PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Ronnie Campbell
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 21 June.
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, including one with the Mayor of Paris, Mr. Jacques Chirac, and this evening I shall preside at a dinner in honour of the Crown Prince of Morocco.
[column 1108]Mr. Campbell
Will the Prime Minister commission an inquiry by the social services inspectorate into establishing the allegations that staff shortages in Wandsworth council resulted in the death of a three-year-old child?
The Prime Minister
No. Obviously that tragic case affected us all greviously. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, the death of that child occurred in August 1989. The details of the case are being thoroughly looked into. Wandsworth council had already spent a great deal on that case, including at one stage removing that family to another place of residence at the cost of some £15,000. They were moved to a residential home and then back into a council house. Wandsworth has a very good record on social workers, having about 4 per cent. more social workers in relation to its population than other inner London authorities. This is a tragic case. Of course, there has been an inquiry and the recommendations of that inquiry will be accepted.
Mr. Teddy Taylor
Is my right hon. Friend at all concerned that on Tuesday the European Court instructed our courts to consider interim relief from sections of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 although the House of Lords decided that it had no powers to do so? Until we accept that European law is supreme over our own law, is not it a dangerous development that the court is effectively taking on the power to suspend sections of laws passed by this Parliament? Will not that open up the possibility and likelihood that groups and individuals will seek relief from laws passed by this Parliament simply by going to the European Court and claiming that they have lost as a consequence of those laws?
The Prime Minister
I share my hon. Friend's concern about that judgment. As he said, since the European Communities Act 1972, our courts have been obliged to protect rights under Community law, but the European Court has now said that where those rights are impaired by British law, our courts have the power to grant an injunction until the main case is heard. That applies to what my hon. Friend said, although the injunction may affect the operation of an Act of our own Parliament. The European Court has left it to our courts to decide whether or not to exercise that power. The case in question now goes back to our courts to decide whether the power to give interim relief should be used. We shall argue strongly that it should not. Meanwhile, the position on fishing rights remains unchanged. I should point out that the European Court's decision applies to all European countries, not only to the United Kingdom.
Mr. Kinnock
Does the Prime Minister agree with the statement that the proposals put forward by the Chancellor last night are
“a very useful intermediate step”
towards “a Single European Currency” —the view, and indeed the words, of the Governor of the Bank of England?
The Prime Minister
That is not quite what my right hon. Friend John Majorthe Chancellor said, in a most excellent and constructive speech—[Interruption].
Mr. Speaker
Order.
The Prime Minister
—which has been very widely welcomed as building on the present position, going forward in an evolutionary way. We should bear it in mind [column 1109]that many other countries may wish to join the Community, and not make it more difficult for them to do so. The speech does not mean that we approve of a single European currency; it says specifically that we do not. It provides for a common European currency, which each country may use if it wishes to do so. That does not therefore take away from our sovereignty. It provides a way of trying to get inflation down by reference to a hard ecu. I was not quite sure whether the right hon. Gentleman said that he had read the speech or, if he had read it, whether he understood it.
Mr. Kinnock
By all means, I have read the speech. I wonder whether the Chancellor explained to the right hon. Lady that if the idea that he put forward were accepted, with the European Monetary Fund and the hard ecu, it would be the final surrender of monetary sovereignty by Britain, as sterling moved into the hard ecu. Does she take that into account in the view that she expresses about what the Chancellor said?
The Prime Minister
The purpose of that speech, and that proposal, is precisely that we do not surrender control over our monetary policy. Of course, we wish to use monetary policy in a way that gets inflation down, but the proposal does not surrender control over that policy.
Mr. Kinnock
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady. These are important matters. Is she saying, in the responses that she has made thus far, that when the Governor of the Bank of England said to the House of Lords yesterday that a European Monetary Fund and a hard ecu would, and I quote him precisely,
“be a very useful intermediate step between the … existing EC currencies and a single EC currency”
he was wrong?
The Prime Minister
I suggest that the right hon. Gentleman reads more carefully the speech of my right hon. Friend John Majorthe Chancellor, which proposes building on the existing ecu—the City has already issued securities denominated in ecu—to have a hard ecu, which could become a common European currency available for countries to use if they so choose. It retains the choice and it retains sterling.
Mr. Speaker
We now come to Question 3.
Hon. Members
Order.
Mr. Speaker
Order. It is all right. I shall come back to Question 2.
Q3. Mr. Bill Walker
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 21 June:
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Walker
Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the 11 years of her leadership the economy in Scotland has been transformed into a dynamic, vibrant and modern economy? Will she confirm that she has no plans to introduce an assembly Act, which would give Scotland an assembly in Edinburgh with tax-raising powers and which would place in jeopardy that modern, vibrant economy?
The Prime Minister
I agree with my hon. Friend. Scotland is doing better than ever before because of this Government's policies, which Scotland has taken to very well indeed and is using profitably to her own advantage. [column 1110]We have no plans to introduce an assembly. If one took into account all Scotland's own spending, with Scotland having to bear all its own expenditure, it would mean an additional 20p on the standard rate of income tax in Scotland.
North-East Scotland
Q2. Mr. McAllion
To ask the Prime Minister when she next expects to visit the north-east of Scotland.
The Prime Minister
I hope to visit the north-east of Scotland later this year.
Mr. McAllion
Is the Prime Minister aware that the Speedlink rail freight service that serves the north-east of Scotland faces closure because of her plans to sell off parts of British Rail? Is she further aware that such a closure would lead to 100,000 tonnes of timber being moved from rail to road, which would create an additional 18,000 lorry movements every year on Scotland's already overcrowded roads? Given that such a development makes no economic sense, does the Prime Minister accept that the price to be paid by the rest of us for her personal obsession with privatisation is too high and that she should instruct British Rail to retain the existing Speedlink service?
The Prime Minister
Some of us think when we visit Scotland and travel on her roads that they are very much better than the roads down south, and not nearly so crowded. Scotland has had an enormous amount of money spent on her roads. Current investment levels in British Rail are the highest, in real terms, for a quarter of a century, with £3.7 billion to be invested over the next three years.
Engagements
Q4. Mr. Bellingham
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 21 June.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Bellingham
Does the Prime Minister share the widely felt concern about human rights in Romania? Does she agree that neither Britain nor the EEC should extend further assistance to Romania in the present circumstances, except of a purely humanitarian kind?
The Prime Minister
I share my hon. Friend's concern. After all that the Romanian people have been through, we were absolutely horrified to see on television a repetition of previous scenes and the violence being used by the miners. We were also very much concerned about the fate of some of the demonstrators who were arrested. We have invoked the Helsinki agreement to seek information from the Romanian Government about their fate. In the meantime, the European Community is quite right to refuse to sign a trade and co-operation agreement with Romania. Romania will not be invited to the ministerial meeting of the Group of 24 on 4 July to discuss aid to eastern Europe. We think that that is a proper response to the scenes that we saw and witnessed on television.
Mr. Ashdown
Does the Prime Minister realise that, whatever the flaws—I suspect that they will be fatal—in the Chancellor's new proposals for competing currencies, it is nevertheless very welcome that her Cabinet colleagues, [column 1111]or at least some of them, have managed to lever her forward an inch or two on Europe? The Prime Minister has said that this is an evolutionary approach. An evolutionary approach must have an objective. Will the Prime Minister repeat to the House what she has said before: that she does not believe that Britain should, or will in her lifetime, join a single European currency or a central European bank?
The Prime Minister
I think that the proposals outlined by my right hon. Friend John Majorthe Chancellor of the Exchequer are the right way ahead: to build on the existing ecu. We have issued securities denominated in ecu. It meets the wish of many people to have a common currency. That is quite different from a single currency. The common currency would be the new ecu. It means that those who wish to use the new ecu in place of their own currency may do so. I do not believe that we shall. It also provides protection against inflation. Furthermore, it would not be an impediment to many east European countries that may wish to join us later. If, however, we tied ourselves up too closely and relinquished our monetary powers to a central authority, they would not wish to join; nor should we wish to relinquish the powers of this House.
Q5. Mr. Irvine
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 21 June.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Irvine
Does my right hon. Friend agree that regional airports play a crucial role in stimulating growth [column 1112]in the areas that they serve? Will she therefore join me in expressing astonishment at the crass, blinkered and short-sighted attitude shown by the Labour-controlled Ipswich borough council, which is intent on closing down Ipswich airport even though no suitable alternative site has yet been found?
The Prime Minister
Yes, the Government wish to see the maximum use of airports in the regions, to meet as much local demand as they can attract. Since 1981 we have given borrowing approval for more than £287 million—[Interruption].
Mr. Speaker
Order. The Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister
We have given borrowing approval totalling over £287 million for the development of local authority airports and I hope that a new site can be found quickly for the airport to which my hon. Friend referred. I understand that discussions have already taken place between Suffolk county council and the Ministry of Defence—[Interruption.] Clearly Opposition Members are not in the least bit interested in the new airport for Ipswich—[Interruption].
Mr. Speaker
Order. This is taking up a lot of time and the Prime Minister is trying to answer the question.
The Prime Minister
The Opposition are not interested, Mr. Speaker. Discussions have already taken place between Suffolk county council and the Ministry of Defence about the possible use of RAF Wattisham. We are interested in regional airports, but the Opposition are not.