Engagements

HC Deb 14 April 1999 vol 329 cc216-22

Q1. [79133] Mr. Peter Luff (Mid-Worcestershire)

If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 14 April.

The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr. John Prescott)

I have been asked to reply.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is in Brussels with his European colleagues, meeting the Secretary-General of the United Nations to discuss the situation in Kosovo. I am sure that the whole House wishes the European Union leaders well in their discussions.

Mr. Luff

Why did the Prime Minister tell the House yesterday that Serbian brutality in Kosovo had been planned well in advance? Three weeks ago, both the Foreign Secretary and the Secretary of State for International Development were saying that no one could have anticipated the Serbian reaction to the NATO bombing campaign, and, incredibly, that to have provided humanitarian assistance in advance would have made us complicit in Milosevic's campaign.

The Deputy Prime Minister

I do not think that there is any doubt that the public, who have been watching their televisions, accept that such events have been happening, even during the discussions in Paris, but no one envisaged their scale. The hon. Gentleman should be well aware of that, and should join us in condemning those actions.

Mr. David Chaytor (Bury, North)

Does not one of the most worrying consequences of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia relate to the implications for the security of nuclear materials there? Can the right hon. Gentleman assure us that dialogue with the Russian Government relating to the security of their nuclear installations will continue, and that, if necessary, they will be given assistance to prevent the development of a supply chain of illegal nuclear materials from Russia to Serbia?

The Deputy Prime Minister

Hon. Members have expressed concern about that on a number of occasions in the House. It also featured in the most recent discussions between the Foreign Secretary and his Russian counterpart.

Mr. Peter Lilley (Hitchin and Harpenden)

May I reiterate the Conservative party's support for the action in which our armed forces are engaged in the Balkans? May I also ask whether, in the light of the deployment of extra troops that the Prime Minister has announced over the past 24 hours—meaning that more than 85 per cent. of the Army is now committed to, or earmarked for, specific operations—the Government share our concern about the possibility that our Army will become overstretched?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I am advised that the Chief of the Defence Staff is entirely satisfied with the situation. The commitment is not as high as 85 per cent.; I believe that it is as low as 43 per cent. In any event, we should take the advice of the Chief of the Defence Staff, and in this context we fully accept what he has to say.

Mr. Lilley

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his answer, but there is real cause for concern. The Chief of the Defence Staff told the Select Committee on Defence last year: I do not think we could sustain two medium level operations"— which he defined as being like the one already taking place in Bosnia— for longer than six months. In view of our commitments in Northern Ireland, Iraq and Bosnia, and in view of the growth and uncertain duration of our commitment in Kosovo, should we not reconsider the strategic defence review?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I do not honestly think that what the right hon. Gentleman has said shows any contradiction between what the Chief of the Defence Staff told us today and what he was saying six months ago. He has given us his judgment, which is that our forces are competent to do what they have been asked to do. I think that the right hon. Gentleman should endorse that judgment, rather than casting doubt on it.

Mr. Lilley

I understand the right hon. Gentleman's reluctance to give an immediate answer to the question I asked about the strategic defence review, but there is a serious issue here, and Conservative Members hope that he and his colleagues will consider it seriously. Given that parts of the Territorial Army are already being deployed in the Balkans, will the right hon. Gentleman give immediate consideration to halting the Government's cuts in the TA?

The Deputy Prime Minister

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has made it clear that restructuring in line with the strategic defence review is under way. I must also tell the right hon. Gentleman that the language he uses—as on the last occasion, involving Northern Ireland—does not help our service men to carry out their obligations.

Mr. Ian Davidson (Glasgow, Pollok)

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the recent decision by the Kvaerner group to pull out of shipbuilding world wide, and the effect that that is likely to have on the Kvaerner Govan yard? Will he join me in welcoming the imaginative steps that have been taken so far by the Scottish Office? Will he undertake that the Government will do all they can to preserve commercial shipbuilding in Clydeside, especially by doing everything possible to ensure that Kvaerner gets the roll on/roll off ferries order from the Ministry of Defence; and that, where possible, work placed elsewhere by the MOD will be transferred to that yard to keep all those people in employment?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I fully accept what my hon. Friend said. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has made it clear that he will do everything possible to ensure that industrial and shipping activity can be retained in Scotland. The appointment of Gavin Laird to consider the future of the premises and find a possible buyer is a quick and proper action that we can all support.

Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)

Will the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that average school class sizes are now larger than they were when Labour took office?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I can confirm that we are on target for reducing class sizes, as we promised.

Mr. Beith

With respect, that is not the same question. In any event, when the right hon. Gentleman made that pledge to five to seven-year-olds, did he envisage that class sizes might gradually be reduced for them, while they increased for the rest of the school system—for eight to 11-year-olds, secondary schools and nursery schools? The average class size is larger in each of those categories, as it is overall. Does the right hon. Gentleman consider it acceptable to cut class sizes for a quarter of our children by raising them for three quarters? Would it be a little off-message to admit that that is not good enough?

The Deputy Prime Minister

The right hon. Gentleman asked whether we were on target for reducing class sizes—[Interruption.] That is the answer that he is going to get, anyway. From September this year, we expect that fewer than 200,000 infants will be in large classes, compared with the figure of almost half a million which we inherited. That is an example of a good record, and of a party and a Government carrying out their promises.

On a more personal note, I welcome the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has had the opportunity to ask a question today, as we deputy leaders do not often get such an opportunity. That opportunity was given by his party leader, the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown), to the only man who is not challenging for leadership of the Liberal Democrat party.

Mr. Vernon Coaker (Gedling)

Over the weekend, I was in Macedonia to see the work that UNICEF is doing there. The vast majority, if not all, of the Kosovo Albanians to whom I spoke support the action of NATO and of the British Government. We should be proud of what our troops are achieving there. Will my right hon. Friend reaffirm the commitment that the Prime Minister gave that those guilty of war crimes in Kosovo will be prosecuted if we can bring them to justice? I was told a horrific tale of 15 people having been massacred, five from one family, by hooded Serb policemen. Such people should be brought to justice.

The Deputy Prime Minister

Those are matters of serious concern. We have heard horrific reports from the camps about the systematic rape of Kosovo Albanian women. That is the same appalling practice as the Bosnian Serbs used as a weapon of war against the Muslims in Bosnia. It is also reported that General Mladic, who was indicted for war crimes in Bosnia in 1995, is commanding a gang of thugs in Kosovo, and that the war criminal Arcan is recruiting volunteers for his paramilitary units from prisons in Serbia. That shows the sort of people on whom the Serbian leadership is relying to carry out its vicious ethnic cleansing.

Let us be clear—the Prime Minister has made it clear—that anyone who has committed war crimes and who is indicted by the tribunal as criminals, shall be pursued exactly as we are pursuing those who committed such crimes in Bosnia.

Q2. [79134] Mr. Andrew Robathan (Blaby)

We all condemn the ghastly crimes that the Deputy Prime Minister has mentioned, but perhaps he remembers telling the House that The demands are reasonable: they are an autonomous Kosovo within Serbia and an international military force to underpin the settlement."—[Official Report, 24 March 1999; Vol. 328, c. 484.] Are those still NATO demands? He mentioned the armed forces a moment ago. Is he aware of the concerns being expressed to me and to others by former colleagues in the armed forces about the shifting and confused military and political objectives?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I think that the House tires of hearing hon. Members offer support and then make statements that undermine the clear aims that have been set out by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. I confirm yet again, as my right hon. Friend made clear to the House yesterday, that those are the aims that we had at the beginning and they continue to be our aims.

Mr. Hilton Dawson (Lancaster and Wyre)

Will my right hon. Friend commend the efforts being made in Lancaster by business and the higher education community to build business development on the superb research skills of a world-class university, and to make Lancaster not only the geographical and historical heart of the north-west, but the economic heart of a vibrant north-west region—and, hopefully, of a north-west regional government in the future?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I very much accept what my hon. Friend has said. With our extra £20 billion for education and the new development agencies that we have just launched in the regions, Government policy will make a considerable difference, helping to improve the prosperity of the region and to achieve the objectives that he has so eloquently spelled out.

Q3. [791351 Mr. William Thompson (West Tyrone)

Has the Deputy Prime Minister the grace to acknowledge that those of us who have been opposed to the Belfast agreement have been confirmed in our consistent belief that paramilitary organisations are not going to decommission their arms? The remarks yesterday confirmed that. Will he acknowledge that we have been right? Will he state that as long as paramilitary organisations maintain that attitude, they cannot sit in a democratic Executive and govern?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I recall visiting Omagh, which is in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, after the terrible tragedy of the bombing. I well understand and accept the deep feeling that he had about the agreement at that time, but I believe that it is necessary to find agreement in Northern Ireland, and the great majority of the people want that. It is not helpful at this stage to cast doubt on whether we will achieve an agreement. The people of Northern Ireland desperately want an end to the spectre of violence that has plagued them for so long. The Good Friday agreement is the only way to achieve that and it is vital that the parties work constructively this week to find an agreed way forward. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has made clear, we can all defend our corners and say, "I told you so", but that has dominated the language and debate in Ireland for far too long.

Gillian Merron (Lincoln) : Does my right hon. Friend agree that parents, teachers, governors and Minister

s are right to be concerned that Tory-controlled Lincolnshire county council is failing to pass on in full the £14 million of extra resources for education made available by the Government to enable children and schools to flourish, not flounder, in Lincolnshire?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I fully accept what my hon. Friend says. Lincolnshire is not the only authority that professes to want—[Interruption.] It is not the only Tory authority either. Any authority that does not pass on the extra resources that the House intended for the improvement of education in its area should be condemned. We made those resources available to improve education and we want them to be used for that. We want those aims to be achieved by councils of whatever political colour and we shall call on them to do so.

Q5. [79137] Sir Michael Spicer (West Worcestershire)

In view of the firm commitments given to the Select Committee on the Treasury by the Chancellor and the Economic Secretary, will the Deputy Prime Minister give an absolute guarantee that the withholding tax will not be introduced in this country?

The Deputy Prime Minister

As Secretary of State for the Environment, I constantly have to deal with the disastrous poll tax. The hon. Gentleman should bear in mind that we have given local authorities the most generous settlement that they have ever received—

Hon. Members

More, more.

Madam Speaker

Order.

Q6. [79138] Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East)

Is my right hon. Friend—[Interruption.]

Madam Speaker

Order. We will have a little order.

Mr. Connarty

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the successful visit by the waterways Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Mr. Meale), to the £78 million millennium canal link project in central Scotland? He visited it with the Minister responsible for transport in the Scottish Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Western Isles (Mr. Macdonald). Will my right hon. Friend give the House an assurance that United Kingdom Ministers will continue to work in co-operation with the Scottish Parliament in areas of joint interest? Will he underline the message that Scotland and the UK are stronger together, and that the Government will do everything in their power to resist the expensive and threatening divorce that is put forward by the Scottish National party as its policy for Scotland's future?

The Deputy Prime Minister

We are keen to strengthen the role of waterways as one good example of partnership. Since we came in, we have increased resources by £8 million, a 17 per cent. increase, and changed the rules so that public and private partnerships can play a greater part in transferring freight to the waterways. In those circumstances, we emphasise the role of partnership, not separation, both with central Government and Scotland, as well as within Scotland between the authorities and private authorities, to improve the waterways and to add to the prosperity of Scotland—in the name of partnership, not separatism.

Mr. Peter Lilley (Hitchin and Harpenden)

May I ask the Deputy Prime Minister about a tax with which he may be familiar? The last time we discussed the crisis in the road haulage industry, he refused to contemplate any changes in the duty rate set in the Budget. Can he confirm that he is now considering the Conservative proposal to reopen the Budget by charging foreign lorry drivers who use British roads, and using the revenue so raised to cut vehicle excise duties?

The Deputy Prime Minister

We have made it clear that we are not reopening any of the proposals that were made in the Budget. We think that the proposals affecting the road haulage industry have been confirmed by the latest reports that show that costs are lower for our industry than for many of its competitors—[Interruption.]> Many independent reports have shown that to be so and I do not see that they are being challenged in any way.

Nevertheless, we continue to discuss with the road haulage industry any issues that it wishes to discuss about future development of policy. That is right. That is what we are doing. We think that that is a proper policy.

Mr. Lilley

The right hon. Gentleman does not seem to be aware that his Department—indeed, his junior Minister, the Minister of Transport—has specifically asked to discuss the Conservative proposal with the road haulage industry. Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the only purpose of introducing a Brit disc tax on foreign lorry drivers who use British roads is to be able to reduce the amount of vehicle excise duty charged in the Budget? Does he not realise that action is needed and that it is needed now—not next year, but now?

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that a number of substantial firms—such as T. Brady, which has 78 lorries—have just announced that they are going into liquidation, with a terrible loss of jobs? Will he introduce a Brit disc and a corresponding reduction in vehicle excise duty in the Finance Bill that is now going through Parliament?

The Deputy Prime Minister

No, we will not do that because the whole picture has to be taken into account and I have given the right hon. Gentleman one indication of that. It is a bit much to hear such comments from a Treasury Minister of six years, whose Government developed a policy of boom and bust in the economy and put 5,000 road transport haulier companies out of business. Now he has the audacity to talk to us about reducing a fuel tax that they introduced.

Mr. Lilley

Is not the reason that the right hon. Gentleman has to resort to bluster the fact that the Treasury has landed him in this mess? The Economic Secretary admitted that she made no assessment of the impact on the road haulage industry of the difference between road taxes here and on the continent. Is not the Government's road tax policy, begun in ignorance and continued through arrogance, now in confusion, leaving the industry in deep crisis?

The Deputy Prime Minister

I do not think that there is any doubt about the information that is available on the difference between costs incurred by British and European companies. The figures are produced by a company called KPMG. I assume that even the right hon. Gentleman will accept the authenticity of that company. KPMG has examined haulage companies and has made it clear that typical business costs are £600,000 higher in the Netherlands and £820,000 higher in Belgium. My hon. Friend the Economic Secretary has made that point time and again. It is somewhat strange to hear the right hon. Gentleman advocating a common European tax when most of the time the Opposition are against European tax. In view of his comments about French lorry drivers, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman should condemn the action by hauliers and offer us an apology. It is time that the Opposition apologised for their past mistakes. Would it not be better for them to apologise than simply to try to rewrite history, as they do time and again? That is hypocrisy.