Engagements (Hansard, 13 December 1994)

§ Q1. Mrs. Ewing
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 13 December.

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

§ Mrs. Ewing
Does the Prime Minister believe in the principle of referendums?

§ The Prime Minister
I have indicated in the House on several occasions that there may be circumstances in which I would support one. Clearly, in the case of Northern Ireland that is so, for I have already announced one.

§ Q2. Mr. Patrick Thompson
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Tuesday 13 December.

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

§ Mr. Thompson
Bearing in mind reports today of an official survey showing that 11-year-old pupils do not have sufficient command of English to answer questions in science and mathematics, and bearing in mind the mounting evidence of the damage being done by the National Union of Teachers' boycott of tests, will my right hon. Friend urge Opposition Members with influence on that union to urge it to drop the boycott today?

§ The Prime Minister
What my hon. Friend says illustrates the importance of regular testing of pupils and equally regular reporting of the results. I welcome 768 very much the fact that most teachers' unions have now called off their boycott. It is high time that the NUT did the same, and I hope that it will do so.

§ Mr. Blair
On railway privatisation, is it right, as the report to the Transport Select Committee states, that the costs of legal consultancy fees and relocation costs for British Rail alone are now £100 million, and that when underwriting and City fees are added in the total cost may be as much as £700 million? Are those figures right or wrong?

§ The Prime Minister
They are certainly not figures that I recognise, but if the right hon. Gentleman wishes to pursue the matter I will give him a more detailed answer.

§ Mr. Blair
I believe that the £100 million figure was given in a parliamentary answer. Perhaps the Prime Minister will check that. Is it also right, as the report indicates, that if the privatisation targets are to be met, the rail network will virtually have to be halved or there will be savage reductions in the timetable across the service? Can the Prime Minister guarantee that if there is found to be the remotest possibility of those things happening he will cancel the privatisation?

§ The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman is using yet another of the scare stories which have surrounded the privatisation process for some time. Since the start of the rail privatisation process, there has been no shortage of scare stories; that is just the latest one. As recently as 24 November, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport stated and restated unequivocally that franchise services would be broadly based on the existing timetable. That remains the position.

§ Mr. Blair
The Prime Minister has not given that guarantee. If he proceeds with a privatisation which has no popular support, which will put the future of the railways at risk— [Interruption.]

§ Madam Speaker
Order. The hon. Member for Lancaster (Dame E. Kellett-Bowman) should not be barracking from a sedentary position.

§ Mr. Blair
If the Prime Minister proceeds with a privatisation that has no popular support, which will put the future of the railways at risk and, in the process, spend hundreds of millions of pounds which should be spent on providing a better public transport service, will that not show how completely out of touch the Government are with the British people?

§ The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman is quite wrong. His comments about rail privatisation are precisely the same as the comments that his predecessors made about almost every privatisation that has occurred. Each privatisation has proved a success. The initial costs of past privatisations have been more than outweighed by efficiency and benefits, and that will be the case for rail users as well. The right hon. Gentleman relies on precisely the same scare stories which existed for each privatisation that has occurred. If he seeks further assurance, it will come tomorrow when the franchise director launches the pre-qualification documents. The right hon. Gentleman will then see how wrong he is.