§ Q1. Mr. Neubertasked the Prime Minister whether she will list her official engagements for 6 November.
§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. This evening I hope to have an audience of Her Majesty The Queen.
§ Mr. NeubertIf, during the course of the day, my right hon. Friend should encounter critics of the Government's public expenditure plans, will she draw to their attention the fact that the Labour controlled London borough of Brent is proposing to replace its retiring town clerk and chief executive with two men—an executive at £16,000 a year and a director at £14,000 a year? Does not that demonstrate the need for restraint, as well as illustrating the reason why the number of employees in local government has been rising rapidly?
§ The Prime MinisterI saw the report in the press to which my hon. Friend refers. I also noted that in the year ending in June the number of local authority employees increased by about 30,000. It is a great mistake to think that administration is improved just by taking on more administrators. The truth is much more likely to be that too many cooks spoil the broth—not only that, but they make it too highly priced to be able to afford it.
§ Mr. PavittIf the Prime Minister has time to look at the excellent administration and organisation of the London borough of Brent, will she make herself better informed than is her right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry, whose statement about that borough appears in Hansard, and which he is refusing to withdraw in spite of the fact that it is totally untrue?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman must refer questions such as that to the person who made the statement.
§ Mr. MontgomeryDuring the course of her busy day will my right hon. Friend take time to look at the Daily Express and at the report of the CBI conference yesterday, where two people stated two views? One was that trade union leaders should get £40,000 a year, and the other that now that a Conservative Government are in power managers are being allowed to get on with managing, without too much Government intervention. Would it not be a good idea if those two things were married, so that trade union leaders got on with the job of looking after their members instead of interfering too much in politics?
§ The Prime MinisterI noted both statements. If we are to increase the prosperity of British industry, managers must manage and trade union leaders must manage their members. I hope that both will do it very successfully.
§ Mr. S. C. SilkinCan the Prime Minister confirm today's reports that the Government of Rhodesia have decided to stop the supply of maize to Zambia? If she can, will she have regard to the special requirements of the Security Council's mandatory resolution, which requires us to give particular help to Zambia in view of its economic difficulties? Will she condemn the action that has been taken and announce that until that decision is reversed the Lancaster House discussions will be terminated?
§ The Prime MinisterI can neither confirm nor deny the reports. Any reports of that kind demonstrate the need to get on with the Lancaster House conference and to reach agreement upon the matters that are in dispute there.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I have just given.
§ Mr. AdleyHas my right hon. Friend had a chance today to see the text of the letter widely published this morning from the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (Mr. Sandelson) to Mr. Ron Hayward, in which the hon. Gentleman describes the NEC's actions as "the cancerous control of these commissars over Labour's affairs"? Does my right hon. Friend agree that if the situation has reached that pass it is a direct threat to the liberty and individual freedom of Members of Parliament? However much certain Labour Members—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. Last week the House invited me to try, even on open questions, to ensure that there was some relevance in supplementary questions. That applies to both sides. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would make the point for which the Prime Minister is responsible.
§ Mr. SpeakerSo is my horoscope. Will the hon. Gentleman, and all hon. Members when called, try to ask a question on a matter for which the Prime Minister is responsible?
§ Mr. AdleyCan my right hon. Friend offer any advice to these Members of Parliament in their predicament?
§ The Prime MinisterI have not yet read the letter to which my hon. Friend refers. Naturally, I and most other hon. Members are concerned that for the future of democracy—[Interruption.] To some of us it happens to matter that we should have two major parties, both based on the liberty of the individual and on political and economic liberty.
§ Mr. HefferThe Chief Secretary to the Treasury said last week that another 300,000 people, possible more, would be out of work as a result of the Government's policy. How does the right hon. Lady justify those figures? What has she to say to those who will become 220 unemployed as a deliberate result of Government policy?
§ The Prime MinisterNo one can predict, with any hope of accuracy, the path of unemployment over the next few years. That was said by the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer. That is what I happen to believe. The previous Chancellor of the Exchequer also spent a long time trying to differentiate between forecasts and working assumptions. He did not succeed. I do not expect that I would succeed either.
§ Mr. MellorWill my right hon. Friend find time today to comment on the Inner London Education Authority's proposal to close Highbury Grove school? Does she agree that this shows utter contempt for educational standards? It is a sheer act of political spite against a former headmaster of that school. Does she agree also that this lends great force to those Conservative councils which are seeking to break up an inefficient, perpetual Socialist monstrosity, and that they deserve Government support for what they are trying to do?
§ The Prime MinisterThe former headmaster, now Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science, has been one of the most successful headmasters of a comprehensive school. Many generations of children have cause to be grateful to him.
§ Mr. SpeakerMr. Callaghan.
§ Mr. John Grantrose—
Mr. CallaghanI understand, Mr. Speaker, that this school is in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, Central (Mr. Grant) and that he therefore wishes to ask a question. I wish to raise another matter. No doubt my hon. Friend will have the opportunity of asking a question as this matter relates to his constituency. Will the right hon. Lady, in her meetings with colleagues, ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say when he expects the minimum lending rate to come down, following his forecast that the lifting of the rate to 14 per cent. on 12 June was to be for only a few weeks?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman knows that the unwisest forecast of all is to say anything at all about interest rates. Although he asks the question, he knows that I would be most unwise to comment on it in any way.
Mr. CallaghanIn that case, are house owners to reconcile themselves to an increase in their mortgage payments next January? Or does the Prime Minister propose to intervene once again to try to keep them down?
§ The Prime MinisterI must be candid with the right hon. Gentleman. I think that there is very little hope of getting down the proposed increase in mortgage rates. Had the Government undertaken the expenditure proposals of the previous Government, the borrowing would have been infinitely greater, taxes, both income tax and value added tax, very much higher, and interest rates even higher than they are now.
§ Mr. Anthony GrantWill my right hon. Friend find time today to send a message to the President of the United States expressing complete support for any action that he might take on behalf of America against the outrageous activities in Tehran, over which the Iranian regime seems to have no control, or does not want to have any control?
§ The Prime MinisterI wholly agree with my hon. Friend. The takeover of the United States embassy was an outrage to diplomatic relations everywhere. We are naturally pleased that our embassy was subject to that for only a short time. We will do anything that we can to help the United States to achieve justice.
§ Mr. John GrantIn view of an earlier supplementary question, may I ask you, Mr. Speaker, whether it is the normal courtesy of the House that when an hon. Member intends to raise a matter relating to another hon. Member's constituency he gives him notice of that? May I inform the right hon. Lady that this is an extremely delicate constituency matter? It would be wrong for her or her hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Education and Science, who replied to the debate last night, to do or say anything that might pre-empt a decision which the Secretary of State for Education and Science 222 will probably have to take fairly shortly. Will she confirm that that is the case?
§ The Prime MinisterNothing will stop me from saying that a previous headmaster of the school was an extremely good headmaster.