| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Sir Teddy Taylor (Rochford and Southend, East): Did the summit accept the fact that it is traffic congestion
rather than traffic volume that causes the most air pollution problems? Will the Prime Minister make a contribution to solving such problems by removing as speedily as possible the freeze on road schemes designed to remove pollution, including those for the A13 and M25, which would make a considerable contribution to reducing air pollution?
The Prime Minister: We have moved pretty quickly from world statesmanship to constituency interests. As for the individual road schemes, the hon. Gentleman will know that a road review is now being undertaken, and I cannot tell him anything about his particular road. However, if there is something that we are about to do about it, I shall let him know. I might add that I believe that one of the most important things that we can do to reduce pollution is to encourage the use of public transport.
Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover): In the attempt to combat international crime, has my right hon. Friend considered using the services of George Carman? As for the problem of the hole in the ozone layer, will he remember that he will not be able to solve it by market forces, nor by using a man with a bike, a ladder and an enterprise allowance? It can be solved only by intervention, planning and organisation--[Hon. Members: "Socialism."]--by other nation states. That cannot be done by market forces.
The Prime Minister: If I may so to my hon. Friend, there is some truth in what he says. [Interruption.] Nervous looks all round. I do not know about hiring George Carman. I do not think that we can afford his fees; I shall have to speak to the Chancellor about that. In my view, the environmental problems require a mixture of solutions. Of course, there are important measures involving regulation and intervention. I agree that if we want an integrated transport strategy, it will not come about through market forces.
On the other hand, unless developing countries in Africa and elsewhere have effective market economies, with private enterprise in them, they will never make the transition to more developed economies that is essential if they are to tackle their environmental as well as their other problems. If this does not seem like too much of a balancing act, I would say that we need a mixture of the two.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing (Moray):
I welcome the general thrust of what has been said in the exchanges on the statement, and emphasise the point that expenditure will have to be involved in some aspects of it. Will the Prime Minister elaborate on what he meant when he said that the leaders had emphasised that there should be no "unproductive" expenditure, particularly in the military sphere? Will there be further developments in disarmament and particularly in getting rid of nuclear weapons--surely one of the white elephants of this century? Could not the money involved be better spent in other areas?
The Prime Minister:
I meant that it is important that any aid that we give to countries is used for genuinely
It is important that we continue with a properly structured aid programme and we would like to increase it if possible. But the quid pro quo is that the money must go into economies that genuinely have a chance to use it constructively. There must be an insistence that proper strings are attached to make sure that money is not wasted on corrupt or unproductive investment.
Finally, aid must be provided in a way that gives those economies a long-term future, rather than shovelling money for no proper purpose. In the end, our constituents are prepared to accept that we have an international and moral responsibility, but they insist--perfectly reasonably--that if money is spent, it should be spent properly.
Mr. Tony McNulty (Harrow, East):
Did the Prime Minister underline to the other Heads of Government the importance of ensuring the stability, peace and democratic future of Hong Kong? Will he outline some of the discussions that were held to ensure that those are guaranteed?
The Prime Minister:
It is important that we have a continuing commitment to Hong Kong and, under the terms of the joint declaration, we will be involved for a significant period after the handover. We have made it clear that one of the key issues is the undertaking to hold democratic elections within 12 months of the handover. We must make sure also that we are sufficiently mobilising international opinion, so that not merely Britain but all parts of the international community are exerting pressure. The importance of the words in that communique was precisely that--there was a consensus in the international community that the joint declaration must be adhered to.
We want a strong and stable relationship with China--that is important to the future of the people of Hong Kong--but it must be on the basis of adherence to the terms of the joint declaration. That is the international agreement we concluded and that must be the basis for our relationship with China and Hong Kong.
Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood):
The Prime Minister said that he was looking to an integrated transport strategy on the part of the United Kingdom to achieve the British contribution towards a reduction of 15 per cent. in greenhouse gases by the European Union by 2010. Can we therefore expect that, in perhaps the most congested and polluted part of the United Kingdom in terms of road transport--Greater London and the south-east of England--the Government will be investing money in improving public transport and, in particular, in London Underground, which is grievously in need of investment to which Labour committed itself during the election campaign?
The Prime Minister:
The hon. Gentleman will know that my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister will make proposals in respect of London Underground in due
Mr. Phil Hope (Corby):
I congratulate the Prime Minister on his success at the summit. What progress was made on the UN funding crisis and, in particular, on the refusal of the United States to pay its contribution to the UN?
The Prime Minister:
Without exaggerating to my hon. Friend, I think that I can say that some progress is being made. President Clinton is personally committed to resolving the funding crisis and it has helped enormously that the new Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, has made such a good and promising start in the reforms that he is making to the United Nations secretariat and the way in which it works. There is a general consensus that if those reforms receive the requisite degree of support and genuinely go deep and strong and make the necessary changes, the funding crisis should be resolved. We certainly want it to be resolved. It is very much in our interests that it is.
Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough):
Since I took silk a minute or so, I think, before the Prime Minister's wife, may I suggest that he takes my advice on the employment of QCs rather than that of the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner)? I congratulate him on his kind remarks about his predecessor and his Government over the Rio targets. It was gracious of him to acknowledge that. As I think that he represents a partly rural constituency, as I do, will he ensure that nothing that the Government do in seeking to achieve environmental targets damages the rural economy or the ability of our farmers and other rural residents to make a living and thrive in the modern economy?
The Prime Minister:
I thank the hon. and learned Gentleman for his kind words about my remarks. I believe that achieving those environmental targets will not damage the rural economy at all. Indeed, properly done, they should help it, since farmers and those living in rural communities would perhaps benefit as much as anyone from a better transport system and, of course, people in rural communities will particularly benefit from greater energy efficiency.
The only way that we will make this argument on the environment work is when people cease to believe that it requires some sort of sacrifice of their interests and recognise that it is in everyone's collective interest that we make the changes to the environment that are plainly and obviously necessary.
Mr. Michael Clapham (Barnsley, West and Penistone):
Did the G8 discuss during the session on international crime ways and measures to prevent child pornography?
The Prime Minister:
We did not discuss that specifically and I do not believe that it was specifically
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |