| Home Page |
Column 1251
House of Commons
Thursday 16 December 1993
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]
PRIVATE BUSINESS
British Waterways Bill
[Lords]
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That the Promoters of the British Waterways Bill [Lords] may, notwithstanding anything in the Standing Orders or practice of this House, proceed with the Bill in the present Session and the Petition for the Bill shall be deemed to have been deposited and all Standing Orders applicable thereto shall be deemed to have been complied with ;
That, if the Bill is brought from the Lords in the present Session, the Agent for the Bill shall deposit in the Private Bill Office a declaration signed by him, stating that the Bill is the same, in every respect, as the Bill which was brought from the Lords in the last Session ;
That as soon as a certificate by one of the Clerks in the Private Bill Office, that such a declaration has been so deposited, has been laid upon the Table of the House, the Bill shall be deemed to have been read for the first and second time and committed (and shall be recorded in the Journal of this House as having been so read and committed) ;
That all Petitions relating to the Bill presented in the last Session which stand referred to the Committee on the Bill, together with any minutes of evidence taken before the Committee on the Bill, shall stand referred to the Committee on the Bill in the present session ;
That no Petitioners shall be heard before the Committee on the Bill, unless their Petition has been presented within the time limited within the last Session or deposited pursuant to paragraph (b) of Standing Order 126 relating to Private Business ;
That, in relation to the Bill, Standing Order 127 relating to Private Business shall have effect as if the words "under Standing Order 126 (Reference to committee of petitions against Bill)" were omitted ;
That no further Fees shall be charged in respect of any proceedings on the Bill in respect of which Fees have already been incurred during the last Session.-- [The First Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means.]
Column 1252
Oral Answers to Questions
NATIONAL FINANCE
Late Payers
1. Dr. Goodson-Wickes : To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received on his proposals to remedy the practice of late payment to suppliers.
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Anthony Nelson) : My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has received a number of letters supporting the Budget announcement of consultation on measures to promote prompt payment. Responses to the consultation paper, which should be addressed to the Department of Trade and Industry, should reach that Department by 31 March 1994.
Hon. Members : We cannot hear.
Madam Speaker : Order. I have already given instructions that the microphones should be switched on. Perhaps we can proceed as it is being taken care of.
Dr. Goodson-Wickes : Hon. Members on both sides of the House tell of small businesses in their constituencies whose survival has been put at risk by late payments from large companies. Will my hon. Friend investigate allegations that such practices are condoned or even encouraged by managements of certain companies? Does he agree that that is another example of the unacceptable face of capitalism which threatens the survival of small businesses, the growth of which the Government have done so much to encourage?
Mr. Nelson : My hon. Friend's complaint is clearly echoed in many of the representations that hon. Members on both sides of the House have received. The Government deplore big companies taking advantage of small companies by the wilful late payment of bills. Many of those small companies have to pay in cash or in advance when big companies can delay payment. That is exactly why my right hon. and learned Friend has produced the consultation paper and I hope that it will be well received.
Mr. William Ross : Surely the best way to bring the big companies to their senses is to make them pay interest on the bills that they owe? Would not it help companies of all sizes if interest rates generally were reduced?
Mr. Nelson : That is indeed one of the proposals that are being mooted in the Government's consultative paper. Clearly, there are problems with legislation, in that it interrupts the contractual arrangements between companies. My right hon. and learned Friend in putting forward the proposals, clearly believes that there is an endemic problem, which is not just a reflection of the period of high interest rates, but has become a matter of culture in business payments. It needs to be dealt with and we look forward to the response to the paper.
Column 1253
Fuels
2. Mr. David Evans : To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the effect of taxation on the consumption of carbon dioxide-producing fuels.
The Paymaster General (Sir John Cope) : Taxes on energy products are one factor affecting their consumption and hence total carbon dioxide emissions.
Mr. Evans : I thank the Minister for his reply. Does he agree that we put political considerations aside when we put VAT on fuel and that we were more concerned with saving the planet? We put a generous compensation package in place--the most generous ever--which made the figure proposed by the hon. Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) a weak, wet 50p. We beat that 50p. Does the Minister further agree that if we wired up that lot opposite, they would not produce enough energy to turn on the lights of Madam Speaker's Christmas tree?
Sir John Cope : As usual, my hon. Friend tells the truth with a flourish. The Labour party supports Rio and the reduction in borrowing, but it is not willing to accept the consequences.
Mr. Wigley : In the context of road fuels, has the Minister had representations from those involved in bus companies? The way in which the rebate works will considerably increase the cost of bus transport, probably to a greater extent that the Treasury has anticipated. Is he studying the matter? Can he tell the companies that the Treasury will find a way round the problem?
Sir John Cope : We always study carefully all representations that we receive. However, the cap on the bus fuel rebate will also encourage energy efficiency which, as the hon. Gentleman knows, is part of the point of the measure.
Mr. Dunn : Is not it a fact that the hon. Member for Glasgow, Garscadden (Mr. Dewar) complained about the way in which his proposal was treated only after the Budget was announced, when he realised that the Government were meeting the amount for which he had asked? Should not he make it plain that he did not complain before the Budget?
Sir John Cope : It came out clearly in the debates last week, following the Budget, that the hon. Member for Garscadden did not raise the matter until after the Budget statement.
Ms Harman : Will the Minister admit that 70p a week compensation for a pensioner couple will not cover the VAT on their fuel bill? Does he recognise how bitter and angry those pensioners will feel when they recognise that, in addition to the VAT, they will have to pay 70p a week on their insurance premiums, which will wipe out the effect of the VAT compensation? Is not that typical of this Conservative Government? Even when they are forced grudgingly to give a little with one hand, they take it all back--and more--with the other.
Sir John Cope : The decision on compensation will add £1.30 a week to the single pension and £1.85 a week to the married couple's pension by April 1996, when the measure is introduced in full.
Column 1254
Mr. Clifton-Brown : Does my right hon. Friend agree that if we are to meet the objectives of the convention on climate change, to which we signed up in Rio, we need to encourage more energy efficiency in the domestic sector, which my right hon. and learned Friend has done in his Budget by doubling the home energy efficiency scheme? We also need to burn hydrocarbons more efficiently in the transport sector. My right hon. and learned Friend has encouraged that by his pledge to increase the price of hydrocarbons by 5 per cent., which is a very tough target in real terms over the next few years.
Sir John Cope : All this goes towards fulfilling our Rio commitments which, as I said just now, the Labour party supports, although it will not accept the means outlined by my hon. Friend.
Public Spending
3. Ms Abbott : To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the effect of his public spending plans for growth in the economy.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Kenneth Clarke) : Taking full account of effects of the Budget, my forecast is for GDP growth of 2.5 per cent. in 1994.
Ms Abbott : Yesterday, under questioning in the Treasury Select Committee, the Chancellor admitted that the total effect of his tax changes would be to put up income tax by the equivalent of 7p in the pound and to put up the average family's tax bill by £9 a week. You can debate-- [Interruption.]
Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Lady must put a question to the Chancellor.
Ms Abbott : Does the Chancellor agree that whatever one says about the effect of his public spending proposals on growth, the country will never trust the Conservatives on tax again?
Mr. Clarke : In the long session yesterday in the Select Committee, I certainly accepted that I had raised taxation to a certain extent and that I had reduced public spending as well to get down the level of public borrowing, which would otherwise be a constraint on recovery. The effect on the individual man and woman will depend not only on one feature of that, but on what happens to economic recovery.
At present, the British economy is the only major economy in western Europe enjoying any growth. We have inflation down to its lowest level for 26 years. We have unemployment coming down again today, which is not an experience shared anywhere in western Europe. That is what will affect the well-being of ordinary men and women, if we can strengthen the recovery. That is the context in which the hon. Lady should put her criticisms of tax policy. She and her party do not have the first idea--at least, they have given no hint of it--of what they would do about borrowing and how they would sustain the recovery.
Mr. John Townend : Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that cuts in public spending have less effect on consumer confidence than do increases in taxation and, therefore, less impact on growth? Does he accept that the overwhelming majority of Conservative Members welcome the cuts in public spending under the Budget and the contribution made to bringing the Budget deficit under
Column 1255
control? Does he further accept that there is still an enormous amount of waste, overmanning and inefficiency in the public sector, especially in local government? Will the Government launch a national campaign to cut that waste and to make further public savings?Mr. Clarke : Obviously, it depends on how one makes the spending cuts. I agree with my hon. Friend that there is plenty of scope to cut out waste in the public service. Many dedicated public servants do just that. We have never embarked on an exercise of reducing public spending quite so sharply as we have on this occasion. It will not damage the economy, because a great deal of the savings will come from administrative improvements and from holding down the pay bill of those who work in the public sector to a level--for the same reasons as the pay bill will be held down in the private sector--to create the conditions in which we can have economic growth and today's welcome fall in unemployment can be repeated month after month. That is why we take the tough and necessary decisions on tax and spending. I will be grateful to my hon. Friend for his support when we do so.
Mr. Nicholas Brown : As well as increasing taxes "to a certain extent", the Chancellor has also committed himself to a very tight new control total for the non-cyclical elements of public expenditure, allowing for growth of only 3.8 per cent. between 1992-93 and 1998-99. Is not it the case that, at the same stage of the economic cycle under Baroness Thatcher's Government, comparable spending rose by 12.5 per cent? Is not it therefore incumbent on the Chief Secretary to say just what hardship and pain are to be caused to achieve these undesirable and hitherto unachievable spending targets?
Mr. Clarke : As a Government, we are in a position where we are very conscious of the need to constrain public spending. We have improved the opportunities for the private sector to be released and achieve growth, investment and new job creation. We have set a very challenging target for ourselves, but it is not impossibly challenging at a time when we have got inflation down. The headline figure is 1.5 per cent.--the lowest for 25 years. It is the first time since 1960 that inflation has been below 2 per cent. for almost every month in the year. That makes the spending targets realistic. When we made our spending decisions--as the hon. Gentleman will recall--we protected all our priorities. Spending on health and higher education was up, we had the new apprenticeship scheme and we protected our spending on law and order. It is a well-judged spending package.
Budget Response
4. Mrs. Gillan : To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received in response to his Budget.
Mr. Kenneth Clarke : The Budget has been widely welcomed throughout the country.
Mrs. Gillan : At this festive time, will my right hon. and learned Friend agree with the owners of small and medium-sized businesses who have made representations to me that his Budget is a major step forward in creating the stable economic environment in which they can trade? Further, does he agree with them that the specific measures taken to help small businesses in the Budget, together with
Column 1256
the low interest rates and unprecedented low rates of inflation, make it possible for them to look forward to a very happy and prosperous new year?Mr. Clarke : I believe so, and I am glad that my hon. Friend has had the same reaction from the small business people she has met as I have had from the people I have met, who have been generous in their comments on my Budget. Mr. Stan Mendham, who is by no means always uncritical of the Government, has been very praising of the Budget. A commentator described me as having something of a bee in my bonnet about small business. That is the case. I believe that in order to improve the prospects for investment in small businesses, it is legitimate to deregulate and take the burdens off them and encourage more risk capital and self employment in this country. I believe that it is in the small and medium-sized business that we will get the growth of employment that we require throughout the 1990s. I am gald that my hon. Friend approves of the fact that we laid such heavy emphasis on the needs of small business in the Budget.
Mr. Sheldon : Facing the consequences of the severe recession, is it not clear that the balance of payments deficit is more important than the Budget deficit? With the pound increasing in value steadily during the past six or nine months to a considerable extent, is it not also clear that this is the time to reduce interest rates, cut imports and encourage exports?
Mr. Clarke : I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman, who is very experienced in these matters, acknowledges that we are now firmly on top of the deficit in the public finances, and so is turning his attention to the balance of trade. He will know that, at the moment, it is difficult to get accurate figures on our trading position as we introduce the new system because of the introduction of the single market. Because our economy is so much stronger and demand is rising here compared to the continuing recession in Germany and France, there is a tendency for people to wish to sell into our economy, which is affecting our position. Otherwise, our trade figures are extremely good and our currency has been remarkably stable for the past few months--it has not been strengthening noticeably. Most importantly, British industry is retaining its competitiveness. We are still holding the advantage from devaluation. Our unit wage costs have fallen this year, and we are in a competitive position. I shall keep an eye on all the matters on which I usually keep an eye when deciding monetary policy, but I am reasonably optimistic about the British trading position as we come out of the recession.
Mr. Heald : I welcome the measures in the Budget which deal with small businesses. Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the measure suggested by the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown)-- slapping an extra 1 per cent. on national insurance contributions for the self-employed--would be a disaster for small businesses and would affect the competitiveness of British industry?
Mr. Clarke : I entirely agree with my hon. Friend.
Mr. Skinner : What about what the Government are doing later today?
Column 1257
Mr. Clarke : My hon. Friend was speaking about an increase in the national insurance contribution for the self-employed. The hon. Gentleman is wrong. We are raising it for employees this evening. If implemented, the proposal made by the right hon. Member for Yeovil would, as my hon. Friend said, damage the interests of self-employed people. Self-employment grew rapidly in the 1980s and, in a modern economy, it is desirable that we reduce the burden on people going for self-employment, rather than increasing it in the way proposed by the Liberal Democrats.
Mr. Beith : The Chancellor presumably recognises that the rate of contribution by the self-employed is below that paid by employed people and employers. As the Budget strategy depends very much on low interest rates and low inflation, will the Chancellor look carefully and favourably at the proposal made by the Treasury Select Committee today, which carries the support of all but one member of the Committee, for a central bank that has autonomous responsibility for monetary policy? Is not that the way to lock in low interest rates and low inflation? Will he give that suggestion the most careful consideration?
Mr. Clarke : I can agree to give the proposal careful consideration, but it requires much further debate and discussion. I am grateful to the Select Committee for its report. We shall have an opportunity, through the Bill being presented today by my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Budgen), to debate those matters in the House. I have an open mind on the subject, although people try to guess my opinion. I have a feeling that the Select Committee's proposal is becoming rather a fashionable cause. We should consider it with care, also taking into account such matters as parliamentary accountability for an increasingly more autonomous Bank of England.
Mr. Bill Walker : Has my right hon. and learned Friend received representations from the Scotch whisky industry, which has been telling me that the sensible treatment of excise duties in the Budget will have a substantial impact on its sales at home? Is he aware that that will increase the revenue to the Treasury and help the position abroad, because it sends the right messages for an industry that exports almost £2,000 million worth of products?
Mr. Clarke : I agree with my hon. Friend and I am glad that I was able to follow the precedent set by my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Lamont) in acknowledging the problems of the Scotch whisky industry and not increasing excise on its products. I hope that the industry will be able to take advantage of that and will recover its strength. I also hope that the industry derives the enormous benefits that could potentially accrue to it from the successful conclusion of the GATT round, which is the best piece of economic news that this and most other trading countries have received in 1993.
Mr. Gordon Brown : After the Chancellor's admission yesterday that the typical family will pay the equivalent of 7p in the pound more in income tax, will he also confirm that the typical family will, from April, be paying £10 a week more in seven separate tax rises and three new taxes? Will he also confirm that, while the wealthiest 1 per cent. received 33 per cent. of the income tax cuts made in the 1988 Budget, middle and lower-income Britain is now
Column 1258
paying 95 per cent. of the tax rises from this year's Budget? Are not the Tories now exposed not only as the party of higher taxation, but, as it always has been, as the party of unfair taxation?Mr. Clarke : The hon. Gentleman uses what he describes as a "typical family". It is not an average family, but a family that he takes out of the middle ranks of those earning. I have acknowledged that we are increasing taxation. I made an hour and a quarter's speech describing my taxation increases. The hon. Gentleman's mistake is to say that that is the only effect that the Budget will have on the average family. If the hon. Gentleman had his way, he would follow policies that would increase inflation, again increase interest rates--now at their lowest level for 16 years--increase public sector borrowing, slow the recession recovery, reverse the fall in unemployment and probably cause it to increase again, and once more make this country extremely uncompetitive in world markets. That would do far more damage to the ordinary person than my Budget, which sorts out the problem with public finances so that we are clear to have a stronger recovery in the 1990s.
Economic Competitiveness
5. Mr. Lidington : To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he next expects to meet his French counterpart to discuss economic competitiveness in Europe ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Kenneth Clarke : I met Mr. Alphandery, the French Finance Minister, along with Finance Ministers from the other member states, to discuss European competitiveness at the recent European Council and ECOFIN meetings. I expect that we will discuss this issue further at future meetings.
Mr. Lidington : When my right hon. and learned Friend next meets his French counterpart, will he employ his customary energetic diplomacy to remind the French Finance Minister that an economic plan for Europe which involves higher borrowing, more help for state-funded white elephants and cuts in working hours would not encourage investment, but would cause any potential investor simply to shake his head sadly and take both money and jobs somewhere else?
Mr. Clarke : I think that my hon. Friend is assuming that the French Finance Minister is a bigger supporter of some proposals that come from the Commission in Brussels than he actually is. My colleague Mr. Alphandery is as big a sceptic as I am of some proposals, such as those my hon. Friend listed, that have been emanating from people with less well-judged ideas. The French Government have been imposing some strict austerity measures recently. They are making changes to their social security system to make it affordable and to reduce the costs on their employers. They have reduced their minimum wage for young people because they have found, as we would if we were to introduce one here, that the minimum wage created unemployment among young people. I assure my hon. Friend that my colleague Mr. Alphandery is somewhat nearer to his views and mine than he fears.
Nevertheless, France is not having the recovery that we are. It has a higher level of unemployment than we do and
Column 1259
I think that the French Government are looking with interest at what is happening on this side of the channel and propose to follow many of our measures.Mr. Hoon : The French Government have obviously decided that the best way of promoting their economic competitiveness is in the negotiations with the German Government on the terms of the creation of a single currency. How does the Chancellor intend to influence those negotiations? Or is he content that Britain should remain on the European sidelines?
Mr. Clarke : We are not on the European sidelines. It is true that at the Finance Ministers' meetings that I attend I am more often in total agreement with the German and Dutch Finance Ministers and usually with the Spanish Finance Minister than with Mr. Alphandery. Nevertheless, Mr. Alphandery and I are agreed on about four fifths of the issues. Last week's debate was based on the Opposition party's crazy premise that all the Finance Ministers of western Europe were sold on the idea of borrowing enormous sums and spending enormous sums to create extra jobs.
I am in complete agreement on currency with the other members of ECOFIN, including the French and the Germans. Now we have to concentrate on achieving convergence in our economic performance to achieve that stability of exchange rates, which will follow. My French and German colleagues are as keen as I am on getting inflation down to the levels that the British are now achieving and on getting public sector deficits down to the level that we are now on course for. [ Hon. Members :-- "Come on."] The gulf exists between the British Labour party and other governing parties in western Europe.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton : Does my right hon. and learned Friend accept that Europe is increasingly uncompetitive and over-regulated? Does he further accept that the growth in the world will take place outside Europe, in north America, south America and the Pacific rim? When will he create policies for Britain's manufacturing and construction sectors to enable us to take advantage of the real growth outside Europe?
Mr. Clarke : I agree with my hon. Friend. We must make ourselves competitive with the countries in the Pacific rim and north America that are our rivals in world trade, but that point is increasingly appreciated in western Europe. As my hon. Friend talked about burdens on employers, he will be glad to know that at the recent summit in Brussels it was agreed that we should have an inventory of social regulations that bear down on employers and add to the costs of employment.
Mr. Winterton : At my request and that of the manufacturing alliance.
Mr. Clarke : I am glad that my hon. Friend went ahead of us to ask for that. We regard that as a considerable success in our negotiations.
Mr. Darling : Does the Chancellor accept that taxation and transport links affect Britain's competitiveness? As the Chancellor does not know when, or even whether, the channel link will open and as he put up taxes when the Conservatives said at the previous election that they would not, why should we believe a single word that he or any of his colleagues say at the next election?
Column 1260
Mr. Clarke : We are borrowing more money from the European investment bank than any other member state and investing it in Britain's infrastructure--for example, the Heathrow express, the Jubilee line extension-- [Interruption.] They are under construction. Until recently, expenditure on Britain's road programme was about 40 per cent. higher in real terms and railway investment in Britain was 40 or 50 per cent. higher than five years ago. We are investing heavily in our infrastructure and we are ahead of our partners in Europe in developing it using European instruments-- [Interruption.] The debate that we had last week was based on the dire proposition of the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown), who had not read the document that he was talking about, that Mr. Delors was offering us some money to build the channel tunnel high-speed rail link. That rail link has not yet been built because it has not been designed.
Mr. Jessel : With regard to economic competitiveness in Europe in the auction of works of art, will my right hon. and learned Friend join me in congratulating my right hon. Friend the Paymaster General on the successful outcome of the long and difficult VAT negotiations, preventing that valuable market from being driven out of Britain and the Common Market to Geneva and New York?
Mr. Clarke : I happily join my hon. Friend in those
congratulations. I happened to be there when the final decision was taken in thee Paymaster General.
Education Expenditure
6. Mr. Win Griffiths : To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what percentage of total expenditure was devoted to education in 1980-81, 1984- 85, 1988-89 and 1992-93.
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Michael Portillo) : For the years in question, the percentages of total expenditure devoted to education were 11.8 per cent., 10.7 per cent., 11.8 per cent. and 11.9 per cent.
Mr. Griffiths : I thank the Minister for that reply. Does he agree that our spending on education as a percentage of total expenditure is not as high as that of most of our competitors and that, in particular, we have a dismal record on nursery education on which we need to spend far more in order to give our children the best possible start in life?
Mr. Portillo : The hon. Gentleman heard the figures that I gave, which I do not think he expected, and I spared his blushes by not mentioning that the number of schoolchildren had fallen by 1 million during that period, so that expenditure per child had risen by 50 per cent. in real terms. The hon. Gentleman is interested in international comparisons. He might think that education was of a high standard in Germany and Japan, but the percentage of gross domestic product spent in Germany and Japan was 3.2 per cent. and here it is 4.8 per cent.
Mr. Forman : Is it not abundantly clear from my right hon. Friend's exchange with the hon. Member for Bridgend (Mr. Griffiths) that my right hon. Friend shot the hon. Gentlman's fox? Is it not equally clear that the Government believe in investing in human capital and
Column 1261
have had consistent policies to that end over the past 15 years? Are they not right to insist that those who benefit directly from higher education should bear a greater proportion of the burden?Mr. Portillo : My hon. Friend is well placed to comment on those matters. He knows that we have increased the proportion of our young people in higher education to about one in three, which is a rise from one in eight in 1979. He also knows that the number of young people participating in further education will increase by about 250, 000 in the next three years.
My hon. Friend says that it will be right for students to bear a greater share of the burden. We certainly believe that where the state provides means-tested help for students' maintenance, it is right that students should make a greater contribution by taking a greater proportion of their funding through loans that are repayable if they find employment at about the average level of earnings. I am sure that that is fair and just. It enables us to make that enormous increase in educational provision.
Mr. Andrew Smith : How on earth does the Chief Secretary square what he has just said with the reports of his views that the target of one in three need not be met and that the country does not need that many graduates by the year 2000? He believes in putting the right-wing dogma of cutting expenditure over the needs of education. He said that he wanted to impose the cost of education on students. Does not that show that he puts the dogma of right-wing Tory ideology over the need for investment in education and opportunities?
Mr. Portillo : I shall tell the hon. Gentleman what I think is important. So far, all the discussion has been about how much money we are putting into education. There should also be a discussion about the quality that we get out of education, the number of people whom we educate and the qualifications with which we put them into the outside world. The hon. Gentleman cited certain of my views. If he has the documents in which I stated them, he should lay them on the table. If not, he should stop indulging in gossip.
Balance of Payments
8. Mr. Jacques Arnold : To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the prospects for the balance of payments.
Mr. Portillo : Unit labour cost performance is excellent and competitiveness has been much improved. In spite of weak activity abroad, the trend in the visible deficit is downard, with exports at record levels.
Mr. Arnold : Does my right hon. Friend agree that that performance is a considerable tribute to British exporters? Will their performance not be further enhanced by the successful outcome of the negotiations on the general agreement on tariffs and trade, into which the Government have put so much effort in recent months?
Mr. Portillo : I thank my hon. Friend for those remarks. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, in particular, has been a major force in pressing for the most liberal outcome to the GATT negotiations. The GATT outcome is estimated to be worth $270 billion to the world economy. My right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the President
Column 1262
of the Board of Trade have put great emphasis on that benefit to the world economy. That benefit far outweighs the individual difficulties of countries. Although we well understand those difficulties, they are definitely less important than that benefit. My hon. Friend refers to the benefits to British industry. Earlier, my hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) spoke about the Scotch whisky industry, which exports £2 billion-worth of its products and faces tariffs of 30 per cent. in Japan, of 250 per cent. in Singapore and of 20 per cent. in New Zealand. The GATT deal is set to sweep away those tariffs progressively, which is good news for British industry.Mrs. Helen Jackson : Is the Minister aware of the deep concern in South Yorkshire about the state of the engineering and steel industry? Yesterday, United Engineering Steels, which is one of the United Kingdom's prime exporters and at the core of United Kingdom industry, had to shed 400 jobs. That company is convinced
Madam Speaker : Order. The hon. Lady must ask a direct question now.
| Next Section
| Home Page |