The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Lithuania

  • Mr Major’s Joint Press Conference with East European Prime Ministers – 2 August 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint press conference with the Lithuanian Prime Minister, Mr Adolfas Slezevicius, the Estonian Prime Minister, Mr Mart Laar and the Latvian Prime Minister, Mr Valdis Virkars, in Vilnius on Tuesday 2nd August 1994.

    MR SLEZEVICIUS:

    I would like to welcome His Excellency, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr Major, and my colleagues from Latvia and Estonia, welcome to Lithuania.

    Today we had an excellent opportunity to discuss bilateral and multilateral relations, we discussed different things. First and most important for Lithuania is economic development and of course we discussed the security problems in the Baltic States region. We all agreed that now it is most important, the withdrawal of Russian troops from Latvia and Estonia, and we are supported in this process. We exchanged views about the integration process in the European Union, we are very thankful to the British government for their support we have had both before and now in this process. Of course we are very thankful for the support we have received from the Know-How Fund and we are very happy that the British government is ready to improve the category of this fund.

    We also discussed the possibility to increase our relations in the economic field, for establishing more joint ventures and foreign capital enterprises. I will leave it to our guest from England to tell you about the possibility to use some credits from the UK and other issues.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Thank you very much. Can I say firstly that I am delighted to be here this morning and to have had the opportunities of not just meeting the President of Lithuania and the Prime Minister, but also the Prime Ministers of Estonia and Latvia and it has been an extremely useful morning from my point of view.

    Of course leaders of all the three Baltic States have visited London, including President Brazauskas, all of them have visited us in London recently, but I believe that this is the first occasion that a British Prime Minister has visited Lithuania, as far as we can discover it is, and I am delighted to be here.

    We had what I suppose one might call a unilateral summit this morning in that the meetings exchanged, we all met each other and exchanged views on a very wide range of issues. What was apparent though was that a number of key themes emerged from those discussions, let me just draw a small number of them out for you in the next few moments.

    This month it is three years since the Baltic States regained their independence. A very great deal has happened in those three years, we have exchanged Embassies, exchanged hundreds of visits, and we have begun to build up trade and investment between our respective countries. All these developments are welcome but they are all in their infancy thus far and have a great deal further to go.

    In all the talks I had this morning we have discussed the closer integration of the Baltic States with Western Europe in general and the European Union in particular, and that is a common goal, a common goal amongst the Baltic State governments and in Western Europe as well. And I think the reason for that is very clear. We see the Baltic peoples as part of what we tend to call in Western Europe the European family. As independent countries, and they are and will remain I trust independent countries, the Baltic States have established links with NATO through the Partnership for Peace Programme, and with the European Union through free trade agreements recently agreed and yet to be expanded and implemented.

    But the first step, the European Union intends to negotiate Europe Agreements as well, and I think it is both natural and right, perhaps even one might say inevitable, that we should develop increasingly close relations, that threatens no-one and I think it will be of assistance to the three Baltic States and of assistance to Western Europe as well.

    It would have been extraordinary this morning if we had not discussed the relationship between the Baltic States and Russia. I believe it is very important to establish a partnership with Russia based on common interests and based on respect for the same international principles. And I believe that the intention of the Baltic governments is to establish stable neighbourly relations with Russia and that is very much to their advantage and to everyone else’s advantage that that is successful. I am delighted that the last of the troops which once occupied the Baltic States will leave, by agreement, by the end of this month.

    One of the areas of course of interest to the Russians is ensuring the fair treatment of ethnic minorities, that is important to the international community as a whole and it is important to Baltic stability, and I welcome for example the revisions that have been made to the citizenship law in Latvia.

    We spent some time this morning with all three of my colleagues discussing trade matters between Britain and the Baltic States. Trade is growing, it is helped by the progress there has been with economic reform, and investment by British companies, although not yet remotely at the level it can and I believe will reach, that investment equally is beginning to grow. I have informed my Lithuanian hosts of our decision to extend export credit cover to Lithuania so it is now available for all three of the Baltic States and I hope that will be taken as a sign of our confidence in their economic success and in their future political independence.

    We are also steadily building up a large number of projects under the British Know-How Fund, all of those are designed in separate ways across a whole range of different endeavours to help the reform process that has been gathering pace in the three countries. For example, we have projects to help small and medium size enterprises right across the Baltic States, to develop agricultural advisory services in Latvia and Lithuania, and to help banking and investment in all three countries. And there are a large number of other examples of this kind.

    If there is one quality that has shone through in my discussions with my colleagues this morning, but also shone through all of the contact we have had with Baltic people over the past three years, it is determination. There is I believe an unshakeable determination to succeed among the Baltic people and I have no doubt that they will do so. It is a difficult task to build a modern democracy, to restructure a distorted economy after half a century of communist occupation. It is a huge huge task to undertake and it is a task I think that has been undertaken very bravely by successive governments in the three Baltic States.

    They have by their efforts put themselves already well on the road to success.

    We discussed a range of other bilateral matters also this morning and a range of other security matters. The discussions I had this morning though were necessarily brief because of the brief period I am able to stay here, but the Foreign Office Minister of State, Douglas Hogg, is here, he will be remaining and will also be visiting the other Baltic States to carry those discussions forward over the next day or so.

    In conclusion, let me just say this. I do not have any doubt about the prospects for the Baltic States and I have even less doubt about the importance of their relationship with the United Kingdom both now and in the future and I very much look forward to developing that relationship.

    MR LAAR:

    I would just mention some issues which were raised during our bilateral meeting, those were of course the withdrawal of Russian troops and all situations in Estonia now between Estonia and Russia, the problems of discriminating questions, what Russia is using against Estonia and Lithuania at the same time. And we talked about our bilateral cooperation in the military field which is very successful from our point of view , and our cooperation among the Partnership for Peace Programme to help support a peace-keeping battalion to develop and we are having increasing bilateral contacts between Great Britain and Estonia in this field as well. One of the main issues was of course our economic and help more investment to come to Estonia. And we are very thankful for the support we have received from the United Kingdom in our talks with the European Union, treaty and now starting negotiations to sign the Europe Treaty.

    MR VIRKARS:

    I would like to start with the point that the Baltic States had a success so far involving political and economic confidence in their transition to a democratic society and a market economy. And I suppose really what all three of us have achieved is macro-economic stabilisation with a low inflation rate and stable and convertible national currency. And we thank the United Kingdom, we pay due regard to the continuous support of the United Kingdom in our comprehensive reform process. We are in a new situation, the withdrawal of the Russian military force is taking place after the conclusion of an agreement with the Russian Federation and I must congratulate my colleague, the Estonian Prime Minister, with this agreement. It is an important step towards strengthening security in the whole Baltic region.

    Nevertheless, current circumstances require the constant attention of the world community. I suppose after the completion of the withdrawal of Russian troops new regional security setting will require new responses from international organisations and I suppose we had today a very truthful discussion about these new responses. I suppose free Baltic States after 31 August will have the next step three Baltic States in the new unified Europe.

    We had discussions about economic issues. The Latvian government, as well as Lithuania and Estonia, has concluded the free trade agreement with the European Union. This is a first step towards integration into the EU and will make a strong impact on political and economic development of the Baltic States and on security issues. All of us are interested this year under the German Presidency to sign the European Agreement and I suppose the United Kingdom will be very helpful in this process. We have planned to submit a trade policy memorandum this summer and then to become a party to GATT as soon as possible, and again I must say the same about my colleagues, and again the UK’s support in this process is very important and will be a determining factor. And of course Latvia has concluded military technical cooperation agreements with a number of NATO countries and we would very much appreciate one with the UK as well and I suppose this process has started too.

    In any case, I am very happy to be here together with my colleagues and the Prime Minister of Great Britain and we really had a good conversation. But what is most important, all of us have good futures.

     

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    I would like to ask the British Premier what he thinks about the prospects of the Baltic countries eventually becoming fully-fledged members of the European Union and NATO and I would like to ask the Latvian Premier about the referendum and the support which he has given for the arrangement of that referendum here in Lithuania.

    LATVIAN PRIME MINISTER MR. VALDIS BIRKAVS:

    That is the referendum about indexation. I don’t know who had this idea about compensation and about indexation but I suppose this idea if adopted will work against Lithuania. That is not the way in which to solve economic problems.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    Shall I pick up those two earlier questions? The first one was of course about the relationship with the European Union both in the short and the long term. Let me try and set out the process as I see it.

    The European Union have just agreed a free trade agreement with each of the three countries individually. I think that is a very important step in the relationship with the European Union and the first priority is to make full use of that once it comes into force at the beginning of 1995.

    The second point would be to build upon something that was agreed by the European Heads of Government at the Corfu summit just a few weeks ago and that was to establish a Europe agreement that is broadly an association agreement with the European nations that would have two practical implications: the first would be to open up trading barriers and increase trade, a very necessary part of moving towards membership of the European Union; and the second practical aspect would be to open up the prospect – the certainty – of regular political dialogue collectively with the European Union, that would be what would come with a Europe agreement.

    The Europe agreement itself would open up the prospect of accession to the European Union itself at a later stage. It isn’t possible to put a time scale on these developments. The principle is clear, the direction is clear but there is a great deal to be done on both sides; the European Union itself is expanding at the moment, it has a great deal to absorb itself and there is a great deal to do to help the three countries prepare themselves for closer integration with Western Europe and a closer trading relationship with them. It is a very fierce, competitive world inside the European Union and one needs to prepare oneself for that or the individual economies of the Baltic states would suffer some damage so there is a march towards that end but it is impossible to put a time scale on it.

    As far as defence is concerned, let me firstly make the point that bilateral defence links are growing quite rapidly between the United Kingdom and the Baltic states. We have been very pleased, for example, to be able to assist with the development of the Baltic peacekeeping battalion with infantry training and with English-language training and I was able to confirm this morning that that will continue.

    I think a very important move was made with the development of Partnership for Peace and the accession to Partnership for Peace of each of the countries represented here today and, of course, Latvia also is now an associate partner of the Western European Union.

    Those measures are quite significant measures to undertake in the short term. Growing trade relationships have their own security implications but I think one has to take it at a measured pace and that is what we are seeking to do at the present time.

    ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER MR. MART LAAR:

    If I can comment on the proposals about indexation, I think if this will be voted for in the referendum it will have extremely negative results on the Lithuanian economy and I have some suspicion that most of this work what is made to this point to get the reforms forward will be lost just now.

    QUESTION (LATVIAN NEWSPAPER):

    I would like to ask His Excellency John Major how the change of Latvian government can influence the integration of Latvia into Europe?

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I think the most important thing for the governments, whether Latvian or any of the others, is to continue to work to integrate themselves both in the international institutions – the Western European Union, the CSCE, moving towards European Union membership, Partnership for Peace – and also to begin to integrate the nature of their economies and the general free-trading impetus that dominates Western Europe, I think those are the best ways to develop but it seems to me that that is what is happening. Some of the economic progress that has been made has been quite staggering and that economic progress needs to continue if there is to be a greater and other relationship in the future.

    I should just say one thing because there is sometimes a tendency I know when talks of the Baltic states to talk of the Baltic states as though they were all the same. The reality is you have got three independent countries each with their own interests; many of those interests overlap understandably so but they are different interests, they are independent countries and I believe they would wish to be seen as independent countries and I perhaps ought to make that point but I think the general direction is the one I set out a moment ago.

    EDWARD LUCAS (BALTIC INDEPENDENT):

    Prime Minister, there is a lot of concern here about the Kaliningrad region of Russia which is host to many tens of thousands of Russian troops. Would Great Britain like to add its voice to that of Sweden and the Baltic states in urging Russia to demilitarise this region very speedily so as to reduce the potential instability that this concentration of forces presents to the whole Baltic Sea basin?

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    We are certainly very keen to see an agreement reached between Lithuania and Russia over Kaliningrad and I believe from my discussions this morning that that agreement is now within reach. I think that is of interest not just to Lithuania and Russia but of interest to a number of other Central and East European states as well as the other two Baltic states. I don’t think I wish to go further than that.

    EDWARD LUCAS:

    It was on militarisation.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I understand that point very clearly and I am just coming to that. I don’t wish to go further than that. I think it is right for them to reach an agreement – that is what Lithuania and Russia are doing – and I don’t believe it is for us to go further than that.

    Nobody is in any doubt that Kaliningrad is Russian territory and the important thing therefore is to make sure that there is a proper transit agreement in the first place and at this moment I don’t propose to go beyond that.

    LATVIAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. WALDIS BIRKAVC:

    Of course, this is not only a Lithuanian question or a Lithuanian problem, it is a problem for the two other Baltic countries as well and as we have seen during last year, both Latvia and Estonia gave very strong support on the question of the withdrawal of Russian troops so we are very clear that Estonia and Latvia will support the Lithuanian activity to find some solution to the Kaliningrad problem and they are of course afraid after the withdrawal of troops from Estonia and Latvia of the important problems this will raise and of course, as I said before,. we will support fully Lithuania in trying to find solutions which are acceptable for Lithuania and that means those that are acceptable for us.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister Major, there were some aspects about military relations with Russia discussed. That is still a big topic in all three Baltic states with different aspects of the question but in your stay in Warsaw recently you strongly spoke of Britain’s help for Poland becoming a full NATO member. I guess most of the Baltic people still want to hear some answers about our prospects of becoming NATO countries.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I set that out both in Poland and here. The implication of Partnership for Peace is that NATO will expand its membership. The question is not whether NATO will expand its membership but when, how and how far and one can’t be clear about precisely when that will be. We certainly wish to do that without destabilising the peaceful circumstances that now exist in Central and Eastern Europe so I think these are matters that need to be taken gradually and by agreement and I think that rather than setting out ultimate aims with the disruptive implications that self-evidently that could have, it is better to proceed with the Partnership for Peace agreement and the Partnership for Peace arrangements that have been established.

    Each of the Baltic states are members of Partnership for Peace. think people have perhaps underestimated the medium and long-term significance of this development. There is a changing shape across Europe at the moment, that changing shape is moving quite satisfactorily and it needs to continue. What nobody needs to do is to disrupt that by pushing too fast or too hard in a way that may disrupt what looks like a satisfactory development of security arrangements.

    QUESTION (RUSSIAN AGENCY):

    I would like to ask the British Premier to once again go back to a very pressing problem here in Lithuania and that is the problem of Russian military transit through Lithuania. There have been voices treating the intention of Lithuania to sign an agreement with Russia on transit as treason. This is an important thing not only for Lithuania but also for the region itself. What would your opinion of that be?

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    I think my opinion of that would be one shared by most of my European partners and that is that it is in everyone’s interest that a satisfactory transit agreement to Kaliningrad is reached and I believe that one is now within sight. I am sure it is right.

    I understand very clearly, given the history and background of Lithuania and indeed of each of the three Baltic states, the concerns that arise in many people’s minds about that transit agreement of troops and material through to Kaliningrad. Nobody could fail to understand the concerns that people may feel based on history about that but I think the circumstances have changed and we have moved on and I believe it is right to reach such an agreement. I think it is a statesmanlike decision to reach such an agreement and I strongly believe that that would be the view of most of my European Union colleagues as well. I hope such an agreement will be reached. It will take some courage to reach such an agreement but I believe it is the right decision.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister Major, you said earlier today that you were optimistic about Baltic security in the future but if things don’t go so well, say Russia turns more belligerent and turns on its neighbours, then will Britain will be willing to stand by the Baltic states? Should the Baltic states have the confidence that Britain will stand by the Baltic states if such a thing happened?

    I would also like to ask the Baltic prime ministers what their degree of confidence is that the West will come to their aid.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    We have taken a consistent position that the Baltic states are independent, should have remained independent, thankfully are independent again and I believe the greatest security that the Baltic states can get will come not least by their increasing trade and other integration with Western European institutions and Western European trading patterns.

    You erect a doomsday scenario and ask what would happen in the event of that doomsday occurring. I don’t think people are likely to answer that question in those terms but I have to say to you that I believe that the Western European countries and the Western states generally would feel strongly about maintaining the independence of the Baltic states but we see no threat to them at the moment. Perhaps if I were a Balt, I would see it differently and I absolutely understand that and I do not dismiss the concerns that many people feel but I believe matters have moved on. The departure of the Russian troops is a very significant step from within the Baltic states and I both hope and expect they will not face the sort of scenario you set out but certainly it is a very strong wish of the United Nations and everybody else that the Baltic states should retain their political and economic independence.

    ESTONIAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. MART LAAR:

    The most important thing is to avoid the possibility of such a scenario and I totally agree with Prime Minister John Major that the best thing for us is to integrate as fast possible with all Western institutions open to us and just now we can see that all European institutions are open to us. This is maybe the most important thing that is happening to us now.

    LATVIAN PRIME MINISTER, MR. VALOIS BIRKAVC:

    I can add that a very important thing in this connection is to be very cooperative amongst the Baltic states and to continue our efforts and step-by-step process of integration in all the European international organisations – step-by-step but fast.

    LITHUANIAN PRIME MINISTER, ADOLFUS SLEZEVICIUS:

    I agree with my colleagues on the principle of an umbrella for the security of the region. In my understanding and the understanding Of our government it is speeding up the integration into the European economic and security structure. We are moving this way, the [indistinct] is very good and after 31 August when we have a completely new situation in the Baltic states this process will move very fast.

    PRIME MINISTER JOHN MAJOR:

    Let me just add a point to that. what I said here today about the necessity for the independence of the Baltic states is not something we just say to the Baltic states; that is a message that the United Kingdom has consistently delivered to Russia over the last few years. I delivered that message in the past to President Gorbachev and also to President Yeltsin and I believe many other Western Heads of Government have done the same thing as well.

  • Mr Major’s Remarks in Reply to President Brazauskas – 2 August 1994

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s remarks to President Brazauskas on 2nd August 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Mr President, Prime Ministers, Ladies and Gentlemen.

    I am very grateful to you, Mr President, and to the Lithuanian Government, for your generous hospitality.

    Prime Minister Laar and Prime Minister Birkavs have kindly travelled from Estonia and Latvia to join us.

    This may be the first visit ever by a British Prime Minister to Lithuania. It has certainly been the first visit of its kind in over half a century.

    For over fifty years we, like you, held firm to the idea that the three Baltic States would again be independent. You never lost hope. Your determination brought you back to independence.

    I had the pleasure of nominating the first three British post war ambassadors to your countries, and of greeting the first Baltic leaders to visit London again. Now I have the even greater pleasure of coming here to one of the Baltic States and of meeting the Prime Ministers of all three.

    We have had an intensive morning of talks. We have discussed individually the different problems of each of your countries, and the particular relationships which you have with the United Kingdom. But there have also been some common themes, and I would like to say a few words about them.

    First, let me say that your independence is no less important to us now that you have regained it.

    You rightly insisted – with our support – that occupying forces had to withdraw. Your persistence will see the Baltic States free of uninvited foreign forces by the end of this month – for the first time in 54 years.

    The way this has been achieved testifies to the good sense of your governments and of the Russian Government under President Yeltsin.

    Second, you want a greater sense of security. We live in an uncertain world, and your countries have had a turbulent and uncertain history.

    I cannot hold out certainty for the future, but I am optimistic about the prospects for the Baltic States.

    Your sovereignty is a recognised fact. You have the rights and status of members of the United Nations and the CSCE. Violation of that status would carry a heavy cost.

    You have developed links with NATO through Partnership for Peace – links which threaten no other country.

    You now have a network of bilateral relationships with your friends in Europe and elsewhere. For example, Britain’s defence cooperation with you and the establishment of the Baltic Peacekeeping Battalion is a sign of practical cooperation which ties in well with Partnership for Peace.

    But I am optimistic also about Russia. I take nothing for granted. The huge changes under way in Russia will take years to work through. But both you and we have shown the desire to develop stable and modern relations with Russia, as sovereign partners and in your case as neighbours. The leaders of Russia, for their part, know that this meets their country’s interests, too. They know, I hope, that the last thing we want is to create new barriers in Europe, now that we have erased the post war dividing line.

    This brings me to my third point. The Baltic peoples are members of the European family. Britain has always been the foremost advocate of an outward looking European Union. I cannot at this stage predict exactly how the European Union will develop in the years ahead. You have taken a first step with your Free Trade Agreements with the European Union. At Corfu, the European Council agreed that Europe Agreements should be the next step of the Baltic States.

    I want the European Union to go on building up its relations with your countries, step by step, matching the development of your own economies and political systems.

    Mr President, fellow Prime Ministers, I have come here at an encouraging time.

    Estonia has now reached agreement with Russia on troop withdrawals.

    Latvia has resolved the problem of her citizenship law. I hope that Lithuania will soon be able to find agreement with Russia on military transit.

    You are making progress with economic reform. This has been reflected in increasing trade with Britain, and investment by some of our largest companies such as Shell and Cable and Wireless.

    Rebuilding your countries after half a century of Communism and foreign occupation is a huge challenge.

    You and your peoples have risen to that challenge. I have no doubt at all that you will succeed.

    We wish to play a part in that success, and will continue to offer our enthusiastic support.

     

  • Mr Major’s Joint Doorstep Interview with Lithuanian President – 22 January 1992

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s joint doorstep interview at Downing Street with the Lithuanian President, President Landsbergis, on Wednesday 22nd January 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    This morning, I have had the opportunity of having discussions with President Landsbergis and have had the very great pleasure of welcoming him here as President of an independent country. That is an especial pleasure to us in the United Kingdom for we had never recognised the Baltic States’ absorption into the former Soviet Union and to see them again recognised as an independent country gives us especial pleasure and I am delighted that we now have diplomatic representation in his country.

    We have had a wide-ranging discussion this morning and have touched on many matters of bilateral interest. One in particular I would like to mention to you this morning and that is that I have agreed this morning with President Landsbergis that we will repay to his country the Baltic gold that was deposited here in 1940 and that had been sold by a previous government in the late 1960s. What we have agreed is that we will replace the quantity of gold that was originally deposited. President Landsbergis has agreed that he will wish this gold to remain deposited with the Bank of England but we will arrange the transfer of title once legal formalities have been completed.

    We have also agreed this morning that there are a series of relatively small intergovernmental claims one country against the other that have been outstanding for many years. We have decided, in parallel with the agreement over Baltic gold, that we will both renounce the claims one country against another and leave the diplomatic/economic slate entirely clean for us to develop a relationship from now onwards.

    It has been an extremely helpful and useful discussion. We have discussed other economic and wider matters and I am delighted to have had the opportunity of this meeting with President Landsbergis this morning.

    PRESIDENT LANDSBERGIS:

    I am very glad to be here to have this meeting to meet Mr. Prime Minister and say that we had a very good understanding of each other. Mr. Prime Minister understands very good the Lithuanian problems and supports us – has supported before and now – in our goals to be a more democratic, more prosperous country as a member of the European and whole world community of free nations.

    We resolved the old problems; we touched the new ones and we have a very good perspective of cooperation for the future.

    I am very glad Mr. Prime Minister for this meeting.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 24 June 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 24th June 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Baltic Republics

    Dr. Thomas : To ask the Prime Minister when representatives of the Government of the United Kingdom will next meet representatives of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia and what plans they have to discuss improved trade relations with the Baltic republics.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office will meet the Lithuanian Foreign Minister, Mr. Saudargas on 25 June. My hon. and learned Friend expects to discuss a wide range of topics of mutual interest with Mr. Saudargas. We have regular contacts with Baltic representatives in London and Moscow, and in the Baltic republics. These contacts cover a wide range of bilateral political and economic issues.

     

    Solvent Abuse

    Mr. Trotter : To ask the Prime Minister which Department is responsible for the co-ordination of Government policies on solvent abuse; and what policies there are to reduce solvent abuse.

    The Prime Minister : The Department of Health takes the lead on Government policies against solvent misuse. These policies are directed primarily towards education and prevention and, where practicable, the restriction of sales of products containing volatile substances to young people. We have supported a number of initiatives to educate young people at risk and to inform adults, including parents, professional workers and retailers who may become involved.

  • PMQT – 12 February 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 12th February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Maclennan : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 February 1991.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. I also called on Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother and presented her with a gift from the Cabinet to mark her 90th year. In addition to my duties in the House, I will be having further meetings later today. This evening I hope to have an audience of Her Majesty the Queen.

    Mr. Skinner : It was a cold weather payment.

    Mr. Speaker : Order.

    Mr. Maclennan : While welcoming the Cabinet’s recognition of my constituent, the Queen Mother, in that way [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order.

    Mr. Maclennan : Would the Prime Minister say why, when he came to the House last week to announce the waiver of the exceptionally severe weather payment seven-day condition, he gave no inkling that it was to last 24 hours and that within four days, his Minister for Social Security and Disabled People would announce that things were to go back to where they are now. The “now you see it, now you don’t” approach cannot be the way to look after those who are so heavily dependent upon that payment.

    The Prime Minister : If there is doubt about that point, let me seek to remove it beyond peradventure at the moment. As I said last week, given the exceptionally severe weather, we wanted to ensure that vulnerable groups would take appropriate steps to keep warm so we waived the seven-day qualifying period. Given the continuation of severe weather since then, we shall once again be waiving the seven-day period. Of course, we shall continue to monitor the situation carefully and if the cold weather continues we shall take similar measures.

     

    Q2. Mr. Evennett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 February.

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

    Mr. Evennett : While my right hon. Friend was enjoying his much publicised breakfast at the weekend, the people of Lithuania were voting in a referendum. Does he agree that the desire for independence by the Lithuanians, as expressed in the result of that referendum, should be heeded by the Soviet Union?

    The Prime Minister : I sympathise very much with my hon. Friend’s point. I would like to see the Soviet authorities negotiate with the elected representatives of the Baltic authorities about their aspirations. That is a point I hope to be able to put to President Gorbachev when I meet him next month.

    Mr. Kinnock : Does the Prime Minister share our deep concern that unemployment, business bankruptcies and factory gate prices are all up while investment and output are down? Whose policies does he blame for that–the current Chancellor’s or the previous Chancellor’s?

    The Prime Minister : I think that everyone shares the concern about bankruptcies and unemployment. We also share the considerable degree of pleasure at the growth that there has been in recent years, at the growth in the number of businesses–which, even last year, was running at more than 1,000 a week–and at the prospects that will continue to exist for this country as we increasingly drive inflation downwards.

    Mr. Kinnock : Does the Prime Minister understand that he has taken many of those new businesses–and longer-established businesses–straight into slump with his policies? Why will he not now cut interest rates, use a more sensible system of managing demand and try to stop the slump now, before the damage gets even worse and goes on for even longer?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman should know that the generalised slogans that he uses simply will not do. Let me quote to him what even The Guardian said of the alternatives :

    “As for the Opposition parties, their call for interest rate cuts with no accompanying recognition of the economic realities is politically opportunistic and economically naive.”

    I agree with The Guardian.

    Mr. Kinnock : May I put it to the Prime Minister that, this very week, factory gate prices are up, unemployment will be up and bankruptcies are up? Is that what he intends to continue to do? If so, I put it to him that his policies are hurting just about everyone and working for just about no one.

    The Prime Minister : I think that the right hon. Gentleman will find that our policies are working. I believe that that will become increasingly apparent. The right hon. Gentleman referred to the rise in output prices. I must say that I think that that is a suspect figure. In any event, the January figure may well reflect the delayed and continued impact of the autumn increase in oil prices. Throughout this year, the right hon. Gentleman will see a continuing fall in the rise of inflation.

    Mr. Rowe : Although at this moment it may seem bizarre to imagine that there could be advantages in transferring from road to rail, will my right hon. Friend confirm that, in better times, when the Department of Transport appraises capital projects it allows for both freight and passenger savings on roads?

    The Prime Minister : In so far as I could hear the first part of my hon. Friend’s question, I believe that I agree with him. British Rail has a substantial investment level at present ; indeed, it is the highest level for 30 years. As the former chairman said not long ago :

    “the investment programme is about the maximum rate we can physically manage.”

     

    Q3. Mr. Fisher : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 February.

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

    Mr. Fisher : Is not the Prime Minister ashamed that an estimated 50 young homeless people are sleeping rough on the streets of Stoke-on-Trent? They are not eligible for his severe weather payments or his emergency aid. What place is there for them in his classless society?

    The Prime Minister : As the hon. Gentleman knows, on a number of occasions I have expressed my concern and outlined the action that we are taking to deal with the position of young people who are sleeping rough. My hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning set out some policies some time ago and explained that a considerable amount of resources would be devoted to implementing them. One of the problems that is recognised and acknowledged by the voluntary groups – if not, perhaps, by every hon. Member – is that some of those who sleep rough have every option to go into shelters but frequently do not exercise it.

    Mr. Janman : Is my right hon. Friend aware of press reports which speculate that the public sector borrowing requirement for 1991-92 will be £9 billion? Does he agree that during the forthcoming 12 months it is important that the Government apply the same discipline to themselves as companies in the private sector are having to apply, and that Government spending should take into account prevailing economic conditions, not pretend that they do not exist?

    The Prime Minister : We must certainly always take into account the prevailing economic conditions in terms of public expenditure control. That is certainly what we shall do.

     

    Q4. Mr. Andrew F. Bennett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 February.

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

    Mr. Bennett : Does the Prime Minister recall one of his early votes in the House of Commons on 20 December 1979, when he voted to break the link between pensions and earnings? Does he realise that as a result of that, pensioners have not enjoyed increases in their standard of living through general improvements and that they are now worse off by £22 a week for a married couple and £13 a week for a single pensioner? Does he realise that if those links had not been broken, people would have had sufficient money to pay for fuel, make sure that they had enough to eat and put on warm clothing and so combat the cold weather? Does not the Prime Minister realise that against that background, the announcement that he has made today of the extra £1 heating allowance is extremely miserly?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is being very selective in the figures that he quotes. If he cares to examine the degree of net disposable income among all sectors of the community, including the elderly, he will find that it has risen substantially throughout the past decade.

    Mr. Lee : Given that our nation likes a modest flutter as much as it likes a traditional Happy Eater breakfast, does my right hon. Friend care to give some encouragement today to those of us who favour the concept of a national lottery designed to provide additional resources for sports, the arts and museums?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend raises an intriguing question.

     

    Community Care

    Q5. Mr. Tom Clarke : To ask the Prime Minister what is Her Majesty’s Government’s present policy towards Sir Roy Griffiths’s recommendation that local authorities should perform the lead role in the provision of community care.

    The Prime Minister : The Government’s policy on community care remains as set out in the White Paper “Caring For People” and the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990. Local authorities begin implementation of those policies in April this year.

    Mr. Clarke : What steps does the Prime Minister intend to take to deal with the increasing problems of many elderly people in residential care who have witnessed a growing number of closures of private and voluntary sector homes as a result of the care gap and inadequate income support? Will he absolutely insist that elderly people do not suffer, in spite of the need for social service and social work departments to reduce their expenditure in order to avoid poll tax capping, even though the real anxiety is to respond to elderly people’s needs, which they recognise in their own communities?

    The Prime Minister : The concerns for elderly people that the hon. Gentleman sets out and which local authorities have are well understood and appreciated. He weakens his case by his remarks about community charge capping, not least because a large number of those authorities that face capping do so because of a flagrant and wilful abuse of their expenditure in many aspects.

    Mr. Nicholas Winterton : Does my right hon. Friend accept that there is considerable anxiety in local government, not least among the staff of part III residential homes and also, of course, the residents of those homes, that many local authorities feel obliged to put such homes into the private or charitable sector, thus creating considerable instability? Will my right hon. Friend take account of the anxiety, particularly among elderly people and their families, who are deeply upset by the instability that is being created?

    The Prime Minister : What we are seeking to do is to ensure the maximum availability of the appropriate sort of accommodation and to ensure that it is provided in the most cost-effective manner. That accommodation may, on occasion, be in the public or the private sector, but it is the quantum of assistance with which I know my hon. Friend is most concerned.

     

    Engagements

    Q6. Mr. Fraser : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 February.

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

    Mr. Fraser : Does the Prime Minister recall that shortly before he became Prime Minister he said that the subject that he cares most about is education? He repeated those sentiments at the Young Conservatives’ conference at the weekend. I have in my hand the sum total of all those speeches made by the right hon. Gentleman on education since 1979 – it averages one line a year. Can the Prime Minister put in the Library any other speeches on this subject, which is so close to his heart?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is being uncharacteristically fatuous.

    Hon. Members : Withdraw.

    Mr. Speaker : Order.

    The Prime Minister : If colleagues insist, I shall withdraw “uncharacteristically”. For the bulk of the period in the House since 1979 I have either been in the Whips’ Office, and thus unable to speak, or a Minister with other departmental responsibilities. If the hon. Gentleman had had what undoubtedly would have been an education to him from listening to the speeches that I have made outside the House he would not have asked that question.

     

    Q7. Mr. Squire : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 12 February.

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

    Mr. Squire : Despite my right hon. Friend and I both having left state schools at 16 and therefore, perhaps being poor educational advertisements [Interruption.] I said perhaps. Would my right hon. Friend underline his determination that standards and diversity in our state schools are enhanced and improved, and above all, that the staying-on rate of students beyond 16 and 18 is increased?

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to endorse my hon. Friend’s point. Education is undoubtedly the key in the future to opening new paths for people, not just people with high abilities, but, of course, people with much lesser abilities as well. We want an education system that rewards dedicated teachers and provides education in the state sector of which we can be proud. That is what we shall be increasingly reaching towards throughout the Conservative Governments of the 1990s.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 28 January 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 28th January 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Lithuania and Latvia

    Mr. Alex Carlile : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make direct representations to the President of the Soviet Union concerning recent actions by the Soviet Government in Lithuania and Latvia; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : We have made our concerns known very clearly to the Soviet authorities, both bilaterally and in conjunction with partners and allies. There should be no doubt of our condemnation of the actions of Soviet troops in Vilnius and Riga and their tragic consequences. We call urgently on the Soviet authorities to withdraw their troops and to negotiate seriously with the elected authorities in the Baltic states.

    Lobby Reporters

    Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Prime Minister if he will change the terms under which parliamentary lobby reporters are briefed by his press secretary so that information may be attributed to the Prime Minister’s office in place of Government sources.

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

    Saudi Arabia (Mail)

    Mr. Beith : To ask the Prime Minister whether he will take steps to ensure that mail can be got through to United Kingdom civilians working in Saudi Arabia from their families, using military postal facilities if necessary and where possible.

    The Prime Minister : In spite of delays caused by difficulties with air services, the Post Office is making every effort to operate the best possible service to Saudi Arabia and mail is getting through. The Ministry of Defence would be willing to consider what help it could provide, if this becomes necessary.

    Royal Prerogative

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister (1) if he will bring forward proposals to institute a system for notifying (a) Parliament and (b) the electorate when the royal prerogative has been exercised; (2) if he will make it his policy to introduce legislation to ensure that the authority of Parliament is required for (a) the declaration or continuation of war and (b) other exercises of the royal prerogative; (3) if he will bring forward legislative proposals to introduce ministerial responsibility to Parliament for the powers currently exercised by the royal prerogative.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 January 1991] : No.

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister what arrangements exist for the Prime Minister to be notified when the royal prerogative is used.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 January 1991] : With very few exceptions, the royal prerogative comprises powers that are now exercised by Ministers subject to the constitutional conventions.

    Declaration of War

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister (1) what would be the effects of an official declaration of war on the maintenance of an Iraqi diplomatic capability in the United Kingdom;

    (2) whether the United Kingdom is at war with Iraq;

    (3) what representations he has received concerning parliamentary consideration of the declaration of war.

    The Prime Minister [holding answer 25 January 1991] : The United Kingdom is not in a state of war with Iraq. British forces are engaged, together with the armed forces of Kuwait and other coalition partners, in hostilities against Iraq under the authority of the United Nations Security Council. The rules of international law applying in cases of armed conflict apply to these hostilities, notably the Geneva protocol of 1925 and the four Geneva conventions of 1949. We will observe our obligations under those treaties scrupulously and expect the Government of Iraq to do the same.

  • PMQT – 15 January 1991

    The text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 15th January 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Jacques Arnold : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 January.

    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. Arnold : In the course of his busy day, will my right hon. Friend spare a thought for the Kuwaiti people who are now in the sixth month of brutal occupation? Does he agree that if British forces have to go into action, they will be fighting in support of the United Nations for the principle that small nations may live in freedom and in peace?

    The Prime Minister : I very much agree with my hon. Friend. I shall of course, seek to deal with those matters in the course of my speech later this afternoon. If we are to have a safe world–and, clearly, that is our objective–we need to safeguard the positions of small countries with large and potentially aggressive neighbours.

    Mr. Kinnock : In view of the brutality– [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order.

    Mr. Kinnock : In view of the brutality against unarmed people in Lithuania and in Latvia in recent days, will the right hon. Gentleman today make direct contact with the Soviet Government to make it clear, beyond all doubt, that for Britain and the European Community any improved relations with the Soviet Union will relate directly to the extent to which the authorities conduct affairs peacefully and with proper respect for basic human rights in all parts of the Soviet Union? Will the right hon. Gentleman give notice that continued violence will severely deter support for economic development in the Soviet Union?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his remarks. I can confirm that we have already made such representations to the Soviet authorities. I deeply deplore the actions in Vilnius and, of course, their tragic consequences. I regard them as unnecessary and undesirable, and I hope that they will never be repeated. I will be happy to pass the right hon. Gentleman’s remarks direct to the Soviet authorities.

    Sir Trevor Skeet : May I ask the Prime Minister a direct question? In the event of poisonous gas or bacteria being used in the middle east in the event of war, will he reserve the option to use a nuclear device if that is necessary for the protection of our own troops?

    The Prime Minister : We have made it very clear to the Iraqis that we would take a very serious view indeed of the use of any chemical or biological weapons, but I must say to my hon. Friend that we have a wide range of weapons and resources at our hands and I do not envisage needing to use the sanction that he suggests.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister realise that he has the overwhelming support of the people of this nation and of this House in his determination to ensure that international law is upheld by the enactment in full of the United Nations resolutions requiring Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait? But does he also realise that, consistent with those terms, it is right to pursue every last possibility for peace? Notwithstanding the fact that the French initiative no doubt has very little chance of success, would not it be wiser to pursue rather then reject it?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his support today and for his strong support in recent weeks, which has been most helpful and much appreciated. We certainly subscribe to the principle of a last appeal to Saddam Hussein to obey the Security Council resolutions and leave Kuwait, but we have considerable reservations about the particular wording proposed by the French, which seems to us materially to weaken the Security Council resolutions and to have some other drawbacks as well. While we subscribe to the principle of a last appeal, I fear that I cannot agree with the precise wording proposed by the French.

    Mr. Conway : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Iraqis’ ability to avoid the effectiveness of sanctions will be aided by the £4 billion worth of gold and foreign reserves looted from Kuwait? Will he assure the House that if we discover that any country breaking sanctions is in receipt of United Kingdom aid, that aid will be stopped immediately?

    The Prime Minister : We certainly take a very serious view indeed of sanctions-breaking, when one considers that sanctions have been working and, to a degree, effectively–although, alas, not remotely effectively enough to achieve the end that we wish, which is the removal of the Iraqis from Kuwait. I will certainly bear in mind the advice that my hon. Friend has given me.

     

    Q2. Mr. Nicholas Brown : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 January.

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

    Mr. Brown : When the right hon. Gentleman met President Mitterrand, was he told the details of the French initiative and, if not, why not? If he was told the details, did he have any proposals of his own to make?

    The Prime Minister : I am bound to say that I think that the substantive part of the hon. Gentleman’s question would be more appropriately directed to President Mitterrand than to me.

     

    Terrorism

    Q3. Mr. Hunter : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a further statement on the United Kingdom’s contribution to international co- operation against terrorism.

    The Prime Minister : We condemn all acts of terrorism wherever and by whomever committed. We shall maintain our firm stand against terrorism at home and overseas. We remain in very close touch with our partners and allies in these matters.

    Mr. Hunter : As so many terrorist organisations have declared their support for, or received support from, Saddam Hussein’s ally the Palestine Liberation Organisation, can my right hon. Friend assure us that there will be effective international co-operation against acts of terrorism which may be committed in support of Iraq and will he ensure that there will never be any surrender to terrorism?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly confirm the last point to my hon. Friend and I very much hope that his earlier point is also the case. I can also assure him that we take the threat of terrorism very seriously indeed and have taken the appropriate cautionary measures. In particular, we have been urging other Governments to improve security at their airports. Very great vigilance will be required both at home and abroad and we are making it clear to everyone that that will undoubtedly be necessary in the weeks ahead.

    Mr. Madden : In view of the gathering support for the French initiative–

    Mr. Speaker : Order. This is a definitive question about terrorism.

    Rev. Martin Smyth : I welcome the Prime Minister’s statement that we take a firm line on terrorism, but in the light of the two recent kamikaze bombings in Londonderry and Fermanagh is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that he is getting full co-operation from the Republic of Ireland?

    The Prime Minister : The Irish Government have made clear to us their continuing commitment to cross-border co-operation against terrorism. We will, of course, continue to discuss improvements to that cross-border co-operation, through the mechanism of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

    Mr. Ian Bruce : Does my right hon. Friend agree that, as we now have better relations with Syria, urging Syria at the end of this conflict to make peace with Israel would be an extremely good way of ensuring that international terrorism is dealt with?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend knows, we have restored our relationship with Syria and we hope that that will herald a greater degree of co-operation between our two countries. I hope that in future Syria will turn away from any form of terrorism.

     

    Engagements

    Q4. Mr. Galbraith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 January.

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

    Mr. Galbraith : During the Prime Minister’s recent visit to Scotland he re-emphasised his position on the poll tax that nothing was ruled out and nothing was ruled in. Yet in the previous week, when interviewed by David Frost, he said that proposals for the abolition of the poll tax would not arise. Can he explain the apparent contradiction?

    The Prime Minister : First, the whole House is pleased to see the hon. Gentleman back in the House and looking a good deal fitter than he was. On his remarks about the community charge, we have repeatedly made the position clear. It is a fundamental review and until it is concluded we cannot be precisely certain about what will emerge. I offered a contingent thought in my early interview with Mr. Frost. What the reality will be, we shall have to see.

     

    Q5. Mr. Butler : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 January.

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

    Mr. Butler : What urgency does my right hon. Friend give to compensation for coal mining subsidence?

    The Prime Minister : I confirm to my hon. Friend that that is an important matter. He will know that the Government have been considering it for some time. I can now confirm to my hon. Friend that it is the Government’s intention to bring forward a Bill in the current Session. The Bill will improve the arrangements for compensation and the repair of houses for those affected by mining subsidence and provide for quicker settlement of disputed claims.

    Mr. Livingstone : Will the Prime Minister assure the House that the Government have not issued any contingency orders for the printing of call-up papers for men aged 18 to 25 who are unmarried?

    The Prime Minister : We have no such arrangements in hand.

     

    Q6. Mrs. Currie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 January.

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

    Mrs. Currie : Has my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister noted the unanimous vote in the Iraqi National Assembly backing Saddam Hussein in his efforts for war? Does he agree that a unanimous vote in this House today would also demonstrate the determination of Britain, if it must, to put Saddam Hussein to flight and obtain justice for the Kuwaiti people?

    The Prime Minister : I most certainly did notice the vote in the Iraqi assembly. I share my hon. Friend’s view that the largest possible degree of support from the House for the Government’s position would be most welcome, not only as an indication of international solidarity but, perhaps more importantly, as the clearest possible indication to our troops in Saudi Arabia that they have the full and united support of the House.

    Mr. Leighton : Having invaded Kuwait to grab the oil, is it not true that Saddam Hussein has been unable to sell a single pint of it and has been unable to sell Iraqi oil either? While the two pipelines are closed, do not those effective sanctions render his position untenable in the long run? Would not it be better to maintain those effective sanctions, rather than resort to the early use of force, which could have unforeseen consequences?

    The Prime Minister : I can only say that I wish that the hon. Gentleman was right. The reality is that sanctions have been in force for a considerable period of time. They may have caused some economic harm to Iraq. What they have not done is cause Iraq to remove itself from Kuwait and end the terrorism that is continuing there day after day.

     

    Q7. Mrs. Gorman : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 January.

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

    Mrs. Gorman : Does my right hon. Friend agree that on a cold day such as today, young people should not be sleeping in our streets when they could be in the ample bosom of some kindly landlady who, but for the twin bogey men of the Rent Acts and the taxman, could be encouraged to let spare rooms? On such a cold day as this, we should be concentrating our minds on removing all the obstacles that prevent people from letting rooms in private houses.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend puts the matter most colourfully and is undoubtedly an encouragement to us all. As my hon. Friend will know, we reformed the Rent Acts in 1989 and we believe that the legislation now strikes a better balance between landlord and tenant. None the less, I agree with my hon. Friend that further measures are necessary to increase the supply of rented accommodation. My hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning will be examining that matter.

     

    Q8. Mr. Trimble : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 January.

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

    Mr. Trimble : We applaud the Prime Minister’s determination that aggression in the Gulf shall not be rewarded and we only hope that the same determination is applied here as well. I refer the Prime Minister to recent press reports about indirect negotiations and contacts between the Northern Ireland Office and Sinn Fein. I ask the right hon. Gentleman for an assurance that there will be no such contacts, direct or indirect, and to ensure that the aggression and terrorism of the IRA and Sinn Fein are not rewarded.

    The Prime Minister : As the hon. Gentleman knows, we have taken a consistent view that Irish terrorism, or terrorism of any sort, should not be rewarded. That has, been, is and I assure the hon. Gentleman, will continue to be our position.