The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Nuclear Weapons

  • PMQT – 15 December 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 15th December 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mrs. Angela Knight : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 December.

    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.

    Mrs. Knight : May I tell my right hon. Friend that taxpayers in my constituency– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Lady is finding herself in a rowdy House because we expect a question from her.

    Mrs. Knight : May I let my right hon. Friend be aware that taxpayers in my constituency of Erewash and across the country are delighted that he successfully defended the rebate for Britain at the Edinburgh summit? May I also congratulate him–

    Hon. Members : No.

    Madam Speaker : Order. The House should have a little more tolerance. I am sure that the hon. Lady has taken to heart what I have said and will try again.

    Mrs. Knight : Will my right hon. Friend also accept our congratulations on so successfully holding down the increase in the Community budget which was sought by the European Commission and some European leaders?

    The Prime Minister : I can sense that it is a Christmas House today. My hon. Friend is right : it was vital that we defended the rebate, worth £2 billion a year. It is now protected until the end of the century. It was an issue on which our European partners knew that we were not prepared to compromise. It is fortunate that we were not represented by the Labour party. The shadow Chancellor would have negotiated on the rebate, and the Leader of the Opposition would have signed up the complete Delors 2 package, costing us hundreds of millions of pounds.

    Mr. John Smith : In view of the appalling suffering being endured by the inhabitants of Sarajevo and other besieged towns and cities in Bosnia, will the Prime Minister join the French and United States Governments in urging the speedy adoption of the United Nations Security Council resolution to enforce the no-fly zone over Bosnia?

    The Prime Minister : There has been a great deal of comment about enforcing the no-fly zone. The issue is being discussed at the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe meeting in Stockholm and it will be discussed further at the London conference in Geneva tomorrow and the North Atlantic Council on Thursday. The imposition of a no-fly zone by the United Nations has already had the effect of stopping combat flights by the Serbs ; so far as we can see, there are still breaches by helicopters and small aircraft, but no clear evidence of their being used for combat purposes.

    We are considering our policy with our allies and partners, but we must weigh the desirability of enforcing the no-fly zone against the possible impact of that on the United Nations humanitarian effort and on the safety of our own troops. If enforcement of the no-fly zone put the United Nations operation at risk, the main losers might well be the people of Bosnia, and we need to consider that carefully before a decision is reached.

    Mr. John Smith : While appreciating the concern that the Prime Minister expresses for the humanitarian efforts, and for the safety of our own troops on the ground, does the right hon. Gentleman not appreciate that there is a growing feeling in this country, as there is in the international community, that there is no point in a no-fly zone which can be defied with such impunity? The time has come for effective international action. I hope that the Prime Minister will take the message from the House that he would be widely supported if Britain supported the other countries in making the resolution effective.

    The Prime Minister : We have never ruled out the possible need to enforce the zone, but, with our allies and partners, we must consider very carefully how the zone is to be enforced and what the effect of enforcement would be on the maintenance of humanitarian effort, which none of us wishes to see end, either this side of Christmas or long after, and on the safety of our troops. Other measures may be brought to bear, and those are all being considered.

     

    Q2. Mr. Anthony Coombs : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 December.

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

    Mr. Coombs : Does my right hon. Friend agree that, in addition to the great success of the Edinburgh summit, we have seen a further example of European co-operation–the successful agreement on the development of the European fighter aircraft? Does my right hon. Friend also agree that that aircraft is vital to Britain’s defence interests, and is good news for the defence industry and for the 40, 000 people throughout the country whose jobs are closely associated with the project?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. The agreement reached by the four Defence Ministers on 10 December means that the development of a new fighter–to be known as Eurofighter 2000–will go ahead. I warmly congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on his part in ensuring that. The agreement is very good news for our aerospace industry and for everyone who works in it. It will also mean that the Royal Air Force will have a combat aircraft with the capabilities required in the first quarter of the next century.

    Mr. Beith : Can the Prime Minister give miners and their families an assurance that not one of the pits recently closed will be prevented from reopening by failure to maintain them while the review takes place? If the right hon. Gentleman cannot do that, what value can we place on the review?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman can place great value on the review. It is open, and we have made it perfectly clear that it is open. It is clear, too, that British Coal is perfectly aware of the undertaking given by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to maintain the pits during the interim period, and I believe that it is doing that.

     

    Milton Keynes (Visit)

    Q3. Mr. Butler : To ask the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to Milton Keynes.

    The Prime Minister : I am making plans for a series of visits to all parts of the country, and I hope to include Buckinghamshire among them.

    Mr. Butler : Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the past 12 months the private sector has invested a record £374 million in Milton Keynes, helping to create 6,500 new jobs? Is that not an excellent example of something that we are seeing throughout the country–a fully justified growth in business confidence?

    The Prime Minister : I think that we shall see a good deal more of that in the months to come–not least because of the very good news on inflation, which on Friday fell to 3 per cent. We also had figures today to show that factory gate inflation is at its lowest level for a generation. That is the clearest possible sign that we have yet seen that we are winning the battle against inflation, which is vital to industry, commerce, investment and jobs. It is precisely because of those successes that we now have the lowest interest rates in the European Community and a very solid platform for industrial recovery next year.

     

    Engagements

    Q4. Mr. Gareth Wardell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 December.

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

    Mr. Wardell : As Christmas approaches and we witness the crisis of despair among the homeless not only in London but in cities such as Swansea, will the Prime Minister recognise that his vision of a classless society is rapidly receding and that our failure to embrace a growing underclass is beginning to undermine the very basis of Britain’s being considered a democracy?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman may not know that the latest count by voluntary organisations last month found a drop of nearly 60 per cent. in the number of rough sleepers since the Government’s initiative some time ago. The hon. Gentleman appears not to have heard about that initiative : with Government funding of nearly £100 million, it is providing new hostel places in central London and 3,000 more permanent places are being provided or planned. More action is being taken to help the homeless now than has been taken for many years.

    Mr. Trend : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the Housing and Urban Development Bill, especially the parts that establish rent-to-mortgage schemes? Does he agree that it will create an excellent low-risk opportunity for young people to begin the process of owning their homes?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. We certainly want to continue to expand home ownership for young people and others. [Interruption.] Labour Members heckle, but then they have fought all our reforms of choice and ownership, time after time. They fought the right to buy, and now they are fighting the rent-to-mortgage scheme. The fact is that they do not trust people to make their own decisions about housing. They do not want people to be independent of the state, but we do : we believe in independence, home ownership and low taxation. That is why we are here and they are there.

     

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

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

    Mr. Enright : Is the Prime Minister aware that his right hon. and noble Friend Baroness Thatcher has been gallivanting through the United States of America, rubbishing Her Majesty’s Government’s presidency of the European Community and making huge sums of money out of it? Will he persuade her to give some of that money to the miners, who have been cruelly deprived–

    Madam Speaker : Order. I hardly think that someone’s travels have much to do with the Prime Minister. I think that we had better move on now.

    Mr. Deva : I welcome the agreement secured by my right hon. Friend in Edinburgh, which will lead to the immediate start of negotiations for the entry into the Community of Austria, Sweden and Finland. Does he agree that the British agenda is now an agenda for the whole of the EC?

    The Prime Minister : I agree : that is increasingly the position. We have achieved a significant turnaround in attitudes to the enlargement of the Community. At Edinburgh we won agreement for the immediate start of negotiations with Austria, Finland and Sweden, and for negotiations with Norway before too long. As my hon. Friend will be aware, we also won support for the eventual membership of the Visegrad countries. When I first proposed that in Paris less than two years ago, very few people supported it ; now it is Community policy.

     

    Nuclear Non-proliferation

    Q6. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

    The Prime Minister : The treaty on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, of which the United Kingdom is a depository state, remains the cornerstone of international efforts to prevent nuclear proliferation. Ten states have become parties in 1992, bringing the total to 155. We continue to work for universal adherence to the treaty, and for its indefinite extension in 1995.

    Mr. Dalyell : Can the House have a clear, unambiguous statement– given the contrary views of Mr. John Gordon, who was head of the Foreign Office nuclear energy unit from 1986 to 1988–that at no time did Britain infringe either article 1 or any other article of the 1968 non- proliferation treaty in relation to the sale of arms to Iraq or other countries in the middle east?

    The Prime Minister : It is Government policy to meet all our obligations under the non-proliferation treaty. Allegations that the United Kingdom may not have done so will be matters for Lord Justice Scott, and I think that that had better wait for his inquiry. I am aware of Iraqi claims. They are matters for Lord Justice Scott to investigate.

     

    Engagements

    Q7. Mrs. Jacqui Lait : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 15 December.

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

    Mrs. Lait : Has my right hon. Friend seen today’s reports that 1 million more free eye tests were given in 1991 than in 1990, and that there were 7 million more private tests? Is that not a demonstration of the success of the Health Secretary’s publicity policy on free tests?

    The Prime Minister : Indeed, it is. In this, as in much else to do with the national health service, the Labour party got it wrong in everything that it said at the time. It peddled stories that people would not have eyesight tests, but the reality is now clear : more people than ever before are doing so. They know that there is no purpose in listening to the Labour party on the national health service–it is always wrong.

  • PMQT – 18 June 1992

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 18th June 1992.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Official Visits

    Q1. Mr. Sumberg : To ask the Prime Minister when he next expects to pay an official visit to Bury.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : I shall be making further visits to many parts of the country and hope to include my hon. Friend’s constituency among them.

    Mr. Sumberg : Is my right hon. Friend aware that at tonight’s annual general meeting of the Bury, South Conservative association we shall celebrate our recent victories in the local and general elections and welcome my right hon. Friend’s recent speech on the citizen’s charter to the Adam Smith Institute, in which he made it absolutely clear that in the battle between the Goliaths, who want greater state intervention, and the Davids, who want greater individual freedom, he backs the Davids every time?

    The Prime Minister : I wish that I could be with my hon. Friend this evening for his celebrations. The people of Bury, South made a wise choice, and they certainly did in the general election. My hon. Friend is right : I want to see a change in attitude in many areas of public services. We need public services that meet what the public want, not what the so-called experts tell them they should have.

     

    Q2. Mr. Austin-Walker : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to pay an official visit to Woolwich.

    The Prime Minister : I will be making further visits to many parts of the country and hope to include different parts of London among them.

    Mr. Austin-Walker : Does the Prime Minister share the enthusiasm of the President of the Board of Trade for the economic regeneration of the east Thames corridor? Does he share the views of previous Secretaries of State for Transport that the Jubilee line is essential for that economic regeneration and that it can be achieved at far less cost to the Exchequer than building the east London river crossing and without the environmental damage that would ensue from the road?

    The Prime Minister : I hope that in due course we shall be able to proceed with the Jubilee line, but we shall wish to see the private sector contribution that we previously set as the sum necessary to ensure that we can proceed. Providing we can achieve that, I hope that we will be able to proceed with the Jubilee line. Economic regeneration is welcome everywhere.

     

    Engagements

    Q3. Sir Anthony Durant : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

    The Prime Minister : 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.

    Sir Anthony Durant : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the reduction in nuclear weapons that was agreed between President Bush and the Russian President is good news and is to be welcomed? However, will he assure the House and the nation that he will maintain strong United Kingdom defences within NATO and will continue with the Trident programme?

    The Prime Minister : I warmly welcome the announcements that were made after the meetings in Washington between President Bush and President Yeltsin. We shall certainly continue to maintain our own independent nuclear deterrent. We shall maintain it, build it, arm it and deploy Trident.

    Mr. Kinnock : On this day on which unemployment has gone above 2.7 million again, does the Prime Minister recall that it is exactly a year since he said that economic recovery would begin–and I use his words– “within weeks” and that Britain would come out of recession by the end of 1991? Why was he so absurdly wrong?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman will have been very pleased to see the economic indicators this week in the light of that remark–very pleased indeed. He will have been pleased to see that manufacturing production has risen for three months in a row for the first time in two years, that retail sales are up again, that the rate of increase in average earnings has slowed further to 7 per cent. and is now at its lowest level for 25 years. While the increase in unemployment is very unwelcome, it is clearly now slowing, so I think that the right hon. Gentleman can now see that we are on the road to recovery.

    Mr. Kinnock : I am always glad to see any movement out of the trough into which this Government’s policies have pushed the British people and the British economy, but, after the Chancellor’s statement yesterday that Britain is three years away from full recovery, as he put it, is not it clear that whenever the Prime Minister or the Chancellor have made optimistic comments about the economy, they have simply not been telling the truth to the British people?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman should not be misled by everything that he reads in newspaper headlines ; he should read the speech itself. He should recall that in January he relied a touch too heavily on a press report and criticised me when he was confusing taxes and interest rates. The reality was that what my right hon. Friend actually said yesterday was :

    “In two or three years’ time people will look back and see that it was now, at this critical juncture, that the right decision was taken.”

    He did not say that it would be two or three years before recovery.

    Mr. Kinnock : Is the Prime Minister giving us a date for recovery? He used to be very anxious so to do. I remind him that this time last year he said that it would start “within weeks”. This time last year he said that there would be recovery by the end of the year. Why is he much more coy now, a year later, in giving us a firm forecast on when Britain can rejoin the countries that enjoy some growth, since we have now had two years with negative growth under his Government?

    The Prime Minister : I think that the right hon. Gentleman should now know that we are on our way to recovery, and if the right hon. Gentleman wishes to know perhaps why the recovery was later than it might have been, I quote the words of the general secretary of the Labour party who claimed that the Labour party did not win the election because of the

    “fear of high tax, plus general unease about [Labour’s] economic competence.”

    That did no good at all while the right hon. Gentleman was boasting that he would be sitting on this side of the Chamber.

    Mr. Renton : While I hope that the Irish people will reach a positive conclusion in their referendum today, does my right hon. Friend agree that the holding of referendums on major constitutional issues runs contrary to the practice of parliamentary sovereignty in this country and that further, it would be impossible to boil down the many complex issues of the 134-page treaty of Maastricht into one short, but fair and comprehensive question? Further, has the Prime Minister noted–

    Madam Speaker : Order. One question.

    Mr. Renton : –the recent twists and turns on the European issue by the Labour leader?

    Madam Speaker : Order. The right hon. Gentleman is being very unfair in putting so many questions in a short space of time. I call the Prime Minister to answer the first two.

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my right hon. Friend’s comments on the subject of referendums. I believe that he states the classical position concerning parliamentary democracy.

     

    Q4. Mrs. Fyfe : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

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

    Mrs. Fyfe : As the Prime Minister says no to a devolved Scottish Parliament, against the wishes of the majority of the Scottish people, and also says no to a referendum on how Scotland should be governed, will he tell us to what, after 10 weeks of taking stock, he is prepared to say yes?

    The Prime Minister : I shall tell the hon. Lady when we have concluded taking stock.

     

    Q5. Mr. Evennett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

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

    Mr. Evennett : I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his excellent speech to the Adam Smith Institute, in which he advocated more choice and opportunity for the less privileged in our society. Does he agree that we have a lot to do for our inner cities–and in particular that we must ensure that standards in inner-city schools are raised?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly agree with my hon. Friend about that. We are determined to raise standards in all our schools, and especially to deal with the problem that clearly exists in many of our inner-cities. I believe that school governors and education authorities must act quickly where inspectors’ reports show that standards are unacceptably low. That is too often the case in many of our inner-city schools, and the Government do not intend to stand idly by and see it continue.

    Mr. Ashdown : What will the Prime Minister do about unemployment, which is now rising inexorably towards 3 million? It is now two months since the election, and only a handful of weeks until school leavers come on to the register. Are the Government so consumed by self-satisfaction and so sunk in lethargy that they offer no hope, no policies and no action for those who are losing their jobs?

    The Prime Minister : I am in no sense satisfied with the level of unemployment in this country, and I have made that clear before. We need the right sort of economic policy, which will sustain long-term employment prospects ; that is what we are putting into place and we shall ensure that we achieve it.

    When the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) asks for action he means short-term subsidy–that is what he is really asking for. His only answer is to subsidise the inefficient, the uneconomic and the out of date. No wonder the Liberal Democrats have so much in common with the official Opposition.

     

    Q6. Sir Michael Neubert : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 June.

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

    Sir Michael Neubert : Is the Prime Minister aware that a distinguished predecessor and former Minister for administrative affairs– Mr. Jim Hacker–reaches pensionable age today? In the spirit of that great statesman, I, too, welcome the Prime Minister’s speech to the Adam Smith Institute this week. I also ask my right hon. Friend to urge his colleagues at tomorrow’s citizens charter seminar at No. 10 to press forward with further improvements to our public services. In particular, will he tell us whether we can expect the publication of a courts charter, to deal with the interminable delays to which so much of our law is subject?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, my hon. Friend touches an important matter, which causes frustration for many of our fellow citizens. We are proceeding to produce a courts charter and I hope that we shall be able to make announcements about it before too long.

     

    Libya (Sanctions)

    Q7. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on representations from Arab countries about sanctions against Libya.

    The Prime Minister : We have had various approaches from Arab countries about sanctions against Libya. We and the Arab League share the same objective–to see a satisfactory outcome to the Lockerbie problem. This, as the Arab League well knows, will require Libya’s full compliance with United Nations Security Council resolution 731.

    Mr. Dalyell : In the light of my two letters to the Prime Minister on this subject, will he consider putting in the Library a response to the cover story of Time magazine–not exactly a publication of the left–which challenges the whole basis of the Anglo-American position? Will the right hon. Gentleman also consider approaching Spain on the legal proceedings relating to Monzer al Kassar, a Syrian drugs and arms dealer?

    The Prime Minister : I saw the article in Time magazine ; I examined it and sought advice on it. The theories about involvement and links with drugs are not new. They were thoroughly examined by the police during the investigation and were discounted at that stage, at the conclusion of the investigation. No evidence has yet been found to link the Syrian, al Kassar, to Lockerbie–but I shall, of course, examine the matter again in view of the hon. Gentleman’s representations.

    Mr. Wilkinson : Can my right hon. Friend enlighten the House about any dealings between Government officials and the Government of Libya over links between the Libyan regime and the Irish Republican Army? Has the IRA received any supplies from Libya recently? Have the Libyan authorities given assurances to the Government that they will not continue to supply the IRA?

    The Prime Minister : The Libyans have provided some information to the Government about their relationships with the IRA ; they did so in Geneva on 9 June. The preliminary assessment of that information suggests that although in places it was incomplete and unsatisfactory, it contains some positive elements which may well prove useful. One positive development is the fact that the Libyans have indicated to us that they wish to cease providing assistance to the IRA. We are not convinced that that is yet the case.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 22 July 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 22nd July 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Greenhouse Gases

    Mr. Frank Cook : To ask the Prime Minister what steps have been taken by Her Majesty’s Government to stabilise the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to combat global warming.

    The Prime Minister : The Environment White Paper (Cm. 1200) sets out the first set of measures to limit the United Kingdom’s carbon dioxide emissions and we will publish a report in the autumn showing how our efforts are being put into practice.

     

    Nuclear Weapons

    Mr. Cryer : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to raise nuclear non-proliferation with his Chinese counterpart.

    The Prime Minister : As a depository state of the nuclear non- proliferation treaty, it is our policy to take every opportunity both to raise the importance of nuclear non-proliferation with all non-parties to the NPT and to lobby them to accede to the NPT as soon as possible.

    Mr. Cryer : To ask the Prime Minister what is Her Majesty’s Government’s current assessment of the capability of (a) Israel and (b) Pakistan to make a nuclear weapon.

    The Prime Minister : We have no firm evidence either to confirm or to deny rumours that Israel may have a nuclear weapons programme. As regards Pakistan, I refer the hon. Member to the reply my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs gave him on 27 February at column 497.

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister what recent ministerial meetings have taken place with other depository powers of the non-proliferation treaty; what matters relating to the treaty were discussed; and what future meetings he proposes to hold in 1991.

    The Prime Minister : The Government attach great importance to nuclear non-proliferation and the subject is frequently raised during bilateral ministerial meetings with the United States and the Soviet Union. However, no recent ministerial meetings specifically to discuss the NPT have taken place nor are any currently planned. Regular trilateral and bilateral meetings of the depository powers of the NPT take place at official level, most recently in June.

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Mr. Graham : To ask the Prime Minister how many Government Ministers have visited Renfrew, West and Inverclyde on official business since 1987; and if he will list the events and the Ministers concerned.

    The Prime Minister : The information can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

     

    Mr. Colin Wallace

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will institute a full review, under the direction of the head of the civil service, of the case of Mr. Colin Wallace with a view to (a) bringing to book those responsible for conspiring to pervert the due process of the Civil Service Appeal Board, (b) ensuring that those responsible for misleading Ministers so as to mislead Parliament are disciplined and (c) that safeguards are put in place to prevent a repetition of these events.

    The Prime Minister : No. I do not accept the hon. Member’s description of what occurred. Safeguards are already in place to prevent a repetition of what went wrong.

     

    Army Boards of Inquiry

    Mr. John Browne : To ask the Prime Minister if he will bring forward legislation to require Army boards of inquiry in cases which may lead to claims for compensation (a) to provide full discovery of documents to those seeking to prove negligence, (b) to take evidence in person from all relevant witnesses and (c) to recommend ex gratia payments in special circumstances.

    The Prime Minister : There are no plans to introduce such legislation.

     

    Migrant Workers

    Dr. Godman : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow on 1 July, Official Report, column 35, when the hon. Gentleman can expect to receive a letter on migrant workers; and if he will place a copy of his letter in the Library.

    The Prime Minister : I have replied to the hon. Member today.

     

    Government Expenditure

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister what are the sizes of the total committed and target expenditure by Her Majesty’s Government for the next financial year on (a) the environment, (b) overseas aid and (c) defence.

    The Prime Minister : Table 4.4 of the statistical supplement (Cm. 1520) sets out the latest plans for central Government expenditure on environmental services, overseas aid and defence in 1992-93. Data on local authority plans for expenditure on environmental services in 1992-93 are not available.

     

    EC Intervention Grain

    Mr. Michael : To ask the Prime Minister whether he will make it his policy to press for the grain stored by the EC to be used to combat the plight of people who currently face starvation in Africa.

    The Prime Minister : The European Commission is already using substantial quantities of grain drawn from intervention stocks to meet the needs of the special programme of food aid for Africa which was agreed in May. We strongly support this, when appropriate cereals are available and their use is cost-effective. Many surplus commodities held in stock, including cereals such as barley are, however, not generally suitable for use as emergency food aid.

     

    Bank of Credit and Commerce International

    Mr. Vaz : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 17 July, what was the actual date on which he was told of the fraud.

    The Prime Minister : I was informed on 28 June.

    Mr. Vaz : To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 17 July, what action he took, with regard to BCCI, following the information given to him that there was fraud.

    The Prime Minister : The action, following the uncovering of the widespread fraud, was for the Bank of England, using its statutory powers. The Government entirely supported the action they proposed to take.

  • PMQT – 18 July 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 18th July 1991. John MacGregor responded on behalf of John Major.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 July.

    The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John MacGregor) : I have been asked to reply My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is conducting bilateral discussions with President Gorbachev.

    Mr. Hinchliffe : In view of the embarrassing revelations that the Secretary of State for Employment knew in June 1990 of possible embezzlement and fraud at BCCI and that the Department of Trade and Industry stated that it has not received the letters which the right hon. and learned Gentleman says he sent to it on the matter, will the Leader of the House, as a matter of urgency, set up a full and independent inquiry into the whole sorry affair?

    Mr. MacGregor : My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Employment received a letter from the BCCI staff which primarily expressed concern about redundancy arrangements at the bank. He received also a copy of a covering letter which the association sent to the right hon. Member for Chesterfield (Mr. Benn). My right hon. and learned Friend wrote to the right hon. Member for Chesterfield on these matters and, as far as I know, the right hon. Gentleman did not come back to him on them.

    As for the second part of the hon. Gentleman’s supplementary question, I understand that the matter is being looked into at this very moment.

    Sir Fergus Montgomery : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 July.

    Mr. MacGregor : I have been asked to reply.

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

    Sir Fergus Mongomery : Does my right hon. Friend agree that if a member of the Cabinet was accused publicly by his colleagues of being unwise, unprincipled and responsible for confusion, he should do the decent thing and resign? If he agrees with that principle, and if he has noticed an item on the front page of The Guardian, should not the shadow Foreign Secretary resign?

    Mr. MacGregor : I say to my hon. Friend– [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order. I think that the supplementary question was in order.

    Mr. MacGregor : I cannot imagine any of my colleagues saying such a thing about any member of the Cabinet. If my hon. Friend is referring to the comments in the press this morning of the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) about the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Mr. Kaufman), I was interested that he said,

    “Everybody knows”–

    this is the statement on defence–

    “it’s a policy change, but no one is admitting it.”

    If the right hon. Gentleman says, “We will not get rid of nuclear weapons under any circumstances”, that really is a change. This demonstrates that the Labour party– [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order. The Lord President should relate his reply to Government policy.

    Mr. MacGregor : Government policy is very clear on the nuclear question, but the Opposition cannot, even now, give a simple answer to a simple question about their defence policy.

    Mr. Hattersley : I look forward to receiving a simple answer to a simple question. Does the Leader of the House share the view expressed by the director general of the Confederation of British Industry on the “Today” programme this morning that Britain is no longer suffering from a depression but from a slump?

    Mr. MacGregor : I share the view– [Laughter.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order. This takes up a lot of time.

    Mr. MacGregor : I will give the right hon. Gentleman a simple answer to his question. The CBI’s director general said on the “Today” programme this morning :

    “The manufacturing side of our economy is in much better international shape than it’s been for many years.”

    That is a much simpler answer than the right hon. Gentleman and other Opposition Members have given on the nuclear issue for many months.

    Mr. Hattersley : It may have been a simple answer to someone’s question, but not mine. Can the Leader of the House attempt to justify his evasive answer having seen, as I suspect he has, the European Community’s judgment on the British economy? It is that British investment will fall next year, while German investment will increase by 6 per cent. ; and that unemployment in Great Britain will rise to more than 3 million next year, accounting for more than half the total increase throughout the whole Community. If that is not a slump, how would the right hon. Gentleman define one?

    Mr. MacGregor : We made it clear in the Budget forecast that recovery would begin in the second half and that view is shared by the CBI and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. As to the European Commission’s predictions on unemployment, I point out that it does not have a good record of making accurate forecasts. It indicated that unemployment in Germany would rise and it has not; and that employment in France would grow and it did not ; and it asserted that training skill levels for school leavers were lower in West Germany than in Greece–and I do not think that anyone else believes that. I suspect that the Commission’s unemployment forecast will turn out to be as accurate as that of the right hon. Gentleman in the 1983 general election, when he forecast that unemployment in this country would rise to 4 million–and it never did.

    Mr. Hattersley : The Leader of the House does not seem to have a good record when it comes to remembering the Prime Minister’s forecasts. In the House last week, the Prime Minister revised his forecast for recovery from the second half of this year to round about Christmas. Is not the truth that now that the glitz and glamour of the G7 summit is over, we are back in the real world of Britain’s economic situation–and that real world is a catastrophe, caused by the Conservatives’ policy of the past 10 years?

    Mr. MacGregor : The most important things for long-term prosperity and for jobs are to get inflation down, as we are doing and which Labour singularly failed to do, and to keep public expenditure under control and at reasonable levels, which Labour also singularly failed to do. The right hon. Gentleman may remember that at the last general election, he committed Labour to increasing public expenditure by some £34 billion. Labour is at it again and that would be a real recipe for disaster for growth in the early part of the 1990s.

     

    Q3. Mr. Bevan : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 July.

    Mr. MacGregor : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave a few moments ago.

    Mr. Bevan : While we welcome the impending nuclear disarmament that will emanate from the G7 summit, does my right hon. Friend agree that Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent would be put at risk, and could lose all credibility, if we cancelled the fourth Trident submarine–as Labour proposes to do?

    Mr. MacGregor : I share my hon. Friend’s strong welcome for the agreement on the START negotiations that was reached yesterday and I am sure that the House shares that welcome. However, my hon. Friend was right to draw attention to the sham of Labour’s defence policy. Not only is it totally confusing, but although they will keep nuclear weapons for negotiations, on the other hand they totally undermine the credibility of our deterrent. Four Trident submarines are essential to ensure that one is on station all the time.

    Mr. Madden : Why are the Government trying to gloss over the background to the closure of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International? Why are they refusing to hold an inquiry into the Bank of England’s role? What advice did the Treasury give to local authorities around the country? Most of all, what did the right hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley) do with the correspondence alleging corruption and negligence inside the bank which he apparently received from the present Secretary of State for Employment?

    Mr. MacGregor : There is absolutely no glossing over. Obviously, we are all concerned about what has happened to a number of small depositors and borrowers at BCCI. The important thing now is for the Bank and the liquidator to get on with the practical arrangements and to move as fast as possible. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has already said that he will be reviewing what happened and will see what lessons can be learnt from it. The hon. Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Madden) will be aware that the Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee is meeting next week and that the Governor of the Bank of England will give evidence to it. Obviously many questions can be asked about what has happened over that period. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no question of trying to cover up and no question of a sham.

     

    Q4. Mr. David Nicholson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his engagements for Thursday 18 July 1991.

    Mr. MacGregor : I have been asked to reply.

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

    Mr. Nicholson : Does my right hon. Friend agree that if the European regional funds, from which businesses in my constituency are unlikely to benefit significantly, were massively increased, the result would be a heavy cost to the British taxpayer? Does he also agree that it would be the height of irresponsibility to recommend such a policy without working out or stating honestly its cost? Is not that what we have come to expect from the shadow Foreign Secretary and the Labour party?

    Mr. MacGregor : My hon. Friend is referring to some of the practical issues that arise out of moving very quickly to convergence and why it is right to take the view that the Government take in relation to economic and monetary union and moving to a single currency. If one moved to convergence very quickly and that required a very big increase in regional funds very early, it would mean taking more money from taxpayers in Scotland to give to Sicily.

     

    Q5. Mr. Salmond : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his engagements for Thursday 18 July 1991.

    Mr. MacGregor : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave a few moments ago.

    Mr. Salmond : What information, if any, was supplied by the Bank of England to Treasury Ministers, including the present Prime Minister, on the contents of the October 1990 Price Waterhouse report indicating serious fraud in BCCI? Does the Leader of the House accept that if it can be established that Ministers or the regulatory authorities had knowledge well before June this year of serious fraud in that bank, the Government cannot continue to wash their hands of the financial disaster facing depositors and local authorities?

    Mr. MacGregor : The hon. Gentleman is probably referring to the Price Waterhouse report of March 1990. He said October, but I understand that it was in March. We are probably talking about the same report. The Bank had given the Treasury explicit assurances that although previous audit reports showed evidence of poor banking standards and losses–this applies to all these reports–they provided no evidence on which it could act in respect of the widespread fraud that was subsequently uncovered in the section 41 report. The evidence of bad banking standards and losses was being tackled by injections of capital from shareholders and by substantial management changes. It was the change in management that ultimately led to the discovery of extensive fraud, which led to the section 41 investigation. That was the first time that the Bank had evidence of serious and widespread fraud on which to take action.

    Mr. Knapman : Does my right hon. Friend recall the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Romford (Sir M. Neubert) on Tuesday and the slur and slander by the general secretary of the Labour party on the President of the United States and particularly on the President’s manner of election? Has my right hon. Friend received any indication from the Leader of the Opposition that he wishes to dissociate himself– [Interruption.]

    Mr. Speaker : Order. This matter is not the Government’s responsibility. [Interruption.] This is taking time. Let us move on.

     

    Q6. Mr. Douglas : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 18 July.

    Mr. MacGregor : I have been asked to reply.

    I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave a few moments ago.

    Mr. Douglas : While not being too thirled to statistics, although they are important, will the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge that the rate of unemployment in the United Kingdom and Scotland is dramatically high and is producing great suffering? Will the Government and the right hon. Gentleman in particular stop behaving like a cross between a pit bull terrier and a Scot–a Scots terrier– [Interruption.] –the type of dog which would ravage us first and then scurry away to get the ambulance. When the ambulance man comes along, he pours on the iodine and says, “If it isn’t hurting, it isn’t working.” It is hurting, but it ain’t working because it is producing great suffering on the part of the people of Scotland and many unfulfilled opportunities.

    Mr. MacGregor : Obviously we regret any increase in unemployment, because it affects families very substantially, but it is important to keep the matter in context. If one looks at the other side of the coin, one will see that there are 1 million more jobs than there were in 1979. We have more jobs in this country than most other countries as a proportion of the working population.

    We are taking extensive measures to deal with unemployment, particularly the longer-term unemployed. It is significant that about half of all the unemployed find jobs within three months. It is also quite reasonable to point out that a wide variety of the measures that the main Opposition party is putting forward would increase unemployment, destroy part-time jobs, impose extra burdens on industry and therefore make the position much worse.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 15 April 1991

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 15th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Iraq

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister what representations Her Majesty’s Government have received from international doctors about disease in Iraq.

    The Prime Minister : We have received a number of reports about conditions in Iraq, notably that of United Nations Under Secretary-General Ahtisaari. We have announced a pledge of £20 million to be spent partly bilaterally and multilaterally to alleviate the human tragedy provoked by Saddam Hussein. We are also funding daily airlifts to the refugees at a cost of £1 million per week. These contributions are in addition to earlier substantial pledges to the International Committee of the Red Cross and United Nation agencies’ appeals.

     

    Chile

    Mr. Wray : To ask the Prime Minister if, during the official visit of the President of Chile, the Government will offer improved terms of trade for Chilean exports, and increased transfer of technology and financial support for his programmes.

    The Prime Minister : Chile will benefit from any market access concessions negotiated with the European Community during the GATT round. We increased our bilateral technical co-operation funds for Chile following the accession of President Aylwin’s Government and are presently discussing a number of projects.

    President Aylwin’s visit will lead to closer links between Britain and Chile. I was able to pay tribute to the President’s achievement in restoring and consolidating democracy.

     

    Nuclear Weapons

    Mr. Allen : To ask the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to use nuclear weapons first in response to a conventional attack.

    The Prime Minister : The 1990 NATO London declaration made clear that, while NATO will never in any circumstances be the first to use force, nuclear weapons will continue to fulfil an essential role in the overall strategy of the alliance to prevent war by ensuring that there are no circumstances in which nuclear retaliation in response to military action might be discounted.

     

    Migrant Workers

    Mr. Flynn : To ask the Prime Minister what is Her Majesty’s Government’s policy towards ratification of the new international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and their families.

    The Prime Minister : The United Kingdom does not intend to ratify the convention on the protection of migrant workers and their families.

     

    Vehicle Theft

    Mr. Cohen : To ask the Prime Minister if he will set up a joint working party of the Home Office and Department of Transport to investigate the possibility of designing cars to be more resistant to theft.

    The Prime Minister : The Home Office and Department of Transport have investigated ways in which the security of cars could be improved and discussions are in progress between these Departments, and with the motor manufacturers, on how best their findings and recommendations may be implemented. Home Office crime prevention publicity, particularly during crime prevention week this week, aims to increase awareness of the need for effective car security measures. My right Friend the Home Secretary published today a car theft index which allows owners to see which models are particularly subject to theft.