GOVERNMENT POLICIES (PRIME MINISTER'S SPEECH) (Hansard, 19 December 1972)

§ Q1. Mr. Arthur Davidson
asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech on Government policies to the North-West London Conservatives made on 30th November.

Q6. Mr. Hamilton
asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of the public speech he made to the North-West London Conservatives on 30th November on Government policies.

§ Q9. Mr. Ewing
asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech to North London Conservatives on 30th November on the progress of his Government's policies.

§ Q11. Mr. Duffy
asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library of the House a copy of the public speech he made on the economy to North-West London Conservatives on 30th November.

§ Q12. Mr. Dalyell
asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech on 30th November to the North-West London Conservatives about Government policies.

§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Edward Heath)
I did so on 4th December, Sir.

§ Mr. Davidson
In that speech, which I thought just a shade long, the Prime Minister referred to the immigration rules. Whatever alteration he makes to those rules will he guarantee that the basic principle enshrined in those rules will be preserved, namely, that immigration officers will in future, as now, carry out their duties without regard to race, colour or religion?

§ The Prime Minister
The rules will, of course, be in conformity with the 1971 Act. I should have thought that all immigration officers would accept the principle the hon. Member has just enunciated.

Mr. Hamilton
What does the Prime Minister think his Government's greatest mistake has been?

§ The Prime Minister
I think to underestimate the extent to which the party opposite, including its leaders, welshed on their European commitment.

§ Mr. Barry Jones
On a point of order. Is it in order for the Prime Minister to make derogatory remarks about Welshmen?

§ Mr. Speaker
Nothing out of order has happened.

§ Sir Gilbert Longden
In his speech my right hon. Friend also reminded his audience that it had been the Government's determination to improve the living standards of those now retired Can be expand on that?

§ The Prime Minister
As for the pension for a married couple, in November 1972 it was £1.10 higher in real terms than it was in June 1970. That is a measure of the real improvement in the pension for retired people.

§ Mr. Ewing
The Prime Minister in his speech referred to the prospects of prosperity sustained for a long time to come. Can he say what prospect of prosperity he sees workers in the steel industry having for a long time to come? Is he aware that there is grave and deep suspicion, particularly in Scotland, of both the Prime Minister and his Government about the statement we are entitled to expect on the future of the British steel industry?

§ The Prime Minister
An assurance has already been given to the House that a statement will be made as soon as possible; but if the hon. Member is asking seriously about the prosperity of workers in the steel industry, I would have thought that the view of the British Steel Corporation, which is well known—that if it is to be able to compete with the steel industries of other great steel-producing countries it must have modern, up-to-date equipment in the right places on the right scale—was indisputable. The other aspect of this matter is that it is therefore necessary to enable the necessary changes to be brought about in a way which will enable those who cannot continue working in the steel industry to get other jobs.

§ Mr. Duffy
The Prime Minister will recall on that occasion making an optimistic and confident economic projection. How would he now modify it in view of two developments last week: first, the official acknowledgment that the handsome surplus on the balance of payments account has now disappeared and, secondly, the barish picture offered by the National Institute?

§ The Prime Minister
The Institute was the first to acknowledge the difficulty of making forecasts. As far as the balance 1113 of payments forecasts in the past are concerned the institute itself acknowledged that its experience has been particularly "unhappy", to use its own word.

§ Mr. Adley
Was not my right hon. Friend slightly modest in that speech in referring to mistakes? Would he not perhaps agree that the Government's record on taxation is something which, if he did not expand on it in that speech, he might like to say something about now?

§ The Prime Minister
The Government gave undertakings to reform the whole tax system and to reduce taxation. We have reformed the whole tax system. We have put forward the Green Paper on the tax credit system, which is something that the Labour Government were not able to devise, however hard they tried, and we have reduced taxation by £3,000 million a year.

§ Mr. Dalyell
Would the Prime Minister care to add to that answer and say that by giving away so many millions to those who can well afford it his Government have increased the industrial difficulties of this country?

§ The Prime Minister
No, I do not accept that in the least. As the greater part of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's Budget went in a reduction of tax right across the board, it is palpably untrue.

§ Mr. Harold Wilson
Following the right hon. Gentleman's racial imputations, may I ask him whether he is aware that one of the most damaging things lie has done for his country is to renege cynically and deliberately on his election pledges about not going into the Common Market without the full-hearted consent of the British people, and that on his terms the country will increasingly pay for that?
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman another question arising out of his speech? [HON. MEMBERS: "Lincoln."] By what authority did the right hon. Gentleman threaten the negotiators in the gas workers wage discussions and tell them that they were not to go to the point of making offers, in view of the fact that the Counter-Inflationary (Temporary Provisions) Act gives him no power whatsoever except in relation to 1114 wages actually paid? By what authority did he make that statement?

§ The Prime Minister
On the first part of the supplementary question, if the right hon. Gentleman had had a majority of 112 for entry into Europe he would have been the first to brag about it, as indeed he did in his own abortive attempt when we supported him in the Lobbies because we maintained our principles. On the second part of the supplementary question, the authority with which we did it was the authority of the Government, the head of that Government and the Cabinet, and they are perfectly entitled to express their view on this situation. Nor was this the first time that it had been expressed. It had been expressed in the House by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the debate on the Third Reading of the Bill on 20th November. It was expressed in the advice issued by the CBI to its members on 13th November, a week earlier, and it had been expressed on a number of occasions to several unions which were in negotiation and which freely accepted that request and that advice. I felt fully entitled, in reply to an absolutely reasonable letter from Lord Cooper, to send back a reasonable reply expressing the view that it was not in the interests of anybody before the details of the second phase are made publicly known to advance any negotiations past the point of making offers.

§ Mr. Harold Wilson
The right hon. Gentleman admitted that he had no authority, statutory or otherwise, to do this. Has he not considered the effect of this on the feeling in other industries in many of which the workers are low paid —because other industries as well as the gas industry are affected? Does he not recognise that this will make more difficult for him what he, the Government and we would like to see, and that is a voluntary agreement? Did he not consider that before taking that action?

§ The Prime Minister
We considered this most carefully before any of the statements to which I have referred were made. I do not believe that it has the effect to which the right hon. Gentleman is pointing. Indeed, for negotiations to be concluded at high levels regardless of what the second phase may be could only open up expectations later to be 1115 disappointed, and that is the situation which causes industrial unrest.