§ Q1. Mr. DayTo ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 26 October 1989.
§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)This morning I presided over 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. DayIs my right hon. Friend aware that the proportion of income tax paid by Britain's high-rate taxpayers is greater than it was in 1979? Does she therefore agree that any proposal to increase that high rate to 50 per cent. or more would have a disastrous effect on the British economy? Does she further agree that that would lead to a reduction in revenue for the Exchequer? In view of that, has she any special message for my constituents in Cheadle, who would be adversely affected by such a proposal?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, my hon. Friend is absolutely correct. The top 5 per cent. of income tax payers now pay 28 per cent. of income tax yield, whereas they paid only 24 per cent. in 1979. Lower taxes have led to a higher yield. That higher yield and the extra wealth created by our policies of tax incentives and enterprise have not only meant a higher standard of living throughout the whole income tax scale but a much higher standard of social services.
§ Mr. KinnockHas it come to the Prime Minister's notice that since she was last at the Dispatch Box in July, Britain's balance of payments has moved a further £5.9 billion in the red, that Britain's home buyers and businesses have been hit again by higher interest rates and that in the meanwhile the number of Chancellors has doubled? In the interests of team spirit, will she get rid of the part-time one?
§ The Prime MinisterInterest rates will stay as high as is necessary for as long as is necessary to get inflation down. With regard to interest rates and mortgage rates, the right hon. Gentleman must be very glad that we do not have a Socialist Government, because in Australia mortgage rates are 18 per cent.
§ Mr. KinnockI understand the Prime Minister's reluctance to answer the question about Sir Alan, or indeed any other Chancellor of the Exchequer. It would be wholly inappropriate for her to dismiss Sir Alan when she so completely concurs with everything he says, and everybody knows it. Is she aware that the confusion that is at the heart of Government policy will remain as long as Sir Alan does?
§ The Prime MinisterAdvisers advise and Ministers decide. Ministers in this Government have a very sound economic policy, which is more than the Opposition have.
§ Mr. KinnockDoes the report that the Prime Minister concurs with the view of her adviser faithfully represent her position?
§ The Prime MinisterHad the right hon. Gentleman listened to previous replies, he could not have asked that 1045 supplementary question. Advisers advise and Ministers decide. Ministers have decided, and we have an excellent economic policy.
§ Sir Anthony GrantWhen the subject of sanctions on South Africa arises, will my right hon. Friend always recall that the Labour Government spent substantial sums of public money to promote trade with South Africa, and in that context treat anything that the Opposition say on that subject as total humbug?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, I recall that. The Labour Government did promote trade with South Africa. Labour also opposed comprehensive sanctions in the United Nations.
§ Mr. AshdownGiven the worries expressed today in the City about the possibility of a recession, will the Prime Minister tell the House whether she agrees with her Chancellor of the Exchequer that Britain's having a £20 billion trade deficit is not a serious problem?
§ The Prime MinisterAs the right hon. Gentleman is aware, I have always supported my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his management and handling of the economy. He does not say that the deficit is not a problem. He says that the measures which he has taken will bring down inflation and the trade deficit.
§ Mr. CashHas my right hon. Friend noticed President Mitterrand's remarks on the question of a new treaty, as opposed to a revision of the treaty of Rome? Does she agree that this is a dangerous path upon which to embark? Does she agree that it would be extremely dangerous and not in the interests of either the European Community or any of the member states to pursue this proposal to a logical conclusion at the summit or in the run-up to the intergovernmental conference?
§ The Prime MinisterWe have yet to absorb the consequences of the Single European Act and all the changes that will be brought about when we come to 1992 with a real common market. There will be a major change in the whole of Europe. It would be premature to have another intergovernmental conference before we properly come to 1992, and even then it will take years to absorb the consequences. It is, however, clear that an intergovernmental conference can be called by a simple majority at a meeting of Heads of Government, but in order for it to make any effective proposals decisions would have to be agreed with unanimity.
§ Q2. Mr. Ronnie CampbellTo ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 26 October.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. CampbellWill the Prime Minister abolish the tax on workplace nurseries?
§ The Prime MinisterNo. Workplace nurseries are treated just as other extra facilities are—as benefits in kind for those earning over a certain salary. It would be quite wrong if those who have nurseries available at work were not to regard that as a benefit in kind while other people who had to make their own arrangements had to pay out of net taxed income.
§ Q3. Mr. WattsTo ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 26 October.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. WattsDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the statement yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security contained unparalleled good news for the disabled and those who care for them, providing an extra £100 million a year over and above normal indexation to more than 500,000 people?
§ The Prime MinisterYes. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security decided that the disabled were most in need of extra help and added to our excellent record on the disabled. We already spend, over and above inflation, 90 per cent. more on people who are disabled than was spent when the Labour party was in power. I notice that a family with a very severely disabled child will get up to £65 a week extra in benefits. That is very good news.
§ Mr. LofthouseWhen the innocent Guildford Four were found guilty does the Prime Minister think that they should have been hanged?
§ The Prime MinisterIf the death penalty had been available, it would have been a matter for the courts and not for us. I believe however, speaking personally, because it is always a matter for the individual vote, that a death penalty should be available to the courts in cases of the most hideous murder. No one should be able to go out and perform the most hideous, bestial, and vicious murders and know that their own life is not forfeit.
§ Q5. Mr. David EvansTo ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 26 October.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. EvansDoes my right hon. Friend agree that, with a few exceptions, the British people pay themselves far too much money? [Interruption.]
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder.
§ Mr. EvansDoes the Prime Minister view with alarm the engineers' threatened strike for a 35-hour working week, which will leave Britain with the shortest working week in the industrial world?
§ The Prime MinisterMy hon. Friend is correct. In the past year earnings seem to have gone ahead of increases in productivity, and that has put up our unit labour costs and will make us uncompetitive with those people in our industrial competitor countries—in Germany, the United States and Japan. It is vital that we stay competitive. I share my hon. Friend's concern about the possibility of a 35-hour week. Some of us do 35 hours in two days and then again in another two days.
§ Q7. Mr. FoulkesTo ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 26 October.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.
§ Mr. FoulkesWill the Prime Minister consider repudiating what the Foreign Secretary said yesterday and will she rule out the use of force when repatriating the Vietnamese boat people?
§ The Prime MinisterNo. Most countries repatriate illegal immigrants, unless they are not really illegal immigrants but refugees, in which case it is totally different. Some 13,000 of the Vietnamese boat people have so far been found to be refugees. Most countries repatriate illegal immigrants involuntarily. We also put back over the Chinese border from Hong Kong over two years some 35,000 illegal immigrants from China. The United States repatriates people to Mexico and Haiti. There is nothing unusual about deporting to repatriate.
§ Q8. Mr. KirkhopeTo ask the Prime Minister if she will make a statement on the Government's inner cities policies.
§ The Prime MinisterExcellent progress continues to be made in the regeneration of our inner cities under the Government's action for cities programme, spending on which is planned to increase from £ billion in 1988–89 to about £.3.5 billion this year. Unemployment in the 57 inner city target areas has fallen by 23 per cent. over the past year.
§ Mr. KirkhopeDoes my right hon. Friend agree that our policies have set the people free from the shackles of Labour local authorities, enabling them to take a full role in implementing all the improvements that are going on around them?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, the regeneration of the inner cities is due to our policies. We formed urban development corporations in many cases to get round extreme Left-wing councils. Secondly, the policy of enterprise and personal 1048 responsibility has paid off handsomely, both in increased jobs and in an increased sense of responsibility and co-operation between industry and the people in inner city areas. The story is a good one and could never have happened under the arrogant controls of Socialism.
§ Mr. LivingstoneWill the Prime Minister tell the House whether she shares the concern that is widespread in society, that convictions should not be based——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. This is a definitive question to the Prime Minister.
§ Dame Elaine Kellett-BowmanWill my right hon. Friend reflect, when dealing with the problems of the inner cities, that health problems are important? Will she call to the attention of her right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Health the fact that the problems of Manchester and Liverpool should be taken into account when setting the regional health budgets and not only, as proposed, the problems of London?
§ The Prime MinisterI take my hon. Friend's point and I will draw the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Health to it. I have, of course, visited Liverpool comparatively recently and seen the great improvements taking place there.
§ Mr. VazThe Prime Minister may recall that on 18 October 1972 in this House, a Conservative Minister, in response to the plight of the expelled Ugandan Asians, stated that there was always a small number of nasty people seeking to make their lives difficult. Is that not the perfect example of the Government's current policy on the proposed compulsory repatriation——
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. That has nothing to do inner cities.