§ Q1. Mr. Evansasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 April.
§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)This morning I had meetings wth ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House I shall be having further meetings later today. This evening I hope to attend a dinner given by Her Majesty the Queen.
§ Mr. EvansDuring the course of her busy day, will the Prime Minister take the opportunity to rebut the argument proposed by many of her hon. Friends that wages councils should be abolished so that the unemployed can be priced back into work at the expense of some of the lowest wage earners in the land? Does the Prime Minister accept that that argument is immoral and impudent as well as Luddite?
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Gentleman will perhaps be aware that the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in its report on employment outlook in September 1984 said:
Increases in relative youth wages appear to have reduced their employment in a number of countries.1056 Moreover, I fail to see what the hon. Gentleman is complaining about on our policy on wages councils, because the previous Labour Government abolished the road haulage wages council in 1978.
§ Mr. Gerald HowarthHas my right hon. Friend read the report in the Daily Telegraph to the effect that in its attempt to indoctrinate our children ILEA's aparatchiks are ordering the removal from school libraries of books such as "Robinson Crusoe", which is imperialist and "Jane Eyre" which is sexist? In deploring that witch hunt, will my right hon. Friend agree that girls helping their mums and boys helping their dads is as natural as pictures showing Socialists in opposition and Tories in government?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir.
§ Mr. KinnockAt the so-called rates summit at Chequers last Sunday did the Prime Minister and her colleagues give their attention to the Audit Commission's report, the views of the Tory-controlled Association of County Councils or the British Chambers of Commerce, all of whom conclude that the biggest single factor accounting for the doubling in the rates burden in the period that she has been in office is her systematic and continuous series of cuts in the rate support grant?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman forgets that the rate support grant also comes from taxes levied on people and businesses, and businesses are hit both ways. Therefore, the important thing is to hold a severe restraint on public expenditure.
§ Mr. KinnockThe Prime Minister's answer makes it clear that last weekend's affair at Chequers had much more to do with trying to ease political pressures on her Government from irate Tories in Scotland and the forthcoming county council elections than with easing burdens of taxation of any kind on the families and businesses of Britain. Will she now, with all that performance, promise to abolish the rates again? If she does so, who will believe her, especially when she has ratted comprehensively on those undertakings twice in the past 11 years?
§ The Prime MinisterLast week's seminar on rates—[Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I ask the House to hear the Prime Minister.
§ The Prime MinisterLast week's seminar on rates was to review the work of the review of local government finance announced last October by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. With regard to the 1974 election, which, as the right hon. Gentleman reminds me, this party lost and his party won, may I point out a promise in the 1974 Labour manifesto, to the effect that prescription charges would be abolished, a promise which the Labour Government never fulfilled.
§ Mr. FryDespite the claim of the Opposition, will my right hon. Friend accept that her determination to reform the rating system will have massive support throughout the country, particularly if this leads to an ending of the inequality whereby many on low incomes have to pay and many on high incomes do not pay at all?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, the rating system is an inequitable system. It will take a great step to reform it, and it will be very complicated, but we hope to bring forward proposals to do just that.
§ Mr. SteelHas the Prime Minister read reports this morning that the Westinghouse corporation in America is claiming to have the contract for the Sizewell reactor in the bag? Does she agree that that rather prejudices the report of the inspector, and will she give the House an assurance that the Government are not prejudging the issue in any way?
§ The Prime MinisterWe had this question some months ago when the Central Electricity Generating Board informed the Sizewell inquiry, last year, that it had placed the contract for the primary circuit for Sizewell B with Westinghouse. This contract involves a firm commitment for the design phase only. If the right hon. Gentleman recalls my reply then, I said that it was necessary to do that to keep open the possibility of developing Sizewell, should planning permission be given. In fact, the CEGB estimates that 93 per cent. of the total cost of Sizewell B will be placed in the United Kingdom, should planning permission be given.
§ Q2. Mr. Skinnerasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. SkinnerIs the Prime Minister aware that in the east midlands since she came to power there have been 2,080 bankruptcies? Why is it, if she is prepared not to lift a finger for them, that she, together with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Bank of England, can bail out Johnston Matthey Bankers to the tune of £75 million of taxpayers' money? Is there one law for the bankers and another for the rest? Will she give a guarantee that the report of the inquiry into this squalid deal will be published, or will there be a cover-up for the bankers and an amnesty?
§ The Prime MinisterI hope that Johnston Matthey will eventually be returned to the private sector. In the meantime, I remind the hon. Gentleman that he supported a strike designed to put many people out of work and many firms into bankruptcy.
§ Sir David PriceIn considering the future of the rating system, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the wise words of the Layfield committee, that whoever is responsible for spending money should also be responsible for raising it so that the amount of expenditure is subject to democratic control?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Mr. Speaker. The fact is that the rating system is not a true democratic system, as most of the electorate do not pay rates and therefore there is not proper accountability.
§ Q3. Mr. Flanneryasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. FlanneryWhen will the Prime Minister stop answering like a latter-day Marie Antoinette? [Interruption.] When will she realise that the game is up—[Interruption.]—and that her reliance on blind market 1058 forces has resulted in an overturn of the opinion polls, the details of which, I trust, she has seen today? Is it not a fact that the jingoism of the Falklands has worn off and that the realities of economic life have now brought into play some powerful figures, who are opposing her, on the Benches behind her? Is she aware that the postmen are lined up against her—[Interruption.]—as are the teachers—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I trust that the hon. Member will be brief.
§ Mr. FlanneryI have had only one minute so far, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerYes, but the hon. Member has such long pauses.
§ Mr. FlanneryIs the right hon. Lady aware that a vote for the Conservative party is clearly a vote for industrial action, because the policies that the Government are pursuing are driving people to extremes, so that inevitably the fight back will come?
§ The Prime MinisterThe hon. Gentleman talks of industrial action. He will recall that those who were recently called on to take industrial action did not have the chance to cast a vote in a ballot under Socialism. As for his remarks about opinion polls, I remind him that we are about 8 per cent. better than we were in 1981. If that continues until 1988, the game will be up for the hon. Gentleman not for me.
§ Mr. CockeramDoes my right hon. Friend share the view that was expressed by the Governor of the Bank of England to a Committee of this House last night that lower interest rates are not a high priority? Or does she share the view of the CBI, of many on the Tory Back Benches, and others, that lower interest rates have a key role to play in investment decisions?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. The Governor of the Bank of England, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and all Members of Her Majesty's Government agree that interest rates have a key role to play.
§ The Prime MinisterI specified the Governor of the Bank of England separately. [Interruption.] I am sorry that that remark should cause such hilarity on the rather silly Opposition Benches. My hon. Friend the Member for Ludlow (Mr. Cockeram) will be aware that no chances must be taken with inflation. Interest rates will be held at whatever level is needed to maintain monetary conditions that will continue to bring inflation down.
§ Q4. Mr. Bidwellasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. BidwellIs the right hon. Lady aware that a big lobby is taking place today about the Transport Bill and the effect that it may have on bus workers and bus services in general? Is she aware of the deep apprehension that exists among the members of my union, the Transport and General Workers Union, about their pensions, wages and conditions of service as a result of this crazy Bill? Will she please go into Central Lobby and try to allay their fears?
§ The Prime MinisterThe Transport Bill is an excellent measure. [Interruption.] In the past, subsidies have gone 1059 up enormously while the number of passengers and services have gone down. We hope that services will go up, as they have in the pilot scheme that we have run in several areas.
§ Q5. Mr. Nicholas Wintertonasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. WintertonBearing in mind the tremendous impetus that my right hon. Friend has given to industry and employment through the Budget and the encouragement that she has given to industry and domestic ratepayers with the announced intention of the reform of the rating system, may I ask her to give a categorical assurance that the manufacturing base of this country is vital to the Government and that she will do everything in her power to ensure that its present position is not just maintained, but is expanded?
§ The Prime MinisterThe manufacturing base is vital to this country. My hon. Friend will have seen the CBI survey, which has just been released. The CBI expects growth to rise to 4 per cent. in 1985. It expects manufacturing output to rise a further 3.75 per cent. this year; it expects manufacturing investment to grow by a further 13.5 per cent. in 1985; and it expects further 1060 growth in the very high volume of exports that we had in 1984. That was good news and has silenced even the Opposition.
§ Q6. Mr. Ray Powellasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Tuesday 2 April.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave a few moments ago.
§ Mr. PowellThe Prime Minister made many references in the House in October to her support for the NACODS agreement that was then drawn up. Will she now ensure that the NACODS agreement is carried out by the person whom she appointed to the chairmanship of the National Coal Board? At least then it will have the agreement that was negotiated in October last year.
§ The Prime MinisterMy right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy yesterday made it perfectly clear that the National Coal Board stands by the NA CODS agreement and looks forward to further discussions on it.
§ Mr. PavittOn a point of order arising out of Question Time, Mr. Speaker. Is it possible for the Prime Minister to put the record straight and to say that the 1974 commitment was to phase out prescription charges, and in fact 3 million—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman is now seeking to do what the whole House is against — to prolong Question Time by raising points of order.