The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Agriculture

  • Sir John Major’s Speech at the Farm Africa Dinner – 16 September 2010

    The text of Sir John Major’s speech at the Farm Africa Dinner, held at Fishmonger’s Hall in London on Thursday 16th September 2010.

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    When John De Ramsey invited me to join you this evening, it was easy to accept.

    I first visited Africa in late 1965 during the Biafran War. I went there as a young banker working for the then Standard Bank of West Africa. I was lucky enough to be stationed at Jos, in northern Nigeria and it was there that Africa first attracted me. I had never seen – before or since – such enormous skies and open space. To me, it was idyllic – and still is. And yet, despite its allure and its promise, Africa is so often overlooked and disregarded. But I believe the time is coming when its profile will change.

    Some doubt that, but I think they are wrong. Change is almost the only constant in today’s hectic world.

    At the time I visited Africa, NATO and the Warsaw Pact were aiming missiles at one another. China was still slumbering. Asia had not begun its rise. The Soviet Union had an iron control of much of Eastern Europe. The EU was in its infancy. Latin America was a Continent of revolutions. The Gulf States were still poor. Oil was $3 a barrel. None of that applies now.

    The global market has taken root, and that will continue to change everything – not least agriculture.

    There are few things men and women can’t manage without, but food is at the top of that list. Nor will – or could – this ever change. But its importance will grow, simply because the sheer scale of demand for more food of a higher quality will be un-ending.

    At the time of Christ, the world population – so far as we know – was a mere 300 million. By 1900 – 19 centuries later – it had risen to one and a half billion – an increase of just over one billion in 1900 years. Today, it is six and a half billion, having quadrupled in the last century, and we are growing at nearly one billion every decade, as opposed to one billion every 1900 years.

    Better diet, environment, medicines, will accelerate that trend. The result is a world population estimated at nine billion by 2050: to put that more vividly, it is the equivalent of two more Chinas in the next 40 years – and, of course, agriculture must feed them.

    Contrast tomorrow’s demand with today’s reality. Today, one billion people go hungry each day, of which well over one-quarter are in Africa – many of them subsistence farmers. It needs a revolution to feed them – not so much in the husbandry of farming, but in growing food where it is needed, or transporting it from where it is grown to where it is consumed. In Africa – where a sharp population growth is anticipated – that will, quite literally, be a matter of life and death. That is an equation Africa understands.

    In Africa, agriculture is an ancient trade. Cereals were being grown in North Africa as early as 6,000 BC, and by 1500 BC, root crops, grain crops and nomadic pastoralism was the predominant way of life for sub-Saharan Africans. That is the first point to be made. Africans can farm. It is in their history. And in their blood.

    So it is today. But even a cursory examination shows that much more needs to be done. Although agriculture provides the main livelihood for nearly two-thirds of Africa’s population, much of it is subsistence farming, and the dire reality is that one in four Africans is under-nourished.

    Here, I wish to pay tribute to Farm Africa. It works to help African communities feed themselves and then become small businesses. Charity can feed a man, but wise charity helps him to feed himself, sell his surplus to his neighbours – and then more widely. And that surplus is needed – evidence suggests that, to meet the Millennium Development Goals, 124 million more Africans need to be lifted out of poverty in sub-Saharan Africa alone by the end of this year.

    No-one should doubt that Africans can farm. They are hard working and often have a fine business sense. Micro-finance from banks – tiny sums sometimes no more than £100 – often provide the seed-corn and, as the banks will tell you, women are usually the best guardians of the cash.

    Let me dispel some enduring myths. Not so long ago, most people’s view of Africa was largely defined by disturbing images of people suffering from poor government, corruption, violations of human rights, severe poverty and pandemic health crises. Against this focal image, both aid donors and investors are discouraged, and it’s not surprising that many investors viewed the African Continent as a submerging, rather than an emerging, market. But I believe they were wrong.

    Nowadays, such attitudes are shifting quickly. After lagging behind the rest of the world in the 1990s, African economic growth averaged 5% a year from 2001 until the recent financial crisis, whilst the rest of the world averaged just over 4%. Africa has been enjoying its most sustained period of economic expansion in over 30 years and, despite the financial upheaval which unavoidably slowed growth, the future looks bright as well. Real GDP growth in Africa is expected to continue to rise as the effects of the recent crisis dissipate. Investors are beginning to notice this, and the knock-on effect of that will be enormous.

    One key element, of course, is strong commodity prices. Africa is fortunate to be endowed with 10% of the world’s known oil reserves, 8% of gas reserves, 54% of gold reserves and a wealth of other precious metals, industrial metals and diamonds.

    This commodity boom is inspiring a huge increase in foreign direct investment in Africa – notably by China. China is active in nearly all parts of the Continent, especially in countries such as Sudan or Angola, where they have significant contracts to buy oil. But she is doing more than that. China is developing infrastructure projects, often tied to aid, using China’s partners and contractors and, in so doing, improving African infrastructure.

    China’s interest extends beyond oil to minerals and forests and arable products. And where China leads, others will follow, in a development that is changing both the perception and reality of the changing African market.

    What of agriculture? Firstly, Africa is blessed with a land mass significantly larger than that of China, India, the US and Europe combined. I make that point for two reasons: in the context of its tremendous size, it is overwhelmingly likely that many of Africa’s reserve riches – whether precious metals or hydro-carbons – still wait to be discovered and, secondly, the abundance of such land, and the nature of most of it, offers unrivalled prospects for agriculture.

    This is hugely encouraging for small entrepreneurs but, in many cases, they need help to begin. The work of Farm Africa, the generosity of private donors like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates, the work of NGOs, and well-directed aid, are all addressing that problem. And the [Comprehensive African] Agricultural Development Programme (CAADP) aims to increase agricultural productivity by at least 6% per annum.

    In jargon terms, the cavalry is arriving, troop by troop, and the possibility of more land under management; better water supply; more rural infrastructure and other practical improvements, is becoming more likely. This is absolutely necessary, and will enable the small rural farmer to operate in a more clement environment.

    500 years ago, John Donne wrote “No man is an island entire unto itself”. Nor is any Continent.

    But the growth of agriculture in Africa should not be seen in isolation. Africa is inextricably linked to worldwide growth patterns. Economic growth elsewhere will bring rising wealth to Africa – indeed is already doing so: this means better machinery for agriculture, better transport infrastructure for distribution, bigger towns in concentrated markets and the attraction of development capital.

    Before the financial crisis, Africa’s five-year economic boom was challenging the conventional view of the Continent as a war-torn, poverty-stricken crisis region undeserving of investor consideration. And so it should have done: after all, many places previously regarded as risky investment options – Vietnam being an obvious example – have since earned handsome returns for investors who identified their growth prospects. There is no reason why similar growth should not be achieved in Africa.

    I spoke earlier of 2050, and a world population of, perhaps, nine billion. Africa’s riches, Africa’s contribution, will be needed – and an ever-more global market will help that contribution to be made.

    Is it fanciful to look forward and see an Africa with a greatly improved road network; with more sea-ports and air-ports; with a private sector mentality; with less bureaucracy; a modern tax system; and growing opportunity for agriculture?

    I think not. And the history of the last fifty years tells us not. Farming for sustenance can become farming for profit. What an industrial revolution achieved for others it can – and I believe will – achieve for Africa.

    And when that happens, Farm Africa – and the other pioneers of help – will see that their help was far-sighted as well as humanitarian.

  • Sir John Major’s Speech at the Worshipful Company of Farmers Livery Luncheon – 6 June 2006

    The text of Sir John Major’s speech made at the Worshipful Company of Farmers Livery Luncheon, held at the Farmers Fletchers Hall on Tuesday 6th June 2006.

    SIR JOHN MAJOR:

    When Henry Plumb invited me to join you today, I was delighted to accept. I was the Member of Parliament for a rural constituency for 22 years and enjoyed a close relationship with the farming community.

    So, I wasn’t surprised to be told I could speak on any subject I wished – whenever I met farmers in Huntingdon, they were always happy for me to say whatever I liked, before they told me what they thought! I am glad to see Lord Plumb is upholding that tradition.

    In this private lunch, I would like to exercise a few hobby horses – starting with farming.

    In all its long history, farming has had many highs and lows – times of prosperity and hardship. But, in many ways, it faces more complex challenges today than ever before. Modern husbandry and all the implications of free markets has changed the industry fundamentally. As a result, farming will never be tomorrow what it was yesterday.

    But – when one looks at the macro position – some of the old truths remain:

    As a nation, we are foolish if we don’t maintain a full variety of agriculture and we must never make ourselves too dependent on imported food.

    In today’s world – so the free marketeers tell us – price rules. That’s it. End of story. I don’t agree. Price is important but supply is more so. If competitive pressures are permitted to turn farming profit into loss, then farmers will diversify and domestic supply of food will fall. Over time, we would be at the mercy of other Nations’ production – and price.

    In areas of manufacturing that may be unavoidable – but for food it is simply not sensible policy.

    We may argue and discuss about what needs to be done about CAP, about Single Farm Payments, about so much else – but unless the central point of supply is understood, and acted upon, then we are laying up problems in the future.

    In a micro way, farming has some weapons it doesn’t use. If individual farmers negotiate with supermarket chains, so be it – but the small supplier is at a huge negotiating disadvantage. The supermarkets are interested, first and foremost, in the price to their customers – that is their job – not the future well-being of agricultural supply, a decade hence. The farmers would do better to negotiate co-operatively and not individually and Government should help them exploit the quality and value of their produce. I hope the Competition Commission inquiry will address this.

    These days I am out of politics – but I observe it with interest.

    In our changing world, Government becomes more complex. Many decisions that were once the prerogative of Nation States are now made either collectively in wider fora, or predetermined by the impact of globalisation. Many of the levers of power available to Nation States twenty years ago are no longer there. As the free market grows in power, politics loses it. All this adds to the frustration the electorate often feels about the performance of Governments.

    I don’t wish to stray into partisan politics but, in the interests of the health of our political system, we do need to correct the present negative impression of politics.

    What the electorate sees today is a new approach in politics – more concerned with appearance than reality, less able to distinguish fact from fiction, more inclined to blame officials than themselves. Responsibility always lies elsewhere. This is an unattractive trait and one that adds to public dis-illusion.

    I have noticed, too, that whenever the present Government are in difficulties (and this seems increasingly often) they tend to trot out the familiar line that Margaret Thatcher and John Major had the same problems. Even if that were true – and often it is not – this playground response is hardly credible after nine years of government. These spats of blame attribution do no-one any good – and harm the perception of politics.

    Then, of course, there is spin. Spin is merely a polite term for deception – and the sooner it is brought under control the better. Of course, politicians will always put the best gloss on things: they would not be human if they did not. But there is a distinction between putting a gloss on politics and downright deceit – and, when the line is crossed, the whole political system is the loser.

    Obsession with spin not only degrades politics – but obscures serious policy. Let me now shock you: I believe some of the things the present Government are doing – are right. They are right to look again at nuclear energy – which will, I think, prove inevitable. They are right to reform health and education, although I am bound to note that their reforms today are precisely those I was implementing over a decade ago that they reviled, rejected and have now re-adopted.

    I fear our political system may be about to suffer another blow. For reasons of electoral fairness we limit the sums that can be spent in elections. That is right. It would also be right to limit the size of donations to a party from any individual or company or union in a single Parliament. But, it would not, in my view, be wise to move further down the route of party politics simply being funded by the taxpayer. The taxpayer should not be a bran- tub into which hard-up political parties can dip their fingers. By all means, change tax law to encourage widespread donations of modest size to our political Parties – even possibly some system of matching funding – but not straight-forward subsidy.

    Until then, parties should match expenditure to income – and if that means an end to expensive negative advertisements attacking their opponents – then so much the better.

    Many of the problems facing future governments will be long-term. Adversarial politics has served our Nation well but, for some issues, we may need consensus, even coalition government. We should not close our minds to that.

    There is one reform upon which I believe I may be an unreconstructed minority. Present opinion seems to be moving towards a reform of the House of Lords that would include a very large, if not completely, elected Upper House. I am very wary of this. I can – with extreme reluctance – accept a minority of elected Peers but I believe majority election would be a fundamental error. An elected House of Lords would be within its right to challenge the supremacy of the Commons. Moreover, this elected Lords would probably consist of new Peers who had failed to get elected to the Commons, rather than those with specialist knowledge who can bring their experience into what should be a revising Chamber. Much experience and dispassionate public service would be lost. I accept some reforms might be necessary and desirable, but a largely elected House of Lords seems – to me, at least – to be an option that owes more to the appearance of democratic principles than the reality of what produces good democratic government.

    Given my views on such matters, it is perhaps rather a good thing that I am no longer in politics – but, having been a Member of the House of Commons for 22 years, it is impossible not to care about what happens in our country; not to despair when things go badly wrong; and not to voice dismay when the electoral system itself malfunctions.

    In a world that changes, politics must change but – as a Conservative with a small “c” – I only wish to see change that is an improvement.

    I do believe we need a new, more considered, view of politics in future. A politics that confronts the uncomfortable. Politics that rises above the short-term and the soundbite; politics that is long-term; politics that knows it no longer controls all the pieces on the chequerboard; politics that adopts common ideals and rejects common abuse; politics that is directed to issues and not to personalities. We need joined-up commonsense politics.

    And frankly, the sooner – the better.

  • Mr Major’s Letter to the Daily Telegraph – 1 August 2001

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s letter to the Daily Telegraph on the subject of Foot and Mouth, published on 1 August 2001.

    JOHN MAJOR:

    Dear Sir,

    The cull of some 4,000 sheep at Brecon is a depressing reminder that Foot and Mouth is far from over. A second cull has now been ordered. More culls seem possible, perhaps even probable.

    After the BSE epidemic I took advice and demurred at the prospect of a Public as opposed to a Private Inquiry. In 1997, the new Labour Government decided differently. In the event the Public Inquiry produced – albeit after a long time – an excellent Report with valuable lessons for the future. In addition it knocked down much of the lurid scapegoating that had caused so much anguish to Officials and Ministers struggling, as they were, with unknown science.

    With Foot and Mouth, of course, the science is familiar, yet we now have the longest and worst outbreak in our history. The Government seems to believe that a full Public Inquiry is not necessary and that, if they delay committing themselves to one, the demand for it will subside.

    I disagree. It is evident that the recommendations given and lessons learned following the 1967 Inquiry have not been applied to the present epidemic and that Ministers’ and Officials’ advice has repeatedly proved to be wrong. This alone is sufficient justification for a Public Inquiry: why has so much gone wrong?

    It is becoming the set belief of many country dwellers that action on Foot and Mouth has been geared more to the political interests of the Labour Government than to the economic interests of farmers and the rural community.

    There was to be a General Election on 3rd May. It was essential, we were told, to avoid Britain being seen as “closed for business”. I warned there should be no election until we were certain Foot and Mouth had been eradicated, not least since the Government’s term had a further year to run. As public disquiet mounted, the proposed election date was shelved. We were told the Prime Minister was acting in the “national interest”. The Prime Minister took personal control and told us we were on the home straight. It was a glaring example of mis-information. The only home straight we were on was the one that led to the 7th June election.

    If political self interest did predominate – and I stress if – then it was indefensible. This is a further reason for a full and comprehensive Inquiry to determine what solid fact and expectation underpinned those public assurances that have, in the event, proved to be so worthless.

    We need to learn fresh lessons from this outbreak. How did it occur? Why did it spread so widely? Why is it lingering so long? Why were troops used so late and the carcass disposal instructions so confused? Why was vaccination thought of, rejected, and now under consideration again? This is by no means a comprehensive set of the questions to be answered: there are so many more.

    I am content for the Prime Minister to take advice on the precise nature of the Inquiry but he should commit himself to it without delay and ensure that it will be held fully in public. Our rural communities – both present and future – deserve no less.

    Yours faithfully,

    JOHN MAJOR

  • Mr Major’s Letter to the Daily Telegraph – 1 August 2001

    The text of Mr Major’s letter to the Daily Telegraph on the subject of Foot and Mouth, published on 1st August 2001.

    JOHN MAJOR:

    Dear Sir,

    The cull of some 4,000 sheep at Brecon is a depressing reminder that Foot and Mouth is far from over. A second cull has now been ordered.

    More culls seem possible, perhaps even probable.

    After the BSE epidemic I took advice and demurred at the prospect of a Public as opposed to a Private Inquiry. In 1997, the new Labour Government decided differently. In the event the Public Inquiry produced – albeit after a long time – an excellent Report with valuable lessons for the future. In addition it knocked down much of the lurid scapegoating that had caused so much anguish to Officials and Ministers struggling, as they were, with unknown science.

    With Foot and Mouth, of course, the science is familiar, yet we now have the longest and worst outbreak in our history. The Government seems to believe that a full Public Inquiry is not necessary and that, if they delay committing themselves to one, the demand for it will subside.

    I disagree. It is evident that the recommendations given and lessons learned following the 1967 Inquiry have not been applied to the present epidemic and that Ministers’ and Officials’ advice has repeatedly proved to be wrong. This alone is sufficient justification for a Public Inquiry: why has so much gone wrong?

    It is becoming the set belief of many country dwellers that action on Foot and Mouth has been geared more to the political interests of the Labour Government than to the economic interests of farmers and the rural community.

    There was to be a General Election on 3rd May. It was essential, we were told, to avoid Britain being seen as “closed for business”. I warned there should be no election until we were certain Foot and Mouth had been eradicated, not least since the Government’s term had a further year to run. As public disquiet mounted, the proposed election date was shelved. We were told the Prime Minister was acting in the “national interest”. The Prime Minister took personal control and told us we were on the home straight. It was a glaring example of mis-information. The only home straight we were on was the one that led to the 7th June election.

    If political self interest did predominate – and I stress if – then it was indefensible. This is a further reason for a full and comprehensive Inquiry to determine what solid fact and expectation underpinned those public assurances that have, in the event, proved to be so worthless.
    We need to learn fresh lessons from this outbreak. How did it occur? Why did it spread so widely? Why is it lingering so long? Why were troops used so late and the carcass disposal instructions so confused? Why was vaccination thought of, rejected, and now under consideration again? This is by no means a comprehensive set of the questions to be answered: there are so many more.

    I am content for the Prime Minister to take advice on the precise nature of the Inquiry but he should commit himself to it without delay and ensure that it will be held fully in public. Our rural communities – both present and future – deserve no less.

    Yours faithfully,
    JOHN MAJOR.

  • 1997 Conservative Party Manifesto – 2 April 1997

    Below is the text of the 1997 Conservative Party manifesto.

    Foreword

    The Conservative administrations elected since 1979 are among the most successful in British peacetime history. A country once the sick man of Europe has become its most successful economy. A country once brought to its knees by over-mighty trade unions now has industrial peace. Abroad, the cold war has been won; at home, the rule of law has been restored. The enterprising virtues of the British people have been liberated from the dead hand of the state. There can be no doubt that we have created a better Britain.

    Why, then, do we still need a Conservative Government? Because resting on what we have achieved is not enough. To stand still is to fall back. Our goal must be for Britain to be the best place in the world to live.

    We live in a tougher, more uncertain world. A fast-moving global free market is emerging. New economic powers are rising in the East. Family life and social attitudes are changing. Europe is adjusting to the end of communism. The European social model is failing. The nation state is under threat. We must respond to these challenges.

    We have turned around our economic fortunes. We have fewer people out of work and more in work than any other major European economy. British people now have the opportunity of a prosperous future. But that prosperity cannot be taken for granted. We have to compete to win. That means a constant fight to keep tight control over public spending and enable Britain to remain the lowest taxed major economy in Europe. It means a continuing fight to keep burdens off business, maintaining our opt-out of the European Social Chapter. If we relax for one moment, our hard won success will slip away again.

    We have strengthened choice and personal ownership for families, and rolled back the state from areas where it was interfering unnecessarily in our lives. But we now have the opportunity to achieve a massive expansion in wealth and ownership so that more families can enjoy the self-respect and independence that comes with being self-sufficient from the state. Our far-reaching proposals for personal pension funds are central to achieving this – so too are our plans to increase support for the family in our tax system. Our aim is to spread opportunity for all to succeed, whoever they are and wherever they come from, provided they are prepared to work hard. To turn the “have nots” into the “haves”. To support the family in providing security and stability.

    We have modernised and reformed many of the areas where the state still has a vital role. But we now have to build on these reforms to deliver even better services. We must continue providing the resources to invest in our modernised health service. We can now provide parents with a hard-edged guarantee of standards in schools. We need also to widen choice in areas where state bureaucracy has constrained it.

    We have pioneered new ways of building partnerships that engage the private sector in areas previously dependent on the public purse. We now need to capture private sector investment on a massive scale to regenerate our cities, transform our crumbling local authority housing estates and modernise other public assets.

    The only way to secure this future of opportunity is to stick with the Conservative programme of continuing reform. Now would be the worst possible moment to abandon the pathway to prosperity on which we are set. We must keep up the momentum.

    At the same time we must maintain the security that a stable nation provides in an uncertain, fast-changing world. We must protect our constitution and unity as a nation from those who threaten it with unnecessary and dangerous change. And we must stand up for our interests in shaping a free-market Europe of sovereign nation states.

    There is, of course, an alternative on offer: to load costs on business while calling it “stakeholding”; to increase the role of the state, while calling it “the community”; to succumb to a centralised Europe while calling it “not being isolated”; to break up our country while calling it “devolution”.

    To risk this alternative would be a disaster for our country. We have come a very long way. We must be sure that we do not throw away what we have gained, or lose the opportunities we have earned.

    Our Record

    The UK is on course to grow faster than both France and Germany for the sixth successive year in 1998 – a post-war record.

    Inflation has now been below 4% for well over 4 years, the longest period of low inflation for almost half a century.

    Mortgage rates are at their lowest levels for 30 years.

    Unemployment has fallen to its lowest level for 6 years. We now have a lower unemployment rate than any other major European economy. Youth unemployment in Britain has fallen to less than 15% whereas by contrast, in France it has risen to 27% and in Italy to 33%.

    A higher proportion of our people are in work than in any other major European economy – 68% against a Continental average of 57%.

    The UK is the favourite location for inward investment into Europe, attracting around one third of inward investment into the European Union.

    We have the lowest tax burden of any major European economy, with the government taking almost 8% less of national income than the European average.

    Public borrowing has averaged 3.4% of GDP since 1919 compared with 6.8% (and a peak of 9.5%) under the last Labour Government. Our level of public debt is now one of the lowest in the European Union – whereas it was one of the highest in 1979.

    In 1994 the UK lost 300,000 working days through strikes, the lowest figure ever recorded; in 1979 the figure was 29,500,000: nearly 100 times that figure.

    Britain ranks fifth in the world in international trade, and exports more per head than America or Japan. Exports account for 28% of GDP as against 9% for Japan, 11 % for USA and 24% for Germany and France. Britain’s current account is broadly in balance, reflecting our increased competitiveness and improved trading.

    1. Doubling Living Standards

    The free market is winning the battle of ideas the world over. From Russia to Vietnam, from China to Romania, people are realising that the socialist model has failed. This is not just an economic triumph. It is a triumph for human freedom. Britain helped to secure it. We should take pride in it.

    The spread of the free market heralds a new age of global competition. That means new markets for British goods and services, but new competitors for British companies as well.

    If we try to protect ourselves from these challenges with more regulations, public subsidies and a cosy dependence on government then Britain will fail. But if we boldly embrace these new opportunities by pushing forward the economic revolution we began in 1979, then we will enter the next millennium with boundless prospects for growth and prosperity.

    That choice – between stagnation and dynamism – is the choice which faces Britain at this election. It is a stark choice between the British way – of trusting the people and unleashing enterprise – and the failing social model, practised on the continent, which the Labour Party wants to impose on us here under the guise of “stakeholding”.

    Hard economic evidence shows how great is the divide between these two strategies. Britain is now in its fifth year of growing faster than France or Germany. Unemployment in Britain has fallen to less than two million, while it rises across Europe. Britain attracts nearly forty per cent of all the American and Japanese investment in Europe. Our aim now is to safeguard these achievements and build on them, so Britain becomes the unrivalled Enterprise Centre of Europe.

    A Low Tax Economy

    For enterprise to flourish, the state must get out of the way of the wealth creators. We are the only party that can cut taxes because we are the only party which is serious about controlling public spending. The choice between the two economic philosophies is clean In the years before 1979, public spending in Britain kept pace with the average for Europe as a whole. Since then, it has continued rising on the continent, while we have restrained public spending here. Now, public spending takes about 40% of our national income as against an average of 50% on the continent. We have broken free from a trend in which the rest of Europe is still trapped.

    Conservative government will keep public spending under tight control and ensure that it grows by less than the economy as a whole over the economic cycle. At the same time we will continue to spend more on the services which matter most to people – hospitals, schools and the police.

    Over the next parliament, we will achieve our goal for the government to spend less than 40% of our national income.

    That means we can reduce the amount government borrows too, and meet our aim of moving towards a balanced budget in the medium term. Our plans show how we can virtually eliminate public borrowing by the year 2000.

    Thanks to our success in controlling public spending, Britain is now Europe’s low tax economy. This is one of the reasons why we are becoming the Enterprise Centre of Europe.

    Our aim is to ensure Britain keeps the lowest tax burden of any major European economy.

    In the election manifesto of 1992, we promised that “We will make further progress towards a basic income tax rate of 20p”. Since then, we have cut the basic rate of income tax from 25p to 23p, and extended the 20p band so that over a quarter of all taxpayers now only pay income tax at the 20p rate. Achieving our public expenditure goals will mean we can sustain permanently low tax levels.

    Over the next parliament, our aim will be to achieve our target of a 20p basic rate of income tax, while maintaining a maximum tax rate of no more than 40p.

    Stable Prices

    Inflation has to be kept firmly under control for an economy to thrive. Britain is now enjoying the longest period of stable prices for almost fifty years. We are on target to reach our goal of 2½% inflation this year.

    Low inflation has delivered lower interest rates whilst preserving the value of people’s savings. Homeowners are now enjoying mortgage rates at the lowest levels for 30 years.

    It has taken tough decisions to break free from our reputation as a high inflation economy. No Conservative government will jeopardise this achievement.

    During the next parliament, we will maintain an inflation target of 2½% or less.

    Rising Living Standards

    The only secure base for rising living standards is a strongly growing economy, low levels of public spending and taxation, and stable prices. That is exactly what Britain is achieving. People are reaping the rewards of their hard work as their take home pay increases. Between 1974 and 1979, the take home pay for a family on average earnings rose, in real terms, by just £1 a week in today’s prices. Since 1979 it has increased by £100 a week; this year alone it will increase by £7 a week.

    The goal which we set ourselves in 1995 is to double living standards over 25 years.

    We are on course to achieve our goal.

    2. Jobs and Business

    Our priority is to create jobs. This is not just an economic priority, but also a social and moral one. Jobs and enterprise are the best ways of tackling poverty and deprivation.

    Britain is succeeding. 900,000 jobs have been created over the past 4 years. By contrast the European social model is stifling job creation on the continent by imposing regulations and burdens on business. In the United Kingdom unemployment is much lower than in the rest of Europe and falling whereas in Germany, France, and Italy it has risen to its highest level for a generation. This is no accident. It is because we have pursued very different policies from those on the Continent.

    Curbing the power of trade unions, opening up markets and cutting red tape, have given us a low strike, low cost economy: and as a result Britain is the number one location for foreign investment in Europe.

    Never have such policies been so important. For the first time this century we face a world full of capitalist competition. The only way Britain will be able to compete and win in world markets is by sticking to the Conservative policies that are delivering success. We can earn prosperity as one of the world’s most successful global trading nations. We should not risk this progress by adopting the very policies that have made the continent uncompetitive and have increased unemployment in Europe by 4.5 million over the past 5 years.

    Small Businesses – Britain’s Risk-takers

    Governments do not create jobs. Businesses do. The source of tomorrow’s jobs will be small businesses, the seedcorn of Britain’s prosperity. Over the last 15 years, small businesses have created over 2 million jobs. By the year 2000, over half the workforce should be working in companies which employ fewer than 50 people. Back in 1979 only a third of the workforce did.

    Entrepreneurs often risk everything when they set up their own business. We have already helped them: raising the VAT threshold, cutting employer’s national insurance contributions, simplifying audit requirements and much more besides. Now we intend to go further, tackling the remaining problems they face.

    High taxes and rates deter enterprise. Our low tax structure has been crucial to our industrial revival. We already have the lowest corporation tax of any major industrialised country. As we want small businesses to flourish, we will go even further.

    We will cut the small companies rate of corporation tax in line with personal taxation as we move towards a 20p basic rate

    Investment and enterprise are deterred if the taxman takes too much of the capital that is built up by a successful business. Capital is ever more mobile, flying around the world to places where the tax on it is low: Britain must be one of those places.

    We will continue to reduce the burden of capital gains tax and inheritance tax as it is prudent to do so.

    One of the heaviest burdens small businesses face is business rates. At the moment, this bears more heavily upon small businesses than large ones.

    In the next parliament, we will reform business rates to reduce the cost that falls upon small businesses.

    No businessman has time to fill out reams of forms. We will continue to simplify the administration of NICs and PAYE for small firms, allowing them to concentrate on satisfying customers not bureaucrats. We are also tackling a problem that hits small businesses particularly hard – the late payment of bills. On top of our programme to ensure government departments and local authorities pay on time we have legislated to require companies to publish their payment policy and to report their record on how quickly they pay their bills to small businesses.

    We have already abolished over a thousand regulations. New regulations must only be introduced if it is clear that their benefits exceed their costs and they do not place an undue burden on a small firm.

    We will introduce “sunset” requirements into new regulations whenever appropriate so that they are automatically reviewed or dropped after a specific period.

    Many businessmen suffer regulatory burdens imposed by local government and quangos.

    We will therefore insist that the whole of the public sector adopts the same stringent rules that we require of central government in justifying the benefits of new regulations against their costs.

    Reducing the Burden on Companies

    Jobs depend on British firms winning orders: the difference between success or failure can be wafer-thin. Any extra burden on business will destroy jobs.

    Britain is enjoying more jobs and record investment, thanks to the competitive edge we have over other European countries. We are a low cost economy But that does not mean we are a low pay economy. Our competitive advantage comes from the lower costs facing our businesses. It can be measured by the social costs an employer has to pay on top of every £100 of wages: in Germany it is £31, in France £41, but in Britain, it is only £15.

    Many countries in Europe have tried to cocoon themselves from global competition behind layers of red tape and regulation – such as the Social Chapter and a national minimum wage. This provides a false sense of security, playing a cruel trick on working people. It also excludes the unemployed from work. As companies in the rest of Europe have grown more uncompetitive, employers have found it too expensive to employ new workers, investment has gone elsewhere, and the dole queues have lengthened. The European social model is not social and not a model for us to follow. But if Britain signed up to the Social Chapter it would be used to impose that model on us – destroying British jobs.

    No Conservative government will sign up to the Social Chapter or introduce a national minimum wage We will insist at the Intergovernmental Conference in Amsterdam that our opt-out is honoured and that Britain is exempted from the Working Time Directive: if old agreements are broken, we do not see how new ones can be made

    We will resist the imposition of other social burdens on the work place through a new European employment chapter.

    Welfare into Work

    Although governments cannot create jobs, they can help people train and find work. We now have in place a battery of schemes working with Training and Enterprise Councils to provide targeted help and training, including remedial education in literacy and numeracy. We are also developing new incentives, alongside Family Credit, to help people move off benefit into work.

    We will always help those in genuine need: in return, the unemployed have a responsibility to look for work and accept a reasonable offer That belief underpins our new Jobseeker’s Allowance which ensures that no-one can refuse reasonable work opportunities and remain on benefit.

    As unemployment falls, we want to focus on those who have been unemployed for some time. At present, Project Work is helping 100,000 people who have been unemployed for more than 2 years in cities around Britain. They are first given help in finding a job – which includes giving employers incentives to take them on. Those who do not find jobs are then required to work for a specific period on a community project. This helps them regain work habits and ensures they are available for work.

    As Project Work succeeds and demonstrates that its costs can be met by the savings from getting people into work, we will extend the programme to cover the long-term unemployed nationwide

    We will also develop an innovative “Britain Works” scheme which uses the experience and ingenuity of private and voluntary sectors to get people off welfare into work.

    Britain has one of the most mobile economies in Europe. People move on, and up, into better paid jobs more easily than on the continent.

    The Information Society

    Britain is at the forefront of creating tomorrow’s information society Already we have exposed domestic telecommunications to competition and stimulated investment in cable and satellite entertainment systems. And by opening up international telecommunications we will continue to encourage companies worldwide to base their global operations here. We will make sure that the digital revolution comes to Britain first.

    We are launching an ambitious programme with industry to spread “IT for All”, giving every adult the opportunity to try out and learn about new IT services. We will work with industry to ensure that all schools are connected to the information superhighway.

    We will use the Millennium Lottery Fund to transform the computer facilities and information links available in schools, libraries, museums, voluntary organisations and other public places after the turn of the century.

    This will give the public much wider access to information services in the years ahead. We will also take advantage of information technology to transform the way government provides services to the public.

    We will keep Britain in the vanguard of new mobile service development – including mobile telephone and information services – by introducing a pricing system for the radio spectrum to achieve more efficient allocation of radio frequencies.

    We will maintain a strong, free and competitive broadcasting and press environment at both national and local level, while continuing to be vigilant in monitoring whether action is needed to curb breaches of standards, and prevent unacceptable press intrusion.

    Science

    British science enjoys a worldwide reputation for excellence and cost-effectiveness, which makes Britain an attractive base for many domestic and overseas companies. We will continue to invest in science and target funds at basic research, which would not otherwise be funded by industry. At the same time we will provide an enterprising environment which encourages firms to invest with confidence in applied science.

    2020 Vision

    There is no part of the globe which has not been reached by British enterprise and British culture. We have always looked out beyond these shores, beyond this continent. Our language, our heritage of international trading links, our foreign investments – second only to America’s – are historic strengths which mean we are ideally placed to seize the opportunities of the global economy.

    Thanks to Conservative policies of liberalisation and privatisation we are strong in industries of the future such as telecommunications, financial services, and information technology. These are the industries that will benefit from opening up trade around the world. We will push for completion of the European Single Market and continue to pursue the objective of transatlantic free trade against the background of world trade liberalisation.

    Our aim is nothing less than tariff free trade across the globe by the year 2020.

    Free competition is important for free markets. Companies should not make agreements that restrict competition and hence result in poor value for consumers. We have set out proposals to give companies greater protection against price fixing, dumping, and other restrictive practices by larger competitors.

    We will introduce a Competition Bill to take forward these proposals in the first session of the next parliament

    We are committed to pushing forward our competitiveness agenda which is making Britain the Enterprise Centre of Europe.

    Opportunity and Ownership for Individuals and Families

    Our Record – Opportunity

    The right to buy has allowed 1.5 million council tenants to become homeowners. There are over 4 million more homeowners today than in 1979.

    The Government has spent £6 billion through housing associations to provide homes for rent. Between 1992 and 1995 housing associations provided 178,000 new lettings – 25,000 more than promised in the 1992 Manifesto.

    There are now around 10 million private shareholders, up from about 3 million at the time of the last Labour government. 2.5 million people now have tax free savings in PEP accounts, and 4.5 million in TESSAs.

    Since 1979, the success of private pension provision has raised the average income of pensioners by 60% more than inflation. Almost 90% of recently retired pensioners now have incomes over and above state benefits.

    Savings in private pension funds have increased to £650 billion –more than 4 times the level in 1979. Their value is greater than the pension funds in all other EU countries added together.

    Over the period 1979 to 1995, education spending per pupil rose from £515 to £1,890 – an increase in real terms of 48%. Real spending on books and equipment per pupil rose 56%. Teachers’ real pay rose 57%: from £270 per week in 1979 to £420 in 1995.

    In 1979, 40% of three and four year olds attended nursery school; in 1995 the figure was 59%. Our nursery vouchers now give this opportunity to every child.

    The proportion of sixteen year olds staying on in full-time education rose from 4 out of 10 in 1979 to 7 out of 10 in 1995.

    Almost 1 in 3 young people now go on to university, compared with 1 in 8 in 1979.

    The proportion of adults with no academic qualifications has halved since 1979 and the proportion of adults with a degree or equivalent has more than doubled rising from 5% to 12%.

    3. Choice and Security for Families

    The family is the most important institution in our lives. It offers security and stability in a fast-changing world. But the family is undermined if governments take decisions which families ought to take for themselves. Self-reliance underpins freedom and choice.

    Families are stronger if they have the money to look after themselves: that is why we are shifting power and wealth back to working families and away from the state. We have already achieved much – the average family’s disposable income has gone up by 40% since 1979. But we want to go further. The next Conservative government intends to reform the tax system so that it gives substantially more help to families.

    We also want to encourage people to save so they have the security and self-respect that comes from being able to rely on their own resources rather than immediately turning to the state. We have already made much progress here too with widening ownership of homes, pensions, and the new PEPs and TESSAs. We now propose further radical measures for more saving for retirement.

    Families and Tax

    We believe families should be left with as much of their own money as possible. They know better than politicians how to spend it. We have already cut the basic rate of income tax from 33p to 23p, and our aim is to get it down to 20p, benefitting 18 million taxpayers. We intend to do even more to help families in particular

    At the moment, if one spouse does not take paid work in order to look after children or dependent relatives, they not only give up earnings but may also be unable to benefit from their personal tax allowance. Yet this is the time at which their income is often most stretched.

    We believe our tax system should recognise and support the crucial role of families in their caring responsibilities. We will give them that support.

    We will give priority to future reductions in personal taxation that help families looking after dependent children or relatives by allowing one partner’s unused personal allowance to be transferred to a working spouse where they have these responsibilities.

    This will provide a targeted reduction in the tax bill to those families who need it most. Around 2 million one-taxpayer couples with dependent children, or looking after elderly relatives and others needing care, would gain up to £17.50 a week – around £900 a year

    Family Savings

    In the old days people just depended on the weekly pay packet or money from the state. But no job can be secure and the state cannot provide for every eventuality. It is ownership which brings true security and genuine independence from the state. That is why Conservatives have long dreamed of a property-owning democracy. Now we are delivering it in practice. Home ownership is up by 4.7 million. 10 million people own a direct personal stake in our economy. 16 million are gaining shares in their building societies thanks to our deregulation of them. We intend to carry forward our vision of a people’s share. This is a significant increase in personal security. It is the Conservative vision of security through personal savings – not a socialist vision of security through the state.

    We want people to enjoy Britain’s success – especially by owning shares in the companies for which they work. We have already introduced a number of schemes to encourage employee share ownership. To encourage a further expansion of worker shares, our new Share Match Scheme will allow employees to be rewarded with additional free shares if they acquire a stake in their company.

    Our goal is that by 2000, more than half of the employees of Britain’s larger companies will own shares in those companies.

    Four and a half million people now benefit from tax free TESSAs and 2.5 million from PEP schemes to encourage the accumulation of long term saving. We will continue to build on this success by exploring ways in which existing tax exemptions for savings can be developed – allowing individuals to secure their future and protect their families against unexpected contingencies.

    We will continue to raise the threshold for inheritance tax as it is prudent to do so.

    People are not just saving for themselves but for their children and grand-children. These savings should not be penalised by the tax system.

    For many people their biggest asset is their pension. Thanks to the steps we have already taken to encourage occupational and personal pensions, we now have £650 billion invested in private pensions – more than the rest of the European Union put together We now plan to build further on this achievement.

    We will make it easier for small employers to set up personal pension plans for groups of employees.

    We will create more flexibility for people who save in personal pension plans to continue investing in those schemes if they subsequently move to jobs with company pension schemes.

    We will also create flexibility for employees with savings in Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVC) schemes to take part of that pension earlier or later than their main company pension.

    But we believe the time has now come to plan for another important step in improving Britain’s pension provision. Britain is already much better placed than many other countries to afford state pensions in the future, but we want even more people to be able to look forward to properly funded pension that grows with the economy and is free from dependence on taxes paid by future generations. We now propose a practical way of achieving a gradual transformation of the state pension scheme.

    At the start of the next parliament we will set out proposals to provide all young people entering the workforce with a personal pension fund paid for through a rebate on their national insurance contributions. At retirement they would be entitled to the full pension earned by this accumulated investment. This could give them a pension significantly higher than they would currently receive from the state. But they will be guaranteed a pension at least equal to the current bask state pension, increased in line with inflation.

    This will be one of the most significant improvements in the state pension system since it was introduced.

    Older people currently in the workforce would be unaffected – they will continue to contribute as now and receive the normal state pension when they retire.

    This policy would come into effect early in the new millennium. Gradual phasing in of the new system over 40 years will make the impact on public finances affordable. Even at its peak, the net revenue forgone will be only a fraction of the savings from the recent Pensions Act. And eventually, the new policy will produce massive public expenditure savings.

    This far-sighted idea is in the best Conservative tradition. The growing wealth of the nation will provide for the next generation through private funding, underpinned by a state guarantee. British people will be able to look forward to retirement with even greater confidence. And our young people will have a pensions opportunity unrivalled in the world.

    Support for Families

    Conservatives believe that a healthy society encourages people to accept responsibility for their own lives. A heavy-handed and intrusive state can do enormous damage.

    Some families need help to cope with their responsibilities. For them, Social Services play a vital role. They help with children where parental care has failed. They deliver an ever wider range of services to people with learning difficulties or who are mentally ill. Our community care reforms have given them a central role ensuring that elderly people get care of the highest quality: and in their own homes where possible. We need to ensure that role is properly fulfilled.

    Early in the next Parliament we will introduce a Social Services Reform Bill which will create a new statutory framework for social services. The Bill will provide for greater openness and accountability in social services.

    We will provide new guidance to ensure social workers properly reflect the values of the community – focusing their efforts on those families who most need support, and minimising unnecessary interference. Social workers working with children will receive special training to cope with the often heart-rending cases they face.

    We will raise standards through a new regulatory framework which will apply the same standards in both the public and private sector.

    We will also remove the power of local authorities to operate care homes where this is in the best interests of the people for whom they are responsible.

    We believe that families who use social services should be able to exercise choice wherever practicable. We have given cash payments to disabled people to purchase the services they need directly.

    We also want new ways of reinforcing individual choice where possible. We will therefore ensure no barriers stand in the way of local authorities wanting to issue their users with vouchers to buy certain services.

    We will review the direct payment scheme, and provided it has been cost effective, we will extend it to other users of social services.

    Above all, we want to help families to help themselves. Caring for older – or disabled – relatives is one of the most natural human instincts. We recognise the crucial and often demanding role carers play, and will help them more.

    We will introduce a Respite Care Programme. This will enable family members with heavy responsibilities caring for a relative to take a much needed break. We will also offer more practical advice for carers who want to go back to paid work.

    But in some cases, elderly people need more care than their friends or relatives can provide. Financing long term care worries many families. We will create an imaginative, fair partnership between individuals and the public sector to resolve this problem.

    In the first session of the next Parliament we will implement our partnership scheme for long term care, making it easier for people to afford the cost of care in old age without giving up their lifetime savings.

    Good preparation for marriage can be an important aid to a successful family, while timely help in meeting difficulties can often avoid family breakdown. These are matters for voluntary effort, not the state, but we will continue to support such effort.

    We need to make sure efforts to help struggling families does not turn into unnecessary meddling.

    When the state goes too far, it is often the children who suffer They become victims of the worst sort of political correctness.

    We will introduce legislation to remove unnecessary barriers to adoption and introduce new rules to make adoption from abroad more straightforward.

    We will also monitor the workings of the Children Act, and act if necessary to ensure it maintains a proper balance between the rights of children and the responsibilities of adults.

    Social Services departments are now the fourth arm of the welfare state. Most people will need them at some point in their lives. We will ensure that the Conservative revolution in public services now reaches Social Services.

    Disabled People

    We have quadrupled real spending on long term sick and disabled people since 1979, to £22 billion.

    We have introduced the Disability Discrimination Act. This is the first legislation of its kind anywhere in Europe and it provides positive proof of our commitment to disabled people. We will monitor it to ensure it continues to meet its objectives.

    We are also providing a continuing fund to enable the most severely disabled people to stay in their own homes.

    Security in Retirement

    Pensioners continue to make a positive contribution to society in retirement. They give more of their time in charitable work than any other age group. They lift some of the pressures on their own families. They help keep our nation’s history and traditions alive.

    They have paid their National Insurance contributions and taxes and rightly expect us to continue to protect the value of the basic state pension against price rises. We will do so. We will also ensure that less well off pensioners continue to get extra help on top of the basic pension.

    At the same time as protecting the state pension, our encouragement of private pensions is already transforming the living standards of pensioners. The average net income of pensioners has risen by 60% since 1979. This has been achieved by our encouragement of saving for retirement.

    The tax system must help pensioners who have saved. Our new lower 20p rate on income from savings directly helps 1.7 million pensioners and the special age allowances raise the point at which pensioners start to pay income tax.

    A Better Social Security System

    People in need can rely on our continuing support. To ensure that taxpayers are

    willing to go on paying for that support, we have shaped a social security system we can afford, taking a steadily declining share of our national income. We are doing this by focusing benefits on those most in need, helping people off welfare and into work, and curbing welfare fraud. These policies are underpinned by our measures to help families help themselves.

    Social Security must be there to help families, pensioners and people in need. We will protect the value of Child Benefit and Family Credit which help with the cost of bringing up children. This is our Family Benefits Guarantee.

    We will bring the structure of benefits for lone parents into line with that for two-parent families. We will continue to help lone parents obtain maintenance, and assist with childcare in work: both these measures help lone parents obtain work. We will pilot our “Parent Plus” Scheme that gives special help to lone parents who want to work, and extend it if it proves successful.

    Social Security fraud must be stamped out.

    We will intensify our current initiatives of inspections and checks, including more home visits, to crack down further on benefit cheats. We will introduce benefit cards across the country. We will establish a Benefit Fraud inspectorate to monitor local authorities’ performance. We will also improve the sharing of information between government departments to catch more fraudulent claims.

    To ensure as much of the Social Security budget as possible goes into benefits, we will continue to improve the efficiency of administration, using the best mix of public and private sector operations.

    Housing

    Owning one’s own home is an aim shared by millions of people. Over the last 18 years, the number of homeowners has increased by 4.7 million – including 1.7 million who have bought their home under the right to buy scheme. Over the next 10 years, we expect to see another one and a half million people buying their own homes – some 3,000 every week. To meet that demand, we will continue to allow local authority and housing association tenants to buy their homes, or move to houses which they buy.

    We will also carry through our draft Bill, creating the option for those buying flats to choose a new form of commonhold ownership.

    For those who wish to rent their home, we are encouraging a thriving private rental market, building on the success of housing investment trusts and protecting assured tenancies.

    Easier renting will help us meet our target of reducing the proportion of empty homes below 3%. The number of empty houses has fallen in each of the last 3 years. But nothing is more frustrating for people who need social housing, than the sight of a suitable property owned by the public sector boarded up and empty. We will stop that.

    Public landlords will have to sell houses which are available for occupation yet have been left empty without a good reason for more than 12 months.

    Housing associations and housing companies will continue to receive help in building new homes, and we will encourage more public-private partnerships. Together, these policies will help meet the demand for new public housing and make sure that there are decent homes for those in need.

    Opportunities for Women

    Women are succeeding in Britain. More women have jobs in Britain than in almost any other European country. Women have a better education, more financial independence and more opportunities than at any other time in Britain’s history.

    This success reflects the efforts and determination of many women. Government’s role has been simpler – to level up the playing field, whether in education, where girls are now doing better than boys, or in the workplace, where opportunities for women are the best in Europe.

    But we know our job is not yet done. Some women still face barriers to doing well. Some still do not have the financial security they deserve. And crime, and the fear of crime, often affect women more than men.

    We will ensure women have equal opportunities in education and the workplace. This can best be achieved by keeping our economy buoyant and our labour markets flexible. And our proposals to bring crime rates down further will help women especially.

    But many women – and some men – face a particular problem: how to juggle job and family. For those who need or want to work, we will seek further ways to minimise the barriers to affordable, high quality childcare. For those who wish to be full-time parents, our proposals to enable them to transfer their unused personal allowance to their spouse will be worth up to an extra £17.50 a week.

    We also want to give women more financial independence, particularly when they retire. We propose, as explained elsewhere, to improve flexibility in saving for retirement and to allow courts to split pensions on divorce.

    Looking Outwards

    The spread of share ownership, the transformation of pension provision, and the sale of council houses are revolutionising our nation. Personal prosperity and property ownership are not selfish or inward-looking.

    People who are secure at home can look out for others in their community. Over two thirds of adults engage in some form of voluntary activity. By the end of 1997 all young people aged between 15 and 25 who want to volunteer will be helped to find an opportunity to do so.

    We will make it easier for those receiving incapacity benefit to volunteer by removing the 16 hour weekly limit on their voluntary work.

    We will encourage voluntary work by others living on benefit while continuing to insist that those who are capable of work should actively seek employment. We will also develop accreditation for voluntary work to encourage employers to see it as preparation for a paid job.

    It is wrong to imagine that compassion must be nationalised and that we can only help our fellow man through state action.

    4. Education and Opportunity

    All children dream of what they might do when they grow up. Our task is to help them turn those dreams into reality whatever their background may be. It is an exciting world, full of new opportunities for inquiring minds: it should be open to every child. Their future – and Britain’s prosperity – depends on the quality of their education.

    Our Education Guarantee

    A good education is the birthright of every child. Literacy is the building block of all future learning: English is the global language of commerce and, much more, a thing of beauty. Without basic science and mathematics, the modern world is incomprehensible. Every child therefore must be taught to read, write and add up from an early age.

    Years of mistaken, progressive education in the 1960s and 1970s denied these precious skills to too many children. We have worked ceaselessly since 1979 to put that right. Our decision to test children and publish the results has allowed standards to be measured and exposed. We have reformed the curriculum, toughened inspections, and given more information and power to parents. Our many excellent teachers now know what is expected of them, and already standards in schools are rising. But they are still not good enough. We must do more.

    Building on what we have done, we can now offer a new pledge to parents – a guarantee of education standards.

    First, we will set national targets for school performance that reflect our objective of ensuring that Britain is in the top league of international standards across the whole spectrum of education.

    Second, we will require every school to plan how to improve its performance, and to set targets which relate to similar schools and national standards.

    Third, we will give all parents full information on the performance of their child’s school

    Fourth, to underwrite our pledge, we will ensure action is taken to bring any under-performing school up to the mark.

    We will meet this pledge by using the full set of levers for improved standards that we have put in place.

    We are revising and simplifying the National Curriculum in primary schools to emphasise high standards in the basic skills.

    Parents and teachers must have an overview of not just how much a child has learnt while at school, but how the school performs against others. Poor schooling must not be protected by a veil of secrecy. Parent power is a vital force for higher standards.

    Regular tests and exams are essential if teachers are to discover how much their pupils have learnt, and parents are to know how much progress their children are making against national standards. That is why children are already being tested at 7, 11 and 14.

    We will publish all school test results, including the results of tests of 7 and 14 year olds.

    We propose also to assess every child at five.

    This will give teachers and parents a benchmark against which they can measure future progress. To give a better measure of pupil’s performance, marks out of 100 will be made available to parents as well as the broad-brush levels.

    We will also introduce a new test for 14 year old children that covers the whole National Curriculum – assessing progress before they choose subjects for GCSE.

    Tests and exams need to be rigorous and demanding. We will insist that they establish children’s command of spelling, punctuation, and grammar in English tests. Children will sit arithmetic tests without calculators. We will not allow such extensive use of open books in tests and in GCSE exams. We will establish an English Language GCSE. We will continue to uphold the gold standard of A-levels, and ensure that the great classics of our literature are studied at A-level. At the same time students should have the chance to study more subjects in the sixth form.

    Rigorous tests show how individual children and schools are performing and expose schools that are not giving children the education they deserve. To underwrite our guarantee, we will then take action to improve standards. We cannot tolerate schools that fail their pupils.

    By this summer every secondary school in the country will have been inspected by independent inspectors, and by summer 1998, every primary school will have been inspected as well. We have the power to take over failing schools directly and close them if necessary We will now go further and require every school to set, and publish, regular targets, and plans for improving their academic results. Independent inspectors will monitor the results of weaker schools and their plans for improvement at regular intervals.

    Sometimes, though, schools are failing because the local education authority which runs them is failing. The authorities with the worst GCSE results and the worst results at Key Stage 2 (11 year olds) are run by Labour. Those children need our help.

    We will allow for on independent inspection of education authorities and intervene directly to raise standards where education authorities are letting children down.

    Failing authorities will be required to set out their plans to raise standards, and work with education teams – directed by independent inspectors – to implement those plans.

    The vast majority of teachers do an outstanding job. They have played a key part in implementing the reforms that we have introduced. A few, though, let their pupils down.

    We will establish a more rigorous and effective system of appraising teachers, which reflects how well their pupils perform in tests and exams: this will identify which teachers need more help and, where necessary, which teachers need to be replaced.

    Many feel that the professional standing of teachers would be strengthened by the creation of a single body which could speak with authority on professional standards. We will consult with teachers and other interested parties about the possible role of such a body.

    The school should be a place of stability and stimulation for children, especially if they come from a hostile or turbulent environment. To improve standards in future our new teacher training curriculum will stress traditional teaching methods –including whole class teaching and learning to read by the sounds of letters. We will also encourage more teachers to enter the profession through practical training schemes focused on classroom experience such as the Graduate Teacher Scheme. A child is likely to learn more in a well-ordered school. Teachers must have the powers they need to maintain discipline. We will give teachers greater power to set detentions, to exclude disruptive pupils and to use reasonable physical restraint where necessary.

    Schools also have an important role to play in spiritual and moral education. We will take steps to ensure that every school fulfils its role of providing religious education and collective worship.

    Choice and Diversity

    When we came to power in 1979 the school system was totally dominated by one type of school – the monolithic comprehensive. The system failed our children. It treated every child the same. It told parents where to send their children. It did not give schools the freedom to run their own affairs.

    Since 1979 we have created a rich diversity of schools, to serve the varied talents of all children and give parents choice within that diversity, because we believe that parents know what is best for their children.

    That is why we – and only we – are committed to giving the parent of every four year old child a voucher for nursery education so they can choose the pre-school education they want for their child, whether in a play-group, a reception class, or a nursery school in the private or state sector.

    We will give more talented children, from less well-off backgrounds, the opportunity to go to fee-paying schools by expanding the Assisted Places Scheme to cover all ages of compulsory education, in line with our current spending plans. We propose to develop it further into a wider scholarship scheme covering additional educational opportunities. The freedoms and status of fee-paying schools will be protected.

    Grant-maintained schools have been popular with parents across the country –whatever their politics. We will encourage more schools to become grant-maintained and will allow new grant-maintained schools to be set up where there is sufficient local demand. We will give all grant-maintained schools greater freedoms to expand and to select their pupils.

    Grant-maintained schools are leading the way. Local authority schools are also benefitting from our policy of local management of schools. Our ultimate objective is that all schools should take full responsibility for the management of their own affairs. In the next parliament we will take another step towards giving them that freedom.

    We will extend the benefits of greater self-governance to all LEA schools. We will require local authorities to delegate more of schools’ budgets to the schools themselves. We will give them more freedom over the employment of their staff and over admissions. And, where they want it, we will allow them to take over ownership of their assets, so they can make best use of the resources.

    Local authorities will continue to be responsible for their schools’ standards. They will provide funds, and compete with other organisations to provide services to schools. We would expect the increased responsibility of head-teachers, and their role in achieving efficiency-savings, to be recognised by their pay review body.

    Schools are stronger and more effective where head-teachers and governors can shape their own distinctive character Sometimes that means developing a speciality in some subjects. Sometimes it means selecting children by their aptitudes: where parents want this we should not stand in their way. Special abilities should be recognised and encouraged.

    We will continue to encourage the establishment of more specialist schools in technology, arts, languages and sport. We aim to help one in five schools become specialist schools by 2001.

    We will allow all schools to select some of their pupils.

    We will help schools to became grammar schools in every major town where parents want that choke.

    The high standards, real choice and genuine diversity which we have introduced will produce the best results for all our children.

    Lifetime Learning

    Lifetime learning is a reality in Britain today. Over a half of all students in universities, and seventy per cent of those in further education colleges, are adults who have returned to education later in life. We will continue to create new opportunities for more people to participate.

    There has been a revolution in further and higher education. Three and a half million people are in further education –up from just half a million in 1979. The number of young people going to university has risen from one in eight to one in three over the same period.

    We will ensure consistently high standards and will consult on the development of higher education when we receive the results of the Dearing Review. We have world class research in British universities which we will continue to support.

    Every young person should have the opportunity to continue in education or training.

    We will give students between 14 and 21 a learning credit which will enable them to choose suitable education or training leading to recognised qualifications up to A levels or their equivalents.

    We will also introduce National Traineeships and encourage employers to offer more work-based Modern Apprenticeships to young people. Objective external assessments of a proper syllabus will be made a part of all National Vocational Qualifications.

    We will continue to support the network of Training and Enterprise Councils, which have created a valuable partnership between business and government. We will encourage more employers to become involved in “Investors in People”, with the public sector matching the performance of the private sector.

    Competitive markets demand high skills. If Britain is to win, we need to encourage learning and give people the opportunity to go where their interests and inquiring minds take them.

    World Class Health and Public Services

    Our Record – Health and Public Services

    Government spending has concentrated on priorities, not wasteful bureaucracy and overmanning. Despite tough overall public spending plans, real spending on the NHS has risen nearly 75% since 1979 , on schools by 50% and on the police by more than 100%.

    The Health Service is treating over 1 million more patients each year than before our reforms.

    The number of people waiting over 12 months for hospital treatment has fallen from over 200,000 in 1990 to 22,000 last year. The average wait has fallen from nearly 9 months to 4 months.

    The Government has set up the Citizen’s Charter to provide first class public services for all citizens. Nearly 650 organisations have received a Charter Mark for meeting demanding standards of performance, customer satisfaction and value for money.

    There are now 55,000 more nurses and midwives and 22,500 more doctors and dentists than in 1979. For every senior NHS manager, 77 people are providing direct patient care.

    Nurses average earnings have grown 70% in real terms: from £68 a week in 1979 to £325 in 1995. Doctor’s pay has risen by a third. Under Labour both were cut.

    Infant mortality has fallen from 13.2 to 6.2 per thousand over the last 18 years.

    Deaths through road accidents are now the lowest since records began in 1926. Since 1979 road deaths and serious casualties have fallen by 43% despite an 85% increase in motor traffic.

    The government has invested record amounts on transport – more than £26 billion since 1979 in investment on motorways and trunk roads; £16 billion in investment on railways; and £8 billion in investment on London Transport.

    Privatisation is delivering better services at lower costs. BT’s main prices are down by more than 40% in real terms. Average household bills for gas and electricity have also fallen in real terms since 1990.

    5. Security in Health

    We have been the guardians of the NHS for most of its life, improving its services and securing its funding. The benefits can be seen in our rising standards of health. 1993 was for example the first year in which no child in this country died of measles. Between 1979 and 1995 life expectancy at birth in England has increased from 70.4 years to 74.3 years for men and from 76.4 years to 79.6 years for women. We are getting healthier and we are better looked after when we are sick.

    Growing Resources for a Modern Health Service

    This progress has been possible because we have increased spending since 1979 by nearly 75% more than inflation, to almost £43 billion. And we are not stopping there. The next Conservative Government will honour a firm guarantee to the NHS.

    We will continue, year by year; to increase the real resources committed to the NHS, so NHS spending will continue to share in a growing economy

    Under Labour there have been years when resources for the NHS actually shrank – something that would be inconceivable with the Conservatives.

    Money is only really a means to an end: better patient care. Now we are treating 9.2 million hospital in-patients and day cases as against 6.9 million in 1992 and 5.1 million in 1979.

    Investing in Skilled Staff

    We are committed to expanding the medical staff of the NHS. We shall therefore increase medical school intakes to 5,000 a year by the year 2000 and are ahead of schedule in reaching the target.

    Good nursing is the bedrock of the NHS. In particular we will increase the number of nurses with specialist qualifications in paediatric intensive care,emergency care, and cancer care. The number of nurses qualifying each year will increase by 2,500 within the next 5 years as we continue to expand Project 2000 training.

    Higher Standards of Service

    We are tackling the problem of long waiting times which can cause so much worry; distress, and pain. We have set tough targets under the Patient’s Charter and as a result average waiting times for in-patient hospital treatments have fallen from more than 6 months 5 years ago to 4 months last year.

    Patients no longer put up with being kept in ignorance. They want to know more.

    We will publish more information on how successfully hospitals are treating patients so that they and their GPs can make more informed choices between services in different hospitals and help stimulate better performance

    Better Primary Care

    Our vision of the NHS is one in which hospitals and family doctors gain greater power to run their own affairs. That is why we will continue to encourage the spread of fundholding among GPs. Labour by contrast would destroy the new freedoms that fundholding doctors enjoy by imposing a new layer of bureaucracy on top of them.

    However, we do not want the benefits of better healthcare to be confined to patients of GP fundholders. Our proposals to shift more healthcare towards family doctors are open to all

    We shall implement the new Primary Care Act which will enable all family doctors to provide a broader range of patient services within their surgeries. This will include (“super surgeries” and practice-based cottage hospitals that can offer faster and more local treatment.

    We expect to see the number of nurses working in GP practices continue to grow, as will the number of GPs.

    We will extend nationwide our plans to enable more nurses to prescribe a wider range of drugs for patients, recognising their contribution to primary care.

    Mental Health

    The last decade has also seen major changes in the care of mentally ill people. We will continue to develop a full range of services – including 24-hour nursed hostels and secure units – that can care for them in a way which is most appropriate to them and the interests of the wider community.

    We will not close any long-stay mental hospitals unless it can be shown that adequate care services exist in the community.

    We will strengthen co-operation between health and social services in the delivery of mental health services. Our recent Green Paper showed how this can be done. And we will monitor the progress of Health Authorities in developing proper mental health care plans.

    Health of the Nation

    A modern health service is not just about treating illness, it is also about keeping people healthy. This is why we launched the Health of the Nation strategy in 1992 – the first time England has had a strategy for health. Its aim is to reduce illness and premature death by identifying common causes of ill health, like excessive smoking and obesity. Different groups in and outside the health service then work together to tackle the problems.

    We are already seeing progress. Between 1990 and 1994, deaths from coronary heart disease among the over-65s, the suicide rate, and the number of teenage pregnancies fell substantially And last year we announced that environmental targets would be added to Health of the Nation.

    Improved general health means fewer people requiring attention in hospitals and GP surgeries – and more resources available for patients who need them. Our Health of the Nation strategy is a vital part of our vision for creating a health service fit for the 21st Century.

    A Modern Health Service

    Healthcare is changing fast. Modern technology is constantly increasing the range of treatments which are available. Conservatives believe that the benefits of these advances should be made available to patients on the basis of their clinical need, without regard to their ability to pay.

    Furthermore we also believe that the NHS must have access to sufficient resources to allow it to invest in the facilities required to deliver up-to-date healthcare. Since 1979 capital investment in the NHS has proceeded at an unprecedented rate. In the future we believe these requirements will be best met in a partnership with the private sector which allows the private sector to improve the facilities in which NHS healthcare is delivered.

    We will promote the Private Finance Initiative which will unleash a new flow of investment funds into the modernisation of the NHS.

    The NHS is a British success story. It commands universal support in Britain. It is widely admired all over the world. Conservatives are proud of the part we are playing in improving the NHS still further.

    6. Better Public Services

    The public sector is being transformed the world over. Britain is in the vanguard. Everyone else wants to learn from our vision of a smaller state doing fewer things and doing them better.

    Old style public services were centrally planned with little information or choice for the public who used the service. Our reforms have made these services more responsive to the public by breaking up cumbersome bureaucratic structures and shifting power to small responsive local institutions and the people who work in them. The schools, hospitals and police have all been transformed in this way. We support the people who do, not the people who plan.

    In order to get better standards we are liberating services from centralised control over capital. We will push forward our Private Finance Initiative to break down these old barriers.

    We have made public services genuinely accountable, with useful information and real choices for the people who use them. We set tough standards and they will get tougher. The Citizen’s Charter has raised standards of customer service. When these high standards are reached we recognise and reward excellence through our Charter Mark initiative. There are now 647 Chartermarks and we will aim for more than 2000 Chartermarks by the year 2000.

    We will require all government agencies to apply for Chartermarks.

    The days of the bureaucratic paperchase are behind us. The future is “government direct”. We will harness the latest information technology to place the public sector directly at the service of the citizen. People will be able to use simple computer terminals to enter information directly. This will transform time-consuming transactions like completing a tax return or registering a new business.

    Privatisation and Competition

    In 20 years, privatisation has gone from the dream of a few Conservative visionaries to the big idea which is transforming decaying public sector industries in almost every country in the world. Britain has led the way with this new industrial revolution: we can be proud of what we have achieved.

    In 1979 the Government inherited a range of businesses which had come into the public sector for different reasons. Many were known for their poor standards of service, and most were making large losses.

    Over the past eighteen years that situation has changed substantially. Privatisation has enhanced productivity, improved customer services, raised safety and environmental standards and substantially reduced prices.

    Telephone, gas and electricity bills to the customer have fallen as never before. Telephone waiting lists are unknown, and water, gas and electricity disconnections have fallen dramatically. Nearly £40 billion in private sector funding has been committed to a major investment programme to meet higher quality water standards. We can now look forward to water prices falling over the years ahead.

    Service standards have improved substantially. Before privatisation published service standards did not exist. Now industry regulators monitor legal requirements to provide quality services in a competitive environment. Refunds may be made when performance standards are not met.

    Privatisation has benefitted – and will continue to benefit – consumers, shareholders, employees, and taxpayers. In 1979 the then-nationalised industries required a £50 million per week subsidy from the taxpayer In 1996 those now privatised companies paid taxes of £60 million per week.

    We will ensure private ownership, competition and regulation continue to deliver lower prices and better services for consumers.

    We will extend competition for domestic gas users, and introduce competition in the water industry, starting with large users.

    The Post Office occupies an important part in national life. It comprises Counter Services, the Royal Mail and Parcelforce. The network of sub-post offices is vital and most are already run as private businesses. The Royal Mail provides a universal service at a standard price in every part of the United Kingdom. No one can imagine a stamp that does not bear the Queen’s head. These characteristics must continue, but reforms are needed to allow the services to develop. The Royal Mail must face up to the challenges and opportunities that are arising from increasing competition and the international liberalisation of services.

    We will guarantee to preserve the national identity, universal service and distinctive characteristics of the Royal Mail, while considering options – including different forms of privatisation – to introduce private capital and management skills into its operations.

    We will transfer Parcelforce to the private sector whilst ensuring that every Post Office in the land continues to provide a full parcel service at an economical price

    Privatisation works. We will therefore continue to pass government activities into private ownership where this can bring benefits to consumers and taxpayers.

    Local Government

    We are developing a new vision for local government.

    We believe local government should take a lead in the planning and development of their communities. To achieve that, we have encouraged them to work in partnership with central government, with private enterprise, and other organisations in their community. The impact of local government is multiplied when they work in this way.

    To encourage this partnership, we have developed the new approach of Challenge Funding. We set up a fund to meet a particular objective and then invite competing bids for the money. Those who form effective partnerships are far more likely to win those bids. The Single Regeneration Budget Fund, for example, has stimulated many working partnerships that are bringing new life to their communities.

    We will push Challenge Funding further to reward effective local government.

    This innovation has the potential to transform the financing of the public sector.

    In addition, we are encouraging higher standards and more cost-effective provision of local services. Local authorities can enable things to happen rather than necessarily running them themselves. They must look after the interests of users of their services – and that is often best done by being a purchaser, not an employer.

    Standards of service are rising in many local authorities. There are, however, still great disparities between the best and worst performers, as the Audit Commission shows in their thought-provoking reports.

    We will keep up the pressure for higher standards and improved value for money by insisting on compulsory competitive tendering.

    The development of Challenge Funding and the shift in the role of local authorities from direct employers to purchasers of services will transform local authorities over the coming years. In the meantime we will, for so long as is necessary, retain the power to cap local authorities to protect taxpayers.

    Strikes in Essential Services

    Industrial relations in this country have been transformed. In so far as there is a still a problem it is concentrated in a few essential services where the public has no easy alternative and strikers are able to impose massive costs and inconvenience out of all proportion to the issues at stake. We will protect ordinary members of the public from this abuse of power.

    We will legislate to remove legal immunity from industrial action which has disproportionate or excessive effect Members of the public and employers will be able to seek injunctions to prevent industrial action in these circumstances. Any strike action will also have to be approved by a majority of all members eligible to vote and ballots will have to be repeated at regular intervals if negotiations are extended.

    Transport

    Our railways are already improving now they have been liberated into the private sector Passenger numbers are up: more people are using the railways every day. Investment is up: Railtrack plans to spend £4 million each day on improving stations and maintaining and renewing the network. The new train operators are committed to investing £1.5 billion in new and refurbished rolling stock. And key fares are set to fall in real terms for the first time in a generation, with guaranteed price controls keeping fare increases below the level of inflation until at least 2003. We intend to build on this growing success story to create a thriving railway network for the new century.

    We will complete the successful transfer of British Rail into the commercial sector

    We now want to draw in private investment to modernise London Underground and improve services to passengers.

    We will bring forward plans to privatise London Underground. Proceeds from privatisation will be recycled in order to modernise the network within 5 years – creating an underground system to serve the capital in the 21st Century. We will regulate fares so they rise by no more than inflation for at least 4 years after privatisation. We will also protect services – including the Travel Card and concessionary fares.

    After completing the modernisation of the network, the majority of the remaining surplus from privatisation will be channelled into additional support for transport investment in London and elsewhere in the country.

    We will continue to encourage public transport. In particular, we will use the existing funding for local authorities to promote developments which make it easier to interchange between bus and rail.

    We recognise the needs of road users, and will continue to work with the private sector to sustain our road building and maintenance programme. Already under the Private Finance Initiative the private sector is contributing some £1 billion to investment in roads and achieving significant savings in construction costs. We will also tackle road congestion by introducing new regional traffic control centres, by extending the use of variable speed limits, and by ensuring that local authorities have the necessary powers to act. We will promote a cleaner environment by supporting a Europe-wide reduction in vehicle emissions, and encouraging the manufacture of more fuel-efficient vehicles.

    We will continue to build on our record of improving safety on roll-on roll-off ferries and cargo ships through higher standards of survivability and the measures in the Merchant Shipping Act.

    We will continue to make it easier for people to travel by air Already over the last 5 years opening up the market in Europe has led to more services and lower fares. We will build on that success in negotiations with the United States and other countries. We will also continue to encourage the development of regional airports offering new direct services to the rest of the world in the same way that we have already opened up new regional links with Europe and the United States. We will privatise the National Air Traffic Service because it will be run better in the private sector.

    Competition and enterprise are the best way to improve our transport system.

    A Safe and Civil Society

    Our Record – A Safe and Civil Society

    Spending on the police has doubled since 1979 after allowing for inflation. There are now about 16,000 more police officers than when we took office. 2,360 more constables have been recruited since the last election and the Government is giving Chief Officers the resources to recruit 5,000 police constables over the 3 years to 1999.

    Recorded crime has dropped in each of the last 4 years. It is now over 10% down on 1992 levels – more than half a million fewer offences – the biggest drop since records were first kept.

    There are now 153,000 Neighbourhood Watch schemes in England and Wales – 38,000 more than in 1992 – covering 5.5 million homes. We have helped fund over 4,000 closed circuit TV schemes over the last 2 years for additional security.

    Our national DNA database – the first in the world – now has over 112,000 samples on it. 3,300 matches have so far been made between suspects and crime stains.

    The Government has increased the maximum penalty for taking a gun to a crime and for attempted rape to life imprisonment. Since 1985 the average sentence for violence against the person has risen by a third and for sexual offences by nearly 40%.

    The number of cars stolen has fallen by nearly 20% in the last four years – that is about 100,000 fewer cars stolen.

    We have built 22 new prisons since 1980. Slopping out has ended. No prisoners now sleep three to a cell designed for one. Prison escapes have fallen by 80% since the last election.

    Mandatory drug testing has been introduced throughout the Prison Service. Home leave has been cut back – down by half in two years.

    We have made witness intimidation a crime. 500 people were charged with that offence in 1995 alone.

    We have stepped up the fight against drugs and organised crime, giving the Security Service powers to support the police and Customs and Excise in tracking down the serious criminals.

    7. Law, Order and Security

    People have a right to sleep safely in their homes and walk safely on the streets. Governments have a duty to maintain that security.

    Our reforms are aimed at ensuring that crime does not pay. And they are working – the pessimists and the scoffers are wrong. Recorded crime has fallen every year for the last 4 years. It is now 10% lower than it was in 1992. That is over half a million fewer crimes – the biggest drop since records were first kept in the middle of the 19th century.

    But crime is still too high. We must do more. Our aim is to keep crime falling over the lifetime of the next parliament. This is what we will do.

    Safer Communities

    Anti-social behaviour and petty crime disrupt communities and spread human misery. The police are rightly now vigorously tackling problems such as graffiti vandalism and drunkenness. Where such behaviour goes unchecked more serious crimes will follow.

    We will support chief constables who develop local schemes to crack down on petty crime and improve public order.

    Closed circuit television has proved enormously successful in increasing public safety.

    We will fulfil the Prime Minister’s pledge to support the installation of 10,000 CCTV cameras in town centres and public places in the 3 years to 1999. We will provide £75 million over the lifetime of the next parliament to continue extending CCTV to town centres, villages and housing estates up and down the country that want to bid for support.

    We will also continue to take other steps to improve the safety of our streets and communities. In this parliament we have given the police power to seize alcohol from under-18s caught drinking in public. The police have been given the power to stop and search in a specified area for up to 48 hours if they reasonably believe people to be carrying knives.

    Identity Cards can also make a contribution to safer communities.

    We will introduce a voluntary identity card scheme based on the new photographic driving licence it will, for example, enable retailers to identify youngsters trying to buy alcohol and cigarettes or rent classified videos when they are under age.

    Tackling Juvenile Crime

    A fifth of all crime is committed by under-18s. We are encouraging schools to reduce truancy through the publication of league tables and by supporting local projects to tackle the problem. We are developing a network of local teams to identify children who are at risk of turning to crime and to take early steps to address the factors which put them at risk.

    We will encourage these local child crime teams to refer children from primary school age upwards who are at risk of, or who are actually, offending to programmes to tackle their behaviour and fully involve their parents.

    The courts would be able to impose an order – a Parental Control Order – on the parents of children whom they believed could keep control of their children but were refusing to do so.

    Courts will be given the power to attach conditions to Parental Control Orders. Conditions might include a requirement to keep their children in at night, taking their children to and from school, attending a drug rehabilitation clinic or going to sessions to improve their skills as parents. Parents who breached these conditions – in defiance of the court – would face a range of possible sanctions.

    Appearing before a youth court should be a daunting experience for the juvenile concerned. All too often it is not. At the moment about a third of all juveniles appearing before the youth courts are discharged without any punishment at all This sends all the wrong signals to youngsters – particularly first time offenders – who then feel they can get away with crime.

    We will give the courts the power to impose speedy sanctions on youngsters, involving wherever possible an element of reparation to the victim. The probation service – rather than social services – will be responsible for enforcing community punishments for under-16s.

    Persistent juvenile offenders need to be properly punished. We are piloting a tough new regime, with a heavy emphasis on discipline, at a young offenders institution and at the military prison in Colchester In 1994 we doubled the maximum sentence for 15-17 year olds to 2 years detention in a young offenders institution. We have given the courts the freedom to allow the publication of the names of convicted juveniles. We will give the courts the power to detain persistent 12-14 year old offenders in secure training centres once the places become available.

    We have given the courts the power to impose electronically monitored curfews on 10 to 15 year old offenders. We will introduce pilots to test their effectiveness. If successful we will consider extending them nationwide.

    Catching, Convicting and Punishing

    We back the police every inch of the way. There are now about 16,000 more police officers – and over 18,000 more civilians helping them – than when we took office. We are providing chief constables with the resources to recruit 5,000 extra police constables in the three years to 1999.

    We support police initiatives to target the hard core of persistent criminals. Intelligence is crucial for this.

    We will establish a national crime squad to provide on improved nationally coordinated approach to organised crime.

    Once caught, criminals must be convicted and then properly punished. The public needs to be protected. We have reformed the right to silence, despite opposition from Labour. The number of suspects refusing to answer police questions has nearly halved as a result.

    We have piloted curfew orders for adult offenders. They have been shown to keep criminals indoors – curbing their freedom as a punishment – and keeping them out of trouble in the meantime.

    We will extend electronically monitored curfew orders nationwide for those aged 16 and over.

    Persistent offenders account for a high proportion of all crime. Prison works – not only as a deterrent, but in keeping these criminals off the street. Those sent to prison are less likely to re-offend on release than those given a community punishment. We will provide another 8,500 prison places by the year 2000.

    We will introduce minimum sentences for violent and persistent criminals to help protect the public more effectively, reversing Labour’s wrecking amendments to our tough Crime Bill.

    Anyone convicted of a second serious sexual or violent crime, like rape or armed robbery, will get an automatic life sentence.

    Persistent house burglars and dealers in hard drugs will receive mandatory minimum prison sentences of 3 and 7 years respectively.

    We will restore honesty in sentencing by abolishing automatic early release.

    Support for Victims

    Concern for the victim must be at the heart of our entire approach to the criminal justice system. We will continue to give strong backing to Victim Support.

    We will give courts in all cases the discretion to allow witnesses to give evidence anonymously if they believe them to be at risk from reprisal.

    We will also take action to allow a judge to stop a defendant from personally questioning the victim in rape cases and other cases where the victim is particularly vulnerable.

    Conservatives are on the side of the victims not the criminal.

    Strengthening the Fight Against City Crime

    Crime that takes place through manipulation of financial accounts and markets is as serious as crime on the street.

    The City’s unchallenged position as Europe’s most dynamic and successful financial centre owes a great deal to its reputation for honesty and fair dealing. We will help ensure that this reputation is maintained.

    We will bring forward in the next parliament a package of measures designed to modernise the current systems for dealing with City fraud.

    This will include legislation to allow the Inland Revenue to pass confidential information to the police, the Serious Fraud Office and the financial regulators to assist in the investigation of cases involving serious financial fraud. We will also remove the remaining legal obstacles to the controlled exchange of confidential information between the police and the regulators in this kind of case.

    Faster Justice

    Justice delayed is justice denied. It is wrong that people who are innocent should face an excessive wait before the start of their trial. The guilty must be held to account for their actions promptly. And victims should be given the chance to draw a line under their experience as quickly as possible. We are determined to speed up justice without diminishing the genuine rights of every citizen to a fair trial.

    Last October the government set up a review of delays in the criminal justice system. It made a series of detailed recommendations. We see merit in those recommendations and will seek the views of interested parties. We believe that taken together they could dramatically speed up the prosecution process, bringing the guilty to justice and acquitting the innocent more quickly.

    All defendants would appear in court the next working day after they were charged. At least half of them would be convicted the next day compared with just 3 per cent at the moment. And the time taken to bring juveniles to court would be cut from 10 weeks to a matter of days.

    Civil Justice

    The civil justice system of this country is a vital part of its competitive economy and has a high international reputation. The commercial courts attract substantial litigation from all over the world, generating significant foreign earnings. We will work to maintain the high standing of these courts.

    We have greatly improved the service the civil courts provide for the aggrieved citizen. The simple procedure for small claims has been extended to claims up to £3,000. For large claims the county court now provides an efficient local service with specialised courts in many locations around the country leaving the High Court to deal with the more complex and difficult issues.

    We will push ahead with the major reforms now under way which will greatly speed up the process and improve the delivery of justice without imposing additional burdens on the taxpayer.

    The Legal Profession

    We will ensure that the framework in which the legal profession operates is responsive to the changing needs of our people and is one in which unjustified restrictions have no place. We have, for example, given most solicitors rights of audience in the higher courts under appropriate conditions.

    Legal Aid

    People are rightly concerned about the rising costs of legal aid. We have taken many steps to control the burden and to deny access to legal aid to the “apparently wealthy” – those who qualified technically, but whose lifestyles suggested they should not.

    But more is required:

    We will change the structure of legal aid to ensure that it, like other vital public services, functions within defined cash limits.

    This will enable us to identify priorities and serve them much more efficiently than the present system.

    Drugs

    Drugs are a menace to the very fabric of our society They ruin the lives of addicts and their families. They can destroy whole neighbourhoods. The promising youth of today can too easily become the sad dropouts of tomorrow turning to crime and violence.

    The Conservative Government has a comprehensive strategy, launched in 1995, committed to fighting drugs in communities and in schools. It is tough on criminals and vigilant at our ports. It is respected throughout the world. We spend over £500m every year in tackling all aspects of drug problems.

    We will continue the fight against drugs through a coordinated approach: being tough on pushers; reducing demand by educating young people; tackling drug abuse at local level through Drug Action Teams; saying “No” to legalising drugs; and working with international agencies and foreign governments to resist the menace spreading.

    This pernicious evil has to be fought by all of us.

    A Confident, United and Sovereign Nation

    Our Record – The Nation

    Many of our old cities have been rejuvenated through a partnership of public and private investment.

    The area of green belt has doubled since 1979.

    Water and air quality in the UK have improved significantly.

    We are one of only a few nations on course to meet our commitment to return emissions of all greenhouse gases to 1990 levels by 2000.

    The Lottery has been established as the most successful in the world – raising £3 billion for good causes in a little over 2 years.

    More support is now given to arts and heritage than at any time in our nation’s history. We now provide nearly 20% more for the arts than the last Labour Government, over and above inflation.

    British talent was this year nominated for 30 Oscars. British music is again receiving international acclaim. The industry is worth £2.5 billion, more than shipbuilding or electric components: one in 5 CDs and records sold anywhere has a British connection.

    There is record investment in our sports facilities. Already the Lottery has provided £480 million for sport, including the planned British Academy of Sport, English National Stadium and, for the first time, direct funding for British athletes.

    We have continued to stand up for British interests in Europe, protecting our opt-out from the Social Chapter, maintaining our border controls, and preserving our budget rebate – worth £18 billion since it was introduced.

    We have the most professional armed forces in the world. We have modernised our nuclear deterrent by replacing Polaris with Trident.

    8. The Best Place in the World to Live

    Britain is admired the world oven Every year, millions of tourists travel here to enjoy our heritage and culture, our cities and countryside, our way of life. Our nation’s history is an anchor in a sea of change. We need to protect, cherish and build upon what is great about our country so our children grow up in a better Britain. We also must make sure that everyone, wherever they live, has the support of a strong, tolerant and civilised community.

    Our aim is for this generation and future generations to take pride in Britain as the best place in the world to live.

    Britain’s Cities

    London is one of the world’s greatest cities. It is livelier than even Our vision of its future is set out in a separate manifesto.

    Many of our cities have undergone a complete transformation over the last decade. We have promoted partnerships –through schemes such as Urban Development Corporations, the Single Regeneration Budget and City Pride – to attract private enterprise and investment back to inner-cities. These initiatives are bringing hope, opportunity and prosperity to what were once wastelands of urban decline.

    As the country thrives and becomes more prosperous, one of our central tasks is to apply the same approach in transforming the legacy of soulless, decaying public housing estates. They are places that suffer from the very worst kind of poverty – poverty of aspiration.

    We have already made a start – spending more than £2bn over the last 10 years on improving 500 of the worst estates. And we have shown how it is possible to tackle the economic and social problems alongside new investment in buildings – where possible, bringing in a greater mix of public tenants and private housing to recreate a more balanced community. Now we will extend this approach, focusing the Single Regeneration Budget to launch a combined attack on crime, unemployment and under-achievement, and developing the government’s partnership with the private sector to help fund the massive investment that will be required.

    Over the next decade, we aim to raise some £25bn of new private investment in housing estates by encouraging tenants in more than half of the remaining public sector housing stock to opt for transferring their homes to new landlords. These transfers will only occur where tenants choose this mute to improve theft estates.

    We will use this approach to regenerate the worst housing estates and transform the lives of those who live in them –targeting support for programmes to improve education standards, employment and crime prevention alongside new private sector investment.

    As well as this attack on poor housing, we will continue to help the homeless. We will carry through our planned extension of the Rough Sleeper Initiative from London to other big cities.

    We will provide sufficient hostel places to ensure that no-one need sleep out on the streets.

    Rural Communities

    Britain is blessed with some of the most beautiful countryside in Europe.

    We need to protect the best of the countryside whilst ensuring good jobs and living conditions for people who live there.

    We have to strike a balance: our rural communities must not become rural museums, but remain vibrant places to live and work. We will make sure government departments work together to ensure that balance is kept.

    We will continue to protect the green belt from development, making sure that derelict and under-used urban land is developed in preference to greenfield sites.

    We will use the planning system to ensure that more new homes are built on reclaimed sites in our towns and cities. We will aim for more than 60 per cent of all new homes to be built on derelict sites.

    This will reduce the pressure to build in our countryside and expand choice where it is needed most.

    We will support our rural communities, by giving special rate support to small village shops and post offices. The planning system can do more to help too.

    We will introduce a new Rural Business Use Class to encourage job creation in the countryside.

    We will increase support for schemes which promote care for the countryside – like Countryside Stewardship.

    We believe participation in traditional country pursuits, including fishing, is a matter for individuals. A Conservative Government will not introduce legislation that interferes with the rights of people to take part in these activities.

    We will also encourage managed public access to private land – in agreement with farmers and landowners – but strongly resist a general right to roam, which would damage the countryside and violate the right to private property.

    We aim to double Britain’s forest cover over the next fifty years. We will continue to encourage tree planting by targeting grants, encouraging investment in wood processing, and using new freedoms with the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.

    Agriculture and Fisheries

    We will continue to provide robust support to the British beef industry through the BSE crisis until its long term strength is restored. We will vigorously pursue the eradication of BSE in the United Kingdom, as we have been doing successfully for the last eight years. We will spare no efforts in our fight against the unwarranted ban on British beef exports.

    Public health and food safety have been the government’s top priorities throughout the BSE crisis.

    We will tighten up control over food safety by appointing a powerful and independent Chief Food Safety Adviser and Food Safety Council to advise government

    We will continue to push for fundamental reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, moving away from production support to measures that will give our farmers the opportunity to compete while safeguarding the rural environment. We will ensure that no change to the Common Agricultural Policy unfairly disadvantages British farmers.

    Fishing is a vital industry in many parts of coastal Britain. We will continue our fight to secure a prosperous long term future for the industry and sustainable management of our fish stocks.

    We will insist at the IGC and elsewhere on measures to stop quota hopping and prevent the vessels of other countries from using UK fishing quotas.

    The integrity of our 6 and 12 mile fishing limits is not negotiable. We reject any idea of a single European fishing fleet.

    We believe that fishermen should have more say in decisions affecting their industry We will press the European Commission to establish regional committees to give fishermen a direct influence in fishing policy. We will use these committees to develop new ways of managing quotas and regulating fisheries which are more sensitive to the industry’s needs.

    Animal Welfare

    A civilised society respects animals. Britain will continue to take the lead in improving standards of animal welfare in Europe. In 1995 we secured a major breakthrough in the treatment of animals in transport; in 1996 we won victory in our campaign to ban veal crates throughout the EU. We are determined that standards should continue to rise and that all EU countries should have to meet them.

    We will seek to ensure that all European countries have to raise animal welfare standards.

    We are not going to take any risks with rabies. There may however be ways other than quarantine which maintain or increase protection for public health, while improving the welfare of pets and reducing the costs to travellers.

    We will publish a Green Paper on rabies protection, setting out all the options including the existing controls, early in the new parliament.

    Britain’s Environment Britain has an enviable track record in protecting our environment. Our rivers, beaches and water are cleaner and we are using our energy more efficiently. We are leading the world in reducing the level of the “greenhouse gases” that cause global warming and pressing for policies that will enable the world to sustain development without long-term damage to the environment. Our Green Manifesto is published separately.

    We have clear objectives to build on this record. We will set tough, but affordable targets, with published environmental strategies to improve air quality and banish city smog – with tighter standards on vehicle emissions and pollution crackdowns around the country We aim for sustained improvements in water quality, at a pace which industry and consumers can afford. We will develop labelling of products that gives consumers information to show the environmental impact of how they were made.

    In addition, we will continue to use the tax system and other incentives to encourage the use of vehicles and fuel which do not pollute the environment. And we will continue to explore policies based on the principle of polluter pays: those who contaminate land, pollute the environment or produce harmful waste should be made responsible for their actions and pay for the consequences.

    Britain – A Tolerant Country

    Tolerance, civility and respect have always been hallmarks of our nation. It is thanks to them that we have an excellent record in race relations.

    Everybody, regardless of colour or creed, has the right to go about his or her life free from the threat of intimidation. We are taking tough action to tackle harassment. Under proposals in the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, it will be a crime to behave in a way which causes someone else to be harassed. The maximum penalty will be 6 months in prison.

    Firm, but fair, immigration controls underpin good race relations. We will ensure that, while genuine asylum seekers are treated sympathetically, people do not abuse these provisions to avoid normal immigration controls.

    A World Leader In Sports, Arts and Culture

    Britain is enjoying a cultural renaissance. British music, films, television, fashion, art and food are winning plaudits the world oven They add excitement, fun and enjoyment to our lives. Our success brings pride to everyone.

    The National Lottery, which John Major set up, will pump billions of pounds into Britain’s good causes. Its proceeds will weave a new, rich thread of opportunity and charity into the tapestry of British life. In addition to benefitting major national institutions, about half of the awards are for amounts under £25,000 – benefitting local communities up and down the country. We will encourage new ways of distributing awards to support the performing arts – through support for amateur productions and community events, providing more musical instruments, and helping productions tour round the country.

    The National Lottery will also help us train and promote British sporting talent. The English National Stadium and British Academy of Sport, funded by the Lottery, will be new focal points for sporting events and excellence. We will encourage more young people to play sport by ensuring every school plays a minimum level of sport, including competitive sports, and developing a network of Sporting Ambassadors – sporting celebrities who will visit schools to inspire young people. We will also encourage the Sports Council to use Lottery money to employ over 1000 additional community sports coaches to assist in schools.

    We will encourage the use of Lottery money to train young athletes and artists, with revenue funding for bursaries, concessionary tickets to professional performances and support for young people’s organisations and productions.

    The development of young talent is important in all fields.

    The Lottery will also fund our Millennium celebrations. They will be inspirational as well as enjoyable. We want these be a showcase of British excellence. Britain will be able to look back on past achievements with pride, and look forward with confidence.

    9. Europe and the World

    Britain is a world leader as well as a European nation. Our economic strength, our history and our language make us a global trading nation with links right around the world. Only the United Kingdom is a member of the European Union, the United Nations Security Council, the Commonwealth, NATO and the Group of Seven leading industrial nations. In the Gulf, Bosnia, Cyprus and Northern Iraq, John Major has shown how our nation can contribute to world peace.

    We will continue to work with international partners to secure peace and stability in areas of tension such as former Yugoslavia; in Kashmir; in Cyprus; and in the Middle East. We will promote reform of the United Nations to make it a more effective organisation for securing international stability. Britain will continue to deploy our outstanding Armed Forces as peacekeepers under the United Nations. And we will support the aspirations of the Poles, Czechs, Hungarians and others to join the European Union and NATO.

    After the transfer of Hong Kong, we will work under the terms of the Joint Declaration to help sustain the prosperity and way of life of the people of Hong Kong and build on the substantial British interests that will remain.

    We will continue to support the Commonwealth, our unique global network, to encourage the spread of democracy; as set out in the Harare Declaration. We will focus our aid programme to encourage sustainable development in countries that are growing towards self sufficiency under democratic government. We have taken the lead in alleviating the burden of debt for the world’s poorest countries. We also have significant flows of private investment to developing economies. We are more than achieving the long term UN target of 1% of GDP for the transfer of wealth to less developed countries. We will continue to maintain a significant bilateral and multilateral aid programme reflecting the aspiration of meeting the UN’s target of 0.7% of GDP for aid as a long-term objective.

    We will also continue to provide leadership in Europe and internationally on environmental issues, building on the Rio Conference to encourage sustainable development – meeting our commitment to reduce Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions by 10% on 1990 levels by 2010 to prevent climate change. The Prime Minister has committed himself to attending the next UN Environmental Conference in June.

    Britain and the European Union

    We believe that in an uncertain, competitive world, the nation state is a rock of security. A nation’s common heritage, culture, values and outlook are a precious source of stability. Nationhood gives people a sense of belonging.

    The government has a positive vision for the European Union as a partnership of nations. We want to be in Europe but not run by Europe. We have much to gain from our membership of the European Union –in trade, in co-operation between governments, and in preserving European peace. We benefit from the huge trade opportunities that have opened up since Britain led the way in developing Europe’s single market. We want to see the rest of Europe follow the same deregulated, enterprise policies that have transformed our economic prospects in Britain.

    However, in June, the nations of the European Union will gather in Amsterdam to negotiate possible amendments to the Treaty of Rome. It is a moment of truth, setting the direction in which the European Union will go. It will also be crucial in ensuring that we have a relationship with the rest of Europe with which we can be comfortable.

    A Conservative Government will seek a partnership of nation states. Some others would like to build a federal Europe. A British Conservative Government will not allow Britain to be part of a federal European state.

    The diversity of Europe’s nations is its strength. As more nations join the European Union, it needs to become flexible not more rigid We must also ensure that any developments which only include some members do not work to the disadvantage of others.

    Our priorities for Europe’s development will be enlargement of the Community, completion of the single market, reform of the European Court of Justice, and further strengthening of the role of national parliaments. We will seek more co-operation between national governments on areas of common interest – defence, foreign policy and the fight against international crime and drugs. We also believe the European Union itself should do less, but do it better. So we have proposed incorporating the principle of subsidiarity – that the European Union should only do that which cannot be done by member states acting alone – into the Treaty. This is how we are approaching the Inter-Governmental Conference.

    We will argue for a flexible Europe which fully accommodates the interests and aspirations of all its member states and where any new proposals have to be open to all and agreed by all. We will not accept other changes to the Treaty that would further centralise decision-making, reduce national sovereignty, or remove our right to permanent opt-outs.

    We will retain Britain’s veto and oppose further extension of qualified majority voting in order to ensure we can prevent policies that would be harmful to the national interest. We will defend the rights of national parliaments and oppose more powers being given to the European Parliament at the expense of national parliaments.

    We will take whatever steps are necessary to keep our frontier controls. We will resist attempts to change the inter-governmental nature of co-operation in justice and home affairs. We will not accept the development of new legal rights that extend the concept of European citizenship.

    Britain’s rebate has so far saved British taxpayers £18bn and we will protect it.

    One of the greatest challenges Europe faces is to cut unemployment and make its businesses competitive. Here Britain is leading the way. We will continue to argue for deregulation and lower costs on Europe’s businesses, the policies that have helped give Britain one of the strongest economies in Europe. We will not put that achievement at risk by signing up to the Social Chapter, which would open the door to imposing the high costs of the European social model on British business. Once Britain accepted the Social Chapter we could not stop many of these damaging policies being imposed on us by qualified majority voting.

    We will insist that any new Treaty recognises that our opt-out from the Social Chapter enables Britain to be exempt from the Working Time Directive, and prevents any abuse of our opt-out. And we will not accept a new employment chapter in any revised Treaty, which would expose British businesses to new costs.

    We made it clear in the previous chapter that we will continue to work for further reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and the lifting of the worldwide ban on British beef and will insist on measures to stop quota hopping by foreign fishing vessels.

    Protecting Britain’s interests demands tough, experienced negotiation. John Major has proved he has these qualities – including the resolve to say no when necessary even if that means being isolated. Labour have said they would never let Britain be isolated in Europe: they would damage Britain’s success by undermining our veto, signing up to the Social Chapter and following in others’ footsteps – even where they lead in the wrong direction. They support policies that would fragment the United Kingdom’s influence within a Europe of Regions. The Liberal Democrats welcome the end of the nation state. Only the Conservatives can be trusted to stand up for Britain in Europe: our national interest must be protected.

    A Single Currency: Our Referendum Guarantee

    The creation of a European single currency would be of enormous significance for all European states whether they are members or not. We must take account of all the consequences for Britain of such a major development of policy.

    John Major secured for us at Maastricht an opt-out from the commitment to enter a single currency. It is only because of this opt-out that we have the right to negotiate and then decide whether it is in Britain’s interest to join.

    It is in our national interest to take part in the negotiations. Not to do so would be an abdication of responsibility. A single currency would affect us whether we were in or out. We need to participate in discussions in order to ensure the rules are not fixed against our interests. The national interest is not served by exercising our option – one way or the other – before we have to.

    For a single currency to come into effect, European economies will have to meet crucial criteria. On the information currently available, we believe that it is very unlikely that there will be sufficient convergence of economic conditions across Europe for a single currency to proceed safely on the target date of January 1st 1999. We will not include legislation on the single currency in the first Queen’s Speech. If it cannot proceed safely, we believe it would be better for Europe to delay any introduction of a single currency rather than rush ahead to meet an artificial timetable. We will argue this case in the negotiations that lie ahead.

    We believe it is in our national interest to keep our options open to take a decision on a single currency when all the facts are before us. If a single currency is created, without sustainable convergence, a British Conservative government will not be part of it.

    If, during the course of the next parliament, a Conservative government were to conclude that it was in our national interest to join a single currency, we have given a guarantee that no such decision would be implemented unless the British people gave their express approval in a referendum.

    Defence in an Unstable World

    The old rivalries of the Cold War have been replaced by new tensions. Britain must be able to react rapidly to protect our security and interests around the globe.

    Our armed forces are the most professional in the world. We have cut unnecessary bureaucracy and increased efficiency, and directed money to support our Services in the frontline. We have made the changes necessary to adapt our Services to the threats which we might now face. We have set out defence plans based on stable levels of funding. There is no need for a defence review, which would raise fear and uncertainty about the future.

    We will continue to ensure the Services have the modern weapons they need to guarantee their superiority against potential aggressors. We will make sure we can conduct military operations throughout the world, and develop our capability to deploy the three services together and rapidly, including the ability to transport heavy equipment into an operational zone. We will take part in ballistic missile defence research so we can decide whether we should procure any such system for the United Kingdom.

    We will continue to target our efforts on recruiting for the armed forces. We will set up an Army Foundation College, which will provide 1,300 places for 16 and 17 year olds who want to join the Army. We will also enable the reserve forces to play a more active role in operations. We appreciate the enormous value of cadet forces, and our current plans include resources to encourage their further development.

    We will continue to support Britain’s defence industry, and we will work with companies to identify the technologies of the future.

    NATO will remain the cornerstone of our security. We will resist attempts to bring the Western European Union under the control of the European Union, and ensure that defence policy remains a matter for sovereign nations.

    10. The Constitution

    Alone in Europe, the history of the United Kingdom has been one of stability and security; We owe much of that to the strength and stability of our constitution – the institutions, laws and traditions that bind us together as a nation.

    Our constitution has been stable, but not static. It has been woven over the centuries – the product of hundreds of years of knowledge, experience and history.

    Radical changes that alter the whole character of our constitutional balance could unravel what generations of our predecessors have created. To preserve that stability in future – and the freedoms and rights of our citizens – we need to continue a process of evolution, not revolution.

    Conservatives embrace evolutionary change that solves real problems and improves the way our constitution works. In recent years we have opened up government, devolved power and accountability, and introduced reforms to make parliament work more effectively. It is that evolutionary process that we are committed to continue.

    Open, Accountable Government

    In recent years we have taken significant steps to open up government to public scrutiny, and give individuals more information to hold government and public services to account.

    We have introduced a code on access to government information, policed by the Ombudsman. We have published information on the workings of government previously held secret –including the composition of cabinet committees, and the structure of the security and intelligence services. We have introduced a new civil service code, and reformed the process for public appointments. We are pledged to legislate on the commitments in our 1993 White Paper on Open Government, including a statutory right of access by citizens to personal records held about them by the government and other public authorities. And we have set up the Nolan Committee and have implemented its proposals to ensure that the highest standards are maintained in public life.

    But our reforms go even wider than that. We have transferred power from central bureaucracies to local organisations such as school governors and hospital trusts. We have introduced the Citizen’s Charter We have also required them to publish information on their performance – information which enables the local community to keep a check on standards and apply pressure where needed. Wherever possible, we are widening competition and choice in public services. We showed in Chapter 6 how we wished to push this agenda forward.

    Regional government would be a dangerously centralising measure – taking power away from elected local authorities. We wish to go in the opposite direction, shifting power to the local neighbourhood – for example, by giving more power to parish councils.

    Parliament

    Parliament – alongside the Crown and our legal system – is one of the three key institutions that uphold our constitution. The supremacy of parliament is fundamental to our democracy, and the guarantee of our freedoms. The last 17 years have seen many changes to strengthen parliament and make it more effective – the flourishing of select committees, new procedures to scrutinise European legislation, reform of parliament’s working day, and a budget that brings together tax and spending.

    We have therefore already done much to improve the way parliament works and will do more. We have accepted the proposal from the Public Service Select Committee and put before the House of Commons a clear new statement of the principles underlying ministerial accountability to parliament.

    All these developments have made parliament open to the citizen, and the government more accountable. In the next session of parliament we will continue this careful reform.

    To give parliament more time to consider legislation thoroughly we will extend the Queen’s Speech to cover not only legislation for the immediate year but also provisional plans for legislation in the year after that

    This will mean that more draft bills will be subject to public scrutiny before they reach the floor of the House of Commons. It will give select committees more time to take evidence and report. And this should also mean better legislation.

    We do not believe there is a case for more radical reform that would undermine the House of Commons. A new Bill of Rights, for example, would risk transferring power away from parliament to legal courts – undermining the democratic supremacy of parliament as representatives of the people. Whilst this may be a necessary check in other countries which depend upon more formalised written constitutions, we do not believe it is appropriate to the UK.

    Nor do we favour changes in the system of voting in parliamentary elections that would break the link between an individual member of parliament and his constituents. A system of proportional representation would be more likely to produce unstable, coalition governments that are unable to provide effective leadership – with crucial decisions being dependent on compromise deals hammered out behind closed doors. This is not the British way.

    We have demonstrated we are not against change where it is practical and beneficial. But fundamental changes which have not been fully thought through – such as opposition proposals on the House of Lords – would be extremely damaging. We will oppose change for change’s sake.

    The Union

    The Union between Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England underpins our nation’s stability. The Conservative commitment to the United Kingdom does not mean ignoring the distinctive individuality of the different nations. On the contrary, we have gone further in recognising that diversity than any previous government. We are publishing separate manifestos for Wales and Scotland.

    While preserving the role of parliament at the centre of the Union, we have given new powers to the Scottish Grand Committee and Welsh Grand Committee – enabling Scottish and Welsh MPs to call Ministers to account and debate legislation which affects those countries – something that would be impossible with separate Assemblies. For the first time, Welsh members of parliament can ask their questions to Ministers in Welsh in Wales. Most recently we have similarly extended the basic powers of the Northern Ireland Grand Committee.

    We believe this is the right way to go. By contrast, the development of new assemblies in Scotland and Wales would create strains which could well pull apart the Union. That would create a new layer of government which would be hungry for power. It would risk rivalry and conflict between these parliaments or assemblies and the parliament at Westminster. And it would raise serious questions about whether the representation of Scottish and Welsh MPs at Westminster – and their role in matters affecting English affairs – could remain unchanged.

    Nor do we believe it would be in the interests of the Scottish or Welsh people. A Scottish tax-raising parliament, for example, could well affect the choice of where new investment locates in the United Kingdom.

    In a world where people want security, nothing would be more dangerous than to unravel a constitution that binds our nation together and the institutions that bring us stability. We will continue to fight for the strength and diversity that benefits all of us as a proud union of nations.

    Northern Ireland

    While we cherish the Union and Northern Ireland’s place within it, we recognise that there exist within the Province special circumstances which require further action to be taken.

    After a quarter of a century we wish to see the unique and originally temporary system of direct rule ended and a successful restoration of local accountable democracy achieved. We want to see this brought about in a form which carries the broadest agreement possible. And we want to see the rights, traditions and interests of all parts of the community recognised within any such agreement.

    We will accordingly continue to pursue a policy of dialogue and negotiation with and between the democratic Northern Ireland parties. We will continue to underpin such negotiations with the guarantee that the constitutional position of Northern Ireland cannot and will not be changed without the broad consent of the people of Northern Ireland. At the same time we will continue to take whatever security measures are required to protect the people of Northern Ireland from those who seek to achieve their political goals by violent means.

    We seek peace. But we will never be swayed by terrorist violence nor will we ever compromise our principles with those who seek to overthrow the rule of law by force.

    A Choice of Two Futures

    At this election the British people face a stark choice. A choice of two futures.

    They can elect to continue down the road of success and achievement. An opportunity that has been hard won by the efforts and sacrifices of the British people. An opportunity that has only come about because successive Conservative governments have been determined to face up to the long term problems facing Britain, and take the tough steps needed to arrest our slow decline.

    Or they can elect to take a huge risk with that future – the future of themselves, their children, their nation – by handing over the government of the country to politicians who have fought, opposed and denigrated every step that has been taken to restore Britain’s economic health and standing in the world. Politicians whose own declared policies would burden the United Kingdom with new spending and taxation, new regulations, and new threats to the stability and sovereignty of the nation itself.

    You can only be sure with the Conservatives.

    Our Vision for Britain:

    25 Pledges for the Nation

    The Enterprise Centre of Europe

    TAX AND SPENDING. keep tight control of public spending priorities, aiming for our target of a 20p basic rate of income tax over the next parliament.

    PRICES AND MORTGAGES. Stick to the policies which have delivered the lowest inflation levels and mortgage rates for a generation, meeting our inflation target of 2½ % or less.

    JOBS. Protect jobs by keeping Britain out of the European Social Chapter; build on our record of falling unemployment; and help get the long term unemployed back to work – including by requiring those on benefit for some time to undertake work experience on a community project.

    ENTERPRISE. Support growth and investment by keeping Britain the lowest tax major economy in Europe. pursuing Britain’s global trade opportunities. and curbing unnecessary regulations.

    SMALL BUSINESS. Reform business rates to help small businesses.

    THE FUTURE. Keep Britain ahead in the technologies of the future, encouraging new entertainment and information services and using the Millennium Lottery Fund to give people access to new computers and information links in schools, libraries, and other public places.

    Opportunity and Ownership for Individuals and Families

    HELP FOR FAMILIES. Give priority to reducing tax bills for families looking after dependent children or relatives by allowing one partner’s unused personal allowance to be transferred to a working spouse where they have these responsibilities.

    HELP FOR CARERS. Help family members with heavy responsibilities caring for a relative to take a much needed break through a new Respite Care Programme.

    OWNERSHIP. Encourage schemes that help employees build a shareholding in the company they work for, alongside tax benefits for other savings schemes.

    PENSIONS. Transform pensions by providing all young people entering the workforce with a personal pension fund paid for by a rebate on their national insurance contributions, while maintaining a state pension guarantee.

    CARE IN OLD AGE. Make it easier for people to afford the cost of care in old age without giving up their house and savings.

    SCHOOL STANDARDS. Guarantee school standards by intervening directly to raise standards where schools or local education authorities are letting children down.

    SCHOOL CHOICE. Widen choice and diversity in schools, with more freedom for schools to develop their own character, more specialist schools, and a grammar school in every town where parents want that choice. We will also maintain our nursery voucher scheme offering a choice of places for parents of all 4 year olds.

    World Class Health and Public Services

    NHS FUNDING PLEDGE. Continue, year by year, to increase the real resources committed to the NHS, so NHS spending will continue to share in a growing economy.

    FAMILY DOCTORS. Enable all family doctors to provide a wider range of services in their surgeries and in practice-based cottage hospitals – offering faster and more local treatment.

    CITIZEN’S CHARTER. Continue to improve the standards and value for money of Britain’s public services, giving those who use them more information and, where possible, wider choice.

    ESSENTIAL SERVICES. Introduce measures to protect the public against strikes that cause excessive disruption to essential services.

    A Safe and Civil Society

    PUBLIC SAFETY. Support local police schemes to crack down on petty crime, and continue our funding for the installation of TV security cameras in town centres and public places that want them throughout the next parliament.

    JUVENILE CRIME. Give the courts power to impose speedy sanctions on youngsters, including an element of reparation to the victim; and continue our war against drugs.

    PERSISTENT CRIMINALS. Ensure persistent house burglars and dealers in hard drugs receive mandatory minimum prison sentences.

    A Confident, United and Sovereign Nation

    QUALITY OF LIFE. Continue the renaissance of our towns and cities, in particular harnessing private capital to regenerate the worst public housing estates; continue to protect our countryside and heritage; and use the National Lottery to help promote British sports, arts and culture.

    THE ENVIRONMENT. Maintain our international leadership role in protecting the environment, and continue improving air and water quality at home alongside effective conservation of our wildlife.

    THE NATION. Maintain the unity of the United Kingdom and preserve the stability of the Nation through an evolutionary – rather than revolutionary – approach to constitutional change.

    EUROPE. Seek a partnership of nation states in Europe, and not allow Britain to be part of a federal European state.

    THE POUND. Guarantee that Britain will not join a single currency in the next parliament unless the British people give their express approval in a referendum.

  • PMQT – 31 October 1996

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 31st October 1996.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Dr. Goodson-Wickes: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 October.

    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.

    Dr. Goodson-Wickes: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that it is the Government’s intention first to cut and then to abolish both inheritance tax and capital gains tax–moves that would be extremely popular with all who work hard to provide for themselves and their children? Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is strange that the electorate hears a great deal about taxes that the Opposition would cut and precisely nothing about taxes that they would raise?

    The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is entirely right. We hear very little about the windfall tax. Instead, we hear about promised reductions in value added tax–reductions that were called “cynical” by a shadow Treasury spokesman last year. But we hear little about what the rate of the windfall tax would be, on whom it would be levied, or what it would mean for the people who use gas, electricity and the other utilities.

    As for our tax plans, I can confirm that our first priority, when it is affordable, is to move towards a 20p basic rate of tax; and then to deal with the other taxes that my hon. Friend mentions.

    Mr. Blair: I think that what most people remember about cynicism and tax is that the Government promised not to raise VAT before the election and raised it straight afterwards.

    On Tuesday, the Prime Minister said that he could not be precise about lifting the beef ban now because there were continuing discussions in Luxembourg. That meeting ended last night. Is it correct that, although a compensation package for all European farmers was agreed, there was no agreed progress on lifting the ban? If so, given that the Prime Minister’s timetable for lifting that ban expires tomorrow, what is his new timetable?

    The Prime Minister: No, the right hon. Gentleman has misunderstood something–but I shall happily explain it in greater detail to him. The discussions yesterday in the Agriculture Committee were not the discussions to which I specifically referred. The discussions are going on with officials and with the Commission in order to deal with the science–that was not a matter for general discussion in the agriculture debate yesterday.

    What was agreed was more resources for farmers. The determination of precisely where the extra £50 million will go is to be discussed in this country and decided later.

    Mr. Blair: Actually, the right hon. Gentleman said on Tuesday that the discussions on lifting the ban were continuing now. My understanding is that lifting the beef ban was not even put on the agenda by the British Government at Luxembourg–an extraordinary state of affairs.

    The Prime Minister gave us the November timetable; it has now expired. Is it his position that the Florence agreement is still valid, or is his position that that agreement should be changed? In the latter case, what change is he seeking; and in either case, given that he gave us a timetable before, precisely what is his new timetable now? I think we should be told.

    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman needs to do a little more research before he asks ill-advised questions on this subject. The discussions on the scientific evidence are continuing with the Commission. Those discussions were not especially appropriate for the Agriculture Committee. Many of them are technical discussions and they are continuing. As I said to the House very clearly earlier this week, scientific issues that arose after the Florence agreement remain to be determined

    As I told the House on Tuesday, of course the Florence agreement is still in being. Much of that agreement has already been met, and, as I set out to the House on Tuesday, a determination on the rest of it depends substantially on the points still under discussion. I shall explain again gently to the right hon. Gentleman that those points arose after the Florence agreement in the light of changed science that is still being discussed. I hope that that is now clear enough for the right hon. Gentleman.

    Mr. Blair: I do not think that it will be clear to the farming industry, to Europe or to anyone else. What is clear is that the Prime Minister said that the beef ban would be lifted by November. The right hon. Gentleman shakes his head. We all remember when he stood at the Dispatch Box and said that the ban would be lifted by November. Is it the position now that it will not be lifted by November, and that he cannot tell when it will be lifted? I think that is true. He simply cannot tell us what the position will be.

    Is not that weak and ineffectual leadership–precisely what means that his Government can no longer advance Britain’s interests abroad, nor look after them properly at home? That is why people in this country say, “Enough is enough”. [Interruption.] Yes, they say that. If we are to get leadership, direction and purpose back in Britain, let the British people decide, and let this weak and vacillating Government go.

    The Prime Minister: That really was one of the most trivial series of comments–utterly trivial. This is a matter of great interest to British agriculture. Scientific changes are important to that industry, but the right hon. Gentleman does not understand them, does not enter into any research on them, deliberately distorts what little he does know, ignores the reality of what is happening to the British beef industry, and moves–as he does on his third question every Tuesday and Thursday–into a carefully pre-packaged, pre-prepared piece of irrelevant, juvenile sloganising. [Interruption.] I hear applause for the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson), who is undoubtedly the author of much of this sloganising. The right hon. Gentleman should give up this matinee performance, and start dealing with the realities of the beef crisis and other matters that we deal with daily.

    Mrs. Peacock: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the county of Yorkshire has an economy that is bigger and better than those of many small nations? Is he also aware that 140 companies from Yorkshire are quoted on the London stock exchange, which is more than many other regions in this country? Will he send congratulations to all those in the county who have worked extremely hard to achieve the present state?

    The Prime Minister: I am certainly happy to congratulate the successful innovators who have produced a successful economy in Yorkshire, and undoubtedly many of them have been successful. That is also true in other parts of the country. At the moment, we have the most innovative and the most competitive economy in western Europe.

    Mr. Ashdown: The national debt has been going for 300 years. Will the Prime Minister confirm that he has doubled it in the past six?

    The Prime Minister: Can the right hon. Gentleman name a single expenditure cut that he has supported?

    Mr. Bill Walker: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the Union that he wishes to protect is the Union of the United Kingdom, and that his Government will have no truck with proposals that put the Union at risk, and would not give people living in England the same opportunities as the people living in Scotland?

    The Prime Minister: I confirm the importance of the Union not only to Scotland but to England and the rest of the United Kingdom. I have never advanced the argument that devolution, or the separation that the Scottish National party wants, would be bad for Scotland alone, although I believe that it would be bad for Scotland–because I believe that it would be bad for the rest of the United Kingdom too.

     

    Q2. Mr. Austin-Walker: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 October.

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

    Mr. Austin-Walker: Yesterday my right hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) reminded the Chancellor of the Exchequer of a BBC radio interview in which the right hon. and learned Gentleman, recalling the introduction of VAT, said that if we could start again we could have VAT on everything. Does the Prime Minister share the Chancellor’s desire to extend VAT to children’s clothes, water, public transport and food, or does he share the view of Opposition Members and of the mass of the British people–that enough is enough?

    The Prime Minister: I certainly think that enough is enough of absurd sloganising of that sort. I am delighted that the Opposition have decided to spend so much of the money that they have apparently accumulated on the sort of trashy advertising campaign that they are trying to conduct this afternoon. If the hon. Gentleman wants to know about VAT, I shall tell him what the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Central (Mr. Darling) said about a Scottish nationalist proposal to reduce VAT to 5 per cent. He described it as

    “another cynical ploy from an increasingly opportunistic and desperate party”.–[Official Report, 23 January 1995; Vol. 253, c. 49.]

    Now the Labour party is doing the same.

    Mr. Garel-Jones: Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, following yesterday’s rise in interest rates, mortgage rates in this country remain at their lowest level for a generation? Can he recall any Government-announced interest rate move, whether upwards or downwards, that was not opposed by the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister: No. One part of the shadow Chancellor’s litany is absolutely consistent: if interest rates go down he claims that that shows weakness in the economy, but if they go up he claims the same thing. It is a consistent litany. My right hon. Friend is right about the present level of interest rates. He is also right to say that the British economy is exceedingly strong, and that we shall keep it strong and keep inflation low.

     

    Q3. Mr. Hutton: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 October.

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

    Mr. Hutton: Does the Prime Minister accept that, after 22 Tory tax rises since 1992, which have left the typical British family with an extra tax bill of £2,000, the British people are entitled to say that they have had enough both of him and of his party’s broken promises on tax?

    The Prime Minister: As the hon. Gentleman is concerned about the level of tax, I look forward to finding out which tax reductions he has supported in recent years. Will he say now that he will not support the windfall tax, the tartan tax, the health tax proposed by his Front-Bench spokesmen, or the teenage tax that will result from child benefit being taken away? Which of those, all of which have been proposed by the occupants of the Opposition Front Bench, will the hon. Gentleman oppose?

    Mr. Riddick: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the European Commission has disgracefully suppressed new evidence showing a clear link between rigid labour laws and high unemployment? Is not that a huge embarrassment for the Commission and for Opposition Members who support the job-destroying social chapter and a minimum wage? Does it not show that the Labour party’s approach would lead to massively increased unemployment?

    The Prime Minister: I have not seen the report, but like my hon. Friend I have heard that the report exists and that there has been some difficulty in getting it into the public gaze. I shall certainly ask whether the report will be published, so people can have a sensible debate on the policies that underlie it and see whether they are, as we believe, costing jobs; if they are, we shall consider whether we can take action to prevent that from occurring in the future and to reverse those expensive, job-costing policies, which are so much the flavour of the month with Opposition Front-Benchers.

     

    Q4. Mr. O’Hara: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 October.

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

    Mr. O’Hara: Two days ago in the House, I repeated to the Prime Minister our invitation to co-operate in the introduction of legislation to regulate the advertising and sale of certain dangerous knives and weapons that are obvious to Opposition Members and to the British public and that ought to be obvious to the Government. The Prime Minister once again retreated.

    [Hon. Members: “Question.”]

    Madam Speaker: Order. Those who are calling out for a question are often the first to be guilty. I am asking the hon. Gentleman to carry out the regulations and put his question, but he does not need any guidance from Conservative Members.

    Mr. O’Hara: Certainly, Madam Speaker. The Prime Minister once again retreated behind the need for a definition. We have now produced a definition and–

    Madam Speaker: Order. The hon. Gentleman must now put a question; otherwise, he must resume his seat.

    Mr. O’Hara: Has the Prime Minister seen the definition, does he agree with it, and will he now sit down with us and discuss it?

    The Prime Minister: Of course we will examine very carefully any constructive proposal. I understand that the hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) has written to my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary and that there will be a meeting with the hon. and learned Member for Montgomery (Mr. Carlile) in the near future. I must say, however, that it seems that the Labour Front-Bench team has been forced to accept what my right hon. and learned Friend has said all along: that it is not easy to define knives to be banned, despite the fact that the hon. Member for Blackburn said that it was. I believe that he has had to change his position. Of course we will consider any constructive suggestion from the hon. Member for Blackburn or from the hon. Gentleman.

  • Mr Major’s Question and Answer Session at Conservative Party Conference – 9 October 1996

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s question and answer session at the Conservative Party Conference in Bournemouth, held on Wednesday 9th October 1996.

    QUESTION:

    [small section at beginning of session missing] within the Caribbean and Ethnic minorities to vote Conservative and not Labour.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If you were to scratch any politician down to the core, you would find some things that they instinctively believe. There are many bits of ideology we learn. That is part of our intellect that we accept them because they are right. And then there are the things that go beyond that. There are the things that go to the very instinctive heart of that particular politician.

    [Indistinct] that equality of people in this country, equality of opportunity and choice. Whether people are black or white or brown. Whether they are rich or poor, old or young. From the north to the south. Is the most instinctive part of the core of what I believe in in politics. I don’t have a shred of hesitation in saying to you I would like more people from the Caribbean background, more people from an Asian background. More people, whatever their backgrounds are, who are now living in this country as British citizens to realise that they are welcome here in my Conservative party. Not just as members, but to seek elected office, whether at local level, county level, parliamentary level, or to be appointed to the House of Lords. They are British citizens. They have the same rights as every other British citizen, and indeed they have a Prime Minister who will stand up for them.

    QUESTION:

    Good afternoon Prime Minister. Just what are we going to do with the idle scroungers and abusers of our welfare system? Thank you.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Let me ask you to reflect firstly on what has already been done. And then perhaps I might invite you to look forward to two speeches later this week. The first you will hear from Peter Lilley, who in my judgement, since he is not here, I will say so in his absence, in my judgement has done more to draw down unreasonable dependency on the state than anybody for a very long time. He has taken some very courageous decisions. And what is more, those courageous decisions have often involved legislation, controversial legislation, being taken through the House of Commons with a very tiny majority indeed. We have done that consistently, year after year after year. Because our interest is in the hard working classes of this country – not in the people who abuse and rip off the system in any way. So I invite you to look forward to two speeches later this week, Peter Lilley, and then perhaps be around on Friday as well.

    QUESTION:

    I am Babs Martin, Women’s Chairman for Warwick and Leamington Conservative Association. Prime Minister, I would ask you, nay, I would beg you, that when a person is condemned to life imprisonment for the murder of a policeman or a child, that life will mean life.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We now have provision to ensure that in many cases that is precisely what it can mean. Michael Howard set out a further range of issues yesterday where we propose to handle not just this question, this question of very serious violent crime, but a whole range of other crimes as well. It is not very long ago that this conference heard Michael outline a twenty-seven point plan some time ago, and it was much mocked by the opposition who opposed every part of it. It has now been carried out and we are moving beyond that so that there should be no doubt in anyone’s mind that our determination is to act firmly but fairly with those people who commit crimes, but above all to protect those innocent victims of crimes.

    Now, you refer to one sort of crime. I would like to touch, if I may, on another. Because it refers to something we propose to do later this year. I guess if you ask most people around the country which is the crime that perhaps, a serious crime, that they perhaps are most concerned about, because they have seen it happen to someone near to them, or they know about it, or perhaps its has happened to them. I think many people would say it was burglary. Well, I wish to share with you some thoughts about that. I, many years ago, when I was in my late teens, maybe early twenties, had my flat burgled. I was a single man, I had nothing much to go, but I remember how I felt about it. If you then imagine how people feel, perhaps particularly elderly people, when someone has entered their house, stolen their possessions, ransacked through their personal belongings, and perhaps stolen mementoes that can never be replaced. And rifled through their clothes and other possessions. I vividly remember someone saying to me, I shall never feel safe again in my home now that it has been violated, in this fashion. I understand that. And when Michael and I discovered sometime ago that the sentence for a first act of burglary, upon being found guilty, was about fourteen months, of which seven were served. Well, prison is not a pleasant place to go to, we thought that was about right. But when we discovered that if it was a multiple offender who had perhaps committed ten offences of burglary, he did not get fourteen months in jail, of which he served seven, but about sixteen or seventeen months of which he served eight or eight and a half. Then Michael and I reached the judgement that that was not a fair response on behalf of society and on behalf of those who were burgled. So we will introduce legislation this November to correct that and more accurately reflect the penalty that I believe that crime deserves.

    QUESTION:

    Bill Garret from Buckingham Branch. It has been suggested Prime Minister, that if we don’t agree to join the Single Currency, our voice, or whatever, won’t be heard in Europe with the same weight as it is now. Is this true?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes, it is certainly true. Europe at the moment is changing. And Europe is going to go on changing. I think that is the first point we need to filter into this great debate that there has been about Europe. It is a great debate. I will take a moment or two about this, if you don’t mind. And elaborate upon it because I know the passions and tensions that have been aroused by this debate over the last few years. So I want to put it in some sort of context. Europe is changing. And it is going to go on changing in one way or another. Our concern and our determination is to make sure that it changes in a way that is acceptable to the United Kingdom and not damaging to the United Kingdom. Now the central part of that debate is what should the European Union be doing. I think it should extending its boarders further to the East to take in those countries in Central and parts of Eastern Europe, who were for so long with the other side of the Iron Curtain militarily. And also economically. There are been an economic Iron Curtain down the middle of Europe as well. And we need to bring them into the free enterprise nations of Western Europe. Not just as a piece of autism, because in this generation of politicians, we have the chance to frame a new Europe that will never again lead to the conflicts that have twice decimated Europe and the rest of the world during this century. We can shape something for our grandchildren, that our grandparents would never have imagined could have happened. Now that is a very great prize. And Britain is one of the nations who believes that is the single most important thing that the European Union should be concerning itself with, rather than other institutional questions.

    But there is the second question, and clearly it was what was in your mind, and I know in the minds of many people in my party. The question of a Single Currency and what will it mean. Malcolm, I know touched on that this morning. And I will develop on that a little further if I may. If a single currency goes ahead, it will have an impact in one way or another way, upon every nation in the European Union, whether or not that particular country is in the Single Currency. Let us accept that fact. If it goes ahead, even if a particular country is not in it, it is going to have an impact upon it. If it fails, that Single Currency, then the fall out from a failed economic and monetary union, would make the fall out from the collapse of the Exchange Rate Mechanism look like a teddy bear’s picnic economically, right the way across Europe. So the first thing we have to determine is that the circumstances for that experiment, if it is to proceed, are right. That the conditions are right. Now this isn’t a new idea, that was why Britain, that is why Norman Lamont and I insisted on what became known as the Convergence Criteria – good economic conditions were written into the treaty some five years ago. They are still important today. And the decisions upon those have still not been made. We don’t yet know what the convergence, how the convergence criteria will be interpreted, to let anybody into the Single Currency. And yet is the wrong people go in, with the wrong economic circumstances, it might collapse and damage us. So we don’t know that yet. We don’t know what the legal circumstances of it are. We know that only a small part of the European Union will go forward. But what is to be the relationship between that part that goes forward and the bulk of the European Union that doesn’t. How does that affect the institutions? How does it affect who pays for what? What happens if the Single Currency circumstances mean that many others who perhaps wish to, join can’t? And give rise to structural unemployment. Perhaps in the Southern part of Europe. Who will pay for that? Will the European Union doing it the tradition way with money transferred from the richer Northern nations to the Southern nations. I don’t think that will happen. Because I don’t see who is going to transfer those resources.

    So this is an issue that if it were to go wrong, could crack wide open the European Union as we have seen it build up over the last twenty five years. And if it cracked it open, then it would impact upon this country as well, so we need to make sure in the national interest that we have Britain’s voice in this debate. I put it to you perhaps the other way round. Let us suppose I earned some easy applause from many by saying I am going to rule everything out immediately. If I did that, and I then had no British voice in this great debate that will effect us, what would I say to the British nation when they said to me, Prime Minister, how can you protect or advance our British position if you have unilaterally ruled yourself out of the discussion upon something that will affect us and affect the whole of Europe. It is very easy to say make up your mind and do this, but it is not wise to make up your mind when you have your country’s interest to protect, and you are in a position to protect them and advance views that may be of importance of your country and to the rest of Europe. And let me say one other things about the Single Currency if I may. We will make our judgement when we have all that information. There are advantages in it. There are disadvantages in it. We will be cautious but we will look both at the advantages and the disadvantages. But we have made one thing clear. Beyond any doubt, and I would like to re-emphasise it for you – if, if a future Conservative Cabinet decided that it was right to enter into a Single Currency, if it decided that, then there would be a referendum of the full nation specifically upon that particular question. We have made it clear that we would not have consent wrapped up in a General Election victory. This decision is going to be the biggest political decision economically that has been taken in this country, perhaps at any time, if a British Cabinet decided to go ahead. A British Conservative Cabinet, decided to go ahead, then I think it is right for us to put that question distinctly, clearly and unequivocally for the British nation to decide and that I promise you, we would do.

    QUESTION:

    Sharon Messey, Bexley Heath and Crayford. Prime Minister, I understand your wish to await reports following the Dunblane massacre. My view is, guns should be kept for the armed forces, but should they be wanted to pleasure, then may I suggest to them only being held on licences premises. In a secure environment, i.e. a gun club. But Sir, you did not get where you are today by awaiting to hear what your opinion should be. I ask you, as a fellow parent, does your gut instinct not say to you, and I crudely quote, “my child’s right to live is far greater than any man’s right to hold a firearm”.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No one could be unaffected by what happened in Dunblane. We were asked before the party conference season to delay the report from Lord Cullen so that it could be examined dispassionately, and dispassionate decisions taken in the interests of children up and down the country, families and everybody else. And we agreed to delay it and we will receive that report at the moment Parliament returns at the beginning of next week. We’ll ask Lord Cullen to report. I have my own very clear views, but we have asked Lord Cullen to report. When Lord Cullen reports, we will make a clear cut and firm decision within a matter of days of receiving that report. But I do not wish to examine that at the moment. I think we have asked for the report. There are many complexities as to how we do things as well as to what is done, and I hope we will have wise advice from Lord Cullen at the beginning of next week, and we will act upon it very speedily. But I do not in a public forum like this, wish to delve into those questions until we have received the Cullen report. And then the Home Secretary and I will be both advocating and explaining precisely the action that we personally, both of us as parents as well, believe is right to be appropriate for the future of gun law in this country. There are only a few more days to wait. I would ask you to be patient.

    QUESTION:

    George Richie, Shrewsbury Constituency. Could I say that I am Chairman of a ward which twelve days ago regained a seat from Liberals. Can I also say we did a very full canvas, and what is absolutely clear is traditional Conservatives are coming back home. Now for the question. It actually has to do with the Single Currency, but an aspect which you, Sir, didn’t actually mention. It is a fact that British pension funds total more than all the pension funds added together in the European Union – the Germans, the French and the Italians – to mention but three. All their pensions are funded from tax. Now if we go into a Single Currency, inevitably there will be a single taxation system and equally inevitably we will have to start having to fund German unfunded pensions. Now if the debt of the German pension, pension debt, was included in the convergence criteria, they would have a debt of something like 140% of GDP. There was no way that they could hit the criteria which is why I suspect they have left them out. Now Sir, we need to smoke the Germans out on this one and it seems to me that one, it seems to me that a hot button could be “Single Currency; your pension in danger”.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well Brian, I was saying earlier we had better bring in one of those cynical journalists to find out if the questions were rigged. I think they would be pretty cynical to imagine they are now. I am delighted to hear about your win in your ward. I hope there are a lot of constituency chairman here who are going to take back Liberal held constituencies at the next General Election as well.

    You’re right about the build up of British pensions funds compared to the rest of Europe. Because of action taken by Conservative Governments many years ago, we have a better gross aggregate of pension funds to look after people’s future security in any other nation in Europe. Indeed, than all the other nations in Europe added together. And that is one of the reasons why over the next few years our economy will become increasingly competitive because it will not have the same extra burden to build up secure pensions in the future because we have laid the ground work for that over very many years. But if I may say so, you illustrate one of the reasons precisely, reasons like that, why the British Government need to be in the negotiations to make sure the convergence criteria are appropriate. If I were not in the discussions, how could I examine your point and raise it with our partners in Europe. And I could offer you fifty other examples like that.

    QUESTION:

    My name is Barbara Stroud, I come from Poole, and I am Chairman of the Dorset and East Devon European Union of Women. In my Conservative work in my area, I am now being more frequently asked, or people more frequently saying, you know, there is hardly any difference now between the Conservative and the Labour policies. But we know from the previous question or two that there is this great fundamental difference that the Conservatives want to the United Kingdom united and Labour want to tear it apart. This message is not getting through to constituents, to the electorate. Not at all. Now we can all go away from here with the strong message that we heard in the debate in the union yesterday. But much much more needs to be done. My question now, can we make this vital issue fundamental issue in the election campaign, and on you place all the resources at your disposal into getting this message to the electorate day and night from now to polling day?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I will tell you what will draw a distinction between our approach to the development of the nation states of Europe, and the Labour Party’s determination to bring policies they could not enact here back from Europe through the backdoor. I will tell you what will drive that distinction home to the people right across this nation. It would be if this party stopped conducting an internal debate with itself and began conducting a debate with the electorate and the Labour Party. And that I believe has happened. We’re not conducting an anti-European campaign. Let me make that perfectly clear. I am in favour of Europe, I am in favour of our membership of Europe. I wish to see that membership work and I wish to see Europe succeed. But my job is to take our ideas to Europe, not just hijack their ideas and bring them back here.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, Pierre Oxley, I am candidate for the Holland Haven district by-election next month. Prime Minister, what do you say to residents of that ward when Liberal and Labour run Essex county council cuts money off social services, whilst Conservative run Government increases money on such vital people in society?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well, I would say there is nothing unusual in that happening when you have Labour and Liberal councils. If you want to look at deprivation across a wide scale in this country, if you want to look at lack of opportunity and education in this country, go to the areas that are run and have been run for years by the Labour Party. The Labour Party tell us now they’ve got all sorts of wonderful ideas for education, but they control the education authorities. Why are they not putting them into practice if they really know what they wish to do, The Leader of the Labour Party says his priority is education, education, education. Well, ours is the same but perhaps in a different order. And I said it in ’91 so I am delighted he has caught up at last.

    But let me offer you a memory I have about education. It goes back a very long way. I went in the early ’80s, I can’t remember which year it was, so many events telescope together. On a brief tour of some countries in South America. I went to Peru, to Columbia and to Venezuela. I was just outside Peru, not one of the richest cities, one of the poorest cities of the world, menaced by a wicked terrorist group called Sendera Luminosa. And I went on the outskirts of that to a small school one morning. I was there, it was part of my visit. And it was adjacent to housing that really by any standards that we see in this country is truly appalling. Unbelievably poor circumstances for people to live. Just after eight o’clock in the morning, those front doors opened, and out of those front doors came a whole selection of moppets up to the age of ten or eleven. Nicely turned out. With satchels, not expensive ones, but satchels. Hair brushed, eyes bright, heading off to their school. And I stopped one of them and asked them what them what his ambition was. And he looked at me and said, I would like to be a brain surgeon. Can you imagine that, a boy from the slums of Lima, who had the soaring ambition to wish to be a brain surgeon. If you wish to know in a sentence what education is about, it is making it possible for boys or girls from whatever background to achieve that sort of superb ambition if they have the guts, the will power, the intellect and the effort to achieve it. That is what education is all about.

    QUESTION:

    Tom Wearing, Redditch. And may I say that Redditch Association is a loyal and united association. Can we have that on the record, BBC. My question, Prime Minister is this, if television advertising is effective, and there is little doubt that it is, why should television be less effective when in advertising gratuitous violence, pornography and permissiveness generally.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    When you’ve finished your question just then, sitting down here, and shyly hiding himself away on the front row is the Home Secretary. I have just a shrewd feeling that when you finished your question, that he agreed with you. And shall I let you into another secret? I agree with you too. And we do need to look at those extra definitions of pornography and other matters in order to protect our children. I think sometimes the judgements that are made are not right. They’re not easy judgements. We’re not a party of censorship and pray God, will never become one. So there are difficult judgements to be made. I don’t believe the judgements always are right. Neither does Michael. And we will take what you say to heart.

    QUESTION:

    Ann Priestly, leader of the Conservative Group on Wycombe District Council. Prime Minister, in spring many people in this hail will be standing as candidates in the elections for local government. I know that you realise from experience how important it is that we return as many Conservative Councillors as possible. Can we be reassured that as much as possible will be done to return those candidates so that we see a sea of blue on the map of local authorities.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Gosh, that’s a tricky one. Yes, of course. I come from Local Government and I know how important it is and I know also how deep the roots of the Conservative Party are sunk in local government as well. From local government has come over the last century or so some of the great figures of Conservative politics, and out there in local government at the moment are young people in it or going into it who will be the great figures of Conservative politics in the future. I want a sea of blue right across local government. Don’t let there be any doubt about that. But I will just say this one thing, since this is a party meeting, and since I can speak to you in the discretion of a private occasion, I would just say one thing for you to take back to your constituencies. I look very carefully at the local election results and I see results in unpromising areas like Hackney where the Conservatives have done spectacularly well and I make enquires and ask what has happened. And I have to say to you, if the Conservatives are out on the streets, knocking on the doors saying we are the Conservatives, this is what we stand for – we win. And if they’re wringing their hands saying well, we’re behind in the opinion polls, we’re very unpopular, then they don’t win. Within a very few months, we have a general election to win. I believe that we will win that general election. I believe we deserve to win that general election.

    Here in this hall today, is the heart and soul of the Conservative Party in the country. Doesn’t lie in cabinet or in Parliament. It is here. You are the movers and shakers who make the Conservative party what it is in the country. You are the people as resentful as I am at the slurs that have been cast at the Conservative party. You are the people that did not join the Conservative Party for fame and fortune, but because you believed in what we stand for. Because you believe in what we want to do. I want you to go back and get every single person in your constituencies out on the doorsteps, reminding people that we Conservatives are not a party apart, we are a part of the nation itself. We have been for 200 years and no party has served its country in Government for so long, so often, and in my judgement, so well, as the British Conservative Party.

    QUESTION:

    Mr Chairman, David Leal, Treasurer, Conservative Association, Hornchurch in Essex, and Chairman of one of its branches. My question to the Prime Minister; information is being let out from EEC, EU, EM, I don’t really know what they call themselves from day to day, that Europe is moving towards federal Europe. Can the Prime Minister tell me that if federal Europe becomes a reality, it will not be part of it?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There are people in the European Union who would move for a more integrationalist European Union, because they believe it, that is what they think is right. They have a different perception on the way in which Europe will develop from us, that is what the great debate in Europe is about. But I don’t have to say anything fresh about that today because I said it to the conference last year or the year before. If Europe go ahead with integration, sometimes called federalist integration, of a sort that is unacceptable to the British, then we will stand aside from that integration. That has been our stated position for a very long time and it hasn’t changed, and it isn’t going to change under a Conservative government.

    QUESTION:

    Peter Fleet, PPC for Southampton ltchen. Prime Minister, whether I am meeting dockers at our port, ship builders at Bosba Thornycroft, or line workers at our Ford plant, one theme is consistent. These working Tories want to pay less tax. Can you assure us that the budget in November won’t be a budget for Europe, but one for Britain?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Now tell me, hands up those who think I’m going to tell you what’s in the budget? I can tell you that we Tories are by instinct tax cutters. I can tell you that we believe money is better off in people’s pockets to make their own choices than in the Government’s pockets to make those choices for people. And I can tell you also that we are concerned to deliver right the way through the next Parliament the economic miracle that is emerging from those difficult years in the recession. We are now in a better economic position than we have been in this country since I can’t remember when. We are going to deal with that responsibly. That means if it is appropriate and prudent to cut taxes, our first instinct would be to cut taxes. But if it is not, if it would be imprudent, and would imperil the recovery that we have got, would imperil the falling unemployment that we’ve got, would imperil the low interest rates and low mortgages that we’ve got. Then we would not do so. We will make a judgement on what is right for the country, we will not make an imprudent budget judgement. But that we are tax cutters, all of us, every single member of the cabinet and the party is beyond doubt, it is one of our instincts because we believe that people’s money is best left in people’s pockets in the largest possible sums.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, I am Councillor Sally Wilkes, a member of Christchurch Borough Council and very proud to have won my seat last year, as a Conservative gain in a seat that has not been held by the Conservatives for more than ten years. My question to you Prime Minister, is when canvassing for the next general election, what can we tell our voters to assure them that this nation is safe in our hands.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    You have several hours? I said a moment ago that our economic circumstances were better than they had been for a long time. That opens up opportunities. I will not answer your question at length this morning, but I will answer your question in very great length indeed on Friday morning if I can invite you to be patient for just another forty eight hours or so. Because when one says safe in your hands, there are two elements to safe in yours hands. There is the domestic element, safe in terms of taxation, in terms of health, in terms of a fair and a good welfare system, in terms of making sure the money goes where it really should, in terms of a good police force, properly, effectively armed, armed forces. All these things are safe, safety on the streets. All those things are part of being safe domestically. There’s also the question of being safe internationally. I talked perhaps sufficiently enough this morning, as Malcolm did earlier, about the European Union, but there’s a wider world beyond that as well, in which Britain is a force of great significance. One of the great nations of NATO. A central pivot of the Commonwealth as well, one of the members of the Group of Seven, on the Security Council of the United Nations. That is, that element of the Nation also has to be safe. There is one difference you know between a British Prime Minister today, and a British Prime Minister of many years ago. For example, William Pitt when he was Prime Minister never moved more than 40 miles away from Downing Street in all the years that he was there. I must have visited 60 countries over the past six years, and I could probably pick up the phone and speak directly and personally to forty or fifty Heads of State around the world because we have met on more than one occasion. We know one another. That helps in its own way to make the world safe and to make it secure. It is very different. And that is true of the changing face of the world. We have seen the unbelievable changes that have been for example in what was the Soviet Union, the collapse of the complete empire, and an embryonic democratic state gradually beginning to emerge. And how I hope that Boris Yeltsin soon successfully has his operation and is fit and can go back to running that country.

    Now you may remember that he was my guest at Chequers with Naina Yeltsin. Norma and I had them at Chequers for the weekend about a year or so ago, and we had our talks on the Friday morning. And I said to Boris, well, we’ve finished some discussions, shall we go out for a walk. And Boris thought this was a very good idea. And he went upstairs and he changed into a blue and white tracksuit and trainers, and I slipped into a rather fetching Val Doonican sweater. And we went out for a walk. Just the two of us, with Norma and Naina, two ambassadors, about 40 security guards, large number of civil servants, for a private walk through the Chequers grounds surrounded only by the birds, the trees, the grass and four or five hundred photographers. It was a very instructive walk. Chequers, the grounds at Chequers, are lovely. And much of it is very hilly. We went over one hill, Boris and I, and there was a lady walking her dog up the hill, because part of it is public ground, and she suddenly looked up, and over the brow of the hill came the President of Russia in a blue and white tracksuit and the Prime Minister in a Val Doonican sweater. And she was undeterred. Magnificent. She swept through us saying “Good Morning Prime Minister, Good Morning Mr President”, and left us in her wake as she walked straight through. And Boris Yeltsin said, “Now I know why we won the war”. And we went on. And I said to “Boris, well, we’ve had a long walk. We’re got three choices; we can take the long walk back to Chequers, we can go down to the little village down there and we can get the cars back, or we could, you and I Boris, go and have a lemonade in the Bernard Arms.” And at this stage, the West Security Forces learnt that the President of Russia could speak English. “The Bernard Arms!” said Boris, “The Bernard Arms!” And we got there. And there were cars parked all outside, but the Bernard Arms was shut; the cars belonged to all the photographers still hanging in the trees! They were staying there. And the Bernard Arms was shut! This was something of a blow. And one of President Yeltsin’s interpreters went up to the door and went [knock, knock] “open up!” It’s the President of Russia”. And a voice came back “This is the Kaiser!”. Now you know why I want him to get well!

    QUESTION:

    Sylvia Tidy, Chairman of the South East Area and Countryside Forum, and a member of Wealden Constituency. Prime Minister, there are a group of farmers in this country that are suffering the most severe hardship they are known for decades. Can you please do your best to see that we get the ban lifted in Europe because our beef and our food is the best and the safest in the Community.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I had a meeting yesterday for around about an hour with Sir David Naish, the President of the NFU, and representatives of farmers who had come for the demonstration yesterday. And I understand the concerns that they feel. Through something that is not within their control, and decision that are collectively being taken abroad. They are concerned about their future and their livelihood. And the British Government is very sensitive to the concerned of the British agriculture industry and very sensitive to see what we can do to help the dairy industry and the beef industry. And we entered into discussion.

    We’ve thus far committed in order to help the industry something in the region of £2,500 million and you heard Douglas Hogg make some more commitments just the other day. But it isn’t just the money. What we need to do is to try and persuade people across Europe and across the world – not the Commission, [indistinct] who have been better friends of the British farmers than the nation states, but the nation states that British beef is safe. I believe it to be safe. Our scientists believe it to be safe. But a panic has been created and it is very difficult to persuade other people of that. And new evidence has emerged in the last couple of months or so which is very material. The first was the report by Professor Anderson and others that BSE is actually dying out of the British herds faster than we thought, as a result of action that we took in 1988/1989, around about that time. And secondly, that the question of genetic inheritance of BSE may not be as straightforward as people thought. A few weeks ago there was a lot of publicity that calves could inherit BSE, from the cow. Now there is considerable doubt about that. What it looks as though it might be, although this is not yet certain, the scientist are still looking at it.

    Uncertain science has bedevilled this matter from the outset. What it now looks as though it is, is that what can be inherited is a genetic tendency to catch BSE if, if the calf is fed contaminated feed. And there is no contaminated feed. It has now been taken completely away. So these are two new ingredients in the debate. And I am sorry that is not 90 at 30 seconds, but this is a matter of crucial importance to the agricultural industry. Desperate worry to the farmers and the most difficult problem, I believe, that any British Government has had to face and seek to solve for very many years. My heart and my sympathy is with the farmers. A large part of tax payers support is with the farmers because when we have come through this, I am determined of one thing above all, that we will have a viable beef and a viable dairy industry in each and every component part of the United Kingdom. However we do it, that is a guarantee the farmers can rely upon.

  • Conservative Party Manifesto – 9 April 1992

    Below is the text of the 1992 Conservative Party Manifesto issued in March 1992.

    Conservative Party 1992 – The Best Future for Britain

    FOREWORD

    At the end of this Parliament a new Millennium will be in view. We must raise our sights high. This Manifesto is about making our country respected and secure, and helping you achieve a better; safer and more prosperous future. For I believe – strongly – that you, and not the Government, should be in charge of your life. That’s what Conservatism stands for. That principle underlies all the policies in this Manifesto.

    I believe in a responsible society Government’s duties are clear: to protect Britain in a dangerous world; to look after those who cannot look after themselves; to protect law-abiding people from crime and disorder; and to protect the value of our currency – without which all spending pledges are worthless and all savings at risk.

    But I believe also in a society in which government doesn’t try to take responsibility away from people. Politicians must never make the mistake of thinking the state always knows best, or that it is entitled to the lion’s share of people’s money I believe in low taxes not just because they ignite enterprise – the spark of economic growth – but because they put power and choice where it belongs: in your hands.

    So when you compare what the politicians are saying in this election, ask yourself these questions. Whom do you trust to take responsibility for Britain’s defence; to keep us safe and strengthen our influence for good? And who, at the same time, wants to give you the opportunity to do your best for yourself and your family?

    Who will give you the power to choose – to say for yourself what you want? And who will give you the personal prosperity that comes from low taxes – from your own savings, your own pension, your own home? Who will let you build up your own stake in Britain’s success – and pass it on to your children?

    Only Conservatives can truly claim to be the party of opportunity; choice; ownership and responsibility. Socialists like to keep people under the government’s thumb. Conservatives want to give them independence. But we also want to put government at your service, giving you what you’ve paid for – good public services, responsible to you.

    I do not believe the answer to every problem is simply for government to dig deeper in your pocket. I believe it often lies in changing the way government works; in making it respond to you. Government should look outwards. It should listen. It should put you in the know not keep you in the dark.

    We have made quite a start, under the seal of the Citizen’s Charter People in schools, hospitals, public offices of all kinds are rising to the challenge. I knew they would. They just needed encouragement, incentive and a system that is outward-looking too.

    It is all part of a revolution in quality in Britain. British goods are once more winning in the toughest markets abroad. There is new vigour in the businesses liberated from state ownership; better management and better industrial relations. These are the firm foundations of economic recovery

    We are raising the quality of our education and training. We are raising the standard of our housing, as more people own and improve their own homes. We are concerned for the quality of our environment. And in government, we are leading a drive for quality throughout our public services.

    That, I believe, is the way we all want to live – a decent life in a civilised community. That is the way we can live: celebrating our achievements, not nurturing old grudges; enjoying our successes, not talking Britain down. We can be free of old prejudices and class bafflers. We can encourage diversity, not division; achievement, not antagonism. We can all make our own contribution to the success of the United Kingdom; and we must keep that kingdom united.

    You know I believe in choice. And in this election, as always, there is another choice. You can vote for our opponents, and watch them take Britain back to the 1970s. Back to socialism. Back to strikes. Back to strife. Back to the world’s pity, or worse still, contempt. I don’t believe Britain wants that. I know the world doesn’t want that for Britain.

    I hope you will choose a different path – to go forward, not back; to go for the best, knowing that Britain can be the best and do it best. My belief is clear. Only the best is good enough for Britain.

    John Major

     

    CONTENTS:

    TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR BRITAIN

    The need for leadership

    Our influence for good

    The risks we face now

    Our armed forces

    The European Community

    WEALTH AND OWNERSHIP

    Britain’s opportunity

    Inflation and Europe

    The route to lower taxes

    The right to own

    Setting the economy free

    Privatisation

    Energy

    Science and innovation

    Regional policies and small businesses

    Consumer affairs

    CHOICE AND THE CHARTER

    The Citizen’s Charter

    The Post Office

    Whitehall & Westminster

    OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL

    Schools, pupils & parents

    Teaching

    After 16

    Higher education

    The training revolution

    Workers and unions

    Women and opportunity

    FREEDOM UNDER LAW

    Police and the community

    Protectors and victims

    Penalties and prevention

    Reforming our prisons

    Our legal system

    Pornography, privacy, libel

    Community relations

    Immigration and refugees

    The danger of drugs

    The threat of terrorism

    RESPONSIBILITY FOR OTHERS

    The NHS – present and future

    Care services

    Children

    Social security

    Disabled people

    The voluntary sector

    Animal welfare

    A BRIGHTER BRITAIN

    Homes and housing

    Transport

    Local government

    Cities

    London

    The countryside

    Farming, forestry and fishing

    The environment

    TOWARDS THE MILLENNIUM

    Millennium Fund

    Arts

    Sport

    Our heritage

    Broadcasting

    A UNITED KINGDOM

    The Union

    Scotland

    Wales

    Northern Ireland

    YOUR CHOICE AT THIS ELECTION

    TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR BRITAIN

     

    The world has been transformed in recent years. Communism has collapsed in Eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union has fallen apart. Everywhere Socialism is in retreat and democracy, human rights and market economics are advancing. The authority of the UN has been bolstered and Iraqi aggression seen off. Talks are under way in the Middle East and South Africa. It is a time of great opportunity, but also of new dangers.

    Britain needs firm leadership at this time. We must be represented by a team of quality and experience. A team which can help shape the world for the next century A Conservative team.

    Under the Conservatives, Britain has regained her rightful influence in the world. We have stood up for the values our country has always represented. We have defended Britain’s interests with vigour and with success.

    The respect with which Britain is regarded in the world has rarely been higher. We play a central part in world affairs as a member of the European Community, NATO, the Commonwealth and the Group of 7 leading industrial countries, and as a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council. No other country holds all these positions.

    We are taking a leading role in recasting all the main international institutions to which we belong: the United Nations, the European Community, NATO, and the Commonwealth. The Prime Minister convened the first ever meeting of the UN Security Council at Heads of Government level. Between now and the end of 1992 there will be seven Summits where issues of critical importance to our future will be determined: two EC Councils, at Lisbon and Edinburgh, the G7 Summit, the CSCE Summit, EC Summits with the US and Japan, and the Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro. Britain will be at the centre of these negotiations.

    THE NEED FOR LEADERSHIP

    The end of the Cold War has enabled the UN to act with new unity and authority Under the authority of the UN, British forces played a leading and courageous part in the Gulf War and the liberation of Kuwait. At the Prime Minister’s instigation, the UN also backed the operation to protect the Kurds.

    Britain has led the world in helping the reforms in the former Soviet Union. The Prime Minister gave full and immediate support to President Yeltsin in the August coup attempt, and was the first Western leader to visit Moscow after the coup failed. Britain has led the way in building up relations with the republics of the new Commonwealth of Independent States. We have provided valuable economic and humanitarian aid to ease the transition to a market economy

    We will support an enhanced role for the UN in peace-keeping and combating state-sponsored terrorism.

    We are determined that Iraq should comply with the terms of the Gulf War cease-fire agreement, and in particular that it should co-operate with the UN in dismantling its weapons of mass destruction.

    We support early Russian membership of the IMF and World Bank, as well as a stabilisation fund for the rouble.

    We are co-operating with our partners to provide urgent help to the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to upgrade the safety of their nuclear power stations.

    We strongly support the peace process in the Middle East. The outcome of the talks must safeguard the security of Israel and achieve self-determination for the people of the occupied territories.

    We will safeguard the prosperity of Hong Kong, nurture democratic institutions and work with the Chinese Government within the terms of the Joint Declaration.

    We seek a solution to the dispute which has divided Cyprus since 1974. A settlement must recognise that Cyprus is indivisible and that the rights of both communities must be assured. We will support the UN’s efforts to secure a fair and lasting solution.

    The problems of Kashmir cannot be resolved by violence. We urge both India and Pakistan to address and resolve the issue, and we stand ready to help.

    OUR INFLUENCE FOR GOOD

    All over the world countries are turning to democracy and free markets. Last October in Harare, the Commonwealth took on a new role as a promoter of democracy the rule of law, and respect for individual freedoms. Already the Commonwealth is monitoring elections to ensure that they are free and fair. Britain is taking the lead in encouraging these trends.

    We give substantial aid to the relief of poverty and to help the struggling economies of the developing world. Our aid programme next year (excluding aid to Eastern Europe and the CIS) will reach £1,800 million. Britain also makes more direct private investment in the developing world than any other EC country – some £2,400 million in 1989. We are urging the international community to take decisive action on debt relief, the liberalisation of world trade and support for good government.

    We continue to accept the long term UN target for aid of 0.7 per cent of GNP, although we cannot set a timetable for its achievement. The quality of Britain’s overseas aid programme is second to none. It is well targeted and highly effective. Eighty per cent of our bilateral aid goes to the poorest countries. New aid to the poorest is given as grants, not loans.

    We are supporting projects designed to build efficient institutions and accountable government. We are helping to improve public administration and the legal system in a number of countries.

    The English language is one of our nation’s greatest assets – culturally politically and commercially The BBC World Service has unrivalled standing around the globe. The British Council acts as a cultural ambassador for Britain and for the English language.

    We will use overseas aid to promote good government, sensible economic policies, the rooting out of corruption, and – crucially – respect for human rights and the rule of law.

    We will press creditor countries to accept the Prime Minister’s proposal – the ‘Trinidad Terms’ – for a two-thirds reduction in the official debt of the poorest countries.

    We will promote the development of multi-party systems through the new Westminster Foundation for Democracy.

    We will promote the English language by strengthening both the British Council and the BBC World Service. We will encourage both to become more entrepreneurial in order to finance their activities in developing markets.

    THE RISKS WE FACE NOW

    The collapse of the old Soviet Union has dramatically vindicated Conservative defence policy. We have always put the security of our country first. We have kept the peace by staying strong.

    Today the threat of a massive surprise attack from Eastern Europe has gone. But we still face grave risks to our security. We cannot drop our guard. Under the Conservatives, Britain will never do so.

    Within the former Soviet Union there remains a huge military force. Democracy and the rule of law are yet to be firmly established. Control over these armed forces and the massive nuclear capability is uncertain. The events in Yugoslavia show what can happen when Communism collapses in disorder.

    Increasingly threats come from outside Europe – as we saw so clearly in the Gulf. Many more countries are acquiring large stocks of modern arms. Some are trying to obtain nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. Britain must be able to respond to any unexpected danger.

    The Conservatives are the only party who recognise both the opportunities and the threats of the new world.

    For over forty years, our security has been based firmly on NATO, the most successful defensive alliance ever. We will work with our allies to ensure that NATO remains the cornerstone of our defence. Britain will command a new NATO Rapid Reaction Corps ready to deploy quickly to counter any sudden threat. As Europeans we must accept a greater role in safeguarding the peace in our continent.

    We will promote arms control and reduction initiatives. On Britain’s initiative, the UN is establishing a register of arms transfers in order to monitor any dangerous arsenals of weapons.

    Britain has always been strongly opposed to nuclear proliferation. We will back an enhanced role for the International Atomic Energy Agency in inspecting nuclear sites and for the UN Security Council in acting against those nations which break their non proliferation obligations.

    We will work to strengthen the Western European Union as the European pillar of NATO. We will press for a European reaction force.

    We will intensify the co-ordination of security policies within the Twelve.

    We will work through the CSCE to safeguard the security of Europe.

    We will support a comprehensive and verifiable ban on chemical weapons, and further controls on the export of items which could be used in making biological weapons.

    We will help Russia in her efforts to dismantle nuclear weapons.

    OUR ARMED FORCES

    Only the Conservatives can be trusted to maintain the quality and capability of our Armed Forces. We are proud of the skill, courage and professionalism which they displayed in the Gulf and which they show daily in Northern Ireland.

    We are the only party unambiguously committed to the preservation and modernisation of our independent nuclear deterrent.

    Our defence would be unsafe in the hands of the opposition parties. Labour have opposed our defence policies at every turn. They have twisted and turned in their attitude to our nuclear deterrent. They would devastate our conventional forces by cuts of at least 27 per cent, which would lead to huge job losses in the defence industries.

    The Liberal Democrats would cause even more damage to Britain’s defences. Their aim is to cut our defence spending by half by the end of the decade.

    We insist that our forces have the modern, effective equipment that they need. The Gulf War showed that the Services must have the latest technology to give them maximum flexibility and mobility. That is why we have ordered the new Challenger II tank for the Army, the Merlin helicopter for the Navy, the ASRAAM air defence missile for the RAF and a wide range of other new equipment for our Forces.

    Our reappraisal of Britain’s defence needs will result in a major restructuring of our Armed Forces to take account of the changing world situation. In future our Forces will be smaller, but better equipped. Our Services deserve the excellent pay and conditions which we have secured for them and will maintain.

    We will complete the deployment of the next generation of Britain’s minimum nuclear deterrent. We will order and complete the fourth Trident submarine.

    We will ensure the Forces have the best and most modern equipment.

    We will improve the quality and management of service housing and help those in the Forces save towards buying a home of their own.

    The Reserves will play an even more important role and we will introduce legislation to allow their more flexible use.

    THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY

    The Conservatives have been the party of Britain in Europe for 30 years. We have argued when argument was necessary; but we have not wavered nor changed our views. We have ensured that Britain is at the heart of Europe; a strong and respected partner.

    We have played a decisive part in the development of the Community over the past decade. It was a British initiative which launched the Single Market programme and our insistence which reformed the Community’s finances. Britain has promoted co-operation on foreign policy and in combating terrorism. Britain has also persuaded our partners to welcome new countries who apply for Community membership.

    The Maastricht Treaty was a success both for Britain and for the rest of Europe. British proposals helped to shape the key provisions of the Treaty including those strengthening the enforcement of Community law defence, subsidiarity and law and order. But Britain refused to accept the damaging Social Chapter proposed by other Europeans, and it was excluded from the Maastricht treaty

    All Member States must live up to their obligations under Community law. At Maastricht, we secured agreement that the European Court will be able to fine any Member State which fails to do so.

    We will work closely with our partners in foreign policy and in the war on international crime.

    We will continue to resist changes to the Treaty of Rome that would damage British business.

    We will resist Commission initiatives which run counter to the principle that issues should be dealt with on a national basis wherever possible.

    Britain is a great trading nation. We prosper through the maintenance of an open trading system. We will work for a successful outcome to the GATT negotiations.

    We will redouble our efforts to reform the Common Agricultural Policy and will stoutly defend the interests of British farmers and consumers.

    We will insist on more effective control over Community spending and will resist pressure to extend Community competence to new areas.

    We will work to strengthen the external frontiers of the Community whilst maintaining the checks needed at our own borders against illegal immigration, drugs, terrorism and disease.

    THE BRITISH PRESIDENCY

    In the second half of 1992 Britain will take the Chair of the Council of Ministers. The British Presidency comes at a turning point in the Community’s history. It gives us the opportunity to shape the direction of the Community and to establish its priorities. We shall use it to promote our vision of an outward looking Community based on free enterprise.

    Our Presidency will reach its climax at the Edinburgh meeting of the European Council, which we will hold in the historic palace of Holyrood House. While the attention of Europe is focused on Edinburgh, the strength of our Union will be visible to all.

    Our priorities will be:

    To start negotiations with those EFTA countries who want to join the Community so that they can join by 1995.

    To build on the EC’s Association Agreements with Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland so that we can welcome them to full membership by the year 2000.

    To conclude EC trade and co-operation agreements with the main republics of the former Soviet Union.

    To complete the single market and extend it to the seven countries of EFTA. Over half our trade is with the rest of the Community. The single market will create an open market of 350 million customers for British goods and services. To complete the single market we shall aim to:

    open up the market for life insurance to free competition;

    liberalise air travel to bring down air fares in Europe closer to those in America;

    free up the shipping and road transport markets so that British operators can carry freely within the EC;

    increase competition in the European energy sector.

    We will provide guidance and help to any British company encountering a trade barrier illegal under European law.

    We will press for progress on the environment, including the Fifth Environment Action Programme.

    We will chair the negotiations on the future spending priorities of the Community to ensure value for money. We will safeguard the abatement negotiated by Mrs Thatcher which has so far brought some £12,000 million in budget rebates to Britain.

    WEALTH AND OWNERSHIP

    The 1990s present a great economic opportunity for Britain. We have got the scourge of inflation under control. We have cut direct tax rates. And a stable currency gives industry a chance to realise the potential released by the reforms of the 1980s.

    We have extended ownership more widely – of homes, savings and shares – with millions more sharing directly in Britain’s success. We will promote enterprise through low taxes, sound money and a stable currency.

    When the Exchange Rate Mechanism was being created, during the final days of the last Labour Government, the then Prime Minister decided Britain could not take part.

    It was easy to see why the economy was too weak. Inflation was too high. In 1974-79, the inflation rate averaged over 15 per cent. It peaked at 27 per cent. Public borrowing rose to nearly 10 per cent of national income – equivalent to £55,000 million today. Penal taxes blunted enterprise. Britain was a byword for strikes.

    The Conservatives have changed all that. Since 1979, our inflation rate has averaged 7½ per cent. Now it is only just over 4 per cent – below the average for the European Community In the 1960s and 1970s, Britain had the slowest growth rate in the European Community. But in the 1980s, we grew faster than either France or Germany Industrial disputes became rare events. And in 1990, a Conservative Government joined the ERM.

    Penal taxes have been abolished. A man on average earnings, with a wife and two children, has an income today which after tax and inflation is 39 per cent higher than it was in Labour’s last year. That great advance in the standard of living is at risk in this election.

    Since the war, living standards have always risen faster under Conservative Governments than under Labour. Now we are pledged to cut tax rates again – and have made a start on the road to 20p Income Tax.

    Corporate tax rates have been cut, too. Our business investment has increased more rapidly than in any other major economy except Japan. Britain attracts by far the biggest share of Japanese and American investment in Europe. That, too, is at risk in this election.

    BRITAIN’S OPPORTUNITY

    We are now members of:

    The biggest free market in the world. British industry is again respected in Europe.

    A zone of low inflation, in which we can compete with the best.

    Britain must not throw this opportunity away by electing a Labour government. The world recession has been tough for all of us, at home and abroad. Unemployment has risen. But in Britain we have laid the foundations for recovery What is needed to trigger confidence and growth is a Conservative victory with a decisive majority. What would postpone recovery, and turn this promise of growth into the certainty of hard times, is the election of our opponents whose policies would mean higher taxes, higher inflation, higher interest rates, more bureaucratic regulation and more strikes.

    In the 1990s, the Government’s task will be to provide an economic environment which encourages enterprise – the mainspring of prosperity. Our aims must be:

    To achieve price stability.

    To keep firm control over public spending.

    To continue to reduce taxes as fast as we prudently can.

    To make sure that market mechanisms and incentives are allowed to do their job.

    Price stability does not mean a frozen economy in which no price ever moves. But we must drive inflation down so low that it no longer affects the decisions made by ordinary people, businesses and government.

    When inflation rises, so do bankruptcies. When inflation falls, industry can plan again for a profitable future. Inflation creates strife, as different groups in society struggle to restore their living standards. It destroys jobs. It erodes savings and social benefits and threatens our currency.

    INFLATION AND EUROPE

    Membership of the ERM is now central to our counter-inflation discipline. But the ERM is not a magic wand. It would not protect Labour; it would merely expose the folly of Labour policies. Some Labour politicians know that all too well – others simply don’t. They – and some of the unions – would put irresistible spending pressure on a Labour government.

    Some members of the European Community are anxious to hurry on from the ERM to Economic and Monetary Union. Others have doubts. Quite apart from the constitutional issues, they do not want to take risks with what is being achieved in the ERM.

    The Treaty negotiated at Maastricht laid down the process under which the Community can, if its members meet certain economic conditions, create a monetary union with a single currency for some or all of them. Together with Germany we fought for tough criteria. We believe a monetary union would collapse, with damaging consequences, if it were imposed on economies that were too diverse.

    A union will only come about by 1997 if a substantial majority of Community members agree it should. It would only include those members who were judged to have met specified conditions. And it would only come about if a majority of members were judged to have done so.

    But the Treaty goes on to say that monetary union will come about automatically in 1999, for all who meet the conditions. We did not want to exclude ourselves from membership; but we could not accept such an automatic commitment. By the end of this decade the EC’s membership will have changed; the economic performance of man of its members may have changed. We cannot tell who the members of such a union might be.

    We therefore secured the freedom to make a proper judgement on events. We are as free to join if we wish as any other member. We would have to meet the same conditions – no more, no less. We will play our full part in the discussions of the monetary institutions Europe may create in the 1990s. But we are not obliged to join in a single currency if we do not want to.

    In due course, we will move to the narrow bands of the ERM.

    We will play our full part in the design and discussion of monetary institutions for Europe.

    When or if other members of the EC move to a monetary union with a single currency, we will take our own unfettered decision on whether to join. That decision will be taken by the United Kingdom Parliament.

    THE ROUTE TO LOWER TAXES

    Economic growth is created by people’s hard work, ingenuity thrift and willingness to take risks. An enterprise economy rewards the industrious and thrifty We believe that government should not gobble up all the proceeds of growth, and that those who create prosperity should enjoy it, through lower taxes and more opportunity to build up personal wealth.

    Our policy is therefore to reduce the share of national income taken by the public sector. In the mid-1970s, public spending peaked at over 49 per cent of our gross national product. In the early 1980s, it peaked at over 47 per cent. In this recession, it is peaking at only 43 per cent. We aim to reduce this steadily as the recovery gets under way

    Keeping control of public spending will enable us to cut taxes while bringing the Government’s Budget back towards balance in the years ahead. Excessive government borrowing can lead to inflation. Government should always be on guard against that danger. However, when demand in the economy is weak, public borrowing will tend to rise.

    Because companies pay taxes according to how well they did the previous year, the deficit tends to be deepest just as we come out of recession. We must make sure that as the economy grows, borrowing slows.

    By bringing tax and spending decisions together in a unified Budget from next year, we will make the choices clearer. But lower taxes and a prudent approach to borrowing do not mean public spending must fall; quite the reverse. A lightly-taxed economy generates more economic growth, and more revenue. High taxes kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. In the course of its last five years in office, Labour was forced to cut public spending, in real terms. By contrast, the Conservatives have been able to raise public spending by nearly a quarter in real terms.

    Higher tax rates do not always bring in more money In practice, they can bring in less. The Conservative Government has more than halved the top rate of tax. Yet top rate taxpayers today provide a bigger share of our tax revenues than they did before. Lower taxes have encouraged more people to work harder – not to spend their time working out how to avoid penal taxes.

    During the past 13 years we have cut, simplified or abolished a whole range of direct taxes.

    We have cut the basic rate of Income Tax from 33p to 25p, and the top rate from 83p to 40p.

    We have now announced a new starting Income Tax rate of 20p.

    We have raised the basic single person’s tax allowance by 27 per cent more than would be needed to keep pace with inflation.

    We have simplified and reduced the burden of taxation on capital.

    We have cut Corporation Tax from 52 per cent to 33 per cent (and from 42 per cent to 25 per cent for small companies).

    We have reduced the burden of National Insurance on low earners.

    We have introduced independent taxation of husbands and wives, giving married women full eligibility for tax allowances.

    We have introduced new tax incentives for savings.

    We have abolished several taxes completely including the surcharge on income from savings, the National Insurance Surcharge, Development Land Tax, and Capital Transfer Tax.

    We are the only party that understands the need for low taxation. Labour and the Liberals openly advocate increased taxation. Yet lower taxes clearly create a more productive economy They also achieve another prime objective of Conservative Governments, which is to transfer power from the state to the people.

    Labour would:

    Reverse our cut in the starting rate of Income Tax to 20p.

    Raise the top rate.

    Abolish the National Insurance ceiling.

    Introduce a new savings surcharge.

    We announced in the Budget an important first step towards a basic Income Tax rate of 20p. By applying a 20p rate to the first £2,000 of taxable income, we have cut taxes for all 25 million taxpayers, and taken the four million on lowest incomes out of 25p tax altogether.

    We will make further progress towards a basic Income Tax rate of 20p.

    We will reduce the share of national income taken by the public sector. We will see the budget return towards balance as the economy recovers.

    THE RIGHT TO OWN

    Since 1979, wealth has been spread more widely through the community Home ownership, share ownership and the build-up of personal pensions have all contributed. Over two-thirds of people live in homes that they own, 10 million people own shares, 6 million of them in newly-privatised industries. About 2.5 million have benefited from tax incentives to encourage employee share schemes. And over 4½ million people are now building up their own personal pensions.

    But these freedoms are at risk.

    Labour would:

    Halt the privatisation programme and threaten the value of shares in privatised industries with renationalisation and new Government controls.

    Bring back credit rationing, leading to mortgage queues.

    Turn the pensions market on its head, making pension provision costly and difficult.

    These changes would drive savings overseas and make wealth again the prerogative of the few.

    By contrast, we want to do more to encourage the wider distribution of wealth throughout society. Sustaining not just a home-owning but a capital owning democracy is crucial to our vision for the 1990s. We intend to spread the ownership of shares, homes, pensions and savings. We will do so through future privatisations, help for would-be home owners in council tenancies and further encouragement for the spread of personal pensions. We intend to lighten the burden of capital taxes and reform the taxation of savings.

    We believe Inheritance Tax is particularly inequitable. It falls only on those who do not dispose of their assets seven years or more before their death. It is inevitably the case that these tend to be people who are not rich enough to engage in high-powered tax planning, or who, for lack of knowledge or advice, fail to take the necessary precautionary action. In the Budget, we announced that we would take most family businesses out of Inheritance Tax altogether. During the new Parliament, we will aim to lessen the burden on families to whom home ownership has brought the threat of this erratic tax.

    As detailed later in this Manifesto, we will aim to bring home ownership, share ownership and personal pensions within the reach of more families.

    We will continue to reform the taxation of savings, building on the success of PEPs and TESSAs.

    We will raise the tax threshold for Inheritance Tax so that the homes and savings of an increasing number of our citizens can pass unencumbered from one generation to another.

    Whenever possible, we will ensure that future privatisations offer opportunities to employees to secure a stake in the ownership of their business.

    We will encourage companies to make dealing in their own shares easier, especially for small shareholders, and encourage wider share ownership, through, for example, the establishment of ‘Share Shops’.

    We will abolish Stamp Duty on share transactions.

    SETTING THE ECONOMY FREE

    Starting with the abolition of exchange controls in 1979, the Government has created new incentives for every part of our economy.

    Manufacturing industry suffered particularly badly from the harm inflicted on the British economy by Labour Governments in the 1960s and 1970s. To a far greater extent than service industries, it was the victim of militant trades unionism, restrictive practices, nationalisation, state intervention, tax distortion, planning controls and over-regulation.

    We believe strongly that a vigorous manufacturing sector is essential to a healthy British economy Over the past 13 years, we have steadily dismantled barriers to its growth.

    The competitiveness and performance of British manufacturing have been transformed. Its impressive recovery was recognised by the Confederation of British Industry, in its report aptly titled Competing with the World’s Best’. Manufacturing productivity has risen by more than half since 1979 – faster than in any other major industrial country. Over the past 10 years, British manufactured exports have grown faster than those of France, Germany the United States or even Japan.

    The British motor industry has achieved an astonishing revival. By 1996, Britain should again be exporting more cars than we import – for the first time since 1974. We have given the industry yet more encouragement in the Budget, by halving the special tax paid on new cars.

    The British Standard for Quality management has effectively become the international standard. But that is only the beginning. We have set up a team of senior business people to pursue the idea of a new British Quality Award.

    The City is Europe’s greatest financial centre. It contributes £11,000 million net to our balance of payments. Financial services employ 12 per cent of our workforce. London’s capital markets and financial services have grown vigorously because they are innovative and highly competitive. We will continue our efforts to break down the barriers that prevent them from competing freely throughout Europe and in the wider world.

    The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is now based in London. It puts us in the forefront of encouraging investment in the developing markets of Central and Eastern Europe.

    Service industries make a vital contribution to our economy and to our balance of payments. Tourism, for example, today employs 1.5 million people, 20% more than in 1980. It is an industry which boasts many famous companies – but it is also driven by the dynamism of many small firms. We will continue to help them by simplifying rules and regulations on business and through the DTI Enterprise Initiative and a range of other schemes.

    We will continue to reduce tax burdens on business, as we have done this year for the motor industry, whenever it is possible to do so.

    We will abolish unnecessary licences and reduce the need for specific approvals for product design.

    We will back British companies encountering any discrimination, trade barriers or state subsidies that should no longer exist within the Single Market.

    We will back the regulators of the financial services industry in their efforts to achieve high standards while keeping the rule books down to manageable size.

    PRIVATISATION

    Competition and private ownership are the most powerful engines of economic efficiency, innovation and choice. They lead to the creation of world-class companies.

    We have returned to private enterprise two-thirds of the companies once owned by the state: 46 businesses employing about 900,000 people. This programme has been the model for governments across the whole world.

    The work of liberalising markets which were once monopolised goes on. In 1984 we privatised British Telecom but only Mercury was given a licence to carry services over fixed links. In 1991 we decided to end this duopoly. The UK now has one of the most open and dynamic telecommunications markets in the world.

    But much greater economic efficiency is not the only gain. Employees have been able to take a direct stake in the newly privatised companies. Millions of people have been given the same chance to own a real share in the nation’s assets. Companies which looked inwards to Whitehall are now listening to their customers and shareholders.

    Some activities of government must always be provided in the public sector. But in central government, Next Steps Agencies and local government, management is increasingly buying-in services from the private sector. Our proposals for developing this policy have been set out in the White Papers on ‘Competing for Quality’ in central and local government.

    We will continue our privatisation programme. British Coal will be returned to the private sector. So will local authority bus companies. We will encourage local authorities to sell their airports. We will end British Rail’s monopoly. We will sell certain rail services and franchise others. These proposals are set out later in this Manifesto.

    The Ports Act 1991 has paved the way for the privatisation of the Trust Ports by competitive tender. Tees and Hartlepool, Tilbury, Medway, Forth and Clyde have already been privatised.

    We are privatising Northern Ireland Electricity and will privatise the Northern Ireland water and sewage services. We will look for ways of bringing private sector skills into the management of Northern Ireland Railways.

    We will bring private sector enterprise into the public services by encouraging contracting out and competitive tendering throughout government.

    We will require all government departments to report annually on their plans for market-testing, and progress in achieving it, in their own services and in those of their associated agencies.

    We will maintain our programme of compulsory competitive tendering of local authority services. We will ensure that unfair terms are excluded and will discourage investment to protect in-house services when better, more cost effective services are available through the private sector.

    We will ensure that competitive tendering is extended to white collar local authority services, such as those offered by lawyers, accountants, architects and surveyors.

    We will tackle all anti-competitive and restrictive practices with vigour. We will introduce new legislation giving stronger powers to deal with cartels.

    DEREGULATION

    We are concerned that at every level of government – in Europe, in Whitehall and in local authorities – some regulations may have been adopted in answer to legitimate concerns, but without proper regard to their overall impact on businesses and individuals. A proper balance needs to be struck between essential protection for the public, and over-zealous and intrusive controls aimed at the elimination of all conceivable risk. It is wrong that new regulations, designed to deal with isolated problems, should interfere with the private arrangements of citizens or with reasonable commercial practices that have earned broad public acceptance.

    The compliance costs of new UK and EC regulations must be assessed properly. Existing regulations which are outmoded and burdensome must be simplified or removed. We will give priority to the work of the DTI Deregulation Unit in these areas.

    We will examine ways in which the uniform scope of regulation could be eased to safeguard traditional local products or practices.

    We will examine whether certain regulations affecting individual citizens within their own homes could be made advisory, rather than mandatory.

    ENERGY

    Our energy policies have brought the consumer both lower prices and better service. We have privatised British Gas and the electricity industry in a way that has opened these markets to competition. These policies are now being seized upon in Europe as essential extensions of the Single Market.

    Domestic customers are now protected by a price formula, and high standards of service are enforced by the independent regulators. For instance, electricity disconnections for debt have fallen by 43 per cent since the launch of privatisation.

    We have ensured that the safety of employees comes first, and have given thousands the opportunity of acquiring a stake in their industry.

    The future of the coal industry depends crucially on the competitiveness of coal as a fuel for electricity generation. British Coal has made enormous progress in increasing productivity since the end of the 1985 strike – but there is still further to go. We will support the efforts of British Coal and its workforce to improve the industry’s performance. The long term future of the industry lies in the private sector.

    We have invested in clean coal technology to safeguard the environment. Renewable energy projects have received unprecedented support. North Sea oil and gas are enjoying a record expansion thanks to our policies of deregulation and low taxation.

    Safety will remain our highest priority throughout the energy sector.

    We will continue to encourage competition in energy markets. We will progressively reduce British Gas’ monopoly of the retail gas market, to give small users the same rights as big firms.

    We will privatise British Coal in a way that enables employees to enjoy a stake in the industry.

    We will increase our support for British Coal Enterprise which promotes economic regeneration in areas affected by the closure of mines, and has successfully assisted 76,000 people in finding new jobs.

    We will review the future of the nuclear industry in 1994. We are committed to safe and economical nuclear power. The existing strict arrangements for nuclear waste will be maintained.

    We will maintain a guaranteed market for renewable energy projects and fluid research in this area.

    We will consult on new building regulations to improve energy use. Together with British Gas and some of the Regional Electricity Companies, we will establish an independent Energy Savings Trust to promote energy efficiency. Our grants scheme for low income households will receive record funding next year.

    SCIENCE AND INNOVATION

    British science has an unrivalled reputation for ground-breaking research. We believe in investing in scientific research because it enriches the quality of our lives and provides the feedstock of industrial innovation. The science budget has grown by 24 per cent in real terms since 1978-9. Increasingly funding will reflect the quality of the research output so that the best centres can truly be world leaders.

    The Government spends nearly £3,000 million a year on civil research and development – at least as high a proportion of national income as the Japanese or Americans. And since 1978, British industry’s spending on R&D has increased by 37 per cent in real terms.

    We will continue to support our science base to maintain the excellence of our science and to ensure that we produce the skilled technical people we need.

    We will encourage the transfer of people and technology from universities to businesses and upgrade the LINK scheme, which funds joint research.

    We will encourage the establishment of centres of technological excellence linking industrial research organisations with universities and polytechnics.

    We will continue to develop new innovation schemes for small and medium-sized businesses, including the highly-regarded SPUR programme to provide help with the development of new products and processes.

    REGIONAL POLICIES

    In recent years, the United Kingdom has attracted five times as much Japanese investment as Germany or France, which powerfully demonstrates that we have created the most attractive environment in Europe for investors. Our positive policy towards inward investment will be maintained, in contrast to that of the TUC and the Labour Party.

    The Government will continue to invest in a strong infrastructure, and boost technology expertise in the regions.

    We will ensure that regional policy is well targeted.

    We will continue to support all parts of the United Kingdom in their campaigns to attract inward investment.

    We will give additional emphasis to upgrading skills and technology when allocating funds.

    SMALL BUSINESSES

    Small businesses are the seedcorn of the economy. Their numbers have grown by more than a third since 1979, while the number of self-employed people has grown to over 12 per cent of the workforce. We will continue to recognise the special needs of small and medium-sized companies, and to ensure that Government delivers useful services to them.

    Our tax regime for small businesses is one of the most favourable in Europe. We have raised the VAT threshold every year since 1979 and reduced the small companies rate of Corporation Tax from 42 per cent to 25 per cent.

    Training and Enterprise Councils (and Local Enterprise Companies in Scotland) have developed a wide range of services for business and enterprise which assist over 150,000 small companies each year. We have developed the popular Enterprise Initiative, under which 40,000 companies have been helped to buy in outside expertise offering key management skills. We now propose to develop this initiative further.

    We also propose to help businesses by easing the transfer of commercial tenancies.

    We announced in the Budget new measures to help small businesses, including full relief against Inheritance Tax on most business assets, reductions in business rates and proposals to speed up the payment of outstanding bills.

    During the new Parliament, we will develop a new Enterprise Service to give small and medium-sized companies help in diagnosing their most important strategic needs. A new Consultancy Brokerage Service will supply information to small companies. We will also develop a Technology Audit which will provide small firms with a plan for change. And we will continue to support Total Quality Management consultancies.

    TECs and LECs will be closely involved in developing and implementing this new initiative.

    The independent Law Commission has recommended that a commercial tenant should in general be freed from any future liability under a lease when he assigns away his interest under it. We will consider how this principle could be put into effect for new commercial leases.

    CONSUMER AFFAIRS

    Consumers want choice, quality and value for money Competition only works effectively if consumers have the information they need to make sensible decisions.

    Our food safety policy promotes consumer choice and consumer safety We introduced the 1990 Food Safety Act to ensure the highest standards of food hygiene.

    We will introduce legislation designed to give consumers confidence that what they purchase is properly described – and that adequate compensation is offered where these requirements are not met.

    We will enable the courts to override unfair terms in contracts and improve our powers to deal with rogue traders.

    We will ensure that guarantees mean what they say, and that manufacturers or importers share responsibility with the people who sell their goods.

    We will tighten up the rules on holiday brochures and contracts, and introduce a ‘cooling-off’ period into timeshare contracts.

    We will introduce legislation to simplify trade mark registration and extend the rights they confer.

    We will enforce science-based controls on the use of chemicals in food production, and will maintain our policy of open access to information on pesticide safety.

    We will improve standards of food labelling in close consultation with consumer representatives.

    CHOICE AND THE CHARTER

    The Citizen’s Charter is the most far-reaching programme ever devised to improve quality in public services. It addresses the needs of those who use public services, extends people’s rights, requires services to set clear standards – and to tell the public how far those standards are met.

    The Citizen’s Charter:

    widens popular choice;

    helps people to exercise that choice in a properly informed way;

    expects all public services to put the customer first;

    promotes the challenge of competition within the public sector;

    requires clear performance standards to be set and for services to be measured against them;

    insists on a proper response to complaints and on action to set right the problems behind them.

    The Charter will be at the centre of government’s decision-making throughout the 1990s. No one doubts the professionalism of the vast majority of public servants. But too often the system’s outdated working methods and attitudes prevent them from giving their best. The Charter’s commitment to modern, open services will help them to win the respect that good service deserves.

    In less than a year since the White Paper, 18 detailed Charters have been published. Each sets out tough new standards and gives new information and rights to the public. Each will be revised regularly to check on progress, and raise standards higher. But, already results are clear.

    In hospitals, from April, every out-patient will have a fixed appointment time and our guarantee of maximum waiting times for operations will be steadily improved.

    On council estates every tenant will have the right to call in a private contractor if the council fails to do a minor repair.

    In schools, all parents will have the right to a report on their child’s performance and details on that of the school.

    Rights such as these should not have been denied to the public. The Citizen’s Charter, steadily but surely, is changing all that.

    KNOWLEDGE, STANDARDS, CHOICE

    The next Conservative Government will carry the Charter still further. There will be more information about standards and performance; clear standards set within public services which are still shrouded in mystery; more choice built into public services and proper complaints procedures introduced. Many of these are outlined later in the Manifesto under Education, Health, Local Government and Transport. Here are a few examples from the programme for the next two years:

    The Audit Commission will be able to publish league tables of performance including each local council and health authority so that people can compare the quality of service.

    We will ensure that inspection reports are published and widely available. All councils will have to respond in public to criticism from auditors.

    We will introduce a new ‘Charterline’ that people with questions or problems with a public service will be able to ring.

    We will require British Rail to tighten its targets for reliability and punctuality on all lines, and report monthly to passengers on how it is doing. London Underground will publish its own Charter.

    We will expect Post Offices and Job Centres to set out standards of service and levels of achievement.

    A new Charter Mark award will give recognition to those parts of the public service that best meet Charter standards.

    British Rail and London Underground are introducing compensation systems for travellers.

    We will review the powers of the Local Government Ombudsman to ensure that findings of maladministration are properly dealt with by all local authorities. We will consult on a new Lay Adjudicators scheme to help the public resolve difficulties and disputes.

    We will extend competition and accountability in public services. Those who provide public services will have to prove they can give the right quality at the right cost.

    We will extend compulsory competitive tendering to local authority housing management, and examine how to apply it to white-collar services. We will act to ensure that private firms bidding to improve local authority public services are not obstructed by unscrupulous practices in councils or by unfair contracts. We will pursue more competitive tendering for central government services.

    We will encourage the wider use of performance pay inside the Civil Service and in other parts of the public service. A link between a person’s effort and his or her pay is a powerful means of improving performance.

    Civil servants dealing with the public will normally identify themselves by name.

    We will toughen inspection of key public services where choice and competition must inevitably be limited. We will introduce, for the first time, regular independent inspection of all schools.

    We will act to ensure that the inspectorates of police, fire, probation, and social services, together with any new inspectorates that are established, will be truly independent of the service which they inspect.

    We will ensure that the reports from these systematic regular inspections are published. More lay inspectors, drawn from other professions and from the general public, will bring fresh insights into service improvement.

    We will publish later this year new proposals for the inspection of social work in England, setting up arrangements for systematic independent inspection of all care services and every local authority social services department.

    Inspections of local authority homes will be carried out by teams that contain lay inspectors and are independent of the influence of the management of the homes.

    All of the privatised utilities have a specialist regulator who is responsible for promoting competition, reviewing prices and protecting the public interest. We have introduced legislation to increase the powers of these regulators to the level of the strongest.

    We are ensuring that the regulators have the powers they need to promote competition and safeguard the interests of the customer by controlling price increases. We will increase competition in the gas and water markets.

    We are giving the regulators powers to set standards of service, covering such matters as fixed appointment times for service calls.

    THE POST OFFICE

    The Post Office is among the best in Europe for speed and reliability of its letter services. Traffic has grown by 50 per cent in a decade in which it has operated without a subsidy Last year the first-class letter service achieved record improvements in reliability The local post office is a vital and valued feature of the rural community.

    In 1981 we introduced private competition for deliveries costing over £1. This led to the rapid growth of the private courier industry with substantial benefits to business users. We believe that further benefits to consumers would flow from additional competition.

    We are committed to maintaining a nation wide letter service with delivery to every address in the United Kingdom, within a uniform structure of prices, and with a nation-wide network of post offices.

    We will legislate to set up a new independent regulator to advise on issues affecting Post Office customers, and on the progressive introduction of competition.

    We will set performance targets for the Post Office and ensure they are published in all offices, together with results achieved.

    We will ensure there is effective redress for customers where services fail.

    We will lower the limit on the Post Office monopoly much closer to the level of the first class stamp.

    We will provide improved scope for contractors to carry mail to final delivery offices.

    We will consider requests to license limited specialist services to compete within the Post Office monopoly.

    WHITEHALL & WESTMINSTER

    Whitehall must move with the times. It is over a decade since the last major restructuring of the departments of government. Since then:

    Two-thirds of the state industrial sector has been privatised, transferring about 900,000 jobs to the private sector.

    Government has reduced the burden of regulation and the need for central bureaucracy

    Civil Service manpower has been reduced by almost a quarter.

    Many of the functions of government have been devolved from Whitehall.

    The Citizen’s Charter programme is bringing new quality to public services.

    We will continue to reorganise central government in tune with its modern role, while devolving and contracting-out executive functions. We want to ensure that the drive to save money to reduce bureaucracy and raise quality is powerfully led from the centre of government.

    We will give a Cabinet Minister responsibility for the Citizen’s Charter programme and reforming the Civil Service, taking charge of the Citizen’s Charter Unit, Efficiency Unit, the programme for creating Agencies and the Public Competition and Purchasing Unit. This will make it easier to raise quality and efficiency in government and see that contracting-out and market-testing are energetically pursued.

    We intend to create a new department, under a Cabinet Minister, with responsibility for broadcasting, arts, sport, tourism, the national heritage and the film industry. This department will aim to encourage private sector enterprise in all these fields. The National Lottery and the Millennium Fund (detailed later in this Manifesto) will also bring new responsibilities to government in these areas.

    We will transfer the core responsibilities of the Department of Energy to the Department of Trade and Industry and responsibilities for energy efficiency to the Department of the Environment, ending the need for a separate department

    Small businesses are the seedcorn of our future prosperity We believe the Department of Trade and Industry should take over responsibility for them. We also want to strengthen the links between the DTI and the highly successful Training and Enterprise Councils.

    Responsibility for overseeing all financial services will be brought together in the Treasury, in line with the practice adopted in most other advanced countries.

    New programmes for regenerating our inner cities are outlined in this Manifesto. Responsibilities will be brought together in the Department of the Environment.

    We are determined to ensure that women in the work-force realise their full potential. We will transfer from the Home Office to the Department of Employment the lead responsibility for co-ordinating government policy on issues of particular concern to women.

    OPEN GOVERNMENT

    Government has traditionally been far too reluctant to provide information. This secrecy extends from the processes of Cabinet Government to schools which refuse to release exam results. Under the Citizen’s Charter, a great deal more information is now being made available on the services provided by government.

    We have also:

    replaced the catch-all provisions of the 1911 Official Secrets Act with narrower offences depending on specific tests of the harm likely to be caused by disclosure, while giving special protection to vital information relating to our national security;

    introduced rights to check certain personal records held on computer, and supported new rights of access to a range of government records;

    committed ourselves to a public right of access to information about the environment, including water supply, air quality dumping at sea and radioactive substances;

    made available more reports on matters of public concern such as food safety and industrial risks.

    We intend to carry forward this move towards greater openness.

    We will review the 80 or so statutory restrictions which exist on the disclosure of information – retaining only those needed to protect privacy and essential confidentiality.

    We will seek to provide greater access to personal records held by government.

    We will be less secretive about the workings of government. For example, when the Committees of the Cabinet are reconstituted after the election we will, for the first time, set out their names and membership. We will update and – for the first time – publish the guidance for Ministers on procedure.

    THE WORKINGS OF PARLIAMENT

    It is not just Whitehall that must change. Parliament, too, has to keep its working methods under review to make sure it attracts the best people to the service of their country and uses their talents to best effect.

    We will propose appropriate Parliamentary reforms to ensure that the House of Commons conducts its business more efficiently and effectively, taking into account the benefits of modern technology, the increasing constituency demands upon Members of Parliament and the need to attract more women to stand for election.

    OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL

    Conservatives believe that high standards in education and training are the key to personal opportunity and national success. We believe in partnership with parents, choice in schools and a good grounding in the basic skills all children need to make a success of their lives. We are committed to widening opportunities without compromising academic standards. We will continue to expand higher education and training. We will reinforce the rights of the individual in the world of work, and break down artificial barriers to advancement. By extending opportunity and arming people with the power to choose, we will give valuable freedoms and a powerful spur to achievement.

    SCHOOLS, PUPILS & PARENTS

    We are now seeing real improvements in our education system. One in four young people goes on to higher education; at the beginning of the 1980s, it was only one in eight. Sixty per cent of 16 year-olds stay on in full-time education, up from only 40 per cent in 1979. And we have embarked on the most important and wide-ranging reforms since the 1940s.

    For the first time in our history, we will soon have a National Curriculum which will require all the main school subjects to be covered thoroughly The testing of 7 year-olds is well under way and tests for older children are now being developed. Starting this September, GCSE courses will be steadily integrated with the National Curriculum.

    Under the Parent’s Charter, all schools will have to provide at least one written report on the progress of each child each year. Information on the performance of all local schools will be given to parents, enabling them to exercise choice more effectively

    We believe all parents have the right to choice in education – not only those who can afford school fees. Young people differ in their interests and aptitudes, and we need a range of schools to offer them the best opportunities. We have always fought to maintain diversity in education, protecting the right of local people to preserve their grammar schools, and defending independent schools against mindless Labour attacks. And we have always valued the important contribution made by the churches to our children’s education.

    We have further increased diversity by:

    Giving schools control over their own budgets and encouraging new types of school.

    Allowing schools to become independent of local councils, by applying for Grant-Maintained status if the parents involved so wish. By mid-1992, over 200 GM schools will be up and running.

    Creating a number of highly popular City Technology Colleges.

    Launching the highly successful initiative under which schools are able to bid directly for the resources to become Technology Schools.

    We intend to take all these initiatives further and offer parents more choice in the new Parliament. Popular schools will be allowed to expand, and more schools will be able to apply for technology funding. We will make it easier for small schools to enjoy the benefits of GM status by grouping together.

    We will complete the introduction of the National Curriculum offering 10 subjects at a nationally-defined standard – English, Mathematics, Science, History, Geography, Technology, Art, Music, PE and, in secondary schools, a foreign language.

    Regular and straightforward tests will be in place for all 7, 11 and 14 year-olds by 1994.

    GCSE at age 16 will be integrated into the National Curriculum, with a new A+ grade to test the most able. The majority of marks will come from a written exam.

    We will continue to encourage the creation of nursery places. For the first time, over 50 per cent of three and four year olds have places either in nursery or primary schools.

    Full information will be published annually about the performance of all local schools in each area.

    Independent inspection of schools will provide parents with straightforward reports on their child’s school, together with an action plan from governors to remedy any weaknesses.

    Popular schools which are over subscribed will be given the resources to expand.

    GM schools will be able to change their character if that is what parents clearly want and the change fits in with the wider needs of the local area.

    The Technology Schools Initiative will be expanded across the country.

    Existing schools which opt for GM status will be able to emulate City Technology Colleges and attract private technology sponsorship.

    We will maintain the Assisted Places scheme, which gives access to independent education to many families who could not otherwise afford it.

    We will ensure that the partnership between the state and the churches in education is maintained and strengthened.

    We will enable small schools to apply for GM status in groups.

    We will pay particular attention to raising educational standards in areas of deprivation in our cities.

    TEACHING

    We are determined to reinforce the professionalism of teachers and the esteem in which they are held. We have created an independent Teachers’ Pay Review Body. We accepted in full its first recommendations; nearly half of all teachers are now earning over £20,000 a year. We will press ahead with regular appraisal of teachers to encourage high standards and develop professional skills.

    As a first step in the reform of teacher training, postgraduate students will spend much more time in school classrooms, learning their skills under the practised eye of senior teachers.

    It is vital that the education system should attract back women who have taken a career break to raise a family. Through grants to local authorities, we are financing schemes to introduce more flexible working practices – such as job-sharing.

    We will undertake reform of the teacher training system to make it more effective in developing classroom skills.

    We will develop measures to encourage women with family responsibilities to enter or return to teaching.

    AFTER 16

    We believe that young people should be free to choose between college, work-based training and sixth form studies. We are giving further education colleges and sixth form colleges in England and Wales autonomy, free from council control. We also value our school sixth forms, and will ensure they retain their place in the new system. And we will allow them to attract older students as well. FE colleges will continue to receive support for adult education, while local authorities will retain the resources to respond to local demand for leisure courses.

    We will defend the well-respected A-level examinations, which Labour would destroy We will continue to encourage participation in AS examinations. We will also continue to develop new high-quality National Vocational Qualifications, and introduce a new post-16 diploma which recognises achievement in both vocational and academic courses.

    We will develop an Advanced Diploma which can be earned by students pursuing either academic or vocational courses, and a new General National Vocational Qualification.

    We intend to allow school sixth forms to open their doors if they wish to older students, and to accept training credits or fees from them.

    From April next year, further education and sixth form colleges will be independent of local government control.

    Mature students will enjoy a wider choice of courses.

    HIGHER EDUCATION

    Britain maintains the best university system in Europe. We have also developed a thriving network of polytechnics, whose student numbers have increased nearly sixfold since the end of the 1960s.

    By the year 2000, one in three young people will follow full-time higher education courses. Meanwhile, the number of mature entrants to higher education has risen by 65 per cent since 1979. And our universities are attracting increasing numbers of foreign students.

    Despite this huge expansion, our students enjoy one of the most generous support systems in the world. The introduction of student loans has given students 30 per cent more money for their living costs than the former system of grants alone. The new system will steadily reduce the proportion of students’ living costs that their parents are expected to meet.

    We will continue to expand the number of students in higher education. We are abolishing the artificial ‘binary line’ between universities and polytechnics.

    We are putting in place new mechanisms to ensure that academic standards are maintained in higher education.

    We will continue to provide generous support for students and to expand our student loans commitment.

    THE TRAINING REVOLUTION

    A training revolution is under way in Britain. The Government’s job is to create a framework within which men and women of all ages can develop skills, gain qualifications and shape their own futures.

    We have already brought the world of work and the world of school into closer harmony Government and industry are working together. Employers already spend over £20,000 million a year on training. Government spending on training has increased 2½ times in real terms since 1979, to £2,800 million. The Government’s effort is being channelled through the 82 new Training and Enterprise Councils (and the Local Enterprise Companies in Scotland) – the most significant peace time partnership between government and industry this century.

    ‘Compacts’ have resulted in many young people working to goals for attainment and attendance in school. In return, they are guaranteed a job with training – or training leading to a job.

    This year, two million students will participate in the Technical and Vocational Education Initiative.

    Investors in People is the new national standard for companies making a commitment to training. TECs play an important role in helping companies attain it.

    Employer-led TECs and LECs are delivering Government-funded training programmes which reflect industry’s understanding of local needs.

    Industry is working closely with the National Council for Vocational Qualifications.

    The CBI’s training targets for Britain’s workforce demonstrate a new partnership between business and education.

    75 per cent of 16 year-olds stay on in full-time education or Youth Training schemes, up from 46 per cent in 1979. Since 1983, over 3 million young people have taken up Youth Training places. And 82 per cent go into jobs or further education when they complete YT.

    Now we are offering young people aged 16 and 17 vouchers they can use to buy approved courses of education or training, and which will put the power of choice in their hands.

    In 1988, we launched Employment Training, the largest programme of its kind in Europe, which has since helped 1.2 million people. While local programmes are the responsibility of the TECs, the Government guarantees the offer of help to particular groups of unemployed.

    Last year, we launched the new Employment Action programme, which will help more than 61,000 people in a full year. This is a new addition to a range of measures which include Jobclubs, the Job Interview Guarantee Scheme and other tested methods of helping unemployed people back to work.

    We are also supporting individual training effort. Since 1988, when we launched Career Development Loans (interest-free for up to 15 months), over 25,000 people have benefited. Last year’s Budget gave tax relief on training fees – a boost to the 250,000 people a year who finance their own training. Now, with the TECs, we intend to introduce new financial help for career and training guidance.

    By the end of the new Parliament, the new system of National Vocational Qualifications should cover virtually every occupation in the economy. The CBI’s training targets envisage 80 per cent of young people reaching NVQ level 2 by the end of the Parliament.

    We intend to make training credits available to all 16 year-olds and 17 year-olds within the lifetime of the new Parliament. The TECs will continue to be responsible for the YT programme for this age group.

    We will continue to finance training programmes for the long-term un-employed and those who face particular difficulties. We will launch with the TECs a new initiative, giving people a voucher with which they can buy a ‘skill check’, providing assessment and guidance on how to make the most of their working lives.

    WORKERS AND UNIONS

    Over the past 13 years, we have legislated to lift regulatory burdens from the shoulders of those who create jobs in Britain. To industry’s relief, we shunned the job-destroying European Social Charter. And we reject Labour’s job-destroying notion of a national minimum wage.

    We have also legislated five times to transform industrial relations, returning power from militants to ordinary union members. As a result, the number of days lost each year through strikes has fallen from an average 12.9 million in the 1970s to less than a million last year – the lowest figure since records began a century ago.

    Labour would disrupt industrial peace by weakening the power of management and the courts. They propose to take away the courts’ most important sanction – the power to take over a union’s assets.

    Sympathy strikes would be legalised by Labour, and employers would be prevented from dismissing strikers who broke their contracts.

    The workers’ rights we believe in are those which enhance individuals’ status and opportunities. We believe people should be informed and consulted by employers about issues which affect their work. No one should be allowed to deduct trade union fees automatically from an employee’s pay without written authorisation. Individuals must be given greater rights to belong to the union of their choice.

    We also believe strongly that employers, employees and customers should not have their lives and businesses disrupted by wildcat strikes. In the new Parliament, we will legislate to enforce and enhance these rights.

    We will require employers to give everyone who works for them for more than eight hours a week a clear ‘written statement of their terms and conditions of employment.

    We will make automatic deduction of union membership dues without ‘written authorisation unlawful.

    We will take measures to give individuals greater freedom in choosing a union.

    We will legislate to require that all pre- strike ballots are postal and subject to independent scrutiny, and that at least seven days’ notice of a strike is given after a ballot.

    People who use public services will have the right to restrain the disruption of those services by unlawful industrial action.

    A SHARE IN THE FUTURE

    We also believe that people at work should be helped to build security for themselves and their families. Employees should be given every opportunity to acquire a stake in the business for which they work. We have ruled that executive share option schemes may grant options at a discount only if the employer also runs an all-employee scheme.

    Saving for a pension reduces reliance on the state. We welcome the provision of occupational schemes covering over 11 million workers. There are already important safeguards, which we have improved, for the rights of members in such schemes. But we believe that a full review of the arrangements is now needed. We also believe that new freedoms for scheme members will strengthen accountability and benefit investors.

    We will establish a review of the framework of law and regulation within which occupational schemes operate.

    We will give every member of an occupational scheme the right to an annual statement of the value of their savings.

    In addition we will examine ways of giving those who retire with lump sum payments more choice as to how their savings are invested.

    WOMEN AND OPPORTUNITY

    A higher proportion of women go out to work in Britain than in any other EC country except Denmark. Many women choose to work part-time, and our policies have encouraged the development of part-time work within a framework which safeguards employees from exploitation.

    Throughout Europe, the UK is recognised to have the most comprehensive legislation to combat sex discrimination. We are also committed to breaking down artificial barriers to women’s advancement based on prejudice or lack of imagination. As an employer, government must continue to set an example.

    The tax relief we have introduced on training fees is constructed to ensure that non-tax payers – who include many married women – will be able to benefit, too. Many Training and Enterprise Councils already have specific plans to help women trainees. We will involve them further in helping employers to help with childcare.

    We believe mothers should be treated equally by government, whether they work outside the home or not. We are fully committed to maintaining the real value of child benefit. And we will act where a push by government is needed to stimulate the provision of childcare.

    All employers who meet childcare costs can set these off against their liability for corporation tax. In addition, we have relieved employees from paying income tax on the benefit of workplace nurseries.

    After-school childcare is an area of particular importance to many working mothers. We will introduce a new initiative to encourage the provision of after-school facilities by schools, employers and voluntary groups across the country.

    The Government will amend the law relating to the employment rights of pregnant women to give effect to the EC Directive on Pregnant Workers. This addition to our already extensive legal provision will give a right to at least 14 weeks’ maternity leave and protection against dismissal on grounds of pregnancy.

    We will take forward our public appointments initiative. Departments will publish plans for between a quarter and a half of public appointments to be held by women by 1996.

    We will ensure that all parts of government adopt a strategic approach to the employment and development of women staff. We will encourage them to participate in the Opportunity 2000 initiative.

    We will continue to oppose EC measures which would discourage part-time employment, valued by so many women.

    We will encourage all TECs to adopt plans to help women trainees have equal access to training opportunities.

    We will introduce a new grant, paid through TECs, to help employers, voluntary groups or schools to set up after-school care and holiday arrangements. We will ensure that schools are free to participate.

    FREEDOM UNDER THE LAW

    The Conservative Party has always stood for the protection of the citizen and the defence of the rule of law. Society is entitled to a sense of security; individuals to peace of mind; the guardians of that peace to our whole-hearted support. Our policies on law and order, and the rights of individuals, are designed to protect the people of this country and their way of life.

    Britain experiences less violent crime than many comparable countries. But crime has continued to rise in Britain. And the challenge for the 1990s is to step up the fight against lawlessness and violence, so that our citizens can live free from fear.

    We must continue to ensure that the sentence fits the crime – with long sentences for dangerous criminals, and fines and a tougher regime for punishment outside prison available as an alternative for less serious crime. And we must maintain confidence in our legal system.

    We must tackle crime at its roots. Two-thirds of the offences dealt with by our courts are committed by only seven per cent of those convicted. Most of these constant offenders started down the path of crime while still of school age.

    We have launched a reform of our prisons, improving the prospect that those who serve custodial sentences will not return to crime.

    But above all we must remember that it is our policemen and women who are in the front line of the battle. To combat crime effectively the police need the full support of the Government and the public.

    POLICE AND THE COMMUNITY

    We Conservatives can be proud of our record in supporting the police. Since 1979 we have increased spending on the police by 74 per cent in real terms. Uniformed manpower has increased by 16,000 and civilian manpower by 12,000. We have launched a campaign to recruit 10,000 Special Constables.

    Over the next few years we want to see a major reform which will help provide what the public wants and needs: a visible, local police presence.

    We will be encouraging police forces to develop local Community Policing, to link the police more closely with the communities they protect. The Metropolitan Police will be reorganised on this basis by the spring of 1993. Two-thirds of English and Welsh forces are already preparing similar plans. Pilot schemes suggest they can add greatly to the citizen’s sense of security and build support for the police.

    Community Policing will involve local residents, listen to their views and engage their help in the fight against crime. It will mean:

    smaller police units with officers serving the same area for longer. That way, people can really get to know their local police officers;

    each police force devolving its management and operational control to local units, and streamlining its chain of command;

    getting police back on the beat, and in close contact with the neighbourhoods under their care.

    It will be supported by an extension of Neighbourhood Watch schemes, which are vital in deterring theft and burglaries.

    Public confidence in the police is enhanced when people know what they can expect from their local police force, and when outsiders are let into the process of inspecting how they work. At least five police forces are already leading the way with charters setting out their targets.

    We are continuing to increase police numbers. There will be 1,000 extra police officers this year.

    We will continue to give the police the support and resources they need to carry out their duties effectively and efficiently.

    We will be seeking the nation-wide introduction of Community Policing.

    We will encourage civilianisation as a means of freeing police officers for operational duties.

    We will encourage the extension of Neighbourhood Watch to more residential areas.

    We will continue to increase the Special Constabulary, which has seen a rise in recruitment this year of 10 per cent.

    We want each police force to produce a charter telling local people, for example, how quickly the police will aim to respond to emergency calls.

    We will introduce lay inspectors with management experience into the police inspectorate.

    PROTECTORS AND VICTIMS

    We look to the police to protect us. They risk their lives to do so. Police officers are entitled to the protection of the community they serve. Those who indulge in the shameful practice of ‘ambushing’, or seeking to frustrate the work of the emergency services, deserve to face severe penalties. We welcome the findings of a study by the Home Office and Crown Prosecution Service which shows that assaults on policemen attract consistently heavier penalties. But we will examine ways of introducing further protection for the police.

    We must also pay special attention to the needs of the victims of crime, in the courts and in rebuilding their lives. We have increased funding for Victim Support.

    The number of people directly affected by violent and sexual crime remains relatively small. But fear of crime can have a devastating effect on people’s lives, and particularly on women’s lives. We are determined to reduce this fear.

    We will set up a working party to examine what more can be done to protect the police and members of other emergency services from assault.

    We will encourage victims to report sexual offences by giving them statutory anonymity

    Under our Safer Cities programme, there are 124 schemes to improve street lighting, which has been shown to reduce the fear of crime significantly.

    Women-only taxi services are being encouraged under the same Safer Cities programme.

    PENALTIES AND PREVENTION

    Our armoury of criminal law and penalties requires constant review. We have just introduced a new law specifically aimed at the so-called ‘joy-rider’. This places the responsibility for dangerous driving, damage, injury or death following from the taking of a vehicle squarely on the shoulders of those in it.

    Even where ‘joy-riding’ is not involved, causing death through dangerous or drink driving is a very serious offence. We believe that the maximum sentence for such a crime should reflect its gravity.

    Squatting is nothing less than the seizure of another’s property without consent. Having consulted widely on the subject, we have decided to extend the criminal law dealing with squatting.

    Illegal camping by gypsies or other travellers can affect the lives of whole communities. We believe that this problem must be tackled.

    We are concerned about the small but persistent minority, particularly of young people, who re-offend while already on bail. We have announced new measures to deter them from repeated crime.

    Young people who find themselves on probation for shop-lifting, vandalism or petty thuggery should be shown where the path of crime may lead. They should be given a brief personal experience of the nature of prison life.

    ‘Joy-riders’ will now face prison sentences of up to 5 years, unlimited fines and unlimited driving bans.

    We will extend the maximum sentence for causing death through dangerous or drink driving.

    We will create a new criminal offence of squatting, to give greater protection to the owners and occupants of shops, commercial premises, houses and flats.

    The 1968 Caravan Sites Act will be reviewed with the aim of reducing the nuisance of illegal encampments.

    As part of a community sentence, young offenders will be taken to see what life is really like inside one of our prisons – a sobering experience for them.

    We will introduce a new police power to make an arrest for breach of police bail.

    We will give the courts the statutory power to increase sentences for those who offend while on bail.

    We will increase the number of bail hostel places, to enable closer supervision of those on bail.

    We will mount a drive against school truancy, and set up a Task Force to find the best ways of co-ordinating the work of local agencies helping young people at risk of becoming offenders.

    REFORMING OUR PRISONS

    Prisons should be places which are austere but decent, providing a busy and positive regime which prepares prisoners for their ultimate release.

    We have been reversing the Labour Party’s neglect of the prison service in the 1970s. Since 1985, 14 new prisons have been opened 7 more will open over the next two years. The end of overcrowding is now in sight.

    We have already taken steps to implement the key recommendations of the Woolf report on the future of our prisons. We will bring private sector skills in to enhance efficiency and increase value for money

    We have put out to tender the contract for prison escort services, an approach which has worked well in other countries. The first contract for a privately managed remand centre has been awarded.

    We will sustain our massive prison reform and building programme.

    A reconstruction programme will end the degrading need for ‘slopping out’ by the end of 1994.

    We will reorganise prisoners’ education, training and work opportunities.

    We will establish the Prison Service as a separate agency, whose director will have the clear responsibility for day-to day operations. The Home Secretary will remain ministerially accountable to Parliament for prison policy.

    We will increase the use of private sector management skills.

    OUR LEGAL SYSTEM

    As a free society we must have a justice system that is fair, accessible and responsive to the citizen.

    We have introduced new powers for the Court of Appeal to increase sentences for crime. And in response to public concern about a small but significant number of miscarriages of justice, we have appointed a Royal Commission to review aspects of the criminal justice system, including the conduct of investigations, the handling of forensic evidence, and the powers of the Court of Appeal.

    We have already reduced the opportunity for abuse by our introduction of tape-recorded interviews of suspects by the police. At the same time, we are concerned that police investigations should not be made more difficult by the misuse of certain rights.

    We have already introduced a wide range of reforms following our Civil Justice Review. Extending the jurisdiction of the County Courts has helped speed up justice. The success of the small claims system in these courts has shown that simplified procedures can enable people to conduct their own cases or rely on a lay adviser. We have also introduced a reform which will give people more choice as to who represents them legally in court.

    We are committed to enabling people with limited means to have access to legal services. We are determined to ensure that these services are delivered efficiently, in a way which provides the best value for money.

    The principles of the Citizen’s Charter are being applied to our legal system. We will shortly be publishing a Courts Charter.

    We are overhauling the way in which family matters are handled in our courts. The new family code will be applied by magistrates and judges especially trained in family law.

    Our Sunday Trading laws have come into question as a result of a possible conflict with Article 30 of the Treaty of Rome. This matter is now before the European Court of Justice, and we are awaiting a judgement. The Government brought forward proposals in 1986 to reform the shopping laws, but Parliament was not able to agree a conclusion. Parliament will be given the opportunity to consider this issue again.

    We will introduce a major Criminal Justice Bill in the lifetime of the new Parliament.

    We will extend the types of cases which can be handled by the County Courts in a simplified way.

    We will consult on a Lay Adjudicators scheme to make it easier for citizens to settle disputes with service providers.

    We will provide a code of family law that will continue to underpin the institution of marriage, give priority to the welfare of the child, and emphasise the primary responsibility of parents for the welfare of children and the family.

    We will bring forward proposals for reform of the Sunday Trading laws once the legal position has been made clear by the European Court of Justice.

    PORNOGRAPHY, PRIVACY, LIBEL

    We have the toughest anti-pornography laws in Western Europe, and we will keep them that way.

    Every year, about 300,000 people – mostly women – request advice and assistance in dealing with obscene or malicious phone calls. We intend to do more to deter this harassment, in conjunction with the telecommunications industry.

    The Press Complaints Commission is now in operation, and we will monitor its work carefully to see if self-regulation succeeds.

    The public’s dislike of unprincipled press behaviour has sometimes been expressed in the award of erratically large libel damages. While this is understandable, it has led to an inordinate number of successful appeals. We therefore propose to simplify the law relating to libel in the light of the recommendations of the Neill Committee.

    British domestic controls on pornography will remain in place even after the completion of the Single European Market.

    We will increase the maximum penalties for making obscene or malicious phone calls.

    We propose to allow judges to settle the level of damages in libel cases where the defendant offers to pay to make amends.

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    Racial harmony demands restraint on all sides, and a tolerant understanding of the legitimate views of others.

    Everybody, regardless of ethnic background, religious or personal belief, has the right to go about his or her life free from the threat of intimidation and assault. We are determined that everyone lawfully settled in this country should enjoy the full range of opportunities in our society That requires openness on the part of the majority and, on the part of the ethnic minorities themselves, a determination to participate fully in the life of the wider community.

    The Home Office invests £129 million in grants designed to encourage those running public services to ensure that people from ethnic minorities can enjoy the full range of public services – such as health, housing and social services. We believe that these grants would be more effective if responsibility was transferred to those Departments which can make best use of the money.

    Racial and sexual discrimination have no place in our society. We have given the police stronger powers to deal with racial hatred. We will continue to ensure that the full force of the law is used to deal with racial attacks.

    We will transfer the education share of the Home Office’s ‘Section 11’ money to the Department of Education, to focus help on those from ethnic minority backgrounds who need additional English language teaching.

    IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEES

    Good community relations in this country depend upon a clear structure of immigration controls which are fair, understandable and properly enforced. We are determined to maintain our present system of immigration controls unless we have evidence that other arrangements would be equally satisfactory and cost-effective.

    But an increasing number of would-be immigrants from Eastern Europe and other parts of the world seek to abuse our openness to genuine refugees. The number of people seeking refugee status has risen from 5,000 a year to 45,000 over the past four years.

    We will continue to honour our commitment to the 1951 UN Convention, and give refuge to those who reach our shores with a well-founded fear of persecution.

    In the new Parliament we must therefore reintroduce the Asylum Bill, opposed by Labour and the Liberal Democrats, to create a faster and more effective system of determining who are genuine political refugees, and who are not.

    We will provide a fair and expeditious system for examining claims for refugee status. This will include a workable appeal system for applicants under which those with manifestly unfounded claims will be returned quickly to their own country or to the country they came from.

    Finger-printing will be introduced for asylum applicants, to prevent multiple applications and fraudulent benefit claims.

    THE DANGER OF DRUGS

    Illegal drug abuse poses a major threat to the fabric of our society. It can destroy the health and lives of young people in particular. We will tackle this problem with vigour.

    We have already taken action on a wide front:

    we have set up co-ordinators in every local education authority to train teachers about the harm drugs can do, and to bring the fight against drug abuse into the classroom;

    we have set up 16 local drug prevention teams in inner cities to tackle particular problem areas;

    we have created the National Drugs Intelligence Unit at New Scotland Yard;

    we have taken the lead in Europe in pressing for the establishment of a Europe-wide Drugs Unit, as a first step towards a creation of a

    we have set up a network of 31 drug liaison officers, in 19 different countries, tracking the international drugs traffickers who threaten Britain with their trade.

    We now have the toughest sanctions in Western Europe against drug traffickers.

    A number of public services and voluntary bodies are engaged in fighting drug misuse at local level. Such efforts need co-ordination to ensure that local effort and dedication is directed to best effect.

    We will not legalise any banned drugs.

    We will bring forward proposals to ensure that the control of drug misuse is co-ordinated effectively.

    We intend to strengthen our confiscatory powers still further. And we will ensure that our controls against drug-trafficking are not weakened by any changes in Europe.

    We will make it an offence to supply anabolic steroids to minors.

    THE THREAT OF TERRORISM

    Tragic and dangerous events remind us only too frequently of the need for the special measures provided by the Prevention of Terrorism Act. While Labour proposes to weaken or dismantle them, we know that for the safety of our citizens they must be continued, and the police effort against terrorism must be reinforced.

    We have set up in New Scotland Yard arrangements to co-ordinate the activities of all our police forces in the fight against terrorism.

    We will provide the necessary measures and resources to combat terrorism, whether it comes from the IRA or other evil groups who seek to undermine our democracy.

    RESPONSIBILITY FOR OTHERS

    Conservatives believe we have responsibility one for another. We will continue to care for those in need and work to establish a society that is generous, as well as prosperous. Our health, care and social security systems are fundamental to government responsibilities; and we believe strongly in fostering voluntary services too.

    THE NHS – PRESENT AND FUTURE

    The Conservative Party is totally committed to the National Health Service. The Government has set out in the Patient’s Charter the principles on which the NHS is based. The most fundamental of these is that need, and not ability to pay, is and will remain the basis on which care is offered to all by the NHS. Since 1979, there have been great improvements in the health of the nation.

    Life expectancy has increased by two years.

    Deaths amongst babies and very young children have gone down by 40 per cent.

    Hospitals are treating well over a million more people a year as in-patients.

    Hospitals are treating over two million more people a year as out-patients.

    Kidney transplants have more than doubled.

    Hip replacements have increased by over 50 per cent.

    Coronary artery by-passes have nearly tripled.

    Since 1979 the Government has vastly increased the resources available to the NHS.

    We have increased overall funding for the NHS by 55 per cent after allowing for inflation. The cash increases in each of the three years up to 1992-93 have been the biggest ever.

    The number of doctors and dentists has been increased by 17,000, and the real resources committed to GP services have doubled since 1979.

    The number of nurses and midwives has gone up by 69,000.

    We have established the independent Pay Review Body which nurses had sought for so long, and increased their pay by 43 per cent. It is hard now to remember that Labour actually cut nurses’ pay.

    We have restored the hospital building programme so savagely cut by Labour at the end of their last term of office.

    But the Conservative Government has not simply spent more money on the NHS.

    We have reformed the organisation of the NHS to encourage those working in the service to respond to what patients want and need, and to get the most out of the increased money which the taxpayer provides.

    At local level, health authorities now have the task of buying health care with their local share of the National Health budget. Hospitals can now be run by their own local team of doctors, nurses and managers. By April there will be 156 NHS Trusts whose local boards will have extra freedoms to develop local NHS services. Another 156 hospitals have applied to become trusts from April 1993.

    We have acted to reduce the long hours worked by junior doctors in hospitals. For the first time limits are being set on the number of hours which may be worked continuously.

    Good nursing is the essential complement to good medicine. We have introduced Project 2000 – a new approach to the professional training of nurses.

    The GP has a crucial role to play in the development of health services. Under the Government’s fund- holding initiative, doctors have control over their own spending on behalf of patients for the first time. Over 3,000 GPs will be fundholders by April, caring for 14 per cent of NHS patients. A further 2,500 are preparing to become fundholders in April 1993. As a result, new services are being offered at local surgeries and health centres. Many general practitioners have said that they would like to become involved in fund-holding. We have already extended the scope of the fund-holding scheme to allow general practitioners to provide services such as community nursing.

    We will, year by year, increase the level of real resources committed to the NHS. Savings made through greater efficiency will be ploughed back into the Service.

    We will develop a comprehensive research and development strategy for the NHS.

    We will continue to develop the NHS Trust movement which places responsibility for managing hospitals and other services with local teams who are closest to patients.

    We will continue to encourage the involvement of doctors and other medical staff in the management of services.

    We will introduce powers for nurses to prescribe where appropriate.

    We will complete the implementation of Project 2000 training for nurses.

    We will set goals for the employment of women in professional and managerial posts in the NHS.

    We will ensure that, following maternity leave or a career break, all women working in the NHS, including those returning to nursing on a part-time or job-sharing basis, are able to return to work of a similar status or level to that which they left.

    We will ensure that the benefits of fund- holding arrangements are available to any GP who wishes to apply, and we will be ready to extend the scope of the scheme further as it develops.

    THE PATIENT’S CHARTER

    No one questions the dedication of those who work in the NHS But before the Government’s reforms, the system did not always allow that dedication to produce the service which people should be able to expect.

    The Patient’s Charter sets out clearly what is now expected from the NHS. We have already pledged that in future no one will wait more than two years for treatment on the NHS. In many parts of the country for most treatments, the waiting time is much shorter than this; and we will seek further progress in reducing waiting times.

    Binding guarantees will be set locally for in-patient waiting times, starting with the operations where waiting causes most distress. To ensure that progress on waiting times continues, we intend that from 31 March 1993, no one should have to wait more than 18 months for a hip or knee replacement, or a cataract operation. We are sure that, as now, many hospitals will be able to do better than this.

    We will move to a system under which a named nurse or midwife will be responsible for your care while you are in hospital.

    We will set specific targets for out patient waiting times.

    We will make it easier for patients to find out what services are available from the NHS via a new national NHS information service.

    We will ensure that comparative information about the health standards achieved by health authorities is available to the public.

    Simple systems will be set up to allow complaints to be registered and responses given if things go wrong.

    STRATEGY FOR HEALTH

    This Government has embarked on the first ever strategy for health. Good health requires more than good NHS care when people are sick. A variety of factors – including preventive medicine, diet, exercise, sensible drinking and not smoking – can contribute substantially to improving health across the whole population.

    We will set health objectives to be achieved by the end of the century, including reductions in illness and death from heart disease and cancers.

    We will add new health objectives as the strategy develops.

    CARE SERVICES

    Care services for children, the elderly and the handicapped are provided by local government, health authorities, the private sector and voluntary groups, not directly by central government. But government is indirectly involved as the provider of taxpayers money and through its duty to set standards for publicly and privately provided care.

    As the number of elderly people in the population grows, there will be more frail and vulnerable citizens who need support. Many of them will want to be cared for at home. Others will need residential or nursing home care. It is vital that people should have choice in the type of care available. In all cases people must be able to rely on the quality of care. As we move towards implementation of ‘Caring for People’ in April 1993:

    We will take steps to ensure that individuals who need residential or nursing care continue to have a choice of homes, including independent homes. Money transferred from the Social Security budget to local social services departments will be used for this purpose.

    We will ensure that all local authorities publish information about the social services that are available, including information on standards and complaints procedures.

    We will provide choice in domiciliary and day care.

    We will provide further funding for voluntary organisations to play their vital part in the development of community care services.

    We will support the organisations which help those who care for friends and relatives at home.

    CHILDREN

    This Government introduced the Children Act, a landmark in legislation to protect children. The Act requires childcare facilities to be registered to ensure that standards are maintained throughout the country

    We believe that the diversity of childcare provision in the UK is one of its strengths. It offers parents real choice. Over 90 per cent of 3-4 year-olds are engaged in some form of group activity. We shall continue to encourage the development of childcare arrangements in the voluntary and independent sectors.

    Each local authority will be asked to produce a Local Childcare Plan setting out the provision available in their area.

    We will ensure that the standards implemented through the Children Act are applied sensibly, and do not discourage private or voluntary arrangements which are often best suited to the needs of children and parents.

    We will carry forward a family support initiative, encouraging the voluntary sector to work in partnership with families and local authorities.

    SOCIAL SECURITY

    Our aim is to improve further and modernise Britain’s social security system. We are providing more support than ever before £14 for every £10 spent in 1979, after allowing for inflation. More importantly, this extra help is more clearly focused on those groups with the greatest needs – less well-off pensioners, disabled people and low income families.

    We have also sought to provide those on social security with better incentives to earn, and gain independence. All too often the old system created barriers to work and penalised the thrifty.

    The benefit structure is now more flexible and easier to understand. The new Benefits Agency is simplifying forms and widening choice in methods of payment. We will complete the massive investment in new technology – Europe’s biggest computerisation project – that has made it possible to raise the quality of service to the public. And we will extend ‘Helplines’ and other means of assistance with individual difficulties.

    We will continue to simplify social security forms wherever possible.

    We will set up a new Family Credit telephone advice service to support working families.

    We will establish a new agency to carry out all social security war pensions work with the aim of providing a better, more efficient service to war pensioners and war widows.

    SECURITY IN RETIREMENT

    Britain’s pensioners recognise the security that Conservative government brings – low inflation, savings that grow, firmness in the face of crime, public services that put the customer first. Those who have dedicated their lives to the service of the community deserve that stability

    We will continue to give the fight against inflation our first priority. The basic state retirement pension will remain the foundation for retirement. We will continue to protect its value against price rises, as we have for the last 13 years.

    We also recognise that some pensioners, who have no savings or pensions from their jobs, need extra help. So we will increase the additional support, already up by over £300 million a year since 1989, available to less well-off pensioners.

    The number of those over pensionable age will be far higher in the next century than it is today If we do not make provision now; the burden we will place on our children will be too great. That is why we must encourage people to build up savings, investments, and occupational and personal pensions.

    But Labour policy is hostile to such personal effort; Labour wants pensioners to depend on the State. Failure to control inflation meant that pensioners’ incomes from savings were cut under the last Labour Government.

    About eight in ten pensioners have some sort of second income to top up their state pension. By abolishing the hated earnings rule we have enabled pensioners to keep their retirement pension, even if they take a job in retirement. And we have increased the level of savings that is disregarded in working out entitlement to benefits for pensioners. Personal pensions have brought real choice into retirement provision. Over 4½ million people have set up their own pensions since 1988. We want to see both occupational and personal provision expand much further in the course of the 1990s. (See ‘Opportunity for all – A share in the future’ for our proposals on occupational pensions.)

    As evidence of our continuing commitment to poorer pensioners, we have announced in the Budget an increase of £2 a week for single people, £3 a week for couples, in income support for pensioners. Combined with the increases this April, this measure will provide less well-off pensioners with between £5.73 and £10.70 a week extra.

    We will continue to pay, from April 1993, a rebate at the level recommended by the Government Actuary for all those who contract out of the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme.

    We will legislate to provide a new 1 per cent incentive for holders of personal pensions aged 30 and over from April 1993, when the existing incentive ends.

    We will consider proposals for a new system of rebates to come into effect from April 1996 with the aim of ensuring that personal pensions remain attractive across the age range.

    We are firmly committed to equal treatment for men and women in pensions. Following assessment of the responses to our discussion paper, we will bring forward legislation to achieve this.

    SUPPORTING FAMILIES

    Our reforms have cut away the barriers that meant many breadwinners lost money if they went to work. Family Credit has transformed the prospects of 350,000 low-income families. As a result of improvements since 1988, we have made available an extra £600 million a year in real terms to low- income families with children.

    But we also recognise that all families face extra costs in bringing up children. So we have raised Child Benefit. For a two-child family the increases we are making will, by April 1992, have raised the total value of Child Benefit by almost £3 in a single year, to £17.45 a week.

    Our new Child Support Agency will make sure that absent parents make a proper contribution – and that far more lone parents and their children get the maintenance that is theirs by right. And benefit changes make it easier for more families – including single parents – to combine work and family responsibilities.

    Child Benefit will remain the cornerstone of our policy for all families with children. Its value will increase each year in line with prices.

    Child Benefit will continue to be paid to all families, normally to the mother, and in respect of all children.

    HELP FOR DISABLED PEOPLE

    Under the Conservatives, more disabled people than ever before are getting the help they need and deserve. Since 1979, the number receiving Attendance Allowance has more than trebled; the number receiving Mobility Allowance has risen six fold; the number receiving Invalid Care Allowance has risen 25-fold. Today we spend some £12,000 million a year on benefits for long-term sick and disabled people. Even after allowing for inflation, that is 2½ times as much as Labour spent in the 1970s.

    Disability Living Allowance will bring together the existing Attendance and Mobility Allowance, providing new help to many disabled people who at present get no such help. Disability Working Allowance will make it easier for disabled people to take up a job.

    We are introducing new disability benefits which will, in the next Parliament, bring extra help to at least 300,000 people. By 1993-94 these and other improvements will mean that we will be directing an extra £300 million a year to long-term sick and disabled people.

    The Independent Living Fund has proved a great success in giving severely disabled people an opportunity to live in the community. We are committed to maintaining a fluid which supports the most severely disabled people.

    THE VOLUNTARY SECTOR

    Charities and voluntary groups play a vital role in our national life. Britain is rich in its citizens’ willingness to give time, effort and money to helping others. We have a great tradition of voluntary work at home and overseas. There are now about 350,000 voluntary groups in Britain – and personal donations to charities now amount to some £5,000 million a year.

    We have done much to boost charitable giving.

    Under the Payroll Giving Scheme, employees can now contribute up to £50 a month tax-free.

    Gifts and bequests have been exempted from Inheritance Tax.

    The Gift Aid scheme allows charities to claim tax relief on one-off gifts of more than £400 – a change just announced in the Budget.

    The maximum limit on single charitable gifts qualifying for Income and Corporation Tax relief has been abolished.

    The new Charities legislation will ensure that charities are better managed and properly regulated. We believe this will enhance public confidence in charities and further boost charitable giving.

    The Government gives some £2,500 million a year to support the activities of the voluntary sector (including housing associations). Industry has been generous with its sponsorship and with technical support. But money is not the only contribution that government and business can make. Businesses have become much more practically involved in work in the community And government could do more to encourage new forms of volunteering, to encourage the most effective use of the money it gives, and to bring together voluntary effort at the local and national level.

    We will continue to support the work of the voluntary sector and promote volunteering.

    We will work with voluntary agencies to develop, over the life of the next Parliament, a national bank of information on opportunities for volunteering.

    We will encourage efforts to improve the co-ordination and promote the growth of local volunteer support, building on the success of Neighbourhood Watch to develop a network of voluntary help in local communities.

    ANIMAL WELFARE

    We are leading the European Community in our achievements in improving animal welfare. We have also taken action at home and abroad to improve conservation, and will continue to do so.

    English Nature, which advises the Government on wildlife issues, has embarked on an ambitious programme to restore endangered species. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 provides special protection for 304 species of birds and animals, as well as protecting our heritage of wild plants.

    We are firmly opposed to international trade in rare and protected species such as rhinoceroses, cheetahs, leopards, and bears. We have pushed successfully for an EC ban on large-scale drift nets that threatened dolphins, and we support the UN resolution calling for a moratorium on their use. We support the extension of the moratorium on commercial whaling and have co-sponsored resolutions against ‘scientific’ hunting of whales. We have successfully pressed for an EC ban on the importation of baby seal products and of furs from those countries which permit leghold traps.

    We have set up the Farm Animal Welfare Council and have brought in welfare codes covering livestock on farms and in transit. We are establishing an ethical committee to look at the effects of advanced techniques in animal breeding. We have banned the use of veal crates, and taken action to ensure humane slaughter. We insisted that we should retain our power to stop the export of live horses. At Maastricht we secured a landmark in animal welfare: our partners’ agreement to a declaration that the welfare of animals should be taken into account in the framing of EC legislation.

    We now have the toughest set of controls on animal experimentation in Europe, and the number of animals used in experiments has fallen steadily We have supported stronger laws to protect badgers and stop cruel tethering, and have increased the penalties for organising animal fights and for cruelty.

    We will introduce a Wildlife Enhancement Scheme and expand the Species Recovery Scheme, both to be run by English Nature.

    We have tightened controls on the import of wild birds and will press the EC to do the same.

    We oppose resumption of the trade in ivory or elephant products, and will provide additional support for elephant conservation projects in Africa.

    We will urge our EC partners to bring animal welfare standards up to UK levels, for example by banning veal crates and stalls and tethers for pigs. We will press them to put into practice the principles of the Maastricht declaration.

    We will use our EC Presidency to toughen up EC regulations and improve EC compliance with rules governing animal experiments.

    We will press for higher EC standards for the keeping of battery hens and for the care of animals in transit.

    We will not accept any weakening of our rabies prevention safeguards.

    A BRIGHTER BRITAIN

    Making Britain a brighter and better place in which to live requires a high quality physical environment – including housing, transport and reinvigorated urban areas. The Conservative commitment is both to the re-creation of our civic pride and also to the preservation and integrity of our rural heritage, founded on the core industry of agriculture. Our aim is to enhance the quality of life for the British people.

    HOME OWNERSHIP

    The opportunity to own a home and pass it on is one of the most important rights an individual has in a free society Conservatives have extended that right. It lies at the heart of our philosophy We want to see wealth and security being passed down from generation to generation. Some 4 million more householders own their own homes compared with 1979. The number of former council tenants who have bought their homes has risen to 1.4 million.

    We now need to make it easier for those council tenants living in high-cost areas or on low incomes to move gradually into home ownership, without taking on too heavy a financial burden at any one time. This will bring the benefits of home ownership within the reach of more people and introduce more diversity in local authority estates. We also want to help more leaseholders to own and control the management of their property.

    But we recognise that not everyone can, or will want to, buy his or her home. So we are determined to encourage a strong private rented sector while continuing to safeguard the rights of existing regulated tenants. Bringing empty private sector dwellings back into use will extend choice, make it easier for people to move jobs, and help tackle homelessness.

    We will maintain mortgage tax relief.

    We will continue ‘Right to Buy’ discounts, and ensure that local authorities respond reasonably and rapidly to applications.

    We will introduce a new nation-wide ‘Rents to Mortgages’ scheme, enabling council tenants to take a part-share in their home, gradually stepping up to full ownership.

    We will put more of the Housing Corporation’s £2,000 million budget into Do-It-Yourself shared ownership. This will enable first time buyers to choose a home and buy a share of it – usually 50 per cent – with a housing association paying rent on the rest until they wish to increase their stake in the property.

    We will introduce ‘Commonhold’ legislation, giving residential leaseholders living in blocks of flats the right to acquire the freehold of their block at the market rate. Leaseholders of higher rated houses will also be given the right to buy the freehold of their property. Leaseholders who live in a block which does not qualify will have a new right to buy an extended lease.

    We will introduce statutory time limits for answers by local authorities to standard inquiries by house-buyers, and explore the idea of a new computerised Property Data Bank bringing together information held by the Land Registry and other public bodies.

    We will extend nation-wide the scheme we have piloted to increase private renting, whereby housing associations manage properties, building trust between tenant and private sector landlord.

    As soon as possible in the new Parliament, we will introduce a new ‘Rent a Room’ scheme wider which home-owners will be able to let rooms to lodgers without haying to pay tax on the rent they receive.

    MEETING HOUSING NEED

    We are also committed to securing a better deal for council tenants and increasing the supply of affordable housing for those in housing need. We will introduce more choice, improve management of estates and create new rights as part of the Tenant’s Charter. Our aim will be to give tenants a choice of landlord wherever possible, and make management of both council and housing association stock more responsive to the needs of tenants.

    We will improve the way in which council housing is managed by bringing in new private sector providers operating on contract to the local authority We will introduce more competition and choice, thereby improving services to the tenant and increasing accountability. And we intend to give council tenants new opportunities themselves to improve the flat or house in which they live.

    We have already begun a process of Large-Scale Voluntary Transfer which allows local authority tenants to opt to transfer to a housing association. We wish to see this result in diversity, not local monopoly, and will therefore act to limit the size of blocks that can be transferred.

    Nearly all new social housing is now being built by housing associations. Over the next three years, we are committed to spend nearly £6,000 million through the Housing Corporation to provide 153,000 homes.

    We will do more to bring into use properties owned by central and local government which are standing empty for no good reason. This will enable us to house more people on the waiting list and, in some cases, to provide more opportunities for homesteading.

    Through Estate Action and Housing Action Trusts we have invested £1,000 million in recent years in a concentrated attack on the country’s worst housing estates. Some 360,000 dwellings have been improved as a result. As part of those programmes, on which we are committed to spend a further £1,400 million over the next three years, we are demolishing or redesigning tower blocks and deck access estates, rebuilding on a more human scale. Wherever we can, whenever tenants want it, and where resources allow; we will pull down the eyesores which have blotted our cityscapes and too often provided breeding grounds for crime and delinquency.

    The Government is spending about £100 million tackling the problem of rough sleeping in our cities. As a result we have seen a sharp fall in the numbers who sleep rough on our streets. Working closely with the voluntary sector we will continue to provide help for those sleeping rough, particularly in the capital.

    We will revolutionise the management of council houses and flats. Compulsory competitive tendering will oblige local authorities to bring in managers who demonstrate their ability to deliver the best services to tenants.

    We will continue our programme of Large Scale Voluntary Transfer of council properties to housing associations. But in order to bring management closer to tenants, we intend to reduce the limit on the number of properties transferred in a single batch.

    We will give tenants a new Right to Improve, so they can receive compensation for certain home improvements which they undertake. And we will improve the existing Right to Repair. We will continue our Estate Action and Housing Action Trust programmes which concentrate resources on the worst council estates.

    We will enable tenants to apply for Housing Action Trusts to take over and improve the worst estates.

    We will work with the Housing Corporation to establish a new Ombudsman for housing association tenants. We will also encourage the Corporation to extend opportunities for tenant involvement in the management of housing association properties.

    We will set up a Task Force – headed by an independent chairman – to help bring empty government residential properties back into use. These will either be sold or let on short term leases to those in housing need.

    As part of Estate Action we will introduce a new pilot scheme to promote homesteading. Local authorities will be encouraged to offer those in housing need the opportunity to restore and improve council properties. In exchange, homesteaders will pay a lower rent or be able to buy at a reduced price.

    TRANSPORT

    Under the Conservatives, transport in Britain is being transformed. More competition on the roads and in the air has led to better services and more choice. Our successful policies of deregulation and privatisation have gone hand in hand with a sustained and growing programme of investment. Over 1,000 miles of new trunk roads and motorway have been built, more than 100 bypasses constructed, and some 750 miles of railway electrified. Airlines now operate 50 per cent more flights. More people travel further and more easily than ever before.

    Over the next three years we are committed to the biggest investment in Britain’s transport infrastructure in our history

    We will also seek further opportunities for the private sector to contribute, as it has for example with the Channel Tunnel, the Queen Elizabeth II Bridge at Dartford, the second Severn Bridge and the Birmingham Northern Ring Road. We intend the proposed new rail link from the Channel Tunnel to King’s Cross to be taken forward by the private sector.

    THE RAILWAYS

    We believe that the railways can play a bigger part in responding to Britain’s growing transport needs, and are investing accordingly Next year alone, British Rail’s external finance will top £2,000 million. The new Passenger’s Charter will help to raise the quality of service. For the first time ever performance targets will be set, widely published and rigorously monitored; fare levels will reflect the standards set; and discounts will be paid to regular travellers where performance targets are not met.

    We believe that the best way to produce profound and lasting improvements on the railways is to end BR’s state monopoly. We want to restore the pride and local commitment that died with nationalisation. We want to give the private sector the opportunity to operate existing rail services and introduce new ones, for both passengers and freight.

    A significant number of companies have already said that they want to introduce new railway services as soon as the monopoly is ended. We will give them that chance.

    Our plans for the railways are designed to bring better services for all passengers as rapidly as possible. We believe that franchising provides the best way of achieving that. Long term, as performance improves and services become more commercially attractive as a result of bringing in private sector disciplines, it will make sense to consider whether some services can be sold outright.

    In the next Parliament:

    By franchising, we will give the private sector the fullest opportunity to operate existing passenger railway services.

    Required standards of punctuality, reliability and quality of service will be specified by franchises; subsidy will continue to be provided where necessary; arrangements to sustain the current national network of services will be maintained; and through-ticketing will be required.

    A new Rail Regulator – who will ensure that all companies have fair access to the track – will award the franchises and make sure that the franchisees honour the terms of the contract.

    BR’s accounting systems and internal structures will be reorganised. One part of BR will continue to be responsible for all track and infrastructure. The operating side of BR will continue to provide passenger services until they are franchised out to the private sector.

    The franchise areas will be decided only after technical discussions with BR. But our aim will be to franchise out services in such a way as to reflect regional and local identity and make operating sense. We want to recover a sense of pride in our railways and to recapture the spirit of the old regional companies.

    We will sell BR’s freight operations outright. We will also sell its parcels business.

    We will be prepared to sell stations – which we want to be centres of activity – either to franchisees or independent companies.

    The Railway Inspectorate will be given full powers to ensure the highest standards of safety.

    ROADS

    Nine out of every ten journeys, whether passenger or freight, are made by road. We must therefore continue to provide an efficient road network. In the years ahead we will concentrate particularly on the bypass programme.

    As part of the Citizen’s Charter, we will bring forward reforms which will enable the private sector to start filling the gaps in the motorway service area network and to introduce more variety Rather than large, intrusive stations at long intervals we should see smaller, more frequent service areas providing a much wider range of facilities.

    We will investigate ways of speeding up, within the Department of Transport, the procedures for building new roads. We will continue our campaign to keep ‘coning off’ on motorways to a minimum by extending lane rental schemes, under which contractors who fall behind schedule incur financial penalties. Next year two-thirds of all motorway maintenance work will be carried out in this way.

    Britain has the best road safety record in the European Community In spite of the vastly increased volume of traffic, fewer people are now killed on our roads than at any time since 1948. Our aim is to improve on that record still further.

    In spite of the benefits they bring, cars carry an environmental cost. In Britain catalytic converters will be compulsory on all new cars from the end of 1992. This will eliminate virtually all harmful exhaust gases, except for the emission of CO2. The only certain way of cutting CO2 emissions is to encourage fuel efficiency. Action is needed at international level and we will play our full part.

    Buses have an increasingly important part to play The deregulation of long-distance coach services has led to a major expansion in reliable and cheap services. Bus deregulation outside London has increased mileage by 16 per cent. We now propose to take deregulation and privatisation further.

    We will improve road transport by:

    Investing £6,300 million in our trunk road and motorway network over the next three years, concentrating particularly on bypasses. Some 40 new ones will be opened by 1993 on trunk roads alone.

    Increasing penalties for those convicted of drink driving.

    Installing cameras at dangerous road junctions to film those who drive through red traffic lights.

    Encouraging local councils, assisted by a special budget we have set aside, to introduce pedestrian priority areas and cycle lanes.

    Privatising the remaining 39 local authority bus companies.

    Deregulating buses in London and privatising the London Buses subsidiaries. A new London Bus Executive will be responsible for bus- stops, stands and stations and for contracting out socially necessary services. The concessionary fares scheme in London will continue.

    Changing the system under which motorway service areas are provided.

    Encouraging action internationally, and within our own motor industry, to promote more fuel-efficient vehicles.

    AVIATION AND SHIPPING

    More competition in aviation means more choice, better services and lower fares. That is why we have been pressing within the EC for full liberalisation of services. We also want to see more transatlantic flights, particularly to regional airports. People in the regions should not have to travel to London in order to fly to the United States. Direct flights would boost local economies and apply downward pressure on fares. The key regional airports are still in local authority ownership. They should be well placed to benefit from an increase in the number of direct point-to-point flights. But if they are really to grow and prosper, they need access to private capital, freed from the constraints of public ownership.

    Air safety cannot be compromised. Over the next five years the Civil Aviation Authority will. invest £750 million in modernising its systems.

    More can be done to cut some of the regulatory burdens our shipping industry faces. We will ensure that the recommendations of the Government Industry Joint Working Party are put into effect as rapidly as possible.

    We will further liberalise transatlantic air services and encourage more international flights to and from regional airports.

    We will encourage local authorities to sell their airports.

    We will reduce airport congestion by increasing the capacity of our air traffic control

    We will continue to campaign within the EC for further liberalisation, particularly of cabotage, so that there are more commercial opportunities for British companies.

    LONDON’S TRANSPORT

    A major programme of renewal and modernisation is transforming public transport in London – including the biggest expansion of London’s rail network since the 1930s.

    The £750 million upgrading of the Central Line is already under way, to be followed by a similar programme on the Northern Line; the Jubilee Line extension and Crossrail will follow.

    London Underground is planning to invest £3,500 million over the next three years. It has introduced an ambitious Company Plan which will lead to better service, cleaner trains and more staff at stations and on platforms. Their new Charter will be published shortly

    Responsibility for the Docklands Light Railway has been transferred to the London Docklands Development Corporation. As its performance continues to improve, we expect to see growing private sector interest in purchasing it outright.

    We will seek to privatise the Docklands Light Railway during the lifetime of the next Parliament.

    The new Jubilee Line is being extended to Docklands and South East London and will be followed by the East-West Crossrail, linking Paddington to Liverpool Street. The Docklands Light Railway is being extended at an eventual cost of £800 million.

    London Underground’s Charter will set out tougher new standards and what it will do to compensate passengers should it fail to meet those standards.

    LOCAL GOVERNMENT

    Local councillors – some 25,000 men and women throughout Britain – are responsible for some of our most important public services. Since 1979 we have sought to create an accountable local government system capable of delivering high quality local services at a price that local people are prepared to pay.

    Conservatives councils in shires, districts and cities have been at the forefront of these reforms. In a responsive and efficient manner, they have demonstrated how to deliver good services at an affordable price.

    Over the past 13 years, we have:

    held down unjustified rises in the cost of local government;

    abolished the power of local councils to shift the burden of taxation on to local business, for the first time limiting the overall rise in business rates to no more than the rate of inflation;

    abolished an expensive and bureaucratic layer of government in London and other big cities;

    developed the local authority role from direct provider to effective enabler, encouraging many tenants to buy their own homes, allowing schools the freedom to manage their own affairs and improving the quality of local services by allowing private business to compete for contracts.

    Labour threaten all these reforms. They would ‘uncap’ local spending, leading to higher local and national taxes. They would ‘uncap’ business rates, threatening a return to the 1980s when the English rate poundage rose 37 per cent more than inflation. They would abolish the requirement on local authorities to seek value for money through competitive tendering. They would remove the freedom of local communities to preserve their grammar schools. They would introduce a new; expensive layer of government bureaucracy at regional level. They would return local government finance to the bad old days of domestic rates, with unrestrained power for local councils to charge householders as much as they like. And they would abolish the Audit Commission, which not only maintains the probity of local government accounting, but also pioneered the drive for better quality of service and value for money in local government.

    We now propose further reforms in the structure, finance and accountability of local government. In the meantime, we have transferred a further share of the burden of financing local services to central government. Today, local community chargepayers bear only a small proportion of the cost of local councils.

    We will set up a commission to examine, area by area, the appropriate local government arrangements in England. Local communities will be fully consulted and their loyalties and interests will be central to the commission s task in deciding whether in any area a single tier of local government could provide better accountability and greater efficiency.

    We are looking at ways in which the internal management of local authorities might become more effective.

    We are applying the principles of the Citizen’s Charter to local government, requiring the publication of more information which will enable local people to judge the efficiency of their councils in providing services.

    We will continue to ‘cap’ local spending where necessary.

    As we announced in the Budget, no one’s Uniform Business Rate will go up this year by more than the rate of inflation 4.1 per cent. And we have speeded up the benefits of revaluation for those businesses who gain from it.

    In future years, we will maintain our pledge to prevent UBR poundage rising by more than inflation.

    We will replace the Community Charge with a new Council Tax in April 1993. The Council Tax will be simple and straightforward to administer. It will be fair and will rightly reflect both the value of the property and the number of adults who live in it.

    Single householders, who suffered under the rates, will receive a 25 per cent discount. By grouping properties into a limited number of bands, the Council Tax also avoids the punitive bills which would be imposed by an unfettered rating system of the kind proposed by Labour. Students and people on low incomes will not have to pay.

    CITIES

    We take pride in our cities. Right across Britain they have been given a new lease of life. From London to Glasgow; from Cardiff to Newcastle, historic buildings have been restored and areas which had been run down have been transformed. The £4,000 million Action for Cities programme underlines the Conservative commitment to our inner cities and the people who live there. It highlights our determination to spread opportunity as widely as possible. We want all our people to share in growing prosperity and to have a stake in the country’s future. Much has been achieved in recent years. The Urban Development Corporations and the wide range of central government grants have helped to regenerate many of our inner city areas. But more remains to be done.

    The best way to restore the spirit of enterprise which first made our cities great is for local people, the private sector, the voluntary sector and local and central government, to work together in partnership. That is the principle which lies behind City Challenge. Its new approach of competitive bidding has already galvanized towns and cities into bringing forward imaginative proposals for regeneration. It has improved co-ordination, secured better value for money and encouraged programmes which tackle problems on a number of fronts.

    We will continue to extend City Challenge and allocate a greater proportion of resources by competitive bidding.

    We will support Urban Development Corporations in their critical task of urban regeneration.

    We will bring together resources targeted inner city programmes into a single budget. This will mean that funding will go where it is most needed locally rather than according to a set of priorities determined in Whitehall.

    We will strengthen the machinery for co-ordination in the regions. New, integrated regional offices of the appropriate Whitehall departments will be established so that business and local government will have only one port of call.

    We will establish a new Urban Regeneration Agency to pull together our efforts to clear up and develop derelict land, helping to bring it back into commercial use and provide new opportunities for local people.

    Working in the urban areas, the URA will administer much of the Urban programme of the Department of the Environment. It will have a dual function. First, outside the existing UDC areas, it will reclaim derelict land, assembling suitable sites for redevelopment using vesting or compulsory purchase powers where necessary Second, it will itself be able to develop land in partnership with the private sector. This represents a major step forward in unlocking the commercial potential of our inner cities and of breathing new life into areas which may have been derelict for many years.

    But our focus is not just on physical regeneration. We want to see more opportunities for training, more encouragement to enterprise, better education and more measures to tackle drugs and crime.

    Encouraging enterprise, improving the environment and providing new opportunities for the unemployed are central to our inner city policies. Remotivating individuals and providing the right conditions for business are the only ways to make lasting change.

    We will offer the Loan Guarantee Scheme for small firms on more generous terms in inner city areas. The scheme will be extended from Task Force areas to include successful City Challenge bidders.

    We will make more people eligible for our successful Job Interview Guarantee Scheme, which links unemployed people with local lobs.

    We will carry out pilot projects for the ‘foyer’ concept, whereby young people are given a place in a hostel if in exchange they give a commitment to train and look for work.

    We will pilot a number of ‘back to work’ bonus schemes in inner city areas for the long-term unemployed.

    We will extend customised training under the Job Link programme to include City Challenge areas.

    We will make inner city Task Force and City Challenge areas eligible for regional innovation grants.

    We are also determined to raise standards in our inner city schools, to crack down on truancy, and to help prepare young people for the world of work.

    The City Technology Colleges show what can be done. They are overwhelmingly popular with parents and pupils and are doing much to raise standards for children of all abilities in the inner cities.

    Under the Citizen’s Charter, we shall soon be able to identify much more precisely than ever before those schools which are delivering unacceptably low standards. So will parents. We will publish test results, exam results and truancy rates and ensure that there is regular independent inspection. This will enable us to put the spotlight on those inner city LEAs and schools which are failing their pupils.

    We will continue to seek opportunities to open new CTCs in deprived inner city areas.

    We will ensure that more schools, especially in the inner cities, have the opportunity to develop their technological expertise.

    Tackling crime and the fear of crime forms a vital part of the strategy to make our inner cities better places to live and work. The Safer Cities initiative, launched in 1988, has successfully brought together local groups and agencies to tackle crime in some of our worst affected urban areas. Twenty schemes are already in operation.

    We will double the number of Safer Cities Schemes to cover 40 urban areas.

    LONDON

    London is a magnet to visitors and business from across the world. Since 1979 we have invested heavily to secure that status. Billions of pounds have gone into improving air, rail and underground links. We will continue that programme of modernisation. We are determined to sustain into the next century London’s special position as one of the world’s leading capital cities. We reject Labour’s plan to recreate a bureaucratic and wasteful GLC. Instead, as part of our Millennium programme, we will launch a London 2000 initiative. The Secretary of State for the Environment will convene a new private sector forum to promote London internationally as a business, tourist and cultural centre. The Secretary of State will also chair a new Cabinet sub-committee to bring together Ministers from all key departments and co-ordinate policy for the further improvement of London. A single Minister will be given responsibility for co-ordinating London’s transport services. London’s place as a world centre for financial and insurance services is pre-eminent; we intend to keep it that way And we will support the vigorous cultural life of the capital, which has seen new galleries, theatres and museums opening over the last decade.

    We will launch a London 2000 initiative.

    We will convene a new private sector forum to promote London’s position internationally.

    We will establish a new Cabinet sub committee to co-ordinate policy on London.

    We will give a single Transport Minister responsibility for services in London. He will chair a new Transport Working Group which will bring together public transport operators from both public and private sectors – to discuss transport issues in London.

    THE COUNTRYSIDE

    We have always cared for the countryside. We support its major industries and way of life, while recognising the place it holds in the hearts of those who live in towns.

    We want to protect our most beautiful landscapes, conserve the abundance and variety of our wildlife and habitats, promote access and public enjoyment of the countryside, and encourage public participation in caring for the countryside.

    But the countryside is more than just a pretty picture. It is a place where people live and work, as they have done in the past and will do in the future. In providing our public services, we will continue to recognise the particular needs of people who live in the countryside.

    We will continue to promote a diverse rural economy, balancing the need for jobs, housing and services in rural areas with protection of the rural environment.

    AGRICULTURE

    Centuries of farming have shaped our countryside. Now farming is at a crossroads, both here and in the rest of the European Community World-wide pressure to reduce protectionist measures, and the need to contain the cost of the Common Agricultural Policy, mean that farmers will face reduced support and increased competition.

    We believe that farming in the UK can meet these challenges. But many farmers will need help to adapt to the new conditions, and we will continue to provide assistance.

    It will become increasingly important for farmers to obtain a greater proportion of their income from the market. We will encourage farmers, retailers and manufacturers to work together to increase our share of the European food market.

    We are committed to reducing the burden of regulation on business in general, and farming in particular. We will not accept UK farmers being put at a disadvantage by EC laws being applied differently in other countries.

    Responsible farmers have always combined efficient farming with care for the countryside. We will continue to encourage this approach through schemes to protect landscape and habitats of special importance. We will also maintain direct support for farming in the Less Favoured Areas in ways which encourage good environmental practice

    We will seek a reform of the CAP which brings agriculture closer to the market; reduces the costs to taxpayers and consumers; is implemented at a pace which the industry can bear; affects all Community farmers equitably, regardless of size or location; and recognises the importance of environmental protection.

    We will build on the producer marketing initiatives which we have already launched, including the Group Marketing Grant.

    We will assist the Milk Marketing Board’s move to a new structure which will be better able to protect the interests of producers and consumers in the Single Market.

    We will publish target response times for grant and licence applications made to the Ministry of Agriculture.

    We will take forward proposals for radical liberalisation of the agricultural tenancy laws in order to make more land available for rent, especially for new entrants.

    We will enforce effective pollution control regulations while helping farmers to meet the high standards required.

    We will press for an agreement in the EC’s Agricultural Council which will allow us to provide financial encouragement for organic agriculture.

    FORESTRY

    Forestry is a traditional rural industry, which also affects the landscape, and gives pleasure to millions of people. The needs of a successful industry, landscape conservation, and public access must all be accommodated; and we will reorganise the Forestry Commission to reflect these objectives more effectively.

    We will plant a new national forest in the Midlands and community forests elsewhere.

    We will review the effectiveness of the current incentives for forestry investment.

    We will produce guidance on the preparation of local Indicative Forestry Strategies designed to encourage new woodlands, while steering planting away from sensitive areas.

    FISHING

    Fishing is a vital industry in many parts of our islands. Many fishermen have done well in recent years but they now face great pressure on the fish stocks. This means that fishing quotas are likely to fall in coming years in order to preserve the long-term future of the fisheries. We will continue to work for the profitable and sustainable future of our fishing fleet.

    We are determined to see that the renegotiation of the Common Fisheries Policy protects the interests of UK fishermen and retains our share of the Community’s fishing opportunities.

    We will introduce a balanced package of measures, including decommissioning and controls on fishing activity, to conserve fish and safeguard the future of the industry.

    RURAL JOBS AND SERVICES

    Changes in agriculture and other traditional industries will affect employment opportunities in the countryside. We will continue to target help through the Rural Development Commission, and ask the RDC to review the Rural Development Areas to ensure that its efforts are targeted on the areas of most need. We are committed to developing tourism in ways which provide all-year-round jobs and bring benefit to less well-known parts of our countryside, without damaging the environment. We have recently published new planning policy guidance which makes it clear how the countryside can benefit from new businesses and jobs, if the location and design of development are handled with sensitivity

    In local government, many of our shire counties and districts have led the way in raising the quality of public service. Local post offices, local transport and local schools all have an important role to play in sustaining rural life.

    We will consult on our recently published draft planning policy guidance designed to provide a clear framework for decisions on developments to aid tourism.

    We will widen the availability of the Rural Development Commission’s successful Redundant Buildings Grant Scheme, and strengthen other RDC programmes.

    We will maintain our special programmes to promote affordable homes in rural areas.

    We are fully committed to maintaining a national network of post offices.

    We will continue to assist local authorities who want to subsidise rural transport.

    We will enable village schools that wish to apply for Grant-Maintained status to do so in small groups, thus enabling them to share management tasks while still enjoying the benefits of independence.

    The expansion of GP fund-holding will bring particular benefits to rural areas because of the convenience of different services – such as physiotherapy and consultant appointments – being offered in the GP’s surgery.

    CARING FOR THE COUNTRYSIDE

    Some of our finest landscapes are designated as National Parks. All National Park authorities will become independent Boards, which will make it easier for them to carry out their tasks effectively The New Forest will be given a statutory status which will give it as great a level of protection as any National Park.

    Last summer the Government launched an experiment in Countryside Stewardship’. This aims to conserve, enhance and re-create fine landscapes so that they may be enjoyed and appreciated by the public. The response from farmers, landowners and environmental bodies has been very positive. We therefore propose to expand the scheme and to introduce a new scheme to preserve hedgerows – a much valued feature of the English landscape, and a haven for wildlife.

    The Government endorsed and supported the Countryside Commission’s target designed to bring 120,000 miles of rights of way into good order by the end of the century.

    At parish level, individuals can work together either to safeguard the character of their local village, or to improve its appearance. Local action can also preserve local wildlife and habitats. Under the Rural Environmental Action Scheme, grants of up to £2,000 per project will be available to support local environmental action.

    The Government is keen to promote the fullest possible use of inland waterways for leisure, recreation and amenity, in the regeneration of inner cities and for freight transport where appropriate. But we recognise that the various uses of canals and rivers must be properly managed to protect the character and environment of the waterways.

    We will expand the Countryside Stewardship Scheme to cover the conservation of historic landscapes, meadows, pasture and hedgerows. Public access to qualifying schemes will be encouraged.

    We will introduce a Hedgerow Incentive Scheme to help preserve hedgerows of particular historic, landscape or wildlife importance.

    We will contribute to the Countryside Commission’s new Parish Path Partnership designed to stimulate local maintenance and improvement schemes.

    We will continue to support the development and redevelopment of our canals, as well as enhancing the environmental standards of our waterways.

    THE ENVIRONMENT

    The Conservative Party’s commitment to the environment is beyond doubt. Other parties promise the earth. We have taken action – both nationally and internationally – to preserve it.

    Environmental protection can impose financial costs on producers, consumers and taxpayers, so we must make sure the threat of damage is a real one. But we also accept the precautionary principle – the need to act, where there is significant risk of damage, before the scientific evidence is conclusive. And we recognise that higher environmental standards can offer new opportunities for business.

    We published the first comprehensive White Paper on the Environment in 1990. It covered everything from the stratosphere to the street corner. We will continue to publish annual progress reports.

    This Conservative Government has taken a lead in working to protect the ozone layer. We will strive to accelerate the eradication of ozone depleting substances.

    One of the most important issues facing all countries is the threat of global warming. Effective action to combat global warming must be international action. Again we have taken a lead. The Prime Minister was the first world leader to announce his intention to attend the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro this June. We have said that we will consider stabilising our CO2 emissions earlier than our existing conditional target of 2005. We have promised to provide new and additional resources to help the developing countries to tackle their environmental problems.

    Within Britain, and ahead of other European countries, we have introduced the concept of integrated pollution control.

    We have set up, for the first time, powerful co-ordinating machinery within Whitehall to ensure that environmental considerations are given due weight in all decision-making.

    We are committed to openness on environmental matters. We support the establishment of a European Environment Agency to provide a Europe-wide environmental database. We believe that the public should have access to information held by the pollution control authorities. Public registers are now provided by bodies such as the National Rivers Authority and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution.

    We will establish a new Environment Agency which will bring together the functions of the National Rivers Authority, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Pollution and the waste regulation functions of local authorities.

    The new EA will have a statutory duty to publish an annual State of the Environment report.

    Within the European Community we will press for the introduction of integrated pollution control on the UK model.

    TOWARDS THE MILLENNIUM

    A more prosperous Britain can afford to be ambitious. We can aspire to excellence in the arts, broadcasting and sport. We can use our increased leisure time, energy and money, to improve life for ourselves and our families. The National Lottery we propose to introduce can be used to restore our heritage and promote projects which will become a source of national pride.

    National Lotteries have been found useful at several times in our history. The British Museum was founded out of the proceeds of such a lottery. Fourteen years ago, a Royal Commission recommended the creation of a National Lottery in Britain to provide extra money for deserving causes. The case has become even stronger as British people gain more opportunities to participate in foreign lotteries – thus increasing the risk that funds which we could put to good use in Britain will be diverted abroad.

    We believe a well-run, carefully controlled form of national lottery would be popular, while raising money for many good causes.

    We will canvass views on how such a lottery should be run and controlled, and how it would fit within the pattern of charitable fund-raising in Britain.

    We believe that the funds generated by a National Lottery should be used to enhance the life of our nation. People who enjoy the arts, sport, Britain’s heritage and fine countryside could all benefit from the proceeds from a National Lottery. Charities, right across the country and covering such areas as medical research, will also be potential beneficiaries.

    THE MILLENNIUM FUND

    We will be consulting widely on the best way to distribute the proceeds of a lottery. But we have decided that part of the proceeds should be put aside, year by year, into a Millennium Fund specifically dedicated to projects which will commemorate the start of the twenty-first century and will be enjoyed by future generations.

    We therefore propose to introduce a National Lottery from 1994, which would help provide funds for a number of good causes in the artistic, sporting, heritage and charitable fields – and from which some funds would be put aside for a Millennium Fund.

    The Millennium Fund could be used, for example:

    To restore the fabric of our nation: our great inheritance of buildings which symbolise and enrich our national life.

    To help endow our cities and regions with facilities to enhance the celebration of United Kingdom 2000, such as the sporting facilities Manchester would need to host the 2000 Olympics.

    To help another major city – chosen by competition – to hold an international trade fair designed to be a showcase of British innovation for the twenty-first century.

    To enable voluntary groups and local communities to bid for funding for their own Millennium projects for local restoration schemes, or for improving the amenities of canals and rivers, as a source of enjoyment for local people and a habitat for wildlife.

    To provide Millennium bursaries for young people (and newly retired people) offering their time, energy and commitment to schemes designed to change the face of the United Kingdom by the year 2000.

    THE ARTS

    Britain has a great artistic heritage and a lively contemporary arts scene. The arts have flourished in recent years, with growing attendance at theatre, opera, dance and arts festivals.

    We have supported this by increasing the public funding of the arts, by 60 per cent in real terms since 1979, and introducing new incentives to personal giving. The arts have also forged new partnerships with local authorities, businesses and private patrons. Business sponsorship in particular has expanded hugely.

    We have set up new Regional Arts Boards and supported the Scottish and Welsh Arts Councils in order to diversify and enrich cultural life throughout the country.

    We have financed the European Arts Festival to be held throughout Britain during our Presidency of the Community in the second half of this year, as well as the first National Music Day in June.

    In this year’s Budget, we announced further tax relief on film-making in this country. Our aim is to make the performing arts, museums and our heritage accessible to all. We will encourage the young to become involved and will facilitate access for the disabled.

    The National Lottery will provide a new source of finance for the arts.

    We will maintain support for the arts and continue to develop schemes for greater sponsorship in co-operation with business and private individuals.

    We will re-examine the role of the Arts Council, as many of its functions are now carried out regionally.

    We will continue our support of libraries as educational, cultural and community centres, and urge local authorities to keep up standards. We will complete the new British Library building for which we have provided £450 million.

    SPORT

    Success in sport is a source of national pride. Enjoyment of sport can enrich every life. We have given strong support to the Sports Council and its efforts to raise participation in sport. We actively support Manchester’s bid to bring the Olympic Games to Britain.

    We want to restore the good image of football. Tough action has cut down football hooliganism. We have helped to establish the Football Trust, which now devotes £20 million a year to improving the safety of grounds.

    Under the National Curriculum all primary and secondary age pupils will follow a course of PE. All pupils will be taught to swim by the age of 11.

    We will continue to encourage private sector sponsorship of sport. We will encourage more effective use of local sport and leisure facilities through compulsory competitive tendering. We want to see more dual use of school playing fields and halls and will give schools more freedom in their management.

    We are asking Local Education Authorities not to make sales of school playing fields in future unless there is no evidence of long-term need.

    Sport, too, will benefit from the resources generated by the National Lottery

    We will actively support Britain’s bid to host the 2000 Olympic Games in Manchester. We will provide £55 million towards the preparation of the site and key facilities in the first stage of the bid, and we will ensure that the project, whether successful or not, contributes to the effective regeneration of East Manchester.

    We will set up a new Business Sponsorship for Sport scheme. This is expected to raise £6 million in its first year to support local and youth sport.

    OUR HERITAGE

    Public interest and involvement in Britain’s heritage has never been greater. We have created in the past decade English Heritage and the National Heritage Memorial Fund to give greater focus and drive to the Government’s policies. The National Trust and private owners take a leading part in preserving our almost unrivalled heritage. Government will work in partnership to secure our heritage for the benefit of future generations.

    Our cathedrals are among our national glories. We therefore launched the Cathedral Repair Grant Scheme in April 1991, providing £11.5 million over three years.

    We have increased, to £12 million, the grant to the NHMF for the purchase of historic properties, objects and collections. The Government also provides help to private owners through English Heritage repair grants, and tax relief in return for commitments on upkeep and public access.

    We want to preserve the special character of our old town and city centres. We will encourage councils to ensure that new developments are in character with the past; to maintain buildings of importance to the character of towns and cities; to limit unnecessary street furniture and signs; and to plant trees and preserve historic patterns and open spaces.

    The National Lottery will also provide funds for the preservation of our heritage.

    We will continue to provide substantial financial assistance for the protection and preservation of the heritage.

    Together with the heritage agencies, we will work to make heritage sites accessible to the public.

    BROADCASTING

    We are proud of our record of extending choice, encouraging new producers and maintaining high standards in broadcasting. We opened the way to the setting-up of Channel 4, independent radio, satellite television and multi-channel cable TV networks. The 1990 Broadcasting Act means that three new independent radio services and a fifth television channel will be set up during the next Parliament.

    Over two million homes already receive satellite TV We have now licensed well over a hundred cable TV networks and this new industry expects to invest £3,000 million over the next five years. In coming years, British viewers will have an increasing choice of channels and programmes. The new and sophisticated cable networks will open the way not only to new telecommunication services, but also to the spread of emerging technologies such as high definition television.

    We attach great importance to the work of the Broadcasting Standards Council, which we set up under the 1990 Act. All television and radio companies accept the need to maintain standards of taste and decency in their treatment of sex and violence and their use of bad language.

    The European Community regulates standards in satellite broadcasts originating from each Member State. We were one of the first countries to ratify a new Council of Europe convention applying similar rules to all its Member States. We also, in the Broadcasting Act, brought in sanctions against the transmission of offensive satellite broadcasts from abroad, and made it an offence for advertisers and equipment suppliers to support such programmes.

    Independent television producers are benefiting from the requirement put on the BBC and ITV to commission a quarter of all their programmes, excluding the news, from outsiders. There are now great opportunities for independent producers to sell their programmes to new television channels and international markets, and there is much greater choice for viewers as a result.

    In 1996, the BBC’s Charter comes up for renewal. This will be considered against the background of the much more varied and competitive broadcasting environment which our policies have created. It is important that there should be a wide public debate about the future direction the BBC should take.

    We will back the work of the Broadcasting Standards Council and remain vigilant about ensuring high standards in satellite broadcasts from abroad.

    We will publish a discussion paper on the future of the BBC recognising its special responsibilities for providing public service broadcasting.

    A UNITED KINGDOM

    The United Kingdom is far greater than the sum of its parts. Over many centuries its nations have worked, and frequently fought, side by side. Together, we have made a unique mark on history. Together, we hold a special place in international affairs. To break up the Union now would diminish our influence for good in the world, just at the time when it is most needed.

    Nationalist plans for independence are a recipe for weakness and isolation. Higher taxes and political uncertainty would deter investment and destroy jobs. The costly Labour and Liberal devolution proposals for Scotland and Wales have the same drawbacks. They do not intend to bring about separation, but run that risk. They could feed, but not resolve, grievances that arise in different parts of Britain. They would deprive Scotland and Wales of their rightful seats in the United Kingdom Cabinet, seats the Conservatives are determined to preserve. We believe strongly that we should go on working together in full partnership in a Union that has served every part of the United Kingdom well.

    The plans for devolution put forward by the other parties would have a grave impact not just on Scotland and Wales, but also on England. They propose new and costly regional assemblies in England, for which there is no demand. We will oppose all such unnecessary layers of government.

    The Union has brought us strength both economically and politically Yet it has preserved the historic and cultural diversity of our islands. Our constitution is flexible, fair and tolerant. It has made this country one of the best places in which to live, work and bring up our children. These benefits cannot be tossed away lightly. We will fight to preserve the Union, a promise which only the Conservatives can give at this election.

    SCOTLAND

    Scotland has achieved an economic and cultural regeneration over the past 13 years. The Scottish economy has responded vigorously to the policies we have introduced to liberate enterprise, and many more people are now saving, investing and owning their homes. The public services are better funded and more efficient. There has been a flowering of Scottish culture.

    Scotland enjoys a rich and distinct tradition and her own institutions, which we have preserved and strengthened. Scotland has its own framework for the encouragement of enterprise, investment and training; its own education system which continues to excel, with more pupils leaving school better qualified and more going on to further and higher education; its own health budgets which deliver high standards of care; and its own glorious inheritance of buildings and countryside.

    A separate Manifesto for Scotland sets out our record in detail and our proposals for building on these achievements. In this document, therefore, we list only a selection.

    Business in Scotland has received a boost from our creation of Scottish Enterprise and the Local Enterprise Companies. We have formed Scottish Trade International to help our exporters, as Locate in Scotland does for inward investors. To assist business further, we will complete the harmonisation of business rates in Scotland with those in the rest of the country.

    The massive bureaucracies and layers of local government have few supporters in Scotland. We will continue to press local authorities to provide the value for money and the quality of services that people expect. We will press ahead with the reform of the current burdensome system of local government by introducing single tier councils throughout Scotland.

    We will continue to strengthen Scotland’s education system for the benefit of parents, pupils and teachers. We will respond to the proposals of the Howie Committee to ensure that upper secondary education matches the best in Europe. We will continue to increase the number of places in higher and further education and will complete our reforms of the system.

    We will extend our reforms to improve NHS patient care in Scotland. Scotland has led the way in setting limits to waiting-times for operations and will now be reducing these further.

    We are creating a new body, Scottish Natural Heritage, with overall responsibility for conserving the natural environment. We will go further, and will create a Scottish Environmental Protection Agency to bring together powers to ensure the quality of our air, rivers and bathing waters.

    WALES

    Since 1979, the economy of Wales has changed spectacularly With only 5 per cent of the United Kingdom’s population, Wales has consistently enjoyed 20 per cent of its inward investment. New industries have sprung up. Self-employment has risen by two-thirds. Welsh manufacturing now has the highest productivity of any part in the United Kingdom.

    Land made derelict by old industries has been reclaimed on a massive scale. The Cardiff Bay development and the Ebbw Vale Garden Festival are outstanding examples, together with the Programme for the Valleys.

    Since 1979, we have spent more than £3,000 million on roads in Wales. Spending on health has increased by 60 per cent in real terms since 1979. We have spent more than £5 million on our radical Waiting Times Initiative, leading to the treatment of 35,000 extra patients. In school we are spending nearly half as much again, in real terms per pupil, as in 1979. And there has been an enormous expansion in the training budget.

    More Welsh homes – 72 per cent – are owned by those who live in them than in the United Kingdom as a whole. Since the ‘Right to Buy’ was introduced in 1980, we have enabled almost 90,000 council and housing association tenants to buy their own homes.

    A separate Manifesto, in both English and Welsh, sets out our full programme for building on these achievements for Wales.

    We will set up a Welsh Economic Council to bring together the various bodies with interests in inward investment, tourism and small business to advise the Secretary of State.

    We aim to remove all significant dereliction from Wales by the end of the new Parliament.

    We will promote the work of the Countryside Council for Wales, in order to protect the countryside and those who earn their livelihood there.

    We will give further resources to our Rural Initiative. And we will continue to support hill farmers through the Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowances.

    We will continue to invest heavily in road improvements, including the second Severn Bridge, completing the M4 in South Wales and the M5 in North Wales.

    We will continue with our record hospital building programme.

    We will continue to offer generous funding for Housing for Wales and concentrate our efforts on the special needs of rural Wales. All major publicly funded housing developments will make adequate provision for the less well off.

    We will introduce a new Welsh Language Act.

    We will publish a White Paper on local government reform this autumn with a view to establishing unitary authorities, based on the historic counties and county boroughs. We will ensure a full role for Community Councils under these arrangements.

    NORTHERN IRELAND

    We have upheld our pledge that Northern Ireland will remain an integral part of the United Kingdom in accordance with the democratically expressed wishes of the majority of the people who live there. It is a pledge that only the Conservative and Unionist Party can give. Conservative candidates are standing in our name and in that cause.

    Our overriding objective in Northern Ireland is to eliminate the evil of terrorism. This requires progress in four areas: security, economic, social and political. The security forces in Northern Ireland perform their duties with courage and professionalism. They are entitled to expect all the necessary encouragement, and legal and material support from the Government. Under the Conservatives, the strength of the RUC has been increased, while the Emergency Provisions Act 1991 contains new powers to combat terrorist funding.

    Northern Ireland is sharing in the economic transformation of the United Kingdom as a result of Conservative policies. Belfast is attracting significant new private investment. Harland and Wolff and Shorts have been successfully privatised. Major work is also under way to regenerate Londonderry and many of Ulster’s smaller towns. We will continue to pursue policies to encourage enterprise and bring new jobs – by contrast with Labour, whose plan for a national minimum wage would hit the Province particularly hard.

    In the new Parliament we will continue to seek to re-establish stable institutions of Government in Northern Ireland, so that powers currently exercised by Ministers in the Northern Ireland Office can be returned to locally-elected politicians.

    We will always give the security forces our full backing within the rule of the law, and – against Labour opposition – ensure that they have the special powers they need to protect the whole community from violence.

    We will complete the privatisation of Northern Ireland Electricity, transfer the water and sewage services to the private sector, and examine ways of bringing private sector skills into the management of Northern Ireland Railways.

    We will continue to pursue policies designed to alleviate social needs, to promote equity of treatment and to widen the sense of common purpose which is growing in the Province.

    We will build on the close security co-operation that has been established with the Republic of Ireland under the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

    We will continue to work strenuously for a political agreement which is acceptable to all the parties involved in the talks which the Secretary of State has had during the past year with the main constitutional parties in Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of Ireland. They have provided a firm basis for political progress in Ulster, and for building new relationships both between Northern Ireland and the Republic, and in these islands as a whole.

    YOUR CHOICE AT THIS ELECTION

    This Election is about the future. Your future. Britain’s future. Our future role in the world. This is a time to go forward with conviction and confidence, not to go back to the failure and bitter controversies of the past.

    It is difficult to remember the Britain we were elected to transform in 1979. The country we did transform.

    It was a depressed and divided country, accustomed to failure and suspicious of change.

    During the succeeding Parliaments, we have curbed inflation, reformed trade union law; encouraged enterprise, cut taxes, modernised our education and training, improved the management of our health service, given more help to the needy, extended ownership, helped through our vigilance to end the Cold War, widened our influence in Europe, and earned the respect of the world.

    A decade of success ended with the problems of recession – a world recession. We know how tough it has been for many but we are poised to move forward again, lacking only the spark of confidence with which a Conservative victory would ignite recovery.

    THE CHALLENGE AHEAD

    The challenges of the 1990s demand a responsible and sure-footed government which understands the nature of the achievements of the 1980s and is ready to build successfully on them. A government committed to the principles of choice, ownership, responsibility and opportunity; committed to low inflation and low taxes; committed to better quality and value in our public services; committed to strong defences. Labour cannot provide that leadership. They lack experience, principle and vision.

    With Socialism everywhere in rout or retreat, it is unclear what the Labour Party stands for. For public consumption, Labour leaders purport to have jettisoned the principles of a life-time. But how much can they be trusted? How genuine is the conversion and what do they actually believe?

    It is clear only that Labour would threaten our achievements, undo our reforms and hamstring Britain. They would turn the clock back to policies that impoverished and divided our country. Socialism here and abroad is the regret of yesterday not the hope of tomorrow.

    ONLY THE BEST FOR BRITAIN

    We believe that only the best is good enough for Britain, and that the best will only be accomplished if we give the British people the freedom and the opportunity they need to succeed.

    We have a new leader, proven in office, and a new agenda – yet a tried set of principles. Those principles reflect our conviction that Britain has done best when the people of Britain have been given the personal incentive to succeed. National success has not been primarily the result of accidents of geography, landscape and natural resources. Nor has it been the result of government action and state control. Success has been won when we have given our people their head: when their natural skills, talents, energy; thrift and inventiveness have been released, not suppressed. That was true when this century began; it is still true as this century draws to its close.

    Britain should approach the Millennium with head and spirits high, with a strong economy, with a high standard of living, with generously endowed and well managed public services, and with secure defences. We want Britain to be an example to the world of how a free people can make the very best of their destiny. That prospect is within the grasp of us all. We must now make it happen.

    The prize is great, the hope invigorating, the dream attainable. We want, with you, to make the dream a reality. A Conservative Government will help you to achieve the very best. The very best future for Britain.

     

  • Mr Major’s Speech to the National Farmers Union – 11 February 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the National Farmers Union in London on Tuesday 11th February 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am afraid, as you know, my visit here this morning is all too brief. Some weeks ago David asked me to drop in for a few minutes and I must say I found the invitation irresistible, irresistible even though John Gummer and David Curry will both be joining you today and tomorrow.

    There were two reasons I found it irresistible. The first is that I have myself an agricultural constituency, arable, pigs, sheep, root crops, horticulture and a lot of farmers who tell me about the difficulties that you face. And secondly, and perhaps more relevantly, it is because I know at first hand what a difficult time farming is going through that I particularly wished to come here this morning. I do understand that and I know there are some things that need to be done before we can remove the present uncertainty and put farming on a sure course for the future.

    After a number of good years some years ago, recent years have been difficult, poor indeed for many farmers, and it remains a difficult and uncertain situation today. And you are I believe dogged with some uncertainties. The two key issues are self-evident and they are not wholly within the remit of the United Kingdom government to solve.

    The first vital issue for your future is the completion of the Uruguay Round as speedily, as comprehensively and as successfully as possible. And the second of course, after many years of talking, agitating, worrying, thinking, is the proper reform of the agricultural policy to be concluded at the earliest possible date.

    Both those issues have to be resolved and they have to be resolved before we can answer the fundamental question that is put to me by my farmers week after week, and rightly so: what is the long-term future of farming? We cannot answer that question properly until we have the conclusions on the Uruguay Round, on the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.

    The United Kingdom government are working very hard both in front and behind the scenes to ensure we have the earliest possible completion of the Uruguay Round. I am disappointed frankly that we do not have it by now, I had hoped that we would. But a great deal of work is going on and I hope that we will get a satisfactory conclusion in the first half of this year.

    Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy is now squarely back in the middle of the community’s agenda and whatever progress may be made in the first half of the year no doubt we will welcome, but the United Kingdom has the Presidency of the European Community in the second half of this year and we will I hope be able to progress matters a good deal further then if there should be any first year delays.

    Because some things are clear for farmers, it is difficult, it is going to remain difficult and there is going to be increased competition for agriculture in this country and right the way throughout the whole of the European Community.

    Some weeks ago I had the pleasure of attending, for the first time, the Oxford Farming Conference and I took the opportunity then of describing the changes which I saw facing the industry and the reasons that underlie those changes.

    I, in the few minutes I have this morning, have not the time to repeat everything I said on that occasion, but the central message remains the same, the central message remains that change in agriculture is as necessary as it is inevitable and you may say: “Why? We have continued evolving, but broadly with the same form of husbandry for a long time, why is it necessary?” And I think the answer to that is clear and is well understood by our industry in this country. It is because the present situation is simply not sustainable over the long-term. Consumers and tax-payers both spend a good deal more and more, and yet what happens to that? Farmers earn less and less, food is in surplus, trade is distorted, developing countries are damaged, the pressures on the environment increase and the costs grow out of all proportion to the benefits.

    And so that system is no longer sustainable and it has to change. And if that is the case, as I believe it to be, then the sooner it changes the better so that the agricultural community can know the environment in which it is going to operate and adapt and make its plans accordingly. And that is what I wish to see happen as speedily as we can do it.

    It was of course governments collectively who set up the Common Agricultural Policy and they did so for good reasons, in retrospect you can see why it was done and why it was done in the way that it was done, there were good reasons for that. The original rationale to conquer food shortages was an absolutely understandable rationale. But there is no possible justification today for an intervention system which, to take but one of many examples, takes so much prime British beef off the market that British retailers and caterers then have to import steak from Ireland – that is not a sensible way to have the system work.

    So governments have their own responsibilities and I neither hide that from you, nor do I duck it. The governments collectively, I use the term in [Indistinct], the government collectively over so long has intervened so often and so much that it cannot wash its hands of the agricultural industry, and I can assure you we have no intention of washing our hands of the agricultural industry.

    In both the GATT talks and the CAP discussions, we will be working hard for solutions which do not put an undue burden on our own farmers and on our own industry.

    Why is it, despite all the excellence of farming itself, all the increased productivity and production which most industries would have given their eye teeth to have achieved in the last decade or two, why is it that agriculture is in its current difficulties? I think the answer to that is clear, because of policies which try to insulate it from the realities of the market. We cannot afford, in your interests, we cannot afford to make that mistake again.

    I am not amongst those people who believe, quite wrongly, that farmers bask in a never never land of subsidies, that is not the agricultural industry that I see. I know that many of you here today, and many not here today, have seen their incomes decline in recent years, in some cases very sharply indeed. I know many hard pressed farmers who wonder how the market could possibly be harsher than the realities that they are facing today.

    But the point is, and it cannot be ducked, the point is that agriculture has been a distorted market for decades and the best long-term answer for the future of agriculture lies in the reduction of those particular distortions. And as individual businessmen going through this period of change, farmers might usefully look at the experience of other industries as well. Every farmer is a businessman, he may be a farmer first but he is businessman as well if he is going to be successful.

    So every farmer, like every other producer, needs to plan his enterprise, he needs to manage his production and he needs to market his goods. Britain is second to none for the technical efficiency of our farming production, but in many cases, not all, but alas in far too many, we have not yet got right the planning and the marketing that are so critical to commercial success for our own agricultural industry. And we cannot leave that where it is, we have to improve it.

    Producing for the market is all about attention to detail and the catering industry, unlike many other sectors, often sells goods by number rather than by weight and it is actually rather important for a catering manager to know how many rashers he is going to get from a side of bacon and British supplies are too often too variable; too much has to be trimmed off and that means waste and loss and that is damaging to the producer who wishes to sell his products as well as for the caterer who wishes to buy them and I know that here amongst this audience and amongst farmers, supermarket buyers have a tough reputation and I think it is right, they are tough – it is their job to be tough – and some producers think they will get a fairer return by selling on the open market but those prepared to work to the supermarket specification will almost certainly do better on contract.

    Food is a unique substance for many reasons. It may not be an expanding market either here or in the rest of the Community but it is a basic market, it is a broadly stable market, it is a market that increases in diversity, it is a market that increasingly wants better quality and better packaged and produced goods and there is beyond a shadow of doubt the scope for United Kingdom farmers to increase their market share here at home in our own domestic market and through exports abroad throughout the European Community and beyond but that is only going to happen if farmers adapt to producing for an increasingly competitive market.

    We are going to find in the next few years – not just in agriculture but in every aspect of industry and commerce – that we are living in a more competitive future for our own products whatever they may be than any we have known in the past and those who succeed will be those who adapt and prepare and meet that competitive market head-on.

    That is not a new message from me or indeed perhaps from others but is one about which I feel passionately and it was because of my concern over this that I held a seminar at Downing Street last November on precisely those issues and your President and daresay a number of other people here today were actually present on that occasion. It was a seminar that had a practical effect; it was with representatives of the farming industry, the food retail industry and the food manufacturing industry and the retailers and the manufacturers were quite clear about their need for consistent quality but they were also quite clear about what they could do to work together better with the agricultural industry. The larger supermarket purchasers of your products were quite prepared to commit themselves to helping farmers to meet their requirements, for example by seconding managers to help farmers organise themselves to supply the volume needed by retailers and manufacturers. They need a satisfactory volume; it may be necessary to work collectively from time to time to market to best economic effect that which you produce.

    I have asked people to pursue those particular discussions and to pursue them rigorously. I have also asked everyone who attended that seminar to come back again next November – when I still expect to be there [Laughter] – to tell me what progress has been made. There is no point in us having seminars, reaching agreement, discussing all these problems if at the end of the day nothing practical is ever done [Applause] so at the end of that very agreeable seminar I said: “Thank you very much; that is very helpful. Come back next year and we will see how much has actually happened!” and I make that public now and I will be happy to ensure that we report back to you, for whom it matters as much as anyone, precisely what has happened.

    We also recognised at that seminar that buying from domestic UK producers has advantages over and above cost and appearance and let me mention one that I think is important that we perhaps do not often stress enough and that is the Food Safety Act which is unique to the United Kingdom. I often wonder whether the same level of protection for the consumer can be assured when food is bought from elsewhere rather than in the United Kingdom. [Applause] We need to bring this point home to consumers who are worried about the quality of their food [Applause] I welcome without any reservation whatsoever the NFU’s own “Food From The Countryside” programme and I think your President is to be congratulated for bringing producers together with their customers and with those who can provide business advice. I hope that all the companies involved are going to benefit from that initiative.

    But there is another aspect to current changes in agriculture that I touched upon briefly at the Oxford Farming Conference. Farmers have land. Often these days they have redundant buildings. They cannot afford in today’s climate to ignore those twin assets of land and redundant buildings but their best hopes of a return may be by using or selling them for non-agricultural purposes and at this point the farmer comes up against the planning rules [Hear! Hear!] I can see that he does! [Laughter] He may sometimes find this a frustrating experience. I do think understatement is sometimes a good thing!

    There are no simple answers to planning. There are important and complex issues to be considered. It often involves striking a balance between numerous interests and a broad trade-off has to be made between meeting people’s needs for homes, for jobs, for services in rural areas and also preserving what is best in the countryside and the preservation of the countryside over the last two hundred years has essentially been in the hands of the agricultural industry and no-one should be able to get away with saying anything different on any occasion or on any platform [Applause] so we must preserve that delicate balance but see what can be done to assist the farmer.

    The Government recently published guidance on the countryside and the rural economy and that sets out the principles on which planning decisions are to be based and there is more scope for a better understanding of what is actually involved in the planning process and that is why in March the Government will be holding a national conference bringing together planners, farmers and conservationists to discuss the issue and thereafter there will be local seminars all over the country for this is a difficult and impenetrable problem where we need the advice of everyone who is concerned about the countryside and the people who live in the countryside.

    Planning, of course, is a form of regulation, a form of regulation which all businesses have to live with and other forms of regulation such as those concerned with food safety have a great impact on farming. Regulation involves cost. We cannot dismantle the controls needed to ensure high standards of safety nor would it be in our interest even to contemplate it but we can and will look hard at the mechanisms of regulation. There may be ways of securing the same standards through measures which impose less of a burden on farmers and if there is, we should examine them and then we should bring them into being.

    Mr. President, in the few moments that I have been able to snatch out of your day on this occasion, I have not remotely been able to touch on all the important matters that are relevant to your [Indistinct].

    I would in some ways be tempting to do so but I think it would equally be wrong to do so. we have to face it squarely if we are to reach the right decisions and that means sometimes that we must set out the uncomfortable aspects of change as well as the comfortable ones but having said that, let me conclude upon this point:

    I want to make it clear to you that I am not pessimistic about the future of the agricultural industry; I am optimistic about the future of farming in the United Kingdom and optimistic for a series of practical reasons:

    You have enormous resilience and adaptability and always have had in your industry. Market realities are not new to you; you have lived through difficult times and you have thrived again at the end of difficult times and I believe once again you will be able to do so.

    And there is a further point that I see day by day in my own constituency and elsewhere and that is this: acre for acre, crop for crop and herd for herd, we still have the best farming industry in this country that you can find anywhere in the world so you can compete and the opportunities for us to do so are clearly going to be there.

    I don’t see agriculture as a declining industry. I do see agriculture as a changing industry and we cannot hide the fact that change is both necessary and sometimes painful but as we come through that change you have a basis for prosperity in the agricultural industry that I think will irresistibly come to the fore. I cannot pretend that change will be cosy; I cannot pretend it will always be comfortable but it does present great opportunities for you. It is up to you as farmers, as businessmen, to take those opportunities. It is up to us, I believe, as Government, to help you to take those opportunities. Let me say to you clearly and unequivocally today that that is what we wish to do, to work with you for the future of the agricultural industry and I promise you that is what we shall do. [Applause].

  • Mr Major’s Speech at the Oxford Farming Conference – 6 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the Oxford Farming Conference on Monday 6th January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I cannot help thinking, standing here in this splendid pulpit, that this is more your scene, Bishop, perhaps than mine. But avoiding the temptation to say: “Dearly Beloved”, perhaps I might say what a pleasure it is to be here this evening and to have the opportunity of speaking to you about agriculture.

    I have over dinner been very well prepared. I have been sitting before [Inaudible] apple juice, it is very powerful stuff, I recommend it. If Maitland Battey has not tried it I am bound to tell him that when he does try it it will change the national drink in Scotland overnight.

    But despite this splendid pulpit this is not in my view an evening for sermonising. But I do have some serious things that I would like to say both about farming and about the countryside and about the future of both farming and the countryside.

    I have, as a constituency Member of Parliament, a farming constituency, mainly arable, some pig farming, sheep, root crops, a bit of horticulture, in fact a bit of almost everything except hill farming, and those of you who know East Anglia will know that despite the innovative nature of the farmers in my constituency, it is pretty difficult to be a hill farmer in Huntingdon.

    But apart from that I have a fairly broad spread of farming, and I make that point because I think it illustrates that I have some knowledge of how crucial farming is to the countryside. And I believe that no-one who understands that can possibly under-estimate the value of agriculture, not just to the countryside on its own, but to our whole way of life in the United Kingdom.

    And I know, too, and make no secret of the fact, how difficult farming has been in the last two or three years. I understand the uncertainty that exists and I dismiss from personal knowledge as unpleasant and ill-informed the absurd caricature that some people propagate of farmers living rich in the lap of subsidy.

    The reality is, we know too well in this room, that farming is short of confidence at present. And to regain that confidence it needs, in my judgment, a categoric answer to one question above all: what is to be the future of farming? Does it have one? And if it does, what is it and how soon will it come about?

    I want partly to try and answer those questions this evening. But only, I fear, partly. And I say that because a full answer to those questions cannot, will not be available until two vital issues are resolved: firstly the final outcome of the Uruguay Round; and secondly the long awaited and much needed reform of the Common Agricultural Policy.

    I start from the premise this evening that it is not for the government to tell you what to do with your farm businesses, they are your businesses, it is for you to decide. But for the past 5 decades the government has been intimately involved with agriculture and I think it is therefore not unreasonable for you to ask how the government sees the future of your industry. And that of course is why we recently published a paper on our farming future.

    For me to say to you this evening that agriculture must change is not to say anything new. Most, I suspect everyone in this room, know that very well. But I do want to touch upon three aspects of that change. First, and briefly, why it is necessary. Second, what the most promising new directions seem to be. And third, and crucially I believe, how the government views change in the countryside more generally.

    So why firstly is change necessary? Agriculture is first and foremost, always has been, an industry. But it is more than that, in the countryside it is both an industry and a way of life. It has an enormous impact on the physical environment around us. But ultimately it will stand or fall as an industry. And like other industries agriculture has its highs, its lows, its ups and downs, and a great deal of the agricultural scene has been in a low for several years now. And the prospects look at present uncertain to bleak for much of farming, even though the rest of the economy is now beginning to emerge from recession.

    Bleak, of course, bleak that is if you feel that the present patterns of production and levels of agricultural price support must be sustained at all costs. But I must say to you bluntly that the reality is that that is simply not possible, not in the United Kingdom, not in Europe, and indeed not anywhere in the world. In fact in many parts of the world, not just domestically in our own industry, in many parts of the world there is now widespread dissatisfaction with many aspects of agricultural support with the direct cost of agricultural support to consumers and tax-payers and with the indirect cost in terms of trade distortions that are particularly damaging to poor countries.

    And moreover those levels of support have other effects and another impact as well. They have, it seems to me, made agriculture a dependent industry – an absurd parody if I, as a non-agriculturalist can say it, an absurd parody when in my experience countryfolk generally, and farmers specifically, are among the most independent of individuals.

    But that is by no means the only evil of the present system of support. The high levels of support for agriculture in most developed countries have led to over-production, increasingly desperate efforts to dispose of surpluses through export subsidies and as a consequence of that, depress world markets. And that has been harmful both to rich countries and to poor countries. In the rich countries resources are wasted on a vast scale and in the poorer countries economic development is held back by the poor returns that their own farmers can earn on world markets.

    And it was that fundamental but crucial factor, the recognition of that, that led to the realisation that the misallocation of resources was so harmful that agriculture needed to be brought into the GATT Uruguay Round.

    International pressures, powerful international pressures, were one of the factors that led the European Commission to propose radical reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. But the internal pressures for change were even greater, despite the very significant, and no-one should understate them, improvements made to the CAP during the 1980s, production continues to expand beyond that capacity to consume it and expenditure continues to increase beyond that capacity to pay for it.

    This year, for example, spending on the Common Agricultural Policy, will be right up against the legal limit set by the agricultural guidelines. Has that helped farmers? Are they individually in the Community and in the United Kingdom better off as a result of that? The truth is it has not helped and they are not. Farming funds are under very great pressure in many parts of the Community and certainly under very great pressure here in the United Kingdom. More general expenditure has not meant more in terms of individual incomes, more has meant less.

    The present system, bluntly, has not served United Kingdom agriculture well. And not only is the level of the support in the Community too high, there are other problems as well. The various support mechanisms take no account, no account whatsoever, of their potential implications for the environment or for the needs of the market.

    So in its present form the Common Agricultural Policy does not operate in the interests of producers, consumers or tax-payers. And it has also led, if I may return to the point I made earlier, to the absurd prejudice that farmers are living in the lap of subsidy when in reality across Europe, and certainly in the United Kingdom, farming incomes are falling.

    The conclusion from this is inescapable and should not be ducked by anyone, there is no point in putting our heads in the sand about it, further reform of the Common Agricultural Policy is essential and farming simply cannot go on as it has at present for very much longer.

    So what are the reforms? What reforms are right for the future of agriculture? Let me set out some of the objectives of reform that the government are committed to.

    Firstly, we believe reform should reduce the resource costs of agricultural support and the burden that the Common Agricultural Policy imposes on the economies of the member states. It should encourage an efficient agricultural industry which has a long-term future driven by the demands of the market. It expressly should not subsidise an inefficient agricultural industry that is not subjected to the demands of the market.

    It should encourage agricultural policies which safeguard the environment and it should apply fairly across the whole of the European Community, regardless of the size or the location of farms.

    And I can promise you this evening that it will be against those objectives that we will judge the Commission’s proposals for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. Though I welcome very much the Commission’s perhaps belated, but let us not be miserly about it, acknowledgement that major changes in the CAP are needed, in particular their recognition that support levels must be cut.

    A number of important elements in the Commission’s proposals do reflect the United Kingdom’s demands for reform, made consistently over many years. But I must add this. Our welcome does not extend to all aspects of the Commission’s proposals, many aspects of them seem to us more designed to perpetuate existing farm structures and production patterns primarily for social reasons than to bring about the innovative and competitive agricultural industry that we need and that the Community must have if it is to compete in a liberalised world market. The proposals before us at present are inward looking rather than outward looking and at present they are the wrong proposals.

    So reform of the Common Agricultural Policy must take account of the changes going on around the Community and notably the development of market economies in central and Eastern Europe.

    Last year Professor Vorichek, here again this evening, told this conference that Czechoslovak farmers were very unlikely to constitute a threat to the Western European market while Czechoslovakia itself could, with growing prosperity, become a good market for farm products and food. I personally look forward to the day, perhaps not in my political lifetime, when Czechoslovakia and all our other Eastern European newly democratised states become part of a European Community that stretches from one end of our continent of Europe right through to the other end.

    But other countries in Eastern and Central Europe have natural advantages when it comes to supplying the Community market with food. And the sensible approach must surely be to recognise this and look for ways of working with these new democracies. It may be necessary to take a long view, it is necessary to take a long view and some people are already doing this.

    This conference this evening, and over the next few days, is taking place against a background of change in the world, in politics, in the economies of the world and particularly our part of the world, and of course in agriculture itself.

    There is considerable uncertainty both about the outcome of the GATT round and about CAP reform. But if the details are unclear, some points I think are becoming increasingly clear.

    In future, whatever happens, United Kingdom farmers will face increased competition. They will be operating, from the end of this year, within a wider Community market and they are likely to be receiving lower levels of price support.

    So what is the key to surviving in this new environment? Surely, firstly, it must be the ability to respond rapidly to consumer demand. That is not I believe just a matter of efficiency. British farmers are already among the most efficient producers of primary food products in Europe. It is about quality, consistently producing to the standard that the market wants, and to achieve this I believe some farmers will need to change both their methods of production and their method of selling their produce once they have completed their production cycle.

    During the next two days you will be discussing the theme of prosperity through excellence. It is a good thing, it is the right theme I believe for you to be discussing at present. You will be focusing on the issues which I discussed recently with a group of food producers, manufacturers and retailers, at a seminar held at Downing Street. And I am glad to learn that this conference believes, as I believe, that the key issue for farmers now is to get closer to the markets they are aiming to sell to and concentrate on adding value.

    And that can be done, adding value can be done in a variety of ways. It does not necessarily mean processing a product on farm or selling direct to the final consumer. Both those options of course are included, both of them will of course suit some individuals, but there are pitfalls for the unwary.

    But adding value can be achieved also by providing a product for which there is a particular demand at precisely the right moment, and there are already encouraging examples of precisely what I mean. If you take, for example, boutique apples – a new term to me, I only learned it recently – I would have called them old fashioned English apples, Laxton superbs, Norfolk Royals, that is how I would have known them, and I feared that they had been swept off the supermarket shelves by standardised products which to my taste may be French, may be golden, but perhaps are less delicious than old English apples.

    But I was wrong about them being swept aside. Apple growers growing traditional varieties have been able to obtain a premium for their apples. Old fashioned apples may become as fashionable as old fashioned roses. Large retailers are now responding by offering more and more varieties and precisely the same is true for potatoes and can be true for many other products as well. And I touch now on delicate ground, but organic food can offer similar opportunities.

    I am aware that the merits or otherwise, I know when to keep out of an argument, it is the first law of politics, I am aware that the merits or otherwise of organic production are the subject of very fierce debate and I do not propose to participate in it, but the point I do want to make is a simpler one. There is a demand for organic products – a big demand, a growing demand – much of which is met from abroad. Why can we not meet more of that demand from within the United Kingdom? I believe that we can and I believe that we should.

    But we have many advantages, some of which I think we do not capitalise on. The higher animal welfare standard that we are determined to maintain in this country could be capitalised on by most of our farmers. The demand for free range eggs and poultry products shows that consumers are prepared to pay extra for food that meets their concerns over animal welfare issues.

    And it is important that the food and farming industry as a whole makes consumers aware of the high standards of animal welfare in this country. That, for example – a crucial illustration – veal produced in this country, cannot by law come from calves reared in the crates that so many consumers find unacceptable. That is something we should make clear to the people who buy these products.

    And if farmers are to take advantage of all these opportunities, better marketing of their products is going to be vital. It is not enough just to identify consumer demands. It is equally necessary to be able to meet that demand by providing the right quantities at the right quality and at the right time. And very often the individual farmer may not be able to do this because he cannot provide the volume or the continuity of supply that the modern food industry requires.

    And the answer to that, and I know it is novel and I know it runs against the instincts of centuries of some parts of farming in this country, but the answer must lie in better collaboration between farmers. That will not necessarily mean classical cooperatives, a whole range of other legal structures are possible.

    But it is because I am convinced of the central importance of improved marketing for the future prosperity of their farming industry that I held a seminar on this topic in Downing Street. And I learned a great deal on that occasion and I believe that the other participants in that seminar did so as well.

    Let me just share with you some of the things that emerged in that discussion. I heard at first hand what is involved in producing against specification, building in quality assurance and the necessary discipline to deliver what is actually wanted. I heard at first hand about the problems of scale, a critical point in selling direct to supermarkets. Producer groups must be large enough to guarantee the volume and consistency of supply needed to interest large buyers.

    And all those present at the seminar, without exception, stressed the need for relevant management skills. A farmer who can produce excellent food does not necessarily have the right skills for striking deals with supermarkets. And everyone emphasised the need to have an organisation providing a sound financial base.

    Following that seminar, large retailers are now ready to engage in a dialogue with producers. One cannot expect them to be other than hard-headed, their shareholders would not allow it and doubt that you would expect it. But as one of them put it to me, their very size now means that they have a responsibility to the nation as well as to their shareholders.

    So at the seminar retailers made four promises to me that I believe are relevant to the agricultural industry. Firstly, to target major opportunities for UK supply of food and food products. Secondly, to offer a more open door to producers. Thirdly, to second managers and non-executive directors to help produce a group to provide what the market wants. And fourthly, to declare country of origin on own label products where this is appropriate.

    So what in practice does that amount to, what does it mean? It means that the major retailers will identify the products which could be bought from UK producers without loss of quality or price advantage. The retailers will make it easier for potential suppliers in the UK to understand their needs. And in addition to that, they will help to make consumers more aware of where the excellent products on the shelves of some of the best supermarkets in the world actually come from.

    I hope that more and more of them will be British. The opportunity is there for more British producers to supply our supermarkets and they must grab this opportunity with both hands.

    And in saying that I am not on some nationalistic Buy British track, but the size of the current trade gap in food which we could produce ourselves is an indicator of the size of the market which our farmers could tap. The market is there if we tap it and have the right skills to make sure that we provide what is wanted, when it is wanted, at the price it is wanted to the people in this country who are demanding food that the people in this room produce.

    To underline the government’s commitment to better marketing, we announced at that seminar that we plan to offer group marketing grants to encourage the development of producer marketing groups and John Gummer has subsequently given details of this scheme.

    The Ministry of Agriculture has set up also a market task force to help identify and define product areas where there may be new or expanding market opportunities. And Food for Britain is ready to assist with its role of promoting and marketing the products of our farming and food industries.

    If British farmers can meet the high standards demanded by their customers in the food manufacturing and retail sectors they will greatly benefit. Not simply through recapturing their own domestic market but in penetrating substantial and rich markets elsewhere in the European Community.

    I believe that the various sectors of the food industry represented at my seminar can respond to those challenges. And just to make sure that they do, I have invited the participants to come back next November to report on progress – when I must tell you I expect to be at the same address – and when they do, I am prepared to continue to push initiatives that will help British agriculture because I believe in its future and I believe in the quality of its products.

    Let me say a word or two about a critical allied subject and that is change in the countryside.

    You and I know that agriculture is changing and will need to change further against the background of the GATT and CAP reforms that are to come and that it will change the countryside but we ought not to be alarmed about that. The countryside is changing anyway – it always has. If it had never changed, we would still have forests from one end of the United Kingdom to the other but as country dwellers you have a very direct interest in the change, the nature of it and the speed of it and, of course, some of the changes affect the way you go about your business.

    Rural depopulation is a significant problem in many continental countries but not in the United Kingdom. Outside a handful of remote areas, we have seen a shift of population out of the cities and into the rural areas over the past three decades. The economy in many rural areas has been thriving and I myself do not think that the government of a free country could or should stop people from living and working where they want to. I believe that the British are peculiarly attached to rural life so that when increasing prosperity, car ownership and the availability of jobs allows them to move to rural areas, this is precisely what many of our fellow countrymen and women choose to do either to bring up their families or to retire and the countryside which in the UK over the centuries has largely been shaped by farmers cannot be run either as a museum or as a week-end playground for people from the cities. [Applause].

    As I have said, the countryside is a place where an increasing number of people want to live and to work. Agriculture remains an extremely important industry but in many rural areas it is no longer the major employer that once it was. Changing practice and increased mechanisation have dramatically cut the number of jobs directly dependent upon agriculture although indirect dependence remains considerable and as the rural population changes, with a growing number of inhabitants with no links with agriculture, so attitudes in the countryside change. It is important for the farming community to see that those new to rural life understand that the countryside is a workplace and that efficient agriculture is essential to its health.

    On the other hand, we cannot write off the criticisms of the way that some farming techniques have affected the landscape. We know perfectly well that pollution from farming is no more acceptable than pollution from any other commercial activity and farming, like other industries, is cleaning up its act – another change to which farmers have had to adapt and have done so very well.

    An influx of population into the countryside does raise a number of crucial issues, I believe it is a healthier and happier state of affairs than the ghost villages which haunt some other countries but we must be careful. A balance needs to be struck between meeting people’s needs for homes, job, schools, shops and other services in rural areas and preserving what is best in the countryside and the record of the Government in protecting the environment is one I am proud of.

    We introduced the Wild Life and Countryside Act; we published the first comprehensive White Paper on the environment; we introduced the environmentally-sensitive areas scheme that has proved notably successful in encouraging farmers to maintain traditional less intensive farming practices but maintain the beauty of the countryside and the wealth of wild life and flora. Last year, the Government launched an experimental scheme “Countryside Stewardship” which pioneers a new approach to encourage farmers and other land managers to recreate some of our most valued landscapes and habitats and country stewardship, a traditional function through the centuries of farmers, goes beyond designated areas and includes additional incentives for the provision of new access for the public and there has, I must tell you, been an excellent initial response to this scheme with over 1200 applicants offering to provide the environmental products that are sought.

    But there is a point to be borne in mind in all this. We must not start conserving for conserving’s sake. Change can be frightening and when you are pleased with things the way they are, it can often be distasteful; sometimes it is unnecessary. But sometimes it is necessary to give more people an opportunity to enjoy what most of us want: reasonable living standards, job opportunities, good access to public services. Proposals which would affect the countryside have to be measured against this yardstick as well as against purely environmental yardsticks.

    This Government’s commitment to the countryside is based upon an appreciation of what people living in the countryside both want and need. Of course, priorities are different in different areas but many things are similar. In virtually all rural areas, you will find people looking for low-cost housing, people looking for jobs, people looking for accessible services. Government cannot wave a magic wand and resolve those overnight but we can and have taken action through carefully targeted programmes operated by the Rural Development Commission, and we have been successful in creating jobs in many rural areas.

    There are now only 3 rural development areas out of 27 with an unemployment level above the England average and the Government has also put in place two measures designed to increase the supply of affordable housing to rent and buy which are directed specifically at rural areas.

    People who live in the countryside should not feel disadvantaged by the mere fact that they are living in rural areas. That must be a fundamental of policy. Newcomers to rural areas often bring the prosperity which enables the children of local people to stay there if they wish. That is one of the side benefits of population movements. But we do not want to see a population exchange with the less well-off in rural areas being driven into cities by the absence of affordable housing and jobs in the countryside and the levers to ensure this does not happen are not all in the Government’s hands.

    Local attitudes to development expressed through the planning system have a crucial role to play. Elected politicians at all levels must give a lead. Proposals for development must not be turned down simply because that is the safer course. Those taking planning decisions locally must ask themselves what the proposed development is going to do for local job and local housing prospects. Do we really need these days to offer as much protection to farm land now that we have surpluses? What will be the consequences for jobs and housing if a particular application is turned down? If there is a problem, does it lie in the design or would the development fit better in a neighbouring site? Can constructive suggestions be made on all those points?

    Those are the questions when considering planning and other matters that must increasingly be asked if we are to ensure the greatest level of prosperity in all its aspects in our countryside in the future.

    We have rightly emphasised that the detailed siting of development is essentially something to be decided locally and this requires local communities to think responsibly about their needs as a community and the needs of their children. It means agreeing to the changes needed to provide opportunities for the young and the not-so-well-off in rural areas.

    These are all vital policy issues that we need to consider side by side for they are intrinsically linked with the future of agriculture and the future of our countryside in the decade ahead.

    Mr. Chairman, I took as my text tonight the need for change, change in agriculture and change in the countryside more generally. My Party has never set its face against change since it knows that it would be futile to do so. What we stand for is conserving what is best while accommodating new thinking and new aspirations.

    I believe that British agriculture has the resilience to adapt and to flourish in new circumstances. Does it have a future? Of course it has a future – of that I am wholly confident. That future is a future that will belong to those who study their market carefully just as it does in any other business and our rural areas have a future as well. I believe that most of you who live in the countryside hope for a future in which your children can if they want to live and work in that countryside as well and not be driven to leave that countryside and go off into the towns. Of course the jobs may change, the prospects may change, the nature of life and the rhythm of life may change just as they have done all the way through history but the key thing is surely this: to channel the enterprise which is undoubtedly attracted to rural areas and will be even more so in the years ahead in such a way that we have balanced communities offering something to people of all ages and ensuring we have a balanced population in each and every part of the rural communities of the United Kingdom.

    That, Mr. Chairman, is what I want to see. That is, I believe, what we should seek: a prosperous countryside, a thriving countryside; a countryside whose beauty will be maintained; a countryside that will cherish an agricultural industry which after the reforms to GATT and CAP will know what its future is, will have the confidence to pursue that future and will be able to look forward to a secure and a prosperous future for many years to come. That is the policy for which I will be working; that is the policy that I believe is in the interests of this country and in the interests of the whole of Europe and it is with that policy and that aspiration in mind that I ask you to rise and join me in a toast to agriculture.

    Mr. Chairman, the toast is agriculture! Agriculture! [Applause]