The Rt. Hon. Sir John Major KG CH

Tag: Scott Inquiry

  • PMQT Written Answers – 25 January 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 25th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Kashmir

    Mr. Pike : To ask the Prime Minister what discussions he has had in the last six months regarding Kashmir; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : I discussed Kashmir at the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in October with the Prime Minister of Pakistan. We regularly raise Kashmir in our discussions with the Indian and Pakistan Governments.

     

    Arms Supplies (Iraq)

    Mr. Kaufman : To ask the Prime Minister what action he has taken to ascertain who drew up the original draft of the letter about arms supplies to Iraq that he sent to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton on 17 February 1992 and who made deletions in that draft to alter it to the form in which the Prime Minister sent the aforesaid letter to the right hon. Member; what explanation he has received for the deletions; and what action he intends to take (a) in regard to responsibility for the deletions and (b) in regard to writing to the aforesaid right hon. Member to correct the false impression that he now acknowledges his letter gave.

    The Prime Minister : My Office has supplied Lord Justice Scott’s inquiry with the further information he requested. The issues arising are a matter for Lord Justice Scott. As will be apparent from my evidence to the inquiry, I do not accept that my letter to the right hon. Gentleman was misleading.

     

    Public Appointments

    Dr. Wright : To ask the Prime Minister which public appointments are handled by the No. 10 appointments secretary.

    The Prime Minister : My appointments secretary assists me over a range of appointments in Church and state for which I am responsible, particularly those where the appointment is made by Her Majesty the Queen on my advice.

     

    New Year’s Honours List

    Mr. Bayley : To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a list of the people included in this year’s new year’s honours list with their place of residence by standard region and their occupation.

    The Prime Minister : No. The information requested could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

     

    British Empire Forces

    Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Prime Minister where the records of all the soldiers of the British empire forces, who were sentenced to death during the first world war but whose sentences were subsequently commuted, are located; and if he will now arrange for them to be made available in the Public Record Office.

    The Prime Minister : The courts martial records of British service men who were sentenced to death during the first world war but whose sentences were subsequently commuted have regrettably not survived. The available evidence suggests they were lost when a German bomb hit the main war office and Army repository in 1940.

    The availability of the courts martial records of other British empire forces is a matter that should be pursued with each of the countries concerned.

     

    Government Successes (Criteria)

    Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister what are the criteria by which Her Majesty’s Government will measure their success in 1994 Official Report, column 849 .

    The Prime Minister : By the success of our policies in all areas of national life.

     

    Back to Basics

    Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement giving details of the Government’s “back to basics” policy.

    The Prime Minister : I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him on 21 January 1994 Official Report, column 849

     

    Ministers (Unsuitability for Office)

    Mr. Simon Hughes : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the circumstances which render Ministers unsuitable to retain office.

    The Prime Minister : There can be a variety of circumstances but the main criterion should be whether the Minister can continue to perform the duties of office effectively.

     

    Engagements

    Sir Peter Tapsell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 25 January.

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 25 January.

    The Prime Minister : 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.

     

    Iraq

    Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister if, when he next meets President Clinton, he will discuss the report of the Harvard medical school team on child malnutrition and disease in Iraq.

    The Prime Minister : I expect to meet President Clinton during my visit to Washington at the end of February. The situation in Iraq may come up in our talks then. However, United Kingdom and United States officials are in regular touch over Iraq, including the humanitarian situation.

    I also refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 20 January Official Report, column 814 .

     

    Health Promotion, Wales

    Mr. Morgan : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to place in the Library a copy of his efficiency unit’s efficiency scrutiny of the delivery of health promotion in Wales.

    The Prime Minister : Copies of the efficiency scrutiny of health promotion in Wales were placed in the Library of the House on 1 April 1993.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 18 January 1994

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 18th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Iraq and Iran

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what record has been kept of representations made to the Prime Minister by members of the public in regard to Iraq since 1985.

    The Prime Minister : Records of representations from members of the public in the form of correspondence on this and other topics that have been received by my office since November 1990, and to which I or my office have replied, have been retained. No records exist prior to April 1989.

     

    Scott Inquiry

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister if any request has been made by (a) Lord Justice Scott or (b) members of the public to Her Majesty’s Government to permit cameras and tape recorders to be taken into and used in the Scott inquiry.

    The Prime Minister : The procedures of the Scott inquiry are a matter for Lord Justice Scott.

    Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister what representations he has received and from whom in the last six months that the terms of reference or the workings of the Scott inquiry into arms for Iraq should be modified or changed.

    The Prime Minister : In the last six months I have answered a written question from the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent (Mr. Smith) concerning a change to the procedures of the inquiry, and a letter from the hon. Member for Coventry, South-East (Mr. Cunningham) seeking an extension to the inquiry’s terms of reference. I have received no other requests for changes.

     

    Christmas Cards

    Mr. Bayley : To ask the Prime Minister how many official Christmas cards were sent out in 1993 by (a) himself, (b) civil servants and (c) staff of Government agencies working in or to his office; and how much these cards cost (i) to buy, (ii) to post and (iii) in staff time to sign, address and place in envelopes.

    The Prime Minister : The information as requested can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

     

    Arms Sales

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister what records are held at 10 Downing street of a telephone conversation made between his predecessor and Mr. Frank Machon in regard to arms sales in January 1989.

    The Prime Minister : As far as I am aware, there have not been any conversations and there are no records.

     

    Engagements

    Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

    The Prime Minister : 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.

     

    Channel Tunnel Rail Link

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish a full list of all statements he has made, and/or press notices issued by his Department, which referred to a possible completion date for the channel tunnel rail link, the dates on which each such statement was made and the possible completion date which was mentioned.

    The Prime Minister : I have not made any such statements.

     

    Crossrail

    Mr. Dobson : To ask the Prime Minister if he will publish a full list of all statements he has made and/or press notices issued by his Department, which referred to a possible completion date for the crossrail project, the dates on which each such statement was made and the possible completion date which was mentioned.

    The Prime Minister : I have made no statements nor has my Department issued any press notices which referred to a possible completion date for the crossrail project.

     

    Broadcasting Acts

    Mr. Madden : To ask the Prime Minister what information he has received from the Irish Republic concerning its decision not to renew section 31 of the Irish Broadcasting Act 1960; when he received copies of guidelines issued to the staff of Irish broadcasting organisations following the non-renewal of section 31; what action he proposes concerning section 10 of the Broadcasting Act 1990; what representations he has received concerning households in the United Kingdom receiving television and radio broadcasts originating in the Irish Republic and observing different broadcasting requirements; and if he will make a statement.

    The Prime Minister : The Irish Government’s announcement of their decision was made immediately available to us, together with relevant background information. So far as the United Kingdom Broadcasting restrictions are concerned, I refer to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) on 17 January, Official Report, column 369. I have not received any representations concerning the reception of broadcasts originating in the Irish Republic.

  • PMQT – 18 January 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 18th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q1. Mr. Enright : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to visit South Elmsall.

    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major) : I have no immediate plans to do so.

    Mr. Enright : With the closure of Frickley colliery, one in three men in South Elmsall is now out of work, which is extremely serious. Will the Prime Minister promise to back Wakefield district council’s bid for coalfield area funds so that it can co-operate, as it has successfully before, with the local chamber of commerce, British Coal Enterprise and others to produce a regeneration programme, which is so desperately needed? Wakefield council has shown that it can do it sensibly and sensitively and I ask that it be given the opportunity.

    The Prime Minister : I understand the difficulties that face the hon. Gentleman and those of his constituents presently without work. I am delighted that unemployment has fallen in his constituency in recent years, but I recognise the serious problems that exist there. I do not believe that the hon. Gentleman’s constituency will specifically benefit from the coalfield area fund, but a wide range of help will be available. In the hon. Gentleman’s area alone, £4 million will be available for an industrial and commercial development programme, and £3 million will be provided to training and enterprise councils for training and business support. As the hon. Gentleman will know, intermediate area status has been granted. Regional enterprise grants have been extended and, in addition, in excess of £2.5 million of European structural funds has been granted to the Wakefield area. We shall continue to keep those under review and do all that we can to help miners who have lost their jobs.

     

    Engagements

    Q2. Mr. Rathbone : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

    The Prime Minister : 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. Rathbone : Will my right hon. Friend spare a moment today to congratulate police and Customs on the co-ordinated job that led to the seizure of £50 million worth of cocaine in Manchester recently? Is he in a position yet to announce how the Government will co-ordinate Government departmental activity to give new impetus to the Government’s own efforts to counter drugs misuse?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend touches on a vital point, which is of great concern to this Government and across Europe. The fight against drugs involves all of us–police, customs, parents and Government–and we must all play our part in stepping up the campaign against those who deal in that trade. I welcome the seizure of cocaine to which my hon. Friend refers and congratulate all those involved in it. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary announced before Christmas that the Government are setting up a drugs unit, the purpose of which will be to ensure that the policies of all Departments are co-ordinated to improve co-ordinated action against the general problem of drugs.

    Mr. John Smith : Can the Prime Minister tell us whether by any chance he received a memorandum around the time of the Budget from the Treasury informing him that freezing income tax allowances for two years in succession would force 400,000 low-paid people into income tax for the first time? Was he aware that his Budgets would have that result?

    The Prime Minister : As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, take-home pay for people in all strands of income has risen materially over recent years–by 40 per cent. plus for those on average earnings since 1979 and by 30 to 40 per cent. for those on half-average earnings. The right hon. and learned Gentleman might also recall that it fell between 1974 and 1979 for single people and for couples without children, and barely rose for couples with children.

    Mr. John Smith : That was hardly an answer to my question. If the Prime Minister cannot answer that question may I ask him whether anyone told him that the tax changes in those Budgets would put the equivalent of 7p on income tax and that a typical family would have to pay another £1,330 over the next two years, or are those things that he preferred not to know about?

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. and learned Gentleman was not entirely satisfied with the first answer, let me tell him further that even after the Budget there will be half a million fewer taxpayers next year than there were in 1979. Tax rates have fallen dramatically over that period and low inflation means that freezing personal allowances will cost basic rate taxpayers 34p a week when compared with inflation. He mentioned people on low incomes, but he neglected to mention family credit, child care allowance, the uprating in child benefit and the fact that the real take-home pay of families on average earnings will be 40 per cent. higher than when his party was last in government.

    Mr. John Smith : May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to make a special effort of memory? I know that it is hard for him with all these papers crossing his desk all the time, but can he not struggle to recall his repeated promises to the British people that he would not increase income tax or national insurance and that he would not extend the scope of value added tax? Is not the breaking of those promises the reason for justified public cynicism and anger at this discredited Government?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is beginning to sound like a very worn record. It is absolutely clear that the standard rates of tax under the Conservative party have dropped dramatically since the Opposition were in government and, in any given circumstance, the rate of taxation under any Conservative Government would be lower than under any Labour Government at any time.

     

    Q3. Mrs. Ann Winterton : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Mrs. Winterton : Bearing in mind the interest presently shown by the press in the lives of the politicians, does my right hon. Friend agree that the press itself should show the same honour and integrity that it expects of others?

    The Prime Minister : Madam Speaker,– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. I am as anxious as anyone to hear the response to that question.

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend might think that ; I could not possibly comment.

     

    Q5. Mr. Mudie : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Mr. Mudie : The Prime Minister will be aware that at permanent secretary level he was advised that the aid package to the Malaysian power station was a bad buy, uneconomic and an abuse of the aid system, yet he still instructed that the aid should be given. In view of the fact that it will cost the British taxpayer more than £230 million, does he consider that to be good judgment, and if so, why is he refusing to allow Members of the House to see papers relating to that decision?

    The Prime Minister : The Government made a commitment to the Pergau project in 1989 personally to the Malaysian Prime Minister. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I decided in 1991 to proceed, both to honour the commitment made by my predecessor and in the wider context of maintaining billions of pounds of British exports to Malaysia–exports of £5 billion since 1982, and doubled exports between 1988 and 1992. To have withdrawn the contract would have put British jobs at risk. It is about time that the Opposition took a consistent position on these things. How does the hon. Gentleman reconcile his party’s call for lower unemployment with his criticism of this project? The British Government are backing British business and achieving orders abroad and all the hon. Gentleman can do is carp and criticise. Does he want jobs for British workers or does he not?

    Mr. Kynoch : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the latest figures for manufacturing output show further significant growth? Does he agree that that represents further proof that the United Kingdom is leading Europe from recovery into a period of sustained growth?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I can certainly confirm that to my hon. Friend and the basis of this is the record that we have on inflation, the fact that we have been able to bring interest rates down and the fact that it is now clear to everyone that the British economy is recovering and growing–recovering more comprehensively and growing more rapidly than any other economy in western Europe.

     

    Q6. Mr. Winnick : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Mr. Winnick : Is the Prime Minister aware of the concern felt by so many people at the amount of financial sleaze in this country arising from Government policies and attitudes? Is he further aware that the one “back to basics” attitude that people desperately want and crave is the restoring of integrity to public life? Is it not clear that they will not get that from the Government?

    The Prime Minister : I agree entirely about the necessity for integrity in public life. The hon. Gentleman and other Opposition Members have sought to take a moral stand about standards in public life. I do not object to that. It is also necessary for those Opposition Members to look at their own colleagues who spread smear and innuendo on a week-by-week basis with a complete disregard for the truth. Smear and innuendo are the hallmarks of political cowardice and they have become the trademark of the Opposition.

    Dr. Liam Fox : Will my right hon. Friend congratulate Rover Cars on its 9 per cent. increase in sales last year many of which were exported through Royal Portbury docks in my constituency? Is he aware that their production output outstripped Mercedes Benz in a difficult market and that neither the success of Rover nor Royal Portbury docks would have been possible without the privatisation programme which only the Conservative party would have had the courage to champion?

    The Prime Minister : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend both about the remarkable success of Rover Cars which I hope and expect will continue in future, and the success of privatisation both specifically and generally. It has been remarkable. What we now see in the motor car industry–in Rover and other parts of the industry–is that it has made the most remarkable turn around in recent years and soon will be a net exporter of motor cars. It is quite different from the old days a few years ago when Red Robbo and others were wrecking the entire industry.

     

    Q7. Ms Quin : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 18 January.

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

    Ms Quin : Is it not the case that the only clear message that the Prime Minister gave to the public yesterday when he was questioned by the Scott inquiry was, “Don’t ask me, I’m only Prime Minister?”

    The Prime Minister : I suggest that, in due course, the hon. Lady reads the six hours of detailed evidence that I gave. She might then regard her remarks of a moment ago to be just a touch inadequate.

     

    Ministerial Visits

    Q9. Mr. Luff : To ask the Prime Minister whether he plans to make an official visit to Worcester.

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

    Mr. Luff : If my right hon. Friend were to visit Worcester– [Interruption.] would he join me in welcoming the decision by two of the teacher trade unions to drop their boycott of national curriculum tests? Does he agree that that sets an excellent example for the other teacher trade union–the National Union of Teachers–to follow?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I very strongly agree with that. I very strongly agree with the two teacher trade unions that have decided to drop their boycott. It would be of immense help, not just to the profession of teaching but, essentially, to the children in the classroom, if the NUT were to take precisely the same action so that the tests can proceed. I believe that there is no justifiable reason for the boycott in the future. There was little, if any, justification before ; now there is none. The NUT should follow the leadership of the other two unions.

  • PMQT – 13 January 1994

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 13th January 1994.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Mrs. Gillan : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 13 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.

    Mrs. Gillan : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the statement by Gerry Adams and Sinn Fein calling for the clarification of the Downing street declaration is just a sickening attempt by the IRA’s apologists to shuffle the responsibility for their evil campaign of terror and fear? Is it not time that they faced up to their responsibilities and grasped the challenge of adopting the democratic path?

    The Prime Minister : I think that my hon. Friend speaks for many millions of people in this country and throughout the island of Ireland. I welcome in particular the recent statement by the hon. Member for Foyle (Mr. Hume), making clear that he sees no excuse whatever for continuing violence and appealing for people to devote themselves exclusively to the democratic process. As the Taoiseach and I have made clear on a number of occasions, the joint declaration is not an invitation for renegotiation. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and I have gone to great lengths in this House and beyond it to ensure that the joint declaration is fully understood and we shall, of course, continue to do so. We still await a positive response from the IRA.

    Mr. John Smith : Will the Prime Minister unequivocally condemn the gerrymandering and wilful misconduct which has cost £21 million of taxpayers’ money in what his party has described as a flagship council?

    The Prime Minister : Let me say unequivocally to the right hon. and learned Gentleman that if the reported allegations about the council turn out to be true, of course I condemn such activities just as I would condemn malpractice in any council, wherever it occurred. It would be wrong to comment on this case while the auditor is still considering it. The auditor operates independently of Government, has full powers to pursue his inquiries and I have no doubt that he will continue to use them to the full. We should wait and see precisely what the outcome may be. Otherwise, we are in danger of assuming that people have committed malpractice until they are proved innocent. I would think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman, who is a barrister, would recognise that that is no way to pass judgment.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister recollect the frequent endorsements that he and his colleagues have offered to Westminster city council, in particular the comment by the Secretary of State for Employment, that Westminster council was one of the Tory’s stunning successes and a source of cheer for every Conservative? Taking everything into account, does the Prime Minister think that those endorsements were wholly wise?

    The Prime Minister : I have just made it perfectly clear to the whole House that the district auditor’s report contains a number of serious allegations. At this stage, they are allegations. There is now a perfectly proper legal process by which the allegations will be examined in depth and the truth arrived at. The district auditor has been at pains to stress that his findings are provisional. I think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman should wait until those findings are confirmed before he is so swift to judge.

    Mr. John Smith : Does not the Prime Minister appreciate that the matter has now been investigated for four years, and what is revealed is a devastating example of financial corruption and an abuse of power by senior members of the Conservative party? Cannot he at least condemn that?

    The Prime Minister : I have already made it clear that if the allegations are confirmed, I will condemn unreservedly. But, as has been made entirely clear, this is the start of the legal process. Unlike the right hon. and learned Gentleman, most people will prefer to wait until that is completed and not find people guilty until and unless they are proven to be guilty. That is a cardinal principle of British law which I commend to the right hon. and learned Gentleman.

     

    Q2. Dr. Spink : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 13 January.

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

    Dr. Spink : Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming yesterday’s sharp fall in unemployment? Does he recall that one year ago the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) predicted that unemployment would rise month after month? Therefore, will my right hon. Friend invite the hon. Gentleman to make another such prediction?

    The Prime Minister : Most people would probably settle not for another prediction but for an admission from the hon. Gentleman that he got it wrong again and again and again. I very much welcome yesterday’s fall in unemployment, which means that the number of unemployed people has fallen by nearly a quarter of a million over the past year. Of course, it is still too high, but the fall of nearly 47,000 on top of the falls in recent months suggests that we are now seeing a continuing downward trend in the level of unemployment. We are the only western European nation to have low inflation, an economy that is growing and unemployment that is falling significantly.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. The House must come to order. There is impossibly bad behaviour today.

    Mr. Ashdown : Does Lord Justice Scott still enjoy the confidence of the Prime Minister?

    The Prime Minister : It was the Government who set up the inquiry and gave Lord Justice Scott the freedom to pursue it as he thinks fit. I have no adverse comments to make on the way that he is doing it.

    Mr. Streeter : Does my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the £20 million contract won by Plymouth-based British Aerospace (Systems and Equipment) Ltd. in December, further boosted by a share in the £50 million contract announced by the Ministry of Defence yesterday? Is that not a fine illustration of defence contracts boosting and sustaining British jobs? Can my right hon. Friend confirm that if the Liberal policy on defence were followed, those defence jobs would simply not exist and many people in the west country would be out of work?

    The Prime Minister : I am, of course, delighted at the contracts to which my hon. Friend refers. It is certainly the case that if the reductions in defence expenditure advocated by the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) or, indeed, the Leader of the Opposition were carried into force, the implications not only for our capacity to defend ourselves but for British industry, not least in the west country, would be very profound. It would be a reassuring change if the Leader of the Liberal party were to say the same thing in the west country as he says elsewhere.

     

    London Hospitals

    Q3. Mr. Corbyn : To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to make an official visit to a London national health service hospital.

    The Prime Minister : I shall be making a series of visits around the country, during which I intend to include NHS hospitals, as I have in the past.

    Mr. Corbyn : In his visits around the country, will the Prime Minister undertake to explain to Londoners why more than 150,000 people are on hospital waiting lists? Beds are being closed and wards are being taken out of operation, and one night in Bart’s hospital more than 30 people had to sleep on floors or on trolleys because there was not sufficient space for them. Are not the Prime Minister’s policies of the internal market leading to more and more closures and losses of bed space as the crisis and the chaos get worse? Is not it time for him to intervene to scrap the internal market and give Londoners the health service which they need, deserve and demand? Is not that a basic right?

    The Prime Minister : We are certainly seeking to give Londoners the health service which they deserve. In addition, we are seeking to improve dramatically primary health care in the capital and that has been evident for some time.

    The hon. Gentleman neglected to mention in his catalogue the dramatic reductions in the times which patients wait for hospital treatment. Since the reforms have been implemented, the number of patients who have been waiting for more than a year has fallen from around 120,000 to just over 70,000, and that figure is on a declining trend. The hon. Gentleman will know of expenditure which has been made in his own area’s district health authority. He ought not to underestimate the work that is being done to improve the health service for all the people who live in London.

     

    Engagements

    Q4. Mr. Milligan : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 13 January.

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

    Mr. Milligan : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the work that is being done in Eastleigh to develop a safer door lock for trains? Such a lock could have averted some of the 300 deaths which have occurred during the past 20 years when passengers have fallen out of trains. Will the Government encourage British Rail to invest in the new technology which would not only save lives on the railways but would also save jobs in my constituency?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend may know that British Rail is actively considering the technical feasibility and the cost-effectiveness of the system to which he refers. I know how important the decision is for my hon. Friend, and I know how hard he has worked on behalf of his constituents. British Rail is examining the matter at the moment.

    Mr. Kaufman : On November 10 1992, the Prime Minister, together with the Attorney-General, announced the appointment of Lord Justice Scott to conduct his inquiry. Will the Prime Minister now express his full confidence that Lord Justice Scott is conducting the inquiry fairly, particularly since he is due shortly to appear before Lord Justice Scott? Is the Prime Minister confident that he will be treated fairly by Lord Justice Scott? Will the Prime Minister repudiate the scurrilous attack on Lord Justice Scott by Lord Howe?

    The Prime Minister : I know that it has been a quite noisy House this afternoon, but I seem to recall answering that question a few moments ago. I will reiterate to the right hon. Gentleman that the Government appointed Lord Justice Scott to conduct an independent inquiry. It is therefore for him to draw up his own procedures and it is not a matter for the Government to comment on those procedures. I have no adverse comments to make upon those procedures, as I indicated a few moments ago.

     

    Q5. Mr. John Marshall : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 13 January.

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

    Mr. John Marshall : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the continued incarceration of Ron Arad is quite unacceptable? Will he give the House an assurance that the Government will maintain their efforts to secure his freedom?

    The Prime Minister : I can certainly give that assurance, and we will continue to support efforts to free Mr. Arad. We have raised the case on innumerable occasions with the Iranians, the Syrians and with any others who may be able to help. On his visit to Israel earlier this month, the Foreign Secretary met members of Mr. Arad’s family and assured them that we will continue to do what we can to help. My right hon. Friend gave them our warm sympathy for the pain and suffering which they must feel at present.

    Mr. Beggs : Will the Prime Minister give us an assurance today that whether or not the Prime Minister of the Irish Republic proceeds to interpret, elaborate, explain or, indeed, encourage Sinn Fein-IRA to respond to the Downing street declaration, he will stand by it and that he expects members of Sinn Fein-IRA to cease their campaign completely and indicate that they will lay down their arms so that they can enter the democratic process?

    The Prime Minister : I certainly wish to see them unreservedly and permanently end violence and then enter into exploratory talks that can lead to them taking part in the democratic process. I reiterate again : we are not in the business of clarifying the declaration. The declaration is clear. What is intended by Mr. Adams in his present activities is to seek bit by bit to draw the Government into negotiation upon the joint declaration. That is not on offer to Mr. Adams now. It will not be on offer to Mr. Adams in the future. If he wishes to enter into discussions, he knows how he may do it. He can decide to give up violence. After three months he can enter into exploratory talks. Then he will be able to enter into the democratic talks process itself. That is the route ahead. The only question that needs to be asked is not of the British Government or the Irish Government but of Mr. Adams. Will he stop the violence and enter the democratic process or will he not? Everything else is fudge.

  • PMQT Written Answers – 16 April 1993

    Below is the text of the written answers relating to Prime Minister’s Question Time from 16th April 1993.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Scott Inquiry

    Mr. Llew Smith : To ask the Prime Minister (1) if the costs of legal and other advisers attending the Scott inquiry will be covered by the resources made available by Her Majesty’s Government to support Lord Justice Scott’s investigation;

    (2) what criteria will govern the repayment of costs for witnesses at the Scott inquiry; and what expenses will be regarded as reasonable.

    The Prime Minister : The inquiry will meet the expenses of a witness or adviser necessarily incurred in attending to give evidence to the inquiry. Legal costs will be met by the inquiry if Lord Justice Scott decides that they were necessary in the interests of justice. They will be assessed by the costs branch of the Treasury Solicitor’s Department on the standard basis (as defined in order 62, r.12(1) of the rules of the Supreme Court). The legal costs of Government witnesses or advisers will be met by the Department in which they were serving at the relevant time.

  • PMQT – 4 February 1993

    Below is the text of Prime Minister’s Question Time from 4th February 1993.

    PRIME MINISTER:

     

    Engagements

    Q1. Dr. Liam Fox : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 4 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.

    Dr. Fox : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the positive response to what he said last night–that the Government will consider new ways to give extra help to unemployed people and to keep them in touch with the jobs market? Is not that open-minded approach in stark contrast with the closed minds but open mouths of Labour Members?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right. My concern is to make sure, wherever possible, that we keep unemployed people in touch with the world of work. Both here and elsewhere, that is a vital issue and I believe that we need a public debate on it. It is right to look at all the radical options and we propose to do so. That may mean offering more opportunities, for example, of volunteering, or extending an element of compulsion, which we already have in Restart. I do not believe that we should shy away from considering those options, and we will not.

    Mr. John Smith : After a week of chaos over Government economic policy and yet more redundancies in British industry, does the Prime Minister understand that it is vital for British manufacturing industry that Leyland DAF should not be allowed to collapse, as there are 5,500 jobs at stake in the company and 10,000 among its suppliers? Will the Prime Minister undertake that if the Dutch and Belgian Governments rescue their parts of the company, the British Government will do at least the same for Leyland DAF?

    The Prime Minister : No. As the right hon. and learned Gentleman knows, the receivers appointed yesterday at Leyland DAF have made it clear that they believe that at least parts of the business can be saved as a commercially viable business without unnecessary state hand-outs. I believe that that is the way to proceed.

    Mr. Smith : Does the Prime Minister not understand the concern which exists in the country because of the Government’s record of neglect of manufacturing industry, and the hesitancy and ambiguity of statements made by the Government? Can the Prime Minister not give a clear undertaking that he will do for Britain what the Dutch and Belgian Governments will do for their countries?

    The Prime Minister : The right hon. and learned Gentleman is asking us to do what has been tried in the past by previous Labour Governments and others and has failed. He should recall the disastrous outcome of the Labour Government’s merger of Leyland with the British Motor Corporation, involving millions and millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money; later they had to nationalise it, which cost even more millions. Much of that money paid for wasteful working practices and unjustified wage increases insisted on by the unions. That was Labour’s idea of industrial strategy and it is clear from the right hon. and learned Gentleman that it still is. He has learnt nothing.

    Mr. John Smith : Does the Prime Minister not understand that that long answer will cause even greater concern to the people in Leyland DAF? Does he not understand that in the real world outside the Carlton club people see a Government lurching from one muddle to another, whether it be interest rates, defence cuts or workfare? Can he not set one simple objective and stick to it? Leyland DAF is a vital British interest and it ought to be secured.

    The Prime Minister : My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade set out our position quite clearly the other day. Hon. Members must understand that we are not prepared to spend taxpayers’ money to provide working capital for companies in difficulty. Many private companies need more working capital from time to time ; it is simply not realistic to expect the Government to provide it. That approach was tried in the 1960s; it failed. It was tried in the 1970s; it failed. That is the economic reality which the right hon. and learned Gentleman should face up to.

    Mr. Onslow : Is my right hon. Friend aware that yesterday’s announcement about the size of the Army is particularly welcome as renewed proof that the Government are ready to respond to changing circumstances overseas? As the Opposition are committed to a 25 per cent. cut in the defence budget, will he use his influence with the Leader of the House to make sure that we have an early debate on the subject?

    The Prime Minister : The measures announced by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence yesterday are a small but necessary adjustment to a changing world situation. They will ensure that the Army has the flexibility and resilience necessary to meet challenges in the years ahead. Had the Opposition been in power and carried out their defence policies, they would have slashed £6 billion off defence. I wonder what they would have said then about the defence jobs that would have been lost.

     

    Q2. Mr. Galbraith : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 4 February.

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

    Mr. Galbraith : In view of the continuing uncertainty in the money markets, can the Prime Minister say whether his Chancellor will be presenting not only the March Budget but the December Budget? May I have a straightforward answer? Will the current Chancellor be presenting the December Budget–yes or no?

    The Prime Minister : I cannot imagine anyone other than the Chancellor of the Exchequer presenting a Budget.

     

    Q3. Mr. Duncan : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 4 February.

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

    Mr. Duncan : Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that criminals, even teenage criminals and other young offenders, are responsible for their own actions and deserve to be punished accordingly? Will he take this opportunity to reaffirm that it is Government policy to punish such young offenders and not to make excuses for them like the Labour party?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with my hon. Friend. There is no excuse for crime. Society is not to blame, and individuals are. For a small number of persistent juvenile offenders we need a new approach. We need new powers to put them into secure accommodation where they can be trained for a useful future. Unless they are trained at an early stage, we betray them, for we leave them in a position where they may believe that crime is justifiable and then wreck their lives as well as other people’s.

    Mr. Ashdown rose– [Interruption.]

    Madam Speaker : Order. This is a very important time, not only for the House, but for people outside who watch and attempt to listen to us. The House must come to order before we can make any further progress.

    Mr. Ashdown : In the light of the Prime Minister’s previous answer and his speech last night, will he assure the House that he understands that any scheme designed to make the victims of his policies the inmates of a compulsory ghetto of low wage and no hope would be rightly condemned? But a policy and programme designed to give the long-term unemployed real training and real job experience–one like the community programme from which I and thousands of others benefited 10 years ago–would be well worth considering.

    The Prime Minister : If the right hon. Gentleman had read my speech before asking his question he might not have asked it in that form.

     

    Q4. Mr. Sumberg : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 4 February.

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

    Mr. Sumberg : Has my right hon. Friend noticed reports in today’s press that the National Union of Teachers is requiring its members to boycott the English test for 14-year-olds? Is not that disgraceful decision a grave disservice not only to parents and children but to the vast majority of decent and honourable teachers who serve the community?

    The Prime Minister : Yes, I believe that it is a disgraceful decision, and one which, in time, the NUT itself will regret. English is the single most important subject in the curriculum, and I believe that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is absolutely right to insist that grammar and standard school English should be taught in our schools. I condemn without reservation the action proposed by the NUT and I utterly deplore the politically motivated campaign being waged by some members of that union. They said yesterday :

    “A boycott of English tests presents militants with an opportunity to broaden the current struggle.”

    Those militants are playing politics with children’s futures, and the sooner the NUT denounces them the better it will be for everyone.

     

    Q5. Ms. Eagle : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 4 February.

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

    Ms. Eagle : Is the Prime Minister aware that this week sees the 75th anniversary of the occasion of women’s gaining the vote? Is it not an insult that his Government have decided to celebrate this great anniversary by abolishing wages councils, thereby adversely affecting the earnings of 2 million women?

    The Prime Minister : Certainly not. We believe in equality.

     

    Deregulation

    Q6. Mr. Jenkin : To ask the Prime Minister what conclusions were reached at his seminar on deregulation held on 2 February.

    The Prime Minister : We agreed to review all 7,000 regulations currently imposed on businesses, with the aim of abolishing regulations wherever possible. Where they cannot be abolished–for overriding reasons of health or safety, for example–we shall work to simplify them. We agreed also that future proposals for new regulations must always spell out the costs to businesses of complying with them. We must not impose burdensome regulations on business unless they are absolutely necessary, and we are determined not to do so.

    Mr. Jenkin : I thank my right hon. Friend for his response, which will be most welcome to businesses in my constituency and in all other parts of the country. Can my right hon. Friend confirm that our right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and his junior Ministers have absolute freedom to seek out and destroy unnecessary bureaucracy and regulation, in whichever Government Department or whichever institution it may reside?

    The Prime Minister : My hon. Friend is entirely right. That is precisely the task that I have given to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. There is a problem with excessive regulation in Brussels, but there is also a problem in Whitehall. We need to deal with both.

     

    Engagements

    Q7. Mr. McGrady : To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 4 February.

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

    Mr. McGrady : May I draw the Prime Minister’s attention to the patients charter that he had published and so ardently supported? The charter sees clinical effectiveness and accessibility as the twin pillars of a good acute hospital service. Is the Prime Minister aware that in many areas, and in particular my constituency of South Down, with an area of 750 square miles, all hospital services are being abolished? Will the Prime Minister join me in condemning that action as contrary to the patients charter, and will he take a personal interest in seeing that those scandalous proposals are abandoned?

    The Prime Minister : I was certainly not aware of the point made by the hon. Gentleman. I shall ask my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to investigate and report back to me.

    Mr. Shersby : Further to my right hon. Friend’s earlier reply about juvenile offenders, does he agree that the two single most important actions that the Government can take to deal with the problem are, first, to stop juvenile offenders reoffending on bail and introduce legislation to deal with that secondly, and to provide the resources for secure accommodation so that youngsters who persistently reoffend can be locked up?

    The Prime Minister : I agree with the two points made by my hon. Friend. I assure him that we have both those matters in mind.

     

    Public Interest Immunity Certificates

    Q8. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Prime Minister if he will introduce legislation to prevent Ministers from granting public interest immunity certificates in relation to export licences.

    The Prime Minister : The law on public interest immunity has been developed by the courts over time, and they are the ultimate judge of where the balance of the public interest lies. Public interest immunity is within the terms of reference of Lord Justice Scott’s inquiry and we await his report.

    Mr. Dalyell : Should it not be the House of Commons now, rather than Lord Justice Scott in the ever-receding future, that asks for an explanation as to why–in order to protect five Ministers, including the Foreign Secretary–Alan Moses QC for the Crown in court, and the Attorney- General on 12 November, were very seriously economical?

    The Prime Minister : The hon. Gentleman is wrong. Claiming public interest immunity is an obligation, not a privilege. In any case, the prosecution in the Matrix Churchill trial failed not because of the disclosure of documents but because of the change of evidence of a key witness. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman awaits the outcome of Lord Justice Scott’s inquiry.