Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

House of Commons PQs

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: House of Commons
Source: Hansard HC [909/223-31]
Editorial comments: 1515-30.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 2768
[column 223]

NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL

Q1. Mr. Stott

asked the Prime Minister when he next plans to attend a meeting of NEDO.

Q9. Mr. Norman Lamont

asked the Prime Minister when he next intends to take the Chair at NEDC.

The Prime Minister (Mr. James Callaghan)

I would expect to take the chair at meetings of the National Economic Development Council from time to time, but I have no immediate plans to do so, Sir.

Mr. Stott

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it is a unique privilege to have been rather fortuitously selected to ask the new Prime Minister the first Question? May I offer my right hon. Friend my sincere congratulations and wish him well in his future endeavours? Is he further aware that if he transmits to the NEDO the policies that he enunciated on television last night, not only are they likely to meet with success but they would contrast markedly with the woeful lack of policies and the lamentable failure of the Conservative Party?

The Prime Minister

I am much obliged to my hon. Friend for what he had to say. No one is in any doubt about the difficult times that this country faces, but if we tackle them with determination, energy and optimism, I am certain [column 224]that this country can come through—and that will demand from everyone an effort that is greater, perhaps, than that which we have made so far.

Mrs. Thatcher

Is James Callaghanthe Prime Minister aware that whether or not he attends the next meeting of the NEDO, my right hon. and hon. Friends and I would like to offer him our very warm congratulations on becoming Prime Minister and our personal good wishes? We should be very grateful if he would also convey our good wishes to his family, who will take a special pleasure and pride in his achievement. I know that we shall have our political differences from time to time, but I hope that we shall always be able to debate them in a courteous and generous spirit.

The Prime Minister

The right hon. Lady disarms me, and that is a very dangerous thing to do. Speaking personally, I am looking forward to a honeymoon of about 10 days at the most, and then I rather fancy that there will be the well-known cries of “Bring back Harold” from the Opposition Benches.

Mr. Thorpe

May I, too, congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on both his election and his appointment, and assure him that if he sticks to the objectives that he indicated last night on television, he will be entitled to support going beyond his own party, or sometimes instead of his own party? Will he, at least in the flush of victory—being a magnanimous man—have some sympathy for the friend of the whole of this House—the Secretary of State for Employment, the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Foot) who was denied the use of the clear, decisive, well understood first-past-the-post system which we all favour—at least, with the exception of the Liberal Party—and which the Government particularly favour, and who would otherwise have been in Downing Street 10 days ago?

Finally, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman a question that is relevant to this Question? Does he agree that if the NEDO and the NEDC were able to get agreement on an economic policy which could stretch beyond the confines of one Parliament and one party, it would do more for investment and stability than any other single factor?

[column 225]

The Prime Minister

I am very grateful for support from wherever it comes, but I intend to rely upon the support of my own party in this House. As long as I command that support, I shall be ready to do what is necessary in the national interest.

As regards the position of my right hon. Friend the Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Foot), he is so thoroughly objective in these matters that no matter what the personal consequences may be, he still sees all the advantages of the first-past-the-post procedure, and so I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman will be able to claim him as an ally on this matter.

I have not had the privilege of attending the meetings of NEDO and NEDC for about eight years, but when I did, I remember the considerable degree of objectivity in the undertakings that they gave. I would certainly hope that we could have—and the Government already have—a long-term economic policy which, if it can be stretched beyond the realms of this Parliament, however long this Parliament may continue—and it may well have a very long life before it—will be of benefit to the country if the policies can be carried on with general agreement.

Mr. Atkinson

During the honeymoon period to which my right hon. Friend referred will he give some thought to the statement which he made yesterday indicating his desire to meet the trade union leaders as soon as possible? Will he now give some indication about the policy he will pursue? Does he intend to meet the trade union leaders, negotiate an agreement with them and then come back to the House, putting that agreement before the House in the form of a policy? Or does he intend to reverse that procedure, getting agreement within the House of Commons and establishing a policy, and then trying to put it to the trade union leaders? Which way round does he intend to proceed?

The Prime Minister

It would be proper, I think, to proceed in the way that we have done so far, namely, that my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Employment and Chancellor of the Exchequer would engage the trade unions in discussions on all matters that are appropriate, that they would [column 226]act under the general guidance of the Cabinet as a whole and would secure the support of the parliamentary party. So far, that system seems to have worked very well.

Mr. Molyneaux

May I offer the Prime Minister the congratulations of the United Ulster Unionist Party? May I also express the hope that since the present campaign against the people of Northern Ireland and of the United Kingdom generally began while he was Home Secretary, so it may be brought to an end under his premiership?

The Prime Minister

I am grateful to the hon. Member, whose friendship I think I may say I have enjoyed for many years and whose services to the people of Northern Ireland I know. I can only echo that if this task is within the capacity of anyone to solve, it will certainly have my unswerving attention, because the people of Ireland have suffered too much for too long, in the interests of their cause, and this matter could be settled if men of good will—and there are some in all parties in the House, as well as in Northern Ireland—were allowed to get control of events and if the extremists were to realise that they cannot win what they are attempting by the methods they are employing.

Mr. Donald Stewart

May I convey to the right hon. Gentleman the good wishes of my hon. Friends and myself in his task? Since we cannot extend the honeymoon to 10 days, will he bear in mind, when Cabinet-making, that his Secretary of State for Scotland does not regard unemployment in Scotland as being disastrous at present? What does the right hon. Gentleman intend to do about that?

The Prime Minister

I shall keep everybody's name in mind in the process of Cabinet-making, but as long as the SNP stands for separation and not devolution I am afraid that I cannot consider members of that party for any of these posts. As for the serious question about unemployment, I regret that in Scotland there was a slight upward movement last month, contrary to the general trend, which appeared, admittedly on a short-term basis, to be downward. I trust that what the Government are doing in their economic policies will reverse any upward [column 227]trend. This is a problem that must be tackled.

Mr. Speaker

We now go back to ordinary Questions. Mr. Hannam.

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENERGY (SPEECH)

Q2. Mr. Hannam

asked the Prime Minister if the public statement on economic policy and other matters, made in London on 17th March by the Secretary of State for Energy, represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Q8. Mr. Tebbit

asked the Prime Minister if the public statement on proposed future Government policy made by the Secretary of State for Energy at a Press conference on 17th March represents Government policy.

The Prime Minister

The public statement made by my right hon. Friend makes it clear that he was giving his reasons for accepting nomination for the leadership of the Labour Party.

Mr. Hannam

As well as our congratulations, will the Prime Minister accept our sympathy on inheriting a shattering legacy of industrial decline? In drawing up his Cabinet, will he recognise the fearful damage being caused to international confidence by such proposals as import controls and further State intervention? Will he resist these proposals and govern now for the nation and not for the party?

The Prime Minister

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his opening comment. As for industrial decline in this country, the hon. Gentleman is partly right, provided that he does not make too much of a party point of it. He knows, as I do, that this industrial decline has been going on for 30 years, or perhaps much longer, and it is therefore a matter that needs to be reversed immediately if the country is once again to enjoy rising standards. I think that the Government's policies—especially in regard to such instruments as the National Enterprise Board—if they are properly used and are not destroyed in party ideology, can do a great deal, especially if coupled with the restoration of confidence, to [column 228]ensure that the industrial decline is reversed. We must pay attention to this task.

The Government's policy on import controls is quite clear. It has not changed from what it has been so far. A country that lives by its exports—which must earn its living by them—must consider seriously before it introduces import controls. On the other hand, looking at this in a practical way, for industries that would otherwise be viable but are being destroyed in the short term, it is proper and right to save employment so that they may live to thrive again.

Mr. Mike Thomas

There are more than two sides to the argument on economic policy. In the formation of that policy and the running of companies it is about time that the consumer voice and the voice of the general public interest were given a far larger say. To that end, will my right hon. Friend see that the National Consumer Council is given a formal place in NEDC rather than its informal attendance, at present?

The Prime Minister

I am obliged for that suggestion. It is one that has escaped my attention during the last two years, but I undertake to have it looked into and to communicate with my hon. Friend.

Mr. Tebbit

Will the right hon. Gentleman now return to the Question on the Order Paper? Does he agree that it can be answered only by “Yes” or “No” ? Does he agree that the answer is “No” , and that he has in the Cabinet still, as far as we know, a member of his team who disagrees basically with every item of Government policy, and said so in the speech to which this Question refers?

The Prime Minister

I have studied what my right hon. Friend said, which is headed “Statement announcing candidature” . Having read it, if there had not been a better candidate in the field, I might even have voted for him.

Mr. Heffer

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us who read that statement felt that it was an excellent one? On the question of import controls, does my right hon. Friend not agree that the points made by the TUC in its economic review bear looking at very [column 229]carefully? The TUC is asking for import controls, and therefore, on the basis of the discussions which my right hon. Friend will enter into with the TUC, will he take another look at the matter, because this is one of the ways—as has been established by the Cambridge school of economists—actually to deal with our problems?

The Prime Minister

I would not be greatly persuaded by the Cambridge school of economists. I am not sure that my right hon. Friend would be, either. As for the TUC, that is a more serious matter, because it lives in the everyday world.

I take very seriously the fact that the trade union movement certainly feels that in a number of areas import controls would be valuable. We must examine this from the foundation, because it is important that we carry the trade unions with us in seeing where the true interests of the workers and those they represent lie. If their true interests lie in not having import controls, I know that the TUC would accept that, but I think it is our job to examine the facts and then to persuade them, and I shall certainly do that.

Mr. Rathbone

May I personally add my own congratulations to my constituent on his appointment as Prime Minister, and ask him whether he realises how widely the commitment to freedom which was expressed on television last night has been appreciated by many of his fellow constituents and by others throughout the country? May I further express the hope that this will guide him in his deliberations with whomever at whatever time?

The Prime Minister

I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman. I think it is true that freedom is an extremely important issue—specially as one goes round the world and sees it being eroded in many places. Our own people—the people we represent—have had their freedoms enlarged in many ways in recent years. I can speak personally about that. In such matters as education there has been a genuine enlargement of freedom. Let no one forget that. I think there must be general consent throughout the House that, whatever view we take, the strongest society we can form is based on individual freedom and personal [column 230]responsibility. If those two go together, no dictatorship in the world can overthrow them.

Mr. Whitehead

As Question No. Q3 cannot now be reached, will my right hon. Friend accept that we all know that any acknowledgment he makes today will not measure up to the unique one he made yesterday, and that he sets out now on his task as Prime Minister with the good wishes of the 316 minority groups in the Parliamentary Labour Party?

Concerning my right hon. Friend's speech on television, will he reiterate in the House now that the predominant theme of this Administration will be a commitment to social reform and equality, which are sadly lacking in this country?

The Prime Minister

The previous Administration under my right hon. Friend, from 1964 onwards, did a very great deal in these fields, and it will certainly be my task to try to carry on where my right hon. Friend left off.

Mr. Marten

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

Order. Would the hon. Gentleman prefer to ask the supplementary question?

Mr. Marten

Yes, Mr. Speaker. The supplementary question is really related to Question No. Q3, which, as I see——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman had better make his point of order quickly.

Mr. Marten

It is exactly the same point. The point really was to be about answering Question No. Q10, because at the end of Questions yesterday I raised with you, Mr. Speaker the question why we did not have an oral statement about the most important summit meeting that took place last week. I have since made my own inquiries—as I am sure you have, Mr. Speaker—and I find that there was a statement in a Written Answer. I raise the question because I think it is wrong that this should be a precedent. I hope that the Prime Minister—whom I congratulate on taking up his post—will expose himself at the Dispatch Box to questioning on the summit meeting.

The Prime Minister

Further to the point of order. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that in general it would be [column 231]better to give an oral statement after a European Council meeting, and I undertake to do so.