Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

House of Commons PQs

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: House of Commons
Source: Hansard HC [986/1333-40]
Editorial comments: 1515-1530.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 2365
Themes: Defence (general), Employment, Industry, General Elections, Privatized & state industries, Pay, Trade, European Union (general), Foreign policy (Middle East), Foreign policy (USSR & successor states), Labour Party & socialism, Sport
[column 1333]

CHEMICAL WARFARE

Q1. Mr. Dalyell

asked the Prime Minister if she will make a statement on her discussions with Mr. Harold Brown, United States Defence Secretary, on Monday 2 June about a United States proposal that Great Britain should acquire chemical warfare weapons for possible offensive use.

[column 1334]

The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)

No such proposal was made. We did discuss the threat to the Alliance posed by the build-up of Soviet forces, and one aspect of this threat is the Soviet Union's substantial offensive capability in chemical warfare.

Mr. Dalyell

In view of that reply and following the equivocal reply to question No. 11 by the Secretary of State for Defence, is it to be taken that offensive chemical weapons are not ruled out? Other than as a “bee-sting” response after Armageddon, in what circumstances would an occupant of Downing Street give a go-ahead for the use of offensive chemical weapons?

The Prime Minister

We have no present plans to build up an offensive chemical warfare capability. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will agree with me that the current circumstances, under which the Soviet Union has a substantial chemical warfare capability and we have only a defensive capability, are very worrying.

Mr. Warren

Will the Prime Minister consider the need, in view of her statement, for warnings to be made strongly to the British people about the deployment by the Russians of chemical weapons? Will she ensure that the Home Secretary issues to the British people warnings on how to protect themselves against these weapons?

The Prime Minister

I believe that it is not widely known that the Soviet Union has a substantial offensive capability. I believe that it should be more widely known. I shall certainly pass on to my right hon. Friend my hon. Friend's message.

Mr. Ernie Ross

Will the Prime Minister take time to explain to the British public how she distinguishes between offensive and defensive chemical weapons?

The Prime Minister

I would not, with respect, have thought that difficult. We have no chemical weapons capability with which to deter the Russians' chemical weapons capability. We are pretty expert in protective clothing against the Russians' chemical warfare weapons capability.

[column 1335]

PRIME MINISTER

ENGAGEMENTS

Q2. Mr. Gordon Wilson

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 17 June.

The Prime Minister

This morning I held meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, and also visited the Japanese embassy to sign the book of condolence for Mr. Ohira. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings, including one with the Foreign Minister of Pakistan.

Mr. Wilson

Will the Prime Minister take time today to study the large volume of representations against the unconditional disposal of the shares in Ferranti? In view of the fact that the view in Scotland is fairly unanimous that this should not take place, what weight is she giving to these representations? What action will she take, as Prime Minister, to ensure that there is no job loss in Scotland?

The Prime Minister

The representations are being studied. No decision has yet been taken. The various options are under consideration.

Mr. McCrindle

Has the Prime Minister noticed the strange posture of the Opposition with regard to our participation in the Moscow Olympics? Has she particularly noticed the accusations against her of thuggery by the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Small Heath (Mr. Howell)? Would she not agree that, in so far as thuggery has taken place, it is surely by the Soviet Union against Afghanistan?

The Prime Minister

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I agree wholly with that assertion. There is an interesting article in The Times today by Robert Fisk from Kabul. I hope that my right hon. and hon. Friends have also seen Sakharov 's letter, published in this country, in which he says:

“In particular, the broadest possible boycott of the Moscow Olympics is necessary. Every spectator or athlete who comes to the Olympics will be giving indirect support of Soviet military policies.”

Mr. David Steel

Does the Prime Minister's statement today to the effect that no decision has been taken on the [column 1336]Ferranti question mean that she has moved away from the unfortunate position that she seemed to adopt last week, when she said that it was the NEB's job to sell the shares to the highest bidder?

The Prime Minister

No direction has been given to the NEB and no decision has yet been taken. I mean exactly what I said.

Mr. Stokes

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when she has to consider the new salaries for the heads of the nationalised industries, she will need to pay the market price, that she must not be afraid of differentials and, above all, that she must not pay attention to the egalitarians who want everybody to be paid the same amount?

The Prime Minister

I have received the report from the Top Salaries Review Body dealing with the chairmen of the nationalised industries and certain other top jobs. It has not yet been referred to the Cabinet. We cannot go on having the big public sector wage awards that we have had in the past, especially at a time when production is flat. The only way to pay for increased awards is through increased output.

Dr. Summerskill

Will the Prime Minister consider today the problems of Halifax, which she last visited during the general election campaign in order to persuade people to vote Conservative? Will she pay a return visit to see for herself the serious crisis which is facing carpet, machine tool, textile and most other manufacturing firms? Will she bear in mind that employees—both those who are redundant and those who are lucky enough to remain in work—and employers, rightly blame the Conservative Government for the crisis?

The Prime Minister

I visited a carpet factory in Halifax when the last Government were in power and redundancies were being suffered then. The factory that I visited had to make a large number of people redundant because of totally different methods of production. It had to keep up with modern methods in order to stay in business.

Many textiles are covered by quotas under the multi-fibre arrangement. That agreement provides for new quotas to be made under certain circumstances and [column 1337]we are anxious that that process should be speeded up. Heavy imports of particular types of carpet come from the United States and my right hon. Friend John Nottthe Secretary of State for Trade has been in touch with the EEC to say that if the imports are going up the EEC's attitude must be reconsidered.

Q3. Mr. Colin Shepherd

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 17 June.

The Prime Minister

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave a few moments ago.

Mr. Shepherd

On the difficult question of Civil Service and public sector pay, will my right hon. Friend confirm that people who are employed in the public sector are not entitled to automatic compensation for every point by which inflation increases? Will she confirm that wage and salary increases must bear some relation to what the nation can afford? If civil servants do not like the conditions of the Service will she recommend them to join the private sector, which is trying to create the wealth to support them?

The Prime Minister

In general I agree with my hon. Friend. The public sector is dependent on the output of the marketing sector for increasing standards of living. There is no way of getting away from that. At a time when there is little increased output available, the public sector will have to consider future pay claims carefully if inflation is to be brought down.

Mr. David Watkins

Will the Prime Minister find time to contact the British Steel Corporation and inform it that the works at Consett, which it proposes to close at the end of September, is meeting all the criteria of profitability and viability laid down by the Secretary of State for Industry? Will she ask the BSC to reconsider its ill-judged proposal?

The Prime Minister

I believe that I am right in saying that the Consett works had a long period of unprofitability lasting about five years. Recently it has come into marginal profitability. I shall not conceal from the hon. Gentleman that a decision to close Consett gives rise to serious concern. I hope [column 1338]that consideration will be given to selling it to the private sector.

Mr. Temple-Morris

As the Labour Opposition's parliamentary party seems, for some peculiar reason, to be about to abandon not only its policies but its leadership to an equally peculiar electoral college, will my right hon. Friend concentrate not only on making a success of her present term of office but of securing what is even more necessary—a second period of office?

The Prime Minister

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I am also grateful to the Opposition for the great assistance which they are giving me in securing that objective.

Mr. James Callaghan

I can tell members of the Government that the country would sooner have me as Prime Minister than the right hon. Lady. I want to ask the right hon. Lady a question about an issue that will dominate this Parliament more and more in the light of answers to questions this afternoon—namely, unemployment. Has the Prime Minister noted the report by the Manpower Services Commission that school leavers' unemployment will double within the next 18 months and that training does not cater adequately for at least half the school leavers. Since the right hon. Lady answered me yesterday negatively by saying that she was not prepared to print money to alleviate unemployment among young people, what does she propose to do?

The Prime Minister

With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's first comment, modesty was never one of his more obvious characteristics. On the right hon. Gentleman's later comment, perhaps it is pertinent to remind him that unemployment under his Government went up from about 600,000 to a peak of just over 1½ million—the sharpest rise in post-war history. Of course I am concerned about increasing unemployment, particularly among school leavers. Under the youth opportunities programme it is hoped that a place will be found for all school leavers. There is a substantial increase in some areas in the number of opportunities available under that programme.

Mr. Callaghan

Is the right hon. Lady aware that her protestations of concern are totally contradicted by the Government's actions? Is she aware that [column 1339]the Manpower Services Commission has had to abandon the examination that it is making, that a special temporary employment programme providing temporary work has been halved and that other cuts in expenditure for the unemployment and training budget have been made? It is no use her expressing concern or trying to say what happened under the last Labour Government. The right hon. Lady has the responsibility now. I want to know what she proposes to do.

The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State——

Hon. Members

Answer.

Mr. Speaker

Order. This is very unfair. The Leader of the Opposition was heard. [Interruption.] Order. The Leader of the Opposition was not shouted down. He was heard, and the Prime Minister is also entitled to be heard.

The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has a programme, which the right hon. Gentleman knows well. It concentrates on the youth opportunities programme. I have one figure ready with regard to Scotland. For example, places for an additional 6,500 entrants to the youth opportunities programme will be provided in Scotland this year. That is 6,500 more than last year. That is good news. With regard to the right hon. Gentleman's comment about printing money, doubtless he will find some of the following phrases familiar.

“We used to think that you could just spend your way out of a recession and increase employment by cutting taxes and boosting Government spending. I tell you, in all candour, that that option no longer exists and that, in so far as it did exist, it worked only by injecting a bigger dose of inflation into the economy on each occasion, followed by a higher level of unemployment as the next step.”

That is true today as well.

Mr. Callaghan

I quite realise that the right hon. Lady is in a difficult position when she is reduced to quoting that sort of thing. We can debate those issues at any time. The point I wish to put to the right hon. Lady, and she knows it, is that she is slashing into programmes. School leavers will not get training, neither will they get jobs. We can debate what should be done about it but she is coming [column 1340]forward with no proposals at all. That is the charge that I lay at her door. It is time that she did something.

The Prime Minister

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, extensive proposals are already in operation. What he is asking us to do is print more money, and, as he knows, that would only produce higher inflation followed by higher unemployment which, he will recall, has been the history of the last 20 years.