|
====================================================================================
NB. THIS TRANSCRIPT WAS TYPED FROM A TRANSCRIPTION UNIT RECORDING AND
NOT COPIED FROM AN ORIGINAL SCRIPT; BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF MIS-HEARING
AND THE DIFFICULTY, IN SOME CASES, OF IDENTIFYING INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS,
THE BBC CANNOT VOUCH FOR ITS ACCURACY
====================================================================================
ON THE RECORD
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC ONE DATE:
19.03.00
====================================================================================
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Good afternoon. Tony
Blair says Europe's now at a turning point.... and it's turning in our
direction. We'll be reporting on this week's summit that's meant to set
Europe on a new course.
And the new leader in Wales
... can he really make a difference when he doesn't have the powers that
he needs ? I'll be talking to Rhodri Morgan. That's after the news read
by Sian Williams.
NEWS
HUMPHRYS: The Tories have high hopes
for the local elections ... will they show that the party now poses a real
threat to Labour at the GENERAL Election?
And William Hague says he
doesn't want Britain to be run by Europe, so might a Tory Government tell
Brussels we want some of our power back.
I'll also be talking to Rhodri
Morgan, the new leader in Wales, and asking him: what's the point of his
job?
But first ... On
Wednesday European leaders gather in Portugal for a summit meeting on economic
reform in Europe. Sounds pretty dry ... but Tony Blair says this is the
turning point and it will prove that the rest of Europe is finally going
our way. However, as Paola Buonadonna reports, it's going to be quite
a task to convince the other leaders that they should abandon their economic
policies and embrace the British model.
PAOLO BUONADONNA: Rush hour at London' s Waterloo
station. Tony Blair is proud of Britain's booming economy and its record
for creating jobs. Next week at a special summit in Lisbon he hopes to
persuade other European leaders to go his way and adopt British-style reforms
to tackle unemployment. The Prime Minister needs progress on these economic
reforms if he is to persuade the British public to join the Euro.
HELEN LIDDELL MP: We need to create an environment
that is business friendly and through that we can create high quality jobs.
And we also have to at the same time make sure through skills and training
that all of our people are getting an opportunity to benefit from the kind
of changes that a modern economy has.
BUONADONNA: By Eurostar France is less
than an hour away from Ashford in Kent but its government's attitude to
the economy is worlds apart. Several thousand French entrepreneurs like
Jean-Claude Cathias have made their feelings clear by relocating this side
of the Channel Tunnel. He now helps run an association which advises French
businesses based in the UK.
JEAN-CLAUDE CATHIAS: France always thinks we need
regulation for everything - absolutely everything. It costs twice the price
in France to employ someone than in Britain. So it really prevents employers
to employ people and as a result in France you have approximately twelve
per cent unemployment for only five per cent here in England.
BUONADONNA: The flexibility that French
entrepreneurs enjoy in Ashford is what the British government insists is
needed to stimulate job creation. Tony Blair says that the Lisbon summit
should be a turning point in European economic policy. He says we can combine
a more dynamic economy with the European Social Model and its concern for
workers. The Prime Minister wants to avoid what he calls "heavy handed
intervention and regulation". But a core group of continental countries,
headed by France, is determined to use the summit to strengthen the social
agenda. The champion of this approach is the French minister for employment,
who's also the daughter of Jacques Delors, one of the architects of the
European Social model.
MARTINE AUBRY (INTERPRETED): I think if Europe has failed to
deliver on jobs for years it's simply because it believed that economic
growth would solve everything and the unemployed should adapt to the needs
of companies. But the State has a greater role to play. It must anticipate
and be more proactive.
JOHN MONKS: Different countries have got
different agendas going into Lisbon. I think the British government, I
think wrongly, have tended to preach at Europe and say that Britain holds
the key, holds the way. In fact I think mainland Europe is doing well in
some areas we're not doing very well. Its education and training standards
are higher, productivity is generally higher and certainly in terms of
manufacturing it's doing better on balance of payments than we are.
BUONADONNA: On the French side of the Channel
Genset is one of the leading biotech companies in Europe. Although managers
here have had to contend with a raft of social legislation, including recently
the thirty-five hour week, they say higher regulation doesn't necessarily
mean higher costs and it makes for a more committed workforce.
DANIEL COHEN: You will always need rules
to protect the employees against the employers. The employers tend to forget
the human aspects of the people in the company. We must understand and
accept that for a company to be successful everyone has to be comfortable
and successful.
BUONADONNA: It's from the Gare du Nord
in Paris that the Eurostar travels back to Britain but the message coming
from the continent is not a welcome one for Tony Blair. France, together
with Luxembourg, Belgium and Italy is determined to strengthen employment
rights and wants to see new directives to protect workers on the agenda
soon. France will be in charge of EU business in three months' time as
it takes over the Presidency from the Portuguese and there's little doubt
that social legislation will be high on their list of priorities.
Many governments in Europe
feel that legislation has a part to play to protect the growing number
of workers who are not in traditional full-time jobs. The British government
is currently drafting regulation to implement a new EU directive on part-time
work. The aim is to ensure that part-time workers receive the same hourly
pay and similar conditions as their full-time counterparts. Two more EU
directives to regulate temporary work and agency work are being drafted
and could be pushed through in the next couple of years.
AUBRY: (INTERPRETED) I think that companies which
choose to operate on a temporary footing must bear the cost. There is no
reason why other companies, why taxpayers, should foot the bill for what
then becomes a form of institutionalised job insecurity.
LAURETTE ONKELINX:(INTERPRETED)It is clear that any directives aiming
to offer better protection for people, for workers, must be adopted as
quickly as possible.
BUONADONNA: But businesses in Britain say
they cannot cope with more legislation. Caterham Cars is a successful
sports car manufacturer in Kent. They build these models by hand and employ
sixty-five technicians but also need part-time and temporary staff during
busy periods. Its managing director says more regulation will put companies
like this under pressure.
SIMON NEARN: We have to maintain our flexibility.
If there's business to be done out there we have to react and to do that
we have to bring in new staff, sometimes on a part-time basis, sometimes
on a short contract. We need the flexibility and the more we are laboured
down with different regulations and requirements from our point of view
the more it makes it hard to react to these things.
BUONADONNA: The government is sensitive
to employers' concerns. Unions and some Labour MPs fear that some part-time
workers will be excluded from the new rules. The government is meant to
put the finishing touches to legislation to implement this directive by
next month.
MONKS: We think they're being
too narrow and minimalist in their interpretation of it. The major argument
is that we want to apply it to all workers - they're thinking of limiting
it to just employees. That makes a difference of several million people
who will be covered by the directive.
TONY LLOYD: One of the concerns to members
of parliament, Labour members of parliament, one of the concerns of people
within the world of work, is that we have a definition that allows people
who are part-time workers to benefit from the protection that this directive
seeks to give them. So we want a wide definition that takes in as many
as possible.
BUONADONNA: Another draft directive waiting
for approval in Brussels would give workers in companies with more than
fifty employees the right to be informed and consulted about any major
changes to their contract of employment. If a company fails to consult
its workers, its plans could be stopped. So far the UK has been blocking
progress on this.
LIDDELL: Good businesses are already
communicating both upwards and downwards within those businesses. So I
don't think over burdensome regulation is the way forward. We want to create
a modern business model that recognises the dynamism of a modern economy.
BUONADONNA: Caterham cars is doing well
- but it's one of the few remaining examples of what was once a thriving
industry. Some feel that what's happened at Rover's Longbridge plant underscores
the need for better consultation with workers and they're hoping to persuade
the government to listen.
LLOYD: I don't think we have anything
to be afraid of in terms of information and consultation. I think we have
an awful lot to gain by saying that where we take an issue like Longbridge
for example, it's in the interest of everybody if the workforce are consulted
at the earliest possible time when major changes are due to take place.
BUONADONNA: French companies such as Genset
have already accepted this type of legislation. If a substantial majority
of countries could be found to back a European directive on this it would
become law despite British opposition.
MONKS: We expect when the French
take over the presidency of the European Union in the second half of this
year, for them to revive the proposal for a directive on information and
consultation. And we think it's a very, very important measure.
AUBREY: (INTERPRETED) This approach exists in France, Germany,
Belgium, in most European countries. I think that at a time when there
are increasing numbers of pan-European companies, which are merging across
European borders, the implementation of common regulations would be useful.
Naturally we mustn't impinge on the operations of the companies. I think
however, that a balance can be found so that employees are not reduced
to learning that their company is about to shut down one of its plants
by reading about it in a newspaper. With such an attitude how can anyone
persuade them that they're important to the company?
BUONADONNA: A whole series of proposals
are heading the British way. The Lisbon summit will also start a five
year plan to update the European social model. The plan, known as the Social
Agenda, will include programmes to tackle discrimination and offer more
protection for workers and will inevitably lead to more Europe-wide regulation.
ANNA DIAMANTOPOULOU: It will be a coherent framework with
a piece of legislation, with projects, with programmes, with policies for
co-operation and co-ordination between member states and it will refer
to social inclusion issues, to other discrimination policies, to social
protection issues, to women issues and we will launch our public debate
after Lisbon.
ONKELINX: (INTERPETED) We are lobbying for the creation
of a genuine European Social Agenda which would act as the guiding thread
of Europe's Social integration. It would provide for the monitoring of
all developments in the matter throughout Europe, both European standards
and European social frameworks. If such a decision is taken the forthcoming
rotating presidencies of Europe - France, which is very keen to see a European
social agenda, followed by Sweden and Belgium, which is no less keen -
will be able to push through the changes required.
BUONADONNA: The direction some in Europe
are taking is not just worrying for Britain, the chief economist of the
European Central Bank says that Europe's economy is hindered by over- regulation.
A message Britain will repeat in Lisbon.
LIDDELL: Rather than just seeking
a legislative solution we should be looking at best practice, at how other
countries have coped with situations, who's done it well and who's done
it less well rather than necessarily always going down the legislative
route. You know, we need to get away from red-tape Europe. Red tape Europe
inhibits business, inhibits opportunities for employment and inhibits opportunities
for growth.
AUBRY: (INTERPRETED) I would like to answer with
a Tony Blair anecdote. When he came to France he told us there's no such
thing as left-wing policies or right-wing policies. There were only good
or bad policies. I don't necessarily share this point of view. I personally
would tell him there are good or bad ways of regulating things. To reject
regulation as something which is always negative seems to me just as bad
as to claim that everything should be regulated.
BUONADONNA: This week's summit will be
a crucial test for Tony Blair. Unless he can be seen to drive the European
economic reform it will be even harder to push Britain's membership of
the Single Currency. Although he may have begun the journey he still seems
to have a long way to go to persuade all his European partners to follow
him.
HUMPHRYS: Paola Buonadonna reporting
there.
HUMPHRYS: Rhodri Morgan is the man
Tony Blair did NOT want to be the leader of his party in Wales, the first
secretary in the Welsh Assembly. But he is ... because Alun Michael,
Mr Blair's choice, was forced out in a vote of no confidence. So Mr Morgan's
presumably a happy man. Wales is his to lead in the direction he chooses.
Or is it? His problem is that the Welsh Assembly has precious little
real power and there's not that much he can do as its leader. Mr Morgan
is in our Cardiff studio.
Good afternoon Mr Morgan.
RHODRI MORGAN: Good afternoon.
HUMPHRYS: You do have a problem
here don't you. It's an odd one in a sense because the people of Wales
seem to like you very much indeed, they think you will work miracles because
you're not, as they see it, Tony Blair's poodle but you can't give them
what they want because you don't have the power to do so.
MORGAN: That's a bit harsh I think......
HUMPHRYS: Accurate....?
MORGAN: I think it's quite possible
that the people of Wales might think in ten years' time that we ought to
be given more powers over more areas of government but they're certainly
not going to do that if we keep moaning about the powers we've been given.
It's only going to happen if we actually make the best creative use we
can of the powers we've got. So as far as I'm concerned we ought to stop
worrying about whether the pitch has been marked out properly and get on
with the game.
HUMPHRYS: Well the trouble is it's
difficult to get on with the game without much of a ball to play with and
you're totally dependent on the size of the ball that Gordon Brown the
Chancellor gives you, that's the snag, and if he won't give you the cash
you can't do the things you need. He won't give you the cash, he won't
even commit himself, guarantee that he'll match the money that Brussels,
the so-called Objective One money that Brussels wants to give you.
MORGAN: But that's true of devolution
everywhere, you have to have some sort of resource transfer mechanism from
central government to the province, region, land, state, small nation as
we are in Wales and Scotland of course in roughly the same position in
dependence on the Barnett Formula. But you know the German lender don't
have resource...they don't have their own tax raising power either, although
they've got a different mechanism by the Upper House in the German Parliament
HUMPHRYS: Ah but that's different...........
MORGAN: But I wouldn't equate -
have you got enough powers with have you got enough tax raising ability
because a tax raising ability for a very poor country like Wales is an
absurdity anyway because people in Wales can't afford the taxes they've
got now. So then the issue is - what is the resource transfer mechanism
from the British Treasury into Wales and into Scotland and into Northern
Ireland. It's worked reasonably well for the past twenty one years although
there are always arguments about the exact application of it and there
are arguments going on now and then there is a particular problem about
Europe and Objective One which is a new thing for us because we've never
had it before.
HUMPHRYS: I want to come onto the tax raising
thing in a moment because that's rather different but as far as this Objective
One money is concerned, Brussels, and here's the oddity about it, Brussels
actually wants to give it to: 'The Commission needs to be satisfied that
future financial resources will be able to provide public funding for the
whole programme......can't be satisfied that this will simply be reviewed
in the public spending review'. In other words what the Commission is
saying is that the Chancellor, as you very well know, has to say now, pretty
much yeah, we will match that money that Brussels is going to give you
and then Brussels will be very happy to hand it over. So it is very odd
isn't it that with a large chunk of money sitting there, that is ours by
right after all, you're not able to get your hands on it.
MORGAN: Well this is a three handed
argument between us in Wales, the Treasury in London for the UK government
and the Commission and each of us has a different timing requirement and
in particular the Treasury doesn't want to commit funds for the years 2001
and beyond before July of this year when it completes the comprehensive
spending review. Brussels wants to know in April of this year but isn't
worried about the first year either so they're reasonably happy and I think
if you'd read the rest of the paragraph you were quoting from you'd see
that they did actually evince considerable satisfaction with the arrangements
for year one from April now, next month, to April 2001 but they do want
to know now roughly what the arrangements are after that, after April 2001
but they want to know before the end of the spending review and the Treasury
don't want to say before the end of the spending review because of the
inevitable jealousies people in other regions of England perhaps particularly
looking at us in Wales, are we getting away with something and obviously
in the West Midlands they'd be looking to see 'well are they going to be
reasonably well treated if there is the ultimate catastrophe in Rover?',
the north-east will be looking because they are very similar to Wales in
terms of standard of living, low GDP per head, but they didn't get Objective
One for various technical factor reasons.
So the Treasury has to
handle all those things politically and financially in a way that is seen
to be fair and we have to make sure that this timing difference between
April and July, with the Commission wanting April and the Treasury wanting
July does not inhibit the commencement of the programme even though everybody
accepts that we've got enough money for the first year.
HUMPHRYS: But you're not, surely,
telling me that you're not asking Gordon Brown - 'Come on, please make
this possible.'?
MORGAN Only weekly John.
HUMPHRYS: Just not daily then.....?
MORGAN: No, not daily. I'm satisfied
that they do understand the problem but they're trying to balance it out
on a basis that will be seen to be fair across the UK and of course I understand
that and we've got year one sorted out we believe and I think everybody
now accepts that the first year from April 2000 to 2001 is okay but it's
a seven year programme and the Commission needs to know - Is there the
commitment there? Are we being serious in the UK then or is Labour in
danger of falling into the same trap as the Tories were of trying to find
little wangles by which you accepted the European money gleefully and then
cut the UK public sector expenditure and all Europe was doing was not contributing
to the net sum of human wealth but enabling the Tories to pursue a tax-cutting
agenda. Now obviously they fought very hard against that when the Tories
did it but they're going to make damn sure that Labour doesn't try that
trick as well. All Treasuries try that trick - of course, it's natural
for all Treasuries to do that, that's how they're made, that's why you
work in Treasury because you like to hold back public expenditure in all
forms, but I think there is an acceptance at the political level in the
UK government that Objective One has got to be a success in Wales because
it's the only chance we have because Eastern Europe will be in in 2007
and most regional expenditure will then be going east of the old Iron Curtain
and it's not going to come to areas like Wales or Ireland or Scotland.
HUMPHRYS: All the more reason to
get it now - exactly. So as far as spending is concerned generally, you
don't have enough money in Wales at the moment to do the things that you
want to do - that's an uncontroversial statement isn't it.....?
MORGAN: That's absolutely true.
No, it is very difficult, I mean the Barnett Formula is now putting a
lot of pressure on expenditure in Wales. We now cannot keep up with increases,
percentage increases in health and education that the Department of Health
and the Department of Education and Employment are doing in England. We
just can't do it because of the way convergence is bringing expenditure
in Wales more into line with that in England and so if you get a five per
cent increase in England we can only afford a four per cent increase in
Wales and that is crippling us at the moment and that's before the European
Objective One factor kicks in from April.
HUMPHRYS: And that's one of the
reasons why debts in the NHS are rising the way they are at the moment
- enormously according to the National Audit Office who said - 'The deficit
for Wales, NHS in Wales, eighty million pounds and rising.'
MORGAN: Absolutely, we are not
now able to match the percentage increases in England because of the way
the Barnett Formula is impacting and it is causing us huge difficulties
and would cause us absolutely insuperable difficulties if we don't win
the battle over Objective One funding. So we do have to have that Objective
One funding, the matched funding then from UK public sector sources to
be outside the Barnett Formula because it's just not acceptable obviously
that if you get a five per cent increase in health or education expenditure
in England, we can only do a three and a half or four per cent increase
in Wales which is what is happening now.
HUMPHRYS: Just for people who don't
understand. The Barnett Formula is the formula by which the amount of money
is calculated goes to places like Scotland and Wales. But just to return
to this question of tax. You need more money, all sorts of people need
more money and yet you can't cope. At the moment, as you say the NHS is
in very serious difficulty in Wales and yet we've got the spectacle of
Gordon Brown cutting a penny off income tax in the forthcoming Budget,
the one that he announced last time around. Possibly, possibly, even cutting
another penny of income tax. Now that sort of money, the money that he
is giving back to some of us in tax cuts would be more than enough to cover
your costs wouldn't it. What do you make of this idea of a Labour Government
cutting taxes and making it difficult to spend enough money on the NHS.
MORGAN: Well I notice the Tories
also accusing Gordon Brown of piling even more money on via stealth taxes
than he is saving in income tax, so there is a difference between what
you call headline tax increases and overall tax burden increases and I
think Gordon is catching it both ways at the moment, from the press and
the Tory Government of actually increasing the overall tax burden while
reducing the, you know the Daily Mail and Daily Express headline income
tax figures. So I'm not sure which you are accusing them of this week,
wherever it is the increase in the tax burden which you were accusing him
of last week, or the speculative reduction in the headline income tax rate.
HUMPHRYS: I'm not accusing him
of anything. What I'm asking you is whether you are happy that he should
be cutting taxes when the money could go on the NHS or education or something
else. Are you quite happy about that?
MORGAN: We want the ability to
increase health and education expenditure and other frontline service expenditure
on a par with what is happening in England and for various technical reasons
relating to the way the Barnett Formula....
HUMPHRYS: ...but you can put that
aside can't you...
MORGAN: ..was structured in 1979
we're not able to do that now. Now, I'm not going to tell Gordon Brown
how to run the economy and I'm certainly not going to do it just before
Budget Day when he'll be making his announcements on Tuesday..
HUMPHRYS: ..might be the best time
to do it.
MORGAN: ...the overall issue of
the tax burden and the overall issue of public expenditure in the UK and
sometimes he's accused of doing both. You can't be doing both, you can't
be cutting taxes and increasing taxes and you've got to look at the overall
net picture on the tax burden. Our problem is that one way or another,
for factors relating back to 1979, at the moment we can't match increases
in health and education expenditure and we hope that the way we can restructure
things from either this year or next year, we will be able to have that
freedom again to be able to match English increases.
HUMPHRYS: You said earlier, you
talked about it being a nonsense for regions or nations like Wales to be
able to raise its own income tax, but that's what they are doing in Scotland.
I mean they can raise or lower the rate of tax by three pence in the pound.
Don't you think it would be nice for you to be able to do the same ultimately.
MORGAN: The Scottish standard of
living and therefore the Scottish taxable capacity is much higher than
ours..
HUMPHRYS: ..oh no, it's the principle
that we're talking about isn't it.
MORGAN: They're roughly at the
same standard of living as England and we're eighteen per cent behind the
Scottish and English standard of living, so you know, if you can't afford
to pay the taxes you are paying now, the prospect of devolution enabling
you to pay more tax than that, and more tax than you would pay if you lived
in England is extremely unattractive. What is more, looking back at the
very narrow percentage by which we won the devolution referendum, if we
now went back less than twelve months later compared to the start of devolution,
then at three years later you look back at the referendum and said we are
going to change the rules now, and we are going to say we are going to
have a tax raising ability in Wales, that's constitutionally outrageous.
HUMPHRYS: So they wouldn't get
away with it in other words. Can't do that - what about this Freedom of
Information business. You want us to know more about how government works,
you want us to have a more open system. But it's not actually going to
happen is it?
MORGAN: I'm not sure why you think
it's not going to happen. It certainly is going to happen. I mean, alright
I run a minority administration, therefore without the support of one of
the three other parties I can't say clap my hands and get my group in order
and therefore that's what happens, you've got to have at least one other
party on board. But on this issues, all three other parties are actually
as interested as we are in having an open government agenda.
HUMPHRYS: ...but you want to release
more information don't you..
MORGAN: There are already three
ways that we can take the devolution project you know further. One is on
the open government agenda, where we can push away at the fusty corridors
of Whitehall method of doing things and the second is by having wider powers
which we may get, which the old Welsh Office used to get once every five
years, some additional power not previously devolved to Cardiff would actually
be transferred to Wales and then finally, there's the issue you were talking
about earlier, the primary legislative powers or tax raising powers, which
for the moment I think is completely off the agenda. Now, as regards open
government, how you do things in Wales. I think we have every right and
every expectation to be able to have an open government agenda pushed forward,
really quite quickly. Remember that we don't have the security implications
in what we do that central government institutions do, so it's a lot easier
for us to do it than it is for government in London.
HUMPHRYS: But you wouldn't be able
to release information from Whitehall would you, that's the point.
MORGAN: No, of course not because
it would destroy our relationship with central government so I mean any
journalist who is thinking they can pop down to Cardiff and get information
about government in London that they can't get from London by asking for
it via us is going to be very disappointed - they can save themselves the
train fare now. With respect to what we do in Wales can get an open government
agenda in a much freer way than you could in London with all the implications
for defence and security and foreign policy and international relations
that London has, well we don't have those inhibitions so we can push ahead
on that agenda using international benchmaking as our formula, who runs
this kind of thing best in the world, can we match the best standards in
the world, and I'm sure we can.
HUMPHRYS: But at the moment a lot
of people say, I think, that it's your own view isn't it, that the Freedom
of Information legislation isn't tough enough. Certainly people like Maurice
Frankel believe that that is the case. Would you be prepared to vote for
greater freedom in Westminster and I suppose really I'm saying to you that
you've always been regarded as a bit of a rebel and now that you are a
highly distinguished leader of a party in Wales and you have that posh
title, does that mean you've become a bit of a pussy cat or are you still
prepared when you go up to Westminster to sit in the House of Commons to
vote for the things that you think really matter.
MORGAN: Oh no, that's for others
to judge. I don't get to London as often as I would like because of the
pressure of work in the middle of the week, and we've got plenary sessions
on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and a lot of these key votes are on Tuesdays
and Wednesdays in London as well. It's very unfortunate, so I'm not in
the House of Commons as often as I would like. If I was, then there are
some issues which relate to conscience or issues of principle where, who
knows what might happen.
Now the Freedom of Information
Act or Bill that is going through at the moment, it's not as strong as
the Scottish Parliament Bill and it's certainly not as strong as what we
hope to do, but I sympathise with the different factors that relate to
government in London and which we don't have to worry about in Cardiff.
Basically I think, you know, the fact is that devolution is as devolution
does, so in a few years' time there will be different models and people
will look across at different models and they will say from Westminster
to Cardiff, to Edinburgh down to London again and across to Commonwealth
countries, the Irish Republic, and I think people will be much freer and
easier in seeing, well there's a better model, why don't we follow that
model. There's a better model in a devolved assembly, why don't we follow
that model.?
HUMPHRYS So you might do that?
MORGAN: This is thought pretty
unnatural at the moment, but this is all part of the variable geometry
UK coming into being slowly, and everybody will adapt to it from the media
to the Sir Humphreys in Whitehall and in Cardiff and Edinburgh before very
long.
HUMPHRYS: What about your own difficulties
in Wales because you're a minority government there effectively. Yeah,
you're going to have to have a coalition aren't you, a sort of formal coalition
the way the Labour Party did in Scotland. Is that in your mind or have
you ruled it out, or what?
MORGAN: Neither. No. I mean it
could be ... I mean the problem is that it took a lot of spade-work in
Scotland. I mean it happened in a week, but the week after the elections
that it took to sign the agreement was based on seven years of co-operation
between Labour and the Liberals in a constitutional convention. We did
not have a constitutional convention and we came into the election therefore
expecting to win a majority, because only one third of our seats are by
proportional representation compared to forty-two per cent I think it is
in Scotland, so they knew they weren't going to form a majority right from
the White Paper, as soon as they saw the voting proportions, We thought
we were going to win a majority but we didn't so it was all a bit new to
us.
Now, we are developing methods
of closer co-operation with at least two of the other three parties in
Wales, and on some issues with all three parties on open government, but
where we finish up in six months time and whether we'll have a coalition,
a working arrangement of some sort, an agreement, about where you have
common ground, well why try and oppose each other when you actually agree
on something, and that applies to not just one party, there's an element
of competition between the Liberals and Plaid Cymru to want to be quite
close to us on some issues, but to want to grandstand.on the outside on
other issues for reasons that I perfectly well understand, and they're
certainly not going to go for, you know, just the perks or the Ministry
of your car, and having one minister in the government unless they get
a lot out of it and they're not sure what they would get out of it, and
we're not sure either, whether we're ready for this. So for the moment
we're trying to work together to find common ground.
HUMPHRYS: Okay Rhodri Morgan, thanks
very much indeed for joining us.
MORGAN: Thank you.
HUMPHRYS: William Hague is taking
a tough line on Britain's relationship with Europe. He wants us to draw
a line in the sand, to say there will be no more powers handed over to
Brussels. Some of his party are worried about what that will do to our
position in the European Union. But, and here's his real problem, others
want him to go even further. They say too much power has been handed over
already and they want it back. Jonathan Beale has been looking at how
the battle might end.
JONATHAN BEALE: Brussels is getting ready to welcome
new countries to the European Union. But before they can take their places
at the table, changes will have to be made. Some Conservatives accept
that means more power being handed over to Brussels. Others want to take
power back. The Tory Leadership is trying to keep both sides happy to avoid
splits over Europe being on display again.
ROGER HELMER MEP: We want to be clear that there
are areas of policy currently which are EU competencies that in future
under a Conservative government should be brought back as clearly British
national competencies.
LORD BRITTEN: Well a lot of people talk
about a lot of nonsense and you can't stop them talking about it, but it
doesn't mean its going to happen.
BEALE: William Hague wants a more
flexible Europe before it welcomes new member states. He wants Britain
to have the right to reject any further Brussels interference. His is a
vision of being able to pick and choose any future EU legislation. It's
Europe a la carte: There are currently fifteen countries in the Union,
but eastern Europe is queuing to join. Conservatives are worried that in
a larger EU Britain's right to veto legislation could be diminished.
The Tories fear it would leave Britain unable to prevent more powers
of the national parliament being handed over to Brussels. The transfer
has already started. In previous treaties Brussels has been given powers
to create a SINGLE MARKET, a SINGLE CURRENCY and a SOCIAL CHAPTER to
protect workers' rights. The Commission is now ready to look at the next
course: Beefing up the European Foreign and Security policy and EU Justice
and Immigration controls It could also press for a European Charter of
Rights. Eventually the Commission would like to get round to creating a
European Army and to gain some influence over Taxation. The Hague menu
would add flexibility.
FRANCIS MAUDE: We take the view that the
European Union's reached a fork in the road - with enlargement much overdue
it's got to do one of two things. It will either have to intensify the
integration towards full political union or it's got to go down the route
of flexibility, of having a European Union where the one size fits all
dogma, of uniformity that's been really the dominant theory of the European
Union since its inception. We recognise that that's out of date. A modern
Europe in a modern world needs to be more flexible.
BEALE: The party's pro- Europeans
are worried. Candidate countries could be left in the cold if there isn't
a new treaty. But William Hague says a Tory Government would be willing
to hold up the negotiations if he didn't get what he wanted:
BRITTAN: It would be a tragedy
for the Conservative party as the champion of enlargement, and greatly
respected and admired in east and central Europe were to lose all that
by seeming to stand in the way of the one change which would certainly
be a modest one which is needed to achieve enlargement, which everybody
agrees is needed.
BEALE: But the Conservatives want
Britain to set its own agenda. It, and any other country could refuse
to sign up to any future EU legislation. Countries such as Germany France,
Holland Belgium and Luxembourg could still pursue further integration.
But they couldn't force Britain to join their party.
BRITTAN: It would mean that there
was a forward looking group and we were left behind and we would have much
less influence. Conservatives, some Conservatives argue in favour of it
because they think it's a way of picking and choosing and cherry picking
and doing what we want and not doing what we don't want. Well, that can't
work in the European Union and it wouldn't be agreed.
BEALE: Some Tory Euro- sceptics
wouldn't swallow it either. They fear a two tier Europe would only speed
up integration for some. Even if Britain opted out at the start - as with
the social chapter - it could always get pulled in later.
BILL CASH: That means a hard core
two tier Europe of the kind that was ruled out by the Conservative Party
when in power in 1996. Now I happen to be dead against the idea of a hard
core two tier Europe because actually it is conceding the principle of
a federal Europe
BEALE: But the policy may brighten
up Tory fortunes back home by appealing to an electorate that's showing
sings of disillusionment with the EU. In last May's Euro elections the
slogan "In Europe, not run by Europe" struck a chord - at least with
some of those who bothered to vote. The party is being urged to go further
still. Many Tories believe there's already been too much influence from
Europe. They want to turn back the clock and renegotiate past EU rules
and regulations which they say have been bad for Britain. In essence they
want a menu that's decided by Westminster not Brussels. Tory Euro sceptics
have already prepared a list of ingredients they want taken out of the
EU's hands. The leadership itself is already committed to trying to take
control of fishing rights, but many within the party want more Some would
like to renegotiate the Common Agricultural Policy. Getting rid of European
health and safety rules such as the working time directive and new workers
rights in the Social chapter are high on the list of demands.
DAVID DAVIES MP: I cannot conceive of a Conservative
Government in the future leaving in place the social chapter, not just
because of its Labour law overtones but because it means the rest of Europe
can overrule us and tell us what laws we should have in that area and there
are others too.
JOHN REDWOOD MP: Is it enough merely to say we're
going to renegotiate fishing or should we also say that the Social Chapter
- which all Conservative members of parliament voted against - should no
longer apply in Britain under a Conservative government? If so I think
that will require a re-negotiation as well. So I think near the election
William Hague has got to put before the British people what his re-negotiation
would amount to. How much flexibility he wants on things that have already
happened.
BEALE: The issue of re-negotiation
is still being considered by the shadow cabinet. An internal party discussion
paper penned by Archie Norman warns: "We should as far as possible avoid
the language of re-negotiation..." It goes on to say that : "Some element
of re-negotiation in the manifesto is unavoidable. It is a question of
how it is described"
MAUDE: It has a connotation for
people at both extremes of the argument - there may be some for all I know
for whom re-negotiation is code for getting out of the European union.
HELMER: We in the party seem to
be very coy about the word re-negotiation, but it seems to me that if we
are committed to going back to areas like fisheries and bringing back national
control of fisheries then whether you like it or not that is re-negotiation.
That's what we have to do, that's what the British people want and that
is what I hope very much will be in large letters in the Conservative General
Election manifesto.
BEALE: But the language has so
far been limited to future flexibility. Even that would still need the
approval of all member states. But rewriting past treaties may prove to
be as difficult as changing the favourite dish of a long established restaurant.
BEALE: Though as a last resort
other countries could always be reminded of who helps pay the bill
REDWOOD: We make a very big contribution
to the budget. I'm sure they wouldn't want to jeopardise that kind of relationship
in any way. We can remind as were paying for a lot of the show maybe we
should have a bit more influence over the show.
BEALE: Such suggestions may be
simply unpalatable. The former shadow foreign secretary is calling for
a more cautious approach. He says they should limit its demands.
JOHN MAPLES MP: I think if we said we wanted
to go back and renegotiate bits of the past I think we'd find that impossible
to achieve in negotiation. Forward flexibility may well be something that
we can achieve and I believe we can.
BEALE: Back in Brussels as the
EU government's prepare to sign the new treaty even such modest changes
may never reach the table. Out of office the Tories are effectively out
of the discussions. Euro-sceptics warn if the party doesn't commit itself
to re-negotiation, more people will be wanting out altogether:
CASH: What I'm saying is
that there is an increasing call for withdrawal from certain quarters in
the United Kingdom, and that that will simply be increased if in fact we
don't have a clear blue light policy of re- negotiation which does stand
up which is not withdrawal, which is in favour of the single market ,
but which at the same time upholds the right of the British people to govern
themselves.
HELMER: The other member states
will realise that if in the long term the British people don't get what
they want out of Europe, then indeed the question of withdrawal will arise
whether we like it or not. So that will be lurking in the background of
the negotiations.
BEALE: The Conservative leadership
still hopes that it's created a recipe that can unite the party and attract
the voters too. But pro-Europeans are already concerned that re-negotiation
will one day appear on the menu. As for the Euro-sceptics they are already
asking for more.
HUMPHRYS: Jonathan Beale reporting
there.
JOHN HUMPHRYS: The Tories are feeling
relatively pleased with themselves this weekend. They reckon they've
got the government on the run over a number of different issues and they've
just scored their first by-election victory in Scotland for more than thirty
years. The next big test for all the parties is the local government elections
in England and Wales in the first week in May. Labour's worry is that
many of their traditional supporters will stay at home and the Liberal
Democrats are afraid they may continue to lose voters in the south. All
of which would be good news for the Tories and people may start saying
that Tony Blair cannot take the General Election for granted. Terry Dignan
has been taking some soundings of his own.
TERRY DIGNAN: For nearly twenty years the
high tide of Conservatism dashed Labour's attempts to capture the towns
of the Medway. Then, in 1997, the Conservatives were swept away. Now they
hope to show they're on course to winning back the Medway towns by taking
the council from Labour in May's local elections. What the Tories are counting
on is a little help from Labour's core supporters. If Labour's traditional
core vote fails to turn out here in the Medway towns and the rest of England,
the Conservatives could be heading for their best election result since
1992. Like Labour, the Liberal Democrats are also worried. Although they
expect to make gains at Labour's expense in the urban North of England,
they fear losing to the Tories in their Southern strongholds. The big question
mark hanging over the Conservatives is whether they do well enough in these
local elections to suggest they pose a serious threat to Labour at the
General Election. Hoo St Werburgh is a microcosm of England's electoral
battleground and, says Medway's Labour leader, could provide clues for
the General Election.
PAUL GODWIN: Well, this is an ex-council
housing estate which has been taken over by a local housing society. A
lot of core Labour voters here who would have voted for us in '97 in a
marginal ward and obviously we need to ensure they come out again and vote
for us on May the Fourth. We currently have one Labour councillor and one
Conservative councillor representing this ward so it's extremely important.
We returned three Labour MPs in Medway at the '97 General Election and,
of course, this is a testing time for us in terms of the vote at the local
elections, probably a year, eighteen months in advance of the next General
Election. I know the three local MPs are working very hard to help us get
the Labour vote out in the local elections for that reason. So it is going
to be a clear indicator and pointer to what might happen in the General
Election.
PROFESSOR COLIN RALLINGS: Labour core supporters exist
everywhere - there are of course many more of them in the North of England
and in parts of urban Scotland, but even in the South there are pockets
of strong Labour support and if Labour supporters there are taking the
same attitude to the party and to the Government as Labour supporters in
the North and in Scotland, then it can have a similarly damaging effect.
DIGNAN: So worried is Medway Council
about future turnouts, it's hired a drama group to persuade these bemused
sixth formers that voting is cool. Low turnouts don't hurt every party.
It's being predicted that if Labour voters stay at home in May, the Conservatives
can feel optimistic about regaining Medway's Parliamentary seats at the
General Election.
RODNEY CHAMBERS: If the traditional Labour core
vote stays at home, then it is my belief - and I think it will stay at
home - that the three Members of Parliament, Labour Members of Parliament,
that are representing the Medway towns at the moment, must be very seriously
worried people.
DIGNAN: When the parties cast off
and set sail for polling day, how many of their supporters will climb aboard?
In local by-elections Labour has only been able to retain sixty-eight per
cent of the votes it received at a previous council contest. The Conservatives,
though, have kept ninety-four per cent of their vote; the Liberal Democrats
ninety per cent. So low turn-outs in council elections have been hitting
Labour hardest.
RALLINGS: In London and in other
places, councils for example like Medway, there are pockets of very strong
Labour support; and if those Labour supporters sit at home then it means,
at the elections in May in Medway, that it could have the effect of Labour
losing effective control of the council. And of course if they sat at home
again come the General Election, then it would mean a seat like Gillingham,
part of the Medway Towns, would be taken back by the Conservatives from
Labour with almost no votes actually changing hands.
DIGNAN: The early signs of Spring
in Kent. Yet Labour fears many of its core supporters feel their lives
show little sign of changing for the better under Tony Blair's Government.
GODWIN: I think it is of concern.
I mean, obviously, the national opinion polls are still very favourable
to the Labour Party but I think it is a problem for us. I think any party
in power when they're governing clearly has to get across what it's achieved.
And the Labour Government's no different from anybody else.
DIGNAN: Nowadays local politics
generate little excitement. But that doesn't put off Liberal Democrats
like Maureen Ruparel. At the last Medway elections her party won as many
seats as the Conservatives. To improve the Tories chances of winning the
council - and then the Parliamentary constituencies - they need to take
votes off the Liberal Democrats. It's conceded that may happen albeit on
a limited scale.
MAUREEN RUPERAL: Apart from people switching to
the Liberal Democrats, I think an awful lot switched to Labour at the last
election. Some may go back to the Conservatives if that's their natural
home, but basic core Liberal Democrat support doesn't alter.
DIGNAN: During the nineties that
support rose steeply in Torbay. So much so that the Liberal Democrats won
control of the Devon resort from the Tories on the back of the Poll Tax
revolt. Since then they've also won the area's Parliamentary seat. The
recent history of voting behaviour here in Torbay will be familiar to many
parts of Southern England. First, the Liberal Democrats win control of
the council. Then, they oust the sitting Conservative MP. To show they're
well on the way to reversing this process, the Conservatives in places
like Torbay will have to be able to inflict heavy losses on the Liberal
Democrats in these elections. Glassblowing - a craft practised at Cockington
Court with funding from Torbay Council, whose leader is visiting. She's
up against Conservatives who - no longer associated with an unpopular Tory
Government - find it easier to exploit local discontents.
ANN WIILIAMS: There are difficult decisions
that we have to take locally, not just here in Torbay, nationally. Government
legislation has to be adhered to, and our local Conservatives here are
in an extremely comfortable position. How wonderful to be able to criticise
the Labour government. How wonderful to be able to criticise the Liberal
Democrat administration.
DIGNAN: In areas like Torbay the
Liberal Democrats believe they've benefited from tactical voting. It's
meant Labour supporters backing them to defeat the Conservatives. But now
the Conservatives are out of office, is tactical voting much in evidence?
WILLIAMS: I don't think the Labour
supporters here in Torbay would like to see a Conservative MP, or a Conservative
council. A lot of people that I speak to on a regular basis, they don't
forget the Tory days here in Torbay. It's commonly known, many, for many,
many years as Tory Bay."
RALLINGS: I think the case has
now rather changed, and the Government isn't hugely unpopular and neither
any longer are the Conservatives. At the next time if people revert to
their normal party pattern, then that may allow, in several of the constituencies,
the Conservatives to slip through the middle without actually polling many
more votes than they did last time.
DIGNAN: These are the Conservative
activists who stayed loyal during the years of unpopular Tory rule. Driven
from power throughout the South West, they're planning a comeback. Today
they're delivering newsletters denouncing their arch enemies in the region,
the Liberal Democrats.
RICHARD CUMING: I think the tide is turning against
them, I think if you have a look at the European election results twelve
months ago, the Conservatives in the Bay polled over nine thousand votes,
the Liberal Democrats just over three thousands votes. The message is clear
that people aren't prepared to support the Liberal Democrat policies either
locally or of course nationally.
DIGNAN: Yet even if the Liberals
Democrats do lose seats in the South, that won't tell the whole story.
Because they could be making gains at Labour's expense in the urban North.
RALLINGS: During the 1990s when
the Conservatives were so unpopular the Liberal Democrats took many seats
and indeed Councils, from the Conservatives, especially in south and south-west
England, places like here in Torbay. And they've found their success now
over the last couple of years more in traditional Labour areas where they
can compete effectively against Labour Councils and represent a protest
vote against the Labour government.
DIGNAN: Having once looked as if
they might sink without trace in local elections, the Conservatives are
back afloat and charting a course to possible victory. In council by-elections
their share of the vote is running at thirty-six per cent, ahead of Labour
at thirty-five per cent. Lying astern are the Liberal Democrats - their
vote share is currently twenty-four per cent. Projecting these figures
to May gives the Conservatives about three hundred gains. Labour would
make roughly two hundred and eighty losses with the Liberal Democrats showing
little or no change - suggesting they'll do well in Labour's Northern heartlands
but badly at the hands of the Conservatives in the South of England. So
what do these calculations tell us about Liberal Democrat prospects at
the General Election? Winning in the North may not be of much comfort
to them because there are few marginal Parliamentary seats they can gain
there. It's the South which will determine their immediate future.
RALLINGS: Almost half the Liberal
Democrat seats currently in Parliament are at risk to a five per cent swing
from them to the Conservatives at the next General Election; and their
performance in parts of the south suggest that they are now suffering that
level of swing to the Conservatives - that must put some twenty of their
MPs under serious threat.
DIGNAN: But does the scale of the
Conservatives' predicted gains - three hundred extra council seats - mean
William Hague could defeat Labour at the General Election?
RALLINGS: I think in reality these
elections in the coming May, the Conservatives need to register something
in excess of four hundred gains to suggest they have the kind of lead over
Labour at this stage in the Parliament which they could use to build on
to threaten the Labour majority at the coming General Election.
DIGNAN: May will see the start
of Torbay's summer season. By then we might only be a year away from Tony
Blair calling a General Election. Much could depend on Labour avoiding
a poor performance in the local elections. That means persuading core supporters
it's worth joining the one in three people who now bother to turn out.
HUMPHRYS: Terry Dignan reporting
there. And that's it for this week. Don't forget you can keep in touch
with us through our website, the address is on your screen now. That's
it for this week, goodbye.
...oooOooo...
22
FoLdEd
|