PRIME MINISTER
(ENGAGEMENTS)
Q1. Mr. Freud
asked the Prime Minister if she will list her official engagements for 24 April.
The Prime Minister (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher)
This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and later met Mrs. Louisa Kennedy, the wife of one of the American hostages in Tehran. In addition to my duties in this House, I shall be having further meetings with ministerial colleagues and others, including one with a delegation from the city of Hull.
Mr. Freud
While the Prime Minister pursues her busy schedule, will she bear in mind that an extra 5p tax on a packet of cigarettes would have enabled the Government to increase child benefit by £1 instead of 75p? Will she accept that any loss of revenue caused by a diminution in smoking would easily have been compensated for by savings in the National Health Service?
The Prime Minister
Extra indirect tax works through straight away to the retail price index. Because so many social security benefits are linked to that index, that would put up public expenditure next year by a multiplier factor. That is one of the aspects that we must take into account when deciding the balance of the Budget.
Mr. Ian Lloyd
Will my right hon. Friend comment on the deplorable example of bath-plug economics, to which our attention was drawn in the press articles on the Isle of Grain power station closure yesterday and today? Can any industrial society survive a system in which 27 men can force the squandering of nearly £400 million of hard-earned public capital in this way? Does not this lie at the heart of the discontent which some of us feel, in that the initiative that she is showing in this area has not been sufficiently robustly supported on the Benches next to her?
The Prime Minister
I agree that industrial relations on the Isle of Grain site for the new power station have been a disgrace, when some 27 laggers can virtually bring the whole place to a dead slow and then a stop and are being paid £4.60 bonus an hour. I agree that we need [column 694]to look into industrial relations on this site and other sites of the same kind. We must also look into the economics of the construction of future power stations which can be so delayed and overrun like this one.
Mr. Arthur Lewis
The Prime Minister referred to her discussions with Mrs. Kennedy, to whom we all give our sympathetic understanding. Is she aware that Mrs. Kennedy spoke on radio before she met the Prime Minister and made a statement to the effect that in no circumstances would those poor hostages support any military undertaking? In her discussions with Mrs. Kennedy, did the Prime Minister give her a similar impression, and will the right hon. Lady and her Government bear it in mind?
The Prime Minister
I saw Mrs. Kennedy this morning, and I think that she is a wonderful and remarkable person. It is clear that both she and her husband, who is being held hostage, have considerable inner resources of strength that are seeing them through. I made it clear that we are anxious to support our friends, the United States, in what we are now being asked to do—to take further political action, and later economic action. We shall continue to support them in those endeavours.
Mr. Body
If, in the course of today, my right hon. Friend considers the tactics that she will employ this weekend in Luxembourg, will she bear in mind that the essence of any genuine community must be the willingness of those who are strong and well off to help those who are less well off? Does she agree that at present we should be net beneficiaries and not net contributors? If my right hon. Friend cannot reach any such agreement, there is no Euro-fanatic in this country who will be able to persuade the British people that we belong to a genuine community.
The Prime Minister
The essence of partnership in any community is that all partners are entitled to an equitable deal. We are not getting an equitable deal at the moment. Because of that, we are requiring back large sums of the net contribution that we make. I still do not underestimate the difficulties of the task, but we must stick to our objective absolutely clearly.
[column 695]Mr. James Callaghan
While we wish the Prime Minister success in her endeavours at Luxembourg to recover this large sum of money—and we have given her steady support in this matter—will she, in view of the statement by President Giscard d'Estaing yesterday that this issue could not be settled in the absence of an agreement to increase farm prices, give an assurance that the position of the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will be fully supported and that no increase will be conceded by the British on prices for goods and commodities in surplus?
The Prime Minister
When that statement was made by the President of France and communicated to the meeting of Agriculture Ministers, Peter Walkermy right hon. Friend made a pretty robust response—as only he can. He said that the agriculture price agreement would be dealt with, as it always has been, on merit. I have made it abundantly clear that we are certainly prepared to look at the other matters which have to be settled within the same time scale but that each of them must, nevertheless, continue to be considered on merit, and I shall stick to that viewpoint.
Mr. Callaghan
I take it that the Prime Minister wants the House to understand that there is no question of bargaining an increase in the farm price settlement on commodities that are in surplus against the budget.
The Prime Minister
I entirely agree. We are not bartering a settlement in one sphere against settlement in another. We are prepared to look at them all—certainly agricultural prices and sheepmeat—within the same time scale. I think that many of my right hon. and hon. Friends would say that if we expect Community members to help us to sort out our problems, we must equally expect to be ready to help them to sort out theirs. That is what a community is.
Mr. Callaghan
I do not know whether the right hon. Lady was trying to obfuscate the issue, but what she said at the end was not clear. We would like a clear answer from her on this matter. Is it the case that when she goes to Luxembourg—she will, of course, be discussing all these issues separately—she does not intend to yield on what is the common [column 696]sense of the agricultural situation, namely, that commodities in surplus will not enjoy price increases this year?
Mr. William Hamilton
“Yes” or “No” .
The Prime Minister
I had hoped that we were at one on this and that after my last reply we were at one. May I repeat——
Mr. Skinner
The right hon. Lady has thrown the towel in.
The Prime Minister
—that we are not going to barter prices on the agricultural settlement against the budget. The agricultural settlement will be dealt with by the Agriculture Ministers in the ordinary way.
Mr. Callaghan
With all respect to the right hon. Lady, we have not had an answer to the question. The question is a simple one. Are we intending to stand firm on our position that commodities in surplus will not enjoy a price increase during the coming year?
The Prime Minister
The right hon. Gentleman is asking me to achieve something that he never achieved. What I will not do is to barter prices in the Agriculture council against the budget. With all due respect, I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman can ask for more than that.
Mr. Callaghan
The House and the whole country will draw their own conclusions from that attempt to wriggle. However, the right hon. Lady is wrong, because we did achieve a freeze on surplus commodities. They did not enjoy any price increase. Will the right hon. Lady please withdraw her remarks on that?
The Prime Minister
It was a freeze on surplus commodities last year, negotiated by my right hon. Friend. In almost all years—I do not say in every one—the right hon. Gentleman negotiated increases in prices above those recommended by the Commission. I think——
Mr. Michael Hamilton
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker——
Mr. Speaker
I shall take the point of order later. I know what it is.
The Prime Minister
The country will be well aware that it was the right hon. [column 697]Gentleman's Administration that left us with a net contribution of £1 billion.
Mr. Whitney
During the course of the day, will my right hon. Friend consider what additional measures her Government, or this House, might take to give British trade unionists the opportunity to have a better level of leadership, the need for which has been exemplified by the performance during recent days of a certain Mr. Mostyn Evans, who signed a national agreement with British Leyland and then advised his membership that he would, support action against that agreement, only to find his recommendation rejected in turn?
The Prime Minister
Over and above what we have provided for in the Employment Bill and the new Green Paper which will be coming out, I think that we must look to the trade unions to sort out their own internal problems. What we are trying to do is to give ordinary trade union members a greater say in union matters.
INTERNATIONAL ARMS SALES
(BRANDT COMMISSION REPORT)
Q2. Mr. Dalyell
asked the Prime Minister what is the policy of Her Majesty's Government regarding the views expressed by the Brandt Commission regarding taxation of international arms sales for the benefit of developing countries.
The Prime Minister
We are studying the detailed proposals of the Brandt Commission and will give our considered views soon.
Mr. Dalyell
On the principle of such a tax, does the Prime Minister agree or disagree with her right hon. Friend the Member for Sidcup (Mr. Heath) and his distinguished co-signatories?
The Prime Minister
I looked at what the Brandt Commission said on this matter of a tax on armament exports and imports. With respect to the hon. Gentleman, it is a pretty cursory reference. It is a long way from a firm recommendation that there should be a tax on armaments. The reference is in the context of a tax on all exports and on all international trade. I could not suddenly out very much more study, and I do not come out with a decision on that with [column 698]believe that those who sat on the Brandt Commission would expect it.
Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop
Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that what may appear to be a developing country in one context is, in some manufacturing contexts, highly developed and may be competing, quite unfairly, with our own producers?
The Prime Minister
I accept what my hon. Friend says. There are great differences among developing countries. One of our problems is that of competing with some of the trades of the newly developed countries, such as South Korea.
PRIME MINISTER
(ENGAGEMENTS)
Q3. Mr. Sainsbury
asked the Prime Minister whether she will list her official engagements for 24 April.
The Prime Minister
I refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave earlier.
Mr. Sainsbury
Will my right hon. Friend find time during the day to look at the information available on the increasing persecution in the Soviet Union of the so-called dissidents, who are, of course, people seeking to exercise fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of religion and speech and the right to emigrate? Will the Prime Minister consider how this information can best be made more widely available so that those who are considering going to the Soviet Union, for whatever reason, might be more aware of the extent of the denial of human rights there?
The Prime Minister
The latest information that I have was given during the course of a debate in this House. It was information compiled by a distinguished academic. It said that between August 1978 and March this year there were some 97 political trials in the Soviet Union, leading to over 200 severe sentences of imprisonment for political matters. As my hon. Friend knows, in addition to those matters, Sakharov has been sent to the town of Gorky, where he cannot communicate with anyone. There is widespread persecution of minority groups in the Soviet Union, and that is endemic to the system.
[column 699]Mr. Robert Sheldon
Has the Prime Minister noted today's further rise in the value of the pound? Does she realise that that will present further problems for our manufactured exports and greater opportunities for manufactured imports, to the great disadvantage of British industry? When will she instruct the Governor of the Bank of England to sell sterling and reduce the value of the pound?
The Prime Minister
If I were to instruct the Governor of the Bank of England to sell sterling, to go on and on selling it and to resist the market, the money supply would go through the roof and we should be laying the foundations for the next round of inflation.
QUESTIONS TO MINISTERS
Mr. Michael Hamilton
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. With no disrespect to the Leader of the Opposition, may I put it to you that it is in the interests of Back Benchers on both sides of the House that some limit should be placed on the number of occasions on which any one of us can intervene? Today the Leader of the Opposition was called no fewer than five times. I believe that the majority of hon. Members would agree with what I have said.
Mr. Mike Thomas
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not the case that if the right hon. Lady the Prime Minister were to answer a simple question there would be no need for my right hon. Friend to intervene on so many occasions?
Mr. Speaker
The House knows that I have often said that I would give extra latitude to the Leader of the Opposition. It is not often that he intervenes on five occasions.
The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Norman St. John-Stevas)
He has.
Mr. Speaker
Well, the Leader of the House can count better than I can. However, [column 700]the House knows that that extra latitude is given. I know that normally the right hon. Gentleman is aware that his own hon. Friends wish to intervene.
Mr. Skinner
He kept me from speaking, but I am not complaining.
Mr. Speaker
That makes me feel at home with the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Scott
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. You mentioned the right hon. Gentleman's own supporters. Is not there something to be said for your taking the view that if the Leader of the Opposition rises five times in succession five Conservative Members might then be called?
Mr. Speaker
That is an interesting suggestion.
Mr. Peter Bottomley
Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I suggest that one can avoid both those problems if, when the Leader of the Opposition is minded to repeat his question a number of times, he could intervene towards the end of Prime Minister's Question Time so that Back Benchers can get in their questions and so that he is able to receive the same answer several times?
Mr. Leighton
Order. This will get us nowhere. It is all a matter of good sense and patience, and give and take. It is not often that the Leader of the Opposition intervenes five times, although it may have happened before.
Mr. St.John-Stevas
indicated assent.
Mr. Speaker
I see that the Leader of the House has counted five.
Mr. St. John-Stevas
During business questions.
Mr. Speaker
Oh, I see. We are talking on a different level.