Engagements (Hansard, 14 June 2000)

§ Q1. [124291] Mr. David Atkinson (Bournemouth, East)
If he will list his official engagements for Wednesday 14 June.

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

§ Mr. Atkinson
Does the Prime Minister recall the letter that my hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, West (Mr. Butterfill) and I sent him last month to seek his personal interest in the anxieties of resort authorities, such as those in our constituencies, that wish to play their part in the national dispersal scheme for asylum seekers but are experiencing specific problems with their placement in our core tourist areas? Will the Government respond positively to the representations that they have received from the Local Government Association to give local control to local authorities for placing asylum seekers in their areas? That would also be in the best interests of the refugees, because it would mean the efficient provision of the education and social services that they need.

§ The Prime Minister
It is precisely for that reason that we are working closely with the Local Government Association. We must have a proper system for dispersal. However, it is important that we do it in consultation with the local authorities. We are doing that.

§ Q2. [124292] Mr. Dennis Canavan (Falkirk, West)
Is the Prime Minister aware that when the Minister with responsibility for pensions addressed the Scottish Pensioners Forum, he received a similar reception to that of the Prime Minister at the Women's Institute? Bearing in mind the fact that many pensioners view the 75p increase as an insult, will the Prime Minister try to ensure a fairer deal for all pensioners by restoring the link between pensions and earnings, which was introduced by the last Labour Government and abolished by the Tories?

§ The Prime Minister
I hope very much that my hon. Friend—the hon. Gentleman—takes account of the fact that we have given pensioners the winter fuel allowance, which will be £150 this autumn, that 1 million pensioners will be better off by £20 a week through the minimum income guarantee, that we are providing free television licences for the over-75s and free eye tests for pensioners, and that the cut on VAT in fuel also helps pensioners. Yes, we have much more to do, but we will have spent £6.5 billion on pensioners in this Parliament. When pensioners realise that, they will know who the true friends of pensioners are, and who are their true enemies.

§ Mr. William Hague (Richmond, Yorks)
Now that we have one faction of the Cabinet—the Trade Secretary, the Foreign Secretary, the Agriculture Minister and the Northern Ireland Secretary—who want the Government to campaign for joining the euro now, and another faction— 933 the Chancellor, the Home Secretary and the Education and Employment Secretary—who want to keep it quiet and join by stealth, when will the Prime Minister get a grip, end the Cabinet confusion and stop his Cabinet Ministers fighting like ferrets in a sack?

§ The Prime Minister
On the idea that we intend to join the single currency by stealth, the Labour party promises a referendum—that is a curious form of stealth. The policy has been set out on numerous occasions by me, the Chancellor and the other Ministers: in principle, we are in favour a successful single currency; in practice, the economic conditions must be fulfilled.

§ Mr. Hague
Everyone else in the country knows that the Cabinet is divided. This Cabinet is out of date. [Interruption.] Labour Members do not know that times have changed; it is this Cabinet that is divided. We knew that the right hon. Gentleman was out of touch with the country; now he is even out of touch with his own Cabinet. The Trade Secretary said: We have to be putting the case for the euro. The Northern Ireland Secretary said: As long as we're outside the euro, there's little we can do to protect industry— to which the Chancellor's response was to send out his spin doctor to say: The Northern Ireland Secretary has the economic intelligence of a pea … Do not tell us that they are not divided. The factions are at each other's throats. Which faction will the right hon. Gentleman follow?

§ The Prime Minister
As the right hon. Gentleman is quoting from the Trade Secretary's speech, let me quote it in full if I may. He said: We will judge if the five tests have been met early in the next Parliament. If the economic tests are satisfied, then we should join the single currency—if that is what the Government, Parliament and the people decide. That is the policy of the Government. It is entirely consistent with what the Chancellor said: The potential benefits for Britain of a successful single currency are obvious in terms of trade, transparency of costs and currency stability.—[Official Report, 27 October 1997; Vol. 299, c. 583.] The two are entirely consistent. If we are dealing, however, with divisions on the single currency—and not just on the single currency, but on Europe—let me quote what the former Prime Minister, my predecessor, said the other day: Sadly, the basic case for being in the EU once again needs making. To be pro-European does not mean being anti-British—indeed I would argue the precise reverse. It is a pity that because the right hon. Gentleman wants to get cash out of a few donors for the Conservative party, those sentiments are no longer shared by him.

§ Mr. Hague
Our policy on the euro is settled— [Interruption.] That is because I lead my party and the right hon. Gentleman now follows his. The Prime Minister wrote yesterday that he thought that the euro was a great success. He now courageously uses articles to say things because people cannot slow handclap an article. He is spending tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money preparing to join the euro. He is telling business 934 to spend hundreds of millions preparing to join the euro. He obviously wants to join the euro, so when will he put his mouth where he puts other people's money and risk his own capital campaigning to join the euro?

§ The Prime Minister
First, the money that has been spent—the majority of it—has been spent on preparing British business for the fact that the euro will be a fact and that the notes and coins will be in circulation, but, as I understood it, the Opposition's policy was to rule it out in principle, but only for a Parliament.
Mr. Sykes said today that he was in the "never" camp on a single currency, and that was where the majority of Conservative MPs were. I believe that it is sensible to keep the option open for this country and give people a choice in a referendum. That is different from a political party that has now been bought by someone who wants to take this country to the margins of Europe, because the right hon. Gentleman does not have the strength to stand up to his Euro-sceptics.

§ Mr. Hague
Is not the real reason that the Government are in such chaos on the euro spelled out in the memo written by the right hon. Gentleman's chief guru, Philip Gould? It reads: From Philip to Alastair. Once again TB is pandering, lacking conviction, unable to hold to a position for more than a few weeks, lacking the guts to be able to tough it out … [Interruption.] Hon. Members should listen; the Labour party spent a lot of money on that advice. It says: TB … lacks conviction, he's all spin and presentation, he just says things to please people not because he believes them. TB has not delivered. He is out of touch. Does TB agree with that, or is it just the rest of us?

§ The Prime Minister
If the right hon. Gentleman is not careful, I shall read out what focus groups say about him. [Interruption.] I shall spare him that. [Interruption.]

§ Madam Speaker
Order. Valuable time is being used up.

§ The Prime Minister
I would have thought that the right hon. Gentleman would like to congratulate the Government on delivery. Under this Government, there are now 978,000 more jobs in the economy—210,000 of them under the new deal, which he is committed to scrapping.

§ Mr. Hague
Change the subject when one is losing—we all know that tactic. We would be delighted if the Prime Minister read out the comments of his focus groups because we could then ask for the whole document to be placed in the Library, and that would be very interesting.
Is not the truth now coming from some of Labour's own Back Benchers? The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent. Central (Mr. Fisher) said that this Government is arrogant. It's all glitz. The hon. Member for Cannock Chase (Tony Wright) said that the Government's all presentation, it's missing the big picture. 935 They have joined the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Kilfoyle) and the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) in accurately describing the Government.
The Prime Minister started with every political advantage, and now he has squandered that advantage with spin, gimmick and a failure to deliver. Is it not the case that he has run out of steam and is running out of time, and if he carries on like this he will be run out of office?

§ The Prime Minister
Let us compare records on delivery. I have referred to the 1 million more jobs. We have halved long-term unemployment, 1 million people have been lifted out of poverty, there are 5,500 more nurses, and £6 billion has been spent on school buildings. What did the right hon. Gentleman do in office? The national debt doubled, crime doubled, child poverty trebled and pension poverty doubled.
The right hon. Gentleman challenged me to read out the comments of the focus groups, so I shall read their comments about him. They say he is "boring", "false", "he irritates me greatly", "pathetic", "drip", "non-entity", "no substance", "no personality", "no stage presence", "complete waste of time", "no policies" and, at the end, very unimpressive team, particularly William Hague.

Hon. Members
More.

§ Madam Speaker
Order. We shall proceed. I call Mr. Rammell.

§ Q3. [124294] Mr. Bill Rammell (Harlow)
Does my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister share my genuine horror at yesterday's UNICEF report, which showed that, in 1995, 20 per cent. of British children were living in families below the official poverty line? That report also highlighted the importance of policies such as the working families tax credit, the minimum wage and the new deal, which the report's authors independently acknowledge will lift 1 million British children out of poverty by 2002. Would not the liberation of those children from poverty be put most at risk by a return of a Conservative Government, because it was Conservative policies that put them into poverty in the first place?

§ The Prime Minister
The UNICEF report said that the independent study confirms the Government's estimate that the measures currently being implemented will lift 1.2 million British children out of poverty by April 2002. That is through the increases in child benefit, the working families tax credit, the minimum wage, the new deal and the minimum income guarantee for pensioners. The Conservative party is committed to reversing every one of those policies. Everyone now knows that the Labour party exists to lift children out of poverty, and the Conservative party exists to put them in it.

§ Mr. Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye and Inverness, West)
Is the Prime Minister aware that among the many problems suffered by the children and the families of children who are victims of NHS vaccine damage, perhaps one of the most galling is that they do not receive one penny in payment if they are assessed as having under 80 per cent. physical or mental incapacity as a result of 936 that damage? More than three years ago, he and his party, in opposition, promised a review. That review has been under way for three years. When will it report?

§ The Prime Minister
It has not been under way for three years, but it is true that we are reviewing the position and we will be able to make a statement on it shortly. We are aware of the huge concern on this, but we have had to deal with many other priorities, too. We have tried to deal with those priorities, but we are reviewing the situation in respect of vaccine damage. As I say, we hope to make an announcement shortly.

§ Mr. Kennedy
Surely it does not take three years of a Labour Government to recognise a basic injustice and to put it right. Is there any truth in the idea that the Chancellor and the Treasury have been blocking other Ministers' desire to come up with a full and fair settlement? Is it not about time—three years later—that a Labour Government should be delivering what Labour put its name to in opposition?

§ The Prime Minister
No, it is not true to say that, but we have done many other things—for example, in respect of the health service—that we did not even promise before an election. The accident and emergency departments of all the hospitals that want to be renovated will be refurbished by the end of this year, there are 5,500 extra nurses, and the health service has the largest settlement in its history. I hope that by the time we publish the NHS plan in July people see that we have a truly radical and progressive future for the health service guaranteed.
Vaccine damage is of course important. We have not been looking at it for three years; that is simply not true. We have been studying it, however, and we will make an announcement shortly.

§ Q4. [124295] Mr. Barry Gardiner (Brent, North)
Why is it that, according to the House of Commons Library, my right hon. Friend's Government are spending £4.1 billion on providing for some of the poorest people in our community? Could it be because today's unemployment figures show a decrease of more than 500,000 in the number of people unemployed and an increase of almost 1 million new jobs in the economy and because this Government are creating pathways out of poverty for the people of this country?

§ The Prime Minister
In fact, as a result of the measures that the Government have taken and of the falls in unemployment and the rise in employment, which is also very important, there is a welfare saving of some £8 billion over the Parliament. Indeed, if we take out the increases for pensioners, child benefit and the working families tax credit, which are deliberate increases in the social security budget, it is falling in real terms whereas under the Conservatives it rose by an average of 4 per cent. in real terms every year. The reason it is important is not merely to make sure that we get more people into work, but because, with the money saved from the welfare costs, we can put additional resources into schools and hospitals, which the Conservatives could not.

§ Sir Teddy Taylor (Rochford and Southend, East)
Would it help to resolve the difficult dispute in the Government on the euro if the Prime Minister told his 937 Ministers simply to tell the truth—namely, that since Britain decided not to join and despite the Government's damaging policies, the British economy has done particularly well and that despite our being told that the euro would go like a rocket, it has gone forward as a damp squib?

§ The Prime Minister
I thank the hon. Gentleman for two things: first, for saying that the British economy is doing particularly well and, secondly, for reminding us of the state of the Conservative party and what used to happen in the days when it was in office. I disagree with him about the euro; but, more important, one thing that has not emerged from our exchanges today is that the Conservative party is now committed to a referendum on any change whatever from the Nice treaty. That is part of the deal with Mr. Sykes. What is more, the Conservative party has now said that it would revisit any treaty signed by this country and subject it to a referendum. The effect of that would be to stop the whole enlargement process in Europe. We have only to have the hon. Gentleman up on his feet to know what life used to be like when we were at the margins of Europe and the Conservative party was split asunder.

§ Q6. [124298] Mr. John Heppell (Nottingham, East)
Will the Prime Minister join me in welcoming yesterday's announcement that Capital One was doubling its work force in Nottingham, thus creating an extra 1,200 jobs in my constituency, in which unemployment is still double the national average?
As the Government have got unemployment down to its lowest level in 20 years, can the Prime Minister confirm reports I have heard today that the shadow Chancellor is now a supporter of full employment—and that Hannibal Lecter is now a vegetarian?

§ The Prime Minister
I welcome the announcement of jobs in my hon. Friend's constituency. Of course, there is a lot of industrial restructuring at present, which means that jobs change a lot; but we very much welcome the new jobs that there are, and of course we welcome the great fall in unemployment. As for the shadow Chancellor's comments, they would be more credible were it not for the fact that he is committed to scrapping the new deal, which has helped more than 200,000 people into work.

§ Sir Michael Spicer (West Worcestershire)
As the Liberal Democrats fight such scurrilous personalised campaigns, what is the moral justification for the Prime Minister's love-in with them?

Hon. Members
Tory gain.

§ The Prime Minister
I am sorry; I did not hear the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question.

§ Madam Speaker
Let us hear the question again. I did not hear it either. [Interruption.] Order. Let us all hear it.

§ Sir Michael Spicer
I may have forgotten it.
938 As the Liberal Democrats fight such scurrilous personalised campaigns, what is the moral justification for the Prime Minister's love-in with them?

§ The Prime Minister
If the hon. Gentleman has a problem with Liberal campaigns, he should take it up with the Liberal party, but I have always thought it sensible to work with people when there is agreement on certain issues.

§ Q7. [124299] Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington)
My right hon. Friend will recall the Conservatives' prediction that 2 million jobs would be lost if we introduced the national minimum wage Despite what they said, we introduced it, and every Labour Member of Parliament is particularly proud of what we did. Will my right hon. Friend tell us what the level of unemployment was on 1 April last year, when we introduced the national minimum wage, and what it is today?

§ The Prime Minister
Unemployment has, of course, fallen, but, perhaps more important, employment has increased by more than 300,000 since the introduction of the national minimum wage. The Conservative party predictions on the minimum wage were wrong; the Conservative party predictions on the recession were wrong; and I think that some of the other Conservative party predictions being made at the moment about Tory gains are probably wrong too.

§ Q8. [124300] Mr. Nick Gibb (Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)
Can the Prime Minister confirm that 2,700 convicted drug dealers, 2,500 violent criminals and 1,800 convicted burglars have been given early special release from prison by his Government? Many of those people have since reoffended. Is not this revolving-door policy proof that the Prime Minister's pre-election claim to be tough on crime is nothing more than another example of his tendency to say one thing and do another?

§ The Prime Minister
First, the prison population has increased, not diminished, under this Government. Secondly, it is we who introduced tougher penalties for rape, violent crime and burglary. Those whom the hon. Gentleman mentioned are on licence in any event, and the proposal had until recently won support across the House.

§ Mr. Roger Casale (Wimbledon)
Is it not rather offensive that the multimillionaire business man Paul Sykes should be wheeling and dealing with the Conservative party in order to lock in its extreme position on Europe? Furthermore, is there not a crass contradiction when someone who purports to lead a democracy movement wants to win influence on the strength of his pocket book rather than his arguments? Will the Prime Minister join me in saluting the hundreds and thousands of people across Britain, whatever their political persuasion, who make small donations to political parties and help to pay the cost of our politics without paying the price of undermining our democracy?

§ The Prime Minister
As I say, Mr. Sykes is entitled to spend his money in any way that he wants; but the price of his money has been the proposals on referendums made over the weekend by the shadow Foreign Secretary 939 and the Leader of the Opposition. Those proposals would mean that a referendum would be held on literally any change whatever in Europe. That policy could not possibly withstand sensible scrutiny.
I hope that one is still to allowed to quote the right hon. Member for Henley (Mr. Heseltine), the former Deputy Prime Minister. He said: A motley crew of "Britain's outers" and "wholesale renegotiators" devote their extremist energies to the one more heave … that they believe will reverse what they see as the wrong-headed judgments of all recent Conservative Prime Ministers. The truth is that the Conservative party has moved further away from any position adopted by any previous Conservative Minister. [Interruption.] Conservative Back-Bench Members shout back at me, but some Conservatives at least must see what has happened to Conservative policy in the past few days and worry for the future of the Conservative party as a sensible party with sensible policies on Europe.

§ Q9. [124301] Sir Archie Hamilton (Epsom and Ewell)
Now that, the Prime Minister's official spokesman has let it be known that he will be working part-time so that he can concentrate on developing policies for the Labour party, will his civil service salary of £96,000 be cut, pro rata?

§ The Prime Minister
First, people complain about too much spin, then they complain that my spokesman is snubbing the media. I have the figures for special advisers, as I thought that I might be asked about them by the Conservative party. It is correct that, since the election, an additional £2 million has been spent on advisers in Downing street. An additional £2 million has also been given to the Conservative party, so I think that we are about even.

§ Mr. Phil Hope (Corby)
My right hon. Friend will be aware that hon. Members have recently had the opportunity to visit the millennium wheel, but he may not be aware that that magnificent showcase of engineering and manufacturing was constructed in my constituency of Corby. Whereas the Conservative party continually carps about and runs down British workers and manufacturing, will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to join me in congratulating the work force, engineers and designers in Corby who have built this world-famous showcase of British manufacturing?

§ The Prime Minister
I congratulate my hon. Friend's constituents on their magnificent effort, and British manufacturing on its success in that regard. What manufacturers remember is what happened in the early 1990s, when the very economic policies that the Conservative party espouses today were tried. We had 1 million manufacturing jobs go, interest rates at 10 per cent. for four years, a national debt double what it is now, and we had—

§ Mr. Bob Russell (Colchester)
Boom and bust.

§ The Prime Minister
We had boom and bust.

§ Q10. [124302] Mr. Tony Baldry (Banbury)
The Prime Minister has had the proposals from. Lord Wakeham's commission on the House of Lords before him for some 940 considerable time, but nothing has happened. Will he give an undertaking to the House and to the country that, well before the next general election, the Labour party will come clean about what it intends to do by way of long-term reform of the House of Lords? It seems rather strange that the Government can bring forward proposals on matters such as fox hunting, yet do not seem to have time to bring forward sensible, long-lasting proposals on reform of the upper House.

§ The Prime Minister
I do not know what the hon. Gentleman is talking about. There is a debate on that matter on Monday, and the Labour party will of course make its position at the next election clear in its manifesto.

§ Angela Smith (Basildon)
The Prime Minister may not have had the opportunity to read the Basildon Evening Echo, but will he take a look at it, as the Tory-led Essex county council is currently reviewing its meals on wheels service? It proposes that two weeks' worth of food should be delivered, frozen and in advance, to pensioners whom it has deemed are unable to cook meals for themselves or are a danger to others if they do so. Will he suggest to Essex county council that, even though it is Tory-led, it has a responsibility to put the needs of the vulnerable first? Will he also suggest that it might cut its budget for the chairman's champagne reception before it cuts pensioners' meals?

§ The Prime Minister
That is the real face of the Conservative party—no one should ever forget it. The Conservatives cut money and services going to the poorest people in our country. The Tory party has always stood for the few and not the many, and it always will.

§ Q12. [124304] Mr. Andrew George (St. Ives)
Is the Prime Minister aware that Cornish schoolchildren receive £250 a head less under the existing formula than the average for England, despite the need to provide services across scattered rural communities? When will the funding formula for local authorities properly reflect the special needs of rural areas, especially areas such as Cornwall?

§ The Prime Minister
I was not aware of the particular statistic that the hon. Gentleman has just given me, but he will be aware that, as a result of the additional money that we have given to schools, the amount of funding per pupil in Cornwall—as elsewhere in the country—will have risen considerably under this Government, having been cut under the previous Government.
I understand that each part of the country argues about the fairness or unfairness of its settlement, and we have to balance those competing claims. However, what cannot be disputed is that under this Government the funding per pupil and the extra money going into school buildings is rising, but under the previous Government it was cut. There is a lot more still to be done, but we at least have never returned to the days of the Conservative party in government.