§ Q1. Mr. Parryasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 21 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. This evening I am attending a dinner given by the British Jewish community to pay tribute to Mr. Shlomo Argov.
§ Mr. ParryWill the Prime Minister spell out where the further proposed £5 million cuts are to be made? Is she aware that if they are to be made in education, social services and housing, that could lead to further social disorder? I challenge the Prime Minister to pay an early visit to Liverpool to see at first hand what effect her policies are having—or has she not got the guts to make such a visit?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have decided, as I said on Tuesday, to stick to the public planned totals of expenditure for this year, next year and the succeeding years. It was on those totals that we fought the election. As to Liverpool, not all is bad on Merseyside. Cammell Laird has won an order for an accommodation rig for Morecambe Bay, Vauxhall has announced the introduction of double shift working in Ellesmere Port, General Motors' AC Delco plant in Kirkby recently announced a large order for the United States, Kodak has recently invested £10 million in Knowsley and there have been announcements of substantial investment by Higsons Brewery, Shell and Ford among others. I am aware that the hon. Gentleman does not like good news, but that is good news.
§ Mr. FootCan the right hon. Lady add to her remarks by telling us more about Merseyside? What is the figure for the increase in unemployment on Merseyside since she took office in May 1979? Also, has she seen reports of suggestions by Sir Terence Beckett of the CBI that jobs in the public services should be cut by 360,000 next year, and does she agree with that?
§ The Prime MinisterI cannot give figures for specific areas. When we came into office unemployment was about 1.3 million and it is now about 3.1 million. If the right hon. Gentleman wants figures for a particular travel-to-work area we can give them to him. The CBI is correct in expecting the Government to keep strict control on public spending, especially as every penny piece of public spending eventually comes from the private sector, and the greater the public spending, the greater the burden upon its back. With regard to the numbers employed in the public sector, the CBI is right in expecting us to be as efficient in the use of our manpower as it is expected to be in the use of its.
§ Mr. Footin that case, can the Prime Minister tell us how much she thinks the cut of 360,000 in public service 560 numbers proposed by Sir Terence Beckett would cost the Exchequer, and what her reckoning is of how much this would cost in unemployment pay and lost taxes? If she agrees with Sir Terence's proposals, does she also agree with the cuts of 130,000 in education and 80,000 in the Health Service? When did she mention that during the general election?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman is very much aware that we have constantly said that we must have efficient use of manpower throughout the whole of the public service. If the right hon. Gentleman cares to look at the published figures he will see that between 1960 and now the numbers employed by central Government have gone up very considerably—indeed, by a full 20 per cent. over that period.
§ Mr. FootWill the right hon. Lady tell us clearly whether she agrees with Sir Terence Beckett's proposed 80,000 cuts in the number of people employed in the Health Service?
§ The Prime MinisterI have not seen the full details of the specific cuts that he is recommending. I am proud that under this Government the Civil Service is down to its lowest numbers for 15 years. The right hon. Gentleman will know that last February we announced a management review of the National Health Service. We should be careful in the way in which we use taxpayers' money and we should have maximum efficiency in management. I note that the right hon. Gentleman does not want either. He wants extravagance, inefficiency, high taxation and high costs.
§ Q2. Mr. Neil Thorneasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 21 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. ThorneWill my right hon. Friend take time to consider the recent CBI remarks that excessive Government expenditure is likely to lead to higher taxation and higher interest rates and that will inevitably lead to the bankrupting of a substantial number of firms and further unemployment?
§ The Prime MinisterYes. Excessive public expenditure has to be borne by industry and commerce. Therefore, we must be careful to keep down the total amount of public expenditure, otherwise taxation will go up. It was the previous Labour Government who put the national insurance surcharge on industry and commerce. It was this Government, by virtue of their good financial management, who managed to take £2 billion from the taxation of industry and commerce.
§ Mr. BeithIf the Prime Minister is so convinced that the CBI is right, what is her response to the other side of its argument, that there should be more Government spending on capital projects of the kind that generates employment in private industry?
§ The Prime MinisterThe two points are not incompatible. As the hon. Gentleman will be well aware, I have said many times from this Dispatch Box that within the planned total of Government expenditure it would in many ways be better if we allocated a larger proportion to capital expenditure. But that requires cutting down on current expenditure and when it comes to securing such reductions few people will agree them. Therefore, 561 increased capital expenditure includes an increased total expenditure, which again would put an extra burden on industry.
§ Mr. RipponTo save public expenditure will the Prime Minister find time today to abolish the Review Body on Top Salaries, if it has not already had the good sense to resign?
§ The Prime MinisterThe Review Body on Top Salaries looks at a number of salary scales other than those of Members of Parliament and Ministers, and those other people would prefer the review body to continue its work.
§ Q3. Mr. Dormandasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 21 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. DormandHas the Prime Minister given consideration this week to the message that came loud and clear from the magnificent Durham miners' centenary gala, which was held last Saturday, to the effect that the closure of pits on economic grounds alone will be fiercely resisted throughout the British coalfields? When will the right hon. Lady realise the devastation that is caused to mining communities by such closures, particularly when her Government do not provide alternative employment? Finally, will the right hon. Lady now dismiss Mr. Ian MacGregor before he starts his butchery, which will cause such social unrest in Britain?
§ The Prime MinisterThe amount to be found by taxpayers through the external financing limit for coal this year is in excess of £1 billion. That is in addition to the money that they have to pay for coal and electricity. Under "Plan for Coal", which was published in 1974, it was assumed that on average 3 million to 4 million tonnes of exhausted capacity would be closed every year. In fact, closures have averaged just over 1 million tonnes a year. It was assumed that there would be substantial investment in coal and under this Government investment in the coal industry has amounted to more than £3 billion. So the investment programme has been in excess of that contained in Labour's "Plan for Coal", although the closures have not.
§ Sir William ClarkDoes my right hon. Friend agree that it is essential to keep strict control of public expenditure, because the previous Labour Government's failure to maintain strict control on Government expenditure meant that we had to go cap in hand to the IMF?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, I agree totally with my hon. Friend. It is necessary to keep strict control of public expenditure, otherwise we shall have to resort either to excessive borrowing, in which case interest rates will rise and the recovery will be aborted, or to much higher taxation, both on people and industry. Both would be bad.
§ Ms. HarmanBearing in mind that the school summer holidays begin tomorrow, is the Prime Minister concerned that there is no comprehensive public provision to care for and entertain children during the school holidays, particularly as most parents have to work to make ends meet? Does she not think that it is a scandalous gap in public services, about which the Government should do something?
§ The Prime MinisterNo. I do not believe that it is up to the Government to provide comprehensive care for school children during school holidays. It is up to local authorities to see that the maximum use is made of buildings, playing fields and swimming pools during the recess and to work with parents and teachers to that end.
§ Q4. Mr. Tim Smithasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 21 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. SmithHas my right hon. Friend seen the reply that was given yesterday by her right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in which he said that he intended during this Parliament to privatise British Telecom, the British Steel Corporation, Rolls-Royce and other industries under his Department? Given the benefit that will accrue to the taxpayer and the consumer from that programme, will my right hon. Friend ensure that it is implemented as expeditiously as possible?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, we shall implement that programme as quickly as we can, bearing in mind that in some cases we have to get legislation through the House and that we must have regard to the speed at which one places those organisations on the market. It is much better for Britain to have less nationalised industry and to put more in the private sector. It is a better bargain for the consumer and it means that industry can obtain its investment from the market instead of having to rely upon Government sources.
§ Mr. LoydenDoes the Prime Minister recognise that her Government's policies have resulted in the doubling of unemployment nationally and that in some areas on Merseyside more than 90 per cent. of the young people are without jobs? When will she realise that such unemployment is crippling individuals and decimating families? What figure will unemployment have to reach before she recognises that the Government's policies are contributing massively to unemployment?
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. To put the record straight, that was a supplementary to question No. Q6.
§ The Prime MinisterThe only way to create more jobs is to create goods and services which people will purchase in competition with the goods and services which they can purchase from overseas. For that purpose the Government need to keep industry's cost down, provide tax incentives that will encourage small businesses and the products of new technology, together with a research and development programme that speeds up the bringing of new products to the market. That is the Government's policy and programme and it is far more likely to produce jobs in future than any policy of Labour Members.
§ Mr. LawrenceDoes my right hon. Friend welcome the public conversion of the right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) to the Conservative policies for the sale of council houses, membership of the European Community and multilateral disarmament? Does she agree that it would have been a darned sight better had he said that to the electorate before rather than after the election?
§ The Prime MinisterI welcome the conversion of anyone to the sale of council houses, membership of the EC—upon which many jobs depend—and multilateral 563 disarmament, which provides for the security of Britain. I note that a number of Opposition Members are very dissatisfied with both the campaign that they fought and the organisation. If they are dissatisfied with the campaign,they have only themselves to blame.
§ Mr. DalyellOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. How can the House be protected from long answers by the Prime Minister?
§ Mr. SpeakerThere are not only long answers but long questions.