the context of an IMF programme, I can announce today our readiness to make available in 1992 a total of £280 million in medium term export credit cover and investment insurance for Russia and the other Republics.

    6. Britain will propose in the EC an improved trade and cooperation agreement with Russia. We will make this one of the priorities of our Presidency.

    7. We have agreed to cooperate on handling surplus Soviet nuclear weapons and safeguarding nuclear materials and we will be sending a technical mission to Moscow to assess the immediate needs at first hand.

    8. We have agreed to cooperate in other defence fields including the transformation required to ensure the restructuring, control and financing of armed forces in a democratic society. I have offered to second a small number of MOD officials to the Russian Ministry of Defence.

    9. The President and I discussed the problem of expertise in the field of weapons of mass destruction and the President told me of the steps he is taking against the risks of proliferation. We will have further discussion about how best we can help the Russian Republic and other Republics to use the talents of their scientists in the cause of peaceful development.

    10. President Yeltsin and I have agreed to establish a secure telephone link between his office and mine. I do not see this as a crisis hot line. It will reflect the growing number of shared issues and interests that we will wish to discuss.

    I have invited President Yeltsin to pay an official visit to Britain later this year. I am delighted to say that he has accepted.

    This afternoon we both fly to New York for a meeting of the Security Council which will demonstrate Russia’s role as a linchpin in the Council’s role as peacekeeper and peacemaker. The keynote of our meeting today has been friendship and partnership. I am sure that will also be a hallmark of tomorrow’s meeting of the Security Council.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Declaration with the Russian Federation – 30 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s Joint Declaration with the Russian Federation, issued on 30th January 1992.

    JOINT DECLARATION BY THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION:

    The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Russian Federation are opening a new page in their relations. They have left behind the period of the Cold War, do not threaten each other’s national interests and are committed to universal democratic principles and aspirations.

    The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Russian Federation, further referred to as the Parties, guided by a spirit of mutual respect and in the interests of developing wide-ranging and friendly relations between their two countries and also their broad cooperation in the international arena, have agreed upon the following:

    I

    1. The Parties recognise that, with the dissolution of the USSR, a group of independent and sovereign states has joined the world community. At the same time, the Russian Federation continues to be responsible in full for the international rights and obligations previously assumed by the Soviet Union.

    2. The Parties declare that the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation are friendly States and partners within the international community. Relations between them will be founded on a shared commitment to the principles of freedom, democracy, the rule of law and human rights, and also upon respect for the letter and spirit of the Charter of the United Nations, the Helsinki Final Act, the Paris Charter for a New Europe and other documents of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

    3. Between the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation there are no ideological barriers, and no political impediments to the growth of friendship and mutual understanding between the British and Russian peoples.

    II

    4. The Parties recognise their special responsibility as Permanent Members of the United Nations Security Council for the maintenance of the peace and security of all States and to cooperate in the fulfilment of the principles of justice, democracy and common human values. They will do all in their power to enhance the effectiveness of the United Nations Organisation.

    5. The Parties welcome the transition from confrontation to cooperation in Europe and the world, and the resultant strengthening of the security of all States. They declare that their armed forces are designated purely for defensive purposes. The United Kingdom and the Russian Federation are committed to the principle that the command, control and management of armed forces should be organised within the framework of democratic institutions and the rule of law. The Parties attach the highest importance to the maintenance of international stability and security during this time of deep transformation in Europe and in the former Soviet Union. They declare their commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes by political means and through dialogue.

    6. The Parties intend to undertake all steps necessary to ensure that nuclear weapons, and all other weapons of mass destruction, are held at all times under secure control. They believe that any proliferation of weapons of mass destruction carries serious risks for international peace and security.

    7. The Parties reaffirm their strong commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention of 1972, and their readiness to conclude an agreement on a comprehensive ban on chemical weapons. They will remain in active consultation on these questions, and will also examine the potential for British/Russian cooperation in the destruction and safe disposal of surplus weapons in Russia. The United Kingdom and the Russian Federation will take steps to prevent the transfer to other countries of technology and expert knowledge which could contribute to the development of nuclear armaments and of other types of weapon of mass destruction.

    8. The United Kingdom and the Russian Federation will work together to consolidate and carry forward agreements for the reduction of forces and armaments. They look to the very early ratification and implementation of the CFE Treaty, as well as of the START Agreement and of other measures to reduce nuclear weapons.

    III

    9. The Parties will organise regular exchanges of Ministerial visits. They will encourage inter-Parliamentary cooperation and contacts between legislative and executive bodies in the two countries, and will promote the exchange of experience in the preparation and implementation of legislation. The Parties will give all appropriate assistance to the development of contacts between public and private organisations in the two countries.

    10. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the United Kingdom and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation will hold regular consultations on both bilateral and international questions.

    11. The Parties favour the further development of exchanges between the armed forces and Defence Ministries of the two countries at different levels and will seek to extend the scope and content of these exchanges.

    IV

    12. The Parties share the view that it is the objective of Governments to establish conditions for the development of free enterprise and of the creative abilities of individuals. They are committed to bilateral cooperation in conditions of a free market, economic liberalisation, free trade and sound management.

    The Parties believe that the integration of the Russian Federation in the world economic system is a vital objective. This process will encourage private investment, stimulate trade and assist the more effective utilization of Russia’s large human and natural resources. The United Kingdom will continue to give active support to the Russian Federation’s application for membership at the earliest possible time of the International Monetary Fund, and of other international economic organisations.

    13. The Parties acknowledge that there is potential for a large increase in trade between the two countries. They agree that economic reform, agreement on debt questions and the creation of a clear legal environment for investment will establish conditions for greater involvement by British companies in the Russian Federation.

    14. The Parties consider it especially important that closer relations in different areas should be developed between all the countries of Europe.

    The Russian Federation welcomes the United Kingdom’s longstanding commitment to an outward-looking European Community. The United Kingdom will continue to support the development of effective ties between the European Community and the Russian Federation.

    V

    15. The Parties acknowledge the importance of the early signature of a British/Russian Treaty, designed to consolidate the fundamental principles of future relations between the two countries.

    Signed by:

    JOHN MAJOR, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

    BORIS N YELTSIN, President of the Russian Federation

  • Mr Major’s Statement on President Bush’s Nuclear Policy – 29 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s statement on President Bush’s initiative on strategic nuclear weapons, released on Wednesday 29th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I warmly welcome President Bush’s latest proposals for strategic arms reductions and I congratulated the President earlier this week on this important and imaginative initiative.

    The proposals address the key problems facing us in the strategic arena, namely how to increase global security and stability against the uncertain background of events in the former Soviet Union, and how to reduce the threat of nuclear confrontation.

    I very much hope that the CIS leaders will respond positively to this initiative. For my part I will certainly support it in my talks with President Yeltsin on Thursday, 30 January.

    The offer of further agreed reductions in strategic missiles deals with the problem of the most destabilising heavy missiles. This is a matter that is outstanding from the START negotiations. We believe it should be immensely reassuring to the Commonwealth States.

    The President’s measures are a further step in reversing the process of nuclear competition between the superpowers. The security of the world will be greatly enhanced if President Yeltsin agrees to the elimination of multiple-warhead ICBMs – the most destabilising elements of the old Cold War confrontation. The way will then be open for Russia to move with the United States towards a more stable minimum deterrence increasingly concentrated on submarine forces.

    The United Kingdom has always been committed to maintaining only a minimum nuclear deterrent. We announced last Autumn a cut of about half in the number of British sub-strategic weapons. In our view Trident is the minimum strategic deterrent necessary to guarantee this country’s future security.

    The greatest danger we face is not the existence of deterrent forces, but the danger of proliferation of nuclear weapons into the hands of other powers in unstable regions of the world. The President’s very welcome initiative addresses this problem squarely and imaginatively.

  • Mr Major’s Speech on Disability – 29 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech on the Employers’ Agenda on Disability, held in London on Wednesday 29th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Alistair, thank you very much indeed. When I left Number 10 a few moments ago, one of my Private Secretaries pressed into my hands some notes and he said: “You will find these extremely useful”, and I won’t and I have not read them and I will pass them back.

    Can I pick up some of the things that Alistair Frame said a few moments ago. I think one thing ought to be more readily understood than it is, and that is that disabled people are a resource, not just a difficulty.

    We have a large number of people in this country suffering from one form of disability or another. But within that pool of people suffering that particular disability there is a huge amount of talent, a huge amount of understanding. And quite apart from the personal elements of life, it is a huge waste of a national and economic resource not to use that particular talent.

    And it is perhaps for that reason, amongst others, that I welcome very much what the forum is doing and the lead that it is giving to employers in government I think as well as in local government and in the private sector.

    It is important that we use that resource. Increasingly we have seen over the years how that resource is both necessary in the market and how it is often providing a particular set of skills that may not be so readily available elsewhere.

    So although I congratulate without any reserve the employers who are part of this initiative, I do say to the private sector and the public sector collectively that there is an element of self-interest for all of us in making sure that this enormous resource is properly used in the future.

    I had the privilege, for alas too short a time, of being Minister for the Disabled. There have been very few such Ministers in the history of government, a number on the Labour side, Alf Morrison, his successors, Tony Newton on the Tory side, myself and Nick Scott who is here this evening and has been Minister for some time. And amongst that cross-party alliance there is an extraordinary concurrence of view about what can be done, what has been done and what needs to be done.

    And I believe that the year I spent as Minister for the Disabled was one of the years in politics I have found most rewarding and that I have most enjoyed. One learned a great deal that is not readily apparent.

    I think when one sees at close quarters some of the especial difficulties faced by people who are disabled and one talks to them, one learns something that I think others perhaps do not learn. And that, above all, is what those people who are disabled themselves most want.

    I will tell you firstly what they do not want. They do not want to be patronised, they do not want to be treated as different, they do not want to be felt that special things are being carved out in their direction. What they do want is the opportunity on a level playing field to use their talents and when they use their talents to be fairly rewarded for using their talents and I believe they are absolutely right in each one of those ambitions.

    There is much that has been done, there is a lot still that remains to be done: the 3 percent target across industry and in government is not yet met everywhere. In government, if I may say so, their record is a good deal better than the private sector collectively, indeed it is twice as good as the private sector collectively. But even amongst government departments at the moment only five government departments and agencies meet the 3 percent target, four others are very close to it, others are a little way behind. But we are moving in that direction.

    Some great companies and some small companies in the private sector set an absolutely magnificent example. Many others have not yet followed that example and I for one hope that they will and I hope that they will do so speedily. It is in their interest to do so, I think it is in society’s interest generally that they do so, and I believe it is in the interest of people who are disabled that they do so.

    So I hope that this initiative will spark a further degree of innovation in both the public and the private sector and I would say to its organisers: firstly that the initiative deserves to succeed; and secondly, that insofar as I can, I will give it my fullest backing.

    I hope it achieves, above all, the forum’s prime objective: to help more disabled people get jobs, good jobs, permanent jobs, worthwhile jobs, fulfilling jobs. And once they have got them to have increased access to development and promotion opportunities as well. There is no reason, as we march through the years immediately ahead, where right through the promotion scales of industry and commerce and politics there should not be the same opportunities for people who are disabled as there have traditionally been for people who are not disabled.

    We live in a changing world, a changing country, opportunities differ, industry differs, the structure of the way in which we live our life differs, the capacity to understand and accommodate differences, some of them perhaps disabilities, becomes greater as year succeeds year.

    And I hope the aggregation of those changes will enable more disabled people to fulfil the ambitions that we have for them and perhaps more importantly than that the ambitions that they justifiably have for themselves in the future.

    So I think, if I may, I will end just upon this point. This is a worthwhile initiative, I am grateful to all of you who had a part in framing it and all of you who are here this evening. I hope it is successful, I wish you well in it, I wish your members well in it, and I hope on behalf of all the people who may benefit as a result of it that the success of this is not only outstanding but swift and thank you very much for inviting me this evening.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 28 January 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 28th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Sellafield

    Mr. McGrady : To ask the Prime Minister what steps he is taking to ensure co-ordination of consideration by the Secretaries of State for Energy, for Environment and for Northern Ireland of the environmental impact of the Sellafield plant on Northern Ireland and the Irish sea.

    The Prime Minister : I am satisfied that suitable mechanisms already exist to achieve the required co-ordination.

     

    Bingham Inquiry

    Mr. Vaz : To ask the Prime Minister on what date he gave his evidence to the Bingham inquiry ; and if he will place a copy of his evidence in the Library.

    The Prime Minister : I have nothing to add to the letter I sent the hon. Member on 22 January, a copy of which has been placed in the House Library.

     

    Hong Kong

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the visits made to Hong Kong by Government Ministers since June 1987 giving the date and purpose of the visit in each case.

    The Prime Minister : The following Government Ministers visited Hong Kong since June 1987 on Government business :

    Ministerial Visits to Hong Kong

    1987 (from June) :

    Lord Glenarthur, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, in September.

    1988 :

    Sir Geoffrey Howe, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in May ; Lord Glenarthur, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in February and June ; Mr. Chris Patten, Minister for Overseas Development, in September ; Lord Young, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, in June ; Mr. Cecil Parkinson, Secretary of State for Energy, in June ; Mr. George Younger, Secretary of State for Defence, in March ; Mr. Archie Hamilton, Minister of State for the Armed Forces, in March ; Mr. Ian Stewart, Minister of State for the Armed Forces, in January ; Mr. Peter Morrison, Minister of State for Energy, in September ; Mr. Wyn Roberts, Minister of State, Welsh Office, in September ; Mr. John Macgregor, Minister for Agriculture, in September ; Mr. Paul Channon, Secretary of State for Transport, in November ; Mr. Nicholas Ridley, Secretary of State for the Environment, in December ; Mr. Francis Maude, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, in September.

    1989 :

    Lord Mackay, Lord Chancellor, in December ; Sir Geoffrey Howe, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, in July ; Lord Young, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, in April ; Lord Glenarthur, Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, in January ; and his successor, Mr. Francis Maude, in September ; Mr. Peter Viggers, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Industry, in November ; and Mr. Richard Needham, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, in December. 1990 :

    Mr. Douglas Hurd, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, in January ; Mr. Michael Howard, Secretary of State for Employment, in September ; Mr. Francis Maude, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, in April and July ; and his successor, Lord Caithness, in September ; Mr. Tim Sainsbury, Minister for Trade and Mr. David Mellor, Minister for the Arts, in September ; Mr. Peter Lloyd, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State in the Home Office, in March and Mr. John Maples, Economic Secretary to the Treasury, in November.

    1991 :

    I visited in September ; Mr. Douglas Hurd, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, in April and September ; Mr. Michael Heseltine, Secretary of State for the Environment, in September ; Mr. Tom King, Secretary of State for Defence, in September ; Mr. John Wakeham, Secretary of State for Energy, in November ; Mr. John Gummer, Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, in October ; and Lord Caithness, Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, in January, July and December.

     

    Departmental Information Systems

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the current state of implementation of FAMIS–financial and management information systems–or its equivalent in each of Her Majesty’s Government’s Departments ; and what proposals he has to develop the system.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 27 January 1992] : Following the financial management initiative, most Departments have been developing financial and management information systems, although there is no single model. Executive agencies set up under the “next steps” initiative are now doing the same. Such systems require continuing development to clarify managerial responsibility, to give better information on how to improve value for money and quality of service from the resources consumed, and to meet changing business needs. The Government will continue to encourage the effort being devoted to developing such systems.

  • PMQT – 28 January 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 28th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Ronnie Campbell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 28 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. Campbell : Is the Prime Minister aware that people in my constituency of Blyth Valley eagerly await the RECHAR money? As there is a split in his Cabinet will he get off his backside, stop swanning around that desert island and have the money paid?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the RECHAR money has been paid by Britain into the European Community and that we should have it back. I hope that Commissioner Millan will release it speedily.

    Sir William Shelton : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that we already see benefits flowing from the citizens charter? I refer, for instance, to shorter hospital waiting lists and to school performance league tables. Will my right hon. Friend tell the House what future benefits–proven benefits–the people of this country will see flowing from the citizens charter?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We are determined to get the best possible value for the enormous amount of public money that is available at present. In addition to the improved information and guidance systems that we have already set up, there will be much more flexible opening hours in the case of tax offices, benefits offices and employment service offices, and a much more detailed and personal service for the taxpayer, who has the cost of those services compulsorily extracted in taxes from his or her pocket.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will the Prime Minister now give a categoric assurance that he will not impose any increase in VAT? Will he please answer yes or no?

    The Prime Minister : We have no plans to increase value added tax.

    Mr. Kinnock : Why cannot the Prime Minister give a straight answer to a straight question? Is he aware that the words he has just used are exactly the same as those that were used by his predecessor just before her Government increased VAT? Why cannot he tell us now what his plans are? Or is he trying to forget that the Government have increased VAT five times in 13 years? Is not that why everyone has good reason to know that Tory Governments mean higher VAT?

    The Prime Minister : There will be no VAT increase. Unlike the Labour party, we have published our spending plans and there is no need for us to raise VAT to meet them. So that the right hon. Gentleman is in no doubt, I tell him that I have no plans to raise the top rate of tax or the level of national insurance contributions.

    Mr. Kinnock : It is time that the Prime Minister came clean with the country. In view of the record of Conservative Governments in always putting up VAT and in view of the Prime Minister’s promises on other aspects of policy, how can he pretend that his intention is not to put up VAT? Do not a Tory Government make VAT rises a certainty?

    The Prime Minister : Before the right hon. Gentleman carries that fib any further, does he recall a further and earlier prediction about value added tax? I quote :

    “Labour foresees 60 per cent. VAT. VAT could rise to 60 per cent. if radical tax changes are introduced by a new Tory Government.” The right hon. Gentleman may recall that prediction by his right hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) before the previous election. That was also the time when the right hon. Member for Sparkbrook claimed that Labour would win by a landslide in the 1987 election. He was wrong on both points then and he is wrong now.

    Mr. Gerald Bowden : Does my right hon. Friend agree–

    [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order. I ask the House to settle down.

    Mr. Bowden : Does my right hon. Friend agree– [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order.

    Mr. Bowden : Does my right hon. Friend agree that a party’s commitment to public services is best judged by its record in government? Will my right hon. Friend consult our right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment to ascertain who controls the 20 authorities that have the highest community charge, the highest rent arrears and more vacant properties than any other authorities? Does my borough of Southwark feature among them?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend makes a sound and fair point. All too often, Labour-controlled councils provide shoddy services at far too high a cost. I well recall the Opposition saying, “If you wish to see what a Labour Government would be like, look at Labour local government.”

    Mr. Ashdown : On the subject of predictions, and while the Prime Minister reflects today on the gloomy report by the Confederation of British Industry, does he recall on new year’s day this year saying on Radio 4 that in retrospect, we would look back and say that the economic recovery had already started? In retrospect, does the Prime Minister agree that he might spend less time talking up false economic dawns and more time taking action for economic recovery?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman is becoming a professional gloom monger. When we look back to the present, it will be perfectly clear that in many sectors of the economy, the recovery has indeed started.

    Mr. Onslow : Does my right hon. Friend remember that when the investment income surcharge was abolished in 1984, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer described it as an unfair and anomalous tax on savings and on the rewards of personal enterprise? What would he say today to anyone who was stupid enough to recommit himself to reintroducing it, as Labour has done?

    The Prime Minister : I would certainly find that extraordinary. I would find it even more extraordinary from a party that claims to care about investment, yet clearly has no understanding that investment comes from savings.

     

    Q2. Mr. Livingstone : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 28 January.

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

    Mr. Livingstone : Given the commitment in the citizen’s charter to parental choice in education, will the Prime Minister agree to meet a small delegation of parents from William Gladstone school which has an excellent academic record and an expanding roll but which faces closure as Brent council wishes to sell the school because of its site value?

    The Prime Minister : I am sure that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State will be happy to see the hon. Member concerned.

    Mr. Michael Morris : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the greatest service he can continue to do for the British public is to keep inflation below 5 per cent? Is he further aware that the public remembers that inflation under Labour was 15 per cent., 20 per cent. and 25 per cent? In order to keep the level of inflation down, will he have a look at what is happening with the six major grocery chains, the increased share of the margins that they are getting and the fact that their margins are now twice the level found in the major grocery chains throughout Europe?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend says, inflation is low and we are determined that it will stay low. He will recall that inflation never fell below 7.4 per cent., and that for only a very brief period, while the Labour party was in Government.

    I will certainly look at the point that my hon. Friend has mentioned.

     

    Q3. Ms Hoey : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 28 January.

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

    Ms Hoey : Before the Prime Minister retires to his desert island, taking with him his Trollope and a very large section of my constituency– without my permission–will he give a clear and simple statement about what he will offer to pensioners so that they can retire with some luxury? Will he match Labour’s commitment to pensions?

    The Prime Minister : A commitment to pensions means nothing if it is not matched by a commitment to low inflation.

    Mr. Devlin rose–[Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order. The hon. Member has not asked a question of the Prime Minister for many months, and not in this Session, unlike some other hon. Members, now shouting “Marginal seat.”

    Mr. Devlin : Has my right hon. Friend had an opportunity to look at the study in The Financial Times on 6 January which pointed to the fact that the northern region has very much benefited from the economic restructuring of the 1980s and is now coming out of recession faster than any other part of the country, due to the success of the regeneration programmes that the Government have put in place in the region?

    The Prime Minister : I have seen that myself in visits to the north. There is no doubt that the north has seen the start of many good things in this country and I am certain that it will be the same again with the economic recovery.

     

    Q4. Mr. McKelvey : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 28 January.

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

    Mr. McKelvey : Can the Prime Minister confirm that last Wednesday he had lunch with Lord Rothermere? Did he take the opportunity on that occasion to co-ordinate the campaign of lies and vilification that the Rothermere press has been conducting against the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : I took the opportunity to enjoy an excellent luncheon. [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order.

    Sir John Farr : As my right hon. Friend prepares himself for the important meeting with President Yeltsin later this week in London, will he take the opportunity of seeing what can be done to deal with the massive threat which still exists from all the different independent Russian states?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend says, this will be an important opportunity to discuss with President Yeltsin both the international difficulties posed by the break-up of the old Soviet Union and the extent to which the west might usefully help the Russian Republic in the difficulties that it faces at present. I anticipate that both those matters will be on our agenda.

     

    Q5. Mr. Bernie Grant : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 28 January.

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

    Mr. Grant : Will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating Labour-controlled Haringey council and the children, teachers and parents of Haringey on the fact that our schools came joint top in English, maths and science in the level 3 standard assessment test and top in the individual subject of science? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that that is a remarkable achievement, bearing in mind the fact that Haringey is an inner-London borough and has all the associated problems? Is not he ashamed at the remarks of his predecessor and of his ministerial colleagues who have constantly criticised Haringey’s education policy and have cut its revenue support grant? Will the right hon. Gentleman see to it that Haringey receives an increase in its revenue support grant and standard spending assessment as a result of its excellent work in educating the children at its schools?

    The Prime Minister : I am delighted to hear what the hon. Gentleman says. I am especially pleased to hear that he now supports the tests introduced by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science. I can tell from what he said that he is a strong supporter of the parents charter, without which those results might not have been fully known.

    Mr. Conway : Will my right hon. Friend take time to congratulate British industry on the fact that it has achieved record exports in the past quarter, that 27 of the top 50 European companies are British and that Britain exports more of its national product than Japan? Are not those successful British companies sick and tired of being talked down by the doom-monger Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right. Yesterday’s trade figures showed clearly that export volumes were at record levels even in a worldwide economic downturn. My hon. Friend was also right about some Opposition Members talking down the economy. The Leader of the Opposition said in his letter to supporters at the beginning of this year that Britain had a £20 billion trade deficit, when the truth was that the deficit fell by a half and the right hon. Gentleman’s figures were wholly wrong. Perhaps he will now write again to his supporters and correct his error.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the Economist Conference on the Citizen’s Charter – 27 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech made to The Economist Conference on the Streamlining of the Public Sector on Monday 27th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    PUBLIC SERVICES ON THE MOVE: THE CITIZEN’S CHARTER

    Mr Chairman, four years ago, as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, I was the guardian of the public purse. I spoke then about the importance of high quality public services. Some people were surprised at such a speech from a Minister with responsibility for public expenditure. But it was right. And the fact that so many people running great enterprises, public and private, are here this morning shows that we are right to insist that people deserve better value for money and more accountable management standards in our public services.

    The Citizen’s Charter is a blueprint to deliver higher standards. Some services – like the National Health Service and social security – cross the nation. Others are the prerogative of Town Halls and local authorities.

    But wherever they may be, there is excuse for accepting second-rate performance. It’s economically wasteful. It’s socially unacceptable. And it’s a poor use of the many talented people who work in the public sector.

    The Citizen’s Charter reflects a determination to improve public service. For me, that was not a new concept. It arose from experience – as a user of public services, as a provider of them in local Government, and, finally, as a Minister.

    My views have not changed on substance over the years. Nor have my convictions. I believed then and I believe now that too often providers of public service fail to understand, or ignore, the interests and concerns of the public they are there to serve.

    Let me give you an example. Too often the public are treated as if they were the lucky recipients of a free service. But they are not. They’re paying for it with their own money compulsorily taken from them in taxes. They are entitled to be treated as credit-worthy customers who’ve paid in advance.

    Mr Chairman, the Citizen’s Charter came about because I was consistently receiving the same strong message. That it was high time to raise standards of performance in our public services. That was the demand of the consumer. And it was also the wish of those who work in the public sector themselves. They had the skills, the dedication, and the enthusiasm to do it. All they needed was the freedom and the encouragement to try out new ideas. The Citizen’s Charter gives them the chance.

    CITIZEN’S CHARTER PRINCIPLES

    What the Charter does is to underline the need for:

    – published standards

    – consulting users and customers

    – increased openness

    – more and better information

    – more and better choice

    – greater accessibility and

    – greater responsiveness when things go wrong.

    These are things we want to see underpinning not some – but all of our public services.

    THE CHARTER’S POLICY MEASURES

    But our White Paper is more than a set of principles. It is an ambitious programme of action to raise the standard of service right across the public sector. It includes some huge commitments:

    The privatisation of British Rail and British Coal. The deregulation and privatisation of London Buses. These will be priorities in the next Parliament. But the main thrust of the Charter is to empower the individual.

    – So it includes also laws to let the public see league tables comparing the standards of service of their local authority with that of others.

    – And, for the first time ever, reforms that will bring about the regular independent inspection of all Britain’s schools.

    – It contains radical reforms which will limit the monopoly of the Post Office.

    – It proposes new powers for citizens to challenge unlawful strikes in the public sector. When the next Parliament is formed, they, too will become law.

    Last July I made it clear that a programme on this scale would take time to deliver. But we must deliver it – and we will. The Citizen’s Charter will be at the heart of this Government’s policy making throughout the 1990s.

    Sometimes people find it hard to relate great policy ideas to everyday life. There is a tendency to be shy of new concepts. People were shy of privatisation. Yet they should remember privatisation has created a nation of shareholders and put telephone kiosks that work in every high street in Britain. Deregulation has opened up the motorways to long-distance coach travel.

    But those benefits were not always seen at first. Indeed, they were bitterly resisted. It is always less trouble to stick to the status quo. But today those ideas are not only accepted, they are imitated right across the world. It will be the same with the Citizen’s Charter. There’s always resistance to good ideas. Wherever we find it, we will beat it. And I have no doubt that the ideas in the Charter will be imitated in other countries too. They are already catching the fancy of policy makers not least in the United States.

    The Charter builds on and takes forward our privatisation and contracting out plans. The White Paper on Competing for Quality, will lead to more buying in of outside skills and a bigger role for the private sector. I want to see much more market testing in the years ahead. In central Government as well as in services outside. And. we are making the way easier for private firms to bid for business. Whitehall has been told to be open to their ideas.

    But the Charter is not only about big policy developments. It also addresses directly some of the smaller things that cause so much irritation in everyday life. Again, an example makes the point. Take fixed appointment times for the man from the gas board or the electricity board. When we were working on the Charter we were told these were unthinkable. Fixed appointment times? Over the years consumers have learned to be grateful if they ever came? Were we mad? The public didn’t want them, they said. The unions wouldn’t like it. These latter day Mr Bumbles were shocked at the consumer demanding more. Whatever next Oliver? A proper service? Now, East Midlands Electricity has shown that it is perfectly possible to get the electricity man to call at a specific time of day, if that’s what the customer wants.

    And take another frustration of everyday life: motorway cones. Sometimes one could be forgiven for believing they had taken over the roads and were marching on the towns.

    So we listened and acted. As a result, £70 million worth of motorists’ time has already been saved by using lane rental. So we must do more of it. And there are other things we can do. A recent piece of work on the M1, with traditional methods, would have taken over 5 days to complete, and cost £25,000. Using rolling lane closure, the work was done in 3 hours and cost just £5,000. We are looking to the Department of Transport to press on fast with all the Citizen’s Charter’s new ideas for handling roadworks better.

    PROGRESS : HEALTH

    Then there’s the Charter’s influence on the Health Service: From this April, all hospitals will have to display publicly their local charter standards. From this April people will be given individual appointment times for out patient visits. No more turning up at 9 am and finding twenty other people there with the same appointment time. And from this April, there will be guaranteed maximum waiting times for hospital treatments. In Scotland there will be maximum waiting times for a number of specified operations. All this is spelt out in the Patient’s Charter which has gone to every home in the land. A better service. A more personal service. And more dignity, too.

    The Health Service must hit the targets that the White Paper set. And then we must go further. I can tell you today that we are launching a new research study into why patients have to wait so long between referral by their GP and seeing a consultant. The time varies considerably. Why? I want to know. And when we know we must put it right. I want to see improvements made.

    Changes like these take effort, commitment, skill, organisation. They mean a shift in approach on the part of a great many people up and down the NHS. Well, it’s happening. There’s a new mood of confidence in a Health Service that is responding to the challenges that the Citizen’s Charter has set. And there will be many more to come.

    EDUCATION

    Then consider education. In no area have the Charter’s proposals received wider public support. Parents now have a right to see governors’ annual reports, which include the exam results in their school. From July all parents will have the right to an annual report on their child’s progress; and, from this autumn, tables comparing the exam results of different schools will be published every year in the local paper. Next year, the comparative tables will include truancy figures and information on where pupils go when they leave school. National Curriculum test results will be published as soon as they become available.

    You may be surprised that it was ever thought unsafe for parents and public to know this sort of thing. Well, I think I can tell you why. It was inconvenient to some of the providers. It might expose poor performance to the criticism it deserved. But poor performance should be exposed if we are to correct it.

    It is those attitudes that the Citizen’s Charter is challenging. We are giving parents a greatly increased voice in their children’s education – a voice they should never have lost. And at the same time we are also letting employers, local business people and so on – see how effective their schools are.

    OTHER MEASURES

    There are other simple but necessary things we’re doing.

    Public services are much more human if they come with a name to them. Anonymity can be intimidating. Very shortly 35,000 Employment service local office staff will be wearing name badges. And all other parts of the public service are doing the same.

    We are going to provide more flexible opening hours in tax offices, Jobcentres, benefit offices and driving test centres. Flexible hours to provide a better service.

    We are seeing standards set in areas where people said it couldn’t be done. For example, the Kent Police will answer all 999 calls within 10 seconds and will attend all incidents that require a rapid response in no more than 20 minutes – 10 minutes in towns.

    We’re making radical changes in inspection. Not just by making sure that the standards are checked in every British school. But also by introducing outsiders – professionals, users, commonsense citizens – into other inspectorates as well. I believe it is quite wrong that professions – like police, social work, or probation – should be inspected only by the providers themselves. They must be subject to independent inspection – to reassure the public and encourage the best performance.

    Other tough targets are being bettered. In 1989 it took some 3 1/2 weeks to get a passport. Now it takes just 7 days. Document processing used to take Companies House a month on average. Last financial year this figure was cut to just one week. Huge improvements in service, not dependent on extra resources. Just good management and a willing response from staff.

    The list could go on.

    WHERE NEXT

    Mr Chairman, ten days ago, I brought a number of my colleagues together with senior officials to assess progress on the Charter. We agreed that we must develop some of the many new ideas that they put forward. And we decided to hold these top-level meetings regularly so that progress would be maintained.

    Last Friday Michael Heseltine unveiled the Tenant’s Charter. This tells council tenants what they have a right to expect from their housing authorities. That they must be kept informed of any major changes that landlords propose to make to their homes or their estates; that they have a right to carry out improvements to their homes, or to swap their homes if they wish to move house to another area.

    Today sees the launch of the Benefits Agency Charter. It lays out clearly the service that benefit claimants are entitled to expect. And it sets specific service standards for speed and accuracy of benefit delivery.

    Other initiatives will follow, including, on Wednesday publication by the Customs of a charter for travellers.

    People are being given information about services that no one has bothered to tell them before. For the future:

    We want even more, and better information. There will be:

    – a video which explains how the tax system works, so that those running small businesses can more easily manage their tax affairs;

    – and a video about the way the courts work, to help those who come once in a lifetime as jurors or witnesses to understand what goes on and to find their way around.

    – In Wales there is to be a code of good practice in planning cases for local authorities. League tables will be published so that, once more, we can put pressure on the worst authorities to catch up with the best.

    – We will soon see a new Passenger’s Charter published. This will set out clearly the standards that British Rail’s passengers are entitled to expect, and make BR account for its performance against them. And it will also improve significantly the terms of compensation they should make available to passengers who suffer worst from train delays.

    – And Charter’s principles should also help the businessman as citizen. He has to deal with many rules and regulations administered by local authorities. In some areas systems are being developed so that a business getting approval from one authority will know that it is valid for others. I want to see such systems, which are currently voluntary, extended more and more widely. Businesses simply cannot understand it when different authorities apply the same laws in different ways. It adds to business costs and detracts from competitiveness. Local authorities need to work with business in smoothing out difficulties that stop firms getting on with their main job – trading.

    – Finally, we are going to make sure that rewards in the public sector are related to performance. Increasingly, peoples’ pay must be linked to giving high quality service. Doing a job of quality must be seen to matter more than doing a job. There will be strict, but fair criteria. But those who work well should earn more than those who don’t. I intend that performance pay should apply more widely in public service – not just in Whitehall, but on the underground and the railways as well.

    THE CHARTER MARK AWARD

    I can also announce today a reward for excellence. It will be known as the Charter Mark award. It will be open to all public services that serve their customers direct. It will be challenging to achieve. In the first year some 50 Charter Marks will be awarded. Only the highest standards of performance will be considered. The winners will have to improve even more. Year on year improvement in the quality of their services. Customer satisfaction.

    And they will have to submit plans for future improvements without cost to the taxpayer.

    I hope many public sector services will apply for the Charter Mark. Not just the big ones. And not just the obvious ones. There are individual schools, hospitals, Agencies, and local authority services, which may not be well known nationally but which provide a service of which they can be proud. I want their efforts to be recognised. To be examples for others to follow.

    RESOURCES

    Mr Chairman, it is the taxpayer who meets the cost of public service – good or bad. Poor public services do not come free, any more than good ones do. And they will cost more. They mean too much time wasted, too many complaints, paying twice over to put right the mistakes made first time round.

    The best effective way to operate is to get things right first time. So let us hear no more of the phoney argument that you can only make things better by spending more money. Politeness. Keeping promises. Giving the right information. Answering letters promptly. These things don’t cost money. They are the everyday currency of decent services. And they must become universal.

    Nor do I believe that people take a proper pride in their work if they are no more than a nameless face or an illegible squiggle at the foot of the letter. With the Citizen’s Charter, public service is taking pride in its work. It now showing it is ready to take responsibility. Ready to trust the public. It’s the beginning of the end of the faceless bureaucrat.

    CHARTERLINE

    I know all too well the frustration that ordinary people feel when they find themselves up against a blank wall of bureaucracy. Passed from pillar to post when they try to get an answer to a simple question, or a problem solved. So we will soon be publishing a paper setting out some ideas for helping people in a quick and simple way, when they get caught in the system. We will also introduce, at first on a pilot basis, a new telephone helpline – the “Charterline”. It will tell people about the Citizen’s Charter, the many different measures it contains and how they can pursue questions that they have in mind.

    CONCLUSION

    The Citizen’s Charter is only six months old. It is still in its infancy. But its effects are building up fast. And people in the public sector know that it is here to stay.

    We will see to it that it works. Where we need to we will legislate. We will contract out when appropriate. We’ll toughen up inspection and further empower the regulators of public utilities where public choice is limited. We’ll set standards and publish results so that the success of every service can be measured and improved.

    And will this all make it work? Yes, certainly it will. Because the Charter ideas are right. Because the public know they are right. Because people want to make it happen. Because hundreds of thousands of people in public service have a commitment to make it happen.

    Already the Citizen’s Charter is changing public service. Step by step. But surely and certainly. More ideas will follow. With political impetus the process of change is now unstoppable.

    And I promise – the impetus will be there.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 27 January 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 27th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    UN Security Council

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister if, pursuant to his oral reply to the hon. Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham), Official Report, 14 January 1992, column 807, he will set out the policies he plans to propose to the special summit of the permanent members of the Security Council of the United Nations on (a) improving good government, (b) improving human rights and (c) disarmament and non-proliferation; and whether he has consulted any non-governmental organisations or specialist independent institutions to help develop such proposals.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 January 1992] : I shall make clear at the meeting of the Security Council on 31 January the importance that the Government attach to good government, human rights, arms control and non-proliferation in the maintenance of international peace and security. Our policies on these matters are well known and benefit from our valuable dialogue with a range of non-governmental organisations.

     

    World Commission on Environment and Development

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer on 15 January, Official Report, column 579, if he will set out (a) the amount of financial support and (b) the types of other support, Her Majesty’s Government plans to give organisers of the reconvention of the World Commission on Environment and Development in London in April.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 January 1992] : The Department of the Environment is contributing £30,000 to the costs of the London meeting of the World Commission on Environment and Development in April. In addition the Government will be hosting engagements for the commissioners.

     

    UN Environment and Development Conference

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 15 January, Official Report, column 579, if he will give the names of the organisations to which reports of the preparatory committee meetings of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development have been distributed and the cost of this distribution to date.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 January 1992] : The United Kingdom for United Nations Environment Programme has circulated reports on UNCED preparatory committee meetings to nearly 2000 organisations, under its contract with the Department of the Environment to keep the non-governmental community informed on preparations for UNCED.