HC Deb 13 March 1979 vol 964 cc263-9
Q2. Mr. Whitehead

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 13 March.

Mr. Foot

I have been asked to reply.

Today my right hon. Friend is attending a meeting of the European Council in Paris.

Mr. Whitehead

As the Prime Minister and the Leader of the House no doubt have the matter of devolution very much in their minds, will my right hon. Friend take it from those of us who remain convinced devolutionists that we should like to see the Scotland Act remain on the statute book? Nevertheless, when the orders are brought before the House, it would be better for the reputation of the House to have a free vote. That is more important than the result of the Government or Opposition recommendation on annulment.

Mr. Foot

These matters will be taken into account, as the Prime Minister said in his statement to the House a few days ago. I have nothing to add to his remarks.

Mr. Whitelaw

Will the right hon. Gentleman take time today to consider the highly important matter of rates, so that he may advise his right hon. Friend on his return? Less than four months ago the Secretary of State for the Environment said that the Government were determined to keep rate increases within single figures. However, last night the Under-Secretary of State confirmed that rate increases would average nearly 18 per cent. Does not that miscalculation demonstrate the full extent of the Government's failure, and, as a result, the crushing burden that will be placed on the hard-pressed ratepayers?

Mr. Foot

It is not a condemnation of the Government. It is a situation which arises from economic circumstances, pay settlements and other factors. I say to the right hon. Gentleman and to the rest of the House that it would be wiser to await the full figures. That was the indication given by my hon. Friend when he spoke in yesterday's debate.

I thought at first that the right hon. Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Whitelaw) wanted to come to the Dispatch Box to congratulate the Prime Minister on the excellent speech that he made in Paris yesterday, but apparently that sticks in the throat of the Opposition.

Mr. Whitelaw

Perhaps I might bring the right hon. Gentleman back to the subject of the question that he is supposed to answer. It concerned rates, and the right hon. Gentleman tried to put us off by saying that what has happened is not the Government's fault. In fact, it is entirely the fault of the Government in their handling of the economy and the way that they pressurised local authority associations over the local government pay settlement. What is more, if the right hon. Gentleman wants to look at local authorities, let him consider the average proposed rate increases in some of the Labour-held areas and compare those with the proposed increases in Conservative areas. He will find that it is a very bad comparison for the Labour authorities.

Mr. Foot

The right hon. Gentleman said that I ought to return to the question on the Order Paper, but that is exactly what I did. It was he who strayed from it. I am interested to hear that the hon. Gentleman was against the local government pay settlement. He talked about the Government using pressure to try to get a settlement. I should have thought that the House welcomed the settlement. I am certain that the country does so.

Mr. George Rodgers

Will my right hon. Friend endeavour to persuade the Prime Minister to discuss with the Chancellor of the Exchequer the best method of making up the shortfall in retirement pension increases which has come about as a result of the difficulty of anticipating the level of wage increases? I appreciate that Conservative Members have never wanted to relate pensions to wage increases, but does not my right hon. Friend agree that a Labour Government are duty bound to honour that commitment?

Mr. Foot

I am sure my hon. Friend acknowledges that we have carried out our obligations in this matter in past years. I cannot make any further statement on the general subject today, and I do not think my hon. Friend would expect that it could be done by question and answer.

Mr. Reid

What was the Government's role in the deals done behind closed doors at the Perth conference of the Labour Party over the weekend? What persuasion went into getting the trade unions to withdraw their emergency resolution that the ordinary people of Scotland had decided and that an Assembly should be set up? Why do not the Government get on with that?

Mr. Foot

I shall not comment on what may have happened behind closed doors or elsewhere at Perth. The resolution passed at the conference was a very good one. It indicated the general way in which the people of Scotland and the Labour Party in Scotland think we should proceed in this matter.

Dr. M. S. Miller

When my right hon. Friend has the opportunity to speak to the Prime Minister when he gets back from his most valuable work in Paris, will he try to impress on him that, although it is by no means the only factor involved in the recent referendum, the main factor is the 52 per cent. of the Scottish people voted"Yes ", against 48 per cent. who voted"No "? [HON. MEMBERS:"Of those who voted ".] Indeed, of those who voted—and that is the usual way in which elections are conducted in this country. Will my right hon. Friend indicate to the Prime Minister that that is a clear majority of the Scottish people?

Mr. Foot

On the first part of the question, I am grateful that an hon. Member from this side of the House has stressed the importance of the Prime Minister's speech in Paris yesterday. I do not know why the Opposition are laughing. The Prime Minister spoke for British interests. I hope that the Opposition will have recovered their equilibrium by tomorrow when the Prime Minister makes a statement on the matter to the House.

On the second part of my hon. Friend's question, what he said is perfectly true. A majority of the votes cast were in favour of the establishment of an Assembly. I know that some, including the Leader of the Liberal Party, have said that it was a small vote, but it was a larger total vote in Scotland than the vote in the Common Market referendum.

Mr. Crouch

Does not the Leader of the House think it strange that 29 hon. Members want to know where the Prime Minister is today? Does it not stir even the right hon. Gentleman's slumbering conscience that we have still not done something about the farce of the procedure of Prime Minister's questions? When are we to have another debate and a decision about the procedure recommendations that we debated recently?

Mr. Foot

As the Prime Minister has said on a number of occasions, we can look at the matter to see whether an alteration is necessary. The earlier alteration was made to meet representations from various parts of the House, but if the House wishes to have the matter referred to the Procedure Committee again, I do not think that the Prime Minister would object.

Q3. Mr. Skinner

asked the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for 13 March.

Mr. Foot

I have been asked to reply.

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I have just given to my hon. Friend the Member for Derby, North (Mr. Whitehead).

Mr. Skinner

Is the Leader of the House aware that some of us on the Labour Benches have been preparing not a neutral but an election-winning Budget? Will he convey these items to the Prime Minister, when he returns, and to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and urge on them the need to raise personal allowances in order to take 3 million low-paid workers and pensioners out of the tax bracket, to abolish the television licence, to introduce school grants for sixth formers—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Gentleman cannot make his Budget speech now. He must ask a question, not give information.

Mr. Skinner

If my right hon. Friend is not out of breath, will he also tell the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer that we feel that there should be free travel for pensioners, the disabled and children going to and from school? If the Prime Minister and the Chancellor ask where the money is to come from, will he tell them that we shall start with an effective tax on people such as the Duke of Westminster and that we shall also—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The hon. Member is not being fair. The minutes are ticking away and his supplementary question will fill a column of Hansard.

Mr. Skinner

We shall also stop the rake's progress in the Common Market.

Mr. Foot

On the last point, I think that my hon. Friend was seeking to agree with the Prime Minister's speech in Paris yesterday. I am sure that my hon. Friend was cut short in the rest of his speech and we cannot expect to anticipate his Budget Statement today.

Sir Anthony Meyer

In view of the total rejection of the Wales Act by the people of Wales, will the Lord President find a moment to telephone the Prime Minister today to suggest that five minutes is all that is required to table the motion to repeal the Act?

Mr. Foot

It is true that there was a majority against in Wales, but I notice that some of those who emphasise that fact most strongly do not take into acount the similar fact, that in Scotland the vote went the other way. That fact must also be taken into account. I have no doubt that the Prime Minister will lay the order, as has already been indicated. [HON. MEMBERS:"When? "] I cannot give any date, but I have no doubt that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Wales will have many other excellent reflections to make on the matter at the same time.

Mr. Ron Thomas

Will my right hon. Friend make clear to the Prime Minister that, although we welcome his speech yesterday, there is a majority on the Government side that believes that Common Market membership has been an unmitigated disaster for the British people and that he should say that unless the common agricultural policy is scrapped Britain will withdraw from the Common Market within 12 months?

Mr. Foot

I believe that what the country will want to do—and what I hope the Opposition Front Bench will come round to doing eventually—is to study carefully what the Prime Minister said yesterday. He made a most important declaration. He was standing up for British interests, and it is especially difficult for a British Prime Minister to do so because when he goes to many such gatherings he has to suffer the awkwardness of having behind him the Quisling newspapers which will never support the advocacy of British interests. That must be taken into account, too. Tomorrow the whole House will welcome what the Prime Minister has to report. It will command general assent on this side of the House.

Mr. Marten

Is the Leader of the House aware that the Prime Minister's effort to cut our net contribution to the Community budget, which is far too high, must have the support of the Opposition as it would cut Government expenditure?

Mr. Foot

I am glad to welcome the hon. Gentleman's question. He puts the point so skilfully and softly that I am sure it must have penetrated the skulls on the Opposition Front Bench.

Mr. Ashton

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You will have noticed that the Prime Minister is absent on Common Market business. The Leader of the Opposition is also absent. As the right hon. Lady draws a salary—it is approximately £80 per week more than any Back Bencher—for doing her job, is it in order to raise during the Consolidated Fund debate on Thursday the scrounging on public funds that is going on?

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman may raise on the Consolidated Fund only those items to which I referred last week and which are covered by the Estimates.