The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: 1995

  • PMQT Written Answers – 21 March 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 21st March 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Consultants

    Mr. Beith: To ask the Prime Minister if he will name the consultancy to which he referred in his oral answer to the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown), Official Report, column 140, on 7 March as having achieved savings of tens of millions of pounds; and what were the savings and consultancy fees involved.

    The Prime Minister: The example related to a Welsh Office roads project. On one particular five year project the final certificate for the main contract was substantially greater than the original tender price because of the effects of inflation and unforeseen conditions encountered during construction. A consultant quantity surveying firm was employed in assisting departmental staff to consider the appropriate price for the overall contract. This work cost around £50,000, but the advice helped to inform the negotiations with the contractor, which led to a settlement £80 million less than the contractor’s claim.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

    Sir Peter Tapsell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

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

     

    Lockerbie

    Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister if he will hold discussions with the United States Government about the action of the CIA in arresting Juval Aviv, former agent of the Israeli intelligence service, and on Mr. Aviv’s report of September 1989 for Pan Am.

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

     

    Teachers and Administrators

    Mr. Spearing: To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to oral answer of 16 March, Official Report, column 1021, concerning the ratio of teachers to administrators or other staff within the ambit of local education authorities, what are the statistical bases and arithmetical calculations on which his statement was based.

    The Prime Minister: Figures collected by the Local Government Management Board show that in June 1994 local education authorities in England employed 376,665 full-time equivalent teachers and lecturers and 316,244 full-time equivalent other manual and non-manual staff involved in education, making a ration of around 2.5 non-teaching staff to every three teachers.

     

    Ministerial Committees

    Mr. Robathan: To ask the Prime Minister what new Ministerial Committees of the Cabinet have been established since the updated list of membership and terms of reference of Cabinet Committees and Sub-Committees was published on 22 November 1994.

    The Prime Minister: I have established a new Ministerial Committee to consider the co-ordination and presentation of Government policy. A copy of the terms of reference and membership is in the Library of the House. The details are as follows:

    MINISTERIAL COMMITTEE ON THE COORDINATION AND PRESENTATION OF GOVERNMENT POLICY (EDCP)

    Composition

    Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Chairman)

    Lord President of the Council

    Lord Privy Seal

    Minister without Portfolio

    Other Ministers will be invited to attend when necessary. Terms of reference

    “To consider the coordination and presentation of Government policy”.

     

    Civil Servants

    Mr. Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Prime Minister what was the total number of civil servants employed by (a) his Department, (b) the agencies under his department’s responsibility and (c) public and other bodies under his Department’s responsibility, for each year since 1979, divided into (i) full-time equivalents, (ii) overtime, (iii) casuals and (iv) other; and whether he will also provide for each year his estimates of (A) civil service job reductions due to privatisations, (B) civil service jobs due to contracting out, (C) civil service job reductions resulting from other transfer of responsibilities, (D) the total of all other staff undertaking work for his department of its agencies without being categorised as civil servants, including external consultants, researchers, agency secretarial staff and staff substitution and (E) total manpower expenditure in 1994 prices.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 20 March 1995]: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Parliamentary Secretary, Office of Public Service and Science on 20 March.

  • PMQT – 21 March 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 21st March 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Keith Hill: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

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

    Mr. Hill: In his busy day, has the Prime Minister noticed that his plea for peace within the ranks has failed and that the Chancellor and Lord Tebbit are at each other’s throats again over Europe? How does he feel now that it is apparent that all sides of his party share the same view as the rest of the country–that he has no authority and is not up to the job?

    The Prime Minister: If the hon. Gentleman is concerned about differing views in Europe, I suggest that he has a look around the Benches beside him. If he seriously thinks that the deputy Leader of the Opposition, the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott), agrees with the Leader of the Opposition, or that the Leader of the Opposition agrees with the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), he is living in a fantasy world.

    Mr. Duncan: Does my right hon. Friend agree that most calls for more funding are really calls for higher taxation and that most calls for greater economic well-being are really calls for higher inflation? Will my right hon. Friend, therefore, undertake to continue his policy of keeping a firm grip both on inflation and public expenditure and not to do what the Opposition always seem tempted to do–cheaply to buy people’s votes with their own money?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is entirely right about the necessity of holding down public expenditure, and equally right to point out that it is simply economically illiterate to object to taxation levels and at the same time to call for higher expenditure, as the Opposition so frequently do.

    Mr. Blair: Does the Prime Minister agree with his Education Secretary, who said this morning– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker: Order.

    Mr. Blair rose —[ Interruption. ]

    Madam Speaker: Order; otherwise I shall have to name a Member on the Conservative Back Benches.

    Mr. Blair rose —[ Interruption. ]

    Madam Speaker: It is Jacques Arnold.

    Mr. Blair: I apologise to my hon. Friend’s dog.

    Does the Prime Minister agree with his Education Secretary who this morning admitted that in funding the teachers’ pay award some schools and authorities would face “considerable problems”?

    The Prime Minister: Of course we recognised from the outset that this year’s settlement is tough in education. We have never made any secret of that fact. We have made it clear that local authorities must choose their priorities. We believe that teachers in the classroom are a priority and should be a first priority among education authorities.

    Mr. Blair: But what does the Prime Minister say to schools and authorities that, as the Secretary of State for Education admits, do not have the reserves and balances to fund the award? If it is proven to the Prime Minister’s satisfaction that such schools and authorities exist–for example, in Tory Buckinghamshire–will he take action and intervene?

    The Prime Minister: I shall tell the right hon. Gentleman exactly what I would say to such authorities. If any local authority is thinking of cutting the number of teachers in the classroom, I would ask it what savings it had made in non-teaching aspects of education. I would ask if it has two administrators for every three teachers, as happens across the country. I would ask what administrative savings it had made. If the answer is none, I would ask, “Why have you made no savings, and why are you singling out teachers in the classroom?”

    Mr. Blair: Is not the Prime Minister aware that five out of the six authorities with the lowest administration costs are Labour–and that all are facing cuts? The right hon. Gentleman talks about non-statutory funding. His Secretary of State for Education said what that means–nursery education, youth work and school transport. Is that an option? Why does not the Prime Minister listen to the voices of parents, governors and teachers, who speak for Britain when they say that if we fail to provide properly for our schools, we are not just letting down our children but betraying our country’s future?

    The Prime Minister: We have provided more adequately for education and for choice in education than the right hon. Gentleman would ever contemplate. If he wants to know what the priorities are, I suggest that he addresses authorities–most of which are run by Labour–about the 1 million surplus school places, which cost £250 million a year, about making use of the estimated £700 million in unspent balances held by schools and about cutting bureaucracy at county hall, where they have failed to take account of the responsibilities of schools and where for every three teachers there are two support staff. Those are the questions that the right hon. Gentleman should address to education authorities. If he thinks that there are no savings to be made, I suggest that he refers to the Audit Commission report, which made it clear that better management of pay bills would save £500 million–5 per cent. of the whole pay bill.

    Mr. Heald: Does my right hon. Friend agree that regional assemblies for England would be confusing, expensive and divisive? Does he accept that people in Hertfordshire do not want to be governed from Norwich? When he exposed that policy, the Labour party fell into confusion and chaos. Will he say today that we are not going to do it?

    The Prime Minister: There certainly seems to be some confusion on the Opposition Benches about regional assemblies. Almost every statement about them that can be made has been made. As Labour examines its policy, it realises that it is the total nonsense that I pointed out some time ago.

    Mr. Prescott indicated dissent.

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman shakes his head; clearly he does not understand that his party’s policy is nonsense. When Labour examines its policies for Scottish and Welsh assemblies in further depth, it will find precisely the same.

     

    Q2. Mr. McKelvey: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

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

    Mr. McKelvey: Has the Prime Minister no sense of shame at having dithered over obscene fat cat salaries, alienating low-paid workers in the health service, including nurses and midwives? Is not the right hon. Gentleman setting the scene for a summer of discontent throughout the NHS?

    The Prime Minister: The hon. Gentleman knows very well that we have funded the health service better than any previous Government. That is clearly shown by the number of people treated in the national health service, the wider range of services and the better treatment that is available.

     

    Q3. Mr. Patrick Thompson: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

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

    Mr. Thompson: Bearing in mind the fact that this is national science, engineering and technology week, has my right hon. Friend had time today to read the encouraging report from engineering employers, which states that economic recovery is developing in a way that will increase national prosperity in the longer term? Is not that a tribute to Government economic policies, and is not this the right time for young people to go for a career in engineering?

    The Prime Minister: I agree about that, and about the need to encourage more young people into engineering and more people into learning skills of that sort. That is why we established the non-vocational qualifications some time ago. In engineering and manufacturing generally exports are growing and employment is increasing; that has not happened in manufacturing generally for many years.

     

    Q4. Mr. Alton: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

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

    Mr. Alton: I welcome the Government’s decision to provide £1 million for the clearing of anti-personnel mines in Cambodia. Is the Prime Minister aware, however, that there are 100 million anti-personnel mines strewn around the world, and that there have been 1 million casualties and fatalities, especially among children? Does he agree that the time is ripe for an international moratorium that would bring within its scope the area- denial mines that are still shipped out of this country? Will he not agree with the terms of the early-day motion, now supported by more than 100 hon. Members of all parties, urging the Government to give a moral lead?

    The Prime Minister: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me notice of the fact that he wished to raise a detailed question about land mines. We have neither produced nor exported anti-personnel mines for some years, and we have contributed generously to the demining programme. In July we announced an indefinite moratorium on exports from the United Kingdom of mines without a self-destruct mechanism. We shall be hoping to use the review in September of the UN weaponry convention to strengthen the protocol on the use of land mines and to ensure that its provisions gain universal support.

    Mr. Allason: Will my right hon. Friend support a measure to make it a statutory requirement that all local authorities declare in their published budgets what is and what is not a statutory requirement and a statutory area of expenditure?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend suggests an ingenious method of ensuring that local authorities’ priorities are met. I shall invite my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment to examine it.

     

    Q5. Mrs. Bridget Prentice: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

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

    Mrs. Prentice: Can the Prime Minister tell us whether it is the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Home Secretary who is right about the feelgood factor?

    The Prime Minister: The people who have most felt the feelgood factor thus far are the 600,000 people who are no longer on the unemployment register, as a result of the fall in unemployment. In terms of economic management, we are seeking to make sure that we come out of the recession of two years ago in a way that avoids laying the seeds of future difficulties, which were sown on many other occasions since the Second World War. Hence we have had to take long-term, difficult decisions; as a result we now have the best prospects of rising living standards, year after year, that we have had for many years. That will produce a very good feelgood factor.

    Mr. Rathbone: Does my right hon. Friend accept that many Conservative Members share the qualms about land mines expressed by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Mossley Hill (Mr. Alton), but that none of us will accept the fact that Liberal Democrat county councillors are not funding education as they can–particularly in East Sussex, where they resisted and voted against a Conservative amendment to the budget that would have provided the necessary funds for education in the county?

    The Prime Minister: I was not aware of the example to which my hon. Friend has drawn my attention, but the rather cavalier use of taxpayers’ money by Liberal Democrat authorities is no new phenomenon.

     

    Q6. Mr. Sutcliffe: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 21 March.

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

    Mr. Sutcliffe: Is it not true, from what we have seen and heard, that there is no policy area apart from Northern Ireland about which the people of this country believe anything that you, Prime Minister, have to say? In education, the parents and teachers are against you. In health, the midwives have been moved to militancy. Is not the best thing that could happen to this Government who cannot agree among themselves that you should resign and that we should have an immediate election?

    Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman is not addressing the House and the Prime Minister correctly. Would he like to try again? He has another minute.

    Mr. Sutcliffe: I apologise, Madam Speaker, if I have not spoken in the language of the House, but I am expressing what I think the majority of British people feel.

    The Prime Minister: Had the hon. Gentleman been in the House longer, he would have heard remarks like that put to me before the last general election.

    Mr. Butcher: Will my right hon. Friend publish all the evidence, some of it garnered in response to hostile questions from Opposition Members, which shows beyond any doubt whatever that a reduction in the top rate of income tax has increased the proportion of tax paid as a total from the top 10 per cent., and that any proposal to increase the top rate of income tax will produce a shortfall in revenue which can then be obtained only from middle-income earners?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend sets out a matter that has been well understood for many years. I will certainly invite my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor to lay that information out in the House of Commons Library. It might be very instructive for the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott), who is giggling on the Front Bench because he does not understand it.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 20 March 1995

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 20th March 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Lockerbie

    Mr. Tam Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has received from Sir Charles Powell about the western response to the destruction of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie.

    The Prime Minister: None.

     

    Terrorist Organisations (Disarming)

    Rev. Martin Smyth: To ask the Prime Minister when a Minister first intimated publicly that the Government’s position on disarming terrorist organisations had changed to allow Ministers to discuss the possibility and modality of disarming.

    The Prime Minister: The Government’s line regarding dialogue with Sinn Fein and the decommissioning issue has been consistent throughout. It is important not to confuse the issues of ministerial participation in exploratory dialogue and Sinn Fein participation in inclusive talks.

    We have always made it clear that, in judging the right time for ministerial involvement, we have to be clear that Sinn Fein is willing to address all necessary issues and that progress has been made in having serious and substantive exploration of them. Ministers need to be clear that, if and when they take part, constructive discussion, particularly in achieving substantial progress on the decommissioning of arms, would be facilitated and accelerated by their joining the dialogue.

    But, as a matter of principle and political reality, Sinn Fein cannot be admitted into an inclusive political talks process until substantial progress has been made on the decommissioning of weapons. This is exactly the point my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland made in Belfast on 14 December last year.

     

    Public Holidays

    Sir David Steel: To ask the Prime Minister what is his policy in respect of the entitlement of employees of the NHS to time off on the national holiday planned for 8 May; and if he will make it his policy that the status of the employers within the health service will have no bearing upon employee entitlement to public holidays.

    The Prime Minister: It is the Government’s policy that the national holiday on 8 May will be observed by all national health service employers in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, instead of the customary bank holiday on May 1. In recognition of the different traditions regarding bank holidays in Scotland, it will be for NHS employers in Scotland to decide whether or not to give staff a holiday on 8 May.

    Entitlement to bank and public holidays for NHS staff employed on national terms and conditions is governed by an agreement of the General Whitley Council.

     

    Royal Family (Publicity Services)

    Mr. Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Prime Minister what was the expenditure for each year since 1984 in support of the royal family in respect of publicity services; and if he will provide a breakdown between different members of the royal family.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 27 March 1995]: Expenditure by COI on publicity services for the royal household for each year since 1984-85 is as follows:

    1984-85 £182,000

    1985-86 £172,000

    1986-87 £181,000

    1987-88 £205,000

    1988-89 £183,000

    1989-90 £375,000

    1990-91 £292,000

    1991-92 £318,000

    1992-93 £237,000

    1993-94 £290,000

    Further information is not available in the form requested.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to Surrey County Cricket Club – 20 March 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech on Surrey County Cricket Club’s 150th anniversary, made on Monday 20th March 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Looking at the film I wonder if the members of the Montpelier Club realised what they were starting when they founded Surrey.

    That a hundred and fifty years on untold millions would have watched cricket at the Oval, and from the Oval. That the very name would be synonymous with cricket or that some of the great names of cricket and some of the great events of cricket would be played on a former market garden.

    Tonight reminds me of how lucky I was to have been born south of the Thames, a Surrey supporter. And, as a boy, to have been in the right place at the right time to see the greatest county side in the history of cricket.

    We all have our memories of the Oval. I was about 10 years old when I first visited it. Like most small boys I was a cricket nut. Having reached Cheam Common Primary School’s First Eleven, the progression to Surrey and then the Test Side merely seemed a matter of time. I looked forward to a clean and healthy life of cricket in which – even on the worst of days – I batted like Peter May and bowled like Alec Bedser.

    During school lessons I invented my own cricket games. I once scored 241 not out during biology while David Fletcher, Tom Clark, Peter May and Ken Barrington only scored 10 between them. Fortunately Eric Bedser scored 20 odd not out so we saved the game. I’m glad he’s recovered from those exertions and is here tonight. Eric, you were a real support.

    On the real cricket pitch it was different. Life being the topsy turvy enterprise it is, I discovered I couldn’t – even on the best of days – bat like Alec Bedser or bowl like Peter May.

    And as for the clean healthy life of cricket, I ended up in politics. One can hear the Devil chuckling although there are many similarities between the two. The game is uncertain. The career is chancy. But they both have their own charm. Politics often is about nightmares. Cricket mainly is about dreams.

    Tonight I have fulfilled one of them, I have batted higher in the order than Colin Cowdrey, one of cricket’s greats and one of Surrey’s past friends.

    Cricket has a great history and a great humour. Arthur Mailey, the great Australian bowler, was once staying at a famous country house in the days of country house cricket. His hostess, an aristocratic lady, invited him to play in a game one afternoon. He declined, saying that he was a little stiff from bowling. “Oh” she replied, “so that’s where you are from”.

    It is often the unexpected things you remember. I can close my eyes now and see Stuart Surridge in the slips with this enormous long arms. I used to think as a boy he could pull up his socks while standing upright. I tried the same and was told not to slouch.

    My father had a treasured heirloom – a gold stopwatch. I borrowed it and took it to the Oval to time how long it took the ball to travel from Peter May’s straight drive to the pavilion gates. Peter soon obliged.

    But pressing the stop button, I dropped the watch. It shattered. Bits came out all over. It was not in good shape. Its best days had gone. In fact, as John Cleese might say, it was a dead stop watch.

    I took it home, aged 11, to return the remains to my father, aged 75. As you can see, like Sir Jack Hobbs, my father’s best work was done after the age of 40.

    My father looked at the watch and then he looked at me. Then he said “before you dropped the watch did you find out how long the ball took?” I said, “No”. Then he gave me half a crown – and as he had very little, that was a lot – so I could watch cricket the next day. It was his way of saying it didn’t matter.

    Surrey have always attracted characters. A hundred years ago one such was Albert Craig, the Surrey poet. He used to write verses – doggerel really – and sell it to the crowds. I write it too, when I’ve time to spare. I wrote quite a lot as a Government Whip when I had to sit on the Bench for hours not listening to speeches. They were mostly about Parliamentarians and, if pressed, one day….

    Thinking of this brings clear and fresh to my mind the first poem I ever wrote, aged about 10 or 11, at the Oval:

    Bernard Constable got a duck

    Oh, he said – what rotten luck

    The Bowler’s really got a nerve

    First ball down and did it swerve

    Hit the pitch and off it nips

    Caught again – in the slips

    In my own defence, I remind you I was only 10 and I only wrote when it rained. Fortunately it was sunny most of the time

    Cricket has inspired more literature than any other game. There have been some wonderful writers. Cardus of course, and CLR James, and Jim Swanton, who must have seen more of the great moments of cricket than any man alive, and RC Robertson Glasgow. I read them all.

    Most of you will know the great poem by Coleridge, the Rhyme of The Ancient Mariner. The rest of you will have been educated after 1960. What you may not know is that Robertson Glasgow applied it to cricket:

    It is an Ancient Cricketer

    Who stops me in the street

    He holds his victims with his hands

    Their catches with his feet

    It tells the tale of a team who run into a spot of trouble with a bird on their way to a match – in this case a duck rather than an albatross:

    The duck it is a wondrous fowl

    But at crossing the road not clever

    That duck (or drake) went under the brake

    And had ceased to quack for ever.

    The outcome was, I am afraid, inevitable:

    For we had done a hellish thing

    To murder a blooming duck

    And some averred we’d killed the bird

    That brings a batsman luck.

    ‘A pity,’ said they, ‘that bird to slay

    That brings a batsman luck.’

    All sorts of disaster befall the team:

    Then a rocket went up, and the squire ran back

    And skirted around and – well –

    Where a cow had dallied, he staggered, then rallied

    The skidded, then rallied, then – fell.

    Thirteen all out, and there wasn’t a man

    But argued until was hoarse

    That the death of the duck had brought ill-luck

    Except old Matthew, of course.

    The Ancient ceased, and his mouth was dry

    So I eased it off with a tankard

    He’d talked enough, and Hops is the stuff

    For a soul which Cricket has cankered.

    What other game could have had such a poem written about it? None.

    Tonight we are here to celebrate Surrey’s first 150 years – we should enjoy it not least because if he were here the Bearded Wonder would tell us we are statistically unlikely to be here to celebrate their next 150 years.

    But we can look forward to that future and the investment we can make in the future of cricket. Some say “it’s only a game”. I don’t agree. It is a game of course and it must always remain one. But it is also part of the English character.

    It is interwoven in the warp and weft of our way of life. It’s fun and life must be about more than economics and social awareness. I want to know that future generations can look forward to the same enjoyment of the game that we have here tonight.

    That is why I want to put team sports back in schools. Why I want to develop youth cricket and club cricket. Why I have high hopes that cricket’s share of the 300 million pounds a year which will come from the National Lottery will help permanently boost the game. That’s why I left my red boxes to fester in Downing Street this evening: despatched to long off – or at any rate to later on.

    Surrey is an important part of cricket’s history. On this occasion, looking around, I hope there are ghosts present. Some of the greatest of all cricketers have been servants of this Club. Bowlers like George Lohman and Tony Richardson and batsmen like Hayward, Hobbs and Sandham. And I just wonder if Bosser Martin, the great groundsman, might also be hereabouts this evening.

    And there are some whom we would dearly loved to have been here tonight. Peter of course, and Stuart Surridge, Jim Laker, Ken Barrington and Tom Clark. Sadly they are gone. But they will never be gone from the history of cricket or of Surrey. If we close our eyes we can remember them again in their prime.

    The future is bright. The renovation of the Oval is truly remarkable. The Ken Barrington Centre now offers wonderful facilities to youngsters. Next year a second county cricket school will open in Guildford. There may be further centres, perhaps in Kingston, perhaps Croydon, perhaps both.

    Surrey will be giving cricket back to all parts of the county. The youth policy is alive and working and I hope we will find more time and more money for development women’s cricket as well. Never forget it was WG’s mother who taught him and it was our ladies team that won the World Cup at Lords.

    I would like to end by paying a special tribute to Coopers and Lybrand for their generosity in sponsoring this evening. Cricket is a natural game for accountants and Coopers and now responsible for producing ratings of players. These must be pretty accurate because they show Waqar Younis to be the best bowler in the world and Graham Thorpe to be the third best batsman.

    But never mind about third best.

    This is Surrey we’re talking about. The very best. The sight of white flannels and a chocolate cap can move me from despair to contentment.

    So, tonight I want to thank those players who’ve brought such pleasure into my life and I want to make one wish: may it always be so.

  • PMQT – 16 March 1995

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 16th March 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. David Shaw: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 16 March.

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

    Mr. Shaw: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the evidence of Labour councillors personally benefiting from fraud, corruption, nepotism and inefficiency is such that people should be informed about it before they vote in the local government elections?

    The Prime Minister: I have no doubt that there are many cases of waste, inefficiency and malpractice in Labour councils; increasingly, one has seen that in auditors’ reports. It is right that the auditors should investigate and make those matters public.

    Mr. Blair: Will the Prime Minister confirm, as a matter of fact, that in a few weeks’ time two new tax rises will be introduced–the cutting of mortgage tax relief and of the married couples allowance–which will add about £250 a year to the average family’s tax bill?

    The Prime Minister: I will certainly confirm the tax changes to which the right hon. Gentleman refers. I will also confirm for him that, as a result of the measures taken by my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, we are now well into the most sustained recovery on the most secure basis that this country has seen for many years, with the economy growing at almost 4 per cent., exports at record levels, the current account in surplus, investment rising and unemployment now having fallen by 600,000–a set of economic circumstances that we have not seen for many years. That is largely due to the fact that my right hon. and learned Friend took the right decisions at the right time.

    Mr. Blair: Are not those tax rises, on top of the existing ones, one reason why people feel so angry about this Government? Is not the truth that, with taxes up, mortgages up and living standards falling, all that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has done is confirm what the vast majority of the British people already knew: that unless you are one of the favoured few at the top, you are worse off under the Tories.

    The Prime Minister: Which taxes would the right hon. Gentleman cut? Which pieces of expenditure has the right hon. Gentleman opposed? How many times has the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) sought extra expenditure of one sort of another? When is he going to understand the most basic economic fact–that he cannot promote expenditure and call for tax reductions and expect to be taken seriously? We have taken the measures necessary for this country’s economy. That is why our economy is more effective, more efficient and more competitive than any other economy in western Europe.

    Mr. Blair: I will tell him what I understand, that– [Hon. Members: — “Oh.”] Since he asked me the question again, let me tell him what is wrong. What is wrong is to fight the election promising to cut taxes then raise them by 7p in the pound.

    The Prime Minister: If the right hon. Gentleman is so concerned about what is right for this country, why does he not for once acknowledge the changes that there have been in this economy? Why does he not for once acknowledge what once he used to say–that his plans for a minimum wage would cost jobs? Why does he not acknowledge what a large number of business men are now telling him across Europe–that his plans for the social chapter would cost jobs? Why does he not acknowledge that this country now has an economy that Labour could never have achieved if it had followed the advice of the shadow Chancellor, who on every conceivable occasion has guessed wrongly about what should happen with this economy?

     

    Q2. Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 16 March.

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

    Mr. Greenway: Will my right hon. Friend congratulate those parents who have set up an organisation called PASS to defend the right of parents to send their children to grant-maintained schools? Will he arrange for an application form to be sent to the Leader of the Opposition?

    The Prime Minister: I fancy that the right hon. Gentleman does not need one, but his hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) who speaks on education from the Labour Front Bench most certainly does, for he would still destroy the chances for parents to send their children to grant-maintained schools, even though the vast majority of hon. Members in this House, including the right hon. Gentleman, know that that choice should be available to every parent.

    Mr. Ashdown: In view of the Prime Minister’s comments on waste and inefficiency, how does he justify an increase over the past four years of 36 per cent. in the amount of public money spent on Government entertainment? What would he have to say to a council which was forced to sack teachers and which responded by raising by more than a third the money that it spent on its own entertainment?

    The Prime Minister: I think what I would say to any council which was contemplating that sort of action concerning teachers would be: how many administrators in education is it looking at, why are there two administrators for every three teachers in education and why do county councils like the right hon. Gentleman’s seek to look at teachers before they look at other areas of savings?

    Mr. Faber: Has my right hon. Friend had an opportunity in the past couple of days to discuss Anglo-Belgian relationships with his counterpart the Prime Minister of Belgium, and in particular what must have been a disappointing visit for him to west London on Tuesday night? At what is undoubtedly a difficult time for British football, would my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating Chelsea football club on a stunning victory on Tuesday night, its fans on the good-natured manner in which the game was watched, and the Metropolitan police especially on the firm but sensitive way in which the game was policed?

    Madam Speaker: I should just inform the hon. Gentleman before the Prime Minister attempts to answer that question that, nice as it may seem, the Prime Minister has nothing whatsoever to do with the success of Chelsea football club.

    The Prime Minister: I am happy to pass credit for the success to the players. May I simply say that I am delighted at how well they did?

     

    Q3. Mr. Mullin: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 16 March.

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

    Mr. Mullin: Did the Prime Minister read this morning’s comment by Lord McAlpine that a spell in opposition would be a good thing for the Tory party, and does he agree that this is one of the rare occasions on which the interests of the Tory party and of the nation coincide?

    The Prime Minister: I did see the comments in the New Statesman and Society . I understand that Lord McAlpine is promoting his book, which is a work of fiction.

     

    Q4. Mr. Amess: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 16 March.

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

    Mr. Amess: Does my right hon. Friend share the pleasure of my constituents in Basildon at the first visit to this country of a President from the Philippines, Fidel Ramos? Will he tell the House whether any trade agreements have been reached as a result of the visit? Finally, will my right hon. Friend do all in his power to assist and encourage the President to try to alleviate the plight of street children and to take forward the social reform programme?

    The Prime Minister: Of course, I am delighted to welcome President Ramos to the United Kingdom. He will find a very warm welcome here and would clearly find one in Basildon also, were he able to visit it. I am not sure whether the President is here long enough to do so on this occasion, but when I meet him later on this afternoon I will be happy to pass on the invitation. I understand that it has been a successful trade visit and a number of contracts have been signed with substantial British companies.

    I know that President Ramos is achieving a great deal with his social reform programme and I know that the whole House would welcome all that can be done to help street children, both in the Philippines and elsewhere.

     

    Terrorism

    Q5. Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Prime Minister what representations Her Majesty’s Government have received from Sir Colin Figures and Sir Peter Marychurch concerning knowledge of an impending attack on airlines at Frankfurt airport in December 1988; and what response he has sent.

    The Prime Minister: We have received no such representations.

    Mr. Dalyell: In that case, could Sir Colin and Sir Peter be invited to shed light on the very specific jictels–Joint Intelligence Committee telegrams–giving clear information about the downing of an aircraft in October, November and December 1988? Could they shed light on the agreement reached by western intelligence with terrorist elements in the middle east about the downing of just one airliner, rather than 10 or 12, in what was described by Mohtashemi as “the rain of blood”, and also on what they know of statements by United States agencies about Major Charles McKee not being able to return to the United States alive?

    The Prime Minister: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me notice of that detailed question so that I might examine the matter before responding.

    As he knows, the Lockerbie investigation is the largest criminal investigation ever undertaken in this country. I have to reiterate to the House that the Lord Advocate has discovered credible evidence against two people only, and they remain the only two accused. If concrete new evidence were brought forward, it would of course be fully investigated. The point raised by the hon. Gentleman, of which he was kind enough to give me prior notice–that western intelligence agencies would enter into a deal with terrorist groups to allow the destruction of an aircraft–is utterly and completely unfounded. It did not happen and the hon. Gentleman can be assured upon that point.

     

    Engagements

    Madam Speaker: The next question is from Mr. Skinner.

    Mr. Skinner: Question 5.

    Hon. Members: Question 6.

    Mr. Skinner: All right; Question 6.

     

    Q6. Mr. Skinner: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 16 March.

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

    Mr. Skinner: Has the Prime Minister seen the reports today that if the Tory party loses more than 1,000 seats in the local government elections in May, which it undoubtedly will, senior Tory Members of Parliament are going to kick him out like a dog in the night? Last year, the Prime Minister said that he had got three bastards in the Cabinet: I do not think that he can count.

    The Prime Minister: As for counting, I shall answer the hon. Gentleman’s Question 5 and Question 6 at the same time.

    The substantive part of the hon. Gentleman’s question might well have been asked of me last year, the year before last, and the year before that. It almost certainly was, and it will very probably be asked of me next year, the year after and the year after that.

    Sir Graham Bright: Has my right hon. Friend seen reports in this morning’s newspapers suggesting that he is considering plans to change how state education is funded? Will he confirm to the House that that is not so?

    The Prime Minister: Yes, I did see the report to which my hon. Friend refers and I can tell the House categorically that it is absolutely without foundation. I do not know whether it is incompetence or malice, but it is certainly inaccurate.

     

    Q7. Mr. Foulkes: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 16 March.

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

    Mr. Foulkes: Has the Prime Minister seen today’s statement by the rail regulator that decisions on sleepers and Motorail are a matter not for British Rail but for the Government? Will he therefore confirm today that there will be a full and formal consultation before any decisions are taken on those vital services?

    The Prime Minister: I assume that the hon. Gentleman refers to the Fort William sleeper. Representations on that can be made during consultation on the ScotRail public service requirement. In the meanwhile, British Rail will retain the assets.

    Madam Speaker: As we started late, I can allow one more question.

     

    Q8. Mr. Spring: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 16 March.

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

    Mr. Spring: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the two Conservative- controlled district councils in my constituency–Forest Heath and St. Edmundsbury–plan no increase in council tax this year? Is he aware that the only reason why my constituents will pay more council tax this year is because of Lib-Lab controlled Suffolk county council, despite it having used up some £16 million of reserves so carefully built up by the last Conservative administration?

    The Prime Minister: Lab councils are a very expensive luxury indeed and I am not surprised to hear what my hon. Friend has to say. Last year, Conservative councils cost around £131 less at band C than Labour councils, and this year the difference looks as though it may be even greater – probably as much as £160 less. I hope that the electorate will bear that in mind in May.

  • Mr Major’s Speech in Jordan – 15 March 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech made on Wednesday 15th March 1995, at the presentation of Scholarships at the Hashemiyya Palace in Jordan.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Good morning. Can I firstly say how delighted I am to be here in Jordan and I am extremely grateful to His Majesty The King for his hospitality and for the warmth of our reception last evening, we were very touched by it and it is a great pleasure to be here.

    We had the opportunity last evening of some very lengthy and some very productive talks with His Majesty that I much appreciated, and it gave me the opportunity to say in Jordan what I have had the opportunity if saying to His Majesty in the United Kingdom, and that is how much we admire the way in which he has seized the opportunity for peace in the Middle East, and the way in which he had reached an accommodation with Israel. And I think in doing to Jordan has made a commitment to a better and safer future for its people, and made a very substantial commitment to the safety and future of people far beyond Jordan, right across the Middle East.

    I was very happy last evening to reaffirm to His Majesty, Britain’s support for Jordan and for the course that he has taken. The friendship of course between our two countries is very old, very close and a friendship that we very much value. It is forced by many things, by countless links of personal esteem and affection. We understand each other. When Britain talks to Jordan, it does not have to talk in code, it does not have to talk marking its words with caution, it can say freely exactly and precisely what it means because it is a discussion amongst friends, we understand each other and we trust each other. And perhaps in this year, this anniversary year of the end of the Second World War, it gives us great pride to record Jordan’s staunch friendship and assistance to Britain throughout that conflict.

    Let me say that, for our part, we stand ready to help wherever we can with Jordan. I am delighted that we were able to play a role in re-scheduling debts and writing off some debts altogether, and we will continue to give consistent support in the efforts of Jordan to reduce its indebtedness and improve the future of its economy. We will also seek to maintain our programme of aid both bilaterally and through the European Union. And we do this for a number of reasons, not just because Jordan is an old and dear friend, but also because of what Jordan stands for – a country committed to democracy; a country that is meeting the challenges of development with very great skill and with very great courage; a country committed to tolerance and to moderation; and a country that understands as well as any country the importance of achieving real and lasting peace and stability in the region. And I am delighted to have had the opportunity of discussing these matters with His Majesty last evening, and I look forward to further discussions with the Prime Minister later on this morning.

    Let me now, if I may, turn to the particular purpose and circumstances of this occasion. Every year Britain is delighted to have the opportunity of awarding some 60 scholarships to a number of Jordanian men and women, giving them an opportunity to study in Britain in a great variety of fields. For the first time this year we are delighted that three young musicians will be going with scholarships from the Purcell Anniversary Fund, recently set up by the British Embassy under the patronage of Her Majesty the Queen. As we as the musicians we have a sample of three other successful candidates, and I think rather than introduce them myself, I will invite the Ambassador, Peter Hinchcliffe, to introduce the scholars to you all.

    [Presentation made at this point]

    I would like, if I may, to add my congratulations to everyone who has received an award and to say that I hope they enjoy their stay in the United Kingdom, I am sure they will and they will find a very warm and a very friendly reception when they get there.

    Can I just say another word or two and make a further presentation. Britain’s aid programme has funded what has turned out to be a hugely successful Hydro-geological study in the south of Jordan. The Kardesi [phonetic] project has produced information on a major underground water resources, a very welcome resources indeed, and it is now a resource which can be developed. I am delighted to learn that it will be completed within a few months, and I congratulate the Water Authority and the British consultants, Scott, Wilson, Kirkpatrick, on their achievements in this.

    Your Excellency, the Minister of Water and Irrigation, I am delighted to see you here this morning and it gives me very great pleasure to present to your government, through you, on this occasion the drilling equipment and the stores of the project to the value of some 3 million pounds. I would also like to hand over to your government two specialist vehicles which we can see parked immediately adjacent to us, one carries a pump testing unit and the other a geo-physical logger. I am not entirely certain what a geo-physical logger is but I am told that it is absolutely essential for this particular work and I hope it is able to play a satisfactory role. I very much hope that this small gift will play a part in the important work to develop Jordan’s water resources, and I am delighted to have the opportunity to being here to present it in person.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Gaza Visit – 14 March 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on his March 1995 Gaza visit, made in his auto-biography, page 520.

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    Not to go to the UN ‘Social Summit’ in Copenhagen in March 1995 was one of my easiest decisions. The Foreign Office pleaded with me to change my mind, as did the Danes. I was told that sixty or seventy other leaders would be at this jamboree, including all the Europeans (though not President Clinton). If I didn’t drop in to deliver the British speech, I was assured, it would look as if we didn’t care about world poverty; and our relations with the host nation, Denmark, would suffer.

    Instead I fulfilled a long-standing commitment to go to Israel, Jordan and Palestine. I cemented strong personal relationships with Israel’s Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein of Jordan, and was the first Western leader to visit Yasser Arafat in Gaza, in the newly-established Palestinian entity. I was able to give some modest help to the faltering Middle East peace process by brokering an agreement between Rabin and Arafat for monitors from the European Union to oversee the elections in Gaza. I like to think that I also did some practical good for world poverty, both by announcing a new aid package for impoverished Gaza and by encouraging my travelling party of senior British businessmen to think of investing and purchasing in Jordan and Palestine. Because of the Arab boycott of Israel they had never previously been able to fly from Israel to Jordan, and many of them had concentrated on the more profitable Israeli market.

  • Mr Major’s Press Conference with Chairman Arafat – 14 March 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s press conference with Chairman Arafat, held in Gaza on Tuesday 14th March 1995.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    When the Chairman and I met in London 15 months ago, I hoped on that occasion to visit Gaza, and I am very pleased now to have been able to do so. Let me say straight away where Britain stands on some of the issues, and make it clear immediately that we stand four-square behind the peace process that is continuing at the present moment.

    Not only do we stand four-square behind it in principle, insofar as we are able to do so, we are taking practical action to help. We have so far pledged something over 120 million dollars to the Palestinian autonomy, some of it comes via our contribution with the European Union, some from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, and some of it bilaterally. We are seeking to ensure that the money goes where it will help most – to the police for their running costs, and I don’t think anyone will doubt the importance of the police service; the training, we have got a very large training programme and that is going to be supplemented by a new management training initiative to the Palestinian Autonomy; and of course to infrastructure for areas such as water supply, public health, without which firstly no decent society can prosper, and secondly other investment will not appear without that basic infrastructure.

    I had the opportunity this morning of handing over 50 Land Rovers and mini-buses to the civil police, and beyond that there will be further contributions in bilateral aid for a Know-How programme to be spent on public administration, health, water, education and private sector development, and of course the peace implementation programme for infrastructure projects.

    Let me just say a brief word about the Know-How programme. One of the features of that programme, not just here but elsewhere, but certainly here, is in its multiplier effect. It is there to encourage collaboration between British and Palestinian private sector firms. We strongly believe the private sector has a role to play and I have brought with me on this occasion a very powerful team of British businessmen who have had a very useful Round Table discussion this morning with Palestinian businessmen and Palestinian Ministers. This afternoon they will be pursuing individual contacts and I very much hope that this will lead to an acceleration in the levels of trade and the levels of investment.

    I know that the Chairman proposes to pursue free market policies and to welcome investors into the area. And the private sector is a very important engine of long-term growth and a very important engine of long-term employment and prosperity which is so necessary to underpin the peace process.

    Let me say a word about that process itself. The pursuit of peace in the Middle East is neither straightforward, nor is it simple. It has been a difficult year, it has been difficult to make the advances that have been made, and I believe it is very much to the credit of Chairman Arafat and the Israeli leaders that so much has already been achieved. I think it is important to acknowledge the successes there have been, whilst also acknowledging the things that still need to be overcome.

    Further political and economic progress is going to be absolutely indispensable if the ordinary Palestinian is going to have faith in the promise of a better future as a result of the peace process. As I made clear yesterday, the border closures sadly had the opposite effect.

    The next step, I hope, will be to arrange elections that will underpin the legitimacy and the authority of the Palestinian leadership. When I was in Israel I pressed Mr Rabin to press ahead with arrangements so that elections and redeployment can take place.

    This morning I have reiterated to Chairman Arafat the European Union’s willingness to consider coordinating the international observation of Palestinian elections, and the Chairman has indicated that this would be welcome to him. I think this is very good news, I will take that message back to our partners in the European Union and I am sure that they in turn will welcome that statement. There will be many practical arrangements of course still to be worked out. But involvement by the European Union in implementing the Declaration of Principles represents an entirely new departure for European involvement in assisting the peace process, and it does reflect, I believe, Europe’s desire to take a more active part in promoting peace across the region.

    I found my discussions this morning very worthwhile. I hope that the discussions between the businessmen, which we will hear more of a little later today, have been equally successful and I would like to thank the Chairman and his colleagues for their hospitality. We admire the determination with which the peace process is being pursued despite the difficulties inherent in any such process. We will continue to help it both politically and practically and we wish it every success in the future.

    CHAIRMAN ARAFAT:

    We are very happy to have this visit from His Excellency here in Gaza and we had the privilege to meet together and to make a tour all around and we can say that we are very grateful to His Excellency for what he has done for our people and for the peace process from the beginning for the support of his government and his people, great support for the peace process. We had a very successful and very positive discussion this morning and I am sure that he will continue in pushing the peace process, especially as you know we are facing some problems and we are facing the delaying of the implementation of what had been agreed upon. But I am sure that with the continuing support from His Excellency, from the European Union, from the co-sponsors from the others, we will be able to have the stability to carry on the peace process, especially on the Palestinian track.

    We discussed also the European role for the elections. As you know, we have a permanent mission and a permanent committee, a European Committee, a European Mission, to help us in preparing for the peace process, for the election, and at the same time we have sent many groups to Europe for training. And we are very grateful for His Excellency to accept what we had discussed with His Excellency this morning about the very important role for Europe in supervising the next election which we hope will be able to take place very soon and without any delay. As you know, this has been delayed for more than nine months and we hope that we will be able to have the election very soon, including the redeployment from the rest of the West Bank. And I have to thank His Excellency for his efforts in pushing forward the peace process and the implementation of what has been agreed upon.

    At the same time, we are proud that we have these strong bilateral contacts at all levels and we cannot forget this very important discussion which I had in London and which we had today in Gaza, and we have to thank His Excellency and his government for the permanent support which we are receiving at all levels, by all means, financial effort, training effort and other support, so that we can have the ability to build and reconstruct the infrastructure which had been destroyed during the Israeli occupation.

    Many thanks for coming, Your Excellency, and many thanks for your efforts and many thanks for what you are doing to help us in pushing forward the peace process. At the same time we cannot forget this big and very important delegation which accompanied Your Excellency, I mean the British businessmen, and now they are discussing with Palestinian businessmen many important issues and coordination at all levels so that we can have more financial support, more economic support and more experience from them to follow-up the very difficult mission to re-build and reconstruct what had been destroyed during the occupation. I have to thank you, Your Excellency, from my heart, for this visit and for you support which we cannot forget. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

     

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, what is your impression on the situation here; and how do you see the role of England in pushing the peace process forward, there was news during the British occupation of Palestine that they took the money… [inaudible]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me take those points in the order that you presented them to me. As far as the impression is concerned, it is very difficult to form an impression in the very brief period that I have been here and I think it would be unwise of me to generalise about that. What is self-evident is the tremendous task that lies ahead. A start has been made, as you go round you can begin to see hotels, tower blocks, housing beginning to be built. One can see as you drove in some superb beaches which in due course might be a very remarkable local asset for bringing in a substantial amount of tourism. All these things lie in the future so one can see many of the things that need to be done, the nursing training college I have just been to see where they were talking about the plans to build a new hospital. So there is a great deal that is beginning to happen. But the immediate impression is firstly that things are beginning to happen; but secondly that there is an enormous task that lies ahead to carry that beginning forward to provide the right infrastructure and the right well-being for the people who live here.

    As far as what the United Kingdom can do, I think there are two things really essentially the United Kingdom can do. It can play its role politically and diplomatically in assisting the only people who can reach a peace, and that is the representatives of the Palestinians and the Israelis, they are going to reach the peace, we can contribute to that, and we should contribute to that, but it is essentially going to be for them to do. The other area where I think there is a role is in the area of practical assistance, and that was what I was talking about a few moments ago. I don’t think I need elaborate upon it.

    On the Barclays Bank point, that is a wholly novel point to me, I will reflect upon it.

    QUESTION:

    [Not interpreted]

    CHAIRMAN ARAFAT:

    [Not interpreted]

    SIMON WALTERS (THE TIMES):

    Mr Arafat, some people have compared the IRA’s armed struggle in Britain to the PLO use of violence in the past. The British Government now wants the IRA to renounce violence and to commit itself to peace. Would you advise Mr. Gerry Adams, the leader of the IRA’s political wing Sinn Fein, to do that?

    Mr. Major, there are reports at the White House from Downing Street that the US President tried to reach you by phone to discuss the Adams issue and couldn’t get through and that you couldn’t get through to him. What is happening, Sir?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think it was yesterday, Simon, you asked me to unveil my correspondence with the President and I declined to unveil my correspondence with the President. We write and we speak regularly. I have no doubt we will speak over the course of the next few days. As you have been with me, you will know I have been fairly mobile over the last couple of days but the President and I speak often and if he wishes to speak to me, we will speak. That is equally true the other way round, if I wish to speak to him we do so. If he has been pursuing me I am sure he will find me soon and since you told me that is the case, we will make sure that he does.

    CHAIRMAN ARAFAT:

    This is an old question I heard during my visit to Britain and during my visit to Ireland and no doubt we are appreciating too much the line and the peace process everywhere and I am encouraging all the partners everywhere not only here, not only in Ireland but everywhere throughout the peace process.

    SIMON WALTERS:

    Should Mr. Adams renounce violence as you did?

    CHAIRMAN ARAFAT:

    I am not giving lessons to anybody but I am supporting this initiative taken by Prime Minister Major and the Prime Minister of Ireland.

    JOHN CRAIG (LONDON DAILY EXPRESS):

    On that same theme, the Prime Minister was making the point yesterday that the next stage of the peace process in Northern Ireland is for the IRA to hand in their weapons; he was saying to us that the ball is very much in the IRA’s court. Would you say now that the IRA must be going to decommission their weapons, lay down their arms?

    CHAIRMAN ARAFAT:

    What I have mentioned is clear to the audience.

    QUESTION:

    Mr. Major, if the position of a solution is very well known why have the plans of Mr. Douglas Hogg to come to the country been changed?

    Secondly, is it likely that the latest position may change under the pressure of the Jewish community in Britain?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The British position on Jerusalem has been clear for a very long time and in the Declaration of Principles that was signed by the Chairman and by the Prime Minister of Israel that is a matter to be determined in the final status negotiations and it can only be determined by them, it can’t be determined by Britain, by the United States, by anybody else, it has to be determined by the people who are part of the negotiations. Our position is well known and our position is consistent, has been for very many years and has not changed but that is a matter that will have to be determined between the representatives of the Palestinians and the Israeli government.

    The British position on Jerusalem is that we acknowledge the de facto position. We understand and we have acknowledged that for a very long time but we believe it is a matter that is going to have to be determined between the Palestinians and by the Israelis. In the meantime, neither side should take unilateral advantage of the present situation until that matter is determined in the final status negotiations.

    I would add a further point, if I may. I don’t actually think it is terribly helpful when there are negotiations like that for third parties to express views publicly. I don’t think it actually is helpful so our view has been perfectly clear, it isn’t going to change under pressure of any sort.

    QUESTION (ASSOCIATED PRESS):

    Mr. Major, you referred earlier to supporting the running costs of the Palestinian government but in the past the Western powers have been hesitant to pay for the running costs and Mr. Arafat’s official recently have expressed a desire that this is continued for an extended period in which running costs are covered. Does your country still support that donor countries should pay for Palestinian running costs and various other government expenditures?

    Also, how do you respond to criticism that for all the pledges and promises have been made, the Western powers and donor countries have been exceedingly slow in actually providing direct aid?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    On the second point, a substantial amount has been disbursed in the last year, rather more I think will be disbursed this year. I made the point earlier when I met the businessmen that that is going to be necessary and I think that is going to be necessary in the future. There is a genuine problem with running costs. We have been able to help in some ways in the past with police salaries for example where there was a substantial contribution last year. Running costs are going to be a partnership and I think on that partnership basis it can be helped by the collection of taxes by the Palestinian authorities and contributions by donors. I suspect both of those things will be necessary and I think we will be very happy to look at that.

    QUESTION:

    [in Arabic, not translated]

    CHAIRMAN ARAFAT:

    [in Arabic, not translated]

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister Major and Chairman Arafat, at what stage are the talks on the deployment of observers for the elections and have you got any idea of what it would cost, how many people and is this part of the overall plan for assistance to the Palestinians?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The details of those discussions lie ahead. We have discussed the matter this morning and I will take back the position I described to the conference earlier to my partners in the European Union but the detail points you raised are important detail points but they yet have to be discussed with my colleagues in Europe and with others.

    QUESTION:

    Mr. John Major, what is your position concerning the increasing settlement activity in Jerusalem and in……..?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Under the Declaration of Principles, it is perfectly clear that there shouldn’t be more settlement activity and that is our position and had been known for some time.

    CHAIRMAN ARAFAT:

    [in Arabic, not translated]

    QUESTION:

    [indistinct, but relating to whether the Prime Minister expected more peace negotiations and whether that would make the peace process more successful]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I certainly look forward to that. I think the way in which one gets from the beginning of the process to the end of the process is by taking each of the hurdles in front of the negotiators one at a time. That has operated very successfully between the Chairman and the Israeli government in the past. I think that is the only way they can continue in future. I think the 1st July target that has been set is very welcome, I hope it is met.

  • Mr Major’s Speech in Presence of Chairman Arafat – 14 March 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech made on 14th March 1995 in the presence of Chairman Arafat.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Chairman Arafat, distinguished guests.

    We have a saying in Britain that a week is a long time in politics. I have no doubt that that is as true here as it is in London. But if a week is a long time, then how to measure thirteen years? For that is the time since my last visit to the Occupied Territories.

    Little could I foresee, back in 1982, the huge changes in your circumstances – and in mine – before I returned to these lands. The Palestinian Autonomy is still at an early and formative stage. It is vital for the stability of this region and the future of its peoples that the Autonomy – and the peace process as a whole – should succeed. I have come to offer our support and our help. I have also come to look ahead.

    The future is uncertain, and the path ahead strewn with potential pitfalls. But the goal of a lasting and peaceful settlement continues to provide hope to all the peoples of the region. Its single-minded pursuit retains a compelling logic. The search for peace, after decades of violence and hatred on both sides, was never going to be easy. It is bound to be a gradual and sometimes frustrating process, as you try to build a new future for your people.

    But I am sure that in choosing to seek a permanent peace, you have chosen well. Britain will fully support your efforts in that direction. We want to see peace established on the basis of Security Council Resolutions. We believe that it can only be achieved by direct negotiations between the parties, with the support of the international community. We especially value, as I know you do, the active encouragement of President Mubarak.

    The first requirement is to implement the Declaration of Principles: to press on with re-deploying Israel’s armed forces on the West Bank and so clear the way to free elections as soon as possible. I have been encouraged to hear from both Mr. Rabin and Mr. Peres yesterday and from you today, Mr. Chairman, of some recent progress. Elections are essential to strengthen the Autonomy and to weaken the opponents to peace.

    Indeed, it remains crucial to intensify efforts against those resorting to violence. A lasting peace requires security – for both sides. This security will need to be vigorously sustained if progress is to be achieved.

    The Declaration of Principles also stipulates that a number of crucial issues, including settlements and the status of Jerusalem, should be reversed for the final status negotiations. Meanwhile, the status quo should be respected, and nothing be done by either party to seek unilateral advantage. It is most important that that principle should be upheld.

    But it is essential that while the negotiations continue, people should see improvements in their daily life. This will be very important in sustaining popular support for the peace process without which it is far less likely to succeed. I hope that the recent progress in your talks with the Israelis will, for example, lead to easier movement from Gaza to the West Bank.

    Beyond these political issues, however, it is perhaps in the economic field that the international community can contribute most. The Norwegian Government have worked especially hard to co-ordinate international assistance. So has the World Bank. And I saw for myself this morning the effectiveness of UNRWA.

    But the European Union remains by some way the major donor. The Union is providing 580 million dollars of new aid. We are establishing a Know-How Programme for the Occupied Territories worth some 7.5 million dollars to help your managers and your businessmen, your water engineers and your health administrators, to build up their own institutions. It will also encourage involvement by the private sector.

    One such example involves co-operation between Palestinian and British companies, in particular Marks and Spencer, in a project with the Palestinian Autonomy and the British Government to help develop Palestinian skill in making garments for export, and so increase employment in wealth-creating ways.

    This morning I handed over fifty vehicles to the Palestinian police, who, as you know Mr. Chairman, have been a particular focus for Britain’s bilateral aid. This follows our substantial contribution last year towards police salaries, and our provision of management and other training for you officers.

    As I have said, the maintenance of security is an essential pre-condition for the successful pursuit of peace. Without it, neither Palestinians nor Israelis will be prepared to make the commitments necessary to achieve a lasting settlement. By enabling your police force to improve security within the Palestinian Autonomy, I believe that these vehicles, and the other help that Britain has provided, will make an important contribution to furthering the peace process.

    Aid can never be the whole story though. Britain’s experience is that prosperity springs from private enterprise. That is why I welcome the policies for a free market which your Administration have adopted. What Palestinian businessmen need now is opportunity.

    So I am especially glad to have with me today a very powerful trade delegation. They stand ready to help in developing your private sector. I am sure that the discussions with their Palestinian counterparts this morning have thrown up some really useful pointers; and I am glad that there will be opportunities to pursue these individually this afternoon.

    Mr. Chairman, the Palestinian people have suffered much for too many years. I recognise the scale of the problems that still confront you. But you have taken a decisive and courageous step. We in the United Kingdom offer full support to the peaceful search for a lasting settlement for your people.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Chairman Arafat’s Lunch – 14 March 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s speech at a luncheon hosted by Chairman Arafat at the Palestine Hotel in Gaza on Tuesday 14th March 1995.  [Small parts of the original text are inaudible, marked with ….]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    …. still remains to be determined, some of them are very crucial issues, settlements and the status of Jerusalem, they are to be referred to the final status negotiations, and in the meantime the status quo should be respected and nothing done to seek unilateral advantage, and I think it is important that that principle is upheld.

    And I think it is equally important to ensure that the negotiations continue and that people see an improvements in their daily lives whilst those negotiations, which may be protracted, continue to go on, and I believe that will be very important in sustaining the popular support for the process that is so necessary for its success.

    Beyond these fields perhaps it is in the economic area that the international community can contribute most, and a number of people have done so, and I saw for myself the effectiveness of some of the work that has been done, and some of the help that has been provided. The European Union remains by far the major donor thus far, providing something approaching 600 million dollars over five years, of which approximately one-fifth comes from the United Kingdom. We will also help in a number of other bilateral ways, but I need not on this occasion. We shall sustain our bilateral aid and I have been able to make a further improvement to it today.

    What we equally seek to do is to encourage, as far as it is practicable, the involvement of the private sector. There are a number of areas of cooperation and some of the key British Chairmen who are part of that cooperation are sitting around this table this morning. I was delighted to hand over 50 vehicles to the civil police this morning as part of our bilateral aid. That and other areas of help have been provided in the past and I am confident will be provided in the future.

    But the maintenance of security is going to be the essential pre-requisite for the successful pursuit of the peace negotiations. Without it, I suspect neither the Palestinians, nor the Israelis, will be able to make the commitments necessary to achieve a lasting settlement. By enabling your police force to improve security within the Palestinian Autonomy, I hope that those 50 vehicles, and the other help that my country has been able to provide, will make a further contribution to helping that peace process by offering reassurance both here and elsewhere as for the maintenance of peace.

    Aid cannot be the whole story. Private enterprise has its own role to play and I need not …. to this particular audience of all audiences, except to say that it is very necessary that private enterprise has the confidence to play its role in the future, and I very much hope that it will.

    Mr Chairman, I have only had a very brief opportunity of having a look at the difficulties faced by the Palestinian people who are present here …. they have suffered a very great deal for a very long time. There are problems on the most enormous scale that face you, I recognise the scale of those problems. But what I believe is beyond doubt is that you and the Israeli government have taken a very courageous and a very exciting step in advancing the process against many difficulties on both sides in advancing the process as far as you have got. I believe that you deserve the support of the international community as you try to advance that process even further and I believe the international community owes it to you as well, to help facilitate the circumstances in which private enterprise itself can …. standards right across the Middle East, and I believe that is the only way forward for all of us.

    Let me simply conclude by thanking you for your hospitality on this occasion, and …. yesterday, and say that we and the United Kingdom will continue to offer all the support we can for the peace process in the hope that it will provide a lasting settlement not just for the Palestinians, but for the Palestinians, for the Israelis and for the wider Middle East. That is the goal that is in front of people and I think it is one that is very worthwhile seeking.