§ Q 1. Mr. Tony Spellerasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 28 April.
§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. After my duties in the House I shall be leaving for an official visit to Sheffield and the east midlands.
§ Mr. SpellerI welcome my right hon. Friend's achievement in getting inflation down to its lowest level for 15 years and in getting realistic wage settlements. None the less, will she accept that the real rate of interest is the greatest disincentive to borrowing and business? Furthermore, will she accept that while labour and capital-intensive businesses such as agriculture, catering and manufacture are doing well on other fronts, the real cost of borrowing is the greatest disincentive to investment and prosperity?
§ The Prime MinisterI share my hon. Friend's views on the importance of interest rates, and I agree that low inflation and low interest rates provide the right framework for recovery. As inflation falls further, so real interest rates, which are slightly high at the moment, will continue to come down.
§ Mr. BeithWill the Prime Minister spend any time today on her plans for the rating system? Will she promise 992 to abolish the rating system, and if so, will it be on the basis of the plans that she had in mind when she last made such a promise, or will she promise merely to reform the rating system?
§ The Prime MinisterThere was no pledge to abolish rates in the last election manifesto—[Interruption.] In the last manifesto we clearly said—
§ Mr. SkinnerSpeak up.
§ The Prime Minister—that the reduction in income tax would have to come first. The hon. Gentleman will have to wait to see exactly what we say about rates when the time comes.
§ Q2. Mr. Chapmanasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 28 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. ChapmanThe hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) spoke of rates. Will my right hon. Friend take time today to look at recently published statistics which show that the average rate poundage of Labour-controlled London boroughs is no less than 50 per cent. higher than for Conservative-controlled boroughs? Is my right hon. Friend aware that the equivalent figure for the metropolitan counties is 25 per cent., as it is in the shires? Does my right hon. Friend agree that the best advice to people is to vote Conservative at the local elections next week if they want to keep their rates down?
§ The Prime MinisterAs my hon. Friend points out, there are many Labour-controlled local authorities that are big spenders of other people's money. This year, the 18 largest over-spenders are all Labour-controlled authorities. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is the duty of councillors to be careful how they spend ratepayers' money and to see that the ratepayers get value in every aspect of the councils' work.
§ Mr. FootIf the right hon. Lady is now showing a renewed interest in the rating system, will she tell us by how much rates have increased under her Government?
§ The Prime MinisterToo much, especially in Labour-controlled authorities.
§ Mr. FootHave not the rates increased in general throughout the country under her Government by 75 per cent.? By how much would that have been reduced had she not cut the rate support grant?
§ The Prime MinisterThe rates are highest in Labour-controlled authorities. This year the 18 largest overspenders are all under Labour control. Among the 18 largest overspenders are the GLC, ILEA, the west midlands, Greater Manchester, Avon, Merseyside, Southwark, Sheffield, Derbyshire, Humberside, Greenwich, Tyne and Wear, Harringey, and South Yorkshire—all Labour-controlled. Labour loves spending other people's money.
§ Mr. FootWill the Prime Minister help us by saying how much the rates have increased in Surrey, which is controlled by the Conservatives?
§ The Prime MinisterThey are much too high in Surrey this year. They are too high in many authorities One of the ways of trying to reduce public expenditure in the local 993 authorities was the new rate support grant system. On average, rates are increasing this year by 6.5 per cent. Had the two biggest spenders—the GLC and ILEA—spent at their target there would have been, on average, virtually no rate increase this year.
§ Q3. Mr. Trippierasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 28 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. TrippierHas my right hon. Friend had time to study the essay that was written by the right hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey) in the book called "Renewal. Labour Britain in the 1980s"? Does she not find it strange that in an essay on foreign affairs he never referred once to Labour's policy of withdrawal from the Common Market or the removal of nuclear weapons and bases? Does she agree that it would be far better if the right hon. Gentleman came clean and renounced those policies, which he knows will be a complete disaster for Britain?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree that it would be a complete disaster to withdraw from Europe or to abandon our nuclear weapons. The former would have a devastating effect on British industry and the latter would mean that we were not properly able to defend ourselves.
I have not read the essay of the right hon. Member for Leeds, East (Mr. Healey). I do not follow these matters meticulously. But I do not share my hon. Friend's surprise. The right hon. Gentleman seems always to accommodate his views to those of the Labour party, whatever they may be.
§ Mr. AshleyDoes the Prime Minister agree that some of the saddest sights that we have seen in the past few days have been the enforced sale of the Victoria Cross by the widow of a second world war soldier and the requests by widows of men in earlier wars to visit the graves of those men? Will the Prime Minister consider initiating an urgent and wide-ranging review of the problems of widows of those wars so that they can be given the same kind of consideration, kindness and compassion as has been properly shown to the widows of soldiers in the Falklands campaign?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, the Government's record in improving the lot of war widows has been unsurpassed by any other Government, including that which the right hon. Gentleman supported, both in terms of the special increases that we have given for old age and in that we have completely taken war widows out of taxation.
It is very sad that the Victoria Cross has been sold. We have looked into that case and Mrs. Nicholson was visited. She was awarded a war widow's pension after her husband's death in the last war, with an increase for her son. Later in life, her son's school fees were met under the war pension scheme. In addition to the standard war widow's pension she has had some help from the RAF benevolent fund. She also has a rank allowance and an age allowance. We were not aware that she needed any further money.
I repeat that we have an excellent record on caring for war widows and I imagine that the excellence of that record will continue in future.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. AdleyIs my right hon. Friend aware that in two recent evenings' canvassing with the excellent Conservative candidates in the Grange ward of Christchurch, which has the largest council house estate in my constituency, I came across a number of erstwhile Labour voters who expressed their grave concern and disillusionment with the Labour party's policy of support for the CND? Therefore, will she do everything that she can to encourage comrade Kent and his Socialist cohorts to keep defence at the forefront of our political debate?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree with my hon. Friend. We shall indeed keep defence matters at the forefront of debate. They are vital to the security of our way of life and the British people. They are also vital to our international standing and I hope that there will soon be a full debate in the House on those matters.
§ Q5. Mr. Tom Clarkeasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 28 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. ClarkeIs the Prime Minister aware that there is widespread concern in Scotland about recent further remarks of the Secretary of State for Defence? Is she aware that distinguished representatives of the Church of Scotland, the Episcopalian Church and the Catholic Church took grave exception to his smear upon the peace movement? Will the Prime Minister use her influence to encourage the right hon. Gentleman to raise the standard of this important debate to a level that it is entitled to expect?
§ The Prime MinisterWith regard to the head of any Church, my right hon. Friend has had no conversation with either Cardinal Hume or — [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."] I am giving the facts. Just because the Labour party does not like them does not make them any less the facts.
My right hon. Friend has had no such conversations, either with Cardinal Hume or indeed the head of any other Church or religious organisation. That answers the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question.
On my right hon. Friend's other revelations about the leaders of CND, I fail to see that anyone can be blamed for revealing the facts.
§ Mr. Maxwell-HyslopDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the most unchallengeable credential for leading a peace movement is to have been responsible for carrying out policies that have preserved peace? In doing that, my right hon. Friend and the preceding five Prime Ministers, who have kept Britain in NATO with nuclear weapons defending that Alliance have shown that they lead the true peace movement for preserving peace between East and West.
§ The Prime MinisterI agree wholly with my hon. Friend. Nuclear weapons are a part of the NATO balance, which has kept the peace for some 38 years. People should be very slow to discard it before they find something that can keep the peace equally well. We are the true peace movement.
Q6. Mr. R. C. Mitchellasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 28 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Mr. MitchellWill the Prime Minister find time today to issue instructions to stop the practice of some jobcentres calling young unemployed people for interview when they arrive find that, without warning, they are being interviewed by a psychologist? Is not the degradation of unemployment that has been caused by the Government quite sufficient without implying that young unemployed people are in some way psychologically disturbed?
§ The Prime MinisterI can understand what the hon. Gentleman is saying and the impact behind his words. It is the work of jobcentres to try to place young people either in training or in jobs. If the hon. Gentleman has any 996 particular case in mind, perhaps he will draw it to my attention and I shall see that it is fully and promptly dealt with.
§ Mr. Mark CarlisleWith regard to my right hon. Friend's answers on nuclear disarmament, has she had time to see the report in today's newspapers to the effect that the Labour party, in its advertising campaign, does not propose to refer to its policy of unilateral nuclear disarmament? As the Leader of the Opposition thinks that it will be the main issue at the next election, does not my right hon. Friend find it extraordinary that he does not wish to put the issue before the public?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, I have seen those reports, but I think that the true face of the Labour party has been revealed in its document and in the sayings of many of its people. The Labour party is unilateralist, which means that it is prepared to play with the defence of Britain and abandon nuclear weapons, wherein lie our true security.