PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Penhaligon
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 8 December.
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 United States Treasury Secretary, Mr. Donald Regan.
Mr. Penhaligon
Can the Prime Minister explain what is happening at Windscale and why, despite all the inspection agencies and assurances from the industry, 25 miles of beach have been closed, radioactivite samples 1,000 times more than normal have been discovered, and the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food refuses to release all the information that it is alleged to have? Can the Prime Minister initiate an immediate inquiry and let the House know when this fiasco will end?
The Prime Minister
As the hon. Gentleman knows, people have already been advised to keep away from those beaches, but inquiries are under way—one by Sir Douglas Black into the incidence of leukaemia in the area, and the other by the proper authorities into any leaks from [column 460]Windscale and the effects that they may have. Both of those inquiries are already under way and there is no point in adding to them.
Mr. Montgomery
Has my right hon. Friend noted the disgraceful scenes at Brent council last night by a Left-wing “Rentamob” ? Is she aware of its determination to stop a coalition of Conservatives and Liberals from taking control of that council? In view of the fact that last week the Leader of the Opposition took so long to condemn violence on the picket lines at Warrington, does she think that perhaps today the Leader of the Opposition will unequivocally condemn the violence that was committed last night by members of his party in Brent?
The Prime Minister
I saw reports of the disgraceful scenes, which really amounted to mob rule by the Fascist Left. That is what happens when they take power, and I hope that the Leader of the Opposition will condemn it.
Mr. Bell
Will the Prime Minister, in the course of her busy day, refer to her statement yesterday that there would be no unilateral withdrawal of the British contingent from Beirut? Is she saying that there is a veto by the United States, France and Italy over British foreign and defence policy?
The Prime Minister
No, Sir. The hon. Gentleman's two statements are not compatible. I said that we would not have unilateral withdrawal. This morning there has been a meeting between the four Foreign Secretaries who represent the countries in the multinational force. The MNF continues its good work in the Lebanon.
Q2. Mr. Fisher
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 8 December.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Fisher
Will the Prime Minister give some time today to consider the problems facing the 9.2 million pensioners in this country? They received an increase in their pension of 3.7 per cent. last month, and many of them are anxious about how they will heat their homes this winter. Will the Prime Minister give a clear undertaking to pensioners that she will not increase gas prices this winter?
The Prime Minister
On the amount that pensioners have, if one takes our record over the whole period—[Hon. Members: “Ah!” ]—since the last of the Labour increases, the pension is 74 per cent. higher than it was then, while the RPI is about 70 per cent. higher. So, in real terms, it is higher than at any time under the Labour Government. There have also been generous fuel additions which, again in real terms, are higher than at any time under the Labour Government. That is not a bad record.
Mr. Hannam
Is my right hon. Friend aware of the tactics used by Left-wing Labour councillors in Brent to gag their opponents and ride roughshod over democracy? Is this not reminiscent of pre-war Fascist Germany?
The Prime Minister
I understand that, via a number of procedural devices, Conservative and Liberal councillors were effectively gagged in full council meetings. If that is correct, one can only totally and utterly condemn it as being contrary to every tenet of democracy.
Q3. Mr. Ashley
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 8 December.
[column 461]The Prime Minister
I refer the right hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Ashley
Will the Prime Minister agree that she has been arguing in Europe for the principle that the poorest members should not pay the heaviest burden. If that is so, how about applying that principle at home where she can implement it? We have 1,068,000 people who are long-term unemployed and who are being denied long-term supplementary benefit. That means that married couples are being robbed of £11 a week—a quarter of their income. Unless the Prime Minister acts on that principle, is she aware that she can be accused of double standards?
The Prime Minister
No, I do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman's accusation. The unemployed receive, in the first instance, unemployment benefit from their insurance. Over and above that they receive, as the right hon. Gentleman says, supplementary benefit. The two in total amount to about £5 billion. I think that the two are reasonable under the circumstances.
Mr. Kinnock
Has the Prime Minister yet had a chance to look at this morning's figures, which, sadly, confirm the fact that the 25 per cent. annual rate of increase in business failures is continuing? Can the right hon. Lady say which policies she will change to reverse this sad trend?
The Prime Minister
Unemployment, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, appears to have peaked. The number of vacancies is not increasing as fast as we would wish. There is very considerable interest in the new enterprise allowance. As he will have seen from “Social Trends” , a record number of people are self-employed. This means that there is a great deal of interest in enterprise. The success or failure of a business depends not upon what the right hon. Gentleman or I say, but upon whether the business produces goods and services which people will buy.
Mr. Kinnock
I should be very glad to have further good news. I at least agree with the Prime Minister's view on competitiveness. Does she not concur with me when I say that it is extremely sad that, in the four years in which she has been Prime Minister, competitiveness has gone down by 30 per cent. and investment has gone down by 20 per cent.? Given the recovery about which she talks, is she aware that if the present “rate of progress” were sustained it would take 160 years to get back to the level that we enjoyed in 1979? Will the Prime Minister answer my original question and say whether the 160-year wait is part of a medium or long-term strategy?
The Prime Minister
As the right hon. Gentleman is referring to 1979 and to industrial effort, I point out that output per head and output per hour now are 11 per cent. and 14 per cent. respectively above the previous cyclical peak of 1979. May I, on investment, refer the right hon. Gentleman to Nigel Lawsonthe Chancellor of the Exchequer's speech in the last full day's debate that we had on this subject, when he gave full details on capital and current expenditure and pointed out that when one has a true definition of capital expenditure it is about the same now as it was during the year 1978–79.
Mr. Geoffrey Finsberg
Will my right hon. Friend find time today to talk to the Law Officers to see whether they can find a way to prevent authorities such as the GLC and Camden from spending ratepayers' money on Labour party propaganda?
[column 462]The Prime Minister
I think that that would probably be, as my hon. Friend indicates, a matter for the district auditors or the Law Officers. I think that we would all deplore the expenditure of ratepayers' money on party political propaganda, particularly those hard-pressed ratepayers of London, including small businesses, who want rates to go down, not up.
Q4. Mr. Winnick
asked the Prime Minister what are her official engagements for 8 December.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Winnick
While recognising that hardly anything has gone right for the Prime Minister in the past few weeks—I am sorry about that—was it not unjust to deprive the Lord Privy Seal and Leader of the House of Commons of his job of co-ordinating Government policy? Why does not the Prime Minister, like the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the Secretary of State for Energy, in their coded ways, recognise the fact that it is the Government's policies that are so damaging to Britain, not their co-ordination?
The Prime Minister
I note that the hon. Gentleman thinks that getting inflation down is very damaging for Britain—although our record is far better than his—and that the record of output per head is very damaging for Britain, although I think that it is very good. We have done far better on the National Health Service than the Labour Government—[Interruption.] The Labour Government actually reduced provision for the National Health Service in real terms in two of the five years—1976–77 and 1977–78—that they were in office. The fact is that the Conservative Government have been very good for Britain, as was recognised at the last general election.
Mr. Tapsell
When, later today, my right hon. Friend receives the United States Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Donald Regan, will she discuss with him the reasons why economic policies which can broadly, but fairly, be described as at least neo-Keynesian seem to have brought such beneficial effects to the United States economy? Before our next Budget is finalised, could the principles of British economic policy be rigorously re-examined with an open mind?
The Prime Minister
In spite of what my hon. Friend said, a Budget deficit of this kind is causing high interest rates, which are extremely damaging to this and other European countries. Further, it is preventing us from getting the amount of investment that we should have in this country because much capital is withdrawing to the United States. The United States also has a fantastic balance of trade deficit in contrast to the figures for this country, where we have a £1.2 billion surplus so far this year. I would rather be in our position, which is sustainable, than in that of United States which, I believe, will cause great trouble within 12 months.
Dr. Owen
Has the Cabinet yet been able to make up its collective mind on the question of breaking the solicitor's monopoly on house conveyancing? If it has not, will the Government continue merely to talk about competition policy while creating private monopolies and maintaining professional monopolies?
The Prime Minister
An announcement will be made when the matter comes before the House shortly.
[column 463]Q5. Mr. Eggar
asked the Prime Minister if she will pay an official visit to Enfield.
The Prime Minister
I have at present no plans to do so.
Mr. Eggar
My constituents will be disturbed to learn that my right hon. Friend will not be visiting them. Had she planned to visit them, is she aware that they would have expressed deep concern at the events that took place in Brent last night and that they, together with the rest of the country, will take the silence of the Leader of the Opposition at Question Time today as condoning the actions last night?
The Prime Minister
The events in Brent were a disgrace to democracy and a revelation of the true nature of the Fascist Left.
Mr. Ashton
Will the Prime Minister find time today to read an article—[Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman has a right to be heard.
Mr. Ashton
Will the Prime Minister find time today to read an article in Monday's edition of The Times, which was written by Mr. David Hart, a political adviser to the Prime Minister's Office, in which he accuses National Health Service—
Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman has not related his question to Enfield. We must move on to business questions.
Mr. Ashton
I want to ask a question.
Mr. Speaker
Order.
Mr. Ashton
I was going to mention Enfield.
Mr. Speaker
I do not know what the hon. Gentleman was going to say. I only know what he did say. I did not hear him refer to Enfield in his question. We shall move on to business questions.
Mr. Ashton
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I was shouted down before I even had a chance to mention Enfield and before I reached the end of my first sentence. If that had not happened I would have been in order. May I ask my question.
Mr. Speaker
I must say that I did not hear the hon. Gentleman say anything about Enfield in his preliminary remarks. However, in the spirit of Christmas, I shall let him finish his question, if he relates it to Enfield.
[column 464]Mr. Ashton
Would the Prime Minister care to comment on an article in Monday's edition of The Times by a Mr. David Hart, who accused National Health Service workers in Enfield and elsewhere—[Laughter]—of theft and moonlighting? Is Mr. David Hart a political adviser to the Prime Minister's Office, and is it the same Mr. David Hart who went bankrupt a few years ago for nearly £1 million, ran up debts of £1,000 in a Chelsea restaurant and in antique shops, and who is highlighted in today's edition of the Daily Mirror? What sort of advice is the right hon. Lady taking from such an adviser?
The Prime Minister
Mr. Hart is not a political adviser to me, or to No. 10. If the hon. Gentleman has any quarrel with him, I suggest that he puts it to him personally.
Sir Anthony Berry
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the Christmas spirit, cannot we have one more question from an hon. Member who represents Enfield?
Mr. Speaker
Christmas is some way off.
Mr. Pavitt
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In the previous exchanges, great political capital was made out of my constituency of Brent. I was at the meeting referred to—[Interruption.] I think that you, Mr. Speaker, will acquit me of being a militant or aggressive person. I have had no chance to reply to that exchange. Is there any way in which I can put the record straight? The comments made about the incident are quite out of keeping with my construction of a complex matter.
Mr. Speaker
I am very sorry that I have been unable to call the hon. Gentleman. I suggest that he tries again next Tuesday.