Below is the text of Prime Minister's Question Time from 28th March 1996.
Q1. Sir Michael Neubert: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 March.
The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major): This morning, I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
Sir Michael Neubert: Is not the wide welcome for the Government's endorsement of
Sir Ron Dearing's proposals for the education of 16 to 19-
The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is right about the desirability of choice and
diversity being the key to raising standards in schools. I am sure that that is right.
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment will set
out more proposals this afternoon to achieve precisely that. That is what we want
for all children-
Mr. Blair: Does the Prime Minister agree that, to restore confidence in British beef,
we should recognise the mistakes of the past and that contaminated meat did pass
into the food chain, but that, for the future, we should take all measures that are
necessary to make negligible, not just extremely small, any chance-
Madam Speaker: Order. This is disgraceful. The House will come to order.
Mr. Blair: Thank you, Madam Speaker.
For the future, we should take whatever measures are necessary to make negligible-
The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman is right about the need to take all the necessary public health measures. The reality is that we have always taken the action that was seen to be necessary and the advice that has been offered. In 1989, we took action that went beyond the advice that we had received. I have had an opportunity to look at the proposals that the Opposition made this morning. They are a mixture of motherhood and action that is already being taken, and they largely miss many of the matters that need to be dealt with. [An hon. Member: "What is wrong with them?"]
If the hon. Lady would like me to run through the eight points and explain why they are irrelevant, I should be happy to do so. I will find them. Here they are.
The Opposition call for proper enforcement of controls in slaughterhouses, yet they opposed the setting up of the Meat Hygiene Service, which was designed to ensure that they were enforced. They call for a random test of the brains of cattle. That is completely irrelevant, as we have stopped all brain products that could possibly be infected from entering the food chain. They suggest that products are labelled with ingredients; that is already happening. SEAC has already looked at the safety of mechanically recovered meat and we have already taken steps to ensure its safety.
As for the plans for a quality assurance scheme, of course we wish to ensure the
quality of all beef, but there would be no question of labelling some beef as safe
and allowing the sale of unsafe beef, which is what they say would mean. Their plan
to ban specified bovine offal in cattle under six months overlooks the fact that
SEAC specifically considered this proposal and concluded that it was unnecessary,
not least because there has never been a single incidence of BSE in cattle that young.
The plan for a separate-
Madam Speaker: Order. The right hon. Gentleman was asked a question by an hon. Member from a sedentary position. Members must learn to listen and not bawl out from sedentary positions.
The Prime Minister: The plan for a separate food agency would mean that matters such as this would no longer be represented round the Cabinet table but would be represented in an agency. The chief medical officer already has the support that he has asked for to carry out his duties. The reality is that our examination is much more fundamental than this public relations nonsense from the Labour party. It is considering votes; we are considering the industry and the national interest.
Mr. Blair: I do not think that we have heard anything quite so pathetic as that.
Let me take two of those measures-
Will the Prime Minister please, for once, stop shirking responsibility and instead take it? In particular, will he understand that, unless he can agree proposals now with the food industry, the retailers and the consumer organisations so that we present a united front, we shall never have the Government back in control of events rather than being controlled by them?
The Prime Minister: What is pathetic is this document. What is also pathetic is this
wriggling change of policy after the hon. Member for Peckham (Ms Harman) and the
right hon. Gentleman did everything that they could to extract maximum political
advantage, at the cost, potentially, of jobs, and of the national interest, in the
beef industry. On his remarks about controls in slaughterhouses, the Meat Hygiene
Service has an officer-
Mr. Harris: Will my right hon. Friend assure his farmers-
The Prime Minister: What needs to be done to ensure confidence both for the beef industry and for allied industries, in the interests of the farmers as well as public health, and the substantial range of matters that must be examined, are all under consideration at the moment. We must address specifically the question of market confidence: that means convincing our European partners and the beef outlets that beef is safe. The next step in that process will be an announcement by my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food later this afternoon.
However, in the interests of the industry as a whole and of public health, it is
important to deal with the matters comprehensively if we are to meet the objective
of restoring confidence. Work and discussion on all the matters is going ahead-
Mr. Ashdown: The Prime Minister knows very well just how many jobs and how many businesses
are now at risk in what is the worst crisis to hit rural Britain for three decades
or more. He knows that every delay will add to that list. I therefore assure him
that, if he brings forward an urgent plan of action, designed to restore public confidence
and to make the British herd BSE-
The Prime Minister: I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman's latter point: it is a Europe wide problem. I shall discuss the matter with our European partners in Turin tomorrow and my right hon. Friends will also discuss the matter with their European counterparts. The right hon. Gentleman is entirely right: 650,000 people are employed in the industry, which generates about £5 billion each year. That is why we must ensure that the proposal we bring forward is comprehensive and will work. I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his offer of support as we do so.
Mr. Lamont: Is the Prime Minister aware that there will be total support for his comments yesterday about the European Union ban on worldwide exports of British beef which he said was unjustifiable, unjust and should be reversed? Does the Prime Minister recognise that we do not wish to be bribed, by accepting the return of some of our own money, into agreeing to something that is fundamentally wrong? Is there not a case for, if not leaving the British seat vacant at the IGC tomorrow, at least saying that there will be no progress until the ruling has been overturned?
The Prime Minister: On the basis of the scientific advice that we have received,
our partners must know that the ban on British beef is totally without justification.
My right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
is having urgent discussions to outline the measures that we are taking to ensure
safety. I assure my right hon. Friend that I shall reinforce that point vigorously
in Turin tomorrow. It is essential that decisions of that sort are taken by member
states on the basis of rational judgments and of science, and not on any other basis-
Q2. Mr. Illsley: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 March.
The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply that I gave a few moments ago.
Mr. Illsley: What message does the Prime Minister have for his so-
The Prime Minister: I do not think that the hon. Gentleman can have heard what I said a moment or so ago; if he did hear it, he patently did not understand it.
We have set out our position on the intergovernmental conference, and I shall reinforce that, precisely as we have previously informed the House, in the discussions at the IGC tomorrow, but with one addition. I shall make it clear that the recent ruling on the working time directive is wholly unjustified, that we do not accept it and that we shall be seeking in the intergovernmental conference to ensure that the Commission does not misuse article 118A in future.
Q3. Mr. Simon Coombs: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 28 March.
The Prime Minister: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave some moments ago.
Mr. Coombs: When my right hon. Friend goes to Turin, will he take the opportunity
to impress on his fellow European leaders the absolute need to reduce business costs?
Will he also ensure that there is no way in which the European social chapter-
The Prime Minister: As I said a moment ago, and am happy to reaffirm, I am not prepared
to see the social chapter opt-
The Labour party may wish to sign up to policies that will make people unemployed-