§ Q1. Mr. Cowansasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 24 January.
§ 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. CowansWill the Prime Minister take time today publicly to announce changes in the policies of her Government that will offer a ray of hope to the unemployed in the northern region, in particular in Newcastle and Gateshead in my constituency, where there are pockets of unemployment as high as 40 per cent., with the prospect of more to come as the policies of her Government decimate the shipbuilding and heavy engineering industries? [HON. MEMBERS: "TOO long."] The only thing that is too long is the dole queue. Is the honest answer of the Prime Minister to the questions I have posed that under her Government there is no hope for the unemployed?
§ The Prime MinisterThe answer to the hon. Member's problem and to similar problems relating to unemployment is to win orders. The answer to winning orders is to keep inflation low and to have good designs and competitive products that will sell both at home and on world markets.
§ Mr. Charles WardleDoes my right hon. Friend agree that, just as unemployment and the need to create more wealth-producing jobs is rightly recognised as an urgent priority, it is also worth reflecting upon the sombre thought that the world does not owe a living to the more than 23.5 million people in this country who are in work? Does my right hon. Friend agree that unless a sense of realism prevails in the 1985 wage round so that pay increases are, at the very least, matched by an improvement in productivity, more of those who are in work will be at risk? [Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I think that I can help the House. Will the hon. Member please make his question brief?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, I agree with my hon. Friend. What is important is that unit wage costs should be as low as those of our competitors. We have done better recently, but so have our competitors. It is vital that our unit wage costs should match theirs and that, therefore, we should keep wages down and productivity up.
§ Mr. KinnockHas the Prime Minister seen today's statement by the national executive committee of the National Union of Mine workers, which makes it clear that the union wants negotiations to take place without preconditions and wants them to begin early next week? As somebody who told me last Tuesday that she really wants an end to this dispute, will the Prime Minister tell the House whether she welcomes this constructive approach by the union?
§ The Prime MinisterAs I told the right hon. Gentleman, I am anxious for there to be a clear settlement. As we have already been through seven rounds of negotiations, it is very important that we — [HON. MEMBERS: "We?"] The country has already seen seven rounds of negotiations—[HON. MEMBERS: "Ah."] How very childish.
As there have already been some seven rounds of negotiations, it is important that the next round of negotiations is entered into on a clear basis so that there can be no fudging whatever. The NCB made its position clear this morning when it issued a statement which said:
If, following the meeting of the NUM National Executive Committee, the National Coal Board receives written indication that they are prepared to help resolve the problem of dealing with uneconomic capacity, the National Coal Board will be prepared to re-enter negotiations with a view to resolving the current dispute. The proposals must establish that the NUM recognise that management must deal with the problems of uneconomic capacity and that the NUM will co-operate in this essential task, recognising the other commitments that the Board are prepared to make on the future of their employees and the industry.The NCB has made its position clear in writing That is the best basis on which to enter into negotiations—to make the position clear in writing.
§ Mr. KinnockWill the Prime Minister tell us exactly who has demanded the new precondition of a written undertaking from the NUM, especially when, late last night, neither Mr. Ned Smith nor the union nor ACAS was aware that any such stipulation was to be made? Can the Prime Minister tell us whether it is the Government who 1127 have made that demand? Frankly, her dirty fingerprints are all over that kind of request. Does the Prime Minister really want to encourage negotiation, or is she still obsessed with securing humiliation, no matter what the cost or how long it takes?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that the right hon. Gentleman forgets the statement that was made on Tuesday, part of which I read out to him on Tuesday, which said:
In seven rounds of negotiations lasting 175 hours"—
§ Mr. HealeyAnswer the question.
§ The Prime MinisterI intend to answer the question in my own way.
In seven rounds of negotiations lasting 175 hours the NUM have refused to move from their demand that every uneconomic pit should be kept going until the last tonne is exhausted. The Coal Board cannot meet this impossible demand that would undermine the Coal industry's future and provide no security for miners or for the children of miners in the years to come … The Board want to achieve a settlement of this dispute but we do not want another round of talks in which the NUM yet again persist with their one impossible demand leading yet again to failure.Now perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will listen. Why is the right hon. Gentleman so reluctant for the NUM to make its position clear?
§ Mr. KinnockThe NUM has made its position clear — much too clear for the convenience of the Prime Minister — because it was the NUM which said that there would be no preconditions. With answers or evasions such as the Prime Minister offers, it is no wonder that the Earl of Stockton calls her policies futile.
§ The Prime MinisterNo, Mr. Speaker. The NUM has not made its position clear. Indeed, the right hon. Gentleman is already arguing about it. The NUM — [Interruption.]—should do what the Coal Board has done. It should put its exact position in writing. Why is the right hon. Gentleman so reluctant — [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I must say to the House that it was precisely for this reason that I made my comment at the beginning of Question Time. The Prime Minister is trying to answer the question.
§ The Prime MinisterWhy is the right hon. Gentleman so reluctant to put his and the NUM's position on the closure of uneconomic pits into writing, when the previous Labour Government not only put it into writing but into legislation, when they provided for grants that would
further assist in the re-deployment of the manpower resources of the Board and the elimination of uneconomic … capacity.Why cannot the right hon. Gentleman be so frank? Is he incapable of it?
§ Mr. BatisteDoes my right hon. Friend accept that those miners who have already returned to work, often in the face of the most serious intimidation, are fighting for the future of the British mining industry? Will she take this opportunity to affirm her Government's determination to protect them from intimidation, in the shape of both present attempts and any future attempts by the National Union of Mineworkers' leadership when the strike is over?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, every possible step will be taken. My hon. Friend is right to remind us that the strike got under way without a ballot, and was pursued with 1128 violence and intimidation. It is because of the bravery of the 77,000 members of the NUM who are back at work that the industry has a chance to flourish in future.
§ Dr. OwenIs the Prime Minister aware that the country will test the acceptability of any negotiation by whether it is acceptable to those who have worked during the -dispute? Does she agree that they have been deserted by the Trades Union Congress and the Labour party, and that the country does not expect the Government to desert them?
§ The Prime MinisterI recognise, and agree with the right hon. Gentleman, that the country owes a great deal to the 77,000 working miners and that they must not be let down. I also recognise that any result must make it absolutely clear that uneconomic pits must close and that the final decision must rest with the management of the NCB after the proper processes of consultation have been gone through. It is totally cynical to try to enter into negotiations without the NUM making its position clear on those matters.
§ Mr. John BrowneDoes my right hon. Friend accept that the depressed level of sterling now represents an outstanding opportunity for British exporters to increase their share of overseas markets? Will she urge them to take advantage of that by pricing competitively at the new levels, rather than leaving their overseas prices at historic levels in the hope of a short-term foreign exchange windfall gain?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, those companies that are in the best position to take advantage of the present price of sterling are already competitive. It is totally and utterly wrong to rely on the lower value of sterling to make goods competitive. By virtue of management, goods should be competitive. A double benefit can be gained by taking advantage of what, I hope, is a temporary lower value of sterling, which is far too low at present.
§ Q2. Mr. Gareth Wardellasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 24 January.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. WardellIn view of the sincere, objective and earnest proposals put forward yesterday by Welsh church leaders in an attempt to bring the miners' dispute to an end, will the Prime Minister give a categorical assurance to the House this afternoon that she will desist from using hardship as a weapon of vindictiveness to get her political way?
§ The Prime MinisterIf there has been any vindictiveness during the strike, it has been on the part of the leadership of the NUM which has deliberately put its members through privations when, since 6 March, they have had on the table the best offer since nationalisation began. The leadership of the NUM has been vindictive and has nearly split its own union.
§ Mr. HowardHas my right hon. Friend had an opportunity to consider the implications of the suggestion made in last week's debate on unemployment by the leader of the Social Democratic party that VAT should be extended to everything but food? Will she do what she can 1129 to urge the Chancellor of the Exchequer to resist the insatiable demands of the right hon. Gentleman for a massive extension of that tax?
§ The Prime MinisterI am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend for that information. I seem to have missed that speech, but I now see that I must read it carefully.
§ Q3. Mr. David Marshallasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 24 January.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. MarshallHow can the Prime Minister justify her decision not to give thousands of pensioners and poor people in Scotland the same treatment as those in the rest of Britain with regard to the allocation of exceptional heating allowances? How much more must they suffer before she shows them any mercy? Is her "hard-hearted Hannah" attitude to the people of Scotland to continue 1130 because they have twice decisively rejected her at the polls? Will she tell the House now that she will give them that allowance?
§ The Prime MinisterAll pensioners are treated very much more generously now under the Conservative Government than they ever were under a Labour Government, and people know it. The £400 million that the taxpayer finds for heating allowances is about 40 per cent. more than was provided by the Labour Government, so Labour Members are in no position to criticise anyone.
§ Mr. FairbairnWill the Prime Minister note, as we move towards the celebration of freedom and peace on VE day, that the latest act of the Government of East Germany is to demolish a Christian church so that the prisoners of their tyranny can be more easily executed if they try to escape?
§ The Prime MinisterAs my hon. and learned Friend is aware, we have said that we wish to give thanks to our dead on VE day, and we wish to commemorate 40 years of peace, which we hope will continue. That is the right spirit with which to enter the activities of VE day.