Engagements (Hansard, 1 March 1990)

§ Q1. Mr. Watson
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 March.

§ The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)
This morning I had a meeting with the President of the European Parliament and I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet. I also had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

§ Mr. Watson
Does the Prime Minister recall saying recently that once people got used to the poll tax, they would wonder why they had not had it before? Is she so out of touch that she is unaware that in Scotland, where it has already been in operation for a year, it is as unwanted, as unaccepted and as unpayable for many families as it ever was?

§ The Prime Minister
It is a very much fairer system than domestic rates, which preceded it. That was evident after the rating revaluation of domestic rates. It is patently unfair that under the previous system only half of those who had votes with local authorities paid rates. They had to carry the burden for the rest. That was the primary unfairness. The second was that under the rating system a 383 single person in one house paid the same rates as four or five people in the next-door house. That, too, was patently unfair.

§ Mr. McCrindle
Has the Prime Minister noticed that both the London Business School and the National Institute of Economic and Social Research have been predicting over the past few days that the level of inflation is likely to reduce to about 4.5 per cent. by the turn of next year, and that mortgage rates are likely at the time to be under 10 per cent.? Does the Prime Minister agree that at least as much significance should be placed upon those medium-term predictions as on the understandable gloom occasioned by a month of admittedly bad trade figures?

§ The Prime Minister
In view of my hon. Friend's question, I am doubly glad to see him return to the House. The rate of inflation and mortgage rates will be likely to fall if we stick to a high rate of interest in the coming months in order to cut the money supply and get down inflation. We must do that until the rate of inflation comes down, when other things will follow.

§ Mr. Kinnock
Has the Prime Minister any plans to make an official visit to West Oxfordshire?

§ The Prime Minister
No; I rather wish that I did, to explain a thing or two.

§ Mr. Kinnock
I hope that that signifies a new readiness on the part of the Prime Minister to listen. Perhaps she should reconsider her decision and go to West Oxfordshire to meet the Conservative councillors who resigned the whip last night, explaining that they were resigning in protest at the Government's local government policies in general and those on housing and the community charge in particular. When her own councillors are blaming her Government, is not it clear that the Prime Minister is running out of friends and excuses?

§ The Prime Minister
But not of explanations of the facts. Of course, I know that the right hon. Gentleman is never perturbed by facts. The facts are that the community charge of £412 is very high and that the situation is made worst of all by gross overspending by the Labour-Liberal-controlled Oxfordshire county council. The council's standard spending assessment, agreed by Government, was up by 12 per cent.—of course, revenue support grant is paid on that—but it is spending £96 per adult above that increase. That accounts for the larger share of the increase in the community charge.

§ Mr. Kinnock
I hear what the Prime Minister says. Does she realise that she is merely proving the point made by a Tory councillor who resigned the whip last night, when he said that any tax that requires so much explanation must be bad?

Hon. Members
Roof tax.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order.

§ The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman always prepares his supplementary questions before he has heard the previous answer. My explanation was very simple and very brief. The Labour-Liberal Oxfordshire county council is increasing its spending by nearly three times the rate of inflation. That is Labour-Liberal policy. They wanted to set the community charge at the highest possible 384 level, hoping that the people would blame us instead of themselves—the Labour-Liberal majority—on whom the blame should rest.

§ Mr. Cormack
Is my right hon. Friend aware that about 70 Conservative Members have said that they feel that education expenditure should now be transferred to central Government, and will she give further earnest consideration to the possible advantage of that move?

§ The Prime Minister
First, I do not think that it would be right for the administration of education to be transferred to central Government. That would be a retrograde step. I prefer our own policy of having grant-maintained schools and of putting budgets to the local schools so that parents and teachers may have a bigger say. But if education were to be transferred, of course, a goodly proportion of the revenue support grant and of the business rate would have to be transferred with it; otherwise we should have a colossal increase in income tax, and that would suit no one. I fear that if we were to do without transferring the revenue support grant, the local authorities would only fill up that expenditure with other measures and we should finish up with both a high community charge and high income tax, which would be totally wrong.

§ Q2. Mr. McFall
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 March.

§ The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

§ Mr. McFall
In view of the popular uprising in West Oxfordshire by reformist elements in the Tory party against unjust and unresponsive government, will the Prime Minister grant the request for perestroika in regard to the poll tax? Will she, or did she, put a call through to the Foreign Secretary in Budapest this week and instruct him to consult the Communist old guard as to what to do in the present circumstances?

Mr. Speake
Briefly.

§ Mr. McFall
Will the Prime Minister be kind enough to say to the Foreign Secretary that it is now safer to walk in Budapest than in Berkshire or Oxfordshire?

§ The Prime Minister
Clearly, the hon. Gentleman studied his question for a long time. My hon. Friends in West Oxfordshire are undoubtedly wishing that Oxfordshire county council was under good Tory control, in which case they would have a very much lower community charge. Had the spending been in line with the Government's assumption, the charge would have been £253, which is a great deal less than what is being charged, largely because of Oxfordshire county council.

§ Q3. Mr. Couchman
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 March.

§ The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

§ Mr. Couchman
Will my right hon. Friend remind those of our right hon. and hon. Friends who are opposed to the giving of British passports to certain key Hong Kong residents that Britain is obliged under the 1984 joint declaration to hand over Hong Kong in 1997 as a successful and prosperous place, as it is now, and that the 385 best way to ensure that is to give reassurance to the managerial, professional, administrative and entrepreneurial backbone of the colony?

§ The Prime Minister
I agree with my hon. Friend that our duty to the people of Hong Kong is, when the lease terminates in 1997, to hand over the colony of Hong Kong to China in a good and prosperous state. That will be most valuable to China and most likely to enable the people in the colony to continue their present way of life as under the Anglo-Chinese agreement.
We have a duty—my hon. Friend is correct—to give passports and British citizenship to two groups of people——

§ Mr. Allen
rose——

§ The Prime Minister
—those who have been employed by the British administration in Hong Kong, who will stay loyally at their posts until the lease is terminated——

§ Mr. Bell
rose——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. This is intolerable behaviour.

§ The Prime Minister
If I am asked questions, Mr. Speaker. I submit that I must be allowed to answer them.
The second group is vital to the prosperity of Hong Kong. I refer to the entrepreneurs who built it up and who will keep it prosperous. For them to stay there, it is necessary to keep prosperity in the colony. For them to stay there, I believe that it is necessary to give them British citizenship.

§ Mr. William Ross
If the Prime Minister is giving some consideration today to local government finance, will she reflect today and over the weekend upon the fact that although local government can manage to obtain quite a lot of central Government help when major disasters such as the present flooding strike, there is precious little for the individual, who in many instances suffers grievously from such natural disasters? Is not it long past the time when the Government and the nation should have considered setting up some form of emergency fund to help individuals who suffer grievous damage as a result of natural disasters? Surely that would be in the interests of the community. Far too much damage has been suffered already this year.

§ The Prime Minister
I have three points to make in answer to the hon. Gentleman's question. First, in so far as extra expenditure falls on the local authority, he will be aware of the Bellwin rules, which have been invoked in Wales, and of other specific grants that may be available under different headings. Secondly, in so far as there is great personal loss through the loss of household possessions or damage to houses, one would expect that to be covered largely by insurance. Thirdly, in some places there is a disaster fund, which meets exceptional difficulty and exceptional hardship suffered by local people.

§ Q4. Mr. Roger King
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 March.

§ The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

§ Mr. King
Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming the Government's commitment to a good roads programme and to the policy of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport? Will she join 386 me in welcoming a balanced transport infrastructure, which is necessary for an economy such as ours, which is growing? Will she reflect on the statement by the Opposition spokesman on transport, the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, East (Mr. Prescott), that a Labour Government would abandon the entire programme?

§ The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir. It is vital for economic growth that we have good transport systems. The roads report that was produced last week gave details of about 500 schemes that will assist the rate of economic growth and reduce the number of road accidents, which we are always anxious to do. The many bypasses that have been announced will help to keep heavy lorries out of our villages and towns. It is an extremely good programme.

§ Q5. Mr. Canavan
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 March.

§ The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

§ Mr. Canavan
When will the Prime Minister face the fact that she and her hated poll tax will be defeated by a combination of people power in Scotland and deepening electoral unpopularity in England and Wales? If the Prime Minister is not concerned about losing the Mid-Staffordshire by-election and about the resignation of 18 Tory councillors in Oxfordshire, will she at least listen to the increasing number of Tory Members who are beginning to realise that by voting for the poll tax they were like turkeys voting for an early Christmas?

§ The Prime Minister
Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will recall what happened in Scotland when we had the result of domestic revaluation of rates after only some seven years. Of course, it would be 17 years if it occurred in England. There was such an outcry that we were bound to take some action to alleviate the result, and we were also bound to agree to change from the domestic rating system. We changed to a community charge, which on the whole is working well in Scotland, and is infinitely preferable to the Labour proposal for a roof tax based on capital values of houses, regardless of whether owner-occupiers or tenants live in them, modified by reference to income tax, which means that everyone's affairs will have to be revealed to the local authority. Labour's proposals are the worst of all, and people would welcome the community charge in comparison.

§ 6. Mr. Kilfedder
To ask the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for Thursday 1 March.

§ The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave some moments ago.

§ Mr. Kilfedder
May I refer to an important matter that should have the support of the whole House—the visit yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to Bradford, where she launched the people in cities programme and the allocation of a further £500 million for that problem? Will she ask the organisers to consider how radical changes have been made to Belfast, because I think that that would be advantageous when they consider what the Prime Minister has in mind for inner cities in Britain?
The Prime Minister: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. Our action for cities programme, particularly 387 that introduced in the past two years, and now the launch of the people in cities programme, has been very successful. The inner cities have been transformed, unemployment is falling rapidly, we have close 388 co-operation between industry, commerce and the cities and I hope that more people will go to each city to see the transformation that has taken place and to applaud it.