PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Marlow
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 November.
The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)
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.
Mr. Marlow
Does my right hon. Friend share the pride of the right hon. Member for Cardiff, South and Penarth (Mr. Callaghan) in the breed of men who man our pits? As it now appears that the House, the nation and a growing number of miners have had enough of the dispute in the coalfields, will my right hon. Friend do all that she can to heal the wounds caused by eight months of bitterness, violence and Scargillism?
The Prime Minister
I welcome the condemnations of violence in the past few days, but I regret that they are not universal. When the strike ends—and I hope that it will end soon—we shall have to do as much as we possibly can to build on moderate, responsible, reasonable and constructive trade unionism.
Mr. James Callaghan
Is the Prime Minister aware that she will be meeting the wishes of both sides of the House if she asks the Cabinet to reconsider the entire Foreign Office Vote—for overseas aid, representation, the overseas news service and the British Council, all of which are so important for our influence overseas—and comes back to the House with a new statement and fresh proposals?
The Prime Minister
As the right hon. Gentleman will be the first to recognise, when one has considered and finalised all the PESC figures it is highly unlikely that any one of them can be reopened. Indeed, I must really say that they cannot be reopened. Having seen the autumn statement, however, the right hon. Gentleman will be aware that only two Departments have precisely the figure for the coming year which they knew they would have from the last White Paper. One is the Foreign Office. The other is the Ministry of Defence. If the right hon. [column 792]Gentleman will contain his impatience a little longer, it is possible that there may be a debate on this next week, when the matter can be discussed more fully.
Coal Industry Dispute
Q2. Mr. Wigley
asked the Prime Minister what steps she proposes taking to help alleviate the social and economic consequences of the coal mining strike.
The Prime Minister
The Government have already provided the financial support so that the National Coal Board is able to offer the miners a good wage increase, a guarantee that any miner who wishes to continue in the industry will be able to do so, an investment programme that will enable the industry to improve its productivity and increase its markets, and the creation of a new enterprise company to bring new businesses to mining communities.
Two of the three unions in the coal industry as well as one third of the members of the National Union of Mineworkers have already accepted the National Coal Board's offer. Since the beginning of last week more than 6,500 miners have returned to work. I hope that those remaining on strike will follow their example.
Mr. Wigley
Is the Prime Minister aware that the great solidarity shown in Wales with the coal miners arises from people's fears that communities will be wiped off the face of the map if mines close in those communities? Is she further aware that their experience so far of the Government's efforts to bring jobs to valley communities in south Wales gives people no great confidence? Trying to starve miners back to work will not solve the basic problems that caused the strike, but will only add to the bitterness. When will the Government cease the abdication of their responsibilities and start to bring harmony instead of discord?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman is well aware that uneconomic pits have had to close for a very long time. That was right, as it is the duty of the National Coal Board to run the industry efficiently and to develop it efficiently. It was always understood that closures of uneconomic pits were covered in the colliery review procedure.
There are some miners at work in pits in Wales, as the hon. Gentleman knows, and I hope that the numbers will increase, because I believe that many, many people within the industry, as well as my hon. Friends, want the situation to get back to normal as soon as possible. They want to earn good money and see the necessary decisions made. We must then work very hard on the enterprise company to try to bring new work to the mining communities.
Mr. Bellingham
Is my right hon. Friend aware that the GLC proposals for banning heavy lorries have far-reaching and damaging effects on small businesses——
Mr. Speaker
Order. I think that the hon. Member for Norfolk, North-West (Mr. Bellingham) has failed to notice that this is a specific question about the coal mining industry.
Mr. Kinnock
In view of her record, the Prime Minister's answer to her hon. Friend the Member for Northampton, North (Mr. Marlow) will be regarded both inside and outside the House as complete humbug. If the right hon. Lady genuinely wants to see a speedy end to the [column 793]dispute and subsequent harmony in the coalfields and elsewhere, will she intervene now to ensure that the cutback in production of 4 million tonnes is withdrawn, as reality has made it redundant, and also to ensure that the colliery review procedure is fully restored in line with “Plan for Coal” ?
The Prime Minister
I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman any lessons on humbug. What he has said from that Dispatch Box shows that he is a self-appointed expert on the subject. At the beginning of the strike he spoke about a ballot, but we then heard virtually nothing about that until a few days ago. It took a highly distinguished trade unionist to condemn violence at a mass meeting of the National Union of Mineworkers before the right hon. Gentleman echoed the sentiments from a safe distance. He did not have the guts to go and do it himself. The right hon. Gentleman knows that the National Coal Board has always honoured the colliery review procedure. I do not know why he continually asks that question. He is well aware that the settlement reached between the NCB and NACODS was an excellent one. It is on the table, and I hope that it will be picked up by those miners who are still on strike.
Mr. Kinnock
Once again in this dispute the right hon. Lady is dodging into incidentals. On the question of meetings, will she meet the leadership of the NUM to explain—[Hon. Members: “The right hon. Gentleman will not.” ]
Mr. Speaker
Order. This is a question of great importance to the House and, I think, to the country too.
Mr. Kinnock
Will the right hon. Lady meet the leadership of the miners' trade union to explain how, after eight months, during which she has allowed the cost of the dispute to increase to £3,000 million, she can sustain the idea that the hit list should stay and that no other changes should be made? How can she still tell the country that she wants a peaceful end to the dispute?
The Prime Minister
I urge the right hon. Gentleman to examine the NACODS' settlement, where he will find the answer. He knows full well that all the five named pits will go through the colliery review procedure, as enhanced by the NACODS' settlement. It is for the National Coal Board and those who are on strike to come to a settlement, as the board did with NACODS. Will the right hon. Gentleman urge the miners to return to work?
Sir Anthony Grant
Despite the excellent financial arrangements that are properly being made for the miners by the NCB, does my right hon. Friend recognise the enormous courage that is required to return to work in the face of appalling intimidation—something that is alien to this country? Will she especially say a word of praise for the fact that the lead in returning to work has been given by Derbyshire and Bolsover?
The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir. Of course, Nottinghamshire has had people back at work for some time. The return to work in Derbyshire and Bolsover has been excellent. I join my hon. Friend in admiring the bravery of those who have crossed violent picket lines to return to work. Many miners would have returned to work but for the fact that, in many places, the strike is being maintained by violence. I hope that they, too, will accept the invitation to return to work.
[column 794]Dr. Owen
Are not the squeaks of the Leader of the Labour party and other Labour leaders in recent days, as they seek to distance themselves from Arthur Scargill, reminiscent of the squeaks of rats leaving the sinking ship? [Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker
Order. Such a response only takes time from other hon. Members.
Dr. Owen
Far from taking lessons from the Artful Dodger, will the Prime Minister make it clear that there will be no question of reopening negotiations on the NACODS' settlement?
The Prime Minister
I agree with the right hon. Gentleman that the National Coal Board can move no further.
Mr. Concannon
My views on violence and intimidation have been on the record for a long time. In her Guildhall speech earlier this week the Prime Minister implied that the miners who had been working during the strike, and those who had returned to work, agreed with her, her Government's policies or with Mr. MacGregor. I assure her that they do not. The argument in Nottinghamshire—it is the only area for which I can speak—is a constitutional one; not one that implies recognition of her policies or those of the NCB.
The Prime Minister
I made no such assertion. Many of the miners who returned to work did so because they believe, rightly, that they are standing up for democracy. Secondly, they are showing loyalty to the industry and ensuring that the industry's customers obtain security of supply. Thirdly, they are doing what most of us wish to do—earning an honest living to keep their families.
Engagements
Q3. Mr. Marland
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 November.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Q4. Mr. Neil Hamilton
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 15 November.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Hamilton
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the movement back to work in the car factories and the mines shows how dangerously out of touch extreme Left-wing trade union members are with their members? Does she further agree that, far from tightening the noose around the nation's neck, as the extreme Left wingers intend, they are tightening it around their own necks, as Mr. Norman Willis discovered to his discomfiture?
The Prime Minister
I was delighted that there was such a forthright condemnation of violence by Norman Willisthe General-Secretary of the TUC. I agree that if industries go on strike they will lose customers and jobs. That is the weakness of the Opposition's case, when they talk about unemployment, but support every strike that destroys existing jobs.
Mr. Tony Banks
Is the Prime Minister now aware that she misled the House on Tuesday and that the pay-outs from the Secretary of State for Transport for those whom he sacked from the London Transport board were the [column 795]responsibility of the Secretary of State, and not of the GLC? Is she further aware that the proposed 6,000 redundancies on London Regional Transport will cost the taxpayers £36 million? How will that assist travellers in London?
The Prime Minister
The size of the compensation is related to the length of the remaining term of office. The [column 796]GLC appointed these members for five years, when it already knew that its control of London Transport would shortly be coming to an end. That was thoroughly irresponsible, but compensation is related to that period, and had the size of the compensation been anything less Nicholas Ridleymy right hon. Friend could have been taken to court to give proper compensation.