§ Q4. Mr. Andrew F. Bennettasked 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. BennettWill the Prime Minister confirm that some families on supplementary benefit will be worse off as a result of the introduction of the poll tax, which replaces rates and water charges?
§ The Prime MinisterBecause the amount that will be added to supplementary benefit or family income support is an average amount, some will be worse off and some will he considerably better off. That is inevitable in an average—some worse, some better.
§ Sir John FarrWill my right hon. Friend accept the congratulations of the House on the splendid unemployment figures announced today—[Interruption.]—which have already been referred to? However, will she also consult her colleagues as to the ways in which job creation can be improved in our manufacturing industries? New jobs are very important, but we also want to make a big impact in creating more new jobs in manufacturing industry.
§ The Prime MinisterI am grateful for my hon. Friend's remarks. Most of the new jobs are coming from economic growth, thanks to the policies of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. They are proving extremely good. Manufacturing industry is highly competitive. Its productivity is going up and investment is good. We get more jobs in manufacturing and in small businesses only by turning out goods at prices and with designs that people will buy, and by having highly competitive and efficient industries. Our policies are producing that.
§ Rev. Martin SmythHas the Prime Minister had time to consider the reply given by the Leader of the House to my hon. Friend the Member for Upper Bann (Mr. McCusker) last Thursday? If so, could she make a statement and, particularly, could she confirm that there is forensic evidence to suggest that the same weapon has been used, allegedly, in Loyalist and Republican paramilitary terrorism?
§ The Prime MinisterI do not think that it is for me to say anything about that kind of evidence. It is not within my responsibility.
§ Mr. HigginsDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the VAT structure, introduced when we abolished purchase tax and selective employment tax with a single positive rate and zero rating for essential items is better than anything else in Europe, and that if we are to harmonise at all it should he on our basis? As I steered the original legislation through the House, with some advice at official level from a Mr. Cockfield, does my right hon. Friend agree with me that the abolition of zero rating would not be acceptable to the House?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have made that clear. We must be able to determine our own structure of VAT. A number of other countries also take the view that they must be free 1278 to determine their own structure, and they are just as much against the proposal as we are. The possibility of this going through is negligible.
§ Q5. Mr. Redmondasked 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. RedmanWill the Prime Minister explain why families who look after elderly parents, thus saving the state money, in line with the Victorian values that the Prime Minister supports, should be penalised by the poll tax?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the hon. Member is aware, the poorest will be protected—[Interruption.] Oh, yes. The poorest will be protected by an 80 per cent. rebate and by an addition to supplementary benefit to enable them to pay the remaining 20 per cent. We believe that rates are levied on far too narrow a base. They are a grossly unfair tax. We believe that the services that are provided by local authorities are provided on a personal basis and that all people, save the poorest, should make a contribution to them. Most people accept that.
§ Q6. Mr. Stanbrookasked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 16 July.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. StanbrookAlthough we should retain local control over the rates of VAT and, indeed, on whether something should be VAT rated at all, does my right hon. Friend agree that the ultimate objective of the EEC Commission—the free internal market—is highly desirable and was probably the big prize that we expected to gain when we joined the Common Market?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, the completion of the internal market is extremely important. There is a great deal to do in standardising and getting safety regulations across the Common Market with things such as television, electrical goods and services, which would genuinely enable us to get a full and complete internal market. We have never accepted the view that we need approximation of taxation to complete the internal market and we do not accept it now.
§ Mr. SteelDoes the Prime Minister recall the statement in the Government White Paper on the privatisation of British Airways, where the Government's objective was said to be the creation of a multi-choice system of airlines? Does that not sound a bit hollow in the light of today's takeover?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, there is a private notice question on the matter later, which will be answered by my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.