§ Q13. Mr. McAllionAt the United Nations summit on social development in 1995 it was agreed that each participating Government should draw up a national plan for the eradication of poverty. Is my right hon. Friend aware that the last Tory Government subsequently ratted on that commitment, claiming that such a plan was not needed in this country? Does my right hon. Friend agree that that represents a calculated insult to the many millions of our fellow citizens who live in poverty or on the margins of poverty? Will he put that wrong right by committing this Labour Government to drawing up a national plan within an agreed time scale? [4969]
§ The Prime MinisterThis Government certainly regard the eradication of poverty as one of their aims and objectives. That is why we want the windfall tax to reduce youth unemployment, why we believe in cutting VAT on fuel and why we are now looking into how the benefits 296 system, particularly the interrelationship between the tax and benefit system, can be improved so that it gives people incentives to get back to work. It is also why we are looking across a range of issues in relation to the welfare state to see how we can make the provision fairer, more effective and more modern.
§ Mr. Tom KingIs the Prime Minister aware that he has given the clearest impression to the House today that he does not regard the leaks that have been discussed as very serious? Is he aware that there is prima facie evidence that a number of people have made a substantial amount of money by relying on the stories or attributions that have allegedly come from members of the Government? This is a serious matter as it goes to the heart of the integrity of Government. Has he taken senior advice on this matter, which seems to many of us to be a very serious issue for his Government?
§ The Prime MinisterSpeculation about what is in the Budget occurs every year to my certain knowledge. [Interruption.] Yes it does. If the right hon. Gentleman wants to go back, as I have done, and check last year's press cuttings from the Conservative Budget he will find that they were all over the place—they involved senior Government sources and other sources. What is happening is merely the usual round of speculation. The Conservative party is tackling this issue because it is afraid of tackling the real issues.
§ Mr. SkinnerIs my right hon. Friend aware that as a result of the massive pit closure programme of the past 18 years and, particularly, the past few years, there is not a single pit left in the Derbyshire coalfields—and the same applies to many other coalfields? Will he take into account the fact that there has not been any overheating of the economy in any of those coalfield areas? When he is drawing up plans arising from the Budget or afterwards, will he hear in mind the fact that, whatever improvement takes place generally, some sort of an industrial development plan is needed for those coalfield areas, where poverty and mass unemployment still reign supreme as a result of the past 18 years?
§ The Prime MinisterI think that my hon. Friend is absolutely right in what he says. That is why it is important—whatever the general state of economy—that we take specific and targeted measures on unemployment that take account of the fact that, for those areas that have engaged in huge industrial restructuring, there must be specific help for people there. It is also one of the reasons why we are committed to development agencies in the regions that can co-ordinate inward investment and the development of small, medium, starting-up and other businesses coming in to supplant those that have gone. That type of specific, targeted activity is a very important part of our economic and industrial policy.