The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Rwanda

  • PMQT – 19 July 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 19th July 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Burns : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 19 July.

    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. Burns : Does my right hon. Friend agree with the conclusion that the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development drew from its perspicacious study of the British economy that the route to higher output, lower unemployment and lower inflation is through sound public finances and deregulation, not placing additional burdens and red tape on business, as advocated by the Opposition parties?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly recommend the OECD report to the House for what it says on both the economy and the health service. I hope that Opposition Members will take time to read it–I know that they have been preoccupied, but it is a good read. The point about the OECD report is that it recognises that the policies that the Government have pursued have helped to transform our economic prospects, which are better now than I can remember for many years–we intend to keep them that way.

    Mrs. Beckett : Does the Prime Minister agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that in this country we still exempt far too many goods and services from value added tax?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Lady should read all that my right hon. and learned Friend said yesterday before selectively misquoting what he said. I shall remind the right hon. Lady what my right hon. and learned Friend said in reply to the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) who is chatting on the front Bench. My right hon. and learned Friend said:

    “It is utterly pathetic to come out with constituency letters in which I merely state my long-stated and well-known view that if we were starting again we might have a lower rate of VAT and fewer exemptions. As he knows, that is not policy now”.–[ Official Report, 18 July 1994 ; Vol.247, c.59.]

    Mrs. Beckett : But the Prime Minister is doing it again–he is running away from the question. I am asking him whether he agrees with the Chancellor that too few goods and services are subject to VAT. Surely he knows the answer to that. Most people in this country believe that too much is already subject to VAT and they want to know whether the Government are, as it now appears, looking for an opportunity to put VAT on fares, books or children’s clothes. It seems that the Government want to do that. Will the Prime Minister now admit it?

    The Prime Minister : Besides listening to what I said a moment ago, the right hon. Lady might care to look at what I said in the House on 14 June, 17 May and 25 January this year, and on 19 October, 6 May, 23 March and 18 March last year. If she is concerned about extra value added tax, perhaps she will tell me whether she agrees with the hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair), who has said in relation to VAT on private schools and private medical care :

    “That is something specifically being looked at”.

    Mrs. Beckett : Surely the Prime Minister realises that the Chancellor has yet again let the cat out of the bag, by giving an indication that the Government want to put VAT on fares, children’s clothes and books. The Prime Minister was willing enough to deny his intentions on VAT before the election, when he was seeking votes, so why is he not prepared to come clean now? Does not the Tory party have a party addiction to VAT ; and is not that addiction damaging the budget of every British family?

    The Prime Minister : So much for a clear denial of extending VAT to private medical health care–we can draw our own conclusions from that.

    As for our policy, I refer the right hon. Lady again to what my right hon. and learned Friend said yesterday. As the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) knows–he is raising this scare again–this is not our policy now and we are not starting again. I see no likelihood of extending VAT. I look forward to a clear denial of what the hon. Member for Sedgefield (Mr. Blair) said the other day about his plans to put VAT on private education.

    Mr. Nicholas Winterton : During his very busy day, will my right hon. Friend accept an invitation from me to visit Macclesfield, which has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country and where manufacturing industry has a very meaningful presence? Will he also accept an invitation to sample the culinary expertise of my constituent, Mrs. Annie May of Sutton, which is near Macclesfield, who won the Good Housekeeping recipe competition and gave her £10,000 first prize to Save the Children Fund? Is not that an example of the success of private enterprise and social concern and involvement?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend’s– [Interruption.] I know it is the end of term : relax. My hon. Friend’s invitation is irresistible. On a date that I cannot yet give him, I shall be happy to accept it.

    As my hon. Friend rightly says, unemployment is falling and has been falling for quite a long time–almost since the shadow Chancellor predicted that it would go up month after month.

    Mr. Ashdown : Will the Prime Minister list what steps Britain is taking to assist in Rwanda and what further steps he proposes to relieve suffering and save lives from the terrible catastrophe taking place today on Rwanda’s borders?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. Gentleman may know, we have already provided air lifts to help with the food required in Rwanda. They are likely to continue. We are liaising with our partners on what may be done.

    Mr. Budgen : Will my right hon. Friend explain why he has decided not to take the opportunity to make a formal statement on the important choice of Mr. Santer as president of the European Commission? Also, why does he not explain why he proposes the appointment of the right hon. Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock) as a Commissioner–an appointment which will give much pleasure to all members of the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : Upon the latter point, no formal decision has been made. When I have a decision to announce I will announce it. As for a statement, none was necessary. If any hon. Member thought that it was necessary, but not forthcoming, he would no doubt have tabled a private notice question.

     

    Q2. Mr. Lewis : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 19 July.

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

    Mr. Lewis : Does the Prime Minister concede that the 1988 changes in the television concessionary licence scheme have proved to be very unfair– even more than they were previously–and that now that it has been determined that the Government will continue the television licence, will he not now return to 1988 and install some fairness into the system, for all pensioners?

    The Prime Minister : I do not think that returning to 1988 is an easy proposition, but I note the point that the hon. Gentleman makes.

     

    Industrial Relations

    Q3. Mr. Bates : To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the change in industrial relations in the United Kingdom since the 1970s.

    The Prime Minister : The strike statistics speak for themselves. There were fewer strikes last year than in any year since records began. Legislation to establish a fair framework for industrial relations has been a key element in attracting inward investment and creating jobs.

    Mr. Bates : As 2 million passengers brace themselves for another day of disruption on our railways, caused by the inflation-busting pay demand of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, can my right hon. Friend confirm that some 75,000 members of the RMT pay their political levy to the Labour party and have been eligible to vote in the Labour party’s leadership elections?

    The Prime Minister : I was not aware of that, but 75,000 is an awful lot of potential votes. Perhaps we will get a clear condemnation of the strike now that the ballot has closed.

     

    Engagements

    Q4. Mr. Barnes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 19 July.

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

    Mr. Barnes : The next Prime Minister’s Question Time is in exactly 13 weeks time. That is three whole months. What does the Prime Minister think should be done to respond to the representations of Members of Parliament in the meantime? What avenues are supposed to be available to us?

    The Prime Minister : The same avenues that have been available to every Government since 1945, including those available to Members of Parliament under previous Labour Governments.

    Mr. Paice : Can my right hon. Friend confirm that, as a result of pressure from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and our right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, the German Government have withdrawn their totally unwarranted threat to ban British beef? Will he congratulate the European Commission on using sound scientific evidence as the basis for decision making and encourage it to do likewise with future scientific matters?

    The Prime Minister : I should certainly be happy to do that and am happy on this occasion to offer my congratulations on the way in which the matter has been handled in Europe. I think that it has been handled very well. The Chief Medical Officer has repeatedly made it clear throughout the saga that British beef can safely be eaten by anyone, both adults and children, including patients in hospital. I am delighted that Germany has confirmed that unilateral measures will not now enter into force. I think that that shows that the whole of the Community, including Germany, now accepts that British beef is safe.

     

    Q5. Mr. Simpson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 19 July.

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

    Mr. Simpson : Does the Prime Minister accept that the £500,000 retirement hand-out paid by Severn Trent Water to its former chairman will go down as the most expensive disconnection in the history of the water industry? Will he explain why, at the end of the 12th wettest winter since 1727, and facing a 67 per cent. increase in their bills to pay for a 60 per cent. increase in profits and a 30 per cent. increase in the top wage increases of management, the public cannot water their own blooming gardens? Does not that amount to one privatisation cock-up too far?

    The Prime Minister : On the earlier part of the hon. Gentleman’s question, as I have said before, I would expect the shareholders and the regulator to question carefully any salary or payment that proved to be excessive. As for the general question of water privatisation, I think that even the hon. Gentleman will concede that, after years of under investment, there is now a substantial investment to deal with environmental matters, of precisely the sort that Opposition Members have asked for for years.

     

    Q6. Dr. Liam Fox : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 19 July.

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

    Dr. Fox : How much of the fall in Britain’s unemployment and the rise in Britain’s competitiveness does my right hon. Friend attribute to the Government’s supply side reforms, especially labour law reform? Does he think that there is any case for dismantling our labour law reforms and trade union reforms, as suggested by Labour leadership candidates?

    The Prime Minister : It is difficult to quantify precisely how much, but I have no doubt that they have had a significant effect. Equally, there is no doubt that a peaceful workplace is a prosperous one. I certainly assure my hon. Friend that, unlike Opposition Members, I have no plans to sweep the board clean and start again.

     

    Q7. Mr. Canavan : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 19 July.

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

    Mr. Canavan : On the question of VAT which was put by my right hon. Friend the Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett), may I ask the Prime Minister to give us a straight answer to a straight question : will he name one thing, just one thing, on which he will never ever impose VAT?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman should look at what I have said in the past when I have made it perfectly clear that I can see no circumstances ever when food would be subject to VAT, and I repeatedly set out the answers to the other points, on the many occasions that I quoted for the right hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett). Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would care to read them.

  • PMQT – 7 July 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 7th July 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Coastguard Service

    Q1. Mr. Kirkwood : To ask the Prime Minister what assessment he has made of whether the reduction in resources available to the coastguard service will prejudice safety at sea.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : The chief executive of the Coastguard Agency has confirmed that the resources available this year will enable the agency to fulfil its objectives on search and rescue and on oil and chemical spills. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport has given the House an assurance that he will not allow the efficiency gain that he is seeking to prejudice safety at sea.

    Mr. Kirkwood : Does the Prime Minister accept that the most efficient way to run the coastguard service would be to provide the existing complement of professional and auxiliary personnel–who know their own coastlines, seas and weather conditions–all the equipment, training and back-up that money can buy? Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House an assurance that he personally will refuse to sanction further efficiency savings in the coastguard service if there is any suggestion that they would prejudice safety at sea in future? After all, the Prime Minister himself may need the political equivalent of a breeches buoy before too long.

    The Prime Minister : Of course we would not do anything to prejudice safety at sea, which is self-evidently of vital importance. It is right to seek efficiency gains where it is thought that they will be available. The agency’s chief executive has joined other Department of Transport executive agencies in submitting proposals on how further efficiency gains may be made. I am sure that that is right. The greater the efficiency gain that can be made across the public service, the greater will be the saving to the taxpayer or the improvement in services elsewhere in the public service.

    Mr. Harris : I welcome my right hon. Friend’s answer and assurances, but would not it be quite wrong and unthinkable to apply to coastguard front-line services the 20 per cent. across-the-board cuts that are being considered for other aspects of the Department of Transport? That must be wrong and out of the question. Will my right hon. Friend ensure that that does not happen under any circumstances?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is running two things together. There is no presumption that the coastguard service must achieve a 20 per cent. reduction. What is sought is a 20 per cent. efficiency gain. I believe that that is achievable, and the chief executive is investigating how it may be achieved. As I said to the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood), that will not be at the expense of the security and safety of people at sea.

     

    Engagements

    Q2. Mr. Fatchett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 July.

    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.

    Mr. Fatchett : Is the Prime Minister aware that Railtrack board members have introduced a new working practice whereby they are paid £500 additional bonus–three times the basic wage of signal staff– simply to attend Railtrack meetings? Will the Prime Minister join me in agreeing that those additional payments are obscene? Will he take this opportunity to condemn Railtrack’s board for making those additional payments?

    The Prime Minister : I will certainly make inquiries about what the hon. Gentleman has alleged, and check whether it is true. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will also take the interests of the travelling public into account and condemn a strike for an 11 per cent. pay award, which far exceeds what is being paid to anyone else in the public sector. There is no justification for an award of that size at this time. I hope that negotiations will continue and that the strike will be swiftly settled.

    Mr. John Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend agree that a new offence of racial harassment–as recommended by the Select Committee on Home Affairs–together with new measures to tackle the publication of racist material, will be major steps forward in the fight against racial attacks?

    The Prime Minister : We abhor any crime in which any element of racial motivation is present. That is precisely why we have added to the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill a new offence to tackle that particular mischief. I believe that that is desirable, and will achieve widespread support among all shades of opinion.

    Mrs. Beckett : On Tuesday, the Leader of the House rejected doctors’ criticisms of the Government’s health service changes; today, the health service ombudsman has published strong criticism from patients. Are they wrong, too?

    The Prime Minister : Like the right hon. Lady, I have not yet had a chance to read the whole of the ombudsman’s report. The ombudsman examines a minority of the cases referred to him, and does not comment on the generality of health service treatment. I understand that some of the reports that have been evident earlier today have been repudiated by the commissioner, but, as I said, like the right hon. Lady, I have not yet had a chance to read the full report.

    Mrs. Beckett : But the Prime Minister must know, as I do, that it reveals a record number of complaints. Does he not recognise that the ombudsman, doctors, nurses, patients and Opposition Members are all saying the same thing–that the Government’s health service changes are making matters worse? When will the Prime Minister drop them?

    The Prime Minister : I think that the whole House will have noted that the right hon. Lady did not say that she had read the report about which she claims to be speaking so authoritatively. Of course we will take the Health Service Commissioner’s report seriously : we are anxious to ensure that the health service continues to improve, and, according to the test set out by the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook), it is. He said that the test of the reforms was whether more patients were treated. They are–1 million more every year.

    Mrs. Beckett : Is the Prime Minister denying that the report shows a record number of complaints this year? Is he denying that? I doubt it very much. Only under the present Government would a record number of complaints be regarded as evidence of success. Does the Prime Minister recognise that the health service changes are hurting but certainly not working, and that, while he may sack the present Secretary of State for Health, he also needs to scrap the policies and start putting patients first?

    The Prime Minister : The reforms are precisely about putting patients first. That is why the number of patients treated in hospital has grown by record amounts, the quality of care has improved immeasurably and the number of patients waiting, and almost all waiting times, have fallen. That is an improvement in care. As for complaints, it was precisely with the aim of addressing the issues highlighted by the Health Service Commissioner that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State established a committee, under Professor Wilson, to carry out a thorough review of complaints procedure. That report was published for consultation in May. We anticipated concern about the matter, and have already put in hand measures to deal with it.

    Miss Emma Nicholson : Does my right hon. Friend agree that bed space is no longer the determinant of a nation’s health care policy, and that when a nation has many beds that is likely to be because epidemiology is not the advanced science that it is in the United Kingdom today?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right. The proper judgment of how well the health service is performing is based, first, on the number of people who are treated and, secondly, on how satisfactorily they are treated. On both those measures, the health service continues to improve.

     

    UN Security Council

    Q3. Dr. Godman : To ask the Prime Minister whether he discussed the membership, structure and functions of the Security Council of the United Nations when he last met the leaders of the other member states of the European Union; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : I did not discuss those matters when I last met European leaders in Corfu.

    Dr. Godman : President Nelson Mandela said recently that Rwanda is a stern and severe rebuke to us all. That surely holds for the disgracefully inept and irresponsible Security Council. Does not the Prime Minister agree that there is an urgent need for the Council to solve the problems of financing and manning peacekeeping operations so that United Nations resolutions can more effectively and efficiently be implemented? Given the mess that the Security Council is in, financially and structurally, most UN resolutions are utterly unenforceable.

    The Prime Minister : I share the horror and revulsion felt by many people, including the hon. Gentleman, about the terrible suffering in Rwanda. That is undoubtedly the case. I do not entirely share the hon. Gentleman’s strictures about the Security Council. It is not practicable for the Security Council–it simply does not have the resources in terms of cash or money, nor is it likely to have in the short term

    Mr. Skinner : Cash or money?

    The Prime Minister : It is not Britain that is behind in its payments to the UN. The hon. Gentleman, as usual, wishes to criticise this country, with a complete absence of the facts when he does so. The Security Council has become increasingly effective over recent years, and many of the measures set down by it, many of the motions passed by it and many of the actions taken by it are far more effective than in previous years. It simply is not practicable for it to become the policeman of every part of the world.

     

    Engagements

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

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

    Mr. Viggers : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the sweeping reforms that we carried out in the national health service in 1991 have inevitably led to controversy and criticism, both malevolent and constructive and positive? Is he aware that, unlike the right hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett), who leads for the Opposition, I took the trouble to read the report of the health service ombudsman? I noted in particular paragraph 1, where he summarises the rest of the report, which I have also read, and refers to the number of complaints as being “remarkably small”. Does my right hon. Friend agree that our reforms have been extremely successful, with more than 8 million people being treated in hospital this year? Will he join me in congratulating Portsmouth and South East Hampshire trust, which for the first time achieved the position whereby no one had to wait for more than a year for any operation?

    The Prime Minister : I am delighted to hear about that improvement in waiting lists and about the remarkably small number of complaints. I am interested to see that the right hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett) did not even get as far as the first paragraph in her studies. I share my hon. Friend’s view that we have every reason to be proud of what the national health service has achieved. The Labour party takes and deserves the credit for having established the national health service–no one would deny it that–but in the 45 years since the health service was established, the Conservative party has been predominantly in government, and that party has put in the resources to build up the health service from its early beginnings to its present excellence.

     

    Q5. Mr. Khabra : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 July.

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

    Mr. Khabra : Does the Prime Minister think it odd that a senior adviser to the Home Office on prison policy is also in the pay of Group 4, which is bidding to win contracts for building private prisons? Furthermore, does he agree that it is odd that an interest is definitely involved?

    The Prime Minister : I understand that the chief inspector of prisons has satisfied himself that there is no impropriety in that appointment and I am happy to accept that advice.

    Mr. Duncan Smith : Does my right hon. Friend agree that most of the public are concerned about people who commit crimes while out on bail? Will he strongly urge prosecutors to take up what we have given them–the right to appeal against bail being imposed on them?

    The Prime Minister : I believe that the vast majority of the public will entirely agree with what my hon. Friend has said. There is an opportunity there to be taken. I very much hope that it will be taken.

     

    Q6. Mrs. Ewing : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 7 July.

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

    Mrs. Ewing : Will the Prime Minister simply confirm or deny the fact that a Cabinet Committee, which he chaired this morning, decided to recommend the closure of Rosyth naval base?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Lady will have to wait, as far as any aspect of the defence costs study is concerned, for the Cabinet to consider the matter itself and for a statement subsequently to be made. Until that time, I have nothing to say either in confirmation or denial.

  • PMQT – 30 June 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 30th June 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Enright : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

    Mr. Enright : Given the 16 per cent. increase in productivity since the last pay settlement achieved by the signalling staff, how does the Prime Minister justify spending £500 million and cramming money into the pockets of already wealthy bankers and PR men, when a mere 1 per cent. of that would give those signalling men a living family wage?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman has overlooked the fact that the signalling men are demanding an 11 per cent. pay rise with no productivity or restructuring. That is self-evidently not a reasonable claim in present circumstances. I very much regret the fact that they rejected the Railtrack offer, and that therefore there has been continued suffering for rail travellers.

    What we should like to know clearly–yes or no–is whether the Opposition believe that these strikes should continue.

    Mr. Michael Brown : Does the Prime Minister recall the speech that he made at the Conservative party conference in 1992, when he asked who had ever heard of a cricketer, Len Hutton, turning out to play for the county of Humberside? Is he aware that on the table of the Secretary of State for the Environment is a recommendation to the Local Government Commission, supported by just about every Labour and Conservative Member representing Humberside, and every Labour and Conservative councillor in the area, welcoming the report? Will he urge the Secretary of State for the Environment to get rid of the county of Humberside and to implement the recommendations as soon as possible?

    The Prime Minister : I am sure that my right hon. Friend will have heard that plea. I think that there are many hon. Members on both sides of the House who would like the return of traditional areas and areas of local government that people will recognise and understand as having historical interest.

    Mrs. Beckett : How can the Prime Minister justify a reported pay increase of £800 a week for the chief executive of National Power, at a time when the Institute for Fiscal Studies has shown that the gap between the best paid and the lowest paid in Britain today is wider than it has been for 100 years?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Lady yet again tends to concentrate on every occasion on the politics of envy and redistribution instead of the politics of growth and job creation. When she learns that there is more to prosperity than envy and redistribution, she may be in a position to lecture others.

    Mrs. Beckett : I am sure that the whole country will note that the Prime Minister failed to condemn either the pay increase or the widening pay gap. But surely he is aware that Government figures show that every ordinary British family, including the lowest paid of all, are paying more taxes now than they were when the Government came to power–with the sole exception of the kind of people who award themselves pay increases of £800 a week. How can that be right?

    The Prime Minister : Of course, average real incomes are substantially up for people at all levels of income, as the right hon. Lady should know. But since the right hon. Lady returns yet again to tax, perhaps she would care to comment on the remarks of the hon. Member for Kingswood (Mr. Berry) who said recently :

    “We”

    that is the Labour party

    “cannot put trust and tax on top of the agenda and then duck the economic issues.”

    That is what the right hon. Lady does.

    Mrs. Beckett : What are certainly up for every ordinary British family are the taxes that they pay under this Government. As a result of the Government’s economic failure, Britain today is a country of low wages, low skills, high crime and higher taxes. Whatever happened to the Prime Minister’s promise to build a nation at ease with itself?

    The Prime Minister : It is actually a nation of low inflation, increasing growth and falling crime. The right hon. Lady has been promising to set out her position on a number of issues and today she certainly has. She has published her own policy document and it enlightens a great deal. If any hon. Member would like to know more about it, I invite them

    Hon. Members : Answer.

    Madam Speaker : Order. It is right that an answer should be given, but to the right hon. Member for Derby, South (Mrs. Beckett) who has every right to question the Executive about its policy.

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Lady has invited anybody who wishes to know more about her programme to phone her campaign hotline and ask for Kevin or Ian who will explain her policies.

    Mr. Rowe : Will my right hon. Friend give a clear and categorical assurance to the House that he will not allow himself to be discouraged from his pursuit of a classless society by the growing probability that both the leading opposition parties will be led by public schoolboys?

    The Prime Minister : The essence of the society that I wish to create lies in the fact that it does not matter whether they are or not.

     

    Q2. Mr. Keith Hill : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

    Mr. Hill : Does the Prime Minister remember those happy Labour days of 1969 when he came to live in my Streatham constituency at the charming Primrose court when the unemployment rate in Streatham stood at one in 50? Thanks to his Government’s policies it now stands at a shocking one in five. Is the Prime Minister be surprised to learn that there is no great demand in Streatham for a blue plaque to commemorate his stay at Primrose Court?

    The Prime Minister : I do not know how much the hon. Gentleman knows about Lambeth at that time in the late 1960s, but if he had checked a little more carefully he would have known that just a few months before the date that he quotes the Labour-controlled Lambeth council was swept from office, going from 57 to three in the local elections.

     

    Q3. Mr. Fabricant : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

    Mr. Fabricant : Is not it the case that being at the heart of Europe and fighting one’s corner for Europe are not mutually exclusive and, if the Opposition say that it is, is not that both false and weak? Is not it also the case that when it comes to exercising the veto or the threat of veto, other countries have used it far more often than we have and, when it comes to abiding by European directives, in the league of large countries, Britain comes top, France comes third and Germany comes bottom? Is not Germany’s threat of the beef embargo a good example of that?

    The Prime Minister : As my hon. Friend intimated, there is a long history of vetoes by other member states–some on the Commission presidency itself. Being at the heart of Europe means fighting for the best interests of this country and of Europe. It emphatically does not mean agreeing with everything that our partners propose. Frankly, that is not the way that Europe works. It is not how our partners behave, how they expect us to behave or how we will behave. Wherever appropriate, we will stand up for the interests of this country and of Europe, and for the nature of Europe that we believe everyone across the continent wants.

     

    Q4. Mr. Clapham : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

    Mr. Clapham : Is the Prime Minister aware that figures provided by the Department of Social Security clearly show that the number of miners who fail tests for bronchitis and emphysema is well over 90 per cent? Does he share my concern that there is a need to review the regulations, not in five years or two years but immediately? Will he tell the House that he is prepared to set in train an immediate review of the bronchitis and emphysema regulations?

    The Prime Minister : As the hon. Gentleman may know, the Government accepted and implemented in full the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council recommendation to add those diseases to the prescribed list. I am sure that was right. The recommendation was made and accepted.

    Sir Dudley Smith : Is my right hon. Friend aware that President Reagan never looked back after he fired striking air traffic controllers? In view of the wilful neglect by Labour Members to do anything to help the travelling public, will my right hon. Friend consider doing the same with the striking signalmen?

    The Prime Minister : We are currently hoping to see a settlement that would end those unnecessary strikes at the earliest date possible. At the moment, Railtrack and the Rail, Maritime and Transport union are in negotiation and I hope that they will reach agreement soon.

     

    Q5. Mr. Alton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

    Mr. Alton : Does the Prime Minister share the sense of horror felt by right hon. and hon. Members in all parts of the House at the massacre of half a million Rwandans and the displacement of 2 million others? Is there not some personal initiative that he could take to ensure that the 5,000 troops promised by the United Nations one and a half months ago are now all deployed, refugees are evacuated and those responsible for the genocide are brought before international courts and tried for war crimes?

    The Prime Minister : Anyone who has seen the dreadful pictures from Rwanda will share the hon. Gentleman’s sense of horror and revulsion. I strongly support the proposal currently being considered by the Security Council, to establish a committee of experts to investigate allegations of war crimes in Rwanda and then take appropriate action. As I am sure the hon. Gentleman knows, the special rapporteur on Rwanda appointed by a special session of the European Commission of Human Rights is now in the country. We expect his report tomorrow and I hope that action can swiftly follow.

     

    Q6. Mr. Jacques Arnold : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

    Mr. Arnold : My right hon. Friend will be aware of our ambition to continue on the path of cutting the basic rate of tax. Has he contrasted that with the ambition of the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott)?

    The Prime Minister : Our policy is entirely clear. Our overriding aim is to sustain the recovery that is now clearly evident–but when it is prudent to do so, we will certainly seek to cut tax rates again. I heard what the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott) said about tax a day or so ago. I am delighted that he set out his position–something of a novelty, in respect of tax, for Opposition Members. I hope that all other contenders will honour their previous promises and set out what they would do about tax.

     

    Q7. Mr. Win Griffiths : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 30 June.

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

    Mr. Griffiths : Does the Prime Minister recall telling his right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Sir E. Heath) last Monday that he regretted using the veto on Mr. Dehaene, and that it would have been avoided if the pre-conference preparations had been as thorough as they were in 1984? Was the Prime Minister suffering from selective amnesia or being economical with the truth in failing to tell the House that in 1984 his predecessor vetoed Claude Cheysson and supported Jacques Delors, who, unlike the Prime Minister, believes in giving workers legal protection from sweatshop employers?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman–perhaps by accident–is not telling the whole story. In 1984, there was a great amount of private consultation, and a number of countries–not just this one–indicated privately, not openly in the Council meeting, that they were unable to accept a particular candidate. My point was that if that sort of negotiation had taken place it would not have been necessary to apply the veto publicly, as I did. I hope that the hon. Gentleman now understands that.

  • PMQT – 17 May 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 17th May 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Dunnachie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 May.

    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 have further meetings later today.

    Mr. Dunnachie : Will the Prime Minister agree to scrap the Child Support Agency in its present form and go back to the drawing board to produce a more efficient and fair method of supporting children of lone parents?

    The Prime Minister : I think that children are entitled to be supported by their own parents and that taxpayers should help only to the extent that parents do not have the means to do so. As the hon. Gentleman knows, in February we made some changes to the Child Support Agency and I repeat what I have said to the House on previous occasions : we shall continue to keep it under review and, if further changes are necessary, we shall make them.

     

    Q2. Mr. Lidington : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 May.

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

    Mr. Lidington : Is my right hon. Friend aware that last week’s decision by the Select Committee on the Crossrail Bill has caused immense dismay among my constituents in Aylesbury and among many other people in London and south-east England? Will he assure the House that the Government will look urgently at other ways in which that project might be taken forward?

    The Prime Minister : I share the disappointment that the Select Committee has rejected the Crossrail Bill. We have consistently made clear our commitment to the project and I am pleased to tell the House that that commitment remains. The promoters are now urgently considering the position and we are in discussion with them on how to proceed.

    Mrs. Beckett : When does the Prime Minister expect to publish the Department of Transport’s report on the technical and legal aspects of fitting seat belts in minibuses and coaches, especially in view of the fact that the Government have been saying since January that that research would be published “in a few weeks’ time”?

    The Prime Minister : I hope that it will not be very long before we are able to publish it. The report has now been delivered to Ministers and I hope that they will be able to announce their conclusions shortly.

    Mrs. Beckett : Could I urge the Prime Minister to make that very shortly indeed, as the report has been in preparation for some time and safety organisations, coach operators and the general public have been calling for a measure along those lines for a considerable time?

    The Prime Minister : We are looking at a range of things. The Department of Transport has been conducting a full review of the technical and cost implications of fitting seat belts to both minibuses and coaches. We also wish to take into account the circumstances of the minibus accident last Sunday and the vehicles in that respect are still being examined by the Vehicle Inspectorate. It is right that we examine all the circumstances. As soon as we are ready, we shall bring forward our conclusions.

    Mrs. Beckett : Can the Prime Minister give us an assurance that when the Government have looked at this report they will be prepared to introduce legislation as a matter of urgency ? I believe that the amendment paper contains an amendment in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Clydesdale (Mr. Hood) which might make possible the adoption of a decision in principle as early as tomorrow night. I repeat the offer of all-party talks which was made by my hon. Friend the Member for Holborn and St. Pancras (Mr. Dobson) as long ago as December, with a view to ironing out the difficulties regarding such legislation. I assure the Prime Minister that, subject to proper scrutiny, the Opposition would certainly give any legislation a speedy passage.

    The Prime Minister : We wish to conclude our examination of this matter before deciding what is the right way to proceed. Increasingly a number of minibus manufacturers are fitting seat belts as a matter of course. That is a decision for them. It is also open to potential customers, when making coach or minibus bookings, to ask whether belts are fitted. I do not wish to give any indication of the outcome of the review until we have had time to study the conclusions and to reach a decision based on all the evidence that is available.

    Mr. Couchman : Is my right hon. Friend aware that, while regretting the need for such a course, the House will back the decision of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis to increase the number of armed response units?

    The Prime Minister : There is a feeling–in the House and across the country, I suspect–that people certainly do not wish the police to be armed as a matter of course. This is a very limited measure and I believe that it is justifiable. Of course, the number of armed policemen will be very small–about 50. These officers are highly trained in the use of firearms and they will be called only to incidents where firearms might be needed.

     

    Mr. Ghazanfer Ali

    Q3. Mr. Madden : To ask the Prime Minister what representations he had made to the Government of Pakistan to secure the release of Mr. Ghazanfer Ali from prison in Mirpur.

    The Prime Minister : Although Mr. Ali is not a British citizen, our high commissioner in Islamabad has followed this matter closely on a humanitarian basis. We are concerned that Mr. Ali’s case keeps being adjourned. Officials at the Foreign Office are arranging to meet his son to discuss future courses of action.

    Mr. Madden : I thank the Prime Minister, on behalf of Mr. Ali’s wife and family, for his past efforts on this man’s behalf. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, Mr. Ali has been held without proper trial for the past four years. I urge him to make further representations to the Prime Minister of Pakistan and to the Prime Minister of Azad Kashmir, who will be visiting Britain and calling at the House of Commons later this week.

    The Prime Minister : I know that the hon. Gentleman has taken a very great interest in the matter. So far, we have pursued it on a humanitarian basis. Given the length of time that Mr. Ali has been detained without trial, I shall consider raising his case again with the Pakistani authorities. The hon. Gentleman knows that as Mr. Ali is not a British national we cannot assist specifically with consular advice. However, on a humanitarian basis, it is right that we should again raise with the Pakistani authorities the question of his lengthy detention without trial.

     

    Engagements

    Q4. Dr. Spink : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 May.

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

    Dr. Spink : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the breast cancer lobby that is taking place at the House of Commons today? Did he have time to read the report on the subject in The Daily Telegraph today? Will he draw its importance to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health?

    The Prime Minister : I think my right hon. Friend will have heard my hon. Friend’s question. I am very pleased that the Macmillan Fund for Cancer Relief survey shows that there was a high degree of satisfaction with the treatment that women had received from the national health service. That was particularly marked among those who had received treatment more recently. I understand that the Chief Medical Officers of England and Wales will publish tomorrow their consultative report on the provision of cancer services. I believe that it will have far-reaching consequences for the services provided for patients with cancer.

     

    Q5. Mr. Grocott : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 May.

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

    Mr. Grocott : Is not it salutary for the international community to note that in Rwanda more people have been killed in the past six weeks–one estimate puts the figure at 500,000–than were killed in the former Yugoslavia in the whole of the past three years? Is not it vital that the United Nations, the European Community and other international agencies ensure that the time, energy and effort that they devote to the solution of crises worldwide are at least in some way proportionate to the degree of suffering on the ground?

    The Prime Minister : There are many people who feel as the hon. Gentleman clearly does about the dreadful bloodshed in Rwanda. It is clearly a bitter civil war and some of the atrocities that have taken place are unforgivable by any rational judgment. The United Nations Security Council has unanimously adopted resolutions calling for a ceasefire. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that it is necessary to assist where practicable. The mandate is primarily humanitarian, contributing to the security and the protection of refugees and civilians at risk. The resolution also imposes an arms embargo.

    Mr. Bowden : As we approach the 50th anniversary of D-day, will my right hon. Friend give some thought to the war widows whose husbands made the supreme sacrifice, to see whether there is some way in which he can ensure that additional recognition is given to that sacrifice this year by some form of financial payment?

    The Prime Minister : I know that my hon. Friend is a doughty fighter for pensioners generally, and war widows in particular, and I am sure that my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor will have heard what he has to say. My hon. Friend will agree that, over the years, we have taken great care to recognise the remarkable sacrifice made by many widows whose husbands were killed in the war and most people will consider it right of us to have done so.

     

    Q6. Mr. Foulkes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 May.

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

    Mr. Foulkes : If the economy is on the mend, as the Prime Minister keeps claiming, instead of increasing VAT on fuel to 17.5 per cent. in April, will he consider getting rid of it altogether?

    The Prime Minister : I do not think that many people doubt that the economy is on the mend. All the indicators show that that is certainly the case. Not every single indicator in the months ahead may be as good as we would wish, but the overall trend is undoubted. One of the reasons why the economy is moving ahead is that we have taken the tax measures necessary to improve our public finances.

     

    Economy

    Q7. Mr. Luff : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the prospects for economic growth and inflation in the United Kingdom.

    The Prime Minister : The prospects for the economy are extremely good– [Interruption.] –and not only that, this year the United Kingdom is set to be the fastest-growing major European economy for the second year running. Underlying inflation is under control, at its lowest for 25 years and well within its target range. I shall spare Opposition Members all the rest that it says here.

    Mr. Luff : I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Does he agree that one of the hardest lessons we have to relearn as a country is that British manufacturing industry can prosper only if it is competitive? Against that background, will he join me in welcoming yesterday’s news that factory gate inflation is at a low level not seen in Britain for a generation?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is quite right about competitiveness. The more competitive we are, the more we will sell and the more jobs we will be able to create in this country. The figures on factory gate prices are extremely good–better than we have seen for many years. One of the reasons why we are competitive and will remain so is that we have no intention of saddling our companies with the social on-costs that so many in Europe have now undertaken and which so many in the House would be prepared to undertake.

    Mr. Purchase : Will the Prime Minister contrast the sweeping victories of many Labour groups in the local elections recently

    Madam Speaker : Order. I am listening carefully because the hon. Gentleman’s question has to be tied to the question on the Order Paper on prospects for economic growth and inflation.

    Mr. Purchase : Indeed, Madam Speaker. Will the Prime Minister compare that record with the awful record of the Black Country development corporation on economic development in the black country? In the light of that comparison, would he care to give back to Labour authorities the money taken from them for that economic development?

    The Prime Minister : I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman about the record of the Black Country development corporation. It is clear that right across the black country and the country as a whole the prospects for manufacturing industry and other industries are rapidly improving. That is self-evident in the growth seen in the past 12 months, the growth that we are seeing now and the growth that we can safely anticipate in the future.

     

    Engagements

    Q8. Mr. Richards : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 May.

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

    Mr. Richards : Does my right hon. Friend agree that sharpening the skills of our schoolchildren will improve the competitive edge of the economy in the future? Does he welcome the recently announced statistics showing that more of our schoolchildren are staying on at school than ever before?

    The Prime Minister : I do welcome that, just as I welcome the fact that the number of people who are unemployed is falling and has been consistently for 15 months. Some years ago, about one in eight of young people went on to further education; that figure is now one in three. Some 70 per cent. of our 16-year-olds are now in full-time education. I am sure that that trend is right and I thoroughly welcome it.