Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

House of Commons PQs

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: House of Commons
Source: Hansard HC [935/775-782]
Editorial comments: 1515-1530.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 2686
[column 775]

URBAN DEPRIVATION UNIT

Q1. Mr. David Hunt

asked the Prime Minister which parts of the Urban Deprivation Unit are based in the Home Office; and which have been transferred to the Department of the Environment, specifying how many staff are in each part and the annual cost of each part.

The Prime Minister (Mr. James Callaghan)

I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Stechford (Mr. MacKay) on 7th July.

Mr. Hunt

Is the Prime Minister aware that this unit is one of many financed by the Government appointed to study urban problems and that nothing is ever published of what they report? At a time when there is a need for a wider and more fundamental appraisal of the problems in areas such as Merseyside, what has happened to the comprehensive community programme and other imaginative ideas?

The Prime Minister

This unit was specifically set up by Lord Carr, when [column 776]he was Home Secretary, for the purpose of study and research into a problem that has baffled a great many people since the end of the war. I do not think that we should underrate the need for it.

The urban programme, together with the much larger resources that the Government are now devoting to it—£125 million a year—is the result of some of those studies. However, as one who was partially responsible for setting one of them up, I must say that not all the experiments have been uniformly successful.

Mr. Loyden

Will my right hon. Friend look at the question of urban aid virtually being used on purely capital projects? The point made by the hon. Member for Wirral (Mr. Hunt) is valid to the whole concept of urban aid.

The Prime Minister

I think that my hon. Friend underrates its value. I understand that 178 local authorities are now taking part in the programme. The projects include such matters as day nurseries, nursery schools and classes, lunch clubs and day centres for the elderly, adventure playgrounds, playgroups, housing aid centres, community centres, legal advice centres and so on. There are others. That is an indication of the value of the enterprises that are being conducted. Some of them are capital projects and others involve a great deal of use of staff.

Mr. Steen

Can the Prime Minister explain why the findings of the community development project that he launched nine years ago, which cost more than £5 million and was aimed at discovering the real problems of urban deprivation, are still being kept secret?

The Prime Minister

No, I could not explain that. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question on that matter to the Home Secretary. I was trying to deal with the reason for the transfer of the unit. I have not gone into the matter in detail. The community development project was the brainchild of a remarkable civil servant, Derek Morrell, who is now dead. I think that it deserved a better fate than it got. Its fate lay more in the hands of those who were carrying it out than in the mind of the originator.

[column 777]

PAY POLICY

(CHIEF SECRETARY'S SPEECH)

Q2. Mr. Blaker

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech by the Chief Secretary of the Treasury concerning pay policy delivered to the Industrial Society on 27th June represents Government policy.

The Prime Minister

Yes.

Mr. Blaker

Is it not surprising that the Chief Secretary did not mention one of the factors that contribute heavily to high pay claims—namely, the burden of direct taxation? Is the Prime Minister aware that four years ago the average payment of income tax by wage and salary earners was £350 a year, whereas this year it is estimated at £810? Is that not an intolerable situation?

The Prime Minister

I suppose that, as the hon. Gentleman is trying to blind me with figures, the answer is that it depends naturally on the extent to which the salaries of those concerned have gone up. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would care to tell us, in the form of a Question, what the increase in salaries has been.

Mr. Kinnock

On the basis of his discussions this week, will my right hon. Friend assure us that in the pay policy for the forthcoming year workers in the public sector will be at no disadvantage compared with those in the private sector?

The Prime Minister

I do not wish to anticipate the statement that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will make tomorrow. I ask my hon. Friend and the House to await that statement.

Mrs. Thatcher

What is the position about the White Paper? There is a note on the tape that there will be no White Paper tomorrow but that there will be a statement by Denis Healeythe Chancellor of the Exchequer. Does it mean no White Paper tomorrow or no White Paper at all?

The Prime Minister

It means no White Paper at this moment. That is to say—[Interruption.] I do not know what is so funny about that. It means that, having gone through the statement that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will make tomorrow, we think that it will be [column 778]perfectly adequate if that is reproduced in Hansard the next day. That is why.

Mrs. Thatcher

With respect, this is a major change and not what we had been led to expect, which was that there would be a White Paper on pay policy. It looks as if we shall now be having a minor Budget Statement. Is the answer to my first question that James Callaghanthe Prime Minister has abandoned the idea of having the White Paper before any economic debate?

The Prime Minister

That is not so. The statement tomorrow will contain a statement on pay and the proposals that the Chancellor will put before the House in the Finance Bill next week. It is being done in this way for convenience. Whether there should be a White Paper in due course is something that the Cabinet can consider later, perhaps in the autumn. Why not? [Interruption.] I must say that this is an awful lot of fuss about very little. If I had not known the Opposition's capacity for nit-picking, I should have expected congratulations on having saved money tomorrow on printing.

Mr. Bidwell

However, understandably reticent the Prime Minister might be about commenting on pay policy now, is he aware that many of us recall that he was once the odd man out on this matter in a previous Administration?

Mr. Tebbit

He might be now.

Mr. Bidwell

Has not my right hon. Friend previously said that if the State intervenes too vigorously in pay matters it is the public sector workers who inevitably get clobbered?

The Prime Minister

That is why I am in favour of obtaining agreement on pay policy whenever we can get it. That is the fairest way of trying to share the rewards in any modern industrial and complex society, otherwise the public sector workers tend to get left out. However, this happens to be a democracy, and the Government must operate within the confines of the argreement that they can secure.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

What about the price of beer going up every three months?

The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend looks well on it anyway.

[column 779]

Q3. Mr. Tebbit

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Chief Secretary to the Treasury concerning wages policy made on 27th June to the Industrial Society represents Government policy.

The Prime Minister

I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Blaker).

Mr. Tebbit

Since the social contract is involved in wages policy, could the Prime Minister clear up the mystery about what has happened to it? Last Thursday he told me that it was not intact, and in a Written Answer yesterday he said that it was not broken. What has happened? Has it died or did somebody just quietly cut its throat?

The Prime Minister

Knowing the care with which the hon. Gentleman frames his questions, I was extremely cautious in replying to the exact words that he used. Hence the difference in the definitions that he has just quoted. I try never to give the hon. Gentleman an opening if I can possibly avoid it.

I have been refreshing my mind this lunch-time with the contents of the social contract. I am glad to say that it is still healthy and going strong, especially that part of the document which says that Government policies will continue to be worked out and priorities established in collaboration and after discussion with the trade unions.

Mr. Powell

Will the Prime Minister refuse to be dismayed by the course of the Government's discussions with the TUC and hold fast to the principle that, as long as the Government maintain their policies over the control and supply of money, free collective bargaining can be restored without any danger to the objective of reduced inflation?

The Prime Minister

I partially agree with the right hon. Gentleman. I agree with the part that says that free collective bargaining can be restored without undue damage. My objection to free collective bargaining in its raw state is that it makes for no sense of justice between the various groups of workers. That is why I should prefer—on every occasion that I could get it—an agreement with the trade unions in order to [column 780]get a general approach. When the Chancellor makes his statement tomorrow, that will not be the end of the matter. Further discussions will have to take place with the trade unions—with their consent—in the autumn. In the present circumstances, the country will need all the help that it can get from the trade union movement in the months ahead.

Mr. William Hamilton

Knowing my right hon. Friend's high regard for the House, may we assume that the Chancellor's statement will be made to the House? Will the Prime Minister make that quite clear, because tomorrow would be a particularly appropriate day for the statement?

The Prime Minister

Yes. It is the Chancellor's intention to come here at 11 o'clock to try to catch your eye, Mr. Speaker. I am sorry that the statement could not be made today, but the House must accept that there are considerable problems that must be overcome. I note the jubilation of the Opposition at the thought that the country is now moving into a new phase. I am glad to say that the patriotism of the trade unions is much greaer than that of right hon. and hon. Members opposite.

Prime Minister

(ENGAGEMENTS)

Q4. Mr. Dykes

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his engagements for Thursday 14th July.

The Prime Minister

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be holding further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with the staff side of the National Whitley Council.

Mr. Dykes

In view of the continued delay and the refusal of the Government to give a statement today instead of tomorrow—which is extremely inconvenient to the House—will the Prime Minister say which of the Ministers with whom he will discuss these matters this afternoon will be in favour of wage increases above 10 per cent. next year and which of them will be in favour of a maximum of 10 per cent?

The Prime Minister

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman waits until tomorrow. I [column 781]do not see why it should be inconvenient to travel on the Tube from Harrow tomorrow morning to hear an important statement.

Mr. John Ellis

Will the Prime Minister find time during his onerous duties today to drop a note of congratulation to the British Steel Corporation, which has been selected to provide technical know-how for a new plant in Venezuela? If the Prime Minister does that, will he add a postscript to say that, while the British Steel Corporation is doing that, it should also invest to increase iron-making capacity at Scunthorpe, because there is no doubt that ever-increasing quantities can be made there?

The Prime Minister

Writing such a letter would be a relief from some of my other duties. I am sure that the House will also be pleased to learn that the British Steel Corporation has landed a valuable management contract in Venezuela to build a new steel plant that will ultimately have a capacity of about 5 million tons. This is an example of a matter raised at our recent conference on industrial strategy, namely, that nationalised industries are moving into overseas work in conjunction with other firms in order that turnkey projects and other projects can be put together on a scale that would be beyond the competence of any individual firm. I hope that everybody will encourage this.

Mr. Brocklebank-Fowler

What further discussions will the Prime Minister have today with his colleagues concerning a settlement in Rhodesia? Will he confirm or deny the report in The Guardian today that the Government could not conceive of British Forces taking part in any peace-keeping force during an interim period of government prior to a settlement in Rhodesia?

The Prime Minister

I do not propose to comment on any newspaper report on these matters. We shall not have a Cabinet discussion on Rhodesia today, but the Foreign Secretary follows this matter continuously day by day and is in close touch with the American Secretary of State and the front-line Presidents.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

When the Prime Minister has discussions later today, will he consider further explaining his opinion about wages control and why the Govern[column 782]ment insist upon a 12-month period between wage increases? It was announced today that Whitbread was increasing the price of beer by one penny and that when the company was accused of doing this before price control was introduced it emphasised that it did this every three months. Will my right hon. Friend try to do something about controlling prices, if not every three months, at least once a year?

The Prime Minister

I should be glad if my hon. Friend would put that question to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection. There are regulations and I hope that the brewers are adhering to them. If not, I am sure that the Secretary of State will follow up the matter.

Mr. Amery

Will the Prime Minister take this opportunity of welcoming the return to Rhodesia of Mr. Sithole, and will he make clear that if agreement can be reached between the Rhodesian régime and representatives of the African majority in Rhodesia the Government will not allow objections of the so-called Patriotic Front to stand in the way of our endorsing it?

The Prime Minister

It would be a little dangerous to do that because it would involve a deliberate choosing of sides by the Government. The Africans will have to choose their own leaders. I hope that everyone appreciates that. I am happy to see the return of the Rev. Ndabaningi Sithole, and I should also be happy to see the return of Mr. Nkomo and Mr. Mugabe. It is not for the House to try to decide on one group in this matter.