PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Stanbrook
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 December.
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. Stanbrook
Does my right hon. Friend agree with our right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster that many social evils of our time derive from the permissive society promoted by liberal politicians in the 1960s and 1970s? If so, what are the Government's plans to combat these evils? Will the Government abandon their posture of neutrality on some issues and deliberate policy on others, which cause many to believe that our Christian way of life is in great danger?
The Prime Minister
I think my hon. Friend will agree that the speech of my right hon. Friend Norman Tebbitthe Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster about the permissive society was far from neutralist. Indeed, it gave a firm lead in the direction in which I think my hon. Friend wishes to go. The Government have supported private Members' Bills on issues such as controlling video nasties and indecent displays. I hope that we shall continue to take that attitude.
Mr. Frank Cook
We are well aware of the Prime Minister's reputation of being extremely reluctant to withdraw from any opinion which she has expressed. I ask the right hon. Lady—[Hon. Members: “Reading.” ]—to cast her mind back to 27 November 1984, 53 weeks ago today, when—this is where I shall read——
Mr. Speaker
Order. I think that this is when the hon. Gentleman will ask his question.
Mr. Cook
I crave your indulgence, Mr. Speaker. I was about to say that I shall express my attitude to that which appears on the piece of paper in my hand. On 27 November 1984 the Prime Minister expressed her hope that the Government would never forget the good work, loyalty and allegiance of those who have served this country. I ask the Prime Minister to consider what form that hope will take following the results of the Australian Royal Commission on nuclear tests at Maralinga.
The Prime Minister
The report to which the hon. Gentleman refers has only recently been published. We are studying it carefully. It comprises 16 chapters, 201 conclusions and seven recommendations. The Australian Government have stated that they will discuss with Her Majesty's Government those recommendations which affect the United Kingdom. I doubt whether the hon. Gentleman has read and absorbed the report so quickly.
[column 423]Mr. McCusker
If the principles which govern the Prime Minister's attitude to disputed British territory are a desire for peace and reconciliation, why does she not enter into negotiations with the Argentine Government with a view to an Anglo-Argentine agreement which will have at its core an Anglo-Argentine conference, jointly chaired by a permanent Minister for the Malvinas and one of her own Ministers, with a permanent secretariat at Port Stanley, which will be able to discuss every matter concerned with the Falkland Islands? After all, there would be no sacrifice of sovereignty, would there?
The Prime Minister
I think, with respect, that the hon. Gentleman is right off beam. The people of Northern Ireland, like the people of the Falklands, to our way of thinking shall decide by majority where their future lies. That is and will remain enshrined in law.
Q2. Mr. Thurnham
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 December.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Thurnham
Will my right hon. Friend ensure that the extreme Left, which has hijacked Manchester council, will not succeed in its plans to hijack Manchester airport?
The Prime Minister
rose—[Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker
Order. I have the message. Members must ask questions for which the Prime Minister has responsibility. I really do not think that she has responsibility for that matter.
Mr. Kinnock
Will the Prime Minister tell us why the memorandum of understanding on British participation in star wars has not been submitted to the British Parliament for consideration?
The Prime Minister
It is still being negotiated. It is not customary to submit a memorandum of understanding to Parliament. It is customary to negotiate it and then for the Government to sign if they consider that the results are satisfactory.
Mr. Kinnock
Will the Prime Minister tell us whether there is to be any conclusion of such negotiations tomorrow? Does she recognise that there is a need and a strong desire on both sides of the House for Members to be able to express views and to ask questions? If negotiations are continuing, can she tell us whether the memorandum involves or will involve any binding agreement, whether any financial commitments have been made by the United States of America, and whether the Government are securing safeguards against the loss both of technology and of technologists in the event of an agreement being concluded? Why, in any case, is there a rush to sign now? Nobody else is showing such sycophantic haste as the right hon. Lady.
The Prime Minister
Some of the details—for example, the use of intellectual property which results from any research which we undertake under an SDI memorandum of understanding—are still being negotiated. It is very important to secure the right to that intellectual property. I am not in a position to say whether the agreement will be signed tomorrow. Its details are still being negotiated. I hope that it will be signed before Christmas.
[column 424]Mr. Phillip Oppenheim
Will my right hon. Friend give thought later today to the fact that when the Greater London council recently decided to invest nearly £2 million in a fleet of 53 dial-a-ride minibuses, it chose to buy French vehicles despite the availability of comparable British vehicles? Is that what Socialists mean by supporting British industry?
The Prime Minister
I hope that, so long as British industry is competitive with others, people will support it fully.
Dr. Owen
Is it right to continue to hide behind the Crown Proceedings Act 1947 and make it impossible for British service men exposed to nuclear radiation to challenge the British Government in the courts, whereas Australian citizens are able to use the courts to challenge the Australian Government? In the light of the Royal Commission report, will the Prime Minister now lift this ban on action being taken by British service men, many of whom have suffered grievously as a result of the tests?
The Prime Minister
As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, a survey on British service men who took part in the tests in Australia was set up in 1983. I am not in a position to give the right hon. Gentleman any more information, because that survey is continuing.
Mr. Spearing
Is the Prime Minister aware that last week a Minister of the Crown, before a Select Committee, said that the forthcoming possible withdrawal from UNESCO was a decision that would be taken by Her Majesty's Government without any pressure whatever from the United States? In view of the fact that change has already taken place, and that Britain, as the leading member of the Commonwealth, could, with her Commonwealth partners, achieve even greater change in the future, and that any withdrawal from UNESCO would be to the detriment of Britain's influence in the world, will the Prime Minister say why she disagrees with those points?
The Prime Minister
As the hon. Gentleman is aware, a statement on the Government's decision on UNESCO is to be made later this afternoon. It was a decision taken in British interests.
Mr. Stokes
Is my right hon. Friend aware that in recent months many hon. Members on both sides of the House have become anxious and distressed about the constant bickering between Her Majesty's Government and the Church of England? If it is too much to hope that my right hon. Friend can abate the intense keenness of some of my colleagues to make instant comments on Church publications, could she, when she meets the Archbishop of Canterbury, ask him whether some of the statements could be made by more broadly-based politicians, not only by those on the Left, and whether their remedies could be more spiritual and less economic?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for the reasonableness of his question. Everyone should read the report and make up his mind on the recommendations.
Q3. Mr. Adley
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 December.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Adley
I welcome the letter that my right hon. Friend sent yesterday to the leader of the Liberal party, in [column 425]which she referred to misdemeanours by a few people in the City. Is she aware that many Conservative Members are concerned about those activities? Will she assure the House that she and her Ministers, where practicable and proper, will bring whatever pressure they think it is right to bear on the City to enforce self-regulation? If that will not work, there are those of us who will be looking very carefully at the Financial Services Bill when it is published.
The Prime Minister
As my hon. Friend is aware, matters of fraud are for the police, and prosecution is for the police and the Director of Public Prosecutions, not the Government. The Government are anxious that there should not be any shortage of resources, and we are reviewing that matter immediately.
As my hon. Friend is aware, the Financial Services Bill will be published shortly. In White Paper form it was broadly welcomed by the House as a whole. My hon. Friend will also be aware that the Government set up the fraud investigation group earlier this year to help to get effective investigation and prosecution of major fraud cases. The Government have asked Lord Justice Roskill to look at the law and procedure in major fraud cases, and his inquiry is expected to report early in the new year.
The Government are as anxious as anyone in the land to see that cases of fraud are brought to court and convictions secured where the evidence so permits.
4. Mr. Hoyle
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 December.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Hoyle
During the break from her engagements, will the Prime Minister examine the take-over bid that is being made by Elders for Allied Lyons? Is she aware that 68,000 jobs at Allied Lyons are at risk? Does she agree that there is something wrong with the capitalist system when it permits foreign bankers to have rich financial pickings at the expense of workers' jobs? Will she ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to recommend to the Office of Fair Trading that the matter should be referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission?
The Prime Minister
It is clear from the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's question that this matter must be considered first by the Director General of Fair Trading. When he has received his advice, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry will decide whether to refer the matter. I hope and believe that that decision will be made soon.
Q5. Mr. Forth
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 December.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Forth
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the police continue to attract the support and confidence of the British people? Does she further agree with the contempt that many Conservative Members hold for mad Bernie Grant and the Haringey militants, who are trying to throw the police out of the Broadwater Farm estate? Does she also agree that the residents of Broadwater Farm estate would rather have police protection than military anarchy?
The Prime Minister
Yes, wholeheartedly. The latest antics of Mr. Grant show how very much the Left is still [column 426]against the police. I think that is a tragedy. I understand that the Commissioner's view is that the police are entitled to be present in the numbers they think necessary. He believes it right that the police—[Hon. Members: “Reading.” ] Opposition Members will try to prevent from speaking anyone who stands up in support of the police. The Commissioner believes it right that the police should be free to decide what is needed to provide the local people—[Hon. Members: “Reading.” ]—with the protection to which they have a right. I notice that some hon. Members do not like free speech.
Points of Order
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Peter Thurnham (Bolton, North-East)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker
I will take points of order after the three statements, unless they arise directly from and are not an extension of Question Time.
Mr. Thurnham
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I should be grateful if you would allow my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to answer my question—[Hon. Members: “No” .] This is a matter for which the Government have direct responsibility, and it stems directly from an answer given on Monday afternoon by the Under-Secretary of State for Transport——
Mr. Speaker
Order. I have no doubt that the hon. Gentleman had thought out his question carefully, because it was printed on the Order Paper. But the House knows that questions must be related to the Prime Minister's responsibility. She has no responsibility for any action that militants might take——
Mr. Churchill (Davyhulme)
rose——
Mr. Speaker
Order. The Prime Minister has no responsibility for any action that militants might take at Manchester airport.
Mr. Churchill
rose——
Mr. Skinner
rose——
Mr. Speaker
Order. I will take Mr. Churchill first.
Mr. Churchill
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Government clearly have responsibility for legislation in the House that could prevent the Marxist Left on Manchester city council from taking over Manchester airport under the guise of a sham——
Mr. Speaker
Order. Indeed, that may be so. Had the hon. Gentleman asked that question, it would have been in order.
Mr. Skinner
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The most important feature of that question was not only that was it planted but that the Prime Minister had a readymade answer to a question for which you said she has no responsibility. The Prime Minister and the hon. Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham) were cheating the House.
Mr. Speaker
Order. Let me tell the hon. Gentleman and the House that it is wrong to say that questions are planted when they are on the Order Paper.
[column 427]Mr. Eric Deakins (Walthamstow)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I ask on whose authority business questions have been relegated to being taken after a statement when our normal procedure is that they come before statements?
Mr. Speaker
If the Government ask to make a business statement, that is in order and it takes its proper place.
Mr. John Golding (Newcastle-under-Lyme)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. How can it be ruled that the Prime Minister is not responsible for the question when the question was written before the answer? [Laughter.]
Mr. Speaker
Order.
Mr. Thurnham
Further to my point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mrs. Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley)
rose——
Mr. Golding
rose——
Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Member for Bolton, North-East (Mr. Thurnham) must put the question in the proper form. If he reads Hansard tomorrow, he will see that he did not.
Mr. Thurnham
Further to my point of order, Mr. Speaker. There is a meeting tomorrow of the shadow joint board for Manchester airport, and we should be most grateful to hear an answer to the question that I put.
Mr. Speaker
Not today.
Mrs. Clwyd
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will understand why I raise this point of order at this stage. It arises out of Question Time. I do so because I was named on the Order Paper for absenting myself from a Private Bill Committee.
Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Lady has given me notice of this point of order, and it does not arise out of this Question Time.
Mrs. Clwyd
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Golding
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker
Order. We have a busy programme today. There are three statements and some important business. I will take points of order if they are legitimate and arise out of this Question Time. I will take other points of order in their proper place at the end, where I always take them.
Mr. Golding
The response of the House to the mistake that I made in my point of order was more eloquent than if I had put it correctly.
Mr. Speaker
I am not taking any more points of order at this stage.
Mrs. Clwyd
rose——
Mr. Speaker
I am not taking any more points of order. I ask the hon. Lady to resume her seat, please. The Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister
rose——
[column 428]Mr. Andrew F. Bennett (Denton and Reddish)
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mrs. Clwyd
Further to my point of order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker
Order. I am not taking any more points of order.
Mrs. Clwyd
rose——
Mr. Speaker
Order. I am on my feet. I will take the hon. Lady's point of order, as I have said, at the end of the statement; and I will take the point of order of the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Mr. Bennett) at the end of the statements.
Mrs. Clwyd
rose——
Mr. Bennett
rose——
The Prime Minister
With permission, Mr. Speaker, I will make a statement about the European Council held in Luxembourg on 2 and 3 December. My right hon. and learned Friend——
Mrs. Clwyd
rose——
Mr. Speaker
Order. Do I understand that the hon. Lady's Committee will meet at 4 o'clock?
Mrs. Clywd
No; it is meeting now, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker
In that event, as an exception, I shall take the hon. Lady's point of order.
Mrs. Clwyd
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am sorry to press the point, but it raises an interesting matter on which I should like your ruling.
First, I was absent from the Committee for which I was named on the Order Paper because I was down on the Order Paper to ask a question in the Chamber. I should like your ruling on whether Committee business takes precedence over the business of the Chamber. I would like that information for my constituents and for other hon. Members. It is important that we should know whether it is less important to examine the Executive than to be in Committee. I should like your ruling because, according to the rules of Committee, we are subject to penalties if we absent ourselves from a Committee. I think that you should give a ruling on the matter.
Mr. Speaker
Order. This is of interest to the whole House. The hon. Lady gave me notice of her point of order, so I am able to give her the ruling for which she asks. She will know that the House has always regarded attendance at Private Bill Committees as of the utmost importance. Under Standing Order No. 122 of the Private Business Standing Orders absences from these Committees must be reported to the House. The form of words of the report matches the wording of the Standing Order, which is:
“A member of any such committee shall not absent himself from his duties thereon, except in the case of illness or by leave of the House; and if any member is not present within one hour after the time appointed for the meeting of the committee, or if any member absents himself from his duties thereon, the member shall be reported to the House at its next sitting.”
That is the Standing Order.