Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

House of Commons PQs

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: House of Commons
Source: Hansard HC [64/817-22]
Editorial comments: 1515-1530.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 2750
Themes: Defence (general), Economic policy - theory and process, Higher & further education, Employment, Industry, Elections & electoral system, Monetary policy, Privatized & state industries, Public spending & borrowing, Taxation, Trade, Foreign policy (Middle East), Law & order, Local government finance, Science & technology, Trade union law reform, Strikes & other union action
[column 817]

PRIME MINISTER

Engagements

Q1. Mr. Hayes

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 24 July.

The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)

This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today.

Mr. Hayes

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the NUM is making a complete mockery of the word negotiation if it is not prepared to make one single [column 818]concession? Will she confirm that there is a great future for economically produced coal, and the fact that we produce deep mined coal at £100 per tonne compared to £19 elsewhere is an absurdity?

The Prime Minister

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct in saying that deep-mined coal is produced more cheaply elsewhere than in this country. I believe that the offer that Mr. MacGregor made in the recent negotiations was very reasonable, and I am very sorry that it was not accepted. The offer that the Government have made shows that there is a great future for the coal industry if it is accepted, with better pay, investment and compensation for voluntary redundancies than have ever been offered by a Government.

Mr. Janner

Will the right hon. Lady give thought to the predicament of councils such as that in the city of Leicester, which was elected and re-elected on a programme of maintaining services for its citizens? Does she not recognise that the imposition of penalties through rate capping is a travesty of democracy and will certainly lead to a reduction in services, especially those most needed by the elderly, the disabled, the disadvantaged and those who are in desperate need of housing?

The Prime Minister

As the hon. and learned Gentleman will be aware, in considering the level of expenditure it is necessary to consider also the interests of the taxpayers, the ratepayers, and those who are running small and larger businesses and who have to provide employment of the kind of which we all wish to see more. Their interests, too, must be taken into account.

The hon. and learned Gentleman will be aware of some of the speeches that we heard during the lifetime of the previous Labour Government. I can remember the late Mr. Anthony Crosland making a speech about rates and saying, “the party is over.”

Merchant Marine Fleet

Q2. Sir David Price

asked the Prime Minister what is the minimum size and mix of the merchant marine fleet that is necessary to be maintained under the British flag for reasons of national security.

The Prime Minister

At present the United Kingdom registered merchant fleet numbers some 820 ships. The Government keep under continuous and detailed review the requirements of Her Majesty's Forces for support by merchant ships when carrying out their roles in the NATO Alliance and elsewhere, and the availability of merchant ships with specifications capable of meeting those requirements. For reasons of security, details of the ships that could be needed cannot be given.

Sir David Price

Does my right hon. Friend recall that at the height of the Falklands conflict there were more ships flying the Red Ensign than the White Ensign in the south Atlantic? Is she further aware that if the decline in the size and the mix of the British Merchant Navy continues she will be unable to call on the same merchant marine ever again in support of the Royal Navy?

The Prime Minister

I understand exactly my hon. Friend's concern. The decline of the merchant fleet has been due to increased competition and continuing difficulties in the world shipping market. I think that the shipping industry is perhaps best at identifying the most [column 819]profitable opportunities to keep its numbers as high as possible. I readily accept that the Merchant Navy is very important for our defence. It is also important to keep a merchant building capacity in this country, for strategic reasons.

Mr. Kinnock

Competition and other challenges are regular and continual factors. How does the right hon. Lady explain the fact that the British merchant fleet has been reduced by half since she became Prime Minister?

The Prime Minister

I gave the reasons in my reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Eastleigh (Sir D. Price). The decline in the merchant fleet is due to increased competition and continuing difficulties in world shipping markets. Against that background our shipping industry has done very well to create such large invisible earnings.

Mr. Kinnock

Are not the changes made in this year's Budget in allowances, taxation and investment in danger of accelerating that decline still further? Will the right hon. Lady halt those policies if she does not want to take the risk of sinking the British merchant fleet along with much of the British shipbuilding industry, and of losing £1,000 million in balance of payments earnings?

The Prime Minister

The right hon. Gentleman will readily accept that any changes in this year's Finance Bill cannot have had any effect on previous losses in merchant shipping—[Interruption.] As the right hon. Gentleman will also know, some final amendments were made during the passage of of the Finance Bill which were welcomed by the shipping industry.

Sir John Biggs-Davison

Since Mr. Scargill——

Mr. Speaker

Order. That has nothing to do with the question.

Mr. Douglas

Will the right hon. Lady acknowledge that coastal shipping is an important ingredient of the British fleet? Why does the right hon. Lady not adopt the same policy towards our coastal shipping as the French and other members of the EC adopt to theirs and make it the exclusive province of the British flag fleet with British-built vessels?

The Prime Minister

The answer is that we are trying the world over to reduce the amount of protectionism that is practised, particularly in countries such as the United States and India. It would be far more beneficial to have free coastal shipping there than to protect our own very much smallers shores. Our fleet will do better when we can reduce the amount of protectionism. The step suggested by the hon. Gentleman would not give us very much, if any, advantage.

Engagements

Q3. Mr. James Hamilton

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 24 July.

The Prime Minister

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

Mr. Hamilton

Does the right hon. Lady realise that her economic and industrial policies are now in tatters? Given that fact, the number of long-term unemployed, the many thousands of young people who have not yet found their first job, and the many people living on the poverty line, what hope do her policies hold out?

[column 820]

The Prime Minister

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman has said about our economic policy. As I have said in the House before, gross domestic product is up 2.75 per cent. on the year earlier, industrial output is up 3.5 per cent. on the year earlier, total fixed investment has grown by 10 per cent. and we have had the lowest annual average figure for inflation for 15 years. [Interruption.] I could cite many other examples, but the Opposition have started to make a noise, because they do not want to hear. I accept that it will be difficult to reduce unemployment, because the number of people of working age is increasing at a faster rate than the number of jobs. However, there has been an improvement in the prospects for young people and the youth training scheme is one of the best in the world.

Mr. Jessel

Has my right hon. Friend had time to consider the election result in Israel? Does not the repeated stalemate there demonstrate the weakness of proportional representation?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir, I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point so vividly.

Dr. Owen

Will the Prime Minister confirm, or deny, that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury is at the moment asking Government Departments to come forward with cuts in expenditure for this year as well as for next year? Will she give the House her estimate of the outturn of inflation, as it must be clear that the 4.5 to 5 per cent. figure is bound to be exceeded? Even in the City people are advocating a 7.5 per cent. inflation outturn for this year.

The Prime Minister

Peter ReesThe Chief Secretary to the Treasury, and other Ministers, are engaged in the public expenditure survey for next year, as is customary at this time of year. With regard to inflation forecasts for the end of the year, that will depend on how long the mortgage rate must remain at its higher level, which depends to some extent on the future of strikes.

Mr. Charles Wardle

Has my right hon. Friend seen that the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals is considering how higher education can best serve the future needs of industry? Does she agree that the gap in high technology skills that exists in the labour market must be filled as soon as possible with home-grown specialists if industry is to take full advantage of new opportunities in changing markets?

The Prime Minister

Yes Sir, but I have noticed recently much closer co-operation between universities and industries, especially regarding high technology. My hon. Friend knows that there are a number of science parks—I recently opened one at Warwick university—which are doing very well and securing the kind of co-operation that has been sorely needed.

Mr. Norman Atkinson

According to the Prime Minister's earlier answers, she insists on absolute commercial viability for the coal industry. On what morality or criteria does she totally reject her responsibility for the social viability of that industry?

The Prime Minister

The hon. Gentleman is aware that social grants have always been given to the coal industry. They are a fundamental part of the financial structure. This Government have been more generous than any other in giving those grants to the industry and in [column 821]making special arrangements for redundancy payments. Those two are treated separately from other grants to the coal industry, such as grants for operating losses, which are extremely high.

Q4. Mr. John Browne

asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 24 July.

The Prime Minister

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

Mr. Browne

Does my right hon. Friend accept that the collapse of the dock strike illustrates vividly that when Governments do not interfere, ordinary trade union members show very little wish to place their jobs in jeopardy in support of a political strike? Does she accept that there is now a crying need for the Government to provide for voluntary secret ballots, not merely for the election of officers, but wherever industrial action is contemplated, to enable trade union members to protect their jobs?

The Prime Minister

As my hon. Friend is aware, we shall debate trade union matters today, on which their Lordships thought that we had not gone far enough to protect the rights of ordinary members regarding the election of trade union officials. My hon. Friend will have noticed that in regions where a ballot of members of the National Union of Mineworkers was held and the majority voted to go back to work—that happened in Nottinghamshire where miners are back at work—they upheld the rules of the NUM rule book. They had a ballot and honoured the result.

Mr. McGuire

Is the Prime Minister aware that when the general election was held just over 12 months ago jobs were still being lost at the rate of 20,000 a month? Given her forecasts of upturns, will she tell the House what the net job loss is? Is it 20,000 a month or fewer?

The Prime Minister

As the hon. Gentleman might have seen from the figures published last week, the number of people in work in the economy, including the estimated self-employed, is estimated to have risen by about 260,000 during the past year. The size of the working population is increasing faster than the number of extra jobs, so there is still an underlying increase in unemployment, which is given every month in the seasonally adjusted figures.

Coal Industry Dispute

Q5. Mr. David Atkinson

asked the Prime Minister if she will estimate the cost to date of the police operations in connection with the current coal dispute.

The Prime Minister

It is the responsibility of each police authority to assess the cost incurred in policing the [column 822]dispute in the first instance. We have not so far required police authorities to submit running records of their costs, but my right hon. and learned Friend Leon Brittanthe Home Secretary has recently asked them to provide such information for the period up to 30 June.

Mr. Atkinson

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, whatever price is being paid, it is one that the British people are prepared to pay for as long as it takes to defend the rights of miners who wish to work? Does she agree that the miners are now being led by self-confessed Marxists, who are more concerned with pursuing section 3S of the NUM rule book—the overthrow of our free enterprise system—than they are with honouring rule 43, which provides for ballots before any strikes can take place?

The Prime Minister

I agree with my hon. Friend. One can never give in to violence and intimidation. If one does, it is the end to democracy in this country. I agree with my hon. Friend that where there have been ballots in the National Union of Mineworkers, as in Nottingham, they have shown that people want to return to work; in some cases they have returned to work and are now turning out coal. I notice that some time ago Neil Kinnockthe Leader of the Opposition said in the House:

“Will the Prime Minister join me in welcoming the fact that a national ballot of the National Union of Mineworkers is now a clearer and closer prospect than it was before today's meeting?” —[Official Report, 12 April 1984; Vol. 58, c. 522.]

That was in April. In July, the right hon. Gentleman said, outside the House,

“There is no alternative but to fight.”

I agree that we need a ballot.

Mr. Barron

Will the Prime Minister tell us how she can ignore the fact that thousands of families are in urgent need of help as a result of the strike? The Government cannot consider the cost to the coal industry of the planned reductions by herself and Mr. MacGregor until they take into account the social cost, which is rarely mentioned by her or by the Secretary of State for Energy. Why does she not consider the social cost to the mining industry?

The Prime Minister

As I said in answer to an earlier question, there is always a good social grant. The cost of voluntary redundancy, which is also borne by special grant, is about £250 million a year. The sums given are greater than those given by any previous Government. As the hon. Gentleman will have noticed, when the Whitehaven pit was closed, the miners said that they were satisfied with the money they received. The Government have fully taken care of the social cost, and I note that more mining jobs have been lost under Labour Governments than under Conservative Governments. The compensation given was not half as good.