§ Q2. Mr. Eggarasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 22 December.
§ The Prime MinisterThis morning I shall preside at a meeting of the Cabinet and in addition to my duties in the House I shall be having meetings with ministerial colleagues and others.
§ Mr. EggarIs my right hon. Friend aware that the public have been immensely reassured by the increased number of police on the streets in central London in the past few days? Is she also aware that, on Tuesday, CND deliberately staged a public demonstration, thus taking many police officers away from street patrol? Could not the country and the House have expected a slightly more responsible attitude on the part of CND?
§ The Prime MinisterWe should all like, especially at Christmas time, to put on record our thanks for the bravery and courage of the police, and especially to remember those families who will not have a loved one with them this Christmas because of the bombing last Saturday. I agree with my hon. Friend that it would have been a nice gesture if those who had planned demonstrations had cancelled them in favour of fighting terrorism and remembered that the police have an overwhelming job to do and are in the front line in that fight.
§ Dr. Owen—may I ask whether she is aware that 15 million people in Britain—that is the official figure—will be living at or below the poverty line this Christmas? Will she make a new year's resolution that, if the economy recovers next year, she will cut taxes by increasing child benefit? Is she further aware that if she were to concentrate a 1p reduction in the standard rate on child benefit that could increase the half-average family earnings by £3.90; that if she concentrated it on tax allowances those earnings would be increased by only 92p, and that if she concentrated it on the standard rate those earnings would be increased only by a miserable 35p?
§ The Prime MinisterI recognise the right hon. Gentleman's very studied question. Before I answer him, may I ask him which defnition of poverty he is using to reach that figure?
§ Dr. OwenIt is the official Government statistic relating to the 3 million unemployed families, the 6 million families that are living on low wages and pensioners who face high costs for rented accommodation. If the right hon. Lady checks that total she will find that 15 million Britons are at or below the poverty line.
§ The Prime MinisterThere is no Government definition of poverty. There are some 7 million people who live in families that are supported by supplementary benefit. There are many other different definitions of poverty, which is why I asked the right hon. Gentleman to say which definition he was using. Many of the low-paid on supplementary benefit have incomes about 40 per cent. above that level. They are wholly artificial definitions. The fact remains that people who are living in need are fully and properly provided for. As to the right hon. Gentleman's question, I am not sure whether he is arguing that taxation should be increased or reduced.
§ The Prime MinisterI am delighted to be able to tell the right hon. Gentleman that child benefit is now higher than it has ever been.
§ Mr. FoxAlthough I want my right hon. Friend to have a relaxing holiday, will she take time during the recess to consider my Adjournment debate of this week on keeping the British £1 note? Does she agree that only as a last resort should the £1 coin be universally introduced? If the risk of forgery can be dealt with, is she aware that a plastic £1 note is acceptable?
§ The Prime MinisterI heard my hon. Friend on the radio during breakfast time this week. I rather share his views on the £1 coin. It is not very popular yet and I have reason to believe that the £1 note will be retained.
§ Mr. Tom ClarkeWill the Prime Minister find time today to attend the Adjournment debate initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) on shipbuilding in his constituency? If she does, will she reflect on the fact that the Minister of State's statement has caused a great deal of anxiety on Clydeside? The arrogance of its presentation has been distinctly unhelpful. Finally, will she accept responsibility as Prime Minister to intervene in this most delicate situation to save taxpayers the cost of maintaining 8,000 people on the dole who would prefer to be working for shipbuilding and their communities?
§ The Prime MinisterThere will be no Government intervention. I share the hon. Gentleman's belief that it will be a tragedy if the workers go on strike, thereby doing themselves out of jobs. Shipbuilding orders are extremely difficult to get. There is a great deal of competition for them throughout the world, and when one has them it is a tragedy if people strike themselves out of jobs at a difficult time. I think that the Government have already shown how much they are prepared to do for shipbuilding. Since 1979 British Shipbuilders has received £850 million of taxpayers' money. Merchant shipbuilding has been subsidised by about £6,000 per job per year.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. StrawDoes the Prime Minister believe that it is consistent with her duty of upholding the rule of law by ensuring that the judiciary is seen clearly to be independent of the Executive that senior Government officials, at ministerial behest, should have held a clandestine meeting to seek political advice from a senior judge, whatever his previously known political affiliations before his elevation? If that is consistent with her duty, why was so much effort made to keep secret the meeting that was held between Mr. Michael Quinland and Sir John Donaldson?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman is aware that the judiciary is absolutely independent. The person who was going to be head of the Department of Employment sought the views of a judge on a certain matter. It is not a bad idea to know how legislation works out if one is thinking again of legislating. Is the hon. Gentleman suggesting that every meeting that is held under the auspices of a Department has to be public? If he is, he is bonkers.
§ Mrs. RumboldAt this Christmas time will my right hon. Friend join me in expressing sympathy to two of my constituents, Mr. and Mrs. Proctor, whose son Timothy was killed in a road accident last year? Does she agree that the House should think about introducing legislation for minimum sentencing when death results from such accidents so that the general public may know that their elected representatives in this place value human life?
§ The Prime MinisterI join my hon. Friend in expressing sympathy for her constituents and all others who have suffered similarly. It is very rare for us to have minimum sentences. If such sentences were to be introduced, there would have to be loopholes for the exceptional case. I think that we are making it clear that we believe in strong sentencing for offences that justify it. As my hon. Friend knows, we shall introduce legislation, which we hope will go through the House, which will enable certain sentences, if they are felt to be insufficient, to be referred to the Court of Appeal for that court to pronounce upon them. That would be guidance in future.
§ Mr. CraigenIn view of the Prime Minister's earlier reply, will she find time today to make a new year resolution to start doing things for Scotland? Will she get her Ministers to knock heads together over the Scott Lithgow yard. instead of wringing their hands in indifference?
§ The Prime MinisterIn answer to the hon. Gentleman's question about Scott Lithgow, I gave the annual subsidy that has gone from the taxpayer to 564 merchant shipbuilding. If one translates that to the Scott Lithgow yards, it is equal not to £6,000 per year per employee, but to £13,000.