Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

House of Commons PQs

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: House of Commons
Source: Hansard HC [166/154-58]
Editorial comments: 1515-1530.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 2412
Themes: Executive, Defence (general), Defence (arms control), Taxation, Foreign policy (Asia), Foreign policy (USA), Health policy, Law & order, Race, immigration, nationality, Sport, Strikes & other union action, Women

PRIME MINISTER

Engagements

Q1. Mr. Maclennan

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 30 January.

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. Maclennan

Is the Government's dogged inflexibility a fair response to the exceptional sense of duty shown by our ambulance men when dealing with injured and dying victims of this week's gales and tempests? What greater catastrophe is required to bring home to the Prime Minister the justice of our ambulance men's case?

The Prime Minister

What the hon. Gentleman says is not correct. The Government and management have[column 155] moved on the ambulance men's case for more pay; it is the ambulance men who have not moved at all since their unions recommended, a long time ago, that they accept a 6.5 per cent. increase. The Government moved to an 18-month settlement, which would offer the men increases of between 9 and 16.3 per cent.—a considerable increase that would cost £6 million more to implement in this financial year. That is far from being inflexible; it represents actual movement.

Q2. Mr. Cyril D. Townsend

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 30 January.

The Prime Minister

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

Mr. Townsend

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, when we are faced with the present historic uncertainty in eastern Europe and the collapse of law and order in East Germany, idle talk of a peace dividend is premature? Would it not be prudent for the United Kingdom to look to Vienna for serious and constructive negotiations, rather than slashing our defence forces unilaterally?

The Prime Minister

I agree wholly with my hon. Friend. Piecemeal reductions would be fatal at this time of great uncertainty. In such circumstances, the right way is to negotiate through the conventional force reduction talks in Vienna. That is how we managed to secure effective reductions in the Warsaw pact forces—larger reductions than those on our side, indeed—and also some verification. NATO is already considering precisely how those reductions should be shared out equitably between its members.

Mr. Kinnock

Will the Prime Minister tell us her response to yesterday's statement by Church leaders appealing for the Government to set up an independent inquiry with the purpose of resolving the ambulance dispute?

The Prime Minister

Had the right hon. Gentleman listened to my previous answer he would already know that the Government have moved on the ambulance dispute. There is already a negotiating body, which is the right body to conduct negotiations, and the increases that the management has offered would cost the taxpayer some £6 million more this financial year.

Mr. Kinnock

On the subject of the cost to the taxpayer, can the Prime Minister confirm that she has already spent £10 million of the public's money on keeping the dispute going? That is more than it would cost to settle it. Where is the sense in that, either for the public or for the ambulance personnel or, indeed, even for the Government? When the public so clearly support the ambulance workers' case why is the Prime Minister so completely out of touch with the feelings of the British people?

The Prime Minister

The sense is to stick to established methods of negotiation, whether a pay review body or a Whitley council. Once one departs from that, it is very difficult for those who have honoured their own methods of negotiation and, indeed, settled at the amounts they were offered, as 85 per cent. did early last summer. It is a great pity that ambulance men did not accept the advice of their union and settle at that time.

[column 156]

Q3. Mr. Carrington

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 30 January.

The Prime Minister

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

Mr. Carrington

My right hon. Friend will know that my constituents who live around Stamford Bridge greatly welcome the determination of herself and of the Home Secretary to bring football hooliganism to an end. Is not this in marked contrast to the attitude of those who reject all-seater stadiums and, incredibly, even seek to deny that football hooliganism exists? Will my right hon. Friend undertake to use the licensing powers under the Football Spectators Act to close any ground where football hooliganism persists in the street outside the stadium?

The Prime Minister

As my hon. Friend knows, and as my right hon. and learned Friend David Waddington the Home Secretary made clear yesterday in his very robust way, the Government accept the Taylor alternative strategy for dealing with these matters in football stadiums, and we accept Lord Justice Taylor 's recommendations. During the passage of the Football Spectators Bill we made it clear that having all-seat stadiums could be made a condition of a licence being given by the Football Licensing Authority. It would be open to the licensing authority to do that. I think that the conditions for a licence do not apply to hooliganism outside the grounds. That matter is already dealt with by other measures, such as the Public Order Act, and by some of the changes that have been made to prohibit the availability of alcohol on buses and trains travelling to designated football matches.

Mr. Tony Lloyd

On this day when there has been support for ambulance workers in Britain, why is the Prime Minister so quick to praise them but so slow to pay them?

The Prime Minister

Of course I am always quick to praise ambulance men, as I am quick to praise other people who work in the Health Service, 84 per cent. of whom accepted pay increases between 6.5 and 6.8 per cent. last summer. We have, in fact, offered the ambulance men, according to where they work or their qualifications, increases of between 9 and 16.3 per cent. over a period of 18 months. That offer represents an increase on the first one, which was rejected.

Q4. Mrs. Gorman

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 30 January.

The Prime Minister

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

Mrs. Gorman

In view of the Hansard Society's report on women at the top, does not my right hon. Friend agree that it makes sense that a job created in the home, or elsewhere, that helps a woman to go out to work is just as valid as any other job and should be treated in the same way for tax purposes? While we are on the subject, what about a few jobs for top women in our own Whips' Office and in the Cabinet——

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Lady should ask only one question.

Mrs. Gorman

rose——

Mr. Speaker

Order. To ask more than one question would be unfair to the hon. Lady's colleagues.

[column 156]

The Prime Minister

I am sure that all my hon. Friend's comments were interesting, but I heard only the first half. I should like to reply to the half that I heard. My hon. Friend asked for tax allowances for people who look after children. As she knows, this is not allowed for tax purposes, any more than are the expenses of travelling to work or of having someone at home to look after an elderly relative would be allowed. That is the present law. A change in the Finance Bill would be needed to change it. I hope that my hon. Friend will make her representations to different quarters, because I can say nothing about that matter.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend Timothy Rentonthe Patronage Secretary will have heard my hon. Friend's other request, and will consider what further action to take.

Dr. Owen

What is going wrong with Anglo-American relations? The United States President is cutting defence expenditure by 2 per cent; further, faster and deeper reductions are emerging in the conventional forces European negotiations; and the United States President is openly advocating a NATO defence review. The Prime Minister refuses to do any of those things. The two Governments cannot even split their differences between six months and a year on the compulsory repatriation of Vietnamese boat people.

The Prime Minister

That is two questions in one. As the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, the United States spends a much bigger proportion of her national income on defence than does any other major NATO country. She spends 6 per cent. of her national income on defence whereas, on a similarly calculated basis, we spend 4 per cent., so I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman can criticise the United States if it makes some changes.

Any changes that affect the mainland of Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, are made through the CFE negotiations. Any proposals go through the NATO machinery first, so that we are all consulted and agree what should go forward to the CFE negotiations. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman realises that that is perfectly right.

I agree that there is a difference of opinion on the Vietnamese boat people—possibly because of America's history in Vietnam and because she lost 55,000 people in her fight there which kept communism back long enough to prevent its extending throughout the area. We shall, of course, go forward with compulsory repatriation.

Q5. Sir Hal Miller

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 30 January.

The Prime Minister

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

Sir Hal Miller

Does my right hon. Friend agree that whatever other Governments feel able to do, the main responsibility for maintaining the confidence of the people of Hong Kong, on which their prosperity and stability must depend, inevitably lies with the People's Republic of China? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the conclusions of the draft basic law committee on elections in Hong Kong are hardly likely to add to their confidence? Are we yet ready to say what we will do?

The Prime Minister

My hon. Friend is right in saying that China has an important part to play—although not[column 157] the only part—in maintaining confidence in Hong Kong, as do the Hong Kong people and as does Britain during our administration until the lease is terminated in 1997. Ideally, we obviously wish to agree with China improvements in democracy and increases in the democratic process in Hong Kong which could be continued through 1997. We shall continue to do our best by the people of Hong Kong and to observe the Sino-British agreement on the future of Hong Kong, in the belief that that is in the best interests of the future beyond 1997.

Q6. Ms. Short

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 30 January.

The Prime Minister

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

Ms. Short

Does the Prime Minister agree that the ambulance workers have overwhelming public support? Does she consider herself to be a democrat and, if so, why does she not listen to the view of the people and agree to binding arbitration so that this dispute can be brought to an end?

The Prime Minister

No. The ambulance people have their own negotiating body through which the negotiations should take place. As the hon. Lady is aware, this claim comes from last year when 84 per cent. of the people with whom the ambulance men work in the National Health Service settled at 6.5 and 6.8 per cent. Since then, the ambulance men have been offered an increase, so it is not the management which has not moved, but the ambulance men themselves.

Dame Jill Knight

Bearing in mind that the union leaders of the ambulance men have not always been straightforward in the matter, will my right hon. Friend confirm that it is a question not only of a 9 per cent. increase on offer now, but of an offer that goes back to April 1989? That should also be taken into consideration.

The Prime Minister

My hon. Friend is quite right. The offer is backdated to April 1989 and for those who have still been working at their posts, considerable back-dated lump sums are to be picked up now, which vary from about £650 to about £1,400. They will be available when the ambulance men settle in respect of their back pay.

Q7. Mr. Boateng

To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 30 January.

The Prime Minister

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

Mr. Boateng

Why does the Prime Minister continue to set her face, like stone, against the ambulance workers while giving a £40 million tax handout to the private medical insurance industry? If she were to fall under a bus tomorrow—and it would have to be a brave one—would she call for BUPA or for an ambulance man?

The Prime Minister

As I have already indicated, the ambulance men had an offer, according to where they work and their qualifications, of an increase in pay varying from 9 to 16.3 per cent. Many of them are still maintaining an accident and emergency service—and we honour them for it—although others are not. I should have thought that 9 to 16.3 per cent. was a very fair and reasonable offer.