§ Q1. Mr. Rookerasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 14 July.
§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
§ Mr. RookerWill the Prime Minister, as leader of the nation and as a housewife, give us her practical advice and tell us what her practical advice is to the unemployed and their families about eating healthily within their means, in view of the assessment by the National Advisory Committee on Nutrition Education that the average British diet puts people at risk?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that those people need advice from me, and I think that it would be presumptuous of me to give it.
§ Mr. MarlowIs my right hon. Friend satisfied that the United States is sufficiently representing Western interests in the middle east? If not, does she believe that Europe, and the United Kingdom in particular, should be taking an initiative in that area of the world?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is no improvement whatever to report on the situation in the middle east. It is very serious indeed. The European Community will be considering whether there is anything that we can say or do to help to bring peace and security to that region.
§ Mr. FootWhen the right hon. Lady says that she is not prepared to give advice to some of the poorest people in the land, is that not what she sought to do last week? Has the Cabinet had a chance to consider the growing anxiety throughout the land about the way in which some of the poorest people may be treated under her Government? Will she give an absolute guarantee that supplementary benefit is to be sustained, because that provides the minimum needs that must be met if proper standards are to be sustained? Will the right hon. Lady give a guarantee that she will protect the standard of supplementary benefit throughout the coming years?
§ The Prime MinisterNo. I cannot go further than the pledge given previously in the manifesto that pensions and other long-term linked benefits would be protected. Supplementary pension is such a linked benefit, and is therefore protected.
§ Mr. FootDoes the right hon. Lady recognise that it is not only the protection of the standards of people on supplementary pensions; there are many other people who depend for a minimum standard of life on the protection of supplementary benefit? Does she accept that if unemployment continues to increase, as it has done under her Government, and if the value of the benefit is cut, as she is now suggesting, we shall soon have 8 million or 9 million people living on the poverty line? Is she content that such a thing should happen in this country?
§ The Prime MinisterThere is no definition of the poverty line — [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"] — and there never has been under any Government—when they have answered from this Dispatch Box. We gave a pledge in our manifesto that pensions and other linked long-term benefits would be price protected. I cannot extend that pledge.
§ Mr. FootIn the light of the anxiety, which can now only deepen as a result of her answers, will the right hon. Lady ask the Cabinet to look afresh at this matter to see whether the minimum standard of life of some of the poorest people in Britain cannot be guaranteed over the coming years?
§ The Prime MinisterI cannot go further than what I have said. The retirement pension and other long-term 1009 linked benefits are price protected. Those long-term linked benefits include widows' pension, industrial death benefit when it is paid by means of a widow's or widower's pension, war disablement and industrial disablement pension, war widow's pension, attendance allowance, invalidity care allowance and non-contributory invalidity pension.
§ Mr. Ian LloydMy right hon. Friend will be aware that successive Governments, including her own, have understandably refused to give the House or the country any information on the British world trade in armaments. As the annual report of the State Department to Congress contains a detailed analysis of British world trade in armaments, will she comment on, first, the relevance of that rule and, secondly, the disclosure in that report that of the $3.24 billion worth of arms supplied to the so-called front-line states, $1 billion has been supplied by the United Kingdom? Will she comment on that, particularly in the light of the fact that most of those states are bankrupt and, therefore, we can only assume that the bill has been met by the British taxpayer?
§ The Prime MinisterIf my hon. friend wishes to ask about a particular consignment, obviously we shall tell him. However, he knows that every order is looked at individually and on its merits. Certainly armaments have been supplied to the front-line states, but when each order was taken a judgment was made by whatever Government were in office as to whether, in all the circumstances, it was wise to meet it. That, again, has been the practice of every Government.
§ Mr. Roy JenkinsCan the right hon. Lady recollect an occasion previous to last night when a Prime Minister was so mercifully saved from his or her folly by the votes of so many wiser colleagues?
§ The Prime MinisterI assume that the right hon. Gentleman used his freedom to vote in his own way. Does he seek to deny it to any other hon. Members of the House?
§ Q2. Dr. McDonaldasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 14 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Lady to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
Dr. MacDonaldWhere is the morality in squandering £280 million this year on tax cuts to the rich instead of raising child benefits by a further 50p per week and raising benefits for the unemployed?
§ The Prime MinisterChild benefit, as the hon. Lady knows, will be at a record level when it is increased in November. That is better than anything achieved by the Government that she supported. I imagine that tax relief is the subject of the Finance Bill which is now going through the House. The 1 million people who will be better off as a result of the Finance Bill include one-sixth of all stevedores and dockers, one-sixth of all transport foremen, 5,000 miners, a quarter of all journalists, many working couples, half of all medical practitioners, the heads of many secondary schools, and half of all university academics.
§ Q3. Mr. Bill Walkerasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 14 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. WalkerHas my right hon. Friend had the opportunity to read the press reports on the so-called public inquiry that was held by the Strathclyde region into the Coulport base for Trident, stating that the inquiry has been based on fundamental errors, which has led to a colossal waste of taxpayers' money and resources? Does my right hon. Friend agree that this is another example of a Labour local authority spending public money for political dogma?
§ The Prime MinisterI have not read the complete report, but I have read the reports of it in Scottish newspapers. I understand that one of the defence economics lecturers at Strathclyde university said that it contained so many errors that it could not be seriously considered.
§ Q4. Mr. Heddleasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 14 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. HeddleDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the road to home ownership passes through Bolsover and Birmingham, Sparkbrook? Is it not curious that some 18 months after the former agent of the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) bought his council house, the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) made a speech this week agreeing that most council tenants want to buy their homes? Therefore, will my right hon. Friend take time today to invite Labour Members to condemn those Labour-controlled local authorities that are still denying council tenants the opportunity to exercise their democratic right?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, gladly. If council tenants live within the area of such a Labour council, they should apply directly to the Department of the Environment to seek help with the purchase of their home.
§ Q5. Mr. Skinnerasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 14 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. SkinnerNow that Brazil is suggesting a moratorium on her debts and the right hon. Lady is making offstage noises about not bailing Brazil out, will she give a guarantee, in order that action can speak louder than words, that she will bring in legislation to force the Inland Revenue to stop allowing tax relief to banks on all bad and doubtful loans? The Labour party will give a guarantee to help get such legislation through and provide her with a bigger majority than we got on the hanging motion last night.
§ The Prime MinisterBrazil is negotiating for another IMF tranche today and it is hoped that those negotiations will be completed by tomorrow. The President of Brazil made a statement today. We have not seen its full text but it looks as if Brazil has taken certain action. That may or may not mean that the next slice of IMF aid will be released. [Interruption.] I am trying to answer the hon. Gentleman's question.
If any Government were to refuse tax relief on bad debts to banks, the effect on British banks and those who deposit with them would be calamitous.
§ Mr. Geoffrey FinsbergWhen my right hon. Friend has further meetings with her colleagues today, will she 1011 invite them not to enter into consultation with the new phoney Association of London Authorities, which is merely a front organisation for the Labour party, but to continue consultations with the long-established London Boroughs Association?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, I completely agree with my hon. Friend. I shall pay due regard to his warning and also consult our many London Members in the House.
§ Mr. FoulkesHas the Prime Minister had an opportunity to read the proceedings of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs, which contains the draft report of its chairman, her distinguished hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Sir A. Kershaw)? As that draft report says that Fortress Falklands is untenable in the long term, will she give a clear indication now under what circumstances and in what conditions she and her Government would be willing to enter into discussions with a future democratic Government of Argentina about the future of the Falklands?
§ The Prime MinisterI understand that this is an uncompleted draft report to which the Government are not required to give a formal reply. However, we have noted that the draft conclusions end with the firm statement that: 1012
Your Committee cannot yet recommend the resumption of negotiations with Argentina on the sovereignty issue or any matters relating thereto.I see no prospect of entering into negotiations with Argentina at present, and I have no intention of negotiating sovereignty.
§ Sir Ian GilmourAlthough I agree with my right hon. Friend that there is no acceptable definition of poverty, does not she accept that the fact and presence of poverty is not in doubt? Since those who receive short-term benefits are at least as poor as those who receive long-term benefits, will she give an assurance that the fact will be fully taken into account when the Cabinet next considers public expenditure?
§ The Prime MinisterAs my right hon. Friend will know, many of those who receive short-term benefits receive supplementary benefit if the amounts are inadequate for their purposes. For example, the unemployed often receive a rather larger proportion of their income from supplementary benefit than from unemployment pay. However, I cannot go further than the promises that I have given, upon which my right hon. Friend fought the last election.