§ Q1. Mr. Bruinvelsasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday, 24 October.
§ The Lord Privy Seal and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. John Biffen)I have been asked to reply.
My right hon. Friend is in New York to address the 40th anniversary meeting of the United Nations General Assembly, and to have meetings with President Reagan and others.
§ Mr. BruinvelsIs my right hon. Friend aware that in 1984 20,000 young children went missing in this country, 420 including 1,047 from Leicestershire—[HON. MEMBERS: "Including the hon. Member."] — While some hon. Members on the Opposition Benches may find a statistic like that rather amusing, as a member of the Conservative party, the family party, I find this particularly disturbing. Does my right hon. Friend agree with me that a central register should be established in conjunction with the Home Office so that parents who are frightened and worred that their children may not be found can have help in locating them? Would he also reconsider Sunday trading because so many children will be left at home on Sunday and may be tempted to disappear when there is no one at home to look after them?
§ Mr. BiffenMy hon. Friend highlights a serious social phenomenon. I am certain that he is right, that this is a matter that gives rise to growing concern. As I understand it, the police national computer facilities are available for the compilation of records, but I understand that my hon. Friend would wish the scope to be much wider than at present. My hon. Friend the Minister of State, Home Office would be happy to see him to discuss the matter further.
§ Mr. MartinIs the Leader of the House aware that the BREL workshops in Springburn are in serious difficulties? The local authority has asked to be allowed to do a feasibility study, which is common practice among many local authorities when redundancies are declared, but the BREL management has refused to allow representatives of the local authority on to the premises. Will the Leader of the House ask his colleague the Secretary of State for Transport to look into this very serious matter and try to do something to help alleviate the serious situation in Springburn?
§ Mr. BiffenThe hon. Gentleman raises a relatively narrow point, but undoubtedly one of great substance in Springburn. I shall comply with his request that I inform my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport of this development to see what can be done.
§ Mr. WrigglesworthHas the Leader of the House had an opportunity to read the report of Association of British Chambers of Commerce today, which shows a disastrous decline in the business confidence of manufacturing industry and in its orders? Does he agree that high interest rates, a high exchange rate and high pay settlements are completely undermining the competitiveness of British industry? Will this not lead to even higher unemployment, more bankruptcies and lower growth? What will the Government do about it?
§ Mr. BiffenI should take that liturgy of gloom more seriously if we were not now in our sixth trade surplus year. After real problems for manufacturing industry as it came to terms with the reality denied it over many years, manufacturing exports are rising at a rate of about 7 per cent. per annum.
§ Q2. Mr. Colvinasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 24 October.
§ Mr. BiffenI have been asked to reply.
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. ColvinWill my right hon. Friend find time today to scan the newspapers for reports on the statesmanlike speech made last night by Chief Buthelezi, the leader of 421 Inkartha, the biggest black political movement in South Africa? If he does he will be disappointed, because not a word appears about his remarks, which are both statesmanlike and constructive, and which totally reject mandatory economic sanctions against that country as a way of achieving political change.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that Chief Buthelezi more accurately represents the true voice of black power in South Africa than does the African National Congress? Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the Government's policy is not to talk with terrorist organisations, or any organisation, until they have rejected terrorism as a way of achieving political change?
§ Mr. BiffenChief Buthelezi does speak for a substantial section of opinion in South Africa. I am certain that his advocacy of a policy that avoids sanctions will strike a chord with many hon. Members on both sides of the Chamber. Not least, it will reinforce the remarks of the right hon. Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Dr. Owen) who said:
Total or even selective trade sanctions will not succeed. The history of sanction-breaking in Africa tells us that.That and much else was put into context yesterday in our debate on the subject. I am certain that my hon. Friend is right to emphasise the importance of Chief Buthelezi's role.
§ Mr. HattersleyDoes the Leader of the House recall that it is exactly one year since the extent of famine in Ethiopia was revealed to the British people by the BBC? That famine is now endemic to all sub-Saharan Africa. How does the right hon. Gentleman justify the Government reducing overseas aid in the same period?
§ Mr. BiffenThe right hon. Gentleman will know that the Government's aid programme has risen faster than prices over the last three years. I admit that that is in the context of an aid budget which is not that much more than £1,000 million, but it is roughly in line with the OECD percentage of gross domestic product. Before easy promises are struck in Central Hall or anywhere else about doubling the aid programme in the lifetime of a Parliament, I am sure that those who have as their bedside reading the book by Lord Barnett will recollect that the aid budget was cut in two successive years under a Labour Government.
§ Mr. HattersleySince the right hon. Gentleman chooses to make such comparisons, does he remember that between 1974 and 1979 the aid budget was increased by 15 per cent.? What is the increase likely to be — or, more accurately, what will the decrease be—between when the Conservative party came to office and when it loses office in 1987? The right hon. Gentleman chooses to preach to us about priorities. Does he understand that we all accept that Government spending programmes must involve priorities? It is Government priorities that we reject and resent. Why is it right to cut the tax on unearned income instead of increasing overseas aid?
§ Mr. BiffenThe right hon. Gentleman is wholly wrong in saying that I adopt the stance of preaching on this or any other subject. The moral megaphone used by some politicians is wholly deafening and distasteful. We try to budget as we believe to be appropriate to our total public spending responsibilities. As the IMF episode under the last Labour Government demonstrated, whatever one's early intentions, one has in the end to deal with reality.
§ Q4. Mr. Nellistasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 24 October.
§ Mr. BiffenI have been asked to reply.
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. NellistIs the Leader of the House aware that GEC has recently declared 900 redundancies, 600 in the city of Coventry and 300 in Fife? Does he agree that as the company last year made £725 million profit, increased dividends to its shareholders by £12 million to £107 million, and now has a cash mountain of £1,400 million liquid assets it is disgraceful that workers in Coventry and Scotland, who made those profits and that cash mountain, should now be condemned to long-term unemployment?
§ Mr. BiffenOf course, I regret any factors that give rise to unemployment. As I once sought parliamentary representation in Coventry, admittedly without success—I am now happy to stick with Shropshire, which has proved much more congenial—I know that GEC as a company has brought great advantages and prosperity to Coventry over the decades. I suspect that many people would join me in feeling that if many other companies were as effective as GEC British industry generally would be far more competitive.
§ Rev. Ian PaisleyWill the right hon. Gentleman take time today to speak to his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland about the statements made recently in a speech in the United States by the Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary? Is he aware that the Chief Constable said that there was not the necessary co-operation from the Garda in the Republic in the fight against the IRA? Will the right hon. Gentleman explain why his right hon. Friend is not prepared to allow the people of Northern Ireland, who are being bombed and murdered by the IRA, to have the full context of that speech, so that they can decide where the truth lies?
§ Mr. BiffenI am not sure that the full context of the speech exists. I do not wish to tangle with the hon. Gentleman on that, but I join him in saying that Sir John Hermon is a most distinguished public servant and that he deserves the support that he has indeed received from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
§ Mr. MichieWhen the Leader of the House next sees the Prime Minister, will he ask how she can support a Government who have destroyed our industrial base throughout the country, especially in my area of Sheffield, and presided over 4 million unemployed, yet can suddenly find a conscience about the unemployed and use that as an excuse not to impose further sanctions on South Africa?
§ Mr. BiffenI shall, of course, refer the question to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, as that was the request, but I should not like it to be thought that I was unable to make any comment of my own upon it. The hon. Gentleman seems to overlook the fact that our gross domestic product is rising by more than 2½ per cent. per annum, manufacturing investment is rising at 14½ per cent., there are clear signs of a growth in the employment base and fixed investment is at an all-time high. I know that Labour Members have a vested interest in gloom, but all those factors will come to fruition and make the next election extremely profitable.
§ Q5. Mr. Marlowasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 24 October.
§ Mr. BiffenI have been asked to reply.
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. MarlowIf my right hon. Friend were to become leader of a party that sought to win the next general election, and if he had potentially among his more influential colleagues someone with the totally unpleasant characteristics of Mr. Bernard Grant, when asked in the House what he intended to do about Mr. Grant or somebody like him, would he demean himself by ducking the issue, as was done yesterday?
§ Mr. BiffenMy hon. Friend asks a very interesting question of a somewhat hypothetical nature. The whole hypothesis contained in the expectation that I should be leader of the Conservative party is as improbable as it is entertaining. We are then asked to expect that a Conservative association would have the political misperception to choose a mirror image of Mr. Bernie Grant, which is also wholly improbable. All the tic-tac signs on the Opposition Benches demonstrate acute nervousness. In the House we have come to know and respect the hon. Member for Tottenham (Mr. Atkinson), distinguished in his service to the House, to the trade union movement and to the Labour party generally. It is his radicalism and his commitment to the Left which is now being turned aside for a very dubious replacement.
§ Mr. John FraserIs it true that the Prime Minister would uphold the suppression of a Government report on defects in council housing on the ground that it would unnecessarily worry millions of tenants to know that £20 billion must be spent on defects in estates such as the Broadwater Farm estate but there is not the slightest hope of the Treasury allowing local authorities to spend such money?
§ Mr. BiffenThe charming and convinced way in which that question is proposed conceals the fact that the hon. Gentleman does not believe a word of it. He knows perfectly well that the Government have committed themselves to publish the report, and published it will be.
§ Mr. DickensOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerDoes it arise out of questions?
§ Mr. DickensYes, Sir. I should like your guidance. Question No. 1 to the Prime Minister was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Bruinvels) and concerned child protection, which is a serious subject. Because my hon. Friend is short in stature, the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) felt obliged to cast an aside to the effect that my hon. Friend is one of the missing children, which reduced the House to uproar. To put the record straight, may I have your assurance. Mr. Speaker, that the House intends to treat the protection of children seriously? May I thank you for allowing me to raise this issue on a bogus point of order?
§ Mr. SpeakerI have heard the hon. Gentleman speak on this important matter before. I am afraid that I have no responsibility for this issue, but I have a responsibility to protect the hon. Member for Leicester, East (Mr. Bruinvels). Had I heard the remark in question—I am glad to say that I do not hear everything—he would have received that protection today.
§ Mr. John CarlisleOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. It arises out of the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside (Mr. Colvin) and the presence in Britain of Chief Buthelezi. Right hon. and hon. Members will have been worried to read in this morning's newspapers that Mr. Oliver Tambo——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. This sounds very like a continuation of Question Time.
§ Mr. CarlisleI hope that the relevance of my point of order will become clear to you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Oliver Tambo, the revolutionary leader of the African National Congress, has been invited to give evidence to the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs. Why, as he is also in London, was Chief Buthelezi not asked to give evidence to the Select Committee——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that I am not responsible for who is or is not asked to give evidence to a Select Committee. That is entirely a matter for the Select Committee concerned.