PRIME MINISTER (Engagements)
Q1. Mr. Silvester
asked the Prime Minister if he will list his engagements for 8th November 1977.
The Prime Minister (Mr. James Callaghan)
In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be holding meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.
[column 477]Mr. Silvester
As many of those meetings will concern wage claims in the public sector, would it be helpful if the Prime Minister were to consider making an announcement—in view of a wage settlement for the miners exceeding 10 per cent., for whatever reason—on whether other employees in the public sector who currently settle at about the guideline figure might reasonably be expected to come back for a second bite of the cherry after such a settlement?
The Prime Minister
The miners' present pay settlement does not expire until the end of February or the beginning of March, and it would be wrong for us to anticipate anything about a settlement at this stage.
Mr. Roy Hughes
In the course of his busy schedule of engagements, will my right hon. Friend look into the parlous nature of the steel industry? Will he and his colleagues give some consideration to restricting foreign imports of steel, which would certainly help the British Steel Corporation at this time?
The Prime Minister
I am well aware of the difficulties of the steel industry. There is a problem about imports and exports at present. For example, there are interests in the United States which are pressing the United States Government to restrict exports of steel from this country to the United States. We must achieve a balance here and be very careful before we rush into action on these matters.
Mrs. Thatcher
Will James Callaghanthe Prime Minister take time today to reconsider the reply he gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit) last Thursday, when he said that the family man on average earnings was as well of today as he was at the time of the last General Election? We all know that that just is not so. Would not the Prime Minister agree that the standard of living has been cut back by 5 per cent. in a year?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady is putting together two separate things. I quite agree that the standard of living has been cut back during the last 12 months. Indeed, I have said so on many occasions. But the statement that I made last Thursday is exact in every particular, and I have had it checked since.
[column 478]Mrs. Thatcher
Perhaps the Prime Minister would care to look at what he said as reported in column 40 of Hansard, when my hon. Friend put to him a direct question. My hon. Friend asked the Prime Minister “to tell the House” —[Hon. Members: “Reading” .] I am quoting from the question to the Prime Minister. The question was put directly to the Prime Minister whether the average man,
“with two young children, will be as well off now as he was at the time of the last General Election.”
The Prime Minister's reply was:
“The answer is ‘Yes’” .—[Official Report, 3rd November 1977; Vol. 938, c. 40.]
What the Prime Minister has now said is that his answer ought to have been “No.”
The Prime Minister
I do not object to the right hon. Lady reading my words. I hope that she will go on reading them, and reading them in the country. I do not think I can take offence at that. What I said last Thursday was complete in every particular. It is for the right hon. Lady to run away and check her figures.
TUC
Q2. Mr. Arnold
asked the Prime Minister when he next expects to meet the leaders of the TUC.
The Prime Minister
I met the General Council of the Trades Union Congress when I addressed the TUC on 6th September. Further meetings will be arranged as necessary.
Mr. Arnold
When the Prime Minister next sees the TUC, will he remind it just how important it is that the benefits of North Sea oil should be used for strengthening Britain's industrial face and not for increasing public expenditure or public services?
The Prime Minister
The next meeting of the NEDC in early December will be considering this matter, and, of course, that point of view will be expressed. It is certainly Government policy, although we hope to have more discussion about this, that there should be a very strong bias in favour of the industrial strategy and industrial regeneration of this country. But I do not think that we should rule out entirely some bonus to [column 479]either public expenditure or private consumption if it seems appropriate. This must be a question of balance in the end. The first priority, I agree with the hon. Gentleman, is the regeneration of British industry.
Mr. Loyden
Will my right hon. Friend discuss with the TUC the use of oil reserves for the purpose of refurbishing the regions from an industrial point of view, and particularly regions of high unemployment, such as Merseyside, as it appears that none of the Government's policies is penetrating that problem?
The Prime Minister
The first problem is to overcome inflation. That is the No. 1 priority. The other benefits will begin to flow from that. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will be making a statement at the end of Questions, I understand, if he catches your eye, Mr. Speaker, about refurbishing industrial areas. Merseyside is a particular case and has, and will continue to have, special attention.
Mr. McCrindle
As the Prime Minister compares the industrial situation this winter with the industrial situation of 1973–74, will he find any reassurance from the fact that at least he is not confronted by an Opposition prepared to support every last inflationary wage claim?
The Prime Minister
What has happened, I believe, is that a general will has been mobilised in favour of the Government's policy, and I am not surprised that the Opposition actually follow that expression of public opinion.
Mr. Ashley
Is the Prime Minister aware that the settlement with the police and the progress made with the power workers reflect very great credit on the Government's attitude, and that the Conservatives' attempts to exploit the present spate of industrial unrest reflect very great discredit on them and their attitude to the trade unions? The country should bear this in mind at the General Election.
The Prime Minister
We are fighting a battle that is crucial, and I certainly do not reject or spurn any allies in it. Therefore, I make no attacks on anybody in the matter. I believe that it is vital, and I believe that so far the country is standing together on the issue. Everybody has his own particular interest, but we are an interdependent society—pretty well every[column 480]body nowadays is a key worker, whoever he may be. It is our task as a House of Commons and as a country to mobilise the general will against the particular interest.
Q4. Mr. Cartwright
asked the Prime Minister when he next plans to meet the TUC.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Mr. Arnold).
HEMEL HEMPSTEAD
Q3. Mr. Corbett
asked the Prime Minister whether he will pay an official visit to Hemel Hempstead.
The Prime Minister
I have at present no plans to do so.
Mr. Corbett
As my right hon. Friend is unable to visit, will he try to arrange to speak to my courageous constituent, Mr. John Prestwich, who is paralysed from the neck down and therefore relies upon electricity for life and yet telephoned me yesterday to urge that the Government should stand firm against the unofficial action of the power workers? While I recognise that the power workers have a sense of grievance, may I ask whether my right hon. Friend agrees that it would be better for them, for Mr. Prestwich and for everyone else if they were to use the proper trade union procedures, even if those procedures also need improving?
The Prime Minister
I am aware that many who suffer, as well as the general public, are in favour of there being a broad acceptance of the general guidelines for moderate increases in pay and earnings this year. The Government will adhere to this policy as long as the policy maintains public support. Without public support, we cannot succeed. With it, I believe that we can succeed, and we shall endeavour to do so.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he said, because I think that the power workers have recognised the force of public opinion in this matter. I hope that they and their union, and, of course, the Central Electricity Generating Board, will get together to iron out whatever difficulties there may be on a tripartite [column 481]basis, provided that they can do so within the general guidelines, which I hope will be accepted by all.
Mr. Tebbit
If the Prime Minister should change his mind and go to Hemel Hempstead, could I persuade him to come and visit my home in that constituency so that I could show him my file of answers from the Chancellor of the Exchequer? Those answers show conclusively that the man on average earnings with two young children was, by early summer of this year, some £8.70 a week worse off than at the time of the last General Election. The Prime Minister could then tell me in private, if he is afraid to say so in public, whether he was just flummoxed and got it wrong or whether he really believes the wrong answers that he gave me on Thursday.
The Prime Minister
I should be very happy to have a cup of tea with the hon. Member. He is always clear in his criticism, even if he is not always accurate. I shall be glad to go along sometime. I do not promise that it will be next week. When I go I shall not have to take a huge volume of files. I shall just take one foolscap sheet that will flummox the hon. Gentleman once and for all.
Mr. Cartwright
In view of the nation's improving financial situation, can my right hon. Friend offer the TUC any hope that some of the recent cuts in public services will soon be made good? Is there not a case for some selective relaxation of financial and manpower controls—in local government, for example—so as to improve employment opportunities and also to make good the falling standards of public service?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend seems to have overlooked the fact that there was a relaxation the week before last to the tune of £1 billion next year, and “that ain't hay” . There will be £400 million going to the construction industry and £600 million going elsewhere. Therefore, there has been a relaxation ranging over a number of Departments.
However, I should like to make one thing clear, about which I feel very strongly. Public expenditure is devised not as a means of giving employment but as a means of giving services to people. [column 482]It is upon that basis that we have to look at it.
Mr. Crouch
When the Prime Minister meets the TUC and its leaders, will he ask them whether they will give him their full-hearted support in supporting his guideline of 10 per cent. for wage increases and not allow the unions, of which they are leaders, to put in grossly inflated demands, as is happening at the moment? I know of one case where the largest union in the country, the TGWU, has put in a demand of 42 per cent. to the oil industry.
The Prime Minister
The TUC at its annual Congress undertook something voluntarily that is of very great value, namely, the observance of the 12-month rule. Full credit should be given to all the unions that are observing that 12-month rule, because it is enabling us to make an orderly return.
As regards what the TUC should allow its unions to do, the TUC does not have control in these matters. The TUC advises unions, but unions take their own decisions. As we have seen recently, and it is part of the problem we have, it is not necessarily the leaders or officers of the unions who are putting in these pay claims. In the case of the fire brigades, it was the rank and file who decided what they wanted to do, despite the expressed view of their leaders. This is a problem for democracy as a whole. We have to give a firm lead, and we intend to do so.
Mr. Mendelson
Although it is undoubtedly true that local government services are provided and their financing is designed to assist people in their daily lives, is it not equally true that, when the instruction was sent out some months ago that local authorities must cut expenditure, that was done on financial grounds and not because the services were unnecessary? Therefore, is it not correct now to send other instructions to the local authorities to restore those services? If the Government do not do that without delay, will there not be the inevitable consequence that more people will be made unemployed this winter?
The Prime Minister
I accept my hon. Friend's correction on that. It was done for financial reasons. However, let me also remind the House and my hon. [column 483]Friend that a year ago the complaint that was being made by both sides of the House was that local authorities were being extravagant in the use of manpower and they were being asked to cut down on it. Now, the pendulum seems to be swinging to the other extreme. I agree that there are some authorities which have used the financial restrictions in an unwise way and in a way that is designed to reduce services where they might not need to be reduced. Of course we want to see those services restored. My hon. Friend does not have to press me on the question of public expenditure. As regards the desirability of providing services for people, I stand fair square behind that.