TUC AND CBI
Q1. Mr. Skinner
asked the Prime Minister when he last met the Trades Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry.
The Prime Minister (Mr. James Callaghan)
I met representatives of both the TUC and the CBI when I took the chair at a meeting of the National Economic Development Council on 1st February. Further meetings will be arranged as necessary.
Mr. Skinner
Will the Prime Minister tell the trade union leaders that in her lust for power, the Leader of the Opposition will do almost anything? First, she stabbed her ex-leader in the back. Then she took elocution lessons. Then she moved the policy of the Tory Party on immigration towards the National Front. Then she was seen drinking whisky with the editor of the Tory newspaper, The Sun——
Mr. Speaker
Order. The Prime Minister is not responsible for the Leader of the Opposition. The hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) may put questions only on those matters for which the Prime Minister is responsible.
Mr. Skinner
Will my right hon. Friend therefore tell the Labour Party, both here and outside, that we shall fight the election not on expediency but on principles fashioned by the Labour Party and the trade union movement?
The Prime Minister
The TUC and the CBI both understand this position. I find, in my discussions with them, that they are principally concerned with how best to co-operate with each other and with the Government in getting higher industrial production, making our way out of the world recession, and raising the standard of life of the people of this country as well as ensuring that there are good industrial relations. These are the matters that we usually discuss, and with very great effect.
Mr. Fairbairn
Will the Prime Minister, when he speaks to the TUC and the CBI, remind them that they do not entirely represent, as they are claimed to do, the people of this country? They represent a very small fraction. Will he agree that it is those who work in small [column 629]businesses who are likely to achieve the production that we need?
The Prime Minister
I find in my discussions with them that the CBI and the TUC would not claim any more than that they represent their own members. It is the responsibility of the Government to have the national interest as a whole in its charge. That is why I cannot always agree either with the TUC or with the CBI.
Mr. Walter Johnson
When my right hon. Friend next meets the CBI and the TUC, will he, through them, convey the congratulations of this House to Sir Kenneth Keith and to all the workers involved at Rolls-Royce in achieving the massive order from Pan Am for the RB211? Does he agree that this magnificent achievement has been brought about by a nationalised company in fierce competition with private enterprise? Does this not reflect great credit on everybody concerned?
The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir, I think it does, especially as I understand that the order was won on the technical merits of the engine, which goes to show that this country can still produce what is necessary against world competition.
If we are to distribute the congratulations fairly—I have already written a personal note to Sir Kenneth Keith—we ought also to congratulate the Tory Party on nationalising Rolls-Royce.
Mr. Budgen
When the Prime Minister next meets the TUC and the CBI, will he draw to their attention the leading article in The Times of today which predicts a 15 per cent. rate of inflation next year as a consequence of the increase in the money supply for the last 12 months? Will he remind them that there is in the circumstances no chance of a reflationary Budget which does not have the effect of increasing the rate of inflation?
The Prime Minister
I read that very interesting article against the background of the knowledge that the leader writer, if I guess the style correctly, is a well-known monetarist. It seemed to me that he was sensationalising a little by annualising—that is, translating into an annual rate—the increase in money supply over the last three or four months, and that [column 630]would not necessarily be borne out over the full 12 months. However, I am having a study made of this proposition, because we should in no circumstances return to the bad habits of the Conservatives in 1972–73.
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENERGY (SPEECH)
Q2. Mr. Nicholas Winterton
asked the Prime Minister if the public speech by the Secretary of State for Energy in Bradford on 10th March 1978 concerning private ownership of farms, factories and banks, represents Government policy.
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend's speech was more of a statement of philosophy than of policy, his theme being that democracy is the best safeguard of personal freedom and of values and that private ownership does not guarantee human freedom. He added that Socialism without democracy is no Socialism at all. These propositions seem to me to be borne out by historical experience and can be verified by current observation of the international scene.
Mr. Winterton
Will the Prime Minister tell the House and the country in rather more principled terms why he allows the Secretary of State for Energy's repeated and very damaging calls for the nationalisation of banks, farms, land and factories to go unrebuked, particularly as the Prime Minister himself owns substantial land in Sussex? Is it not about time that the Prime Minister stood up and said that he opposes these pseudo-Marxist policies that are being pursued not only by his own party but within his own Cabinet?
The Prime Minister
The hon. Gentleman clearly has not read my right hon. Friend's speech with the care that it deserves. I have studied it extremely carefully. I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for bringing it to my attention, because I thought that the way in which my right hon. Friend portrayed the philosophy of freedom and democratic Socialism was excellent. If the hon. Gentleman reads the speech he will find that he has translated a negative about private ownership into a positive. I suggest that he reads the speech again.
[column 631]Mr. David Steel
Does the Prime Minister recall that the last time I questioned him about a speech of the Secretary of State for Energy he expressed the hope that we would take less of a morbid interest in the speeches of that right hon. Gentleman and more in his own? May I tell him that that advice appears to have fallen on deaf ears, since the only copy of this latest speech has disappeared from the Library? Without the benefit of the authorised version, may I ask the Prime Minister to confirm that so long as the Lib-Lab agreement exists none of these interesting ideas from the right hon. Gentleman is likely to see the light of day?
The Prime Minister
I understand that it is the desire of the right hon. Gentleman—which I fully appreciate and approve of—in due course to resume the full independence of the Liberal Party. I cannot anticipate that we are likely to have a united manifesto whenever the call to the people comes. We shall devise our own manifesto in due course. I am sorry to hear that the only copy of the speech is missing. It must be a little grubby by now, because on looking at the Order Paper I see that we had six identical Questions from the hon. Members for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton), Burton (Mr. Lawrence), Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Rost), Chingford (Mr. Tebbit), Melton (Mr. Latham), and Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. McCrindle). I suppose the hon. Gentlemen concerned passed it around among themselves.
Mr. Ashley
Now that it is clear that long-term changes in technology can have far-reaching implications for future generations—and can result either in economic prosperity or mass unemployment—will the Prime Minister consider setting up a Royal Commission to look into these changes and ensure that we are properly equipped for the future?
The Prime Minister
This is a very important question. A lot of us had our attention drawn to it by that very remarkable programme on BBC 2 last weekend which reviewed automation and micro-circuitry. There is no doubt that this will have—indeed, is already having—a profound impact on our employment prospects for the mid-1980s. I shall certainly consider the suggestion that my hon. Friend has made, because I do not [column 632]believe that either here or in the other countries of Western Europe we have devoted enough attention to employment prospects in the next decade.
Mrs. Thatcher
Will James Callaghanthe Prime Minister now answer the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) in his supplementary question? As Tony Bennthe Secretary of State for Energy is known to want massive further nationalisation—and as Labour's programme includes demands for massive further nationalisation of banks, insurance, land, building, and many major industrial companies—will the Prime Minister say whether he accepts or rejects that programme?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Lady will be satisfied in due course—[Hon. Members: “Answer.” ]—when the programme and policy of the Labour Party is published in full and the electorate is asked to decide on it. Until then, I suggest that the right hon. Lady waits in patience.
Mrs. Thatcher
Why does not the Prime Minister give a straight answer to a straight question? As he is Leader of the Labour Party, presumably that is his programme, unless he repudiates it. Does he repudiate it?
The Prime Minister
The issues on which the election will be fought in due course—indeed, it seems to me that in some ways it has already started—[Hon. Members: “Answer.” ]—will undoubtedly appear, be printed and be discussed. I am bound to say that for anyone who believes in a mixed economy—as I imagine a number of us do on the Government side of the House but not on the Opposition side—the one phrase that caught the imagination of the people of this country—and which has undoubtedly influenced their attitude to public ownership—was what the former Leader of the Conservative Opposition said about the unacceptable face of capitalism
PRIME MINISTER
(ENGAGEMENTS)
Q3. Mr. Cartwright
asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 6th April.
The Prime Minister
This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and [column 633]I shall be holding further meetings with ministerial colleagues. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be meeting Dr. Waldheim, the Secretary General of the United Nations. This evening I hope to have an Audience of Her Majesty The Queen.
Mr. Cartwright
Will my right hon. Friend give high priority to securing an expansion of world trade through a concerted and planned reflation in the industrialised economies of the West? Does he agree that that is a much more sensible solution to our economic problems than the sort of high profit/low tax panacea offered by the Leader of the Opposition?
The Prime Minister
The expansion of world trade is one of the major factors that is concerning the leaders of the industrialised world at present—as to how far it can be stimulated and what part various countries can play in it. In my view there will undoubtedly be growth in the world economy this year. This is of very great importance to Britain because about 21 per cent. of our gross national product is represented by foreign trade. Therefore, if other countries are not growing economically our prospects for exports are to that extent diminished, and we want them improved.
Mr. Gordon Wilson
Will the Prime Minister take time off today to examine the disgraceful episode that occurred on Monday of this week when a group of 20 managing directors and trade unionists, representing the knitwear industry in Scotland, attended a meeting in Glasgow which was not attended by two senior civil servants, who gave as their excuse for not turning up the fact that they did not know that there was a train service between London and Glasgow which took only five hours? In view of their ignorance and the fact that the Government have failed to provide employment in Scotland to merit the needs of the Scottish people, will the Prime Minister promote an amendment to the Scotland Bill to provide that economic and industrial powers are put into the hands of the Scottish Assembly?
The Prime Minister
I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland will look into these complaints if, indeed, they are realistic, and will give the hon. Gentleman an [column 634]answer in due course. I do not propose to investigate it myself.
Mr. Hooley
In his conversation with Dr. Waldheim, will my right hon. Friend make it clear that this country could not tolerate any attempt by the Israelis in South Lebanon which might prevent the 100,000 refugees who have been driven out of that part of the world from returning to their homes and taking up their shattered lives?
The Prime Minister
I hope to have discussions with Dr. Waldheim about the position of the United Nations force in the Lebanon, and I shall certainly represent to him the need to ensure as far as possible that there is no contact between the PLO and the guerrillas and the Israeli border. It is important that there should be a clear separation. From then on, I hope that negotiations will be resumed quickly between Egypt and Israel.