here - United Kingdom Parliament
here - United Kingdom Parliament
here - United Kingdom Parliament
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
813 Oral Answers<br />
1 DECEMBER 2010<br />
Oral Answers<br />
814<br />
unemployment will rise next year, and all the Prime<br />
Minister can say is that it is some kind of rosy scenario.<br />
Let us take the rise in VAT, because that is one of the<br />
reasons why unemployment will rise next year. Can the<br />
Prime Minister tell us what impact that will have on<br />
economic growth and jobs next year?<br />
The Prime Minister: First of all, let me deal with VAT<br />
precisely. The former Chancellor, the right hon. Member<br />
for Edinburgh South West (Mr Darling) said:<br />
“VAT would have allowed you to pay off a sizeable chunk of<br />
the deficit.”<br />
That is the policy that the last Chancellor supported.<br />
If we had followed over the last six months the advice<br />
of the Leader of the Opposition, we would be linked<br />
with Portugal, with Ireland—[HON. MEMBERS: “No.”]<br />
Yes. We would not be standing <strong>here</strong> today discussing<br />
how we will get faster growth and lower unemployment;<br />
we would be sitting around discussing how to rescue<br />
and bail out Britain.<br />
Edward Miliband: Okay, Mr. Speaker—[[HON.MEMBERS:<br />
“Ooh!”] You can rewrite history for only so long. Let us<br />
be—[Interruption.] Let us be absolutely clear about<br />
this—[Interruption.]<br />
Mr Speaker: Order. We are wasting the time of Back-<br />
Bench Members. Let us hear the Leader of the Opposition.<br />
Edward Miliband: The deficit was 2.5% of national<br />
income before the crisis—the recession—hit all around<br />
the world. It went up all around the world; it was a<br />
global economic recession. The question is: should we<br />
cut too far and too fast, which is what the Prime<br />
Minister is doing, so that t<strong>here</strong> are four years of sluggish<br />
recovery—the most sluggish recovery from recession in<br />
40 years? Why does the Prime Minister not answer the<br />
question? Is this the most sluggish recovery from recession<br />
in Britain for the last 40 years? Yes or no?<br />
The Prime Minister: This is one of the fastest recoveries<br />
in Europe, and the point is, if we had followed the right<br />
hon. Gentleman’s advice we would not be discussing<br />
recovery; we would be discussing meltdown. He can<br />
have a blank sheet of paper about the future; he cannot<br />
have a blank sheet of paper about the past. We know we<br />
were left a record budget deficit; we remember “no<br />
more boom and bust”; we remember all the things that<br />
he was responsible for. I have to say to him that, after all<br />
that—and he has been doing the job for the last three<br />
months—people are beginning to ask, “When’s he going<br />
to start?”<br />
Edward Miliband: With that answer, it is no wonder<br />
that today we learn that the Foreign Secretary describes<br />
this gang as the “children of Thatcher”. It sounds just<br />
like the 1980s—out of touch with people up and down<br />
the country. Why does the Prime Minister not admit<br />
that he is complacent about the recovery and complacent<br />
about the people who will lose their jobs? And it is they<br />
who will pay the price.<br />
The Prime Minister: Not waving, but drowning. My<br />
mother is still with us, so she is able to testify that what<br />
the right hon. Gentleman has just claimed is not literally<br />
true, but let me say this: I would rather be a child of<br />
Thatcher than a son of Brown. [Interruption.]<br />
Mr Speaker: Order. I call Tobias Ellwood.<br />
Mr Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East) (Con): Thank<br />
you, Mr Speaker.<br />
The Prime Minister will be aware that British citizens<br />
affected by the 7/7 bombings were supported by the<br />
criminal injuries compensation scheme. However, when<br />
such attacks take place abroad, such as in Bali, Mumbai<br />
or Sharm el Sheikh, no such compensation for things<br />
such as prosthesis and long-term care exists. Does the<br />
Prime Minister agree that any Britons caught up in<br />
terrorist attacks deserve our support, no matter w<strong>here</strong><br />
in the world that attack takes place?<br />
The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend is entirely right<br />
to raise that issue. People who are victims of terror,<br />
whether at home or overseas, deserve our support, as he<br />
says. People might not know, but my hon. Friend’s<br />
brother was tragically killed in the Bali bombing—that<br />
horrific attack that took place some years ago. We are<br />
looking at this very difficult issue of trying to make sure<br />
that, when we consider criminal injuries compensation<br />
and what has been proposed for injuries overseas, we<br />
have a fair and reasonable system. The Justice Secretary<br />
is looking at that, and we will come forward with<br />
proposals.<br />
Q3. [27560] Lindsay Roy (Glenrothes) (Lab): The<br />
Prime Minister’s Government are spending £4 billion<br />
so that councils can promote wellness, £2 billion on<br />
reorganising the NHS, £100 million on electing police<br />
commissioners and £2 million on a happiness survey.<br />
Does that not demonstrate that the Prime Minister has<br />
lost touch with reality?<br />
The Prime Minister: No, it does not. Let me take—<br />
[Interruption.] Generally speaking, I think the hon.<br />
Gentleman should cheer up a bit. Let me take the issue<br />
of NHS reform. Even with the settlement that we have<br />
set out for the NHS, which involves real-terms increases<br />
each year, if we stand still with the NHS and keep the<br />
current system, we will find it running into very severe<br />
problems each and every year. So, it is necessary to<br />
reform the NHS, it is necessary to cut out bureaucracy<br />
and it is necessary to reduce management costs, so that<br />
we have a system w<strong>here</strong> we actually try to create a<br />
healthier nation and, t<strong>here</strong>fore, reduce the demands on<br />
our NHS. That is what our reforms are all about.<br />
Q4. [27561] Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con):<br />
Along with Jamaica, Nigeria and Vietnam, the Irish<br />
Republic has one of the largest groups of foreign<br />
national prisoners in the UK. Given that we are about<br />
to lend it more than £7 billion, could the Irish Republic<br />
be persuaded to pay for the incarceration of those<br />
people by taking them back to jails in their own<br />
country?<br />
The Prime Minister: My hon. Friend makes an extremely<br />
good point. We are looking at how we can transfer<br />
prisoners who are foreign nationals from the UK to<br />
other countries. Obviously with Ireland the situation is<br />
slightly different, because of the long relationship between<br />
our countries. The previous Government announced<br />
that they would not routinely support the deportation<br />
of Irish nationals from the UK; that was announced in<br />
February 2007. Since then, t<strong>here</strong> has been a European<br />
directive that is helpful, because it makes more automatic<br />
the removal of prisoners to other countries. But t<strong>here</strong> is