The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Iraq

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Saddam Hussein – 15 February 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on Saddam Hussein, made in Merseyside on Friday 15th February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    As further details have become apparent throughout the day, it has become crystal clear that there seems to be a very large number of conditions attached to the apparent offer that had come out of Baghdad early this morning. That is very disappointing but it does look as though it is not a serious attempt to reach a conclusion but something of a bogus sham. That seems to be apparent and the more we learn about what has been said, the more that seems to be the case. I regret that very much but I fear that is the only conclusion that we are able to draw from what we have heard thus far.

  • PMQT – 14 February 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 14th February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Sir Hal Miller : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.

    Sir Hal Miller : Does my right hon. Friend agree that reductions in interest rates following a fall in inflation will sharpen the already competitive position of our motor industry which increased exports last year by 18 per cent? Are not rising exports, rising investment and increased skill levels proof positive that we are achieving what Labour claims to want, and that we should stick with our policies, rather than cut and run?

    The Prime Minister : I can scarcely disagree with my hon. Friend. The motor industry has a very impressive export record, which is a tribute to good design, increasing competitiveness and the increasing work rate of employees in the industry.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to explain to the 110,000 people who lost their jobs in the course of the last month that they did so as a direct result of his incompetent economic policy?

    The Prime Minister : It is interesting that during the 40 months in which unemployment fell, month after month after month, the right hon. Gentleman made no mention of this matter. I regret the rise in unemployment, but the right hon. Gentleman will have to concede that the level of unemployment in this country, at 6.6 per cent., is not only well below the European Community average but very well below the average levels of most of our European partners.

    Mr. Kinnock : Today’s figures show the biggest January rise in unemployment since 1981–the time of the last Tory slump. When the Conservatives have done this twice in a decade–regardless of who has been the leader, or who the Chancellor–is it any wonder that they will always be known as the party of unemployment?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman may find it difficult to explain the following unemployment rates : 9 per cent. in France, 9.9 per cent. in Italy, 9.3 per cent. in Canada, and 6.6 per cent. here. He may also have overlooked the fact that there has been a considerable rise in the number of job vacancies.

    Mr. Kinnock : Perhaps the Prime Minister–who is the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, not of France–will explain why, if Tory policies are to work, hundreds of thousands of people have to stop working.

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman’s track record on such predictions is simply not good. He will recall predicting that mass unemployment of 6 million was inevitable. It was not, and his predictions now are wrong.

    Sir Anthony Grant : When my right hon. Friend reflects today on the position in the Gulf, will he consider that a dictator like Saddam Hussein, who has been unscrupulous enough to murder his own people over several years, will probably have no scruples about allowing innocent people to suffer in a bombing raid for propaganda purposes? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the tragic event in Baghdad and the sad loss of life should not mean that a single allied soldier should be put at risk by a premature land assault?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend knows, we shall consider very carefully when it is right to launch a land assault. The position in that regard remains as I have described to the House in the past. Everyone regrets the death of civilians, particularly in the tragic circumstances of the past few hours. But the United States has explained why it attacked that particular site : it did so on the basis of an assessment that showed that it was a legitimate military target, which played a part in the Iraqi war effort.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister agree that, in considering the lessons of the terrible tragedy that took place in Baghdad last night, we should not forget that Saddam Hussein has, not through inadvertence, but through acts of deliberate policy, killed more Muslims than any other living person? Does he also agree that, as the terrible toll of the war rises, so should our determination to build a just and durable peace to follow it?

    Will the Prime Minister answer the question that I fear he dodged last week and say whether he is prepared to give the United Nations, in whose name we are fighting the war, the lead role in building the peace that follows?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with the observations that the right hon. Gentleman made at the outset of his question. To avoid doubt, I shall repeat the point that the allies are not targeting civilians, unlike Saddam Hussein, who continues to fire missiles wholly indiscriminately at built-up population centres. On the subject of the United Nations, clearly we must consider with all our colleagues in the allied forces, particularly the Arab states upon and around whose lands the conflict is taking place, how to proceed at the end of the conflict.

    Mr. Dykes : Will my right hon. Friend accept the congratulations of the House on his successful visit to Germany on Monday? If he will forgive the pun, far from being a “brugeing” experience, it was a successful visit, both bilaterally and in terms of the resuscitation of European solidarity?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. It is important to ensure that we play a leading part in the centre of the Community, which means that we have the closest possible bilateral contact with all our European partners.

     

    Q2. Mr. Nellist : To ask the Prime Minister if the will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Mr. Nellist : Was yesterday’s massacre of women and children in Amiriya a good example, under the 1977 Geneva protocol, of precision targeting of the right or wrong target? Was not the burning and lasceration of those children’s bodies, to correctly use a military euphemism, the degrading of nobody in Baghdad but of those in whose name that slaughter took place?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman puts the matter with his customary bad taste and inaccuracy. As I explained a moment ago, there has been precision bombing, and that site was bombed because there was legitimate reason to believe that it was a military target.

     

    Q3. Mr. David Nicholson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Mr. David Nicholson : My right hon. Friend will be aware of the concern at the advertising and the unsolicited temptations to borrow pursued by banks and other lenders in recent years, for which many businesses and many individuals are now paying a painful price. As interest rates come down, will my right hon. Friend use his influence as Prime Minister, as former Chancellor and as a former banker to impress on the banking industry the need for responsible lending–and will he consider what role the Government might play in that?

    The Prime Minister : I have done as my hon. Friend suggests. My views on this subject are well known. I am very glad to see that the banks and building societies are addressing the issue of the marketing and provision of credit. As the banks have freely acknowledged, the code that they have covers only banks and building societies. That is why, in December, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry issued a consultative document proposing a number of specific changes to tighten the law on consumer credit. These measures will have a wider field of application than just banks and building societies.

     

    Q4. Ms. Armstrong : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Ms. Armstrong : Did the Prime Minister notice the figures published yesterday that show that the top 20 local education authorities providing nursery education are Labour, and the bottom 20 are Tory? Given the abysmal performance of Tory authorities, when the Secretary of State for Education and Science two weeks ago abandoned any commitment to the expansion of nursery education, did he have the Prime Minister’s approval?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Lady should look at the whole provision of education services throughout the country, and if she is looking at lists of the top and the bottom authorities she should also look at the authorities with the highest community charges.

     

    Q5. Mr. Robert G. Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Mr. Hughes : Will my right hon. Friend take time today to send a message of congratulations to the voluntary bodies and statutory agencies that have worked so hard during the past few days to provide shelter for the homeless in London? Will he note the comments of the deputy director of Shelter, who said the other day that the arrangements made were magnificent and excellent?

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to join my hon. Friend in congratulating all those involved–particularly the voluntary organisations that have co-operated so willingly with my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning. As a result of that swift response there should be no need for anyone to sleep rough on the streets of London during this period of extreme bad weather.

     

    Q6. Mr. Foulkes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Mr. Foulkes : What is the Prime Minister going to do now that John Yates, the highly respected NHS management consultant appointed by the Government to advise on reducing waiting lists, has resigned, describing the Government’s policy, of spending £100 million to find out that waiting lists have increased, as a total waste of money? Would not it be better to sack the Secretary of State for Health and keep Mr. Yates?

    The Prime Minister : As it happens, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health invited Mr. Yates to see him to discuss the reduction in waiting lists. Mr. Yates refused.

     

    Q7. Mr. Hague : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Mr. Hague : Will my right hon. Friend take time today to reflect on the successful expansion of higher education under this Administration? Are not the one in five school leavers going into further and higher education, compared with the miserable one in eight when Labour was in power, a crucial part of building a better trained and educated workforce? Are not this Government providing the resources for that?

    The Prime Minister : Indeed they are. My hon. Friend is right and I entirely agree with his remarks about the importance of higher education– both universities and polytechnics–and the role that they are playing in trying to equip our young people for a better start in life.

    Mr. Andrew Welsh : Is the Prime Minister truly aware of the crisis facing agriculture, with farm incomes at their lowest in real terms since the second world war and record numbers leaving the industry? Why then is the Ministry of Defence supplying Argentine and Uruguayan beef to British forces in the Gulf when British cold stores are jam packed with intervention beef, subsidised and paid for by British taxpayers? Will the right hon. Gentleman assist taxpayers, the armed forces and agriculture by sorting that out?

    The Prime Minister : It is because of such absurdities that we are keen to see a proper reform of the common agricultural policy. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has made it clear that that is a top priority for us and we shall seek to negotiate it with our colleagues in Europe.

     

    Q8. Mr. Riddick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Mr. Riddick : Does my right hon. Friend agree that today’s problems of homelessness have been caused, first, by the way in which the private rented sector has been regulated almost out of existence and, secondly, by the incompetence of many local authorities, mainly Labour controlled, which have more than 100,000 vacant council houses up and down the country? [Interruption.] Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to confirm that the Government will take the necessary radical action to free and deregulate the private rented sector in order to bring many hundreds of thousands of empty flats and rooms back on to the market?

    The Prime Minister : Nothing could better have illustrated the Opposition’s hostility to the private rented sector than their activities while my hon. Friend asked his question. It was absurd that the private rented sector was declining and properties were left empty because of rent control. We have introduced to the subsidy arrangements all sorts of incentives to encourage local authorities to bring properties into use. We continue to examine further ways to stimulate the private sector.

     

    Q9. Mr. David Marshall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 14 February.

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

    Mr. Marshall : What does the Prime Minister have to say to the record number of 40,000 home owners who had their homes repossessed during the past 12 months as a result of his high interest rates policy? What advice does he give those people?

    The Prime Minister : All repossessions are a tragedy for those who are involved. The hon. Gentleman should bear it in mind that repossessions account for less than one fifth of 1 per cent. of home owners and that the overwhelming majority of those are as a result of marriage breakdown.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to Servicemen at Munster Army Base – 11 February 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to servicemen and their wives at Munster Army Base in Germany, made on Monday 11th February 1991.

    [Quality of initial recording was poor, numerous sections are indistinct]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Thank you very much. I am delighted to be here today and I only regret [indistinct] able to have on this particular occasion. Can I just say something to you first about what is happening out in the Gulf and about the visit I made [indistinct].

    I think all of you know why your husbands are out there and why your colleagues are out there in the Gulf; there are serious, important principles at stake. It is not just the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, important though that it is. I think there are wider issues as well and one of the wider issues, of course, is the fact that if a large [indistinct] nation like Iraq is able to invade a small defenceless nation like Kuwait and get away with it, then I wonder how many other small defenceless nations around the world [indistinct] a problem on our hands elsewhere if we do not deal with the problem that exists in Kuwait now.

    The second problem, of course, and is that if this were to continue uninterrupted and the Iraqis were to keep control of Kuwait, then I believe very strongly that we would have a much more serious problem on our hands in two or three years time and a much more difficult and widespread problem to deal with. In fact, that it is better to deal with it now, rather than have a much wider and large-scale conflict to deal with in two or three years time, for in two or three years time the Iraqis could be better prepared; they might have the nuclear weapons they do not have now or the biological weapons they do not yet have and so to [indistinct] and to [indistinct] of other people it seemed to us to be necessary to deal with the particular problem immediately and I know from those of your husbands I met while I was out in the Gulf that [indistinct] is their view as well.

    When I went out there early in the New Year, I went out there because I wanted to see for myself because I do not believe, however well you are briefed, you can understand a matter unless you do see it for yourself. I wanted to see for myself what it was actually like out there and I wonder if I can just paint you [indistinct] picture.

    I went right out in the desert [indistinct] and they were well dug-in. If you, were for example, to travel as I did in a helicopter [indistinct] for mile upon mile upon mile [indistinct] encampment, with little pieces of armour [indistinct] headquarters [indistinct] that was actually dug well into the ground and covered with camouflage nets [indistinct] every single day regardless of the possibility of attacks [indistinct] from Iraq. It was [indistinct] a most remarkable operation [indistinct] for as far as you could see from the helicopter [indistinct] every single [indistinct] there were literally [indistinct] all well dug-in [indistinct] at that time [indistinct] they will have moved on now [indistinct] what they were doing.

    I had the opportunity of having a lot of informal meetings with the boys over there rather like the meeting we have got here except that we were obviously short of microphones and it was just a question of gathering round and talking.

    [Indistinct] when I went out there I was not at all certain what I would actually find [indistinct] professional army of course, but a professional army [indistinct] did not expect to be out in a place like the desert [indistinct] that is going on at the present time and I wondered what people would feel about that and I was naturally [indistinct] about the reaction. I do not think I will ever come away feeling so proud of people as I did of those people as I had [indistinct] just after [indistinct] but Iraq was [indistinct]. People knew what they were there for, they knew how difficult the task would be, they were totally and completely confident of their ability to do it and although on many occasions they made it clear how much they missed their families, they were utterly under-standing of the reason they were sent there and completely understanding of the fact that it would take some time before the work would be completed.

    You have all seen what has been happening [indistinct] conflict in the middle of January. The Royal Air Force, the American Air Force and the other allies have done [indistinct] over the period of the last month. They have [indistinct] with the most remarkable skill; you can actually see from photographs out there how military targets have been picked out in the middle of large areas and destroyed [indistinct] have not been damaged at all and it has been a remarkable operation [indistinct] longer than many people imagine. It will go on for a little longer yet, for a very good reason: we want to make sure that if and when it comes to a land battle – and I think it is probable rather than possible that it will come to a land battle – that everything possible has been done to minimise the severity of that battle. We will not commit our troops to a land battle until we are absolutely certain it is the right time to do so and until the air forces have finished the work that they have been engaged on for a very considerable period of time. So I cannot tell you precisely when that will be: I can tell you that we will take every measure that we possibly can to minimise the scale and to minimise the possibility of casualties should that land battle come about.
    When I was there, I [indistinct] some of the boys I met actually came from and I do assure you that they are totally prepared for what lies ahead.

    There were several other things I had the opportunity of discussing with them and that I would like to mention to you today. When this [indistinct] is over we will, I promise you, bring them home just as soon as we can. I do not propose to leave them out there for a lengthy period at the end of this conflict. It may be we will have to bring the troops who are out there back home and replace them for a short while for logistical reasons, clearing up and bringing home equipment, with some other troops; that is a decision to be taken and quite possibly that is what will happen but I will not keep them out there for a lengthy time at the end of this particular conflict.

    Let me also just say a word about the future of the army and [indistinct] at the end of this particular conflict what we can learn from it, what it actually may mean in terms of the future size, scale and skills that we need for the Armed Forces generally and for the Army in particular and we also will need to look and see what is needed for the future of individual regiments. That will take a while but I think it is a wise decision to stop, regroup and consider at the end of this conflict though it will not delay a decision unnecessarily because I know of the difficulties and uncertainties that that causes in many people’s minds.

    One other thing [indistinct] here in Germany [indistinct] I will just say to you I do not know quite how clearly you get a feel of what opinion is like in the United Kingdom but I must say to you that the support that there is for your husbands and for those troops out there in the United Kingdom is so tangible you can [indistinct] feel it, not just in the House of Commons though certainly [indistinct] the House of Commons, but also there among the public at large there is a total and overwhelming support for your husbands out there and tremendous respect for the work that has to be done and is going to be done. I think many people who perhaps often do not think about these matters will have gained new respect for the work of the Armed Forces as a result of what they can see and learn in this the first-ever television war.
    I wish you could feel how strong that support is because I think it would be a comfort and I think to your husbands in the Gulf it certainly would be a great comfort [indistinct] the support that they have.

    [Mainly indistinct, but regarding the large number of letters the Prime Minister had received at Downing Street]

    [Indistinct] from other people in this country who support has been tremendously important. Your letters are getting through and the fact that they are getting through and the support that you are actually giving to your husbands from here is of the most immense importance. That is one of the things, I believe, why morale out there is so very high and if they cannot be here to say that to you, I am pleased that I am, to say “Thank you” for those letters and to keep on writing to them even though it is not always easy for them to reply and may not be so in the future, I do assure you [indistinct] all the things may not be so in the future, I do assure that [indistinct] receive your letters sent out there is very much appreciated

    So thank you very much indeed for your welcome today and I was very pleased to be able to come today. I hope this matter will not drag on too long. I cannot tell you how long it will be because I do not yet know, but I can reiterate finally the promises that I made some time ago that when it is over, we will not delay in bringing your husbands back home to you and I hope that that day will not be far away. [Applause].

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    [indistinct] but now I have had the opportunity of seeing their families and seeing the tremendous support they are being given by them [indistinct] I am very pleased that I came.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We will, I think, have to consider, at the conclusion of the events in the Gulf, precisely what lessons we have learned from it in order to be sure that we make the right decisions. That is the most important thing: to make sure we make the right decisions to have the right size and nature of army for the threat to be [indistinct] in the future, so that will be my first concern. I will not delay in making those decisions but I think I do have to gather together the facts and the lessons we have learned in order to be able to make them so I am afraid I cannot give you a time-scale but I can give you the promise that we will not delay unduly about it.

    QUESTION:

    [Indistinct] people will be coming back home [indistinct] back to Germany?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Back to where their families are. I think that is where they will want to come.

    QUESTION:

    Finally, Prime Minister, do you have any message – any additional message – for the families of troops in the Gulf?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Only that I hope I can understand how they feel at this difficult time. I do understand that it is very easy for people to say it is very necessary but a particular stress and strain is placed upon the families of the troops who are actually out there. I admire them tremendously in the way they have responded to that strain and I hope that that strain will come to an end as soon as possible in the most favourable way.

  • PMQT – 7 February 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 7th February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Ashby : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 February.

    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, including one with the president of the International Red Cross.

    Mr. Ashby : When my right hon. Friend meets the president of the International Red Cross this evening, will he tell him of the utter revulsion that the British people feel about the treatment of prisoners of war by Saddam Hussein? Will he urge the International Red Cross to redouble its efforts to obtain from the Iraqis details of the prisoners of war and about access to them? Will he ask the International Red Cross please to remind Saddam Hussein that the Iraqis cannot expect to benefit from the International Red Cross if, at the same time, Iraq refuses to honour its agreements under the Geneva convention?

    Mr. Major : I shall certainly be making those points, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence did yesterday. I shall also be making it clear that in no way can Iraq’s behaviour be equated with that of the allies in their treatment of prisoners of war. Iraq is in gross and flagrant violation of its obligations while the allies are doing everything possible to ensure that they meet their commitments under the Geneva convention.

    Mr. Kinnock : Today’s attack in Whitehall was both vicious and futile, since it will neither intimidate nor divert anyone, whether in government or opposition, in this democracy. May I express my relief at the fact that the attack caused so little harm to people, my admiration for the workers in Whitehall who continued with their duties, and my appreciation of the emergency services who responded with great speed and expertise? Today’s experience further increases our fellow feeling for the people of Northern Ireland who have lived with such atrocities for nearly two decades. May I put to the Prime Minister my firm view that outrages such as the one today increase the unity and determination that we all share to defend democracy and defeat terrorism, whatever its source.

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. I know that he shares my contempt for terrorism, which he has just expressed again most eloquently. It is clear from the timing of this morning’s attack that it was a deliberate attempt both to kill the Cabinet and to do damage to our democratic system of government. It failed. In no circumstances could it possibly have succeeded. Many people in this country, including most noticeably those many brave people in Northern Ireland, have been the victims of terrorist attacks on many occasions. None of those attacks succeeded in changing the policy of successive Governments, nor the policies or principles of this House in any single iota–nor will they. The IRA’s record is one of deep failure in every respect. That failure was demonstrated yet again today. It is about time the IRA learned that democracies cannot be intimidated by terrorism and we rightly treat it with contempt.

    Sir Bernard Braine : Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that in the present exceptionally cold weather, which is forecast to increase in intensity, some of our fellow citizens, especially the elderly and the infirm, may suffer grievously? Is it possible for my right hon. Friend to consider ways and means of providing extra help for such people?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security met my right hon. and learned Friend the Chief Secretary this morning to discuss the particular problems caused by the wholly exceptional weather. Severe weather payments have already been triggered in half the country and that may be extended. Our primary concern now is to ensure that vulnerable groups keep warm. Therefore, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will be announcing later today that the seven-day qualifying period will be waived in view of the exceptionally severe weather. Therefore, people should keep warm–secure in the knowledge that payment will be made to those eligible even if, as forecast, the cold weather lasts only a few days. Payment will also be made at the enhanced rate of £6 per week to reflect higher fuel charges.

    Mr. Ashdown : Will the Prime Minister pass on our best wishes to those who were injured in this morning’s outrage? Does he realise that the whole House and, I believe, the whole nation will back him in his determination to ensure that government continues as usual, despite this morning’s outrage? Does he agree that the operation of an open democracy necessarily carries with it some risks and that the proper response to terrorism is to do as he has done and make it clear that we will not be deflected in our policies or weakened in our determination to preserve the open and accessible character of our democracy?

    The Prime Minister : I believe that the right hon. Gentleman speaks for the whole House in what he has said. Our determination to beat terrorism cannot be defeated by terrorism. I hope that that is fully understood everywhere. I shall be happy to pass on the right hon. Gentleman’s best wishes to those who were injured and also his congratulations and those of the Leader of the Opposition to those many people from the emergency services who helped this morning.

    Rev. Ian Paisley : Will the right hon. Gentleman accept that the people of Northern Ireland fully support what the Leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition has said today? Will he also accept that they congratulate the Prime Minister and his colleagues on their escape today? Will he bear it in mind that those of us who represent Northern Ireland in the House often face difficulties when murders and atrocities take place in Northern Ireland and we cannot have the time of the House to bring them to hon. Members’ attention as has occurred today? Will the Prime Minister consult the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and consider whether immediate action can be taken to ensure that the fair employment legislation is not used against workers supporting the war in the Gulf?

    The Prime Minister : The whole House recognises that, alas, Northern Ireland has had far too much experience of the sort of attack that we have seen today in London. The hon. Gentleman will know of the firm opposition of the Government and their predecessors to that sort of attack in Northern Ireland.

    Mr. Ernie Ross : Further to his reply to the hon. Member for Leicestershire, North-West (Mr. Ashby), when the Prime Minister meets the president of the International Red Cross, will he confirm that while we insist that Iraq accepts its responsibilities, we will also accept our responsibilities with regard to others who are suffering because of our allies’ failure to accept the International Red Cross and the Geneva convention? Will he tell the president that he will re-affirm that commitment to the Israeli Government in relation to their treatment of the Palestinians on the west bank and in Gaza?

    The Prime Minister : All allies in this conflict are following the Geneva convention to the letter. That is, has been and will continue to be the case.

     

    Q2. Mr. Cyril D. Townsend : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 February.

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

    Mr. Townsend : In view of my right hon. Friend’s great concern for the plight of Terry Waite and the other British hostages in Beirut, will he give serious consideration to sending a senior emissary to Tehran and Damascus–taking advantage of our restored diplomatic relations–and to Beirut to learn at first hand what more the British Government can do to obtain the hostages’ long-overdue release?

    The Prime Minister : We remain very concerned about the plight of Mr. Waite, Mr. McCarthy and Mr. Mann and about the effect on their families of their long imprisonment. We already have representatives in Teheran, Damascus and Beirut and they are devoting a great deal of effort to securing the release of our hostages. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary met Syrian Foreign Minister Ash-Shara’ yesterday and made it clear yet again that Syria will do all that it can to secure their release.

     

    Q3. Mrs. Heal : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 February.

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

    Mrs. Heal : I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement about the cold weather payments. As one who knows well the weaknesses of that system, why does he not use the power that he has to abandon the scheme altogether and look for a general uprating of pensions for all people all the time?

    The Prime Minister : In making that point, the hon. Lady wholly forgets the changes that have been made to the payments available. She has perhaps also overlooked the fact that severe weather payments did not exist at all when last there was a Labour Government.

    Mr. Stanbrook : In view of my right hon. Friend’s welcome words about the people of Northern Ireland, do not they now deserve a promise that they will never be removed from the protection of the British Crown?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend knows, they have that certainty without their express wish to be otherwise.

     

    Q4. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 February.

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

    Mr. Skinner : Does the Prime Minister recall that on 8 November last year, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer introducing his autumn statement, he said that for this financial year there would be a budget surplus of £3 billion? Is he aware that many Ministers are saying that that £3 billion surplus has disappeared? If such a gross miscalculation had been made by a Labour local authority, it would have been subjected to poll tax capping and surcharge. What does the Prime Minister intend to do – sack his Chancellor?

    The Prime Minister : As to the fiscal position, that will be announced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor in the Budget. As to the accuracy of forecasts, far be it from me to recall unhappy memories for the hon. Gentleman, but there were occasions when the right hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey) was out by several hundred per cent. in his fiscal forecasts.

    Miss Emma Nicholson : Will the Prime Minister congratulate those of our allies such as Turkey, and other nations that have fundamentalist Muslim insurrectionists and great difficulty maintaining political stability, on the brave moves that they have made in furthering the allied cause in the Gulf?

    The Prime Minister : I am entirely happy to do that. My hon. Friend expresses the point most eloquently.

     

    Q5. Mr. Tony Banks : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 February.

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

    Mr. Banks : May I share with the Prime Minister a problem that I have?

    Hon. Members : “No.”

    Mr. Speaker : Order. Provided that it is a question.

    Mr. Banks : It is not that sort of problem, anyway. A small gent came into my constituency office on Monday and said, “Why is it that in Britain we have the highest inflation rate, the highest interest rates and the highest balance of payments deficit in the European Economic Community?” He asked whether these were the problems of success or an indication that the economy was in deep doo-doo. I said that I had not the faintest idea, but that the next time I saw the Prime Minister I would ask him. So what is it – economic success or deep doo-doo?

    The Prime Minister : It is clear that the hon. Gentleman has not the faintest idea, for his facts are wrong.

     

    Q6. Mr. Ian Taylor : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 February.

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

    Mr. Taylor : Following the previous point, does my right hon. Friend agree that the stability of sterling against the deutschmark, despite the recent rise in German interest rates, shows increasing confidence in the Government’s determination to bring down inflation within the exchange rate discipline? Is not that the best framework for a lasting and sustained reduction in interest rates, with the removal of the premium required for holders of sterling in terms of interest rates against other currencies? Is not that better for British industry than the cut-and-run tactics practised by the Opposition?

    The Prime Minister : The stability certainly reflects, to some extent, our membership of the exchange rate mechanism, which is in no sense a straitjacket. If the pound were falling, we should not be able to cut interest rates whether we were in or out of the exchange rate mechanism. In due course, the stability that the mechanism provides will help and not hinder. The opportunity will come as our inflation rate falls.

     

    Q7. Mr. Malcolm Bruce : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 February.

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

    Mr. Bruce : The husband of a constituent of mine unfortunately died in the Gulf a few months ago. As a result, my constituent and her daughter lost their home in Germany and require to be rehoused by the local council, which has not been able to rehouse them. If that is an indication of the way in which the Army treats widows, will local authorities be able to cope in those circumstances?

    The Prime Minister : As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Army will always look at these matters sympathetically. If the hon. Gentleman will provide me with the details of the case, of which I had no prior knowledge, I shall be happy to examine it for him.

  • PMQT – 5 February 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 5th February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

    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. Winnick : Is the Prime Minister aware that, as the recession bites even deeper in all parts of the country, not least in the west midlands, the country will simply not buy the nonsense that it is all due to the Gulf war? Is he aware, further, that people recognise that the recession and the devastation that are occurring in so many parts of the country are due to the disastrous policies of a discredited Government who simply do not know from day to day where they are going?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly accept that there is a downturn in the economy and I have made that clear. But the hon. Gentleman must recognise that that downturn, in terms of investment and growth, comes from a very high level after a very lengthy period of growth. It is absolutely essential that we take the appropriate decisions now to ensure that we have a lower rate of inflation in the economy in the 1990s.

    Mr. Hayes : Is not my right hon. Friend greatly encouraged by the fact that British investment outstrips that in Germany, France and Italy? Does not he think that British industry is getting rather fed up with the Labour party continually saying that there is no end to the recession in sight and no economic good news? Does he agree that it is becoming the party of the abominable no-men?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend knows, our investment record over recent years has been extremely good–a record unmatched elsewhere in the Community.

    Mr. Kinnock : Since it is clear that before too many weeks have passed the Government will be forced to cut interest rates, why do they not do it now and save British industries and British home buyers absolutely pointless pain?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman should not be so desperate. If he panics in opposition, what might he do in government?

    Mr. Kinnock : First, all observable panic is on the right hon. Gentleman’s side of the House. Secondly, he will soon have a very good opportunity of finding out the strength of Labour in government.

    It is all very well for the Prime Minister to try to avoid the question. It is not his business which he spent a lifetime building up that is now threatened ; it is not his factory that is facing closure ; and it is not his mortgage that threatens to put him and his family out of their home. Is he not ashamed that Britain, alone of all the major industrial countries, is facing, under his Government, prolonged slump–extended slump–because of his policies?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman has clearly overlooked the fact that– [Interruption.] –I shall come directly to the question. The right hon. Gentleman has clearly overlooked the fact that there is a recession in a number of countries. The right hon. Gentleman misunderstands the importance of interest rates. Nobody wants interest rates to be unduly high, but we need to ensure that we have a low inflation economy. That is the means to ensure that we have it.

    Mrs. Peacock : I am sure that my right hon. Friend is aware of the many Gulf support groups that have been set up throughout the country to offer help and support to those families who have loved ones fighting in the Gulf. Will he join me today in sending best wishes to the two groups in my constituency, in Batley and Cleckheaton, who are doing a superb job?

    The Prime Minister : I am certainly happy to do as my hon. Friend requests. I am delighted by the number of Gulf support groups that have been set up around the country and I wish them all well.

     

    Q2. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Mr. Skinner : Can the Prime Minister tell us how this war can have any moral or democratic purpose when British troops risk being slaughtered on the desert sands while the Kuwaiti royal family is gallivanting around the gambling dens and casinos, living it up? When the war is over and those Kuwaiti American stooges are back in power, with all their luxury, some British troops will be coming back to the dole queue, the poll tax and cardboard city. Is that the classless society that the Prime Minister talks about?

    The Prime Minister : I always thought that the hon. Gentleman was against the sort of actions that we have seen in Kuwait by the Iraqis. I am sorry that I am wrong.

     

    Q3. Dame Peggy Fenner : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Dame Peggy Fenner : During my right hon. Friend’s busy day I am sure that he will share my concern about the current proposals for reform of the common agricultural policy. Does he agree with me that we should not accept any reform that penalises the efficient British farmer, since that will not help the British consumer?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. I share the view of the majority of hon. Members that further reform of the common agricultural policy is needed, but that must make European agriculture more, not less, open to market forces. As my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has been making clear in Brussels, we shall very strongly resist any proposals that penalise the efficient farmer and, in so doing, place the burden upon consumers.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister recall the very welcome words of the Foreign Secretary at the weekend when he said that when the fighting is over we must be prepared to use the peace wisely? May I therefore put to him this proposition : if the United Nations provides the authority for fighting the war in the Gulf, the United Nations should have the responsibility for building the peace that follows it. Does the Prime Minister agree?

    The Prime Minister : We shall certainly be discussing, both within the United Nations and beyond–with the Arab states that have the primary interest–what is necessary for the future security of the region.

     

    Q4. Mr. Nicholls : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Mr. Nicholls : Has my right hon. Friend noted that for the last four months inflation has been running at about 1.9 per cent. per annum? Does not that show that the Government’s policy of reducing inflation is working? Does not such a policy offer a far more certain way towards eventual interest rate reductions than the soft option advocated by the Leader of the Opposition by way of a devaluation?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right. Soft options tend to lead to hard times. Our policies are succeeding in reducing inflation. As inflation comes down there will be the opportunity for sustained interest rate reductions.

    Ms. Ruddock : Does the Prime Minister agree with me

    Mr. Dickens : I saw the hon. Lady on television.

    Mr. Speaker : So did I.

    Ms. Ruddock : Does the Prime Minister agree with me that, in keeping with the spirit and purposes of the United Nations, consent to the allied military action is limited to ending Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait, that peace and security in the region can be achieved by other means, and that those means must include the removal of nuclear and chemical weapons throughout the region?

    The Prime Minister : The present aims are set out perfectly clearly in Security Council resolutions. As to the second point in the hon. Lady’s question, I think that it is a matter that everyone will wish to address after the conclusion of the conflict.

     

    Q5. Mr. Wilshire : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Mr. Wilshire : Does my right hon. Friend agree that, whatever our party politics, we should all welcome the proposed abolition of the apartheid laws in South Africa? Does he agree also that, whatever we may think about that country’s past, the best way to support its Government now is to help them make those changes as quickly as possible and to begin the process of reintegrating South Africa into the community of nations?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend that it is necessary to support the South African Government. But perhaps even more relevant is support for the people of South Africa–all of them. President de Klerk has made a truly massive move forward and it is now for the international community to respond. I hope very much that it will do so. I have already discussed the matter with the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth and with President Bush, and my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary raised it with European Community Foreign Ministers yesterday. I spoke about it this morning with Mr. Hawke, the Australian Prime Minister. He and I agree very strongly that the time has come to begin lifting the Commonwealth measures, especially the sports sanctions, particularly in the case of those sports that are integrated in South Africa. All in all, the announcement by President de Klerk was a most welcome move forward.

     

    Q6. Mr. Norman Hogg : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Mr. Hogg : Is the Prime Minister aware that the naval base at Rosyth in Scotland employs 5,000 naval and civilian personnel? Is he aware that we have received ministerial assurances that, in the defence review, all the options will be considered impartially? Is he aware of a secret study report showing that there is an intention to close Rosyth in the shortest possible time? Does not he agree that it is disgraceful that at a time when our naval personnel are serving in the Gulf, their home base is being threatened in this way?

    The Prime Minister : No decision has been made to close Rosyth or any other naval base. We fully recognise the implications that closure would have for employment in the area. Those implications would be fully considered and examined before any such decision was taken.

    Mr. Haselhurst : Can my right hon. Friend assure the House that if President Bush raises the question of transatlantic air routes he–the Prime Minister–will sustain the Government’s position, as outlined by the Secretary of State for Transport, in a very strong and sensible defence of British civil aviation?

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport is discussing these matters. I can assure my hon. Friend that my right hon. Friend will defend our interests very robustly.

    Mr. Eadie : How does the Prime Minister justify the salary of £225,000 per annum being paid to the new chairman of British Coal? Previous chairmen had a large industry and a comparatively small salary, whereas the present chairman is inheriting a very small industry and will have a large salary. Some of us suspect that his terms of reference are to make the industry smaller still.

    The Prime Minister : The gentleman concerned is being paid according to his ability.

     

    Q7. Mr. Moate : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Mr. Moate : Reverting to reform of the common agricultural policy, does my right hon. Friend agree that if, for social reasons, the Germans and French wish to subsidise their small farmers, they should be free to do so?

    As the British taxpayer will next year spend £4 billion on agricultural subsidies, apparently to produce inadequate incomes for farmers and excessively high prices for consumers, is not it time we considered repatriating agricultural policy so that we can decide what is best for Britain?

    The Prime Minister : The common agricultural policy is an established element of the European Community. I share my hon. Friend’s view that it is an unsatisfactory one, and for that reason we are seeking to reform it.

    Mr. Alan Williams : Is the Prime Minister aware that a measure of the underlying weakness of our economy is the fact that, excluding North sea oil, in the past three and a half years, at constant prices, we have had a trade deficit of £85 billion? Why does he believe that we can solve that problem with the same rate of exchange that caused it?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman is selective in his criticism. He wholly forgets that we had eight successive years of growth, a period in which our investment has grown faster than that of Germany, Italy, France and anyone else in the European Community and we now have a wholly different industrial position from that which we inherited in 1979.

     

    Q8. Mr. Irvine : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Mr. Irvine : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the concern of many firms operating in the financial services sector about the European Commission’s draft directive on capital adequacy? Does he agree that some of the requirements imposed on capital adequacy are excessive, and will he make vigorous representations to ensure that, where appropriate, they are reduced?

    The Prime Minister : I am aware of the concerns that my hon. Friend raises. He will know that firms that act purely as advisers are exempt from the requirements of the capital adequacy directive. We do not wish to see inappropriate or unnecessary capital requirements imposed on any United Kingdom investment firm.

     

    Q9. Mr. Barron : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 5 February.

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

    Mr. Barron : Under the private Bill procedure, the Government have always accepted their neutrality to be one of support for a private Bill. Last Thursday night, the Southampton Rapid Transit Bill was defeated by the use of the payroll vote, including 10 members of the Cabinet, two of whom are members of the War Cabinet, which was suspended when that vote took place. What has changed the Government’s mind? Was it political judgment or political spite?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman should know that that was the individual decision of Members of this House.

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Vice-President Quayle – 31 January 1991

    Below is Mr Major’s joint press statement with United States Vice-President Dan Quayle, held in London on Thursday 31st January 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Thank you all very much for waiting. I am sorry we have kept you waiting so long. The Vice-President and I have been able to talk for a little over an hour, predominantly about the Gulf of course, but also about other matters,

    I think we are both pretty satisfied with the way things are going so far. A fortnight into the conflict, I think there is absolutely no doubt about the remarkable extent of cooperation between the United States. the British and indeed the other allies and we are all extremely pleased about that. And there was particular pleasure I think over here at the President’s State of the Union Address and his very generous words about the activities of the RAF and we were all very pleased to hear that.

    The Vice-President has had a successful day here I think and has visited Lakenheath and elsewhere and I might invite him to say something about his trip.

    MR QUAYLE:

    Thank you very much Mr Prime Minister. Let me once again just reaffirm the positive, strong cooperation that we have had between the United States and the United Kingdom. It was reaffirmed again today at Lakenheath where I visited with the spouses of a number of the troops from the United States and the United Kingdom that are deployed in the Persian Gulf.

    I enjoyed the conversation with the Prime Minister immensely, we value and respect his judgment and opinions on world affairs. We do have and continue the special relationship with the United Kingdom and I am delighted to be back once again to pay my respects to an outstanding and remarkable Prime Minister.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, can you indicate for how long you can resist being provoked into a wider scale land war?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think we will have to see what happens out there. I think as you know in Khafji the Saudis are now examining the houses one by one, there is a house search going on to find out whether any Iraqis are there. There was an incursion, as you know, into Khafji by the Iraqis, it may well be that they will do the same thing again and that there will be other incursions of that sort, but we will deal with those as they arise. But the general strategy of the campaign has been pretty clear, it is pretty clear what we propose to do in future and we will stick to that.

    QUESTION:

    Vice-President, now that the difficult stage of the conflict has been entered with mounting ground casualties, how worried are you that American public opinion will stay behind supporting the war if casualties do mount, as they appear to be?

    MR QUAYLE:

    There is strong and overwhelming support for President George Bush and our policy in the Persian Gulf. The American people, perhaps contrary to international public opinion, have a great deal of patience. They support this President, they support the policy in the Persian Gulf, they support the allied effort to get Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait. We are in no hurry to engage in a ground campaign. The air campaign is going quite well and you can judge by the results that we have been successful, we have a strategy that the Prime Minister understands and knows quite well and that strategy is now being deployed, and I might say that that strategy is working.

    QUESTION:

    Can I ask you both what lessons you have drawn from the Iraqi incursion into Khafji about the fighting spirit of their soldiers and what it would mean for a land campaign?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the first thing to say is they have clearly lost at Khafji, have they not? There was an incursion there, the Saudi, Qatari and the American troops there have driven them out. The Iraqi losses have been quite heavy and they are no longer there. So whatever one may learn about the Iraqis, one has learned a little more and that is that the Iraqis will be beaten and that I think is the lesson we were sure was there for them and it has certainly been reinforced by what has happened at Khafji over the last 36 hours or so. And I suspect if there any more incursions the same lesson will be learned again.

    MR QUAYLE:

    I would just reaffirm the fact and that is that we have been successful. Perhaps Saddam Hussein would like to commence the ground war because he has been so unsuccessful in getting any of his air assets deployed, about the only place that they are deployed right now is in Iran. They are certainly unable to have any access to the airways, we have air supremacy, that is a fact and it is a very important military fact.

    QUESTION (JOHN DRAPER, ITN):

    Can you explain what would be the role of the B52s due to be deployed in Great Britain?

    MR QUAYLE:

    I am not going to get into the actual military operations, but we are very appreciative of the continued cooperation of the United Kingdom on this and everything else, but I am not going to get into its role and mission and things of that sort.

    QUESTION:

    Perhaps Mr Major might?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The B52s will be used as the Commanders wish them to be used and that is true of all the other aircraft in the conflict.

    QUESTION:

    Will they be armed with nuclear weapons?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No they are not going to be armed with nuclear weapons.

    QUESTION (CNN):

    Mr Vice President, earlier today you were quoted as saying either we will continue to have Saddam or we will achieve peace. Does that mean to achieve peace Mr Saddam has to be ousted?

    MR QUAYLE:

    Has to be ousted from Kuwait, absolutely, and he is going to be ousted from Kuwait.

    QUESTION:

    From power though, will he have to be ousted from power?

    MR QUAYLE:

    I did not say ousted from power I said that he will be ousted from Kuwait, and he will be ousted from Kuwait, that is the objective and we will achieve that objective.

  • PMQT – 31 January 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 31st January 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Patchett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 January.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.

    Mr. Patchett : Has the Prime Minister seen reports this morning that the Italian cargo vessel the Karin B is returning to Britain with a cargo of toxic waste? In view of the grave public anxiety on the matter, will he ensure that under no circumstances will the ship be allowed into any British port with its deadly cargo?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly assure the hon. Gentleman that waste will be allowed into this country only if it is safe to treat it. We shall certainly apply that principle to the Karin B and its cargo.

    Sir Ian Lloyd : Does my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister agree that in the nuclear weapons age the much pilloried phrase, “Careless talk costs lives” is a dramatic understatement? Does he further agree that the intolerable position in which Admiral Sir Tom Woodward was put in a public discussion on television early yesterday morning by the right hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn) was a serious threat, especially as the right hon. Gentleman asked that the relationship between the President of the United States and British use of nuclear weapons be brought out into the open? Does my right hon. Friend agree that that shows the importance of the existing convention which applies to the matter?

    The Prime Minister : It is an important convention. However, I did not see the interview and I should prefer not to comment too directly upon it.

    Mr. Benn : Is the Prime Minister aware that Admiral Woodward was a great deal more candid than Ministers have been about the use of nuclear weapons in the Gulf? Is he also aware that there is widespread anxiety in Britain about the extension of the war aims well beyond the United Nations objectives relating to Kuwait and about the possibility of an extension of the war? Will he welcome the initiative of the French Government in going to Tehran to see whether at this late stage some progress might be made by negotiation leading to a ceasefire?

    The Prime Minister : I repeat to the right hon. Gentleman that I did not see the interview with Admiral Woodward and I have no comment on it. On the war aims, I have made it clear consistently that our aims are those set out in the United Nations Security Council resolutions. That is and remains the position.

    Mr. Colvin : Will my right hon. Friend find time today to consider the somewhat fragile political climate in South Africa, following the welcome meeting of reconciliation between Chief Buthelezi and Mr. Nelson Mandela? What action can the Government take to encourage the nations of the world to take a more positive attitude towards South Africa to encourage that country faster and further down the road to reform which we all want to see it travel?

    The Prime Minister : I very much welcome the meeting between Chief Buthelezi and Mr. Mandela. It is an extremely welcome development. As my hon. Friend will know, the European Community nations lifted the investment sanction some time ago because of the progress that has been made. If, as I hope, further progress on dismantling apartheid is made soon, I hope that we shall see a further gesture from the European Community, the United States and the Commonwealth on lifting sanctions.

     

    Q2. Sir David Steel : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 January.

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

    Sir David Steel : After the Gulf war, bearing in mind what was done after the Falklands war, will the Prime Minister consider setting up a high-level inquiry into the acquisition by Iraq of British arms and technology, including some from private companies, quangos and Government Departments, so that lessons may be learned, and so that never again will our forces be faced with an enemy armed partly by ourselves ?

    The Prime Minister : There is a considerable degree of sensitivity about the supply of arms and equipment. As the right hon. Gentleman will know, for some considerable time we have not supplied arms to Iraq for precisely that reason. We will take great care in future to ensure that we are careful about that matter.

    Sir Jim Spicer : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the record of loyalty and service to NATO of the republic of Turkey in the last 45 years, and also to the United Nations in Korea and to United Nations endeavours in the Gulf, is worthy of great praise and should be considered carefully by other NATO members and members of the European Community?

    The Prime Minister : Turkey certainly has a distinguished record in NATO, and I am happy to acknowledge that fact.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will the Prime Minister take the opportunity to confirm that any interest rate rise in Britain in response to today’s rise in German interest rates would be disastrous for industry?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. Gentleman knows, we will set interest rates and reduce interest rates when we think it is appropriate. As he knows, we have made our position on the subject perfectly clear. When it is appropriate and in the interests of the economy to reduce interest rates, and when we see that the reduction will be sustained, we will take action.

    Mr. Kinnock : The Government have been telling us for years that they have been curing inflation. Is not it the case that they have always made the mistake of combating inflation only with high interest rates, with the result that they have hit investment? How does the Prime Minister expect the country to become more competitive in advance of the completion of the single market if all the time he is wearing down investment, skills, training and the other things that are essential to enable Britain to compete?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman should know that as our inflation differential with the European Community narrows, we will be in a position to reduce interest rates. The right hon. Gentleman, who invariably advocates the cutting of interest rates, may recall that he also advocated a further cut in interest rates in 1987. Had we then followed his advice, we would have faced a far greater problem today.

    Mr. Kinnock : The Prime Minister will have great difficulty in saying to anyone that he could have greater difficulties than those caused by 1,000 redundancies a day, a reduction in output, a reduction in investment and the highest interest rates in the developed world.

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. Gentleman is serious about Britain’s success in the 1990s, he needs to bear it in mind that we must get inflation down to the rate of our competitors. We are prepared to take action to do so. I regret that the right hon. Gentleman, as ever, wants the soft option.

     

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

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

    Mr. Cran : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the contribution made by Germany yesterday to Britain’s war expenses is extremely welcome? Can he indicate to the House whether he expects contributions from any other source?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly agree with my hon. Friend that the further contribution of £275 million from Germany is very welcome. So also is the offer to provide some military material. I spoke to Chancellor Kohl this morning and was able to thank him for the generosity of the German people.

    Mrs. Heal : Following the visit yesterday by hon. Members, all of whom happened to be women, to the wives of the service men serving in the Gulf, will the Prime Minister take the opportunity to write a letter of support to the wives, many of whom feel isolated and lonely? Will he agree to do that? Will he also agree to a delegation of the wives coming to Westminster to explain to hon. Members their difficulties and feelings while they are supporting their husbands who are serving in the Gulf ?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly agree with the hon. Lady about the remarkable contribution made by the wives of our service men. I hope shortly to have the opportunity of visiting a number of the wives in Germany and I look forward to that. I would be happy to send the letter that the hon. Lady suggests.

     

    Q4. Mr. Bowis : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 January.

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

    Mr. Bowis : Does my right hon. Friend agree that there can be few worse examples of the inhumanity of Saddam Hussein than his cruelty to the prisoners of war and their families in refusing the International Red Cross access to them? Will he do everything in his power to ensure that that access is achieved?

    The Prime Minister : I assure my hon. Friend that we are certainly doing that. The action by the Iraqis in refusing access is intolerable and unforgivable. We are in daily touch with the Red Cross in Geneva and are doing our best to support its efforts. I shall be meeting the president of the Red Cross early next week.

     

    Q5. Mr. Lewis : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 January.

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

    Mr. Lewis : Does the Prime Minister share my view that it is obscene that the lives of coalition forces in the Gulf are threatened by arms and weapons probably made by their own families in their own country ? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an unequivocal assurance today that he will take Britain out of the international arms trade, which includes the training of personnel from other countries and providing technical know-how?

    The Prime Minister : The obscenity lies in Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, and the sooner that the hon. Gentleman recognises that the better.

     

    Q6. Mr. Day : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 January.

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

    Mr. Day : Does my right hon. Friend agree that Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait was an act of naked aggression, but Israel’s occupation of the west bank and Gaza was brought about by decades of Arab intolerance of the state of Israel and that, because of those two different scenarios, there should be no linkage at any future date?

    The Prime Minister : It is clear that the situation is different because in 1967 it was Israel which was attacked. But we now have to look to the future and a solution to the Arab-Israel problem based on territory for peace. Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait has made that task much more difficult, but as I have said to the House on a number of occasions in recent weeks, we shall certainly be looking to see whether we can bring that peace forward as soon as the conflict is over.

    Mr. Molyneaux : Does the Prime Minister share my admiration for the prompt response of senior members of the Commonwealth to the invasion of Kuwait? Does he share my hope that those ties with the Commonwealth will endure long after various temporary entanglements have disappeared?

    The Prime Minister : I most certainly do, without qualification.

     

    Q7. Mr. Thorne : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 January.

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

    Mr. Thorne : As justice delayed is justice denied, will my right hon. Friend, in his usual caring fashion, be kind enough to examine the efficiency of the courts and whether it is right that people, particularly from abroad, should be obliged to wait so long for their trial? I am thinking in particular of Mrs. Dina Le Tarle, the American wife of a surgeon, aged 29, who has been prosecuted for her actions while responding to muggers on the underground. She has now been waiting three months for her trial.

    Mr. Speaker : Order. If the case is sub judice, the hon. Gentleman should bear that in mind.

    The Prime Minister : I understand the general point that my hon. Friend makes. The Government are concerned to reduce to a minimum delay in all criminal cases.

    Mr. Michael J. Martin : The Prime Minister will know that many of the soldiers who are serving well in the Gulf are in the Army because they could not get jobs in civvy street and when the Gulf war is over there will be soldiers who, unfortunately, will be unfit for Army service. Can the right hon. Gentleman guarantee them jobs in Glasgow and the north of England?

    The Prime Minister : The early part of the hon. Gentleman’s remarks will be widely resented by many of our forces in the Gulf. I heard from him no talk of employment during the 40 successive months when unemployment was falling.

     

    Q8. Mr. Page : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 31 January.

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

    Mr. Page : My right hon. Friend is hearing from those who wish to see extensions to the sanction period in respect of the Gulf calls to bring about a ceasefire. For the benefit of the House, will my right hon. Friend surmise why those people are trying to put our troops in extra danger by giving Saddam Hussein the breathing space to develop a nuclear weapon?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. He makes a valid point. We are not interested in a pause or a ceasefire, which would simply enable Iraq to regroup, resupply its forces and place our troops in greater peril. The conflict over Kuwait will be concluded only when all the provisions of Security Council resolution 678 have been met.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview on the Gulf War – 19 January 1991

    Below is Mr Major’s doorstep interview given in London on Saturday 19th January 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Good Morning. I thought I would just try and bring you up-to-date with some of the things that have been happening this morning and then I will endeavour to answer any questions you may have in a few moments.

    I think the matter that has been concerning us most over the last few hours has been the second missile attack on Israel from Iraq. I think it is extremely deplorable, unforgivable in any sense, that this particular attack has taken place. I think it draws a very sharp contrast between the nature of conflict that we perceive and the nature of conflict that Saddam Hussein has in mind. It is very noticeable that the allied forces have been using precision bombing techniques, and often their pilots have gone to some personal risk to avoid civilian injury and to concentrate on military targets.

    By contrast, of course, Saddam Hussein has now twice sent extremely dangerous weapons into the middle of a built-up area where there are a large number of civilians in a country that is not a party to this particular conflict. I think that is quite literally an act of terror and will be seen as such.

    I have sent two messages to Prime Minister Shamir over the last few hours: firstly, to express my sympathy for this second outrageous attack; and secondly, to say that I hope, even despite this second provocation, that it would be an act of great statesmanship if Israel did not retaliate, I think it would be seen as a sign of great strength and not weakness. And he will know of course that the allied forces are seeking to find and destroy those Scud missile launchers as an act of immediate priority and that of course will continue.

    You may care to know that the Foreign Office summoned the Iraqi Ambassador this morning, firstly to indicate clearly our total sense of outrage at the activities of the Iraqis in launching these missiles, and secondly of course to remind the Iraqis of their obligations under the Geneva Convention in terms of prisoners of war. And we asked specifically for an assurance from the Iraqis that any prisoners of war would be granted all that is entitled to them under the Geneva Convention and that we would be informed at an early date of any prisoners they may have. I hope and expect that to happen and we will continue to press the Iraqis to make sure that it does.

    I had a conversation last evening with our Commander in the Middle East, General Sir Peter de la Billiere. It was a lengthy conversation, I spoke to him firstly to let him know of the state of opinion in the United Kingdom and the enormous support there was here at home and in Parliament for the activities of his men out there in the Gulf and to express my admiration particularly for the way in which the RAF pilots and back-up crews had performed their duties over recent days. Sir Peter briefed me on precisely what was going on out there, reassured me about the morale of the troops, and it was a most useful and worthwhile conversation. I expect to be in contact with him regularly over the period of the next few days and I know he will also be having conversations with the Secretary of State for Defence, Tom King.

    At the end of the first few days of this conflict, I think we can say that it has gone satisfactorily. You will have seen for yourselves the nature of the conflict and the extent of success that we have had, I think all that is very satisfactory. But I think it does have to be seen against the sheer size and scale of the war machine that Iraq has assembled over the period of the last decade. Despite all the damage that has been done, there is a great deal still that needs to be done. They have a very substantial military arsenal, a large number of planes, a considerable amount of armour, a large number of men, very substantial and sophisticated equipment and telecommunications installations. The air attacks upon them have been very successful thus far and I anticipate that they will continue for some time to come.

    It has been a good start, undoubtedly, but there is a very considerable amount still to be done. What I think is becoming totally clear, clearer as hour succeeds hour, is that Iraq cannot win this conflict but there is still some considerable way to go before they have lost.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

    QUESTION (Michael Brunson, ITN):

    Prime Minister, you will have heard that Mr Arens said that Israel will retaliate. Do you understand that and when you talk of restraint would you accept that they may want to take some limited military action of their own?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Of course I understand that. The provocation that has been offered to the state of Israel over the last two days could hardly be over-stated. On two occasions they have had a missile attack whilst they are not a combatant in this particular war and in the midst of a civilian area. The state of Israel have a perfect right in international law to respond and I think their restraint thus far has been admirable. I think it would be extremely helpful if that restraint continued but I understand the pressures that the Israeli government are under.

    QUESTION:

    Are you confident that all the Scud missile launchers can be found and destroyed?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have had a considerable amount of success thus far in finding them and destroying them. Both the United States Air Force and ours have destroyed Scud missile launchers. We cannot of course be precisely sure how many the Iraqis have, they clearly have a substantial number left, the mission to seek them out and destroy them will continue until we are satisfied they have all been found and destroyed.

    QUESTION:

    Do you welcome the undertakings from the Egyptians and Syrians, which come as a surprise I imagine?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think they are welcome, I think they may come less of a surprise to us than to some others. The Egyptians and the Syrians have been very resolute throughout this whole affair, that was very plain to me when I met President Mubarak in Cairo just 10 days or so ago.

    QUESTION:

    In view of the concern you have expressed today again, will you be in direct contact with Prime Minister Shamir today or tomorrow?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have sent him two messages over the period of the last few hours, it may well be there will be a further message, but at the moment there is no need for a further message at this moment.

    QUESTION:

    What is your reaction to the fact that a British plane has now taken out one of the Scud missiles?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am delighted that they have done so, it was found by a British reconnaissance plane and destroyed by the British, I am delighted that that is so. The Americans have had very considerable success, it is now clear that the British are having success as well and we, too, will concentrate on that. It is very important for a large number of self-evident reasons that those Scud missile launchers are destroyed and destroyed as soon as possible.

    QUESTION:

    Are you feeling confident?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am in absolutely no doubt about the outcome of this conflict, there is absolutely no doubt about that. The outcome of this conflict if Saddam Hussein does not withdraw is that Iraq will be defeated, there is no conceivable doubt about that, but it may take a while before that is satisfactorily concluded.

    QUESTION:

    Are we talking now about weeks? The initial euphoria has obviously gone from people’s minds but should people be settling into thinking now of a conflict in weeks?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I never indulged myself in that initial euphoria. It was always clear to me that the sheer size and scale of their military arsenal meant that it was likely that it would be sometime before this matter was resolved. You can never be sure in the fog of this sort of conflict precisely how long it will take, we do not know whether the morale of the Iraqi troops will crack, we simply cannot tell about that. But on the understanding that that does not happen then it may be a considerable time before the matter is satisfactorily concluded..

    QUESTION:

    Can you define for us exactly your war aims, you said in the Commons that you hoped that Saddam Hussein would be gone, I think indicating that you hoped internally something might happen to him, but is it simply to liberate Kuwait or is it to do much more damage?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The aims are set out quite clearly in the Security Council Resolutions, those are the war aims of all of us and I have nothing to add to that.

    QUESTION:

    You are stressing again today in the clearest terms that people should not think this is going to be a short affair. Does the fact that you keep on stressing this point show that perhaps you are more concerned than you are letting on?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No it does not mean that at all, it is all going very satisfactorily. What it does illustrate is the sheer size and scale of the armour, the men, the airfields, the planes, that the Iraqis have. That is a very considerable arsenal, they have devoted a huge amount of their resources throughout the period of the last decade to building up that arsenal and although there is no way that they will be able to win this conflict, it will take a while before we can fully destroy the arsenal that they have got unless they surrender at some stage before that. And that is the warning that I am making clear to people, they ought not to be concerned about the fact that this conflict continues, it was always likely that it would have to continue for a significant period of time.

  • Mr Major’s Political Broadcast on the Iraq War – 17 January 1991

    Below is Mr Major’s political broadcast on the Iraq War, made on 17th January 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Since before dawn today, Britain’s forces have been in action in the Gulf. Their skill and courage have already been tested. Tonight I want to explain to you why they are there, and what this conflict is about.

    Our troops are part of an international force. It is drawn from many countries. It is acting under the authority of the United Nations and its purpose is to end Saddam Hussein’s ruthless occupation of Kuwait.

    He invaded without justification. His army has conducted itself without mercy. If such brutality and aggression are rewarded with success, then we are all at risk. If you appease a bully, you pay for it later. And you often pay more dearly.

    We did not want a conflict. I need hardly tell you that. We have tried hard to avoid it. We have given Saddam Hussein every opportunity to withdraw. Time and again the United Nations has called upon him to leave Kuwait. In the patient diplomacy of the past five months, leaders from around the world have sought peace – and then sought it again.

    But, unfortunately, Saddam Hussein has chosen war. He has rejected every attempt to reach a peaceful solution. He has rebuffed even the Secretary General of the United Nations. At the United Nations, the world agreed that Iraq must withdraw, or be driven out of Kuwait. We applied sanctions to make our point clear. We refused to trade with Iraq. Those sanctions made life harsher for Saddam’s people, but he was not a man to be influenced by their suffering. Then the world set him a deadline. Free Kuwait, we said, or we will have to free it from you.

    But Saddam Hussein has rejected all appeals. He has defied the United Nations. He has increased his forces in Kuwait. He tortured and killed those who opposed him. He has tried to wipe Kuwait off the map of the Middle East.

    For our part, we – the rest of the world – have acted with enormous restraint. Time and again we warned him – and we offered him this promise. If he would withdraw his invading army from Kuwait, and return them to Iraq, he would not be attacked.

    Saddam has chosen instead to defy the world. The deadline passed, on January 15th, and still he refused to withdraw. That is why we and our partners are now facing up to our responsibility. It is to compel him to obey the United Nations.

    We could not delay any longer. Delay would have increased the risk to our troops out there in the Gulf. Delay would have made the task more difficult. And delay would have extended the terrible sufferings of the people of Kuwait.

    Our aims are clear. They have been set out, for all to see, by the United Nations Security Council. First;

    – we must get Iraq out of Kuwait – right out of Kuwait. Second;

    – we must restore Kuwait’s legitimate government. And third;

    – we must uphold the authority of the United Nations.

    We and our allies want nothing more than that. We are not seeking to dismember Iraq. We have no intention of imposing our choice of government on Iraq. We are simply doing what the United Nations said should be done. We are acting with the authority of the United Nations – and on behalf of the whole world.

    I will not offer you rash promises about how quickly this can be done. The operation on which we have embarked involves danger and sacrifice. But I am confident it will succeed. And we know it is a battle which has to be fought.

    On Tuesday, Members of Parliament gave the Government their overwhelming support. One of the biggest parliamentary majorities in recent history supported action to enforce the decisions of the United Nations. It is a just cause. And it is right that we in Britain should play our part.

    I take no pleasure in this conflict. But I do know what we are doing is right. Our nation has been through many trials in the past. But when – as now – right and justice have been on our side, we have prevailed.

    The military operation must go on until the decisions of the United Nations are enforced. Then we can start searching again, and searching hard, for lasting solutions to the problems of the area. We must try to work out security arrangements for the future, so that these terrible events are never repeated. And we shall – I promise you – bring our own forces back home just as soon as it is safe to do so.

    It is to those men, and women, serving our country in the Middle East that my thoughts go out most tonight. And to all of their families here at home. To you, I know, this is not a distant war. It is a close, and ever-present anxiety.

    I was privileged to meet many of our servicemen and women in the Gulf last week. Their professionalism is outstanding. Their confidence, impressive. And their courage – undoubted.

    You can be proud of them. Very proud. Each one of them has Britain’s wholehearted support – and the prayers of all of us for their safe return home. And our prayers are also for you, their families, who carry so much of the burden of Saddam’s war. We are no less proud of you.

    Goodnight – and God bless.

  • PMQT – 17 January 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 17th January 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Butler : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 January.

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

    Mr. Butler : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is vital that our troops know that they have the overwhelming support of the House not only in liberating Kuwait but in realising the promise of a newly effective United Nations?

    The Prime Minister : I very much agree with my hon. Friend. I believe that his views will be echoed throughout the House. I hope that that strong support will be sustained within and beyond the House in the difficult weeks ahead.

    Mr. Kinnock : May I take this opportunity of supporting the feeling expressed by the Prime Minister earlier today that the current conflict was not wanted by those allied against Iraq and is, therefore, regretted? For the sake of our forces and their families, and for the sake of innocent civilians in Kuwait and in Iraq, people everywhere will hope that success in fulfilling the purposes of the United Nations is achieved as speedily as possible. Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to make it clear that Saddam Hussein can quickly prevent further death and destruction by fully and immediately complying with the United Nations resolutions, by laying down all Iraqi arms and by respecting international law?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with the right hon. Gentleman and I am grateful for the way in which he expressed his view. I hope that at an early stage Saddam Hussein will do what he should have done a long time ago –make it clear that he is prepared to leave Kuwait fully, wholly and unconditionally and spare the world the conflict that is at present going on.

    Mr. Tredinnick : My right hon. Friend will be aware of the assessment by General Colin Powell of the United States joint chiefs of staff that 80 per cent. of the sorties against Iraq have been effective. Is not that a remarkable achievement and a great credit to the allied forces? Does not the pinpoint bombing that we have seen on the news illustrate that there will not be the civilian casualties in Iraq which some had feared? That is important, because our quarrel is not with the people of Iraq.

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. Our problem is not with the people of Iraq but with the dictator of Iraq who created the invasion of Kuwait. My hon. Friend is entirely right. I echo what he said about the precision bombing that we have seen thus far. I might add that much of that precision bombing is carried out at low level precisely to avoid civilian casualties, sometimes at risk to our pilots. I think that their bravery deserves acknowledgement.

    Mr. Ashdown : We all heard the news of last night’s action with deep regret that this war had to be fought. Does the Prime Minister realise that in this House, and I believe in the nation, there is no mood of jingoism for war but a deep determination to see through a job that must be done, to support our forces and to back the United Nations?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with the right hon. Gentleman. We entered this enterprise with reluctance, but we shall pursue it with persistence until the end.

    Mr. Thornton : Will my right hon. Friend accept my warm congratulations on the way in which he made his statement this morning and particularly on the way in which he answered the questions put to him by the press? Does he agree with the commentator on Radio 4 this morning who urged that we should not attempt through the many armchair generals who will commentate on this war to second-guess what the military are doing in Iraq?

    The Prime Minister : I think that it is already clear from what we have seen today that the degree of care in the planning by the allied high command has been very successful. I believe that the conduct of those military operations is in very satisfactory military hands.

     

    Q2. Mr. Clelland : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 January.

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

    Mr. Clelland : Does the Prime Minister recall that many of our hostages, who have now returned from Iraq, spoke of the friendliness and helpfulness of the ordinary Iraqi citizens during their period of entrapment? Will he confirm that this war is against Saddam Hussein and his henchmen, not against ordinary families in Iraq? Does he further agree that ordinary Iraqi nationals, living in this country, many of whom are refugees from the oppression of Saddam Hussein, should not be harassed or held accountable for the actions of the dictator?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for making that point. It is entirely true that there are a large number of Iraqi citizens in the United Kingdom who are here precisely because they have been persecuted by Saddam Hussein. I believe that their refuge here will be appreciated and understood by the British people.

    I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman that we have no quarrel whatsoever with ordinary Iraqi people. As I said a moment ago, it is the dictatorship of Iraq which we are opposing.

    Sir Eldon Griffiths : Since President Bush this morning said that one of his war aims was to destroy the existing chemical and potential atomic war-making capacity of Iraq, will my right hon. Friend associate the United Kingdom with that war aim? Will he also confirm that, once those installations are destroyed, no British or European company will, in future, assist in their being replaced?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend may know, those installations have been attacked, but thus far we are not entirely sure with what success. I hope that that will become apparent later. Subsequently, I certainly hope that firms will take great care in any dealings they may have with those who may recreate that sort of facility.

     

    General Colin Powell

    Q3. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister on how many occasions he has had a meeting with General Colin Powell of the United States joint chiefs of staff; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : I met the chairman of the United States joint chiefs of staff on 4 December. British commanders, of course, have been in regular touch with General Powell.

    Mr. Dalyell : If General Powell were to be instructed either to accept or to offer a call for a cease fire, would we have to wait until Kuwait was occupied by coalition forces? In the light of my letter of yesterday to him, could the Prime Minister clarify the differences between himself on the one hand and Secretary Cheney and General Powell on the other on the use and legal aspects of nuclear weapons?

    The Prime Minister : On the first point, the conflict can cease when it becomes clear beyond doubt that the Iraqis are moving out of Kuwait and we are certain that that is the case. That has been and will continue to be the position.

    On the use of nuclear weapons, I think that I made it clear in the debate the other day that we did not envisage the use of nuclear weapons. To the best of our knowledge Iraq does not have a nuclear capacity. Under the non-proliferation treaty, which has been signed by the United States and ourselves, we would not therefore use them.

    Mr. Aitken : Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the vital ingredients in the success of the military operation so far was General Powell’s request, courageously supported on 9 November by President Bush and the British Cabinet, to double the number of troops and aircraft deployed to their present high levels? Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to congratulate all those responsible on both sides of the Atlantic, from commanders to backroom boys, on this remarkable feat of military logistics and preparedness?

    The Prime Minister : I would certainly be most happy to do that. When I was able to visit Dhahran and some of the military establishments a week or so ago, it was astonishing to see the way in which the sheer logistics of obtaining such a dramatic armada of weaponry, in terms of both land and air forces, had been achieved. It has been a remarkable logistical operation.

    Dr. Owen : Does the Prime Minister agree that one of the significant achievements of General Powell has been to ensure that this is not just an American dispute with the Iraqi Government–he has also involved the Arab Governments? Should we not all like to pay tribute to the Saudi Arabian Government and the Kuwait Government in exile for agreeing to their aircraft flying into Iraq, in marked distinction to the French?

    Hon. Members : Hear, hear.

    The Prime Minister : I certainly believe that it is entirely welcome that there has been a multinational effort in terms of today’s attack on Iraq. My understanding is that it was a four-nation attack in the first wave. But, as the right hon. Gentleman may not yet have heard, France joined in the attack at a later stage. I understand that some of her aircraft have suffered damage.

     

    Engagements

    Q4. Mr. Sayeed : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 January.

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

    Mr. Sayeed : Although it is difficult to consider any matter other than the middle east today, will my right hon. Friend bend his mind to the conventional forces in Europe treaty that, just two months ago, seemed to offer so much hope for peace in the world? As all 22 signatories are required to ratify that treaty, does my right hon. Friend believe that that will happen, after the brutal repression in Latvia and Lithuania and the undermining of the treaty’s spirit by some elements in the Soviet military?

    The Prime Minister : I very much hope that that treaty will be signed. Clearly, there are a number of serious problems that need to be resolved, particularly the Soviet Union’s transfer of a large number of tanks from the army to the naval coastal command with the intention of bypassing the treaty–which has the absurd effect of ensuring that the Soviet navy has more tanks than the British Army.

     

    Q5. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 January.

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

    Mr. Winnick : Is it not the case that Saddam Hussein must be held responsible not only for the present war and tragedy, but for the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers who lost their lives during a totally useless, futile war against Iran? Who is this criminal dictator to lecture us about the loss of innocent lives?

    The Prime Minister : I am delighted to share the sentiments expressed by the hon. Gentleman.

    Sir Peter Emery : Will my right hon. Friend accept the praise of Conservative Members for the way in which he has handled the situation so far? Will he also accept that considerable congratulations should be given to the Leader of the Opposition and to the leader of the SDP both of whom have unified behind the Government? [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order.

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend that those initials are very difficult to remember.

    I have been very pleased and heartened–but more importantly, our troops will have been pleased and heartened–to see the uniformity of support given to them by the House.

     

    Q6. Mr. Alton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 January.

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

    Mr. Alton : Following the decision of the Soviet Union earlier today to reject the call of the conference on security and co-operation in Europe for an international conference on the position in the Baltic, the first death in Latvia yesterday, the appearance of militia men with their black berets and President Gorbachev’s attempt to extinguish a free press in the Soviet Union, does the Prime Minister agree that, if we are to be even handed in our treatment of human rights abuses and the right of self-determination, it is now time to convene a meeting of the Security Council to discuss the position in the Baltic states? Does he agree with Boris Yeltsin who said that we are at the beginning of a mighty offensive against democracy?

    The Prime Minister : As I made clear to the House in Question Time earlier this week, I deeply deplore the actions in Vilnius and I very much regret the reports that a Latvian civilian has been killed by Soviet security guards. We have made our views crystal clear to the Soviet Union. The Soviets can be in no doubt about the way in which we view that and we have also made it clear that the continued health of the European Community will depend on the Soviet Union pursuing a path of reform, not of repression.

     

    Q7. Mr. Couchman : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 17 January.

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

    Mr. Couchman : The thoughts and prayers of many of my constituents will be with the sappers from Medway towns serving with our troops in the Gulf. Will my right hon. Friend seek to reassure them in their anxiety that the courage and superb professionalism of all our troops will contribute to a swift and satisfactory outcome to this conflict, which many of us had hoped would never happen?

    The Prime Minister : I have no doubt that those qualities will contribute to a successful outcome. However, we should be under no illusions about the scale and potential might of the Iraqi forces and, while I am confident about the success, I cannot yet be confident about the speed of that success, and I think that we should prepare ourselves for that fact.