The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Saddam Hussein

  • PMQT – 20 January 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 20th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Oppenheim : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 January.

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

    Mr. Oppenheim : Will the Prime Minister join me in paying tribute to the courage of British troops who have fought so bravely for their country, particularly in Iraq? Does my right hon. Friend share the widespread sense of revulsion in the country at the behaviour of the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galloway) in going to Iraq and saluting the man responsible for perpetrating such unspeakable and appalling atrocities against his own people and also at the actions of other Opposition Members who, by their actions, have given succour to terrorists?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend and I believe that the whole House will think that the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galloway) was foolish in his action. There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has inflicted suffering on the Shias and the marsh Arabs, is oppressing the Kurds and denying basic human rights, has victimised British citizens and is failing to comply with United Nations Security Council resolutions. There is, frankly, nothing to be said for him and nothing should be said for him, by any Member of the House.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the huge tax increases to be imposed this year and next year will check economic recovery?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. and learned Gentleman had taken the trouble to listen to my right hon. and learned Friend, he would have heard him say that the recovery is now

    “strong enough not to be stopped”.

    I remind the right hon. and learned Gentleman of the facts. The economy has now grown more than 2 per cent. in 12 months and has grown for six successive quarters. Retail sales have grown 4 per cent. in the last year and car production, manufacturing output and export volumes are all up. With low inflation and low interest rates, there is no doubt whatsoever that recovery is under way.

    Mr. John Smith : I note that the Prime Minister does not deny that the Chancellor said that the tax increases would check economic recovery. Does not he understand that, as new tax codes arrive in homes all over Britain, people are now seeing the full impact of those increases on their personal standards of living? Why cannot the Prime Minister understand that increases equivalent to 7p on income tax are bound to hit family budgets for six?

    The Prime Minister : I reiterate to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that the economy is growing stronger daily. It is growing and it will continue to grow.

    Perhaps the right hon. and learned Gentleman could remind the House where tax rates stood when he left office. Investment income was taxed at 98 per cent., top-rate income tax was 83 per cent., corporation tax was 52 per cent. and the basic rate was 33 per cent. The right hon. and learned Gentleman is in no position to talk about taxing, either in the past or today. He complains about the spending reductions made in the public expenditure round. Would he keep those reductions? Would he tax to restore them?

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister recall saying, during the general election campaign,

    “Greater taxation would kill recovery stone dead”?

    If that was true then, why is not it true now–or is this just one of the many things that the Prime Minister finds it easy to forget ever having mentioned?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. and learned Gentleman wants to discuss the question of forgetting things, let me point out that he may have forgotten the words of Lord Desai, whom he sacked for telling the truth. Lord Desai said :

    “It is good for the Labour party to have debate about alternatives, competing policy mixes, provided that no one thinks that adopting them or not will make the slightest difference to the actual reality.”

    The right hon. and learned Gentleman has no economic policy whatever and he cannot hide behind that for ever.

    Dame Jill Knight : Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is deplorable for a woman holding the post of headmistress to deny her pupils the chance of seeing one of the greatest English plays ever written by the greatest English playwright, on the ground that it depicts heterosexual love? Will my right hon. Friend join me in deploring that example of political correctness?

    The Prime Minister : I think that my hon. Friend has spoken for not only the majority of people in the House, but the majority of people in the country. As for the wider question of politically correct ideology, there is no doubt that it is widely unpopular among parents, who want schools to teach their children the basics of English language, English history and all the subjects that will equip them for a proper adulthood.

    Mr. Ashdown : On the subject of listening– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I want some order in the House before we make any further progress.

    Mr. Ashdown rose– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I shall have to start naming Members–[Hon. Members :– “Hear, hear!”]–on both sides of the House. This is an abuse of very precious time.

    Mr. Ashdown : On the subject of listening to the Chancellor, did the Prime Minister by any chance hear him say on radio this morning that he did not recognise the difference between spending and investment? Could that be the reason why Britain consistently languishes near the bottom of the class of the 22 advanced countries when it comes to investing in education and our future?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman clearly failed to understand what my right hon. and learned Friend had to say this morning. If he examined the text more carefully, he might be able to ask a more credible question on another occasion.

    Sir Fergus Montgomery : Does my right hon. Friend accept that, despite the professional whingers, the vast majority of people want to see more deregulation, unnecessary regulation ripped up and bossy bureaucracy banned and that they want unnecessary form-filling for the sake of form- filling to be a thing of the past?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right, not just for people but also, of course, for business and for many voluntary bodies as well. There is no doubt that the growth of regulation, from the European Community, from this House and from local government, has grown outrageously over the last 25 years and it is necessary to get rid of the regulations. If I had the support of the Opposition in doing that I should be delighted, for we will be introducing a Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill which will produce the biggest bonfire of unnecessary regulations that the House has ever seen. We will see then which Lobby Labour Members are in.

     

    Q2. Mr. Mike O’Brien : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 January.

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

    Mr. O’Brien : As parliamentary adviser to the Police Federation, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the criticisms of his Police and Magistrates Courts Bill from the police, chief constables and former Home Secretaries such as Lords Whitelaw and Carr, who say that the Bill comes dangerously close to politicising the police? Will he now seek all-party agreement on the Bill and stop introducing things such as the Sheehy report and the Bill which, in the face of rising crime, are undermining police morale?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman will have to do better than that if he wishes to keep his new job. One of the aims of the reforms is to put a much greater breadth of experience on to police authorities and, as the hon. Gentleman may know, the intention is to bring the experience of many leading members of the community–head teachers, business men, doctors and others–on to police authorities. The police welcome that and they also welcome the increased individual authority given to chief constables, neither of which points was mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

    Mr. Gale : Will my right hon. Friend join me in applauding today’s launch of the guaranteed pensioners income bond? Will he accept that the 30 per cent. of my constituents in Thanet, North who are over the retirement age will welcome the Government’s recognition of those who have worked hard all their lives, not to be a burden on the state but to be able to provide for their old age themselves?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. The new bond will be widely welcomed because it will give pensioners a guaranteed return on their savings month in, month out. The other essential element, especially for people on fixed incomes and those who are retired, is to ensure that the value of their savings is not eroded by inflation. By keeping inflation low, we are helping every pensioner on a fixed income. Not since 1946 has there been such a successful period for inflation as the last 12 months and we intend to keep inflation at a very low level.

     

    Q3. Mr. Betts : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 20 January.

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

    Mr. Betts : Does the Prime Minister accept that, in pursuing its disgraceful housing sales policy which disadvantaged so many people in housing need, Westminster council must have annually reported that policy to the Government in its housing investment programme submission? Does he agree that the Government must specifically have approved all the subsidies for the cash incentive scheme under which Westminster emptied its houses and that the Government must also have given a specific consent to the disposal of all properties for which a general consent did not exist under the Housing Act 1985? Will the Prime Minister therefore give a clear and comprehensive statement to the House of what knowledge his Government had of those policies and what specific approvals his Ministers and his officials gave to that council to enable those policies to be put into practice?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman clearly is in some dispute with his Front Bench about Labour policy. The hon. Gentleman refers to the disgraceful policy of selling council houses. For much of the past two years, Opposition Front Bench spokesmen have been trying to pretend that they are in favour of selling council houses. [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The Prime Minister must be heard. [Interruption.] Order. I shall not proceed until there is some order in the House.

    The Prime Minister : As I was saying a moment ago, the hon. Gentleman had better be clear about whether his party is in favour of selling council houses or not, for there is a great difference between what he said and what spokesmen on the Front Bench have been saying. The reality is that hundreds of thousands of people in the country are home owners today because we gave them the freedom to be so, and that policy is undoubtedly correct.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in London – 17 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview held in London on Sunday 17th January 1993.

    QUESTION:

    Is this a punishment that fits the crime of Saddam Hussein?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The action that was taken this evening was taken after a great deal of consideration, after a great deal of consultation and after giving Iraq every opportunity to comply with the Security Council resolutions. They were aware that they were breaking them. They were blatantly breaking them and they were aware that they were at risk of a response. And after very careful consultation between the allies there was a response.

    QUESTION:

    Did you counsel caution on President Bush?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, there was complete agreement between the allies about the nature and timing of the response this evening. It has been discussed for two or three days. I have had a number of discussions over the weekend with President Bush and the outcome of those discussions and with President Mitterrand and others was the action taken this evening.

    QUESTION:

    [Indistinct] action if necessary?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not going to anticipate what may happen now. We have said repeatedly that there are Security Council resolutions that we require Iraq to comply with. They know that. It could not possibly be clearer to them. They have been told time and time and time again. They have now had illustrations that if they will not comply with the Security Council resolutions then there will be a response. I hope they will comply.

    QUESTION:

    Do you regret the civilian casualties?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We do not yet know any details about that. The military advice I have is that it is very unlikely, that those casualties, if you mean the Rashid Hotel, that the casualties were caused by the action of the United States. We do not know that. There was a great deal of random and haphazard fire from within Baghdad and it may well be that that was self inflicted but at this moment we do not know.

    QUESTION:

    What about British military involvement, do you expect any of that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not going to anticipate what may happen in the future. On this occasion it was considered operationally the right way to deal with the problem was to use the Tomahawk cruise missiles and that was what happened.

    QUESTION:

    What about those who say that this was reckless and will escalate problems in the Gulf?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I disagree with them. The problems, originally the invasion of Kuwait came from Iraq. The disobedience of the Security Council resolutions is by Iraq. It is not just the occasional disobedience, it’s wilfully disobeying the requirements of the international community time and time again. He has been courting trouble, he has had trouble. He knew what was likely to happen. It has happened.

    QUESTION:

    Will you be making a statement Prime Minister to the House of Commons tomorrow?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The Defence Secretary will make a statement tomorrow afternoon.

  • Mr Major’s Statement on Iraq – 13 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s statement on Iraq, made at Downing Street in London on Wednesday 13th January 1993.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    As you know, Royal Air Force Tornadoes and tankers have today taken part in a limited Coalition attack on surface-to-air missiles and their associated command and control facilities in southern Iraq. There have been no Allied casualties. All our aircraft have returned safely to base and preliminary information – and I emphasise that, preliminary information – indicates that the aircraft accomplished their mission satisfactorily.

    Let me say that we did not take this action lightly. Last year, we established a no-fly zone over southern Iraq and the purpose of that was quite clear – it was to stop Saddam Hussein from the repression of his own people. Over the last few weeks, our aircraft in that no-fly zone have come under increasing threat, threat from Iraqi aircraft themselves entering the no-fly zone and from missile batteries installed in Southern Iraq.

    Over recent days, the Iraqis have been ample warning. The action that we have taken tonight has deliberately been both limited and proportionate but we believe it will be effective in establishing the conditions which will enable our aircraft to operate in the no-fly zone with safety.

    The Iraqi regime are in breach of Security Council requirements on a number of fronts. They pose a threat to aircraft protecting the Kurds in Northern Iraq, they are impeding the actions of the UN inspection teams, they are illegally entering Kuwaiti territory. Each and every one of those breaches needs to stop. If they don’t, we shall have no hesitation – again with our Allies – in taking the necessary action to enforce Security Council Resolutions.

    The Secretary of State for Defence will be making a statement to the House at 10 o’clock.

    I will take one or two questions.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, have you spoken to President Bush about your next action?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I shall be speaking to President Bush again within a few minutes.

    QUESTION:

    Do you have any idea of the level of Iraqi casualties that might have come from such missions?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Not at this stage.

    QUESTION (Michael Brunson, ITV):

    How long can this cat-and-mouse game with Saddam go on? People are saying he should be taken out once and for all.

    PRIME MINISTER:
    I think he has had a very clear indication today of the fact that people are growing increasingly intolerant of his defiance of the Security Council Resolutions. I hope that he will learn from the lesson.

    QUESTION (Robin Oakley, BBC TV):

    Do you expect this action to put an end to violations by Saddam Hussein and are the Allies prepared to step up action if he continues to defy UN Resolutions?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We are prepared to make sure that the Security Council Resolutions are enforced. I hope this will put an end to the infringements. We have hoped that before and it has not. If he infringes again, he must expect us to retaliate again and we have made it entirely clear to him that we will certainly do that.

    QUESTION:

    Do you regret not dealing with Saddam Hussein tougher two years ago?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No. I think the decision that was taken to stop the fighting at the time we did was the right decision at the time. One has to recall we were operating under a UN mandate; that mandate had been enforced; we had no legal authority to do more and I believe it was right to stop when we did.

    QUESTION:

    Are you prepared to take the same tough action against the Serbs since many Muslims may feel that Christians in Europe are applying double standards?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think people know the action that we have already taken in humanitarian aid in Bosnia and we have a substantial number of troops on the ground and you will know the very sad news indeed that one of them was killed this morning.

    Thank you very much indeed.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on Saddam Hussein – 8 January 1993

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on Saddam Hussein, made on 8th January 1993.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We’ve told Saddam Hussein. He’s been told quite clearly by the Allies that we wish to ensure the safety of the no-fly zone. Firstly he must honour the no-fly zone. There must be no more flying in it. And secondly, he must remove the SAM missiles. That’s made clear to him, he knows that and set a time frame for it. I hope he will comply.

  • PMQT – 16 April 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 16th April 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Sir Anthony Durant : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 16 April.

    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.

    Sir Anthony Durant : May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his four-point initiative to deal with the Kurds and Shi’ites, especially the safe haven proposals, which are important? Will he work hard with the agencies to improve aid to the Shi’ites and Kurds and push the United Nations to implement resolutions 678 and 688 so that the Kurds and Shi’ites can return in confidence to their towns and villages and thereby stop this appalling situation?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. Hundreds of tonnes of aid have already been delivered, of which 220 tonnes have come from the United Kingdom. In addition to the three C130s already there, nine Chinook helicopters operating from Turkey will be fully operational by the end of the week. The two special representatives of the secretary-general are in Iraq and by the end of the week 150 United Nations personnel will be in Iraq to oversee the relief effort. Urgent and intensive international discussions are continuing on a safe haven plan, which I and others believe is the only way forward. Indeed, I believe that it is rapidly gaining ground. Later today, I shall chair a further meeting of Ministers to take stock of aid needs.

    Mr. Kinnock : May I strongly support the Prime Minister in the efforts being made to get aid to the wretched people who are fleeing from Saddam Hussein’s forces? As the agonies of the Kurdish people continue, will the right hon. Gentleman tell me whether he shares my view that the atrocities committed by Saddam Hussein against the Kurdish people mean that the Iraqi dictator has a case to answer under articles 2 and 3 of the genocide convention of 1948? Will the Prime Minister refer the issue of genocide to the United Nations Security Council as a matter of urgency?

    The Prime Minister : I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his first words. I have asked for legal advice on the subject of genocide.

    Mr. Teddy Taylor : As the strict budgetary controls of agricultural spending were effectively blow sky high last Monday when the Council of Ministers voted by 10 to two to go through the ceiling, will my right hon. Friend say what on earth we can do, or is agriculture entirely out of control? In congratulating him on Britain’s being one of the two who voted against, may I ask whether he will tell the consumers and taxpayers of Britain whether we can take any action to hold on to the strict budgetary controls for which we fought so hard?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of keeping strict budgetary control on agriculture and on other items of the European Community budget. We have consistently stuck to that position and we shall continue to argue for it in the Agriculture Council and the other Councils of the Community.

    Mr. Ashdown : Notwithstanding the Prime Minister’s welcome but long- term plans for Kurdish sanctuary in Iraq, does not our present air superiority provide a means and United Nations resolution 688 provide the authority for action now to prevent continuing genocide against the Kurds in Iraq? Is not the only thing lacking for action the political will and international leadership? Why does he still seem reluctant to provide either?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, the only comprehensive international plan before the international community is the one that I announced to the European Community on Monday this week. As I said to the House a few moments ago, urgent and intensive international discussions on the plan are continuing at this moment.

    Mr. Churchill : I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his safe haven policies. Will he build on them as soon as possible with our colleagues and partners in the Security Council to ensure that, under United Nations auspices, forces are sent to both the north and south of Iraq to establish at the earliest possible opportunity safe havens into which Saddam Hussein’s armies will not be permitted to go?

    The Prime Minister : I have made it clear to our colleagues in the United Nations and elsewhere that, if the relief effort is harassed or frustrated, in my judgment, under Security Council resolution 688, it is clearly the responsibility of the United Nations to protect both helpers and helped. If necessary, the United Nations would have to act on that responsibility and seek from its members whatever assistance, including military assistance, it might need.

     

    Q2. Mr. Wray : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 16 April.

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

    Mr. Wray : The Prime Minister will be in no doubt that the question on everybody’s lips is about the disgraceful “Panorama” programme which made allegations that the Prime Minister used an accommodation address in Templar street in Lambeth to gain access to the electoral register, a seat on Lambeth council and thus win a seat at Westminster. Will he give an assurance that that accusation is untrue and what action is he about to take?

    The Prime Minister : The qualification for standing for Lambeth council was to be resident within the area. “Panorama” was told on more than one occasion by the lady whose address they gave that I was living in the area, directly opposite her house, at the time and that that fully met the qualification requirements. I cannot explain to the hon. Gentleman why “Panorama” chose not to broadcast that fact.

     

    Q3. Mr. Bowis : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 16 April.

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

    Mr. Bowis : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the success of his policies in bringing down inflation, interest rates and mortgage rates shows that the better way for Britain is the Conservative way to opportunity and that it is getting better and better as the months go by? Does he agree that that is why there is such disappointment on the Opposition Benches and such desperate calls for an early election?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right. It is precisely because we were prepared to take tough action on inflation that it is now coming down fast and, as I forecast, interest rates are following it down. The economy will continue to improve in the months ahead and we will continue to extend opportunities by spreading wealth, ownership and choice. No other party in the country can offer that to the British people.

     

    Q4. Mr. Pike : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 16 April.

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

    Mr. Pike : Is not the Prime Minister concerned about the many thousands of struggling pensioners who get a pension increase and immediately lose income support and other transitional arrangements? Is not it time that he ended the practice of giving with one hand and immediately taking back with the other and started to give all pensioners a fair deal?

    The Prime Minister : If that were the policy of the Opposition, any pretence that they might have had of public expenditure control would have gone.

    Mr. John Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the next decade will be the decade of opportunity for young people, but that one opportunity that the House and the country would rather they did not take is the opportunity to commit crime? Does he agree that in national Crime Prevention Week the one major objective that we should seek is for young people to be deterred from criminal activity?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly agree with my hon. Friend. He will have noticed in particular the initiative on truancy taken this week.

     

    Q5. Mr. Patchett : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 16 April.

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

    Mr. Patchett : Does the Prime Minister feel comfortable with his policies, given the criticism from within his party, both inside and outside the House, or is he merely a victim of an enemy within?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman will find that there are millions and millions of people outside the House who support our policies and who will vote for them.

    Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop : Will my right hon. Friend make an important and clear statement today that the British Government’s policy in support of the safety and security of Iraqi Kurds in Iraq is not support for Kurdish insurrection against successive Governments of Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran to form a separate state and that activity of that kind gives a spurious strength to the present Government of Iraq to take military action of a genocidal kind against Iraqi Kurds in Iraq?

    The Prime Minister : I have made it clear in the House on previous occasions that our concern in Iraq is to ensure that the Kurds are well treated, safe and protected from repression. That remains our policy.

     

    Cyprus

    Q6. Mr. Corbyn : To ask the Prime Minister, what discussions he has held with the Government of Turkey concerning their occupation of part of Cyprus.

    The Prime Minister : I met the Turkish Prime Minister yesterday and the President of Cyprus last week. My discussion yesterday with the Turkish Prime Minister concentrated on the plight of the Kurds. I urged him to help the international efforts to get the Kurds down from the mountains into areas of Turkey and Iraq where they can receive food and medicine. The Turkish Prime Minister and I spoke briefly about Cyprus later in the day.

    Mr. Corbyn : Perhaps the Prime Minister can tell us what discussions he had with the Prime Minister of Turkey. He must be aware that the British Government are a guarantor of Cypriot independence and that the 1974 invasion of Cyprus by Turkey was condemned by the United Nations. Does not he think that the aim should be the withdrawal of foreign troops from Cyprus and the reunification of the island, with guarantees from all communities to end the terrible time suffered by so many people through the division of the island by military intervention?

    The Prime Minister : I made it entirely clear to the Turkish Prime Minister that we supported the efforts being made by the secretary-general and we hoped that he would make progress speedily towards a satisfactory solution.

    Mr. Anthony Coombs : Will the Prime Minister confirm that Cyprus, a democratic member of the Commonwealth, is the only European country at present forcibly occupied by a foreign power? Does he agree that positive action is necessary to persuade Turkey that it is in its interest and in the interest of the regional stability of the eastern Mediterranean that the reunification of Cyprus as a stable and democratic country is implemented as soon as possible?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend and the Turkish Government are aware that that is our policy.

     

    Engagements

    Q7. Mr. Wareing : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 16 April.

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

    Mr. Wareing : Is the Prime Minister aware that the answer that he gave to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition this afternoon will have appalled the whole nation? If a Prime Minister, above anyone, has not yet taken legal advice about the genocide convention, when Kurds are being murdered and tortured every day, it is a disgrace. Indeed, it is a sin that this matter has been allowed to go as far as it has. Will the Prime Minister take action today to instruct our representatives at the United Nations to raise the matter of genocide so that action–even military action–is taken against the butcher of Baghdad?

    The Prime Minister : I note the hon. Gentleman’s remarks with care. It is wise to seek and await proper legal advice on such measures. If the matter is so self-evident, why did not the Leader of the Opposition raise it until yesterday and where has the shadow Foreign Secretary been for the past fortnight?

  • PMQT – 26 February 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 26th February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Andrew MacKay : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. MacKay : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that there can be no ceasefire in the Gulf war until all relevant United Nations resolutions have been fully implemented, prisoners of war and Kuwaiti hostages held in Iraq have been released and all Iraqi troops have laid down their arms?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend, but unfortunately the conditions that he so succinctly set out have not yet been met. As my hon. Friend will know, Saddam Hussein spoke again this morning, but without giving any indication whatsoever that Iraq will comply with all the Security Council resolutions. Instead, this morning Saddam Hussein reiterated his untrue claim that Kuwait was part of Iraq and threatened implicitly to return. He must know that meeting the Security Council resolutions is an essential step, and he must publicly and explicitly do so.

    I believe that we are now in a new situation with the beginning of the ground war. Our first concern has to be with the safety and security of our forces–[Hon. Members :– “Hear, hear.”] That means that we require all Iraqi forces in the theatre of operations–those occupying and those supporting the occupation of Kuwait–to abandon their weapons and equipment, and withdraw. Until they do so, they will be treated as hostile.

    Saddam Hussein started this war on his terms. He must end it on the terms set out by the United Nations.

    Mr. Kinnock : May I take this opportunity strongly to commend our forces for the bravery and professionalism that they are showing in the liberation of Kuwait? Does the Prime Minister share my view that Saddam Hussein could halt the war instantly if he were personally to announce his complete compliance with all relevant United Nations resolutions and, in addition, immediately release all the prisoners of war and civilians he is holding against their will in both Kuwait and Iraq?

    Finally, is it not clear that if Iraqi forces leave their military vehicles and lay down their arms, they will be safe from attack, our forces will know that they are also safe from attack, and all hostilities can end?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman is entirely right and I agree with him without reservation. He will know that, even this morning, Saddam Hussein said–I shall quote him because there was an implicit threat in what he said :

    “the Gates of Constantinople were not opened before the Muslims in the first struggling attempt.”

    That is the clearest threat that he will yet again return. We have a duty and an obligation to remove that threat using all necessary means.

    Dame Janet Fookes : As Saddam Hussein, like the devil, is the father of lies, would my right hon. Friend ensure that all in authority take not the slightest notice of what he says, but only of what he does?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly give my hon. Friend that assurance. There have been many occasions in recent months when Saddam Hussein expressly told untruths. At one stage, his Foreign Minister was negotiating on one tack while he was speaking and acting on another. We simply cannot and do not trust him.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister agree that, despite today’s welcome news, there is still much hard and potentially costly work to be done before Kuwait is made secure? He is entirely right to say that the safety of our troops and the long-term security of Kuwait mean that any Iraqi troops who wish to return home may do so, but only after they have surrendered their weapons. If they do so, will he say that, once Kuwait is at last liberated, secure and free from threat, Desert Storm will end?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. Gentleman is quite right. Those are the circumstances in which Desert Storm can end. He is right to emphasise yet again the safety and security of our troops. Frankly, I do not believe that either they or world opinion would forgive us if, at this stage of the conflict, we permitted the Iraqis to withdraw with their weapons, perhaps with risk to our troops and the risk that they would return later.

     

    Q2. Mr. Robert G. Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. Hughes : Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the Government have established 12 regional technology centres to aid technology transfer? Can he also confirm that under this Government, the number of science parks has increased from two to 39 with 22 more planned and that spending on civil research and development is higher, as a percentage of the gross national product, in this country than in Japan or in the United States? Does he agree that calls for the establishment of such policies, when they are already in train, merely demonstrates that those who call for them show muddle and ignorance, which dominate Labour party thinking?

    The Prime Minister : I cannot immediately imagine to what document my hon. Friend is referring. If, perchance, he is referring to the document on industrial and manufacturing matters that was released yesterday by the Labour party, he is a little unkind. There were some good ideas in that document. Unfortunately, the good ideas are already being implemented and the bad ideas are being recycled.

    Mr. Allen McKay : Does the Prime Minister agree with the Secretary of State for the Environment who wants to do away with the poll tax or with the Minister of State for the Environment who has gone on record in the Ribble Valley by-election as saying that he wishes to keep it?

    The Prime Minister : The next Member of Parliament for Ribble Valley, who I hope will soon be on the Conservative Benches, will be here in time to hear the result of our review of the community charge.

     

    Q3. Mr. French : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. French : Does my right hon. Friend agree that an industrial policy that is based on the creation of quangos, subsidies and inadequately costed tax breaks is, as the Financial Times called it this morning, a “recipe for economic distortion”?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend, but, again, I fear that he is being too charitable. He has forgotten the reinvention of the son of National Enterprise Board, an enterprise which took money away from viable businesses to pick winners which, alas, went bust.

    Mr. Alfred Morris : What emphasis will the Government put on reparations from Iraq and to what extent will they be demanded? Moreover, what is the attitude of other Governments in the coalition?

    The Prime Minister : The attitude is set out in the Security Council’s resolutions. All Governments in the coalition subscribe to them and that remains the position.

     

    Q4. Mr. Ian Taylor : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. Taylor : This House has been powerfully united against the terrorism practised by Saddam Hussein in Kuwait. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is important that the House is also united against the evil acts of terrorism in this country and that it supports all measures, including the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989? Will he have a word with the Leader of the Opposition to encourage him to be more robust on the issue?

    The Prime Minister : No one doubts the commitment of the whole House to deal effectively with terrorism and not to give way to it. In my judgment, the widest possible support for the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act would be a welcome event and would help to that end.

     

    Q5. Mr. Ron Brown : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. Brown : I know that the Prime Minister is involved in many important duties. However, will he understand one thing? The real enemy is at home ; the enemy is the capitalist system and the Tory Government. They are responsible for the problems of the British people.

    We have an example of a state-owned British company wishing to take over the fertiliser business, presently owned by ICI. That is blocked because of the Government’s blind party dogma. If we want investment in this country, is not that unfair to workers who may lose their jobs, especially in Leith, where there is a subsidiary owned by ICI called Scottish Agricultural Industries? Is not that wrong?

    The Prime Minister : It is a rum occasion when I have to take lessons in dogma from the hon. Gentleman.

     

    Q7. Sir Hugh Rossi : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Sir Hugh Rossi : As a successful end to the hostilities in the Gulf is happily within reach, will my right hon. Friend now ensure that the allies will combat, with the same vigour and single-mindedness of purpose, the premeditated ecological vandalism perpetrated by Saddam Hussein? It places at risk the worldwide environment from acid deposition, from accelerated global warming and from desertification, and it also pollutes and poisons the waters of the Gulf.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is right and he touches on an important point. The United Kingdom has already made a substantial contribution to help to deal with the pollution caused by the Iraqis in recent weeks. I am sure that my hon. Friend is right. An international effort will be needed and we will be part of that.

     

    Q8. Mr. Battle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. Battle : As it is clear that some of the right hon. Gentleman’s Social Security Ministers want to continue the freeze on child benefit and that some do not, will he tell us which ones he will back? Will he pledge now to make good the four-year cut in child benefit or will people have to rely on his one-off, occasional piecemeal statements at the Dispatch Box for their basic benefits?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman knows very well that there are occasions when we make statements on public expenditure matters such as child benefit. This is not one of them.

    Mr. Dunn : When accounts are rendered for the Gulf war, will the Prime Minister seek to obtain an explanation of the extraordinary behaviour of the Soviet Union in recent days? Will he make it plain to the Soviet Government that they can play ball either with the west or with Iraq, but not with both?

    The Prime Minister : I shall have the opportunity to discuss all those matters with Mr. Gorbachev early next week.

     

    Q9. Mr. McAllion : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. McAllion : Is the Prime Minister aware that hundreds of young Scots, half of them aged under 18, pass through London’s night shelters every year and that research has shown that on average each of those youngsters has less than £2? Why does the Prime Minister continue to deny to the 16 and 17-year-olds among them the right to benefit? Is the fate of those youngsters who have been thrown on to the streets and are vulnerable to drugs and prostitution a matter of complete indifference to the Prime Minister and his Government?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is entirely wrong, as he knows. We have provided unprecedented training opportunities for young people of that age. There is no necessity whatsoever for any of them to be sleeping rough on the streets of London.

     

    Q10. Mr. Thurnham : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 26 February.

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

    Mr. Thurnham : Does my right hon. Friend agree that just as the world recognises the strength and discipline of our armed forces, so it should recognise the strength and discipline of our economy? Is not our pound sterling as strong as Chobham armour?

    The Prime Minister : I agree. My hon. Friend will know that there has been a remarkable series of events in recent months and he will also know that sterling has remained remarkably stable despite those events.

    Mr. Hume : During his visit to Northern Ireland last week, did anyone raise with the Prime Minister the security value of fixed military checkpoints? Did anyone point out that over the past 20 years nothing of security value has been found at such checkpoints, and that they have become security risks providing targets in the form of the young soldiers and policemen who man them? Is the Prime Minister considering reviewing the use of such checkpoints?

    The Prime Minister : I discussed a raft of security matters during my meetings in Northern Ireland last week. However, the hon. Gentleman is aware that it would be unwise to discuss them.

  • Mr Major’s Statement from Chequers – 24 February 1991

    Below is Mr Major’s statement from Chequers on Sunday 24th February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think as you all know the land battle started at an early time this morning. It is a massive encounter and it will not cease until the Iraqis have been completely driven out of Kuwait. I very much appreciate the diplomatic efforts that have been put in hand over the last few days to try and avoid this particular conflict. But they have failed and they have failed because at no time was the Iraqi leadership prepared to accept the Security Council resolutions in full, at no time were they prepared to do so.

    We have also seen in the last few days that there was neither time nor reason to delay the land battle any longer, no reason because the Security Council resolutions were not going to be met, and no time because of what is now happening in Kuwait city. There are now something over 200 oil wells that have been wantonly set alight on the direct instructions of the Iraqi leadership. That number is rising hour by hour. The Iraqis are engaged upon the systematic destruction of Kuwait city. We have repeated reports of young men and women being rounded up and executed in Kuwait city, murdered perhaps would be a more apt word for what is going on there. And we also have reports of large numbers of Kuwaitis being herded together on trucks and taken out of Kuwait to Iraq, presumably to be used as a bargaining counter in some discussions at the end of the conflict.

    I think it is clear therefore that the nature of the regime with which we are dealing is not a regime whose words you can rely upon or with whom you can deal in the normal manner. The land campaign has therefore begun.

    I spoke at length yesterday afternoon not only to the leaders of a number of members of the allied coalition but also to the Commander of our forces in the Middle East, General de la Billiere. He was confident of what was to come, he was well prepared and assures me that the troops were well prepared. He is also well aware of the risks and the dangers that will need to be overcome in the next few days.

    I know you will not expect me to give you any indication at this early stage of how the conflict is going. I cannot do so, it would not be in the interests of our troops to do so and they of course must be our prime concern. As soon as it is possible to say something more concrete about that then of course we will do so.

    If I may, I would like to add one final word to the families of those men who are engaged in this conflict in the Gulf. It will not, I believe, be a long conflict but it may be a fierce one. There is no doubt in my mind that it is an absolutely justifiable conflict and that we will win it. As soon as that is confirmed we will bring home the men who have been engaged in it at the earliest possible time.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    [Indistinct] time and time again, we have had quite differing signals from the Iraqis, we simply cannot rely on what they have said. The whole world will have noticed in the last few days the quite distinct voices that came out of Moscow with the negotiations that Tariq Aziz was carrying out there and the speeches that Saddam Hussein was making in Baghdad, they were wholly different. As for the future, that will have to take care of itself.

    QUESTION:

    What were your personal feelings this morning?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am very sorry that it has come to this. A tremendous amount of effort has gone in over many months by a large number of people to ensure that we did not come to this particular conflict so I am saddened that it has done so. But I must say I am absolutely convinced that there is no choice and that it is right. If the Iraqis were to succeed, if they were to get away with what they have sought to do over the last few months, then I think that would be intolerable not just for Kuwait but for the rest of the world. So I think there is an inevitability about what is happening at the moment and I am absolutely clear in my mind that it will end successfully.

    QUESTION:

    Saddam Hussein has been defiant yet again in his tone, what do you think of his tone that he seems to be continuing with again this morning?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Arrogant, unrealistic, and it must soon dawn even on him that he is going to lose and lose big.

    QUESTION:

    Now that the land war has started, how should Saddam Hussein end it, is it going to be difficult for him merely to make a statement that he intends to withdraw now that the forces are engaged? What signal does he have to give that will allow this war to end?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There is no sign of him giving any signal at all that it proposes to end, even this morning he has been making wholly unrealistic and wholly defiant and wholly untruthful speeches. So there is no sign from him whatsoever that it is going to end so I am in no position to forecast that. I know what the end will be, the end will be that he will lose, but how that will come about I am afraid it is impossible for me to judge at the moment.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview (III) – 22 February 1991

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s third doorstep interview on Friday 22nd February 1991, held in London outside 10 Downing Street.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think you will all be very well versed on the various peace initiatives that have been made in the last few days. I am grateful for the fact that they were made but I think it is clear, in view of what has happened, that the Iraqis have been more concerned with seeking to evade the context of the Security Council Resolutions than to meet those particular Resolutions.

    In the light of that, the Coalition partners decided today that they would issue a statement to set out precisely what was required in order to stop that conflict. The statement that has been made has been agreed with all the Coalition partners; it has been the subject of very substantial discussion; it is perfectly clear; and it is not negotiable.

    So Iraq now know precisely what they have to do. I hope they recognise that we are not prepared to bargain with them and we are certainly not prepared to be strung along by them. What is necessary is perfectly clear; they have known what the Security Council Resolutions are since November of last year – the time has now come for them to implement them. If they fail to implement them, then they will know what the consequences are and I think everyone will know precisely where the blame will lie for any events that follow subsequently.

    I think, therefore, that I have nothing more to say about that but I am happy to take any questions you may have.

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS :

    QUESTION (JOHN SERGEANT – BBC TV):

    Prime Minister, what happens if Saddam Hussein decides unilaterally that the Iraqis will withdraw from Kuwait?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    He now knows what is necessary. What is necessary is to implement the Security Council Resolutions in full and to state authoritatively and publicly that he is proposing to do that. That is what we require of him.

    We are really not prepared to be strung along any longer; it is not in the interests of Kuwait; it is not in the interests of our armed forces; and it is not in the interests of the whole territory – I hope he recognises that.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, what hopes do you have?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have seen on a number of occasions in the past that hopes have been raised and then dashed so I am not going to express whatever hopes I have. I think it is necessary to set out the position clearly and that we have done. There is now no doubt whatsoever about the position the Allies hold.

    MICHAEL BRUNSON (ITN):

    [Indistinct] you are not, as such, going to offer Saddam Hussein a cease-fire, that is not part of the agreement? Can you explain why not?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The position is perfectly clear, Michael. We have set out what he needs to do. If he does that, then the possibility of a cease-fire is there and we would have a cease-fire but we are not in a position of bargaining with him. He knows what needs to be done; he has known it for a long time; it is time for him to stop fooling about and do it.

    MICHAEL BRUNSON (ITN):

    And the moment he begins to withdraw, then we would consider holding our fire?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We need an authoritative statement of what he is prepared to do – one that is unmistakable – and it needs to be followed by clear-cut action.

    QUESTION:

    Can he withdraw with his military armour with him or must he leave some of that armour behind in Kuwait?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    He has a time-frame to get out; we will have to wait and see how that works out.

    QUESTION:

    Do you think that the agreement today is something which could be built on?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There isn’t an agreement today! What has happened today is that we have set out – so that there may be no doubt about it – what terms we require of the Iraqis. That is the position; it is not negotiable; it is not an agreement. The Security Council Resolutions set out what was necessary a long time ago; they are not something that Saddam Hussein should play games with – he should obey them!

    QUESTION:

    Is the bombing to go on then, Mr. Major?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The conflict continues until such time as Saddam Hussein stops it by announcing that he will meet the Security Council Resolutions and begin to withdraw.

    QUESTION:

    It has been suggested, Prime Minister, that napalm might be being used on the Allied side. Is that right?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No. I have heard no such suggestion.

    JOHN COLE (BBC TV)

    Prime Minister, is 5 p.m. tomorrow, London time, when the land war can begin?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is analogous to the 15 January deadline that we had on an earlier occasion.

    JOHN COLE (BBC TV)

    You don’t say that it will begin at that time?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I don’t say that it will begin at that time.

    QUESTION:

    Is the war on or off in your opinion now?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That is a matter for Saddam Hussein to decide – I wish I knew the answer! We very much want it to be off. We have tried repeatedly to make sure it was off. I don’t think we could, frankly, have done any more to ensure that this conflict ended. We have done all we can during the conflict to minimise casualties – that has been the consistent position of the Allies throughout the whole of this affair and it remains it – but the situation now is clearly in Saddam Hussein’s hands; he can stop the war and he cannot any longer claim to be in the slightest doubt about what he needs to do to stop it.

    QUESTION:

    So it is on?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That is for him to determine, isn’t it?

    QUESTION:

    What precisely will you want to see at 5 o’clock tomorrow to be sure that the Iraqis are withdrawing?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We want a clear and authoritative statement that he is prepared to withdraw, that he is prepared to meet the Security Council Resolutions and that he begins to do so.

    QUESTION:

    Does he, Prime Minister, actually have to start withdrawing or merely say that he will?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We need the authoritative statement and then he will need to begin to withdraw very speedily.

    QUESTION:

    What is your reaction to the scorched action by the Iraqis?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    They have been damaging oil wells for some time. It does seem to have been accelerated by a very substantial extent over the last 48 hours or so. Precisely what the purpose is, one can only conjecture but clearly it is happening; it is undesirable and it is not something we would wish to see continue.

    MICHAEL BRUNSON (ITN):

    But clearly he has to stop doing that as well as the real danger is that if you give him any leeway at all he would continue to try and destroy those?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think that is self-evidently so.

    QUESTION:

    There is no lessening of any military activity between now and the deadline?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    None whatsoever. The military activity will continue until such time as a statement is made that he will obey the Security Council Resolutions and he then does begin to do so.

    Thank you all very much indeed!

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in London – 21 February 1991

    Below is Mr Major’s doorstep interview held in London on Thursday 21st February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Can I just say to you we have now had the opportunity to look very carefully at what Saddam Hussein seems to have said in his speech. It clearly is very disappointing. There is no glimmer of hope, no glimmer of compromise, no suggestion in the slightest way that he realises what he has done and the extent of the damage that he has caused by his illegal actions over recent months.

    Nothing in his speech, I fear, gives any hope of compromise or any suggestion that he is about to obey the Security Council Resolutions. I think this is an immense opportunity that has been lost; it has been lost and now it seems it has gone.

    There is no doubt whatsoever that Iraq is going to lose this conflict and that they will be despatched from Kuwait and that Kuwait will return back to its legal ownership. I had hoped that he might have announced – for he knows what is necessary – that he was going to adopt the Security Council Resolutions. Clearly he has not done so; there has been no suggestion of that at all and I regret that very much.

    QUESTION:

    Does this make a land war inevitable, Prime Minister?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We propose to ensure that Kuwait is liberated. Unless Saddam Hussein does adopt the Security Council Resolutions in full, then there will be a land conflict.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think Saddam Hussein has effectively said to the Soviet Union that he does not seem to regard their peace movements as satisfactory and in any event, as we made clear, in our view they fell a good deal short of the Security Council Resolutions that all the Allies have previously worked to.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, it is clear now that the conflict must continue – that inevitably must include the possibility of a land war. Can you assure the families of those who may be called upon through their sons and daughters serving out there to suffer casualties, that every last chance was pursued to avert a land war?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Over the last few months, we have done everything we possibly could firstly to prevent the conflict beginning and secondly, as I think everyone will recognise, to minimise casualties, both military casualties on our side and civilian casualties in Iraq. It has been a very remarkable operation to do that. The bombing campaign is there to minimise any casualties that subsequently there will be if we yet come to a land conflict, so we will have very great care for the safety of our troops. That has been the position and will continue to be the position.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, is it not the case that in his speech Saddam Hussein did in fact offer to withdraw from Kuwait and would that not be enough to avoid the bloodshed?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    He has made it perfectly clear I think, if one reads the whole of his speech – and it is in itself contradictory in some places – that any reasonable reading of his speech suggests no hint of compromise whatsoever, no acknowledgement of what he has done, no willingness to obey the Security Council Resolutions and nothing really that would bring this conflict to a conclusion.

    QUESTION:

    How ready do you think that the troops are and how decisive do you think the defeat is going to be that is going to be inflicted on Iraq?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There is no doubt about the outcome of the conflict – there is absolutely no doubt about that at all: the Iraqis will lose. That, I think, has been clear for some time and is certainly crystal clear now.

    QUESTION:

    Do you see any merit in waiting to see what the Foreign Minister of Iraq says in private to the Soviet Union [indistinct] what the President said in the broadcast?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If the Iraqis were going to accept and endorse the Security Council Resolutions, then I would have thought that Saddam Hussein would have taken the opportunity of saying that in his speech today. Quite clearly, he has not done so and in any event, I must repeat again that the proposals put forward by the Soviet Union fall a good deal short of the Security Council Resolutions.

    QUESTION:

    As one who may now be responsible for ordering, for agreeing to a further escalation of the conflict, are you easy in your own mind about taking that order?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We have done everything we could to prevent this. What we must seek to do is to restore Kuwait to its rightful ownership and ensure that there is a durable peace and security in the Middle East. That is in everyone’s interest both in the short and the long term, and upon that reason I am content in my own mind that it is right.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, have you reached the stage where the timing of the land battle is now a matter for the military commanders?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not going to comment on the timing of the land battle. I do not think that would be at all wise.

    Thank you all very much indeed!

  • PMQT – 21 February 1991

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 21st February 1991.

    PRIME MINISTER

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mr. Viggers : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Mr. Viggers : Bearing in mind the horrors that have been perpetrated in Kuwait, where thousands have been murdered and tortured, and bearing in mind also the awful nature of the weapons available to Saddam Hussein, does my right hon. Friend agree that there can be no doubt that the implementation of all the United Nations resolutions is both a just and a necessary cause? Does he also agree that since August Saddam Hussein has had every opportunity to withdraw from Kuwait, and that if a major land offensive should now be necessary our forces will carry with them the gratitude and good will of the entire nation?

    The Prime Minister : I very much agree with my hon. Friend. The only message that we wish to hear today is that Iraq is prepared to accept and implement all the Security Council resolutions in full and immediately. That is a message which can be given to us at any time. As I told the House on Tuesday, only when such a message is received and has begun to be implemented can there be an end to the conflict.

    Mr. Kinnock : Will the Prime Minister confirm that within the past 48 hours every one of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council has made it crystal clear to Saddam Hussein yet again that if immediate and unconditional removal of all Iraqi forces were to take place the fighting could end? Does the Prime Minister agree that that is what the whole world wants–including, had they but the freedom to say it, the ordinary people of Iraq? Knowing that, is not it obvious that of all the many cruelties committed by Saddam Hussein, the greatest would be his failure to take the opportunity, which has always existed and still exists, to avert a major land battle and the great suffering that it would bring?

    The Prime Minister : It has certainly been made clear by the allies that we stand by the Security Council resolutions in full. As the House may know, I understand that, within the past few minutes, Saddam Hussein has begun broadcasting to Iraq. There is no indication yet of what he has said or what he will say, but I am bound to say that he preceded his broadcast with yet another Scud attack.

     

    Q2. Dr. Michael Clark : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Dr. Clark : Does my right hon. Friend agree that Britain is an inventive nation and that we maintain a strong science base? Will he, therefore, join me and other hon. Members from both sides of the House in congratulating the Royal Society of Chemistry on celebrating its 150th anniversary this year? Will he also pay tribute to the chemical industry, which contributes a balance of payments surplus of more than £2,000 million per annum to Britain?

    The Prime Minister : I am happy to do that. Only last Friday I had the pleasure of opening an innovative ICI factory in Runcorn in the north- west which will manufacture an alternative to CFCs–the first such factory in the world. The chemical industry has an impressive record both in investment in research and development and in the exploitation of that investment by our scientists. That is the basis of industry’s necessary recovery.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does the Prime Minister agree that no one, but no one, can relish the prospect of having to fight a land war in the Gulf, that even at the 11th hour every realistic avenue for peace ought to be pursued, but that we cannot allow ourselves to be distracted by cul-de-sac designed to delay the freedom of Kuwait? Will he confirm that the aim of the allies is not a temporary peace, leading to conflict later, but a durable, United Nations-based peace, a basic ingredient of which must be recognition of the legitimacy of Kuwait?

    The Prime Minister : I very much agree with the right hon. Gentleman, particularly about durability and security. There is no need for particular peace proposals. The peace proposals that we wish to hear are those that we have set out and agreed with our allies and others in the United Nations Security Council resolutions. That has been and remains the position. If Iraq is prepared to accept and implement those, the conditions exist for an end to the conflict. Without that, they do not exist.

    Mr. Barry Porter : Will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity today to congratulate the management and work force of the Rover Group on their contribution to the British export drive? Does he agree that the figures recently announced are self-evident proof that it was a very good deal between British Aerospace and Rover for the west midlands, the taxpayer and the country?

    The Prime Minister : There has been a remarkable renaissance in the motor car industry generally. That, of course, includes Rover.

     

    Q3. Mr. Lofthouse : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Mr. Lofthouse : Is the Prime Minister aware that West and South Yorkshire police and fire authorities are about to set their budgets this weekend for the forthcoming year? Is he also aware that the options before them are to do so in accordance with the Home Secretary’s guidelines, and thus maintain their present effective forces, or to set the budget according to the standard spending assessments of the Department of the Environment, which would result in the loss of hundreds of police and firemen’s jobs and consequently of services? Considering the increase in the crime rate and the ever-greater demands on the fire service, what advice does the right hon. Gentleman have for them?

    The Prime Minister : Like all authorities, this one must select its own priorities.

    Mr. William Powell : My right hon. Friend will be aware, not least from his knowledge of his own constituency, of the wonderful work done by many thousands of people working for village hall committees. Is he aware that, notwithstanding the marvellous efforts of our right hon. Friend the Member for St. Albans (Mr. Lilley) two years ago to protect village hall committees from some of the worst trepidations of EEC VAT directives, VAT remains a serious problem for them? Will he have a word with the Chancellor and encourage him to try to find a fiscal device to make life easier for those voluntary fund-raisers?

    The Prime Minister : It is not readily apparent what fiscal device my hon. Friend has in mind, but if he cares to suggest something I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will examine it.

     

    Q4. Miss Hoey : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Miss Hoey : Does the Prime Minister recall when he was a young man being a councillor in Ferndale ward in my constituency? Does he realise that this month there is 25 per cent. unemployment in Ferndale ward? Will he have time in the next couple of weeks to come and see the people there, many of whom have been out of work for more than two years, and tell them what more they can do to get jobs under the Conservative Government?

    The Prime Minister : While visiting Ferndale ward, which I had the privilege of representing for a period after 1968, I might also discuss with the people why, so many years later, nothing has been done by Lambeth council to improve their environment, their housing, their street cleaning or any of the other matters that concern them.

    Mr. Michael Brown : Does my right hon. Friend accept that the answers to any review of the community charge are staring us in the face from Westminster city hall? Would my right hon. Friend note that that council–a single-tier authority–has been able to reduce its community charge as a result of good housekeeping? Will my right hon. Friend ensure that Dame Shirley Porter is made a member of the Government review team immediately?

    The Prime Minister : We should be happy to have Dame Shirley’s advice on that or on many other matters and I am happy to congratulate Westminster city council on the community charge that it has levied. It is certainly an example to other authorities and I hope that they will follow that example.

     

    Q5. Mr. Bill Michie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Mr. Michie : Does the Prime Minister agree that concern about loss of face, or part face, by any leader leading a nation involved in the Gulf war pales into insignificance when compared with the possible loss of life if a land war is embarked upon?

    The Prime Minister : Nobody wishes artificially to bring about a land war if it is avoidable. The hon. Gentleman should bear in mind who began this conflict, what the aims were and what is necessary both to end it and to ensure that there is a secure and durable peace, which means that conflict will not recommence at a later date. The hon. Gentleman should bear that in mind.

    Mr. Cash : When my right hon. Friend saw Chancellor Kohl the other day, did he discuss the German proposals for political union, which have now been submitted to the intergovernmental conference? Did he agree that those proposals were completely unworkable and that if they were put into effect they would mean, to all intents and purposes, the end of the Westminster Parliament?

    The Prime Minister : I discussed a range of matters with Chancellor Kohl. I did not discuss the letter which the French and the Germans put forward, although we discussed in general terms some of the matters related to both the economic and monetary union IGC and the political union IGC. I set out for Chancellor Kohl our concerns about those matters and the policies that we have set before the House.

     

    Q6. Mr. Michael : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Mr. Michael : On a day when the Government’s own gross domestic product figures have illustrated the depth of the recession and the frightening drop in production created by his policies as Chancellor and now as Prime Minister, will the right hon. Gentleman reflect on the stupidity of adding 6,000 experts on training the unemployed to the queues of unemployed? Opposition Members have lived with the misery caused by the Government for millions of people during the recession in the early 1980s. How does the right hon. Gentleman intend to prevent a repetition of that misery for millions in the 1990s?

    The Prime Minister : We have an excellent record on training, as the hon. Gentleman knows. As for economic circumstances in this country and elsewhere, the hon. Gentleman will know that three of the G7 countries are now officially in recession and two more have had a downturn in output. The hon. Gentleman imputes too much authority to me if he thinks that I am responsible for all that.

    Mr. Hill : Does my right hon. Friend agree that probably one of the biggest mistakes that the western alliance has made was to try to treat Saddam Hussein as though he were an honourable man when in fact his words are worthless? When my right hon. Friend next telephones President Bush, he may be able to tell him of some of the evidence that we have heard in the House about the human rights being destroyed in Kuwait and the genocide taking place there which must mean more and more deaths for the Kuwaitis every day.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend expresses a view which is held by the vast majority of hon. Members in the House. There is no doubt that since 2 August the Iraqis have broken any number of international obligations and there must be some considerable concern about whether we can trust what is said to us by them.

     

    Q7. Mr. Loyden : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Mr. Loyden : Does the Prime Minister recall the statement that he made on 29 November following his election to his present position? He said then that he wanted to see a country at ease with itself. Does he believe that 2 million unemployed, the continuing decimation of our health service, the imposition of the hated poll tax and the current deepening recession represent a climate in which the people of this country can be at ease with themselves? Does he not now recognise that the only way to remove those problems is by the removal of the present Government?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is a class warrior who believes in conflict ; I am not. That is the difference between us.

     

    Q8. Mr. John Marshall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 21 February.

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

    Mr. Marshall : Will my right hon. Friend tell the House and the country which five local authorities have the highest community charge, which five have the worst education results and which five have the largest rent arrears?

    The Prime Minister : I shall be happy to write to my hon. Friend will a detailed list of those authorities. I think that I can tell him now, however, that he will find no Conservative authorities among them, and an overwhelming predominance of Labour authorities, almost certainly including Brent, Camden and Lambeth.