PRIME MINISTER
Engagements
Q1. Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 February.
The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)
This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with Chancellor Kohl. In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today.
Mr. Jones
Will the Prime Minister find time today to look at a report in The Liverpool Daily Post, which confirms that district nurses in my constituency are using their free time to organise fund-raising activities to purchase medical equipment for the use of patients in their homes? Does that not demonstrate to the Government that, far from moonlighting, as suggested by the right hon. Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit), nurses are concerned about cuts in the Health Service?
Mr. Speaker
Briefly.
Mr. Jones
Will the right hon. Lady give an assurance to the House that the nurses' pay award to be announced by the review body will be funded in full by the Government, with no strings attached?
The Prime Minister
I have no doubt that the nurses in the hon. Gentleman's constituency are doing extremely well and are carrying out their duties to their patients. With regard to revenue provision for the Health Service, in the hon. Member's constituency in 1978–79—[Hon. Members: “Here we go.” ] Yes, here we go with the facts. The hon. Gentleman was complaining about revenue provision. In 1978–79 it was £19 million; in 1988–89 it will be £58.1 million; an increase in real terms of 45 per cent.
Mr. Soames
Will my right hon. Friend commend those nurses who tomorrow will stay at their posts and do their duty? Does she agree that the suggestion that a strike will not gravely damage patient care is dangerous nonsense?
The Prime Minister
A strike would gravely damage the patients and increase the waiting lists, which we have been strenuously trying to get down and for which, in this financial year, there has been some £25 million allocated specially to get them down. Another £30 million has been allocated for next year especially to get waiting lists down. A strike would increase waiting lists. It would also increase the burden on the nurses who would not dream of striking because they would never desert their patients.
Mr. Kinnock
When Mr. Trevor Clay of the Royal College of Nursing left the meeting with the Secretary of State yesterday he clearly had a strong impression that this year's pay award to the nurses would be fully funded by the Government. Will the Prime Minister tell us whether that impression was accurate—yes or no?
The Prime Minister
There has been a statement—[Hon. Members: “Yes or no.” ]—issued since by the Royal College of Nursing. The position is as follows. The [column 849]implementation of the review body's award comes under an undertaking given by Lord Carr, when he was in this House, when the Top Salaries Review Body was set up, together with the review bodies for the armed forces and for doctors and dentists. Lord Carr announced to the House that the Government would not modify their recommendations
“unless there are clear and compelling reasons for … doing so” .—[Official Report, 2 November 1970; Vol. 805, c. 672.]
That has remained the practice. That is quite different from the funding of the implementation. The press statement by the Royal College of Nursing consists of four paragraphs, and I am quite happy to read out the whole lot.
Mr. Faulds
Yes or no.
The Prime Minister
The hon. Member should listen to what the press notice said. I had better read out the whole press statement by the Royal College of Nursing:
“During the meeting between the Royal College of Nursing and the Secretary of State, he stated clearly that the nurses' pay award would be fully implemented ‘unless there were clear and compelling reasons for the Government not to do so’.
This is the language which has been used in the past when the awards have been interfered with or underfunded.
The Royal College of Nursing fully understands that the Secretary of State cannot give a firm assurance on implementation and funding. This view is clearly reflected in a number of newspaper reports.
The Royal College of Nursing does not believe that there can be any clear and compelling reasons for not implementing or fully funding the award in 1988.”
That is the full statement by the Royal College of Nursing, and that is the answer to the right hon. Gentleman's question.
Mr. Kinnock
Given the number of nurses leaving the Health Service, the widespread dissatisfaction and the wide scale of public support for proper pay for nurses and full funding, will the Prime Minister tell us what in her opinion would be the clear and compelling reasons for not paying the nurses properly?
The Prime Minister
I stand by the comments, remarks and traditional practices that we have already adhered to. The pledge given by Lord Carr and the practice to which the Government have adhered, which has led to increases in pay for nurses of the order of 30 per cent. in real terms, is in contrast to the right hon. Gentleman's record. In the five pay years between 1974–75 and 1978–79 Labour cut nurses' pay in real terms in four of those years.
Mr. Kinnock
Just to be absolutely clear, is the Prime Minister saying to the nurses today that she will not offer an undertaking to make full funding of the nurses' pay award this year, just as she has never made full funding of nurses' pay awards?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman has asked this question in different terms three times. The answer is the same: that we have never undertaken to fund in full a pay award before we know what it is and what the structure is. Nevertheless, our total record on nurses' pay—[Hon. Members: “Oh” .]—is absolutely excellent, as I might remind him.
Mr. Speaker
Order.
The Prime Minister
A ward sister on the maximum of the basic scale under the Labour Government was paid £4,900 and is now paid £12,000. That is the result of the Government's stewardship.[column 850]
Mr. Dykes
Now that my right hon. Friend has fully, comprehensively and satisfactorily answered those points, does she agree that we can use Prime Minister's Question Time for other important subjects? Bearing in mind the United States' position, announced last night, on the Security Council resolution, does she agree that this is a disappointing decision by the United States in view of the importance of that resolution and the gradual approach of the international peace conference in the middle east?
The Prime Minister
My hon. Friend knows that we support the resolution. My hon. Friend is aware that we have quite clearly come out in favour of an international conference as a framework conference within which bilateral negotiations should take place between King Hussein of Jordan and Israel. I hope one day that other people will come round to that viewpoint and it will make possible further negotiations, which are urgent.
Q2. Mr. McKay
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 February.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. McKay
Will the right hon. Lady take into consideration the fact that the nurses down from Yorkshire today will listen very carefully to her failure to give clear and compelling reasons for not funding their increase and increasing underfunding? Is it not, in fact, in line with the fiddling of the payment of £8 for welfare benefits, where people are paid a single payment and not on each welfare benefit? That must be taken into account too.
The Prime Minister
May I assure the hon. Gentleman that any clear and compelling reasons would not consist of the prices and incomes policy which hon. Members at present in opposition used to depress nurses' and doctors' pay year after year and, because of their economic stewardship, used to cut the National Health Service.
Mr. Redwood
Does the Prime Minister agree that the position of the Health Service would be greatly improved if the Leader of the Opposition would categorically condemn strike action in the Health Service before we see the recommendations of the pay review body? Would she agree, further—[Interruption.]
Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman must ask a question of the Prime Minister for which she has responsibility.
Mr. Redwood
Would the Prime Minister in the course of her busy day think of a way of persuading the Leader of the Opposition—[Hon. Members: “No.” ]
The Prime Minister
rose—
Mr. Speaker
Order. The Prime Minister must be asked questions on matters which are her responsibility, and for that, I am afraid, she has no responsibility.
Westland
Mr. Dalyell
To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to her answer of 3 December 1987, Official Report, column 1100, what representations she has received seeking an amendment of the Public Record Acts so as to facilitate the early release of non-classified material relating to the Westland affair.
The Prime Minister
None, so far as I am aware.
[column 851]Mr. Dalyell
Who brings the greater dishonour on Parliament? A Back-Bench Member who resorts to unparliamentary language, or a Head of Government who misuses a Law Officer's letter and then displays a shameless lack of candour about what she has done?
The Prime Minister
I totally reject what the hon. Gentleman has said. The many, many statements and speeches that I made on the subject were checked meticulously with the records.
Mr. David Shaw
Would my right hon. Friend agree that the ferry workers of Dover should not be—
Mr. Speaker
Order.
Engagements
Q4. Mr. Tim Smith
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 February.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Smith
Is my right hon. Friend aware that, according to Trevor Clay, RCN members are being manipulated and intimidated by extreme Left-wingers, that strike vote meetings are being held which have no constitutional basis inside a union, and that at University College hospital RCN members were challenged by pickets at the door to state their points of view? Does not this despicable behaviour on the part of the hard Left show that they have no interest in the welfare either of the nurses or of the patients, but are cynically using both to further their own political ends?
The Prime Minister
I find it astonishing that some of the nurses' unions should attempt to use a strike weapon at a time when there is a pay review body—which was [column 852]given to the nurses because they did not go on strike—sitting to consider how much they should be paid. I find it even more astonishing that right hon. And hon. Members of the Opposition do not utterly condemn the intimidatory tactics that Mr. Trevor Clay reported upon.
Mr. Beith
What was yesterday's half per cent. rise in interest rates meant to signal, and to whom? Was it a warning that the Budget is going to be highly inflationary rather that one that will tackle the problems that have occupied the House this afternoon?
The Prime Minister
I think that, as usual, the hon. Gentleman has got his economics upside down. The half per cent. increase in interest rates was decided on because we are determined to keep inflation down and not let it go up, as did the Government whom he supported.
Q5. Mr. Thorne
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 February.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Thorne
Does my right hon. Friend not consider it hypocritical of those trade union leaders in the National Health Service who have criticised waiting lists in the Health Service in the past to encourage their members to go on strike now, thereby considerably lengthen waiting lists, to the detriment of patients and everybody else?
The Prime Minister
All those who are interested in giving a better service to patients and shortening waiting lists must condemn the strike activities that we are witnessing now. Not only will they increase waiting lists, but they will put an increasing burden on people in organisations such as the Royal College of Nursing, who will not leave their posts. We should all be very grateful to the nurses who put the patients first.