§ Q1. Mr. Newensasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 8 July.
§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with Dr. Albrecht, the Minister President of Lower Saxony. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
§ Mr. NewensWhen will the Prime Minister recognise that the massive increase in unemployment, the dumping of cheap exports in this country, high interest rates, an overvalued pound and the consequent irreparable damage being done to British industry constitute an utter condemnation of the obsolete monetarist policies that she is pursuing? Is there any point along the road to disaster at which she will turn aside from those misguided policies?
§ The Prime MinisterWith regard to the dumping of goods, we try to take action as quickly as possible through the European Commission. With regard to interest rates, the money supply figures permitted a slight reduction in interest rates, which was a move in the right direction. With 231 regard to the unemployment figures, I believe that it is generally accepted that the top priority must be to fight inflation. Only when that battle is won will there be a firm enough base on which to expand manufacturing industry. With regard to the hon. Gentleman's strictures on manufacturing industry, I must tell him that during the lifetime of the previous Government the output of manufacturing industry fell.
§ Mr. Cyril D. TownsendWill my right hon. Friend confirm that the Government will remain steadfast to the communiqué issued in Venice on the Middle East, and will remain opposed to any attempt by Israel to alter unilaterally the status of Jerusalem?
§ The Prime MinisterThat matter was dealt with in the communiqué issued from Venice. The communiqué is being put into effect by contacts being made with the many parties involved in the Middle East problem.
§ Mr. JayDoes the Prime Minister feel that the Government's incentive Budget of a year ago has stimulated a great industrial revival?
§ The Prime MinisterThere are many firms that are world beaters and doing extremely well, and I doubt whether they would be doing as well but for that incentive Budget. Many people who would otherwise have remained overseas have come home to start up new businesses.
§ Mr. ShersbyDoes my right hon. Friend agree that a wage claim of 35 per cent. from the miners in the present economic circumstances is unrealistic? Does she further agree that the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers should receive every encouragement from hon. Members to reach a more moderate settlement?
§ The Prime MinisterThis is the season of trade union conferences. Parliament gets accustomed to a number of high claims being made. It is not so much the claims as the settlements with which I am concerned, as is everyone who is concerned with the cost and price of coal this year and the price of electricity. What the miners decide will determine the price of electricity next year.
§ Q2. Mr. Barry Jonesasked the Prime Minister what are her official engagements for 8 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave a few moments ago.
§ Mr. JonesIs the right hon. Lady yet able to say how she will find thousands of new jobs for redundant steel workers? Can she say what intervention she will make to save the tottering textile industry? Is she not experiencing just a tremor of panic as the British manufacturing base collapses because of her outrageous policies?
§ The Prime MinisterIt is ridiculous to say that the British manufacturing base is collapsing. With regard to the problems of steel, the British taxpayer has poured about £5,000 million into the steel industry over the last five years. A number of closures have to be made, and Shotton was one of them. About £15 million was put into the Shotton area to try to mitigate the effects of some of the redundancies and to start new jobs.
With regard to textiles, I understand that the hon. Gentleman has an Adjournment debate tomorrow evening. There are successes a little further south of his constituency, where British Celanese is continuing with a £2 million investment.
§ Mr. FormanIn view of the fondness of the Opposition and certain sections of the press for the bad news all the time, will my right hon. Friend take time today to draw up a list of all those aspects of the economy in which there are signs of an improvement in productivity? Will she consider the possibility of a Queen's Award for increased productivity?
§ The Prime MinisterI have not considered a Queen's Award for improvement in productivity, but my hon. Friend is right. There are areas where there have been great improvements in productivity—
§ Mr. ConcannonThe miners.
§ The Prime MinisterThe miners, I agree, have made improvements in productivity. The average miner's wage at the coalface is £147 a week. They have made improvements in productivity. I am 233 sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton (Mr. Forman) will be delighted to receive confirmation from the Opposition Benches of what he said.
Mr. James CallaghanWhen the right hon. Lady refers to closures in the steel industry that have to be made—I use her words—is she referring to the prospect of either Port Talbot or Llanwern steelworks being closed, because that is the greatest fear afflicting South Wales at present? If so, what would be the consequential impact on the coal mines of South Wales? Would we then be ready to close coal mines that are capable of producing coal in an efficient way because there is not the demand from the steel industry? If not, what is the Government's policy? How will the right hon. Lady protect the people of South Wales and elsewhere from the ravages of Government policy?
§ The Prime MinisterWith regard to the proposed steel closures, the new chairman who has just gone into the British Steel Corporation is making a full and up-to-date assessment of the position of British Steel and will report to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State when he has had time to make that assessment.
The situation with regard to the coal mines in South Wales is a matter for the National Coal Board. There are regular meetings, as the right hon. Gentleman knows better than I do, to discuss the future of coal mines in that area. It is still possible for coal to be landed in this country from Australia and the United States at a lower price per ton than it can be produced in some of our coal mines. That is sometimes a factor that puts up the price of steel.
Mr. CallaghanIs the right hon. Lady aware—she must be—of the controversy over the subsidising of coal production in other countries compared with the subsidy here? Her Government propose to taper the subsidy on operating costs so that it is wiped out in two or three years' time. I ask her, in the interests of this country in 20 years' time, whether she is prepared to see coal mines closed, in the knowledge that the coal that could be produced will be for ever forgone and that succeeding generations will never be able to mine it?
§ The Prime MinisterThe external finance limit of the National Coal Board 234 in the current year is about £834 million. That is a considerable subsidy by the British taxpayer to coal mines. There is also a substantial subsidy to steel. There are high subsidies to coal in other countries. The trouble is that we provide subsidies for far too many industries—coal, steel, British Leyland, shipbuilding and, last year, electricity. It is one thing after another. The right hon. Gentleman must remember that some industries have to produce the subsidies that others receive.
Mr. CallaghanDoes the right hon. Lady realise that those subsidies were made at a time when growth in manufacturing and other industries of this country was increasing at the rate of 3 per cent., when inflation was below 10 per cent., and when we had a decent incomes policy? When will she abandon her present policy, so that we can get back to that situation again?
§ The Prime MinisterDuring the stewardship of the previous Labour Government average earnings increased by 113 per cent., retail prices by 106 per cent., and manufacturing output fell by 2 per cent.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave earlier.
§ Mr. AdleyDoes my right hon. Friend envisage any circumstances in which there will need to be an early amendment of the Act of Settlement 1701?
§ The Prime MinisterThe Act of Settlement remains in force and the Government have no plans to change it.
§ Mr. Joel BarnettWill the Prime Minister say whether her recent statements mean that she now has an incomes policy for the public sector, and free collective bargaining for the private sector?
§ The Prime MinisterI have what most employers have had ever since employers began—a policy for the pay that one pays to one's employees.
§ Mr. OnslowAgainst the background of the welcome rejection of the recommendations of the Boyle report, will my right hon. Friend find time to comment today on the statement of the president 235 of the Nottinghamshire miners that the Government are out to create an unequal society, so why should the miners not get what they can?
§ The Prime MinisterI should think that many miners are pleased with the pay that they are earning, which is £147 a week for coalface workers. I think that that is evidenced by the fact that, according to reports, there is now a queue of young people wanting to become miners.
§ Dr. Edmund MarshallTo return to the Act of Settlement and the current speculation about whom the Prince of Wales may or may not marry, is not the most important consideration the fact that he should be able to lead his own life and find his own way to happiness, like everyone else?
§ The Prime MinisterI have already replied that the Act of Settlement remains in force and that the Government have no plans to change it. There is nothing that I can usefully add.