House of Commons Hansard Debates for 22 Jun 1990

Column 1250

schools, colleges and universities. I regret to say that, as a member of the Select Committee on Education, Science and Arts who has visited many such institutions, I have found that business is still dismissed in the similar off-hand way in which Victorian aristocrats looked down their noses at those quaintly described as being in trade'. Too often, in many faculties within those excellent institutes of learning, there is reluctance to encourage people to go into business or to become entrepreneurs and to make and create wealth.

To ensure that Britain succeeds in the world marketplace, we must change such outmoded attitudes and the philosophy that gives school pupils the idea that working in industry is what one does when one cannot go on to university or higher education, because one's A-levels are not good enough to get a place. We must change the idea that studying engineering--both the previous speakers have been heavily involved with engineering--is not quite as good as studying a pure science, that business administration is not a proper degree subject, and that graduates who go into company management schemes are merely wasting their talents and their time.

Mr. Stevens : I wish to emphasise the point that my hon. Friend made about how unpopular engineering is, even among engineers. A recent survey by Imperial Ventures Ltd. showed that of 14,000 engineering graduates, only 5,000 intended to go into engineering.

Mr. Evennett : I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that information, which highlights the point that I have been trying to put across. In the countries that we have to compete with in the world marketplace, the enterprise message has got through, loud and clear, as a consequence of the right attitude and the generally high standard of business education at degree level and beyond. In those countries--America, West Germany, wherever--talented people are encouraged to go into business, with spectacular results, as we have seen, for the export and industrial development of those countries. We need a similar approach to business, industry and exports as entrepreneurs have in those countries.

All hon. Members take trips abroad and we know that many business men abroad regard exporting as a fun opportunity and a challenge as well as rewarding and worthwhile for the nation and for the individual. That is what we have to say to our young people in schools and colleges in this country. We must tell them that that is a way to have a challenging, exciting and invigorating career, and it is just as worthwhile for the well -being of the country as working in institutions of higher education and learning.

Of course it remains true that exports are created not by attitudes alone, but by products of the right quality, at the right price, which other people wish to buy, supported by an effective after-sales service. However, a change in attitudes could ensure that people of talent are available to design, manufacture, promote, sell and service products here and abroad, that would advance Britain's exports to the rest of the world. We have to do that if we want to progress.

In recent years there has been some change in attitude, but more needs to be done as we go into the 1990s. We

Column 1251

remain a major exporting nation, and we should be proud of it and ensure that we approach exporting with new vigour.

The Government strongly believe in wealth creation, enterprise and the entrepreneurial spirit, and they have given us tremendous opportunities. As a nation, we must take them. I believe that, under the present Government, we will take them, and that the results will benefit everyone in this country, because more wealth will be created, as will more exports, which are so vital.

10.57 am

Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) : The hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Evennett) was a bit unfair to universities and schools, which have made progress in the vital area that he was discussing, and which are stimulating people to work in export industries.

Almost all Opposition Members who have spoken or been present this morning represent constituencies in the north-east of England, and we can point to Newcastle university and polytechnic, as well as other higher education institutions, which are involved in export-related activities, and are conscious of responsibilities towards business. Those institutions have grown up with business.

In some areas financial pressures have made it difficult for institutions to provide the service that they want to provide. For example, language teaching is of the greatest importance to exports. An export-inhibiting tendency in this country is that people do not know other peoples' languages sufficiently well. Languages such as Russian and Spanish--which is one of the most useful for export markets--are not as widely taught as they should be. That is partly a result of financial problems, and partly because of an historically wrong structure for language teaching in Britain.

When the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford talked about the City, and the contribution that it has to make, he reminded me of the discussions that we have had this week on related matters. It is important that the City retains its pre-eminence as a centre of financial services, and that is why I should like Britain to lead developments in European currency and central banking--which will take place anyway. I should like a European central bank to be in London. If not--if it is in Frankfurt or somewhere else--the City will have to pay the price in the role that it plays.

I apologise to the Minister and to other hon. Members who may speak later because I have a constituency engagement which will force me to leave early. That is one of the problems with a constituency 300 miles away from the House. One advantage of such a constituency is that it has many exporting industries. For example, Pringle's Knitwear, Hardy's of Alnwick, which is known throughout the world for fishing tackle, and Jus-Rol Frozen Foods are all great exporting industries, along with agriculture, which has had to fight in recent weeks to keep its export markets open. When the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford referred to salmon, I hope that he was not challenging Berwick's role as England's salmon capital, exporting wild salmon--both as smoked salmon and in other products--throughout the world.

In the area that I represent there are great export commitments. Trade figures have been depressing in recent months ; the one encouraging factor has been export

Column 1252

growth--usually that has been the one comforting note. However, more recent figures have shown that growth to be slowing. There is bound to be a fear that it was mainly a beneficiary of depreciation a year ago, and that it may not be sustained. The appalling trade figures--far beyond the Government's deficit forecast--would be more bearable if the price that we are paying in the form of export restraint were controlling inflation. Our export performance must improve far more dramatically if we are to cope with the tendency towards import growth--a serious problem that can be addressed only if our manufacturers win more of the home market and a larger share of the overseas markets. It is asking a good deal of our industries to expect them to keep up with the British consumer's taste for imports.

Mrs. Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley) : On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am sure that I speak for the entire House and for the people of Britain in expressing our deep concern and sympathy for the victims of last night's devastating earthquake, which has left thousands killed or injured. The British people are always ready to respond with generosity in such circumstances, and I am sure that the Government will also be ready to respond with immediate humanitarian aid for the earthquake victims. We know already that appeals have been made for medical supplies, food, tents, blankets, clothing and heavy-duty equipment. We should like Ministers to tell us this morning precisely what emergency action they intend to take in response to the tragedy

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Paul Dean) : I am sure that the whole House echoes the concern that the hon. Lady has expressed. Although there have been no requests for a statement, I am sure that what she has said has been heard on the Government Front Bench.

Mr. Beith : I should like to associate myself and my hon. Friends with the concern expressed by the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) about this appalling tragedy. I hope that the Minister will be able-- without getting into trouble with you, Mr. Deputy Speaker--to give us any useful information that he may have about Goverment assistance to Iran.

The support for exports in this country is diffuse : it is spread over many Government Departments, not all of which seem to know what the others are doing. The Department of Trade and Industry, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Department of Energy and agencies such as the British Overseas Trade Board sometimes seem to be going in different directions. The Foreign Office recently decided to take more than 20 members of its commercial staff out of Latin American- based work and transferred them to eastern European work. At the same time, the British Overseas Trade Board argued that eastern Europe was not an immediate priority to which resources should be diverted, and that we should continue to work primarily in some of the other markets. A difficult question to answer is how much should be given to eastern Europe now, given the slow pace at which the infrastructure that is necessary for effective trading relations is being created. It appears that different Government agencies are pursuing different policies, which are sometimes in conflict. I wonder how the Government will address that problem.

Column 1253

Small businesses play an important ro le in exports but it is usually harder for a small business man to penetrate foreign markets and maintain the necessary contacts without adding overheads that it is beyond the resources of his business to maintain. There is, perhaps, a greater ro le for Government in the promotion and assisting of small business exports. However, the charges that are now imposed for export advice are a potential disincentive ; a business man may not know how much he will receive from a market, or whether he can recoup his costs, of which the charges are an additional element. Such charges may be insignificant to larger firms, but smaller firms--for whom that type of assistance matters most--may be deterred from entering an uncertain market, or taking a new product into an overseas market.

The Government are contemplating major changes in their export promotion support activities, especially those designed to off load that activity into the private sector. The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry would like nothing better than to give almost all the activities of his Department to the private sector.

Mr. Redwood : Shame.

Mr. Beith : Is the Minister denying that? If he is, that is useful information that can be discussed further, later in the debate. It is not clear that the private sector feels able to take on some of the Government's export credit activities, especially those involving large lumps of insurance concentrated on markets with uncertain creditworthiness. In such instances, it is difficult to obtain any commercial return on the credit. Other countries are continuing to sustain various efforts designed to assist exporters in those markets. Some countries have done more than Britain to support and sustain changes of commerce. With their local business contacts and the direct participation of local business people, they are in a unique position to help exporters : one business man can talk to another in a language that both understand. I want to encourage greater Government support for changes of commerce.

There is a danger of "unilateral disarmament" in the Government's export promotion activities. In their desire to adopt a free-market approach and to remove themselves from activities at which they may not be particularly skilled, or which may seem to be too interventionist, they may be moving faster than Governments in other countries. It is vital for our Government to recognise that their job is not to rid themselves of responsibilities that they think they should not have, but to ensure that they are on all fours with Governments in competing countries, and that we are not providing less assistance. If the level is inappropriate, we should seek an international agreement to ensure that Governments are not as involved as some are. We must attempt to operate by international agreement, and to secure transparency in the export promotion and credit activities of other Governments.

If this country is strict about indicating the loss-making areas of Government export credit activity, we must ensure that the same transparency is available in other countries, rather than send our exporters into a market where they will compete with exporters who have hidden

Column 1254

subsidies from their Governments. The Government should divert a considerable amount of diplomatic and negotiating effort into that. Eastern Europe has recognised all the inefficiencies that result from protection and from state management of economies. What better time to convince Governments across the world that the inefficiencies that they all build into international trading relationships by protection and hidden subsidies are harmful in the long run to consumers, both in their own and in other countries? Let us go with the wind of change in eastern Europe, and recognise that it has implications not just for eastern Europe or third-world countries, but for advanced developed countries such as Japan.

Now it the time to realise that a great many subsidies and interventions in those markets are anti-competitive. They are unfair to exporters in other countries and they are against the interests of consumers in every country. Just as the past year has been a year of dramatic change towards freedom in eastern Europe, let us now aim for a year, or even a decade, of dramatic change towards genuine free trade.

11.9 am

Mr. Ian Gow (Eastbourne) : I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Stevens) on winning the ballot, on his excellent speech and on the courage which he displayed in persevering with that speech. My hon. Friend had a virus in January. By common consent we are now in June and I join my hon. Friends and the entire House in hoping that that virus will depart quickly, we hope before the end of the month. I also enjoyed--as I always do--the speech of the hon. Member for Wallsend (Mr. Garrett). So we started today as we shall try to continue, although we shall certainly not be able to better those two speeches.

Richard II ascended the throne of England 613 years ago today. I am delighted that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs is in his place, not least because he is one of the most articulate exponents of the Government's free enterprise policies. That ascension to the throne of England is an appropriate date to remember because it reminds the House of an extraordinary contrast. We are often told that it is a good thing that many people from overseas come to the United Kingdom. That might be regarded as importing people, yet we are told that importing is not so virtuous and that exporting is the only virtuous thing. We are importing people, which is supposed to be good in the sense that they are supposed to bring money here. But my hon. Friend's motion refers only to the export trade.

Mr. Nicholas Soames (Crawley) : Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Gow : Of course I shall give way. Let me make it plain to all hon. Gentlemen and hon. Ladies that I shall give way as often as they wish to intervene.

Mr. Soames : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. When my hon. Friend talks about importing and exporting people, is he aware that the Government have recently undertaken some important legislation which could lead to importing quite a number of people from Hong Kong? Does he agree that those people are likely to make an important and valuable contribution to the United Kingdom economy and that they are greatly to be welcomed?

Column 1255

Mr. Gow : My hon. Friend is an expert on the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Bill and has made several journeys to what is at the moment the Crown colony of Hong Kong. I hope that the 50,000 heads of families to whom my hon. Friend refers, and upon whom we shall confer the right of abode in Britain, will remain in Hong Kong. I do not want to sound in any way unwelcoming ; I hope that they will stay in Hong Kong because I want Hong Kong to benefit from the contributions that those people can make to the Crown colony.

I do not know who drafted my hon. Friend's motion, but it bears some of the hallmarks of the civil service. I was not suggesting that civil servants drafted it, only that it bears some of the hallmarks of the civil service. It states :

"That this House considers that the United Kingdom export trade is a vital factor in the development of the British economy ;" Who could quarrel with that? I am about to be really kind to the hon. Member for Berwick-upon- Tweed (Mr. Beith), who is no longer the Chief Whip of the Liberal Democrats but is now the shadow Chancellor ; I hope that I have got his designation right. Even the once-mighty Liberal party could not dissent from the proposition that the export trade is a vital factor in the development of the British economy. The motion continues with the words,

"notes that Britain exports a wider range of commodities than any other country".

What on earth does that mean? I am happy to give way to my hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton if I missed that part of his illuminating speech which told us what he meant by

"a wider range of commodities".

Now I come to the most important part of my hon. Friend's motion to which I draw the attention of the shadow Chancellor of the Liberal Democrats and my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State, who I hope will not be in that position for very much longer. He will not misunderstand what I am saying because seated upon the Treasury Bench is a Lords Commissioner of the Treasury. I hope that the Lords Commissioner will tell my right hon. Friend the Patronage Secretary that my hon. Friends and I are looking for the early promotion of my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State. He is far too good to be an Under-Secretary of State ; he should be a Minister of State. I am sure that that view will be shared by the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed after he has listened to my hon. Friend's speech. I hope that my hon. Friend will contribute to the debate because it is very important and I shall be asking some questions which my hon. Friend may not find too easy to answer.

My right hon. Friend the Patronage Secretary is now in his place so I shall have to repeat the tribute I paid to my hon. Friend the Minister. My right hon. Friend was about to make the journey to his Sussex constituency, but on hearing that tribute to one of Her Majesty's Ministers, my right hon. Friend the Patronage Secretary postponed his journey and came into the Chamber. Madam Deputy Speaker has just come into the Chamber, so she cannot accuse me of repeating what she did not hear. I was saying that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State should be a Minister of State. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Patronage Secretary will cease talking and will listen carefully.

The most important part of my hon. Friend's motion is the words,

Column 1256

"supports the Government's efforts to remove barriers to international trade to free the movement of goods and money ;" It is surprising that the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed did not seize upon those words as being the most important ones in the motion. The Liberal party used to support free trade. I do not know whether the Liberal party still supports free trade. Sometimes the Liberal party wants to restrict trade and to impose controls, but I do not agree with that. I believe in the freedom of people, goods and capital in what is now the European Community, but I go further than that. I should like the free movement not of people but of goods and services worldwide. Some of my hon. Friends will agree that we cannot suggest that those who live in Africa or Asia should be able to come here, but I am in favour of their goods coming here freely. I look forward to the day when there will be free trade not just in the European Community but with other nations, too.

Mr. Michael Grylls (Surrey, North-West) : Will my hon. Friend give way?

Mr. Gow : Of course I will. My hon. Friend is chairman of the Conservative Trade and Industry Committee and is as knowledgeable about these matters as even my hon. Friend the Minister.

Mr. Grylls : Listening to that, I almost decided not to intervene. Does my hon. Friend agree that one advantage of the strength of the European Community, as it moves towards a free market by 1992, is that it can use its influence as one of the most important trading blocks in the world to bring about free trade in different parts of the world which would add greatly to wealth creation? It should use that influence to the good.

Mr. Gow : I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. As in other matters, my hon. Friend and I have identical views. I agree with him, and I agree with myself.

My hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton, despite his illness, referred to the European Community. I am surrounded by hon. Members who have strong views on the European Community. I was rebuked by the hon. Member for Wallsend--at least I think it was a rebuke, but it was a courteous and friendly one--

Mr. Ted Garrett : It was a historical correction.

Mr. Gow : It was either a rebuke or a correction. I frequently plead guilty to charges that are levelled against me, which often are only too well founded.

I am a student of de Gaulle, whose story is fascinating. It is appropriate we should be talking about him, because was not last Monday, 18 June, the anniversary of the first occasion on which he saved France?

Mr. Soames : The appel.

Mr. Gow : Yes.

Before General de Gaulle returned to power in May 1958, and before the treaty of Rome was signed on 25 March 1957, he had been the leader of the Rassemblment du Peuple Francais. He was the only leading political figure in France who was opposed to the signing of the treaty of Rome. Although the treaty was signed in 1957, it did not become operative until 1 January 1958. I remind the House of those dates because in May 1958--a year after the treaty had been signed and four and a half months after it had become operative--de Gaulle became

Column 1257

the last Prime Minister of the fourth republic. By the time that he had formed his administration, which included Ministers from all parties, France was already a member of the Community. But because de Gaulle believed in the solemnity of treaties entered into by France, when he became president of the fifth republic the following January he set about fashioning the institutions of the Community so that they should be in the best interests of France. I do not rebuke the general for doing that, and in a moment I shall mention my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, who has sought, without as much success as de Gaulle, to fashion the institutions of the European Community, notably its trading arrangements.

Mr. William Cash (Stafford) : Does my hon. Friend recall that when Adenauer and de Gaulle met for the first time, de Gaulle subsequently recorded in his memoirs :

"We discussed Europe at length. Adenauer agreed with me that there could be no question of submerging the identity of our two nations into a stateless institution"?

Mr. Gow : I do not recall those words, but I remember the meeting of those two relatively old men, who were the heads of the Governments of France and Germany. When de Gaulle became president in May 1958 he was 68 and Adenauer was almost the same age. They both lived through the first and second world wars and it was left to those two statesmen to ensure that an essential element for peace in Europe was friendship between France and Germany. It was infinitely more difficult to be the architect of that policy in the years following the war, when bitterness was so great and all the signs of the destruction were evident--not just the blood spilt but the buildings that had been destroyed.

I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Cash) reminded me of the role of Adenauer and de Gaulle and how they set about creating friendship. I remember vividly that de Gaulle kept only two stars on his kepi, when lesser men had promoted themselves to field marshal. He visited Germany, at Adenauer's invitation, to inspect the flower of the reviving German army, which I found moving. I must not be led astray into de Gaulle and Adenauer, not least the amazing contribution that de Gaulle made.

My hon. Friend the Member for Stafford read some words to the House about the relationship between Adenauer and de Gaulle, which reminded me of another famous phrase of de Gaulle's. We have reminded ourselves of the phrase "Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals." That phrase earned me a rebuke from the hon. Member for Wallsend. De Gaulle coined a phrase which reflects the views of my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Shepherd), who believes in the concept of a Europe des patries. I give way to my hon. Friend.

Mr. Richard Shepherd (Aldridge-Brownhills) : Having been pulled to my feet, I entirely endorse the sentiments and observations of my hon. Friend.

Mr. Gow : A Europe des patries is endorsed by my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills. That is a terrible name ; I have never liked the boundary commissioners. They should never have given my hon. Friend's constituency that name. Castle Point is another example. My right hon. Friend the Father of the House is

Column 1258

a delightful man, but I have never understood why his constituency is called that. We might have a debate on the boundary commissioners.

Mr. Andrew Mitchell (Gedling) : My hon. Friend mentions the changes that the Boundary Commission makes from time to time to the names of our constituencies which he regrets. Whenever I have had the pleasure of listending to one of my hon. Friend's speeches, he has referred to my constituency as "Gelding". I am grateful for this opportunity to remind him, before he mentions my constituency and perhaps makes an inadvertent mistake, that it is Gedling.

Mr. Gow : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. His father represented a constituency called Basingstoke. The boundary commissioners abolished that constituency and renamed it Hampshire, North-West, but I still think of my hon. Friend's father as the Member for Basingstoke. My hon. Friend the Member for Crawley (Mr. Soames) is in his place, as he usually is. Later today, he will make the journey to Crawley. I remember when that constituency was called Horsham and Crawley. The folk who live in Crawley are no longer represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (Sir P. Hordern) but are represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Crawley.

Mr. Soames : Does my hon. Friend agree that it is a continuing disgrace and a source of the deepest anxiety and unhappiness to many hon. Members that my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (Sir P. Hordern) does not sit upon the Treasury Bench?

Mr. Deputy Speaker : Order. I hope that we will not get too far away from the subject of United Kingdom export trade.

Mr. Gow : It continues to astonish me that my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham is not in the Cabinet, promoting exports--I think that that brings the discussion within order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend should be in the Cabinet. I mean no disrespect to my right hon. Friend the Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley)--who would wish to be discourteous to him?--but my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham would be as excellent a Secretary of State as my right hon. Friend. Incidentally, we cannot rebuke the boundary commissioners for calling my right hon. Friend's constituency Cirencester and Tewkesbury. It is a delightful name and conjures up a vision of the finest English architecture in a beautiful part of the world.

I wish to return to exports and to the Common Market. By one of those happy accidents, I have before me an extract from the Official Report of 29 June 1989. It records the famous occasion when my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister had returned from the kingdom of Spain and the so-called Madrid summit--and came to the Dispatch Box from which my hon. Friend the Under- Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs will speak soon. Unlike many other Heads of Government, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, wholly in character, came back directly from Madrid to the House to give an account of what had taken place and to submit herself to examination and

cross-examination by my hon. Friends and even by the spokesman--now absent- -of the once-mighty Liberal party, the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed.

We may pause here to note that the Treasurer of Her Majesty's Household--my hon. Friend the Member for

Column 1259

Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)--whose weekend appears to have begun already, judging by his attire, has torn himself away from his constituency to listen to a debate on exports. He knows more about exports than almost any other man, because he contributed to cementing friendship within the Community by marrying a girl from the kingdom of Spain. That marriage took place when Spain was not in the Community. One might say that there is a direct link between my hon. Friend's marriage and the accession of Spain to the Community, because Spain acceded a long time after we joined on 1 January 1972. At that time, my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr. Heath) was First Lord of the Treasury. Unaccountably, my right hon. Friend is not in his place. No doubt he is conducting an orchestra in a distant land--I suppose that he is contributing to exports. I think that some of my hon. Friends would like to export my right hon. Friend, but who would purchase him? That is an interesting point. Perhaps my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will tell us the answer.

Mr. Redwood : Perhaps it is an audible export rather than an invisible one.

Mr. Gow : Did my hon. Friend say "audible"? He did not say "inaudible"?

Mr. Redwood : No.

Mr. Gow : Anyway, that was a fair point to make.

I said that my right hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup might be contributing to an export drive, but before then I was talking about the journey made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister from Madrid to London in June last year. Did she make that journey alone?

Mr. Soames : No.

Mr. Gow : My right hon. Friend did not. When she returned from the Madrid summit, no one believed that she was alone on the aeroplane. She was accompanied by my right hon. Friend the Member for Blaby (Mr. Lawson), who at that time was Chancellor of the Exchequer, and by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Surrey, East (Sir G. Howe), who at that time was Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, so there was a kind of trinity on the aeroplane. I shall not lay myself open to a charge of blasphemy by trying to describe their different roles, but there was a trinity--although I must say that that point was not original ; Aneurin Bevan once said it.

Mr. Soames : Would my hon. Friend care to speculate on what events following the Madrid summit--at which a good deal of discussion on exports took place--led to two members of that trinity no longer holding the same posts that they held then?

Mr. Gow : Each hon. Member knows that no Minister can continue in the same office for ever. Indeed, one might say that I am living proof of the truth of that proposition. Therefore, we should not be too surprised if those who held office in June last year do not hold the same office today.

My hon. Friends may say that there is one dramatic exception to the rule that no one can hold the same office for ever, because my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has held the same office since 4 May 1979. That was the

Column 1260

day--my hon. Friend the Member for Watfor d remembers it with great clarity--on which the Queen summoned to Buckingham palace the first woman in the story of these islands ever to hold the office of First Lord of the Treasury.

My hon. Friend the Member for Crawley put a question to me and I shall try to answer it, but first I should like to return to the Official Report of 29 June 1989. My hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills put a question to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. Her words are relevant to the motion of my hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton. All of my hon. Friends who are here now were here on that occasion. [Interruption.] My hon. Friend the Member for Crawley is leaving the Chamber to get some further works of reference. I hope that he will catch your eye a little later, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made her famous statement on 29 June 1989. By an extraordinary accident, Richard II came to the throne in 1377. I thought that the column number of my right hon. Friend's speech in the Official Report and that date were the same, but I now find that they are not.

My right hon. Friend said :

"the Council"--

that is, the Council of Ministers--

"agreed that the measures necessary to achieve the first stage of progressive realisation of economic and monetary union will be implemented from 1 July 1990."

Let us pause there. Mark how timely this debate is. Is not today 23 June? No, it is 22 June, but we are not very far away from that date.

I see that my hon. Friend the Treasurer of Her Majesty's Household has apparently joined the Liberal party. He is wearing yellow today, which is very odd. However, we do not want to be misled into that subject.

The Prime Minister said :

"The first stage of progressive realisation of economic and monetary union will be implemented from 1 July 1990".

That is the first day of next month, which is eight days away. That is why my hon. Friend the Member for Nuneaton tabled the motion for debate today. He realised the significance of the words of the Prime Minister and thought that it would be timely to hold a debate a few days before 1 July.

The Prime Minister said :

"These"--

that is, the measures--

"include completion of the single market, abolition of all foreign exchange controls".

I entirely agree with that.

I remember the reaction of the Labour party when my right hon. and learned Friend, who is now the Lord President of the Council, abolished exchange controls in the autumn of 1979. The Labour party was strongly opposed to that and said that if exchange controls were abolished, all sterling would go out of the United Kingdom. My hon. Friend the Minister knows a great deal about that. Was he not in the think tank at the time?

Next Section

Home Page