Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

House of Commons PQs

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: House of Commons
Source: Hansard HC [128/143-48]
Editorial comments: 1515-1530.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 2487
Themes: Industry, Privatized & state industries, Pay, Foreign policy (Asia), Foreign policy (Middle East), Health policy, Law & order, Media, Northern Ireland, Strikes & other union action
[column 143]

PRIME MINISTER

Engagements

Q1. Mr. Dykes

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 23 February.

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. This evening I hope to have an audience of Her Majesty The Queen.

Mr. Dykes

As this is such a crucial moment, will my right hon. Friend today and in coming weeks continue her determined and much appreciated efforts to secure an international peace conference and a lasting settlement in the middle east, bearing in mind that this must be done without preconditions on either side, that the credibility of the United States is inevitably reduced by its historic and strategic closeness to one party to the dispute, and that Europe and the United Kingdom have a unique role to play in this process?

The Prime Minister

As my hon. Friend knows, our policy has not changed, over the past year in particular, when we have espoused the cause of an international conference as a background for direct negotiations between King Hussein and the Palestinians and Israel. It has not been possible to get that going because it has not met with a sufficient degree of support from Mr. Shamir. We shall continue to espouse that course because we think it is the best one. The other side of the problem arises as to who shall negotiate on behalf of the Palestinians, but I believe that that particular part is soluble.

Mr. Kinnock

First, I warmly welcome the reply that the Prime Minister gave on the international conference.

Does the Prime Minister recognise that her refusal to give a commitment fully to fund the Health Service pay award is, in the words of the Treasury and Civil Service Select Committee, causing “damaging uncertainty” and in some areas continued ward closures. Will she now make the necessary commitment to funding so that health authorities can plan and provide properly without cutting staff and without closing wards?

[column 144]

The Prime Minister

No, Mr. Speaker. This is about the fifth time that I have had the same question, so the answer will be precisely the same. The pay award will be dealt with in precisely the same way as previous awards, and of course previous awards have been highly beneficial to the nurses. I did look up to see precisely the dates upon which we dealt with it last year. All the reports of the review bodies came in between 1 and 14 April. We like to deal with them altogether. The nurses, doctors, dentists, the profession supplementary to medicine, the armed forces and the top salaries pay review bodies' reports all came in within a fortnight and we announced all our decisions by 23 April. I hope that if the reports come in in a similar group this year we will be equally expeditious in announcing our decision.

Mr. Kinnock

The Prime Minister says that she has made the commitment before, but never before have we had a Select Committee with a majority of her hon. Friends saying publicly that the absence of a commitment is causing “damaging uncertainty” , and never before have we had the same Select Committee saying that the Prime Minister has up to £2 billion extra that she could spend on the National Health Service without changing the proportion of GDP spent on the service. When that service has such desperate and immediate need today, and when she plainly has the money, why does she not use the money?

The Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend John Majorthe Chief Secretary gave a very effective reply to the Select Committee. With regard to GDP, the right hon. Gentleman will be aware that not only has GDP gone up—there is further good news on that today; it is up 5 per cent. on what it was a year ago—but the proportion of unincreased GDP spent on the Health Service has gone up from 4.8 per cent. under Labour to 5.6 per cent under the Government.

Mr. Kinnock

The Prime Minister quotes her right hon. Friend. In response to him, her right hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow) said that coded messages were not enough and that his reply was not good enough. Today, now, wards are being closed and uncertainty is causing damage because the right hon. Lady will not make a commitment. Why does she not make a commitment and relieve the health authorities of further weeks of uncertainty, causing further damage to the Health Service?

The Prime Minister

The nurses have had great action under Tory Governments, and have had pay increases of 30 per cent. over and above inflation, compared with a 20 per cent. reduction under Labour. The nurses have done very well under Tory Governments, and I shall deal with the report as I have indicated.

Mr. Knapman

Does my right hon. Friend agree that vast sums of public money have been given to the Rover car company and that further sums of money should not be given to that company to fund excessive pay demands?

The Prime Minister

My hon. Friend is correct. During the lifetime of this Government about £2.9 billion has been given to the Rover-Leyland group. There is no intention of providing any more money specifically to fund the demand for an increase greater than that which the management has decided to offer. It is for the management and the work force to resolve the strike. I hope that it will [column 145]not last long, because strikes do not help anyone, least of all those who work in a particular company. My fear is that that would be handing jobs and business to Japan.

Mr. Matthew Taylor

I am pleased that the Prime Minister is a regular visitor to Cornwall, but is she aware that in so doing she and many others are adding to the burden on the Health Service in Cornwall? Roads are congested and ambulances are less able to move around the county as hospital closures increase. Will the Prime Minister—[Interruption.]

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman must ask a question, please.

Mr. Taylor

Will the Prime Minister ensure, within the review of the Health Service, that a new commitment is made to tackle the problem of rural scatter in areas such as my constituency?

The Prime Minister

We shall have a very thorough review of the Health Service, taking into account many representations. If the hon. Member has specific and rather more definite representations to make, perhaps he will let me have them in writing.

Mr. Colvin

When does my right hon. Friend expect the flotation of the National Freight Corporation, a business that was previously owned by the state and is now owned by its workers? Are not the privatisation and flotation further examples of the transfer of wealth in favour of working people and their families?

The Prime Minister

I very much welcome the progress that the National Freight Corporation has made since it was privatised by a management buy-out. It has done very well by its work force, and the work force has done very well by the National Freight Corporation. Profits have increased by about nine times since privatisation, and those who helped with the buy-out have had a very good deal. I wish the company well for the flotation.

Engagements

Q2. Mr. Mullin

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 23 February.

The Prime Minister

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

Mr. Mullin

Does the Prime Minister agree with Lord Denning that it is better to have one or two innocent people remain in gaol than to risk undermining the credibility of the legal system by having to own up to a mistake? [Interruption.] Does she further agree that nothing discredits our system of justice so much as the widespread notion that some mistakes are too big to own up to?

The Prime Minister

The hon. Gentleman asked me to agree with a proposition by Lord Denning. I would prefer to see the proposition in context. I understand that the hon. Member may be referring once again to the recent hearing by the Court of Appeal of the case of the Birmingham pub bombings. The Court of Appeal hearing fully examined the defence case and decided that the convictions were sound. The Court of Appeal has certified that there is a point of public importance. I understand that the appellants intend to apply to the House of Lords to pursue the matter. The judgment, of course, is fully available to those who wish to read it in detail.

[column 146]

Mr. Favell

Has my right hon. Friend had time today to consider the Japanese ambassador's comment that if there were a business Olympics we would win gold medals? What kind of medals would we win if the Opposition were in charge?

The Prime Minister

I saw the most excellent comment by the Japanese ambassador. I think that he and Japan are very pleased with the inward investment that they have had into this country. They have insisted on one union only with which to negotiate. The companies have done well and the work force has done well. They have done well for Britain and we are very pleased with the compliments of the Japanese ambassador on our excellent, enterprising industry.

Q2. Mr. Strang

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 23 February.

The Prime Minister

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

Mr. Strang

Will the Prime Minister acknowledge the fundamental importance to the Scottish economy of the coal and steel industries? Is she aware of the widespread concern that thousands of jobs which depend upon these industries are threatened by privatisation? Will she take steps to direct British Steel to invest in new facilities in Scotland? Will she put an end to the suggested economic lunacy of a privatised South of Scotland Electricity Board being allowed to close pits by importing foreign coal?

The Prime Minister

The hon. Gentleman has, not unexpectedly, asked two questions, one about steel and one about coal. As to steel, it is the subject of a debate later. The hon. Gentleman is aware that undertakings, subject to commercial considerations, were given to Ravenscraig with respect to steelmaking for the next seven years and to the Associated Dalzell plant for plate-rolling. It was, I think, an undertaking for the longest production of almost any steel plant in Europe. I thought that that went down extremely well in Scotland. We hope to undertake the privatisation of electricity, including Scottish electricity, during the lifetime of this Parliament. There will, I hope, be a White Paper out soon about our proposal.

I understand that the hon. Gentleman was asking a third question about coal, in connection with the ending of the coal contract, which I believe is due to terminate at the end of March—[Hon. Members: “No.” ] My right hon. and learned Friend Malcolm Rifkindthe Secretary of State for Scotland is aware that the existing arrangements between the South of Scotland Electricity Board and British Coal are due to terminate at the end of March. [Hon. Members: “No.” ] If they are not, there is no problem.

Mr. Stanbrook

When my right hon. Friend signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement, did she expect that the Irish Government would use it to justify a unilateral inquiry into an incident that occurred within the United Kingdom, to restrict the extradition of alleged terrorists from Ireland, to set aside a decision of the Attorney-General and to attempt to reverse the verdict of the British Court of Appeal?

The Prime Minister

I do not think that it is right or possible to use the Anglo-Irish Agreement for that purpose, if one looks at the terms of the agreement. With regard to the inquiry which the Republic of Ireland has recently indicated that it has set up, of course, in their own [column 147]country the Irish Government can inquire into anything they wish, but not in matters north of the border. I have taken note of what my Friend has said about the extradition arrangements which we had with them and which were changed unilaterally. I have nothing to add to the excellent statement which my right hon. and learned Friend Sir Patrick Mayhewthe Attorney-General made in the House on other matters.

Q4. Mr. Smith

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 23 February.

The Prime Minister

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

Mr. Smith

Further to the question that was asked earlier by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition, was the Prime Minister denying the report that appeared in today's Daily Telegraph that Ministers have already decided not fully to fund the nurses' pay review, but instead to seek further efficiency savings? If she is not denying those reports, when will she realise that for her to suggest that nurses' pay should be funded only at [column 148]the expense of patient care would be beyond contempt and rejected decisively by this House, as it has been by the Select Committee on Social Services, and as it will be by the people of this country?

The Prime Minister

I have not read any newspapers today. [Hon. Members: “Oh.” ] I have been far too busy. What appears in those newspapers is not my responsibility. We shall deal with the report of the review bodies in precisely the same way and with precisely the same expedition as we dealt with them in previous years, and in particular last year. The hon. Gentleman will not have long to wait.

Mr. Strang

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I shall take points of order after the statement.

Mr. Strang

I have a point of order arising out of Prime Minister's questions, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker

Order. I know that the hon. Gentleman wishes to raise a matter, but I shall still take points of order after the statement.