§ Q1. Mr. Franksasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 16 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 the House I shall be having further meetings later today, before departing for Washington this evening.
§ Mr. FranksMay I draw the Prime Minister's attention to the latest unemployment figures released today. which show that for the 12th consecutive month the number of people unemployed is dropping? Is it not the case that in relation to the north-west, which shows the second largest drop, in a free and open economy at last the north is showing what it is capable of doing?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, I join my hon. Friend in welcoming that latest reduction in unemployment. which is the 12th successive reduction. The north-west is one of the areas that are reducing the level of unemployment fastest. The north-west is also doing very well under this Government's policies of faster growth, privatisation arid Trident, which is being built in my hon. Friend's constituency. It is also benefiting from an excellent new hospital in Furness. The north-west is doing very well.
§ Mr. KinnockThe Prime Minister said that she would not support any proposals to impose VAT on food, gas or electricity. Why can she not bring herself to give exactly the same precise undertaking on children's clothing and children's shoes?
§ The Prime MinisterI made it very clear during the election precisely what undertakings I would give. I also made it very clear that although there were certain people in the House, particularly right hon. and hon. Members on the Opposition Benches who wish to constrain the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it is not part of my duty to constrain him in his annual Budget. That takes place only once a year, unlike what happened under the previous Labour Government, when Budgets took place frequently.
§ Mr. KinnockI am sorry, but on the subject of children's clothing and shoes the Prime Minister was anything but clear during the general election. Why does 1275 she not say now, in exactly the precise terms that she has used when referring to other items, that she would not have such a proposal coming before the House? Or would she, like the Paymaster General, suggest that such proposals would be vetoed? That is precisely what the Paymaster General said this morning.
§ The Prime MinisterI have already answered the right hon. Gentleman. He will go on raising scares and we will be able to point out how, on a day when the unemployment figures were down, he tried to raise another scare. [Interruption.] Of course he did.
With regard to the veto, I think the right hon. Gentleman is referring to proposals that have come forward through the European Commission. They are not out in detail, but, as he knows, partly due to our very vigorous fight on the Single European Act, any tax changes can be made only by a unanimous vote. Not only would this Government vote against Lord Cockfield's proposal, but a number of our European partners would do so as well.
§ Mr. KinnockThe problem is the move to impose VAT on what are currently zero rated items of considerable importance to the family budget. Does the right hon. Lady agree with the words of the Paymaster General that the Government would
in fact veto VAT on food, fuel, children's clothing and shoesYes or no?
§ The Prime MinisterMy hon. Friend the Paymaster General specifically confirmed what I said during the general election campaign, and that was his precise purpose. I am well aware of the words that he used. I am amazed that the right hon. Gentleman does not welcome the fall in unemployment.
§ Sir Ian LloydMy right hon. Friend's chief scientific advisers will doubtless have drawn her attention to the immense significance of the facts reported recently by our embassy in Tokyo, that the Japanese are marketing a I megabit semiconductor, are about to market a 4 megabit semi conductor, are designing a 16 megabit semiconductor and are reaching out to 64. As the issue has now moved into the public domain with the publication in the United States of the defence science task force report on semiconductor dependency, will my right hon. Friend seek to place this issue on the agenda for her discussions with the President of the United States so that the joint response in the West—the Alvey programme and American efforts—can be co-ordinated?
§ The Prime MinisterI must confess to my hon. Friend that I do not think that that issue will be at the top of my agenda for this visit to the United States, which will be a short one. Other matters will be at the top. My hon. Friend is well aware of the substantial research and development budget that is paid for by the taxpayer, and I know that he is anxious to encourage more research and development expenditure from the private sector.
§ Q2. Mr. Cohenasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 16 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. CohenWill the Prime Minister reconsider the introduction of a poll tax? Is she aware that in my consituency two adults will pay £1 a week more if it is 1276 introduced, that three adults will pay £8 a week more, that four adults will pay £15 a week more and that a single pensioner on supplementary benefit will have to find £1.50 a week more from his pension? For these people and millions of others is it not so much a poll tax as a pole axe?
§ The Prime MinisterThe majority of widows, single people and single parents will pay a good deal less under a community charge. There will be an 80 per cent. rebate and an addition to supplementary benefit to help people pay. Those who will suffer most are those who are suffering most now under the rating system in areas where there are high-spending Labour councils, or those who are living in the London area.