PRIME MINISTER
(ENGAGEMENTS)
Q1. Miss Joan Lestor
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 29 April.
The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)
This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with Pastor Georgi Vins. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
Miss Lestor
Will the Prime Minister find time today to answer questions that were not answered by Ministers in the defence debate yesterday? Can she confirm reports that the Diego Garcia base was used by America in the rescue attempt in Iran and say whether she has yet given assurances to President Carter that this country would not support any military intervention there?
The Prime Minister
With regard to the latter part of the hon. Lady's question, we have not given specific assurances, but the European Council of Ministers and Ministers from the Government Dispatch Box have made clear that they do not believe that military intervention will help to secure the release of the hostages. Equally, they believe that a rescue operation can be distinguished from military intervention.
With regard to the hon. Lady's first point, I do not wish to get myself into a position where I have to confirm or deny movements through allied bases.
Mr. Scott
Will my right hon. Friend find time to consider carefully the widely reported statements of Mrs. Kate Losinska of the CPSA about infiltration by extremists into the Civil Service unions? Will she ask her noble Friend the Lord President of the Council to institute an urgent inquiry into security within the Civil Service?
[column 1145]The Prime Minister
I am grateful to my hon. Friend but it would be difficult to do exactly what he requires. I assure him that we shall keep a close watch on the point that has been made.
Mr. Maxton
Will the Prime Minister today ask the chairman of the BBC what fee was paid to Richard Nixon for his interview last night on “Panorama” ? Does not she agree that, at a time when the BBC intends to disband the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra it is a disgrace for it to pay any fee, however small, to such a despicable and discredited character?
The Prime Minister
The answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is “No, Sir” . It would not be right for me to make inquiries of the BBC about specific fees that it pays. With regard to the BBC's decisions on public spending, I may hold extremely strong views that some of them have not necessarily been made in the right places. I believe that direct representation would come better from people who feel strongly about these matters rather than from Government.
Mr. Forman
Will my right hon. Friend take some time today to look again at the original terms of reference of the Standing Commission on pay comparability? Is she aware that those terms of reference include no explicit reference to inflation and the need to counter it? Will she therefore look again at the matter to see whether future references can include such a reference or, better still, will she abolish the Commission?
The Prime Minister
My recollection is that the original terms of reference were not so much to make specific recommendations on pay claims as to look into the feasibility of a comparability study. I assure my hon. Friend that we are looking into the whole future of this particular comparability committee.
CONTROL OF DOGS (DEPARTMENTAL CO-ORDINATION)
Q2. Mr. Andrew F. Bennett
asked the Prime Minister if she is satisfied with the co-ordination between the Northern Ireland Office, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Department of the [column 1146]Environment, and the Home Office over the implementation of the inter-departmental report on the control of dogs.
The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir.
Mr. Bennett
Does the Prime Minister agree that it is appalling that, in a country of supposed dog lovers over 100 dogs a day have to be destroyed because they are straying in the streets? Is it not high time that the recommendations of the inter-departmental working party on the control of dogs were implemented?
The Prime Minister
I saw the report of the hon. Gentleman's effective Adjournment debate. Of course, we are extremely sorry that there are so many stray dogs which are not properly looked after and have to be destroyed. It is a long time since the inter-departmental working committee reported in 1976. However, I can give no assurance that legislation will be introduced in the near future.
Mr. Marlow
Is the Prime Minister aware that 50 people a year and possibly more—mainly children—suffer severe eye damage as a result of toxicara canis, a worm passed on from dogs? Would my right hon. Friend like to speculate on the public outcry if the same amount of human damage was caused by nuclear power? Does she believe that she should take strong action?
The Prime Minister
I am aware of the risk, but I do not think that we can obviate it through legislation. It is of considerable concern that people do not look after their dogs and that so many strays have to be destroyed each year. I much regret it.
Mr. Molyneaux
Does the Prime Minister agree that this necessary measure should be applied to the United Kingdom simultaneously, particularly since it involves an increase in the licence fee? Does she agree that the recommendations should be implemented as speedily as possible?
The Prime Minister
A number of hon. Members will feel that action should have been taken before. I have made inquiries about the Northern Ireland position. I understand that legislation has often been different in Northern Ireland and has gone ahead at a different rate. I am told that action is more urgent there than in the rest of the United Kingdom.
[column 1147]FRAMLINGHAM
Q3. Mr. Gummer
asked the Prime Minister whether she has any plans to visit Framlingham.
The Prime Minister
I have at present no plans to do so.
Mr. Gummer
Is my right hon. Friend aware that she would receive a great welcome in Framlingham but that at present such a visit would go largely unreported because of the refusal of the NGA to ballot its members on the present industrial action? Is she aware that that refusal came about because, according to Mr. Wade, it is too expensive to run a ballot? Is not that another indication that the employment legislation going through the House is necessary, will be welcomed by moderate people, and should be supported by the Opposition?
The Prime Minister
If that is so, certainly the Employment Bill will remedy the position because under it the Government may pay to hold a postal ballot. I understand that two of the other unions held a ballot and that the people involved demonstrated that they did not wish to strike. It is a pity that the Employment Bill is not already through the House so that others could take advantage of its provisions. I would add that I should like to visit my hon. Friend's constituency, even if it were not reported.
PRIME MINISTER
(ENGAGEMENTS)
Q4. Mr. Lawrence
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 29 April.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave earlier.
Mr. Lawrence
Will my right hon. Friend find time today to study the report of the Public Accounts Committee, which tells us that the Polish Government are paying £50,000 for 24 ships, which will cost the British taxpayer £152 million under a deal negotiated by the Leader of the Opposition when in Government? Will she confirm that it is no part of her policy to conclude such preposterous commercial deals with Communist countries?
[column 1148]The Prime Minister
I agree that that was a waste of public expenditure. The losses on that deal were very great indeed, for 24 ships. We do not know the extent of the losses yet because not all the ships have been delivered. I understand fully the need to try to get some work for the shipyards so that they can have an orderly rundown, but we should not do deals of that kind, which are a bad bargain for Britain.
Mr. Flannery
Will the Prime Minister direct her mind once again to Iran? Does she realise that the piece of electoral military adventurism engaged in by America in Iran has worsened the whole world situation, and yet she described that adventurism as “courageous” ? Does she realise that, had the American troops gone near the embassy, there would have been a major shoot-out leading to a large number of dead and that the coffins of the martyrs, so called, would have been carried through the streets? Does she accept that the world situation would have been made worse than at any time since the Second World War? Will she withdraw her support for such military adventurism in the interests of world peace?
The Prime Minister
May I ask the hon. Gentleman to realise that 50 hostages have been held in Iran in flagrant breach of every single international law? It would be as well if we all directed our efforts to using peaceful means to realise them.
Mr. Patrick McNair-Wilson
Does my right hon. Friend accept that the whole country will welcome the fact that the Foreign Secretary is to make an early visit to Washington? Will she reflect that Britain has the longest history of good relations with many of the Gulf States of any other country and that therefore our help and guidance can be of the greatest importance in maintaining stability and peace in that area at this time?
The Prime Minister
I endorse warmly what my hon. Friend has said. Britain could not have a better emissary to those parts of the world than Lord Carringtonour present Foreign Secretary.
Mr. Faulds
Will the right hon. Lady ponder today that Mr. Brzezinski, in a television interview last night, reiterated [column 1149]the dangers of disintegration in Iran when no such thing is yet happening? Is it not obvious that he is hoping, or helping, to bring that about as an excuse for military intervention? Will she make it clear that we in this country shall not be party to such lunatic intentions on the part of such a dangerously powerful madman?
The Prime Minister
I think that there may well be a danger of secession of some of the Iranian peoples. I believe that it would be contrary to the interests of the West if that happened. I hope that Iran will retain her unity, but that is a matter for internal affairs in Iran. I have already made clear my views about military action.
Q5. Mr. Montgomery
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 29 April.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave earlier.
Mr. Montgomery
Has my right hon. Friend seen the opinion poll published yesterday which shows that 63 per cent. of Labour voters are opposed to the TUC's day of action on 14 May? Does she agree that on this issue, as on so many others, she is much more in touch with the people than the Leader of the Opposition, whose silence on this issue is deafening?
The Prime Minister
I hope that the vast majority of people will join in condemning the plans for such a day of action, which has nothing whatsoever to do with a trade dispute and which will only help Britain's competitors.
Mr. Marks
Will the Prime Minister take time today to consider more carefully than she has in the past the effect of her various Departments' policies on young families? Will she ask herself whether such families are being asked to bear too great a part of the sacrifices which she is demanding? The right hon. Lady recently said that our standard of living had gone up 6 per cent. Has the [column 1150]standard of living of young families gone up by 6 per cent.?
The Prime Minister
With regard to the Government's policy on families I believe that it is most important to leave families with a greater proportion of their own income—their own earnings—to spend in their own way. The standard of living of a family must come not from the Government but from the action of the breadwinner.
With regard to specific measures, I believe that it will be of great help to families when more of them can purchase council houses because that will fulfil an ambition for many people. I also believe that it will be of great help to families that the family income supplement is going up by one-third. I believe that family benefit rising by £4.75 will help them to fulfil their very many obligations.
Mr. James Callaghan
Following that answer, will the Prime Minister tell us—since she wishes council tenants to purchase their houses—why it is that the GLC has stopped lending money to would-be council house purchasers? Will she tell us why it is that there have been fewer council houses sold during the last six months than there were in the last six months of the Labour Administration?
If the Prime Minister really believes that young families have more money in their pockets because they pay less tax why is it that the total level of taxation paid by the average family today is higher than it was 12 months ago?
The Prime Minister
Had the right hon. Gentleman been in power today the level of taxation would have been a great deal higher. In the first two Budgets of the Labour Government the level of income tax was increased, as was indirect tax. If the right hon. Gentleman takes the view which I deduce from his comments, I trust that he will repudiate—[Hon. Members “Answer” .] the comment of his right hon. Friend that the Labour Party would continue to oppose the sale of council houses.