§ Ql. Mr. Wallaceasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 July.
§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had 457 meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
§ Mr. WallaceAs we have heard within the past half hour that the Secretary of State for the Environment is to make a statement on the Local Government (Interim Provisions) Bill, following the Government's substantial defeat last week in another place, will the Prime Minister take this opportunity to admit that the undemocratic provisions of that Bill are unprincipled? Will she, for once, show some humility and admit that her Government have been wrong?
§ The Prime MinisterThe Government have decided to table an amendment to the Local Government (Interim Provisions) Bill on Report in another place, proposing that the present members of the GLC and of the metropolitan county councils should continue in office into 1986, but without elections next year. At the same time, further provisions will be introduced to prevent unreasonable actions by the outgoing authorities.
§ Mrs. PeacockDuring her busy day, will my right hon. Friend consider the fact that the recent picketing activities in Yorkshire not only harm Yorkshire but draw attention to the Yorkshire work force, many of whom are hardworking? Does my right hon. Friend agree that those actions make it difficult for those of us who wish to attract new industry to replace the textile industry?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree very much with what my hon. Friend said. The strikes and picketing are not conducive to attracting new industry and new jobs to this country. As always, strikes destroy jobs.
§ Mr. KinnockDoes the Prime Minister not think it is a pity that we had to gouge agreement from the Government at 2.30 pm to make a statement this afternoon? Was the original decision, which was made by the Cabinet this morning and announced to the press, by the Prime Minister's press secretary at 11.45 am, that the Secretary of State should not make a statement made because the right hon. Gentleman was afraid to come here, or because the right hon. Lady was afraid to let him?
§ The Prime MinisterThat is absolute nonsense. The right hon. Gentleman should know that there are strict rules of order as between this House and the other place. That is a matter for Mr. Speaker, not for me.
§ Mr. KinnockThe Prime Minister knows that she is misleading the House and the country. She is still dodging the question, just as she is dodging democracy by still running away from the ballot box. Who is afraid? Who is frit now?
§ The Prime MinisterWe on the Government Benches are hardly afraid. I think the right hon. Gentleman misunderstands. I have already replied to his question, and that is just bad luck on him.
§ Mr. SteelOf which is the Prime Minister more proud? Is it the report of the Wessex area Conservatives on her strident and uncaring style of government, or is it her constitutional achievement in turning the House of Lords into the conscience of the nation?
§ The Prime MinisterI hope that the right hon. Gentleman will accept that the Government took cognisance of what the House of Lords said. I shall be 458 interested to know whether all right hon. and hon. Members on the Opposition Benches—I know his view — are now fervently for the continuance of their Lordships' House.
§ Mr. HeddleHas my right hon. Friend noticed that the GLC has voted £6 million to clothe the wolf Livingstone in sheep's clothing? Will she take this opportunity—and do so continually—to explain to the country that the abolition of an insensitive and expensive tier of bureaucracy will increase local democracy and accountability?
§ The Prime MinisterI agree with my hon. Friend. It will mean that local government will be conducted at one tier nearer to the people. I note that many parties in the House have preferred unitary authorities to authorities where there is a second tier.
§ Q2. Mr. Geoffrey Robinsonasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. RobinsonThe Prime Minister must be aware that her statement on the Local Government (Interim Provisions) Bill will fall far short of meeting the expectations of the House. It is clear from developments during the past 24 hours that the Secretary of State for the Environment has lost his nerve over this issue and has had to be dragooned into making a statement to the House, which he promised less than a week ago. Why will the Prime Minister not put the wretched man out of his misery and sack him?
§ The Prime MinisterI am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman knows, but, as far as I am aware, my right hon. Friend will be making a statement to the House.
§ Mr. ThurnhamStriking miners have said in a radio broadcast that they wish to return to work but that they dare not for fear of the closed shop arrangements. Unlike the Leader of the Opposition, will my right hon. Friend assure miners that they will not lose their jobs if they go back to work and that the National Coal Board is not one of those maverick employers—like, for example, Bolton council—which encourages their employees to stay out on strike?
§ The Prime MinisterThe National Coal Board gave an undertaking some time ago that it would safeguard the jobs of any miners who lost their union membership. Therefore, there is no need for miners to fear going back to work on that account.
§ Mr. Donald StewartIs the right hon. Lady aware of the decision of the British Medical Association in Manchester today by a two thirds majority — and I assume that she regards its members as rational and patriotic people — that the expenditure on armaments should be reduced drastically and that the money saved should be diverted to health purposes? Will she now take some initiative along those lines?
§ The Prime MinisterThis Government have always been prepared to conduct disarmament talks, provided that the end result was that disarmament was on a balanced and verifiable basis. To do other than that would be to put the security of the country, which would include the doctors, at risk.
§ Mr. BudgenWill my right hon. Friend comment upon the agreed second section of the Fontainebleau communiqué, which states that the VAT contribution may be increased to 1.6 per cent. on 1 January 1988? Is that preparing the ground for a second increase in own resources?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the communiqué made clear, such an increase could take place only with the unanimous consent of each Head of Government and also with the ratification of each and every national Parliament. Those are the safeguards.
§ 3. Mr. Tony Banksasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. BanksIs the Prime Minister aware that her Government's policy towards local government now resembles "Son of the Titanic"? Before she sacks the Secretary of State for the Environment, that poor bumbling wreckage at the end of the Front Bench, will she bear in mind that he was only carrying out her instruction to abolish the Greater London council, which was based on her own personal vindictiveness towards Ken Livingstone?
§ The Prime MinisterThe GLC and the metropolitan county councils will be abolished in accordance with the provisions of our manifesto, which was overwhelmingly endorsed by the electorate at the general election, and again during the Euro-elections.
§ Mr. Nicholas WintertonWill my right hon. Friend accept that the United Kingdom is one of the greatest contributors of aid to Zimbabwe? Therefore, will she, together with our right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, make urgent representations to Mr. Mugabe and his Government about the unjustified detention of Bishop Muzorewa, who was a past Prime Minister of Zimbabwe-Rhodesia, and a great friend of the United Kingdom? He has been detained without trial for eight months now. Will my right hon. Friend do something about it, and will she make representations or withhold aid?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that it would be advisable to withhold aid. As my hon. Friend knows, Bishop Muzorewa has no British citizenship—he is a Zimbabwe citizen, and therefore it is a matter for Zimbabwe. I shall of course draw the attention of that Government to what my hon. Friend has said.
§ Q4. Mr. Loydenasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. LoydenIs the Prime Minister aware that her claim that the National Health Service is safe in her hands rings hollow on Merseyside, and similar places, where the number of hospital beds has been cut and waiting lists of people suffering from cancer have lengthened? Will she consider the petition which is being presented at No. 10 this afternoon, signed by 25,000 people in Liverpool, demanding an improvement in the Health Service in that part of the world?
§ The Prime MinisterOf course I shall look at that petition, but, as the hon. Gentleman knows, since the 460 Government came into office in 1979 spending on the NHS has increased in real terms by 7.5 per cent. More patients are being treated—there are more than 600,000 more inpatients and day cases, and 2.5 million more outpatient cases each year. Waiting lists have fallen by 50,000, after rising by 250,000 under Labour. There are 57,000 more nurses and midwives and 9,000 more dentists and doctors. I could go on relating other great increases in the NHS made by this Government, whose record is far superior to that of any other Government.
§ Sir Philip HollandDoes my right hon. Friend agree that attempts to persuade her to intervene directly in the miners' dispute were merely a device to trap the Government into providing additional subsidies for uneconomic effort? Will my right hon. Friend undertake to reject any such proposals in the future, as she has done so admirably in the past?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. I welcome the talks that are now taking place between the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers. Throughout the dispute the chairman of the NCB has expressed his willingness to discuss revision of the "Plan for Coal" with the unions. I hope that the NUM will approach the talks in the same spirit.
§ Q5. Mr. Chris Smithasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 5 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. SmithAs the Prime Minister has been unable to tell the House why her Secretary of State for the Environment is so frightened to tell the House what the Government's intentions are towards the GLC, will she instead take this opportunity to tell the House and the people of London why she and her Government are frightened of the ballot box, and why, as the overwhelming majority of Londoners wish, she should not face the electorate in the GLC elections at the ballot box next May, which is the democratic and decent thing to do?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman must be under an illusion. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment will make a statement after Question Time. The district council elections will take place in the usual way. I remind the hon. Gentleman that the Conservative party won handsomely the latest ballot for the European elections.
§ Mr. SilvesterWill my right hon. Friend spare time today to consider the urgent matter of the loss to the country of "The Crucifixion" by Duccio? Is she aware that the Manchester city art gallery has raised £1.2 million from its own efforts, and that if another £600,000 is not forthcoming from the National Heritage Memorial Fund or the Exchequer the painting will leave the country in 10 days' time?
§ The Prime MinisterI know that my right hon. Friend the Minister for The Arts would like to purchase even more works of art that we are able to. The decision was taken by the trustees of the British Museum and the National Heritage Memorial Fund. The export licence will be dealt with in the usual way. This country is rich in works of art, many of which are stored away and cannot be shown. Many people wish that they were on display in buildings that are properly maintained.