Engagements (Hansard, 17 December 1991)

§ Q1. Mr. John Garrett
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 December.

§ The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major)
This morning I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

§ Mr. Garrett
Last week the head teachers association of Cambridgeshire wrote to the county council to say that because of critical shortages of books, equipment and 142 facilities and because of oversized classes, it would have serious difficulty providing the national curriculum. Under those circumstances, what advice does the Prime Minister give to his constituents—to buy private education, as he does?

§ The Prime Minister
In Cambridgeshire the education standard spending assessment for the current year is £225 million, 16.4 per cent. higher than last year. There has been another substantial increase for 1992–93, an increase which safeguards the position of all children in Cambridgeshire.

§ Q2. Mr. Ian Bruce
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 17 December.

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

§ Mr. Bruce
Does my right hon. Friend welcome the British Medical Association's somewhat belated conversion to the concept of fund-holding GPs? Does he agree with the BMA that that should now be extended to every GP who wants to hold a fund?

§ The Prime Minister
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. There is no doubt that GP fund-holding has been proving successful and has been extending quite dramatically. I welcome the fact that that is the case. We are currently considering how the benefits of fund holding can be extended and will make an announcement in the new year.

§ Mr. Kinnock
In the interests of establishing the causes of the present mortgage crisis, could the Prime Minister confirm that, as Minister of State for Social Security, he halved mortgage support for newly unemployed people and that, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he put the mortgage rate up to its highest in history?

§ The Prime Minister
If the right hon. Gentleman had done his homework—rather unusually—better than he has, he would know, first, that the change in the 16-week rule was introduced after lengthy consultations with building societies and, secondly, that at the time, they said that there was no reason for people to lose their homes because of that reduction; nor have they.

§ Mr. Kinnock
I think the answer that the Prime Minister was groping for was yes. Since he and his policies are uniquely responsible for the difficulties being experienced and the record repossessions and arrears, will he accept the obligation for introducing a proper mortgage rescue scheme, like the one recommended by the Labour party, instead of trying to shift the blame on to everyone else?

§ The Prime Minister
The alleged mortgage rescue scheme proposed by the Labour party is a farce and has been denounced as such and the right hon. Gentleman should know it. As for the real problem, we are in the midst of discussions with the Building Societies Association and others and in due course we shall make an announcement that will build on the assistance that we have already provided. We have been considering the problem for some time—[Interruption]—unlike the right hon. Gentleman, who has only just discovered it.

§ Mr. Kinnock
What is a farce, a tragic farce, is the Government's record—a Government who came to power to provide a property-owning democracy and ended with a debt-ridden recession. Since, because of the right hon. 143 Gentleman's policies, the building societies stand to lose £1 billion because of mortgage repossessions and since local authorities are having to spend £500 million on bed-and-breakfast and temporary accommodation, does not the Prime Minister think that the rescue mortgage scheme that we have promoted would be the effective way to ensure not only the relief of misery for scores of thousands of families, but that at least he did the honourable thing by his victims?

§ The Prime Minister
The alleged mortgage rescue scheme about which the hon. Gentleman boasts was described this morning by an independent commentator as a policy made in an Enid Blyton story book"—[ Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order.

§ The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman's policy is ludicrous. As for the levels of owner occupation, there are 3.5 million more owner-occupiers today than there were in 1979 and no doubt 3.5 million more than there would have been had the right hon. Gentleman been in government.

§ Sir Hugh Rossi
If one were looking for the reasons for the present situation, does my right hon. Friend agree that it has been the departure of the building societies and other lenders from the traditional concept of not lending more than 75 per cent. of actual valuation, nor, from the point of view of personal status—[Interruption.]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman must be allowed to make his point.

§ Sir Hugh Rossi
—more than one quarter of monthly salary? If those criteria had been adhered to, many people would not be in their present position. Does my right hon. Friend agree—

Hon. Members
Too long.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman is being rather long-winded.

§ Sir Hugh Rossi
Will my right hon. Friend consider legislation to ensure that those traditional criteria are adhered to in future to stop this cyclical problem arising every so many years?

§ The Prime Minister
It is a sad fact that many people over-extended their mortgage commitments and now face difficulties. The Government are playing their part to alleviate those difficulties and we expect the mortgage lenders—all the responsible ones—to play their part in that. The sensible ones know that it is in their interests to do so.

§ Mr. Ashdown
If the Prime Minister is really keen to assist families who now stand in danger of having their homes repossessed, will he recognise the anomaly that exists between those on low incomes who pay rent and receive housing benefit and those on low incomes who pay mortgages and do not?

§ The Prime Minister
I recognise that point very well. But the right hon. Gentleman should not pose, as he frequently does, as the friend of the home-owner—[Interruption.]—Oh, no. His policies are to put up taxes 144 and abolish mortgage income tax relief. He should stop coming to the House pretending to support home-owners when his policies would discriminate against them.

§ Mr. Beaumont-Dark
Does my right hon. Friend accept that only the very wealthy or the very foolish can afford to go to the libel courts for justice? If ordinary people are to have justice, perhaps a jury should find whether somebody is guilty of libel, but these £250,000 and £500,000 judgments are not justice but folly. Should not judges be able to decide what award is justified?

§ The Prime Minister
That is a matter on which I should be wise to seek the advice of my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney General and the Lord Chancellor. Even in the heat and battle of Prime Minister's questions, it is best to go away and reflect on some matters.