TALYSARN
Q1. Mr. Wigley
asked the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to Talysarn.
[column 1597]The Prime Minister (Mr. James Callaghan)
I have at present no plans to do so.
Mr. Wigley
Is the Prime Minister aware that if he did visit Talysarn and many other slate quarrying villages, he would be forcibly impressed by the suffering from silicosis and other lung diseases? The practical situation facing these people puts them in a special category, because the former quarrying companies have gone defunct and the workers cannot get justice in the courts of law. Would the Prime Minister look at this situation again, in the same way as he has looked at the position of coal miners, who have been helped considerably by the Government?
The Prime Minister
I know the villages concerned, and many years ago I lived in that area. I have great understanding of the problem. Silicosis is a grave disease. A great deal of research has been done on it in my former constituency of Penarth. In logic, there is very little reason why remedy should be limited to coal miners, as such, but I think we should await the report of the Pearson Committee and see whether it brings forward any proposal on the matter of physical disability. When it has reported, we can consider future action.
Mr. Cryer
Irrespective of the Pearson Committee report, there is an urgent need to look at the incidence of silicosis among foundry workers. Having opened the door to a proper scheme of compensation by the National Coal Board for miners suffering from pneumoconiosis, I believe that the scheme should be extended to cover people who work in foundries.
The Prime Minister
The same considerations apply to foundry workers as to slate quarry workers. It is my understanding that the Pearson Committee intends to review this matter, and I think that we should await the proposals that it will bring forward.
Mr. Charles Morrison
Although the Prime Minister may not be visiting Talysarn, will he take an early opportunity to announce, here or elsewhere, his proposed cuts in public expenditure? In that respect, is he aware that in spite of the huffing and puffing from members [column 1598]of his Left wing, they will make the best of Lobby fodder?
The Prime Minister
At Talysarn there is a considerable programme of current derelict land clearance, to the tune of £320,000, which I hope will help the hon. Member for Caernarvon (Mr. Wigley) and his constituents. They have been discussing additional expenditure for this and other matters.
Mr. Skinner
To get back to the more serious aspect, as the Prime Minister knows, the latest news arriving from the Isle of Man miners' conference is on the question of the retiring age being lowered. One of the main causes of pneumoconiosis and associated diseases is the fact that miners have to work up to 50 years in appalling conditions. Does my right hon. Friend agree with the National Union of Mineworkers in what it said on this matter this morning, or does it conflict with the pay policy? Will he give this matter his attention?
The Prime Minister
The question of earlier retirement for coal miners should be considered very seriously, because of the special conditions under which they labour. To introduce such a scheme now probably would conflict with the existing pay policy, but that is no reason why we should not consider any proposals that the NUM puts forward, particularly if it regards this as a matter to which it attaches priority. However, I could not give any guarantees this afternoon about implementing such proposals.
HEADS OF GOVERNMENT (PUERTO RICO MEETING)
Q2. Mr. Forman
asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the agenda of the Western economic summit meeting in Puerto Rico.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Member to the statement I made to the House on 29th June.
Mr. Forman
Is it not a fact that when the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues went to Puerto Rico for the summit they were given what amounted to a six months' stay of execution by their international counterparts? Is it not also a fact that, whatever may have been on the agenda of the Puerto Rico [column 1599]meeting, the dominant factor on the Government's agenda must be the need to bring forward planned cuts in public expenditure for 1977–78, and to do so soon enough, so that when the Chancellor has to go back to the IMF at some time before November he has domestic policies of which our international creditors can approve?
The Prime Minister
The first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is not a fact. On the second part, I note the almost masochistic desire of the Opposition to be flogged into having less public expenditure, as though this were something utterly desirable, when, by all accounts, and judging from questions put to me this afternoon, it has been shown that additional public expenditure would meet very desirable social needs. If the Government have to regulate the amount of public expenditure, the hon. Gentleman should not take a delight in that; he should help us to work in order to get more public expenditure in due course.
Mr. David Steel
In his statement—[Interruption.]—the Prime Minister summed up the summit in the two words “co-operation” and “inter-dependence” . Since we all recognise how dependent we are on others to give credit, will he give the House and British industry a clear target date by which he hopes we shall return to single-digit inflation?
The Prime Minister
I think that the House will allow me to congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his election yesterday to the leadership of his party. I assure him that there will be very few occasions when he will receive cheers from all parties in the House at the same time, so he had better make the most of it this afternoon. On behalf of all of us, I wish him at least an enjoyable tenure of office.
The original hope and intention of the Government was that we should be down to single-figure inflation by the end of this year. The depreciation of sterling and the increased price of raw materials and commodities, one of which is partially but not wholly consequential upon the other, means that this must be postponed a little. I am sure that hon. Members will be delighted to know that I expect to see the inflation rate going down again this month—I would have expected some [column 1600]applause for that. My pause there was for applause. I expect to see the rate going steadily down. We shall, on present commitments—[Interruption.] It is too hot for me to shout. Hon. Gentleman opposite would do better to keep quiet. They may be pleased to know that we would certainly expect to reach a single-digit inflation rate during the course of the next year.
Mrs. Thatcher
As the James CallaghanPrime Minister now has a breathing space in which to take the necessary economic measures, is he aware that on the Opposition side we were pleased with what he said yesterday about the need for greater profits and a profitable private enterprise sector? Is he further aware, however that within a few hours of his meeting the Tony BennSecretary of State for Energy was advocating further measures of nationalisation? Will the Prime Minister therefore repudiate the right hon. Gentleman, in view of his own new-found commitment to the free enterprise sector, by dropping both the Secretary of State and the nationalisation measures now before the House?
The Prime Minister
I assure the right hon. Lady that none of this was discussed at Puerto Rico. If I were to meet my colleagues again I am sure that they would take the view that was taken by the CBI representatives yesterday, that the Government's policies, taken as a whole, offer the best opportunity for this country to escape from the economic thraldom in which it has been held. The fact that the CBI and the TUC together were willing to make this joint settlement should be welcomed on all sides of the House.
As for my right hon. Friend's speech, I regret that I have not had an opportunity of reading it. I am sure, however, that it was full of his usual good sense.
Mrs. Thatcher
I was asking the Prime Minister not so much what he said but what he proposed to do in support of what he said. Is he aware that we can only conclude that when he is with the CBI he is content to appear in capitalist clothes, but that when it comes to taking action in the House of Commons he is only too willing to be pushed into more Marxist measures?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady does not seem yet to have understood that this was not a meeting with [column 1601]the CBI; it was a meeting of the NEDC, and a joint conclusion was reached by all the parties there, which was why they all appeared at the Press conference—a pretty-well unprecedented move. As for my Marxist clothes, I am willing to fill in an application for membership of the Tribune Group, but I somehow think that it would not have me.
Mr. Heffer
They do not have to be Marxists.
Mr. Mike Thomas
Does my right hon. Friend accept that regardless of his Marxism, his neo-Marxism or his non-Marxism, he would have been greatly strengthened both in Puerto Rico and at his meeting with the NEDC yesterday had the Opposition Front Bench taken the view about pay policy which the right hon. Member for Sidcup (Mr. Heath) advocated so eloquently yesterday?
The Prime Minister
It would be foolish to neglect the good elements of Marxism, which have been absorbed into a great deal of political thinking and which, oddly enough, permeate all parties. Personally, I have not yet been utterly convinced by the doctrine as a whole. It is certainly true that some of my hon. Friends in the Tribune Group would qualify more as Left-wing Liberals than as Marxists.
My hon. Friend asked about the attitude of the Opposition. I think that a great deal of our industry has long since ceased to expect the Opposition to say anything that is either relevant or helpful to the cause of Britain's industrial recovery.
CBI AND TUC
Q3. Mr. Adley
asked the Prime Minister when he last met the TUC and the CBI.
Q5. Mr. Hannam
asked the Prime Minister when he last met the CBI and the TUC.
Q7. Mr. Lawson
asked the Prime Minister when he last met the TUC and the CBI.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Members to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Blaker) on 27th May.
[column 1602]Mr. Adley
If some members of the TUC and some Labour Members below the Gangway should revolt against the forthcoming cuts in public expenditure, will the Prime Minister unequivocally welcome support from the Opposition side of the House, from wherever it may come, and will he ensure that the decision of Parliament, whatever it may be, is upheld by the Government?
The Prime Minister
I lead the Labour Party and the Labour Government. It will be upon Labour votes that I shall depend in any policies that I place before this House.
Mr. Madden
Will my right hon. Friend confirm rumours circulating this afternoon that a subsidiary of Lonrho is to be advanced considerable funds to acquire Brentford Nylons? If that is so, how can my right hon. Friend reconcile it with the recent publication of a report dealing with highly disturbing matters concerning that company, and the fact that this afternoon it is indicating bumper profits?
The Prime Minister
I cannot answer that question without notice. I have not heard those rumours.
Mr. Lawson
Since the Prime Minister is so fond of praising the TUC for the sacrifice it has allegedly made in accepting stage 2 of the Government's incomes policy, will he tell us precisely what sacrifice the unionised 45 per cent. of the national work force is making that the non-unionised 55 per cent. is not making? Is it not the case that the trade unions have deliberately framed the policy so that, by and large, their members will suffer relatively less and the rest of the work force, including middle management, will suffer relatively more?
The Prime Minister
I do not think that any of that is true, and the hon. Gentleman is not helping by putting about that kind of allegation. The TUC has made a pay agreement voluntarily among its members, which is unexampled and has received far more praise from foreign countries—who are more objective—than from the Opposition Benches. Because of that agreement, we are on the way to single-figure inflation and our industry and exports have better chances than they have had for many years.