Engagements (Hansard, 16 July 1997)

§ Q1. Dr. Marek
To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 16 July. [7025]

§ The Prime Minister (Mr. Tony Blair)
This morning, I had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. Later today, I will continue to have such meetings.

§ Dr. Marek
Is the Prime Minister aware that there is a growing consensus in Gibraltar that the constitution should be changed so that Gibraltar becomes a little less of a colony and a little more of a Crown dependency? Should proposals be placed before him that do not affect the treaty of Utrecht in any way, will he give them his careful and serious consideration?

§ The Prime Minister
What I can say is that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary said to the Chief Minister of Gibraltar, on 7 July, that any proposals made by the Gibraltar Government would, of course, be given careful consideration. They must be compatible with the treaty of Utrecht. I can certainly say to my hon. Friend that we will never consent to any arrangement that goes against the freely expressed wishes of the people of Gibraltar.

§ Mr. Hague
I welcome the further fall in unemployment announced this morning. What lessons does the Prime Minister draw from the fact that unemployment has now been falling in Britain for four and a half years, but rising elsewhere in Europe?

§ The Prime Minister
The lesson I learn is that it was the Conservative Government who put it up in the first place.

§ Mr. Hague
Would the Prime Minister not be more convincing if he admitted that the huge reductions in 389 unemployment in this country, while it has risen elsewhere, have a great deal to do with the policies of the previous Government? Is he not aware that we have had in recent years the best record of job creation of anywhere in Europe? But, specifically, does the Prime Minister agree that measures that increase the costs of employing people would tend to reduce the number of jobs available?

§ The Prime Minister
I see no incompatibility at all between measures that are fair treatment for people at work and a successful economy. In case the right hon. Gentleman had not noticed, he is now in opposition.

§ Mr. Hague
In case the Prime Minister had not noticed, he is now in government and he has to answer the question.
Does the Prime Minister agree that increasing the costs of employing people reduces the number of jobs available? Since the Prime Minister believes—he must believe, since the Government's welfare-to-work scheme is subsidising employment—that reducing the costs of employment increases the number of jobs available, why does he not believe that increasing the costs of employment reduces the number of jobs available?

§ The Prime Minister
First, as I told the right hon. Gentleman, the previous Government put up unemployment from the level that they inherited. Secondly, as I told him, I do not believe that treating people fairly at the workplace is inconsistent with decent employment measures. Thirdly, if the right hon. Gentleman wants to improve the unemployment situation, particularly for the young unemployed, whose numbers rose under the Conservative Government, he should support our welfare-to-work programme, not oppose it.

§ Mr. Hague
The House is entitled to less waffle and more answers to questions. I am not talking about fairness in the workplace; I am talking about the Prime Minister's tax on pension funds, which will cost companies billions of pounds and increase the cost of employing people.
Is it not the truth that all Labour Governments in history have left office with unemployment higher than when they took office? Is it not the truth that loading costs on to businesses through a tax on pension funds, signing up to the social chapter and adopting a minimum wage will put at risk the jobs that have been created for thousands of hard-working people in recent years?

§ The Prime Minister
What would put people's jobs at risk is a return to Tory boom and bust: a return to the days when, under the Government that the right hon. Gentleman supported, interest rates were higher than 15 per cent.—as they were during the last recession—and borrowing was running at more than £40 billion. [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer the question."] The answer to the question is very simple. The way to secure a strong economy is to take measures to put public finances and monetary policy in order, rather than causing a Tory boom and bust. That is the answer.