Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

Press Conference in Edmonton for Western media

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: Government House, Edmonton, Alberta
Source: Thatcher Archive: transcript
Editorial comments: 0900-0930. Some of the questions were not audible to the transcriber.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 3037
Themes: Agriculture, Commonwealth (general), Conservatism, Defence (general), Defence (arms control), Economic policy - theory and process, Industry, Monetary policy, Energy, Trade, European Union (general), Foreign policy (Americas excluding USA)

Chairman

The Prime Minister will say a few words and then we'll take questions for half an hour. Prime Minister.

Mrs. Thatcher

Ladies and gentlemen. This is the last time I shall be talking to you in Canada. It's been a brief but a rather wonderful visit and we've enjoyed every moment of it. We were very anxious to come to Alberta and to get to see this part of Canada and now we've been we're particularly glad that we came. It was a very happy dinner last evening, a wonderful audience to talk to and I thought they responded to everything we said which perhaps shows that there is a very special relationship between the people of Alberta and the people of Great Britain, because we have so many things in common and of course, as you know, we have the training grounds which we value very much I've had very interesting talks with Premier Lougheed this morning. Naturally they included things that we have in common—agricultural policy which is very important in Alberta and also they're very interested to know about the future of the Common Agricultural Policy in the Community. And of course we both have an interest in world oil prices, in keeping them stable, which we've both played an active part in, believing that that is in the interests of industry the world over, not to have these enormous fluctuations in prices but to have a period of stability. I think one has learned especially here—and also in Ontario with the visit we did to Premier Davis—the immense importance and significance of provincial government to the life and policy of Canada and to their relationship with other countries. I think that's something that we couldn't quite have learned in the same way without coming here to see it. One knows it intellectually but one has in fact seen it very much in practice.

Can I say that I'll be sad to go and hoping to return. Now can I have your questions …   .

Question

Prime Minister, you've mentioned again this morning and last night you mentioned it, that you were grateful for the training grounds here in Alberta—are you also grateful to Canada for allowing …   . to Cruise?

Mrs. Thatcher

Yes indeed, grateful, not surprised because I think it is … Canada's part of NATO, Canada is a very very staunch supporter of NATO, founder member and she is just carrying out her part of that decision. [end p1]

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

I am sure that there could not be Cruise missile testing here unless Premier Lougheed had also agreed and the people of Alberta had agreed.

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

I didn't even know whether he has or whether he hasn't. That's a matter between you and him.

Question

What do you expect the forthcoming Commonwealth conference to achieve?

Mrs. Thatcher

The Commonwealth is a really remarkable organisation of 46/47 countries. We get together alternate years. It's very impressive that people from such diverse backgrounds with this historic experience in common, we can all speak in English, it's the only international conference that I attend where there's no need for any translation, although you've got 46 or 47 countries assembled together. We all speak in English and therefore you can have genuine debates. What does it achieve? It achieves a greater understanding amongst the 47 countries there of world problems and what you can and cannot do, because you talk them all through. It achieves a greater understanding of the relationship between the industrialised world and the developing countries and how much we depend upon one another. We constantly of course are discussing the politics of government and the importance of democracy and many of us still believing in the two-party system. Some not and I'm afraid not all countries in the Commonwealth are democracies as we understand them but it does contribute to greater understanding and the important thing about it is, is that the countries girdle the world, they're not from any particular region but include people from all regions, so we have the Atlantic represented, the Indian Ocean, the Pacific and Australia and New Zealand, it's a very interesting and significant conference but I think you count its achievements in relation to its continuity and the general opinion that it influences, rather than sudden startling statements. I know you like sudden startling statements but they're not necessarily the most important things of all.

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

Oh, I expect so, he's very very well aware of our views and Nigel Lawsonour chancellor of the exchequer is in Washington at the moment, at the IMF and I think he's already had something to say about deficits and their effect on interest rates, I think yesterday. And of course if you get artificially high interest rates because you have a high deficit it is the worst thing for getting new businesses going and for getting construction going again.

Chairman

The lady …   . [end p2]

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

Well, you know the part that we played in trying to stabilise world prices, when OPEC was meeting in London, it seemed to us at that time the most important thing was to stop the fluctuation and indeed to stem a sudden sharp fall, had you got a very sudden fall it would have been devastating for international finance and for some countries who are already suffering from a fall in oil prices and it would only have gone up again sharply and one wanted, if possible to smooth that, so we don't get that effect but you get stability. Now the interests of Alberta and those of Britain are very similar on oil pricing and we just had a brief word about that.

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

No, no, I'm not going any further than … we hope that the stability will hold.

Question

What actions might Britain take in the case of possible increase in OPEC production over the next few months if prices do begin to drop again?

Mrs. Thatcher

Well, let's not start to inject doubt into the system at the moment. The stability is holding at the moment and we'll do everything we can to try to hold it and to some extent it always depends upon the supply and demand position, but with increasing activity in the United States, in one or two countries in Europe, that should help the position, should help to hold it.

Question

When you say you'll do everything you can to hold the price of oil, what measures are they?

Mrs. Thatcher

Well, they're the kind of measures … it isn't so much they're measures as the kind of consultation we had with OPEC on the last occasion. You can't hold it against a fundamental imbalance of demand and supply. That is very very difficult indeed, but you know Saudi Arabia took a very very prominent part on lowering her own production in order to try to hold the stability and it was a great act of leadership, a great act of sacrifice on her part to try to keep stability. [end p3]

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

I don't think I used those actual words although that may have been the meaning, I think Alberta has a wonderful base both in the prosperity of her agriculture and in the oil and gas, it's a marvellous combination of itself but it also gives you the opportunity with the kind of wealth that that can create to have many many other industries there which everyone needs to try to give their people a …   . more various opportunities for jobs and just a wider variety of activity.

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

We weren't quite here as salesmen, you know we have a very good agriculture and very good oil as well, so we weren't really trying to sell one another's goods to one another. Naturally he's interested, Ian, in …   . as indeed the whole of Canada and the United States, in the Common Agricultural Policy and what's going to happen and as you know there were one or two problems occurring between the two sides of the Atlantic and those have not yet been resolved, though talks are continuing but the fact is that on our side of the Atlantic we have substantial surpluses and they are sold off and this side of the Atlantic they have substantial surpluses and the fact is that there's one great buyer of those surpluses, that is the Soviet Union, who in fact if I might say it, did not run a Communist system but a free enterprise system, would also probably be a surplus producer. It is …   . but there is that difference between us, there is that problem between the two sides of the Atlantic and it's not yet resolved, as you know we're having our say on the CAP in the budget negotiations, how far we're winning the battle I wouldn't like to say.

Chairman

Another question

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

No, we didn't, I can only say that …   . the general things that I've said, every country in the world operates some protectionist measures. When we meet in international fora we always recognise this and there are cases where you have to, but I stress what I said yesterday, we should hesitate a very long time and look very deeply before we take any steps to increase those protectionist measures because it is in all our interests to get expanding world trade and you get that by reducing protectionism, but if you're going to reduce protectionism and that is your objective, to go to freer trade, you also have to take steps to see that it is in fact fair trade and that's where the difficulty really comes in, because it's no earthly good some of us being great exponents of free trade and finding others putting up all sorts of artificial barriers against our goods. The attitude then is to try to get their barriers down, to go to free trade, but it is barriers put up by some people which are death to free trade, and I never want us to get into the position we were in in the thirties where we went to increasing protectionism with all the devastating effects that had on the volume of world trade [end p4]

Question

You seem so confident of economic recovery during your visit here. How long do you think it will take for the West to return to pre-1980 levels …   .

Mrs. Thatcher

Did you hear what I said last night at the dinner? It wasn't in a press release or anything like that, so you may not have heard it. I think there was a time especially before the 1970 period actually when the world was really taking growth for granted. You know, we'd had quite a period of post-war growth, but then you came into the period where many of the initial demands of people had been satisfied and so one was going into a slower expansion period and also into a replacement period and all of a sudden the expectation of growth was reduced as the growth virtually stopped and we got in the 1970s an example of what damage inflationary policies can do, it killed the Bretton Woods system, then we got the colossal increase in energy—then we got the new technologies and then we had world recession. Now all of these things I think have been a much more devastating experience in the seventies to eighties than most people realised and I think there is a much, much more fundamental adjustment going on because we now have to get sound prudent financial policies the world over, and although we know as a matter of commonsense there's almost unlimited demand for new goods and new services the world over. It's not easy to get those started again in a way where you can get steady growth. I therefore can't foretell. I can only say that I believe growth will continue again. It's starting to continue again, but this time we must have it against the best background of all, which is prudent financial policies so you have got a stable background against which you can get growth operating and you do not inject in measures which lead themselves to sudden fluctuations, because if you start too sudden increases those too in the end will lead to sudden falls and dislocation. I think it will take quite a time and I think one of the limiting factors is the debt position of a number of countries at the moment, which obviously stops them from expanding because they have such enormous liabilities from the past and also the position of a number of the under-developed countries who still have not absorbed the enormous increases in the price of oil and it means that they have less money to spend on other exports and that affects other manufacturing industries the world over. I'm sorry it's a long answer. It's a genuine answer that's why it's a long one.

Chairman

Gentleman at the back.

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

I don't think they differ very much, I think for conservatives on our side of the Atlantic and conservatives on this side of the Atlantic, you'll find that conservatism consists of two things, of trying to conserve the best in the past, against a stable financial framework and of constantly being prepared to adapt to change and to embrace change. The two are very much part of the same coin. Now you'll know a number of the quotations from our great conservative statesmen—‘change is the means of conservation’—Burke, or Disraeli—‘change is constant’—the only question is whether it takes place against the background of your customs, conventions and institutions or whether it's dislocatory and of course without it always taking place in an evolutionary way against a stable background and I don't think that's any different here from Britain, indeed I would say that Alberta is a very good manifestation of that. The kind of stability of financial institutions and of honourable standards is the best background against which you can absorb change and develop new things. [end p5]

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

Well, we have met with some of the Canadian businessmen that I spoke with yesterday, some of those who actually do invest in Britain. As you know they purchased or repurchased the old Bowater paper plant and it's been revitalised by Canadian investment. Mitel is a Canadian investment, indeed indeed there are very many Canadian investments in Britain and I've been saying—look, please, let's have more. Canadian investment is very welcome and there is already quite a bit but also as you know, I'm a great believer in British investment overseas, if we're to pay out the dividends which arise from investment into Britain, then we have to have dividends and interest coming in from our investment overseas, to cover those outgoings and I hope to produce a profit. I also believe that outward investment from Britain is a way in the long run of replacing the oil in the North Sea, by income producing assets overseas. And you will remember of course that we were very fortunate at the beginning of the last war to have immense income producing assets from overseas which of course we had to use to enable us to fight the last war, so it has many many aspects to it.

Chairman

Shall we take three more questions?

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

No, as far as I am aware, I wouldn't dream of commenting on the federal government policies, those indeed are a matter for the people of Canada and they would naturally feel very upset if I were to comment on what is really strictly in their province. Canada is just as anxious as I am to get recovery, I am very anxious to have that recovery soundly based so that it can continue and very much aware that recovery's going to be the more difficult this time because of the international debt position. That international debt position arises really from the way in which after the first sharp oil price increase the great surpluses from the Middle East were recycled through the banking system and lent in too large quantity and too quickly to some of the developing countries whose plans were over-ambitious. Lending too much and borrowing too much has landed them in considerable difficulty, and that I'm afraid will be a limiting factor on recovery because they're not going to be able to import goods which are the natural goods which we would wish to sell. [end p6]

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

I think there's a general realisation that the task of government is to have sound financial policies, to leave sufficient monies with the private sector because the private sector invests in response to the needs of the market and therefore that is where your expansion and new jobs and new industries are going to come from. And it's also the task of government to have the right taxation policy which gives incentive to expansion and new industries. I think that's generally understood, I think it's also generally understood now, much more so, that on the whole the expansion does not come from government, it is the private sector which builds up the new products in response to the needs of the market. Governments don't do that, governments really are the background, the sound policies, keeping the currency stable, helping sometimes through the taxation system, new business to start and always mitigating. … Government has a job to mitigate some of the harsh effects of change, so we can help with young people in training them for the kind of new products which we see are on the way. I think there is a much greater and wider understanding now that countries who pursue those policies are the countries that are going to come first out of the recovery and are going to be able to sustain a higher standard of living longer—as I say I think if Russia weren't Communist she'd be a very very much more prosperous economy than she is.

Question

Mrs. Thatcher

No, I haven't really been talking about differences, what I was very impressed with is the immense strength and power of the provinces, which have a great effect on the whole policy of Canada. As you know, in federal systems there are several different ways of running them. The Australian one is very different from the Canadian, the American one also is different. Not for me to get into the differences. One can only be impressed by both the strength and power of the provinces in the life of Canada and when you start to fly over the immense distances you begin to understand why it must be that way. You cannot possibly run things wholly from the centre and you also have provinces which are very diverse and you begin to understand …   . have a very much more practical understanding of the importance and significance of the provincial system in the life of Canada.

Chairman

Well thank you very much ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for attending. Thank you Prime Minister.