The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: British Coal

  • PMQT – 1 December 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 1st December 1992. Tony Newton deputised for John Major.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Ronnie Campbell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

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

    As part of his European Community presidency duties, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is visiting Spain and Portugal for discussions with Prime Minister Gonzalez and Prime Minister Cavaco Silva in preparation for the European Council in Edinburgh.

    Mr. Campbell : With 20 million tonnes of subsidised foreign coal coming into Britain and subsidised nuclear electricity coming from France– equivalent to 6 million tonnes of coal in the United Kingdom–will the Prime Minister consider subsidising the transportation of British coal to Europe and the rest of the world, thus saving miners’ jobs and British Rail jobs?

    Mr. Newton : The hon. Gentleman has, understandably, raised a variety of issues which are the subject of the review by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. I note that my right hon. Friend is present and will have heard what the hon. Gentleman suggested.

    Mr. John Greenway : Will my right hon. Friend remind the Prime Minister to tell the Prime Ministers of Spain and Portugal that many people in the United Kingdom must make great sacrifices in the present economic climate and that they will not take kindly to any great increase in the European Community budget to fund expenditure in those countries?

    Mr. Newton : I understand that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has referred to those matters in his conversations. I have no doubt whatever that he has once again made Britain’s position clear–we will not be prepared to contemplate any adverse change in the British abatement.

    Mrs. Beckett : Does the Lord President realise that when people get their council tax valuation figure based on 1991 prices, they are likely to feel that it is extremely unfair since, in most parts of the country, house prices have fallen sharply in the past year? In Greater London alone, house prices have fallen by about £11,500 since the valuations were carried out.

    Mr. Newton : The hon. Lady will be well aware that, generally, valuations in London have turned out to be lower than we thought. Somebody living in a band A or band B property in the south-east should not need to pay any more than someone living in a similar band elsewhere. What people must fear is the Labour party’s policy of returning to the rates.

    Mrs. Beckett : Will the figures be a devastating reminder of the way in which the Government have let people down by pursuing policies that have destroyed the value of their only major asset? Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there are likely to be millions of appeals against the valuations, which will mean that the chaos and injustice of the poll tax is likely to be surpassed by the chaos and injustice of the council tax?

    Mr. Newton : The policies that the Government have pursued have brought about a halving of interest rates to the benefit of home owners generally in the past two years.

    Mr. Hendry : Given that today is the Churches National Housing Coalition’s lobby of Parliament, will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to policies for tackling homelessness? Those policies include the rough sleepers’ initiative, the pilot foyer schemes and projects to bring empty shops and houses back into use, including 70,000 belonging to local authorities.

    Mr. Newton : Yes. I acknowledge what my hon. Friend says. I am glad to say that the Government’s policies are expected to deliver considerably more houses than the 153,000 over three years promised in the election manifesto. We expect the policies to produce 170,000 by 1994-95. In addition, an extra £86 million has been made available for the rough sleepers’ initiative over three years. That initiative has already reduced the numbers sleeping rough by more than 60 per cent. I am delighted–as my hon. Friends will be–that the first property has been purchased today by housing associations using the £600 million for England made available in the autumn statement.

     

    Q2. Ms. Gordon : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

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

    Ms. Gordon : Does the Leader of the House realise that, despite what he said, Londoners have been hit by a triple whammy in relation to the council tax? First, house prices were forced up by an unsustainable boom, then they collapsed because the Government refused to reduce interest rates in a futile attempt to save the pound, and finally houses have been banded on the basis of unrealistic values. Will he ask his right hon. Friend to intervene to ensure that Londoners are not hit again by a second unfair tax, and to modify the son of poll tax?

    Mr. Newton : I have already made the key point that I need to make in reply to the hon. Lady in response to the hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett). The grant paid to authorities in London and the south-east- -which has significantly increased in comparison with last year–takes account of the higher cost of providing services in that region. The hon. Lady should ensure that her local authority does not use the money in a profligate way.

     

    Q3. Dr. Goodson-Wickes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

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

    Dr. Goodson-Wickes : Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is often an unfortunate link between lack of accommodation and lack of a job? Will he join me in congratulating the Young Men’s Christian Association in my constituency which, following a Government initiative, has pioneered a partnership between the churches, the Employment Service, and the training and enterprise councils to break the vicious cycle and bring hope to young people?

    Mr. Newton : I very much agree with my hon. Friend. I think that he is referring to what is known as–my hon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Mr. Hendry) mentioned it–the foyer project, which brings together in a strong partnership the expertise of people working in the spheres of employment, training and support for young people. It is an excellent initiative and I hope that we see more of them, along the lines of that described by my hon. Friend the Member for Wimbledon (Dr. Goodson-Wickes).

     

    Q4. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mr. Winnick : Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the Prime Minister is particularly proud of the fact that, since he has held his present position, unemployment has risen from 1.5 million to nearly 3 million–even according to official figures? What sort of Christmas message are the Government to give to all those people in our country who have been deprived of the right to work, to the homeless, to people who are frightened of losing their homes, and to all the other victims of the Government’s wretched policies–people who cannot expect the Treasury to pick up their bills for them?

    Mr. Newton : Apart from what I have already said about the Government’s housing policies and the progress being made, I think that what my right hon. Friend would highlight the autumn statement and the prospects that it brings for improved economic performance.

     

    North of England

    Q5. Mr. Devlin : To ask the Prime Minister when he next intends to make an official visit to the north of England.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply.

    My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is making plans for a series of visits to all parts of the country and hopes to include the north of England among them.

    Mr. Devlin : When my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister comes to the north of England, will my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House remind him that it is a region which benefits more than any other in Britain from European Community investment and inward investment from outside the European Community? In the light of that, will my right hon. Friend tell the Prime Minister that it is seen as urgent by many people in my region that the Maastricht treaty be ratified as soon as possible?

    Mr. Newton : It is certainly the case that anybody who visits my hon. Friend’s part of the country will see the physical advantages of the attractions which, under this Government, this country has had for overseas investment such as Nissan and Fujitsu and the huge progress that has been made in generating a new economic base up there. I have no doubt that my hon. Friend speaks for his constituency in wishing to see that process continued and strengthened by the ratification of the Maastricht treaty.

     

    Engagements

    Q6. Mr. Ernie Ross : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

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

    Mr. Ross : Can the hon. Member tell the House whether or not the substantial privatisation contract awarded to Tarmac was in any way a pay- off for the substantial sums donated by that company to the Conservative party last year.

    Mr. Newton : Yes I can, and it is not.

     

    Q7. Mr. Fabricant : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply. I refer the hon. Lady to the answer I gave some moments ago. [Laughter].

    Madam Speaker : Order. Mr. Fabricant.

    Mr. Fabricant : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the MO figure for money supply, the amount of cash flowing around in the economy, has increased by 3 per cent. this month over the same figure last year and, while not trying to allude to any botanic connection, would he agree that this is at least an encouraging sign for the economy?

    Mr. Newton : May I first apologise to my hon. Friend. It was not actually, despite the evidence, a deficiency of my eyesight, but the fact that the first person in my sight line was the hon. Lady opposite, the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms. Walley). On my hon. Friend’s question, it is the case that the MO figures, mainly notes and coins in circulation, do reflect the growth taking place in retail sales and they add, I think, to the improvement that can be seen, in the fact that, after allowing for falls in interest rates, real disposable income of a typical family with a £30,000 mortgage went up by 20 per cent. in the two years to October 1992.

    Mr. Mallon : I know that the right hon. Gentleman will share my view that the violence we saw in my constituency at the weekend and that ripped Belfast apart today is vile and reprehensible and cannot be allowed to exist in any civilised society.

    Does the Leader of the House agree that what the terrorist groupings fear most is not more resources for security or more troops, but the creation of a new agreement among the people of Ireland which will strip the terrorist groups of any shred of legitimacy and confine them to the dustbin of history? Will he ask his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to ensure that when there is a new Taoiseach in the Republic of Ireland, they will jointly lead a drive for peace and a peaceful settlement within Ireland in 1993?

    Mr. Newton : The hon. Gentleman has spoken with warmth for virtually everybody–probably for everybody in the United Kingdom, certainly for the overwhelming majority. I shall take pleasure in drawing his remarks to the attention both of the Prime Minister and of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whose hard work to this same objective has been manifest over the past few months.

     

    Q8. Mr. Nicholls : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 1 December.

    Mr. Newton : I have been asked to reply. I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave some moments ago.

    Mr. Nicholls : Has my right hon. Friend had the opportunity of considering the findings of Professor Rheinhardt Schmidt of Kiel university that of the top major companies in Europe, six are United Kingdom companies and that if facts like that are as obvious as far away as Germany, it is about time they were as obvious to the Opposition Front Bench here?

    Mr. Newton : I have indeed seen that report, showing that the three top firms in what is, I believe, German-based research, are British and that six of the top 10 are British, including a significant number of our pharmaceutical companies. They deserve to be congratulated on their achievement. I should like to hear a bit more of that type of compliment coming from the occupants of the Opposition Front Bench, instead of their trying to run down our firms and industry.

    Ms. Walley : While the Prime Minister is spending time in Portugal and Spain, may I ask the Lord President to urge him on his return, prior to his visit to the north of England, to call in at Stoke-on-Trent, my constituency, where he will see for himself the lack of Government support for manufacturing industry, particularly in relation to the pottery, ceramics and allied industries? May we have a Government commitment to examine the way in which investment can be made to that industry? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is no good talking all the time about what can be done to get people retrained ; we should be preventing them from becoming unemployed in the first place?

    Mr. Newton : I shall draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to the hon. Lady’s request. I must, at the same time, draw her attention to the fact that the autumn statement included a substantial range of measures designed to encourage manufacturing industry, and that one of our key manufacturing industries, motor cars, is showing great signs of being far more successful than it has been for decades past.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 25 November 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th November 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Iraq

    Mr. Alan Williams : To ask the Prime Minister if briefing material for the Ministry’s folder for Question Time while he was (a) Chief Secretary to the Treasury, (b) Foreign Secretary, (c) Chancellor of the Exchequer and (d) Prime Minister still exists; and if he will make it available to the Scott committee of inquiry.

    The Prime Minister : The briefing material prepared for my use at Question Time while I was Chief Secretary to the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer and since I have been Prime Minister is still in existence. Not all the briefing material prepared for me for Question Time while I was Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has been retained, although that which relates to Iraq still exists. Material which is asked for by Lord Justice Scott’s inquiry will be made available to him.

    Mr. Hain : To ask the Prime Minister how the Iraqi defence procurement network’s activities in relation to United Kingdom-based companies were monitored by the Government in the period (a) 1985 to December 1988 and (b) since December 1988.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 November 1992] : It is not the Government’s practice to comment on intelligence matters.

     

    Devaluation

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of (a) the degree to which the sterling price of imports has been maintained and (b) the change in demand for imported manufactures, following the fall in the value of sterling.

    The Prime Minister : It is not possible to separate the impact of the recent fall in the value of sterling from other factors influencing the sterling price of United Kingdom imports. Nevertheless, improved competitiveness is expected to restrain the growth of manufactured import volumes in 1993.

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the benefits of devaluation to the financing needs of the coal industry.

    The Prime Minister : The new external financing limits for British Coal announced last week, which are provisional pending decisions on the coal review, already take account of recent changes in exchange rates.

     

    Pit Closures

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister (1) what account he took in agreeing to the pit closures of the expenditure implications as regarding unemployment benefit; if he will publish a table showing for each mine in the current year and for each of the next five years (a) the estimated direct and indirect costs to the Exchequer of those made unemployed, (b) the estimated operational loss at each mine in 1991 and in the current year to date and (c) the estimated loss in 1993 of disposing of surplus production on the international market at the world price.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 23 October 1992] : I had regard to the likelihood that, in the light of market assessments, continuing to mine coal for which there was no economic market would involve a substantial ongoing cost to public expenditure and that we were proposing a wide range of measures to help those made redundant secure new jobs and to enhance job prospects in the areas affected. I have asked the chairman of British Coal to write to the hon. Member about the information at (b). On (c), this too would be an operational matter for British Coal but even in the event that a suitable contractual arrangement could be established on commercial grounds there would also be the matter of compliance with the United Kingdom’s GATT and other international trade obligations.

     

    Public Interest Immunity Certificates

    Mr. Oppenheim : To ask the Prime Minister how many public interest immunity certificates were signed by Ministers (a) from 1974 to 1979 and (b) since 1979.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 24 November 1992] : Public interest immunity certificates were signed by Ministers periodically throughout the period in question, but no central record is held of the number involved.

  • PMQT – 19 November 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 19th November 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Pike : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 19 November.

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

    Mr. Pike : Does the Prime Minister recognise that urban programme authorities, such as Burnley, which have been designated programme authorities because of deprivation, on the Government’s own criteria, are devastated by the axing of the urban programme? That has brought despair and despondency to those areas. Will the Prime Minister now guarantee that those deprived areas will get more resources, not less, as a result of the change in Government policy?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is probably overlooking, first, the impact of city challenge, secondly, the impact of the measures announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor and, thirdly, the fact that the urban programme has not been cancelled. Some £176 million will be available in 1993-94.

    Mr. Riddick : Does my right hon. Friend agree that, following yesterday’s publication of school league tables, there can be no turning back on providing extra information to parents about their schools? Did my right hon. Friend notice that while the Labour party and the education establishment mafia were opposing the league tables, parents throughout the country were jamming the switchboard of the Department for Education demanding copies of those very league tables?

    The Prime Minister : It is indeed the case that the education service will never again be able to hide this important information. I hope that hon. Members of all parties will agree that this is information which should legitimately be available to parents, is now available to parents, and should continue to be available to parents.

    Mr. John Smith : Can the Prime Minister none the less explain why his Government are so incompetent that they cannot even produce an accurate record of the examination results?

    The Prime Minister : That is a bit rich coming from the right hon. and learned Gentleman. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman recalls his infamous Jennifer’s ear broadcast not long ago, he will recall that the day after that, the Labour party’s dossier of people it claimed had to wait for treatment was wholly wrong. Out of 10 people it listed, five were wrong.

    Mr. John Smith : To return to the subject, can the Prime Minister explain why in the case of Manchester high school, which had a 100 per cent. pass, the figure was recorded as 16 per cent. and in the case of Holyrood comprehensive school in Chard, a 46 per cent. pass was recorded as 6 per cent? In both cases the schools contacted the Department to correct the misleading information that they thought was likely to be published. Why cannot the Department for Education perform the simple task of recording and transmitting information?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is seeking to hide the fact that he and his party want a cover-up on these statistics- – [Interruption.] If there are errors in the statistics, the Department will correct them. The main point is that it is right to give this information to parents and astonishing that the Labour party should wish to hide this information from parents– [Interruption.] —

    Madam Speaker : Order. Members must come to order instead of bawling and shouting all the time like this.– [Interruption.] –Order. Ministers must be heard in the House, as must every other Member. I call the Prime Minister.

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful, Madam Speaker. It would be interesting to know whether the right hon. and learned Gentleman agrees with this morning’s Guardian, which said :

    “What’s new is that parents have more information than they had before. No democrat should regard this as a reverse. This will allow a more informed choice.”

    Is Labour against more choice and more information?

    Mr. John Smith : We favour, above all, the provision of accurate rather than dogma-ridden information. When the Prime Minister is engaged in the task of correcting the errors, will he look at the case of Cambridgeshire, where, according to the county council, there have been 53 errors affecting at least 30 schools? Why does the Prime Minister not admit that the Government have made a botch of this, take it away and start again, this time trying to reach the minimum competence levels which even this Government should be able to attain?

    The Prime Minister : I am glad that the right hon. and learned Gentleman acknowledges that we shall continue to provide this information, and next year we shall go further with the information. This is the biggest exercise of its kind ever undertaken by a Government : a quarter of a million statistics in one complete set of tables. Every school had a chance to check its figures. In addition, some complaints may have originated in the information wrongly presented in the media, based on our figures–[Hon. Members :– “Oh!”] It is hardly surprising that there are some errors.

    We shall correct them. Next year– [Interruption.] Hon. Members had better listen, because this is what they will get next year : extra information ; national curriculum results in English, maths, science and technology, routes taken by pupils at age 16 ; truancy rates ; and examination results. They will also get the first primary school tables giving national curriculum results for pupils aged seven. That is the information which the Opposition would hide and we shall provide.

    Mr. Butcher : I commend to the attention of my right hon. Friend an article in the current issue of the Fabian reviews in which it is argued that selective education should be reintroduced and that our secondary schools should be reformed on the German model of vocational and academic education. If this is now a legitimate subject of interest for the more enlightened socialists, why are our own Ministers so coy about reintroducing grammar schools?

    The Prime Minister : The main thing that we are concerned with is the highest quality of education across the whole of the public sector. That is what we are seeking to provide, together with the greater spread of information. With regard to what my hon. Friend has to say about the socialist party, he must speak for them in so far as he wishes to do so–I certainly would not wish to do so.

    Leaving aside for the moment the 180 refugees for whom Austria has provided refuge because Britain would not, may I again remind the Prime Minister of the more than 6,500 innocent civilians without adequate refuge, trapped in Serbian prison compounds, their lives threatened imminently by starvation and cold because no third country will have them? Does the Prime Minister realise that they are there, at least in part, because of his failure as President of the European Community to provide a co-ordinated European plan for Yugoslav refugees? Why?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman knows that this country has taken the lead in most of the initiatives dealing with Yugoslavia in recent months. We have welcomed more than 40,000 visitors, of whom 4,000 have applied for asylum. This country has shown great generosity and will continue to do so, but we share the view of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees that help should be provided as close as possible to people’s homes, and not by taking them abroad when that is not absolutely necessary. That is the policy which we have been following and the policy which I believe it is right for us to follow.

    Mr. Dunn : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the publication of league tables for local schools is entirely responsible? Is he also aware that the reason why certain parties in the House object to the publication of information for parents is that it brings into the open the mediocrity introduced into our schools by the left in the 1960s?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend–and, more to the point, so do parents up and down the country, who know very well where the bad education authorities are. The Labour party has tried to block every one of our education reforms, so it is hardly surprising that it is now trying to block information.

     

    Q2. Mr. Hall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 19 November.

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

    Mr. Hall : Is the Prime Minister aware that the ICI chlora-alkali factory in Runcorn has experienced a 60 per cent. increase in its electricity bills in the past 18 months? Unless it can negotiate a more realistic price for its electricity, or benefit from bulk purchasing, it will go out of business–putting 4,000 people in Runcorn out of work. Will the Prime Minister give a commitment that he will intervene on behalf of jobs in British industry and ensure that ICI is treated fairly in this matter?

    The Prime Minister : I cannot intervene in the way in which the hon. Gentleman invites me to, and it would not be right for me to do so.

    Mr. Ian Bruce : Will the Prime Minister find time in his busy schedule to visit Portland to speak to those running the naval base there and, in particular, to examine sea training? It is not planned to reduce sea training, but simply to move it to Devonport. Is not the best place to undertake such training the place where it has always been undertaken– Portland?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend knows of the decision, which has been taken after careful examination. I am not able to announce any change in that decision this afternoon. I am, of course, perfectly happy to discuss the matter with my hon. Friend.

     

    Q3. Mr. Ernie Ross : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 19 November.

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

    Mr. Ross : Following the announcement today that 3,500 jobs are to go at the Royal Bank of Scotland and 550 at Blue Circle cement, does the Prime Minister realise that while unemployment continues to soar out of control no one will have any confidence in him or in the economy? Why does not the right hon. Gentleman admit that he has not a clue what to do about unemployment?

    The Prime Minister : Given that the hon. Gentleman supports a party which wanted a tax on jobs, all the burdens of the social charter and a national minimum wage, I find his remarks a bit rich. It is odd that the hon. Gentleman did not notice the reductions in interest rates, the measures taken by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor last week, or the measures taken by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment over many months. Where has the hon. Gentleman been during all this time?

    Mrs. Gillan : Will the Prime Minister join me in congratulating a company in my constituency–Amersham International–on winning the Queen’s award for industry for its brain-imaging agent, ceretec? The company leads the world in the field. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is further evidence of the success of the Government’s privatisation policy?

    The Prime Minister : I most certainly agree with my hon. Friend. It is a fact that most of the industries that have been privatised have had a substantially better record in the private sector than they had in the public sector. That is why it is entirely right for us, wherever we can, to look to move enterprises from the public to the private sector, where they can be run by business men, run for profit, and provide secure, long-term, permanent employment.

     

    Q4. Mr. Ronnie Campbell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 19 November.

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

    Mr. Campbell : On 16 November the Prime Minister wrote a letter to the National Union of Mineworkers saying that the 10 pits in the review would have to close because they were not making a profit. [Interruption.] I am not reading. Is the Prime Minister aware that five of those collieries are currently making a profit and two of them are expected to make a profit at the end of the financial year? Who is telling the truth in the matter–the Coal Board or the Prime Minister? The pits are to close–yet they are making a profit. Does the Prime Minister not want to keep the pits open because he would tarnish his reputation again?

    The Prime Minister : The Government are seeking to ensure that we can have a coal industry in the future which is sustainable, profitable and viable. That is in the interests of the coal industry, in the interests of energy users and in the interests of the local communities–and it is what the Government wish to see.

  • PMQT – 5 November 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 5th November 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Colvin : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 November.

    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 today.

    Mr. Colvin : Will my right hon. Friend find time during his busy day to decide how to use the diplomatic and negotiating skills which he deployed so effectively at Maastricht to prevent a trade war between the United States and the European Community? Will he pull out all the stops to achieve an agreement on the general agreement on tariffs and trade before President Bush leaves the White House, in the knowledge that agreement on GATT will do more than anything else to pull the world out of recession?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend on his last point– it is a very serious matter. It is for the European Commission, which has the responsibility to negotiate on behalf of member states, to make a deal, and we shall seek to reach a concerted position so that such a deal can be achieved. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade will make a statement about that a little later.

    Mr. John Smith : Why is it that, in the midst of all our present miseries– [Interruption.] Why is it that, in the midst of this situation, the Government think that it is a priority to abolish wages councils which offer a safety net for 2.5 million people, two thirds of whom are women?

    The Prime Minister : I think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman takes a very narrow view. When he studies the whole of the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill, he may have a more enlightened view. As he may know, we have decided that wages councils will be abolished because they distort the operation of the labour market. Abolishing them will lead to more jobs rather than fewer. These days, wages councils are an anachronism. They no longer have a useful role. They were set up in 1909 and they are not relevant to 1992.

    Mr. Smith : Does the right hon. Gentleman not understand the truth that was expressed by Sir Winston Churchill when wages councils were set up, which was that, if there is no wage protection, the good employer is undercut by the bad and the bad is undercut by the worst? Does he not understand that people in this country are sick and tired of his professing concern about unemployment when 1 million people have lost their jobs since he became Prime Minister?

    The Prime Minister : It is precisely because of the concern to sustain and maintain jobs that we propose to get rid of the councils that destroy jobs. The fact of the matter is that they create unnecessary bureaucracy and add to the burdens on business. If that is the Opposition’s industrial strategy–more burdens, less business and fewer jobs–the right hon. and learned Gentleman had better make it clear.

     

    Q2. Mr. John Townend : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 November.

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

    Mr. Townsend : Is my right hon. Friend aware that Conservative Members are in favour of a very tough public spending round this year, especially on the revenue account, even if that means a public sector pay freeze to protect capital projects? Is he aware also that, when we are having to take painful decisions, it is not acceptable for Mr. Delors to ask for an increase in own resources? Will my right hon. Friend tell Mr. Delors that if he wants more cash, he should look to the waste, fraud and corruption revealed by a recent report of the Court of Auditors?

    The Prime Minister : On the first part of my hon. Friend’s question, I cannot, of course, this afternoon anticipate my right hon. Friend’s autumn statement which he will make to the House next Thursday. However, I agree with my hon. Friend that the Commission’s proposals for a massive increase in Community spending are excessive in the present circumstances. No more than anyone else can the Community spend more than it can afford. I believe that, when we consider the future financing, we must be guided by the same principles of budget discipline and sound public finance that we all agreed to put in the Maastricht treaty.

     

    Q3. Ms. Glenda Jackson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 November.

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

    Ms. Jackson : Does the Prime Minister recall the pledge that he gave in his election manifesto that the value of child benefit would increase each year in line with prices? Despite the wriggling evident in his previous answer, will he repeat that pledge to the House today?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Lady must wait for the autumn statement next week, and I will tell her why. When asked to anticipate a financial statement in the election, the Leader of the Opposition said, “You’ll have to wait till next week when I make it.” That applies to us as well.

    Mr. Knapman : Does my right hon. Friend believe that a single currency for Europe is a desirable objective?

    The Prime Minister : I have indicated often enough in the House, not least yesterday, that I do not believe that that is a remotely likely objective to be reached in the time scale set and that one can only determine whether it is desirable in the circumstances of the day, when the decision needs to be made. That is not now.

     

    Q4. Mr. Janner : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 November.

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

    Mr. Janner : Does the Prime Minister agree that the closure of the 31 pits would make 30,000 miners compulsorily redundant and destroy the jobs of up to 70,000 people in related industries and that very few of them would have any chance of finding other work? In those circumstances, what does the Prime Minister say in response to the extraordinary revelation made by the chairman of British Coal yesterday to the Employment Select Committee that, when he and the President of the Board of Trade decided to close the pits, he had no discussion, conversation or consultation with the Secretary of State for Employment?

    The Prime Minister : There has been a great deal of consultation in government for some time over the whole question of pit closures and there was a great deal of detailed consideration for some time. The hon. and learned Gentleman now knows precisely what the situation is from a lengthy and detailed statement made by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

    Mr. Lidington : Does my right hon. Friend agree that, although this country’s links with our friends in Europe continue to strengthen, our special relationship with the United States of America remains as vital now as it ever has been?

    The Prime Minister : It has been a very close relationship. I believe that my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath) referred to it yesterday as an historic relationship. It has remained that for many years. I believe that that results from the shared interests that we have around the world and from a shared historical background. I have no doubt that that will continue.

    Madam Speaker : Mr. Paddy Ashdown– [Interruption.] Order. The House must come to order. Mr. Ashdown.

    Mr. Ashdown : Is it not the case that the decision taken last night by the House, by however narrow a margin, nevertheless means that Britain’s future in Europe has been saved and, with it, tens of thousands of jobs around Britain?

    The Prime Minister : May I say first to the right hon. Gentleman– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The House must come to order and hear the response from the Prime Minister.

    The Prime Minister : May I say first to the right hon. Gentleman– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The Prime Minister must be heard in the House, as every other right hon. and hon. Member should. The Prime Minister.

    The Prime Minister : Thank you, Madam Speaker. May I say to the right hon. Gentleman that the price of principle is often abuse, but he was right last night in the vote that he cast. [Interruption.]

    Mr. Sykes : Does the Prime Minister agree with the business men of Scarborough and Whitby who say that the social chapter would devastate jobs?

    The Prime Minister : That is a view with which I entirely agree. It is a view expressed not only by the business men of Scarborough and Whitby, clearly with great clarity, but by business men across this country. The social chapter was not in the interests of this country. We were right to reject it.

     

    Q6. Dr. Berry : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 November.

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

    Dr. Berry : Is the Prime Minister able to explain why he believes that an increase in public expenditure will severely damage the economy while hoping and praying that exactly the same activity by the private sector will get Britain out of recession?

    The Prime Minister : I do not know on what basis the hon. Gentleman produces his question. The Government’s position on public expenditure has always been that it must be prudent, it must be affordable and it must be in the interests of overall management of the economy. That was, is and remains the case.

    Sir Peter Emery : Will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity to extend an invitation to President-elect Clinton to come to this country, immediately after 20 January, when he can?

    The Prime Minister : I am delighted to take the opportunity of saying that I look forward to meeting President-elect Clinton before Christmas. I have already had the opportunity of sending my congratulations to him and stating them both privately and publicly, and I look forward to meeting him before Christmas. I hope that it will be possible for him to visit this country.

     

    Q7. Mr. Fatchett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 November.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer that I gave a few moments ago.

    Mr. Fatchett : After the Prime Minister’s poor performance in yesterday’s debate and after his policy failure on unemployment, the mines, British industry and devaluation, does he agree that his recent 16 per cent. approval rating in an opinion poll shows the generosity of the British people?

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman was looking for one person in this country who has good reason not to trust opinion polls, he has just addressed a question to him. As to yesterday–right sentiment, wrong leader.

    Mr. Ian Taylor : Does my right hon. Friend share my view that the true test of compassion in public services is not necessarily the amount of money spent but the quality and efficiency with which it is spent? Does he, therefore, share my horror at the lack of compassion of Lambeth council, which has already spent £400,000 of local charge payers’ money on phantom teachers?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I did see that particular report, which illustrated not only that Lambeth council is inefficient but that it is slightly less inefficient than Islington council, which spent rather more on the same matter.

     

    Q8. Mr. Hoyle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 5 November.

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

    Mr. Hoyle : Will the Prime Minister repeat in the House the assurance that he gave to the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth (Mr. Carttiss) that he would not introduce the Third Reading of the Maastricht Bill until after the second Danish referendum ? Does that not show that there was no limit to the wriggling of the Prime Minister in his attempt to obtain votes in the Lobby last night ?

    The Prime Minister : If the hon. Gentleman’s last point had been right, there would have been no debate yesterday. It was precisely because I was concerned to get the Bill through that there was a debate yesterday and we will move to Committee stage, and move forward.

    I am happy to make the point entirely clear to the hon. Gentleman. Yesterday, the House reaffirmed its assent to the Bill proceeding to Committee stage. In doing so, no thanks to the official Opposition, it reaffirmed our determination to play a leading role in Europe and strengthened our negotiating hand in Edinburgh. As for progress, there will be a limited discussion before Christmas. We will return to the Bill in greater detail in the new year. I wish to have plenty of time for full and proper discussion on all the details of a constitutional Bill which is of great concern in the House. It is important to carry the assent of the House on the Bill. That will take time.

    The present intention of the Danish Government is to hold a referendum in May. Given the Committee timetable that we have in mind and the full discussion that we need, we will need to take the Third Reading after that date in May. That has been and is the position, and that is the point that was made clear yesterday.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 4 November 1992

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 4th November 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Civil Servants

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 23 October, Official Report, column 389, how many members of the civil service have retired early since the beginning of 1992, on terms comparable to those mentioned in his answer.

    The Prime Minister : These terms are payable to civil servants who are retired early by reason of redundancy or in the public interest. The number shown in Civil Service Statistics (1991 edition, table 7) as leaving for these causes in 1990-91 was 1,582. Figures for 1991-92 will be published on 27 November.

     

    Coal Industry

    Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister what is his response to the petition presented on 23 October to No. 10 Downing Street by the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey on behalf of Liberal Democrats calling for a fully independent review of the coal industry before any pits are closed.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 29 October 1992] : My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has announced a moratorium until early in the new year on the closure of 21 of the pits proposed for closure by British Coal, unless the work force at a pit concerned agrees otherwise, and a full and wide ranging review of the prospects for these pits. The Government will publish a White Paper early in the new year setting out the results of the review in the context of our energy policy. There will be a full debate in the House of Commons.

    British Coal is carrying out the statutory consultation process in relation to the other 10 pits before any closure takes place.

  • PMQT – 29 October 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 29th October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. William O’Brien : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 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.

    Mr. O’Brien : Can the Prime Minister confirm that the chairman of British Coal told the Select Committee on Trade and Industry yesterday that the 31 pits due to close are only the beginning, and that seven more are due to close in due course, making a total of 38 pits, which will be devastating to the mining industry and to mining communities ? What is the Prime Minister going to do? Is he going to come clean on that issue?

    The Prime Minister : What I believe the chairman of the coal industry actually said, although I have not yet read his evidence in detail and I must make that clear to the hon. Gentleman, was that British Coal could close more than 31 pits and have a viable industry. That is a quite separate proposition from saying that that is likely to happen, and my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has made it perfectly clear that he is reviewing the situation.

    Mr. Waterson : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the London business school survey, which showed that there would be greater reductions in air fares in Europe if there were more liberalisation, would equally apply to air fares between here and the United States of America, where there is a greater need for liberalisation?

    The Prime Minister : Yes I do agree with my hon. Friend about that. We have sought greater liberalisation in air fares for some time. We are confident that they would produce both a better service and cheaper air fares. We think that that is a prize well worth seeking.

    Mr. John Smith : Does not the publication of the Foreign Office’s assessment of the Danish proposals confirm that the Prime Minister cannot possibly discharge the undertaking that he gave to the House on 24 September before the Edinburgh summit at the earliest?

    The Prime Minister : No, I must say to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that I do not believe that that is the case. The British presidency has the responsibility of seeking to negotiate Denmark into a position where it can ratify the treaty. We hope to be able to reach a framework upon that by December. What is clear is that the Danes have now set out how they propose to proceed, and it is also clear from the Birmingham declaration that we shall have positive decisions on subsidiarity at Edinburgh.

    Mr. John Smith : But does the Prime Minister not recollect saying in precise and specific terms in the House on 24 September that there would have to be a basis for the Danes to have a second referendum and that subsidiarity would have to be set in place? How can it be set in place before the Edinburgh summit?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is wriggling because he knows that he is trying to move away from the European policy that he has always had. I say to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that if he cannot keep his principles in opposition, he will stay in opposition.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister not appreciate that it is a bit rich to be accused of a U-turn by a Prime Minister who has done a U- turn on devaluation and the exchange rate mechanism, a U-turn on pit closures, a U-turn on economic policy and a U-turn on his undertakings to the House?

    The Prime Minister : I think the right hon. and learned Gentleman has been touched upon a sore spot. He knows that his party has had seven changes of policy on Europe already. Even Salome ran out of veils at seven. He has shed seven veils and what is revealed is less attractive than Salome.

    Mr. John Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend agree that nothing would help more to restore economic recovery all round the world than a settlement in the GATT round? Will he continue to do everything that he can to bring about such a settlement?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I can certainly give my hon. Friend that assurance and I and a number of my right hon. Friends have been in touch with the key negotiators again over the last 24 hours. I hope very much that there will be yet more negotiations over this weekend and that there will be an early settlement. It is a very great prize and I hope and believe that it will be there for the taking.

     

    Official Visit, Newham

    Q2. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister if he has any plans to pay an official visit to the London borough of Newham.

    The Prime Minister : I am making plans for a series of visits to all parts of the country. Newham is not yet included, but I am happy to consider it.

    Mr. Banks : That is very good news. I will organise a riotous welcome for the Prime Minister when he comes, but I must tell him with great respect that he is about as popular in the east end as anthrax. If he were to come to my advice surgery on Friday, he would find that 60 per cent. of my cases are housing problems and that is true of all inner city hon. Members. In 1979 my borough was spending £50,000 a year on bed- and-breakfast accommodation and this year we are spending £7 million on it. We have only 1.4 per cent. of our properties vacant.

    If the Prime Minister wants to do something about homelessness and to boost the economy, will he allow local authorities to spend the £5.1 billion of accumulated capital receipts? That would do something about homelessness and jobs, or is he only interested in his own job and his own homes?

    The Prime Minister : I must say that that is a bit rich from the hon. Gentleman. Newham borough council’s rent arrears now amount to 21 per cent. of its rent roll and it has 1,000 empty properties. Newham has the lowest collection of community charge almost anywhere in the country and as far as its collection record is concerned, perhaps some explanation of that is that seven of the Labour councillors refuse to pay their community charge.

     

    Engagements

    Q3. Mr. David Atkinson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 October.

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

    Mr. Atkinson : If Parliament does not ratify the Maastricht treaty, can my right hon. Friend point out precisely what the alternatives would be for Britain and the consequences which would undoubtedly be encouraged if the Labour party were to abandon all principle by failing to support the Prime Minister on Wednesday night?

    The Prime Minister : On that last point, I believe that they have already announced that they have no principles, so everybody is aware of that. I believe that it would be damaging for Britain if we were unable to ratify the Maastricht treaty. We would lose influence in Europe, we would lose the opportunity to lead it in the direction that we want away from centralism into a free market towards an enlarged community and towards a decentralised community. But more than that, I think we would be sending a signal to investors in America, Japan and elsewhere that they could not rely on our commitment to Europe and I dare say that people who work in Sony factories in Wales, Nissan factories in the north and many other investments throughout the United Kingdom would not regard that as a sensible policy.

     

    Q4. Mr. Alton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 October.

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

    Mr. Alton : As the Prime Minister has rightly just reminded the House whether the Maastricht treaty is ratified next week is a matter of great principle, and given the confusion that there has been during the past week or so, can the right hon. Gentleman clarify whether he will personally regard next Wednesday’s vote as a matter of confidence in himself and his Government?

    The Prime Minister : We will put down our motion before the end of this week. I can say to the hon. Gentleman that it will be a substantive motion and we shall invite support for it on its merits.

    Mr. Richards : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the recent raid on an IRA bomb factory was the product of painstaking and diligent work by the Metropolitan police and others, and will he congratulate all of them on that success?

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to do that. As my hon. Friend will know, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on specific police operations, but they have undoubtedly been very successful in their work against terrorism and have faced particular difficulties with the large number of bombs that have been placed, particularly in the city of London, in recent weeks. I know that they will continue that work.

     

    Q5 Mr. Battle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 October.

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

    Mr. Battle : As the Department of Social Security has confirmed that the Prime Minister intends to tax invalidity benefit, I challenge the Prime Minister to tell us exactly where that plan to tax the sick is to be found in his election manifesto. Tell us. Which page is it on?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman should stop scrabbling among newspapers and wait for the details of the autumn statement in due course. When it comes, he might also comment on the substantial real-terms reductions in many social benefits under the last Labour Government.

    Mr. Thurnham : Does my right hon. Friend agree that his success in beating inflation, now down to 2 per cent. annualised over the last six months, provides the firmest foundation for low interest rates, and that it is his policies, rather than the muddled policies of the Opposition, which will ensure that this country, as a great trading nation, gains the greatest success from the GATT talks?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, my hon. Friend is entirely right about the importance of low inflation. It is noticeable that even today the official Opposition are apt to disregard inflation as the important ingredient in economic well being. It is the fact that we now have low inflation, together with the increased competitiveness that increasingly is there, which will provide the basis for recovery.

     

    Q6. Mr. Dafis : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 October.

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

    Mr. Dafis : Notwithstanding the rhetoric of the Welsh Office, as economic conditions in Wales certainly justify granting to Wales objective 1 status under the EC structural fund, will the Prime Minister support the granting of that status to Wales?

    The Prime Minister : I think that that is a matter upon which my right hon. Friend will wish to comment.

     

    Q7. Lady Olga Maitland : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 October.

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

    Lady Olga Maitland : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming a reduction in the number of house repossession actions? Is that not a demonstration of our policies to facilitate house owners so that they do not have to leave their homes at a time of financial crisis? Finally, I extend to my right hon. Friend a warm welcome to my constituency of Sutton and, in particular, to his birthplace, St. Helier’s, which is a NHS trust.

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that invitation. I am pleased that the number of repossession actions in the last quarter were a third down and that is welcome. That is in part due to two particular factors–the package of measures on repossessions announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor last December and the significant fall in interest rates over the past two years.

     

    Q8. Mr. Hanson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 October.

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

    Mr. Hanson : Yesterday afternoon I spent two hours with miners from the Point of Ayr colliery in my constituency, one of the 21 on the moratorium list– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. This is Question Time. I wish that the hon. Gentleman would now come in right away with his question.

    Mr. Hanson : They told me of run down investment in pits, job losses and everything else. Will the Prime Minister give me and my hon. Friends an assurance that there will be no run down in investment in pits on the list during the term of that moratorium?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has made all those matters clear. The hon. Gentleman is well aware of what is happening during the moratorium period.

     

    Q9. Mr. Ward : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 29 October.

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

    Mr. Ward : Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the foundations of recovery is to maintain capital expenditure, particularly where it affects the construction industry.

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend about that matter, as I set out in my remarks in some interviews a few days ago. As I said to the House at Question Time last week, economic circumstances outside the United Kingdom have materially changed, but in many ways that gives us new opportunities to develop our strategy for recovery. I cannot anticipate today the outcome of the public expenditure round but it is right to recognise the importance of capital projects and I know that that is very much in the mind of my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 28 October 1992

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

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Libya

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he has had with President Bush over the circumstances surrounding the imposition of sanctions by the United Nations against Libya; and what plans Her Majesty’s Government have to raise the issues surrounding Lockerbie at the United Nations.

    The Prime Minister : The Government have worked closely with the American administration on all aspects of the Lockerbie case, including United Nations Security Council resolutions 731 and 748.

     

    Bloodstock

    Mr. Alfred Morris : To ask the Prime Minister if he will institute an interdepartmental review of the case for reducing the level of value added tax on bloodstock in the United Kingdom to reduce the difference between the United Kingdom rate and the rates levied in France and Ireland.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 26 October 1992] : The Government recognise the regional economic importance of the bloodstock industry. My right hon. Friend the Paymaster General has worked hard with industry representatives to ensure that it is not significantly disadvantaged by the continued difference in VAT rates between member states. The introduction of the flat rate farmers’ scheme and a 0.75 per cent. cut in betting duty in the 1992 Budget will help to secure the right environment in which the industry can compete successfully.

    Ministers receive many well-argued cases for tax relief, many of which appear at least as deserving of a reduced rate as bloodstock. The Government believe that their long-standing policy of a VAT system based on a zero rate and a single positive rate is simple for all traders and cheap to administer.

     

    Pit Closures

    Mr. Alfred Morris : To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has received from the General Secretary of the TUC about pit closures; and what reply he is sending.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 26 October 1992] : Following British Coal’s announcement of pit closures on 13 October the General Secretary of the TUC, Mr. Willis, wrote to me on 15, 17 and 20 October.

    In replying, I noted that the issues he raised had been addressed in Parliament on a number of occasions and that we looked forward to the TUC’s contribution to the widespread consultation announced by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

    Mr. Willis also wrote to me twice on 26 October. I shall reply to these letters shortly.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 27 October 1992

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

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Appointments

    Mr. Redmond : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list all the names of public appointments that he has made, giving the period for which the appointment was made, relevant qualifications of the appointees and what remuneration each currently receives.

    The Prime Minister : As I told the hon. Member on 13 June 1991, Official Report, column 663, in answer to a similar question, this information could be supplied only at disproportionate cost.

     

    Housing Associations

    Ms. Walley : To ask the Prime Minister what response he has made to representations from the National Federation of Housing Associations about the retention of the £2 billion grant for housing associations ; and if he will make it his policy that no cuts in expenditure will be made to the budget for the west midlands.

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth) wrote to me on 15 October, enclosing a letter which he had received from the chairman of the west midlands regional council of the National Federation of Housing Associations (NFHA). My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Department of the Environment replied on my behalf.

    The Government cannot comment on the outcome of the public expenditure survey, which will be announced in my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s “Autumn Statement”. The Government have shown their commitment to housing associations as the main providers of new social housing by increasing resources for the Housing Corporation from £935 million in 1989-90 to over £1,700 million in 1992-93.

    Next year resources will be allocated among the Housing Corporation’s regions in accordance with the housing needs indicator, which is agreed by the Department of the Environment, the Housing Corporation and the NFHA.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 27 October.

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 27 October.

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

     

    Pit Closures

    Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the Prime Minister in agreeing to the pit closures what account he took of the effect on competitiveness of the changes in exchange rate between the pound and the dollar; and if he will publish a table showing for each year since 1970 (a) the relative unit value of United Kingdom exports compared with those of the United States of America in each year based on the second half of 1973 equals 100 and the fourth quarter of 1986 equals 100, (b) the world price of coal in terms of dollars and (c) an index of freight rates from (i) the United States of America, (ii) Australia and (iii) the contract price for United Kingdom coal delivered to power stations.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 23 October 1992] : The competitiveness of British-mined coal was considered at a range of pound : dollar exchange rates. The other information requested cannot be supplied in the time available and my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade will write to the hon. Member.

     

    Middle East

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy during his visit to Egypt on 23 October to raise with President Mubarak Israel’s nuclear capability and the danger of nuclear proliferation throughout the middle east.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 26 October 1992] : I discussed a number of middle east security matters with President Mubarak. I did not discuss Israel’s nuclear potential.

  • PMQT – 27 October 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 27th October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Watson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 27 October.

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

    Mr. Watson : As the Prime Minister bobbles about helplessly in a sea of chaos, has he noticed the latest damning evidence of economic decline in today’s Confederation of British Industry review, yet one of last week’s U- turns–just one of them–promised economic growth? Before he finally slips beneath the surface, will the Prime Minister tell us what, if anything, he will do to prevent recession from turning into slump?

    The Prime Minister : In the time that he spent preparing that question, the hon. Gentleman clearly did not read all of the CBI quarterly survey. If he had done, he would have seen output expectations up on September, export optimism up on July, the domestic prices balance at an all-time low and, for the first time ever, the balance of firms reporting unit costs actually being reduced. As to improving economic circumstances, the hon. Gentleman should note what has been done. Interest rates have been cut 11 times in two years. They are the lowest interest rates in Europe, and British firms also face the lowest corporate tax rates in Europe.

    Mr. William Powell : My right hon. Friend will be aware of how welcome the declaration of the London summit on the conference on Yugoslavia was in relation to the war crimes that are taking place in Yugoslavia and also the subsequent action taking place at the United Nations. Unfortunately, of course, there is no permanent machinery for trying war crimes, although the General Assembly of the United Nations has been discussing such permanent machinery. Will my right hon. Friend encourage his colleagues in the Government to take a more constructive approach towards establishing such permanent machinery?

    The Prime Minister : I am certainly content to give my hon. Friend that assurance. This was a matter that was raised at the London summit on Yugoslavia some time ago, and as a result of that, the whole matter is being examined in the United Nations.

    Mr. John Smith : Could the Prime Minister explain how he takes comfort from a CBI survey which predicts that jobs will be down, output will be down, orders will be down, investment will be down and confidence will be down? Will he answer the question that was put by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Central (Mr. Watson)? What action will he take to stop a slump?

    The Prime Minister : For the second successive Question Time, the right hon. and learned Gentleman has failed to listen to an answer already given. If he had listened more carefully he would have heard what I said about output expectations, export optimism, the domestic prices balance and the balance of firms reporting unit costs actually falling. He would also know that manufacturing output has risen in each of the first two quarters, that car production was up sharply in September, and that retail sales have been up in both the second and third quarters.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister not understand that the complacency of that answer will shock the public? Does he not realise that the British public are now sick and tired of failed economic policies as well as bogus economic promises of recovery which are never ever fulfilled?

    The Prime Minister : Throughout the last three years the economic policy of the right hon. and learned Gentleman has been the same as ours, but 1 per cent. less off interest rates. Exactly the same. His commitment to the central part of our economic policy was total and frequently stated. He always wanted lower interest rates. Will he now bear it in mind that we have the lowest interest rates in the European Economic Community–lower than we have had for a long time–and that there is no economic policy whatever from the Opposition?

    Sir James Kilfedder : May I, as one who voted against the Government in the crucial Division last week on the pit closures and was opposed by a Tory candidate in the general election, from my critical position of independence congratulate the Prime Minister on the brave determination that he has shown–history will commend him for it–to put the United Kingdom at the heart of Europe? Will he take the opportunity as often as possible to spell out in simple terms to the people of this country the consequences, particularly for jobs, if Britain is left on the sidelines of Europe?

    The Prime Minister : I am most grateful to my hon. Friend for what he has had to say. Let me say this on the European Community and the Government’s policy. I believe that we have had three historic mistakes over the last 30 years in European policy. [Interruption.] The first was when we failed to join the Community at the outset. The second was when twice other countries refused to accept Britain into the European Community. They were mistakes of great damage, to not just this country but the whole of the European Community. Today, with the possibility of enlargement through the changing policies in Europe, we have more of a chance than ever we have had before of building a European Community in the image that we in this country wish to see. It would be folly at this stage to throw that away by isolating ourselves in the Community and by ending our influence. That is the way that the sort of Community we do not wish to see–not the sort of Community that my right hon. and hon. Friends and I have been fighting for for some years–comes about.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister not realise that the terrible damage done to his credibility and that of his Government by his foolish manoeuvrings over the last week have undermined the case for Europe, for which there is a majority in the House, as well as delaying the chance of recovery, for which there is such desperate need in the nation?

    The Prime Minister : What undermines the case for Europe is the manoeuvrings of the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith) as well as the manoeuvrings of the right hon. Gentleman himself.

    Mr. Roger Evans : Can my right hon. Friend give an assurance to the House that legislation will be introduced at an early date to strengthen the law against the curse of new-age travellers?

    The Prime Minister : There seems to be some competition for legislation to be introduced in the House. We are examining the particular difficulties created by new-age travellers, and I hope that at the end of that examination we will be able to produce legislation to protect those who suffer from their activities.

     

    Q2. Mr. Illsley : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 27 October.

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

    Mr. Illsley : The Prime Minister will recall that last Wednesday members of his Government said that there would be a meaningful, genuine, statutory 90-day review of the 10 collieries earmarked for closure. Bearing in mind the fact that there is no such thing as a statutory 90-day review, and that most of those collieries are now closed, does the Prime Minister accept that the House was apparently misled?

    The Prime Minister : I shall reiterate to the hon. Gentleman what I said myself on the subject of the 10 pits. I made it perfectly clear then that the 10 pits that have no economic future will go through the full statutory review procedure. I made it equally clear that the Government would co-operate with the inquiry by the Trade and Industry Select Committee and that the President of the Board of Trade will give evidence if that is required.

    Mr. Nicholls : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that he will never allow the EC to impose on us by the back door the social chapter that the Labour party would impose on us by the front door? Will he also confirm that he will fight for British interests and jobs in Euope, as he has always done?

    The Prime Minister : I can most certainly give my hon. Friend that assurance. Before I went to the negotiations on the Maastricht treaty I indicated to the House that I would not come back having accepted a single currency being imposed on this House, and equally, that I would not accept the social chapter. I honoured both of those commitments and I propose to keep to them.

     

    Q3. Mr. Barnes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 27 October.

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

    Mr. Barnes : A sales manager of British Coal, Alan Aitken, has told customers that supplies will be supplemented by imports during the period of the pit closures. This is a disgrace. How much will be added to these imports by the agreement that the Prime Minister made with the Colombian authorities about the importation from that country of coal that is produced with the help of child labour?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is clearly reading the wrong articles, for what he has had to say is rubbish. I made no offer to stop British Coal’s anti-dumping complaint. Nor did I in any way reach the sort of agreement that the hon. Gentleman suggests with the Colombian authorities–not at any stage. Since I spend a lot of my time, as the hon. Gentleman knows, seeking an agreement on GATT, it is hardly likely that I would support dumping.

     

    Q4. Mrs. Angela Knight : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 27 October.

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

    Mrs. Knight : Does my right hon. Friend agree that not even the French farmers would benefit from a world trade war? Will he confirm that he will continue to pursue an early conclusion of the GATT round, which will be good for developing countries, good for Britain–including companies in my constituency of Erewash–and even good for France?

    The Prime Minister : I can most certainly confirm that. The reality is that everybody would lose out from a trade war, including France and everybody who lives in France. In the last few days I have been in touch with the Americans and with leaders throughout the European Community to urge an early resumption of talks between the Community and the United States, both on a GATT agreement and on ending the dispute about oil seeds. I am glad to say that the two sides are in touch again and the United States is holding off from taking trade retaliation. We must seek an agreement both to end the dispute over oil seeds and a comprehensive agreement on the Uruguay round as speedily as possible. On the substantive point of my hon. Friend’s question about benefits, it would produce £120 billion worth of extra world output were we to have a successful GATT outcome.

    Mr. Cunliffe : Does the right hon. Gentleman understand that he may be out next week on 90 days’ notice, without statutory review? Will he bear with me while I relate to him the humiliating experience, which is causing great distress, that miners at Parkside colliery suffered on Friday? They were told to report to the pit every day for 90 days but that they were forbidden to go down the mine. Will the Prime Minister condemn this unspeakable behaviour and have words about it with the chairman of British Coal?

    The Prime Minister : I shall examine the case that the hon. Gentleman sets out and I shall see for myself what the facts are.

     

    Q5. Mr. Amess : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 27 October.

    The Prime Minister : I refer my hon. Friend– [Interruption.] –to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

    Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Member for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie) should not behave in that way.

    Mr. Amess : Is my right hon. Friend aware that mortgage interest rates for first-time buyers are now at their lowest level for 25 years? Does he agree that that will have the effect of putting more money in people’s pockets so that they can spend it on goods in the high street and thereby help our economic recovery? Does he further agree that that is very good news for home buyers throughout the country and particularly for my constituents in Basildon?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend has the most famous constituents in the western world and I can confirm that the very substantial reductions in mortgage rates will help them a great deal. It will also make a significant difference to the amount of money available for high street purchases, though of course the central point is that each 1 per cent. off interest rates is worth £1 billion a year to industry, and that is vital for investment, for future prosperity and for jobs.

    Dr. Kim Howells : Can the Prime Minister confirm that doubts about the future of the hugely important Al Yamamah defence deal, which the British Government have signed with the Saudis, increase day by day and parallel the decline in the influence of his predecessor, Baroness Thatcher? Will he confirm that interest in that deal increases as it looks as though his predecessor may be making a comeback, along with that grease-palming son of hers [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. [Interruption.] We want a question from the hon. Member.

    Dr. Howells : That was my question, Madam Speaker.

    The Prime Minister : I refute the hon. Gentleman’s distasteful remarks about my noble Friend. As for the Al Yamamah contract, there is no doubt that the Saudi commitment to Al Yamamah remains as strong as it has been for many years. That has been stressed to the Secretary of State for Defence and directly to me by the king.

  • PMQT – 22 October 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 22nd October 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Moate : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 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.

    Mr. Moate : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the fact that interest rates are significantly down and that car production figures and even retail sales figures are up? In welcoming the Government’s renewed commitment to economic growth and job creation, may I ask my right hon. Friend to tell the House more about his strategy for recovery– [Interruption.] The Opposition are not interested in recovery–in particular, ways of stimulating new capital investment projects, especially private and public sector joint-funded projects such as the important new Swale project in my constituency?

    The Prime Minister : I had the opportunity of learning about the Swale project when I visited my hon. Friend’s constituency some months ago. I think that everyone will welcome the drop in interest rates and the other economic developments that were mentioned by my hon. Friend. When it is safe to make further reductions without imperilling our inflationary objectives, it would certainly be the Government’s intention to do so. There is no doubt in any part of the House that across Europe and beyond Europe, economic circumstances have darkened and have become more difficult. That circumstance needs to be taken into account in our policy and in the policies of other countries as well. That means that in the months ahead there will be some difficult decisions. There will be tough decisions to be taken in the public expenditure round. It means that we must restrain expenditure where we can, but it also means that we must look with particular care at those elements of expenditure that have an employment and particularly growth potential, which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will do. We shall certainly look more carefully at ensuring that we seek to get the private sector working more effectively to assist in capital projects, which I believe the whole House will welcome.

     

    Q2. Mr. Heppell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer that I gave a few moments ago.

    Mr. Heppell : Will the Prime Minister give a guarantee that the 10 pits that have been given a 90-day reprieve will be allowed to continue to mine coal during that period? The men want to work. Will he allow them to work?

    The Prime Minister : No, I cannot give a guarantee that during the 90-day period coaling will continue in those 10 pits. It is necessary, and it will be the case, that those pits will be in a condition to resume coaling. If at the end of that period it is determined that that is the decision, they shall do so. But during that period, I can give no guarantee that there will be coaling.

    Mr. Kynoch : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the tough new rules for GCSE examinations, which will ensure continuing pressure to improve and to achieve higher standards under this Government?

    The Prime Minister : I most certainly will. The requirement to seek higher standards is felt by every pupil, and it is a demand sought by every teacher and every parent. It will certainly be the Government’s policy to bring that about.

    Mr. Hume : As the Member who represents the constituency with the highest unemployment, I ask the Prime Minister to tell the House whether the reports of the Government’s intention to reduce contribution-based unemployment benefit are correct. Does he not believe that the Government would be better employed in applying their mind to reducing unemployment rather than to reducing unemployment benefit?

    The Prime Minister : As I said to the House a moment ago, it is certainly our intention to pursue a strategy that will bring recovery, and with it growth, jobs and prosperity–I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will welcome that. It is essential that that moves right to the centre of thinking in each and every aspect of Government policy in the circumstances that now apply in this country, throughout western Europe and beyond. As I stated clearly a few moments ago, that is the Government’s intention.

    Sir Jim Spicer : In this statement on Tuesday my right hon. Friend stressed the crucial importance of an early completion of the GATT round. Now it seems that the talks have broken down. Can my right hon. Friend give us any idea why that happened, and will he do all that he can to get them started again?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly answer my hon. Friend’s second question in the affirmative. This morning I saw the reported comments of the French Foreign Minister that there will be no serious GATT discussions for several months. Let me make it absolutely clear to the House that I could not disagree more strongly with that view. It is not shared by the British Government as holder of the presidency of the Community, nor by the Commissioner, nor by the majority of member states, which last week at Birmingham authorised the Commission to negotiate for a GATT settlement by the end of this year.

    Over the past two weeks the narrowing of the gap between the Community and the United States has been very welcome. That gap can be bridged. What is needed is for both sides to stay at the negotiating table, and I shall do all that I can to bring that about.

    Mr. John Smith : Given the daily changes in policy which we have all observed this week, what does the Prime Minister have in mind for his next U-turn?

    The Prime Minister : I have to say to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that I think that that question falls rather below the level of events. It was his U-turn on tax policy which helped to lose Labour the election. It sank his predecessor, but the right hon. and learned Gentleman did not resign–he was made the leader.

    Mr. Smith : Does not the Prime Minister realise that following the British Chambers of Commerce report which says that lack of confidence in the Government is causing many of our difficulties, confidence in him is drastically declining among the people of this country? They are not impressed by a Government blown about by events, and which has one simple rule–“A policy a day keeps Back Benchers at bay.”

    The Prime Minister : Only a few months ago all the people of this country had the choice to determine in whom they had confidence, and 14.5 million of them chose the Conservative party. That is why–because of the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s tax policies, and because of a lack of confidence in his party–the right hon. and learned Gentleman is sitting on the Opposition Benches. That is where he will remain, for at least the next four-and-a-half years.

    Mr. Jonathan Evans : Notwithstanding the recent reactions we have heard from China, may I ask my right hon. Friend for his assurance that he will give his unequivocal support to the governor of Hong Kong in his recent announcement, which is good for the people of Hong Kong, good for Britain and entirely in accord with this country’s agreement with the Chinese Government?

    The Prime Minister : I can most certainly give that assurance. The governor’s proposals set out recently in his speeches in Hong Kong received very wide support among all sorts of opinion in Hong Kong, and very wide support in this House and in public opinion in this country. His aim is to make the Hong Kong Government more effective and more accountable, and to broaden democracy in a way that will survive beyond 1997. That is the right future for Hong Kong, and the governor has the complete and total support of the Government and the whole House in that endeavour.

     

    Q3. Mr. Meale : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Meale : To return to the subject of mining, will the Prime Minister give the House a guarantee that while the review period continues in the coal mining industry, he will place a moratorium on manpower and coal development underground? Without that, it is a meaningless exercise and many pits will face mass redundancies and closures. Yes or no?

    The Prime Minister : I think that we have made clear to the hon. Gentleman what happens during the moratorium and the fact that the 21 pits, apart from the 10 where there are special circumstances, will continue in the fashion that was set out clearly yesterday. I cannot and will not give the hon. Gentleman detailed assertions about matters that lie within the day-to-day management responsibility of British Coal.

    Mr. Tracey : My right hon. Friend’s recent words on growth and sound investment are much to be welcomed. May we, as London Members, urge on my right hon. Friend the cause of the completion of the Jubilee line and the benefits that would flow from it?

    The Prime Minister : I know how assiduous my hon. Friend is in the interests of London. I have noted most carefully what he said.

     

    Q4. Mr. Wareing : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Wareing : It has been widely suggested that the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the President of the Board of Trade should resign. Will the Prime Minister tell the House what are his qualities and those of his colleagues which could justify their continuance in office?

    The Prime Minister : The 14.5 million votes we got in the general election.

    Mr. Barry Porter : I had the opportunity this morning of speaking on the electronic telephonic device to Sir Anthony Beaumont-Dark, who had one or two ideas. He seemed to think that it was not a bad idea to reduce interest rates in a gentle sort of fashion, taking into account what the deutschmark is doing, and that we should keep up a reasonable semblance of public expenditure in capital terms. I thought to myself at the time, “That is not a bad idea”. Does the Prime Minister agree?

    The Prime Minister : I am sure that my hon. Friend will not be at all surprised to know that Sir Anthony has mentioned those matters to me as well.

     

    Q5. Mr. Nigel Jones : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Jones : When the people of Cheltenham march, should not the Prime Minister ask himself what is going on? Does he not realise that they are angry about the way in which the economy is being run? The Prime Minister and his office say that there has been a change in economic policy; the Treasury says that there has not. Who is telling us the truth?

    The Prime Minister : The Government always listen when people make comments of that sort and it was perfectly clear to the House from what I said a few moments ago precisely what objectives the Government have set themselves. Lest there be any doubt in the hon. Gentleman’s mind, let me say that there has been no movement away from the inflation objective or from the belief that we need non-inflationary growth. There is no doubt, not even in the hon. Gentleman’s mind, that outside this country as well as inside this country, there is a changed economic environment. In that changed economic environment, we have to consider what is in the interests of this country and shape our policies accordingly. That is what we have decided to do. That is the policy that we will continue with.

    Mr. Hunter : In the light of the IRA’s intensifying campaign of violence in several parts of the United Kingdom, is my right hon. Friend satisfied that sufficient powers and resources are available to those combating terrorism? Will he make it a priority to give fresh consideration to those matters?

    The Prime Minister : We have always given very great priority to the fight against terrorism in Northern Ireland where the security forces face terrorism on a day-to-day basis and on the mainland where, increasingly in recent months, the terrorists have sought to intimidate with bombs. I must make the point to the terrorists again which will carry universal support in the House : they have no chance whatsoever of succeeding–not now, not tomorrow, not ever.

     

    Q6. Mr. Grocott : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 October.

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

    Mr. Grocott : Does the Prime Minister remember that at the time of the Tory leadership election the reason given for why he beat his two rivals was that he was the one who was the particularly good economist? Will he therefore help the House and tell us whether the Government are pursuing the old economic policy or a new one? Will it be promoted by the old Chancellor or a new one?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman clearly is not listening. He spends too much time reading in the newspapers about what might have been said two years ago.