§ Q1. Mr. Ray Powellasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 29 November.
§ 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 meeting President Mitterrand in Paris this evening and shall attend a dinner to be given by the President at the Elysee.
§ Mr. PowellThis week we have heard a lot about the Prime Minister's speech on Monday night to the Carlton club on the subject of upholding the rule of law and the enemy within. Will she explain to the House and the nation why the Employment Act 1980 and the Shops Act 1950 should be treated entirely differently by her and her Ministers? Why does she allow the courts to treat the Employment Act in one way, with its harsh, obscene sequestration of trade union funds, while condoning blatant abuse of the Shops Act? Is——
§ Mr. SpeakerI ask the hon. Gentleman to be brief.
§ Mr. PowellIs that not another example of the Tories' double standards?
§ The Prime MinisterClearly, the hon. Gentleman would have profited if he had read the lecture in full. He might then have learnt that the law in this country is impartially administered. The courts are the servants of the law and not of the Government.
§ Mr. StokesWill the Prime Minister be good enough to give an assurance that if the House should be so foolish as to allow in television cameras the cost will not fall on the taxpayer?
§ The Prime MinisterI believe that the situation would be the same as that in the other place, and that no extra money would be provided for televising the House, should it decide to allow televising of its proceedings. But in one way the BBC licence fee is raised automatically by the amount that the Government decide on, having received all the representations. People have no option but to pay it if they wish to receive television broadcasts.
§ Mr. KinnockYesterday the Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted that unemployment was higher than the Government had assumed or expected. In the light of that, what possible justification can there be for taking away £340 million of regional job development money or for allowing the closure of one third of Britain's skillcentres?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman heard the statement on regional policy yesterday, or read it. If he had done so he would have learnt the answer to his question, which is that the changes in regional policy are designed to obtain better value for the money that is spent in the regions and to ensure that it is directly related to the number of jobs that are anticipated. It would seem much better to relate it to job creation than to capital allowances, which could give a subsidy towards replacing jobs with machinery. I doubt whether the right hon. Gentleman would be in favour of that.
§ Mr. KinnockNot only did I hear the utterly unconvincing statement yesterday, which is a betrayal of regional interest, but I looked at reactions to it this morning. Is the Prime Minister aware of criticism of it from the Confederation of British Industry, the Trades Union Congress, trainers, managers and employers? When today's unemployment figures stand at a November record of 3,223,000, why does the right hon. Lady still want to hit simultaneously at investment, employment and training? What makes her insist on destroying the means of people, regions and firms to help themselves to get work?
§ The Prime MinisterIf the right hon. Gentleman heard the statement he will know that the average cost per job is £35,000, which seems a high cost for creating jobs. I should have thought that he was keen on getting better value for money. Indeed, he said as much in a speech on 6 October 1983, when he spoke about Labour party policy. He said:
We plan to get the maximum advantage out of that expenditure and we very much do want value for money because it is our money.That is our policy, and I am delighted to have his support for it.
§ Mr. KinnockWe want better value for money and better jobs for money. The Prime Minister wants neither.
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman is speaking nonsense. If he wants better value he will get it from the way that we are going. If he wants better and more jobs, will he stop supporting the miners' strike?
§ Mr. Nicholas WintertonIn seeking to assist my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, may I ask her to assure us, especially 130 of her colleagues who will not accept the decision of the Secretary of State for Education and Science, that he will not be allowed to phase out the minimum maintenace grant and, for the first time in nearly a quarter of a century, to charge fees for higher education courses?
§ The Prime MinisterMy hon. Friend will be aware from the autumn statement that this year money for education has been increased by £140 million. There are many demands on funds and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science has followed some of the demands made previously in the House that more should be given to science. Part of the money that comes from the change in student awards goes to increasing the sum spent on the science budget. In the next two years £10 million will go towards improving laboratories and equipment, and in each of the next two years £14 million will go to enable the research councils to undertake more high quality research projects. My hon. Friend will know that 100,000 families will not make any contribution to students' grants. He will also know that we have the most generous system of student grants——
§ Mr. Wintertonindicated dissent.
§ The Prime MinisterIf one lived in Japan it would be lower, in Sweden it would be lower, and in the United States it would be very much less generous.
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I ask the House not to shout and laugh when the Prime Minister is answering questions, because when that happens I cannot hear her, and neither can anyone else.
§ Mr. SteelGiven today's disgraceful unemployment figures, how does the Prime Minister expect students to find part-time jobs, as recommended by the Secretary of State for Education and Science, to finance their education?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the right hon. Gentleman knows, many of them frequently do. In addition to the £700 million that taxpayers give towards student grants, there is also an extra amount of about £100 million that is not taken into account in that figure for housing benefit and supplementary benefit in the recesses.
§ Q2. Mr. Lofthouseasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 29 November.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. LofthouseIs the Prime Minister aware that yesterday's statement on regional policy will have a devastating effect on many communities? Is she further aware that it is another kick in the teeth for the mining communities, especially in west Yorkshire and the Castleford travel-to-work area— [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] If hon. Members listen I shall tell them. Is the Prime Minister aware that if she has no plan to assist those areas we shall have a continuation of the unfortunate incidents that have occurred in my constituency during the past week, and that she will be held responsibile?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman is talking nonsense, and he knows it. How he dares to say that in a week during which—long before the announcement was made—we have seen violence at a level and of a pitch that we never expected to see in this country is a mystery. If the hon. Gentleman wants the maximum number of jobs from the expenditure of money, he should approve of a system that links the subsidies to the jobs created. It would be ridiculous to link it to anything else.
§ Mr. Robert BanksWill my right hon. Friend reflect on the traffic chaos last night caused by the student demonstration on Westminster bridge? Does she agree that the organisers of such demonstrations not only cause enormous irritation and inconvenience to the general public, but prevent the emergency services, doctors and surgeons from getting through to people whose lives may be at risk? Should not court fines reflect the gravity of those circumstances?
§ The Prime MinisterI believe that it was a disgraceful demonstration, which stopped traffic, ambulances and fire engines, and undermined any sympathy that some people may have for the students. [Interruption.] I repeat that no students anywhere in the world are treated more generously than British students. In Sweden and Japan they would receive loans, and in many other countries they would receive part loans and part grants. Britain has the most generous student grants in the world, and such demonstrations undermine the faith of those of us who have continued to give student grants.
§ Mr. FootHow does the Prime Minister conceivably justify the withdrawal of special area assistance from the areas that have already been hardest hit under her Government? Why does she show such enthusiasm for this measure of combined stupidity and meanness?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the right hon. Gentleman knows, the total available for regional aid covers a larger area than it did previously— [Interruption.] Not so much will be given to special development areas, but there were many problems in those parts of the country which were just outside development areas, especially in the west midlands. The regional grants cover a wider area and make grants available to more people. They also link the grants to the number of jobs created. I should also point out to the right hon. Gentleman that the Government, by knocking off the national insurance surcharge, have probably done more for jobs than any other Government.
§ Q3. Mr. Bellinghamasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 29 November.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some minutes ago.
§ Mr. BellinghamDid my right hon. Friend hear about the corporation dust cart that screeched to a halt outside a Scottish bank yesterday morning, whereupon the driver leapt out and placed his application for British Telecom shares at five minutes to 10? Is it not good news for Britain that at the beginning of next week probably over 1 million more people will become first-time share owners? Does 1088 she agree that one of the things that riles Labour Members is that many of those new shareholders will be Labour supporters, who have ignored threats of renationalisation?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, the denationalisation of British Telecom will bring many people into share ownership and independence for the first time. The Labour party cannot tolerate that, because it wants people to be under its thumb and not to be independent with their own shares and their own homes.
§ Mr. BennHas the Prime Minister's attention been drawn to the case of Brenda Greenwood, the first miner's wife to be thrown into prison for voicing her opposition to pit closures? Is she aware that her attempts to crush and criminalise all opposition will fail in Britain, as it did in pre-war Germany?
§ The Prime MinisterUnlike pre-war Germany, this country has a totally independent system of the rule of law. [Interruption.] I would have hoped, if it is not a forlorn hope, that one day the right hon. Gentleman and the Opposition would totally condemn violence and see that the violence on the picket line and the violence perpetrated in the name of this strike is stopped. From the fact that they do not we shall draw our own conclusion—that they wish to continue the strike by that method.