§ Q1. Mr. O'Brienasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 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 this House I shall be having further meetings later today.
§ Mr. O'BrienIs the Prime Minister aware of the hardship and suffering that her Government are causing all people, but patients especially, because of the restricted drug list in the National Health Service? Is she aware also that old people now have to pay between £7 and £10 a week to obtain the drugs that they require, for which there are no alternatives? Will she shake up the Department of Health and Social Security, which admitted in a letter dated 17 June that it had not the resources to reply to the letters of complaint that it was receiving, to make sure that hon. Members can obtain information about what is likely to happen in the future? Will she take steps to make sure that the Department is overhauled and that the restructured list is extended?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not accept what the hon. Gentleman said about the prescribed drug list. Every penny that is saved by prescribing generic drugs instead of specific named drugs goes back into patient care and therefore enables more medical services to be supplied. I should have expected the hon. Gentleman to be grateful for that. I shall look into his complaint about the Department's failure to reply to letters.
§ Mr. Neil ThorneWill my right hon. Friend find time today to condemn all racial harassment? Will she condemn especially those who jump to conclusions about these issues in advance of police investigations, especially in the Kassam case in my constituency?
§ The Prime MinisterI gladly join my hon. Friend in condemning unreservedly all racial harassment. It should not occur in a country such as ours. If it does, it must be dealt with. I agree with my hon. Friend that the specific case to which he refers is a matter for investigation and that it is not for us to jump to conclusions.
§ Mr. HattersleySince the Department of Health and Social Security now concedes that it possesses figures for both gainers and losers under the Government's new social security plans, why did the Prime Minister pretend that no such figures existed?
§ The Prime MinisterI have made it perfectly clear in the House that illustrative figures will be published at the right time when decisions have been taken on the White Paper and that no effective figures could be published until then.
§ Mr. HattersleyIf the figures had only this minimal importance, why was the paper which included them withdrawn from civil servants for destruction, on instructions from the Department, immediately after the Prime Minister made her dubious statement to the House a month ago?
§ The Prime MinisterI have made it very clear that the time to publish a range of figures is when decisions have been taken on the structure at the time of the publication of the White Paper. Other figures would be purely speculative. I note that the right hon. Gentleman has nothing more significant to ask.
§ Mr. HattersleyThe Prime Minister must know that she is wholly unconvincing when she tells us that the Department of Health and Social Security called in a paper and had it shredded for figures that were wholly speculative. Is it not more likely to be the case that she wanted to suppress the figures because they demonstrate that under her proposals 1.8 million families will lose housing benefit altogether, and 600,000 families will be denied supplementary benefit?
§ The Prime MinisterThe right hon. Gentleman will recall that, when the Leader of the Opposition was asked about his figures, he said:
I am not going to put figures on two or three years hence.If we wished to conceal figures, we would hardly have undertaken to give an illustrative range of figures in the White Paper this autumn. We could hardly have wanted to be concealed that which we intend to reveal when the time is appropriate.
§ Q2. Mr. Michael Brownasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. Michael BrownWith over 40 per cent. of tax revenues coming from those on below average income, does my right hon. Friend agree that, if we are to help the low paid, tax cuts must be the priority in her deliberations with her Cabinet colleagues?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, I accept that tax cuts are a priority. As my hon. Friend is aware, we have done a great deal to increase the tax-free allowances. We have put up the tax-free allowances in our time by 20 per cent. in real terms. There is more to be done because, as my hon. Friend is aware, some 40 per cent. of pensioners come into the range of income tax and, as he has already said, many people below average earnings pay far too much income tax.
§ Mr. SteelWill the Prime Minister deny the reports that were circulating last week that, instead of attending the world conference of Finance Ministers with the IMF 474 and the World Bank in October, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be attending the Conservative party conference at Blackpool? Does she agree that it is time for British leadership on issues such as interest rates, currency stability, the fight against recession, Third world development, and debt, and will she tell her right hon. Friend that he really ought to go to the world conference?
§ The Prime MinisterI am surprised that the right hon. Gentleman thinks it surprising that the Chancellor should think it important to be at a party conference. I wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman would not put off certain engagements to be at his own party conference.
§ Mr. ParrisWith so many more newsworthy issues facing my right hon. Friend, will she not forget the problems that face agriculture as we go into the summer still with no agreement on cereals, and with a regime on dairy products which faces with ruin many small dairy farmers in hill and marginal land?
§ The Prime MinisterI am indeed aware that many small farmers have been placed in difficulty. As my hon. Friend is aware, we had to take action on the common agricultural policy, but it does not make sense to pour more and more money into surpluses. Therefore, we are taking action steadily to bring down the surpluses. I think that that is correct.
§ Q3. Mr. Wareingasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. WareingWould the right hon. Lady care to define to the House and to the 11,000 people who had their homes repossessed last year because they could not pay their mortgages, 40 per cent. of whom went into arrears because of unemployment, the term "property-owning democracy"?
§ The Prime MinisterA record number—over 60 per cent.—of all people in houses own their own homes. That is excellent, and is in no way counteracted by the fact that a very small percentage have had their homes repossessed. The number of people having difficulties in meeting their mortgage payments is still well under 1 per cent. of the total.
§ Q4. Mr. Michael Forsythasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. ForsythIn view of my right hon. Friend's reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Cleethorpes (Mr. Brown) recognising the vital importance of tax cuts in generating economic growth and job creation, will she consider introducing an accelerated programme of disposal of state assets in order to support significant cuts in tax rates over a number of years? Will she recognise that that would have the added benefit of restoring much more of the economy to the disciplines of the competitive private sector?
§ The Prime MinisterYes. It is important to go ahead with the privatisation programme for its own sake. It improves the performance of former nationalised industries, it enables many people working in those 475 industries to come into share ownership for the first time and it enables managers to manage on a commercial basis. All those are good things in themselves and they help to reduce taxation.
§ Mr. TorneyWill the Prime Minister give further consideration during her busy day to her decision to abolish wages councils for workers aged under 21? I represent the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers, which has a mass of members who come under the wages councils. Will the Prime Minister realise, as those people do, that her Government, having created mass unemployment, are using it to cut the standard of living of thousands of young workers throughout the country, including members of my union who know that their conditions will be worsened by the Government's action? Will the Prime Minister reconsider her decision and not abolish the wages councils?
§ The Prime MinisterNo. The decision announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment yesterday will, I believe, improve the employment prospects of young people and will be a further step towards relieving the burden of regulations on small businesses. I remind the hon. Gentleman that 16 wages councils have been abolished since 1969, and 14 were abolished by Labour Governments.
§ Q6. Mr. Jim Spicerasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. SpicerMy right hon. Friend will be aware that the major problems in famine areas are the provision of transport and lack of infrastructure. Will she take advantage of next week's meeting in Washington of party leaders of the International Democrat Union to press for better co-operation in those areas, if necessary, by the secondment of NATO military personnel to the United Nations?
§ The Prime MinisterI am reluctant to try to do that centrally through the United Nations, as I do not think that it would be the best way. There is a United Nations relief co-ordinator in the stricken areas, including Ethiopia. We co-operate through him and he asks for bilateral military aid where it is required. As my hon. Friend knows, we have been giving considerable help in Ethiopia through the 476 Hercules and by other means. I think that that bilateral action, through the United Nations local special coordinator, is the best way to continue.
§ Mr. HumeIn the light of the Prime Minister's statement to the American Bar Association earlier this week that no ransom would be paid for kidnapped people in this country, will she tell me why the Government have never taken action against insurance companies in the City of London which conduct a multi-million pound business providing insurance cover against ransoms after kidnaps? Does she agree that the existence of such policies is an encouragement to kidnapping, as is proved by the fact that everybody kidnapped in Britain and Ireland by terrorists over the past number of years held such policies?
§ The Prime MinisterI tend to agree with the hon. Gentleman that the existence of such policies is conducive to kidnapping and can encourage the kidnapper in his terrible work.
§ Q7. Sir Fergus Montgomeryasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 18 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Sir Fergus MontgomeryHas my right hon. Friend noticed that a CBI report forecasts that 370,000 new jobs will be created in 1985? Does she agree that if that is realised 1 million new jobs will have been created since the last election? Is that not something to give hope to the unemployed?
§ The Prime MinisterThe CBI report certainly gives hope. I hope that young people will be encouraged by the fact that 640,000 new jobs have been created in the last two years. As the news from Eurostat shows, more new jobs have been created in Britain in the last year than in the whole of the rest of the European Community.
§ Mr. Willie W. HamiltonNow that the House is about to go into recess, will the Prime Minister give a message of comfort to the nation and the House that she will not undertake any official visits during the recess?
§ The Prime MinisterMany people who have made important invitations would take considerable discomfort from such a reply.