|
====================================================================================
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 TWO DATE:
01.10.00
====================================================================================
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Good afternoon. Is
the tide really turning for the Tories? Their conference starts tomorrow
and we'll be asking what they need to do to beat Labour. I'll also be talking
to Margaret Beckett. Can the government get its act together again in
time for the big test? And has David Trimble reached the end of the road
in Northern Ireland? That's after the news read by Peter Sissons.
NEWS
HUMPHRYS: There's a bit of a new spring
in the Tories' step as they prepare to hit the campaign trail. Are they
in with a real chance or just preaching to their own converted?
And the Ulster Unionists
are about to hold their annual conference. Can their leader David Trimble
and the peace process survive?
JEFFREY DONALDSON: I think there's got to be a
change of policy and if there isn't a change of policy, then I think the
party as a whole, never mind the leader, is in deep deep trouble.
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Well against all the odds
the Tories are gathering in Bournemouth for their annual conference, looking
and sounding more optimistic than the Labour Party did when it met in Brighton
last week. It wasn't meant to be like this, but Labour have been knocked
off course a bit by a whole string of unfortunate events. (Conferences
usually give parties a bit of a boost, but even though Labour have seen
a small improvement in the opinion polls, they're still looking a bit
shaky.) So what must they do now?, Margaret Beckett is the leader of the
House of Commons and she's in our Derby studio.
Good afternoon, Mrs Beckett.
MARGARET BECKETT: Hello.
HUMPHRYS: I don't expect you to
say this morning yes I think the Tories will win, but do you acknowledge
at least that the climate has changed a little bit and the Tories are beginning
to land a few blows on you and people are beginning to take them rather
more seriously than they did.
BECKETT: I think that certainly
the Tories are making more of an impact but as to whether or not that in
the long term will actually follow through is quite another matter because,
yes, of course, they are leaping on every passing bandwagon but when you
look at the total of what they are saying it simply doesn't add up, either
arithmetically or any other way. You know more for pensions, more for
health and yet they are planning to cut public spending by sixteen billion
pounds. So, I think it's a good thing if it makes people look harder at
the Tories because what they are saying is frankly unbelievable.
HUMPHRYS: Well you say but it may
be that a lot of people will look at it and rather like what they see because
the terms of the debate now are much clearer than they were, you are the
party that is going to spend, spend a great deal of money. The Tories are
the party who are saying we are actually going to cut taxes, we are going
to spend a little bit more, not as much as the Labour Party but a bit more
but we are going to cut taxes and that may well be the message that Middle
England, the people who helped put you in power last time actually want
to hear.
BECKETT: Well, you are being a
little kind to the Tories because yes they are saying they are going to
cut taxes, although they have already had to abandon the guarantee they
gave, which William Hague said there was no small print, no qualification,
no caveat, it was an absolute guarantee, but that was a couple of months
ago and he said they'd cut taxes under all circumstances, they are no saying
that anymore but yes they are saying they will cut taxes but they are also
saying, I heard him saying this morning, there will be more for pensions,
there will be more for the Health Service or as much for the Health Service
as we are pledged to invest and they won't cut the investment we are making
in education and yet, they are going to make all these cuts in public spending
and in public investment. So, I repeat, it just doesn't add up and if we
talk, let's take just one example of what they are saying about pensions.
What they are saying is that the substantial sums of extra money that
in a variety of ways had gone into pensioners' pockets under this government
they will re-package and add a bit more on top and I think they are simply
making the point, this is money they wouldn't have had from a Tory government.
HUMPHRYS: But the message nonetheless
that is going to get through to many voters is if you want your taxes to
be a bit lower, then it's the Tories you ought to vote for.
BECKETT: Well maybe, I think the
claim, as I say, is that they can cut taxes and they can cut public spending
but every time you challenge them on any particular area of spending they
say oh, no the cuts weren't for there. It simply doesn't add up. None of
it adds up, I mean why should pensioners believe all the pledges that are
made when it wasn't under the Tory government that they got all this money
that William Hague is going redistribute, he says. It wasn't in fact under
the Tory government that we saw the substantial programme of sustained
investment in education and health to which this government is pledged
if we're fortunate enough to be returned to office. If people want that
investment, which is what they have been saying, then clearly they don't
want to see it cut back by Tories who are having to cut on their own promises
sixteen billion pounds.
HUMPHRYS: On the other hand people
don't like paying high taxes do they and what the Tories are saying, you
could argue this is a very responsible approach, what they are saying is
we will spend what we think the country can afford, yes we are going to
match you on health, no pledge as you say on education and there's going
to be this little bit extra for the pensioners but by and large we are
going to keep our spending within the limits that the economy can manage,
they regard your spending pledges as positively irresponsible and again
that is a message that a lot of people might say yeah, it makes sense.
BECKETT: Well the only concrete
tax cutting pledge, apart from the general pledge to cut all taxes and
cut spending but somehow not hurt anybody, the only specific spending..
tax cutting pledge that I've heard them give lately is the one on fuel
tax, where they say they would make some cuts in fuel tax but again, of
course, it was Gordon Brown, who a year ago in the budget, cut something
like four hundred million pounds in motoring costs and as for the general
pledge about cutting taxes, we are already, with the exception of the fuel
tax, we are already one of the most lightly taxed nations anywhere in Europe.
If you look at all the other taxes, the Tories are trying to latch on
to fuel tax because they hope it will give people the impression that they
are paying more in taxes than elsewhere in Europe, they are not - overall
they are paying less in taxes.
HUMPHRYS: But what people will
know very well indeed, it's been reconfirmed today, what they will know
very well is that they are paying more taxes across the board under the
you than they were you came into power. Taxes have gone up in spite of
the pledge before you came into power that they wouldn't.
BECKETT: No, no, what we said before
we came into power is that we would not put up the standard rate or the
top rate of income tax and we have not done that..
HUMPHRYS: That isn't just what
Tony Blair said, he went way beyond that, you know perfectly well...anyway...
BECKETT: Come on John, you know
that isn't so. You were one of the people who challenged people like me
repeatedly to say what would do you on all these other taxes and refused
to give any such promises because we said it would be responsible to do
so.
HUMPHRYS: Tony Blair said taxes
would got up under a Labour Government..
BECKETT: Come on, what we said
very clearly was that the rate of income tax wouldn't go up. We did not
say anything about the whole range of other issues. But what we did say
was that an incoming Labour government would have to turn the economy around,
pay back some of that debt, billions of pounds of debt that the Tories
left us saddled with and that that meant the first couple of years would
be a tough couple of years, because if you remember, with the exception
of a bit of extra funding from the Windfall tax, to which they were opposed,
we actually stuck to the Tories' spending programmes. So all this stuff
about it wouldn't have been here, it wouldn't have been there, if we'd
had a Tory government, we implemented in the first two years with some
softening at the edges, their spending plans and with regard to issues
such as the money that is on pensions, the money that's going into the
Health Service, of course it's taking time, it's taking longer than people
wanted, it's taking longer than any of us wanted but that's... these are
the facts of life, it doesn't take any less time to train a nurse or train
a doctor because you've got a new government. It will take time for that
investment to come through.
HUMPHRYS: But the very simply message
is that if you get back into power, you are not saying we will cut taxes,
if the Tories get back into power there's a chance that they will. So
this is the very simple, shorthand message that the voters may very well
take from all this, isn't it and that could be very damaging for you.
BECKETT: That's not exactly right,
I mean we are...
HUMPHRYS: ...you're not promising
to cut taxes are you?
BECKETT: ...we aren't promising,
we aren't saying that we won't be able to, after all, Gordon has already
introduced a ten p. starting rate of tax, he's already made the tax system
fairer...
HUMPHRYS: Ah but they'll look at
your record, won't they, and see that you haven't cut taxes in the last
three years...
BECKETT: Oh ...., John, I would
like nothing better than for them to look at our record. They look at
our record, they see that when we came to power we were paying forty-seven
p. in every pound we raised in Revenue on the cost of the debt that they
left us and on the costs of unemployment, and now we're paying seventeen
p. That's how we got the room for manoeuvre, to make the investment that
we want to make. And of course we are going to look at issues like fuel
tax. Look at the whole picture, when we see the figures over the whole
year and see if there's anything that can be done, ought to be done, to
ease the costs for ordinary motorists. If we can do so, we will, but not
at the risk of jeopardising the investment in Education and Health, and
Transport, that everybody wants to see. And I think what people will see,
there is nothing I'd like better than for them to take the Tories seriously
as an Opposition and look seriously at what they're promising, because
whichever way you look at it, it simply doesn't add up.
HUMPHRYS: Let's look at um, one
of the other reasons why it hasn't been a terribly good week for you this
past week and that's what happened in Denmark. I mean, that has put paid
to any chance of an early referendum on the Euro, and I, I know that the
line from everybody is say, oh, it happened in Denmark, it's got nothing
to do with us at all, but nobody believes that for two seconds. Of course
it's got something to do with us, because it delivered a very clear message
from, of what ordinary people think about these issues, so it, it does
mean that an early referendum, I stress an early referendum, is not on
the cards now, doesn't it?
BECKETT: Well, we've er, er, it's
always been a question as to when it would be possible to have the referendum
because of course the government would have to be satisfied that it was
in our economic interest to join the Euro and then put that decision to
the British people, and again, you will have on this programme, dozens
of times, asked Ministers to speculate about when that time might come,
and no-one can, because it does depend on the five economic tests.
HUMPHRYS: And that's it is it?
That's all it depends on is the five economic tests, because what Denmark
very clearly showed is that economic interests were actually on the back-burner
there, I mean they were irrelevant in large part because their currency
is already attached to the Euro and the Deutsche Mark very firmly, so are
you actually seriously saying, that issues of sovereignty, which is what
decided the Denmark in, the, the, the referendum in Denmark very very clearly,
issues of sovereignty in this country simply don't matter, it's just those
five economic tests?
BECKETT: No, of course they matter...
HUMPHRYS: ...Ah
BECKETT: ...but what we have said,
and we've said it quite consistently and we stand by it, is that while
we've considered very carefully these issues of sovereignty and all of
those things, we think on balance, that the, the balance of the argument
is that it is in Britain's interest to join, provided that it is not damaging
to us economically, and of course we would only recommend a referendum
to say yes to going into the Euro at a time and in circumstances where
we believed that it was clear that this was in Britain's national interest.
Surely that's what a British government ought to be doing, saying we'll
decided on the basis of Britain's national interest, not some ideological
shibboleth or some artificial time-scale. I mean the Tories aren't saying
they'd never take us into the Euro, they just say, not for the next five
years.
HUMPHRYS: So the future of the
pound's an ideological shibboleth is it? I mean, what, what Gordon Brown
said, um last September...
BECKETT: ...no, the ideological
shibboleth is the, er at least, this is how I would describe it, is the
artificial timeline, the saying, not for the next Parliament, not for five
years, they aren't saying never.
HUMPHRYS: Mmm. But as far as er,
well let's deal with ideological shibboleth's of all sorts then in that
case, ideology and sovereignty and these matters, you said, yeah, of course
it matters a bit. Gordon Brown seems to think that it doesn't matter at
all. He said, there are no, and I'm quoting from what he said September
of last year, there are no political or constitutional objections. None.
Now it's extraordinary isn't it, particularly bearing in mind the, the
way people of, in Denmark voted on those precise issues.
BECKETT: Well, people in Denmark
made a decision for Denmark on the basis of what they felt about the issue.
And of course as you will have noticed, their interest rates have had
to go up already, so that may not be a cost-free decision, but it's a decision
that they were free to make, and they have made. The British people will
be free to make that decision, at least they will if they have a Labour
government. The Tories are showing no sign of giving them the opportunity
to make that decision, even in a forthcoming parliament, but we would put
that decision to the British people and then they will make their own judgement
as to where Britain's interest lies.
HUMPHRYS: But what every single
opinion poll that has ever been taken seems to show us, certainly over
the last several years, and it's getting much much worse now if we are
to believe the polls, is that people don't want the Euro, and the reason
they don't want the Euro is that they don't want to get rid of the pound,
they don't want to get rid of our sovereignty, they don't want our interest
rates to be dictated by foreigners as they would see it. Now that is a
real grass roots feeling, isn't it? You must come across it every day
on the doorstep yourself - and yet, that is the area where the Tories are
'in touch' with people. This is going to damage you, isn't it?
BECKETT: Well, er, you say, I do
come across it, you're quite right, I do. And very often I come across
it from people who voted in 1975 that we ought to stay in the European
Community, and I gently point out to them that that was the basic decision
that they made. And it's no good the Tories pretending that in some way
there's a cost-free alternative and that the issue of our membership of
Europe wouldn't arise if we decided never to join Euro...
HUMPHRYS: ...we're not talking
about membership of Europe, are we, I mean, that's, that's
BECKETT: ...well, er, um, er, you
know...
HUMPHRYS: ...a red herring isn't
it?
BECKETT: Well, no it's not a red
herring and it is an issue people will have to take into account but I
repeat, I repeat...
HUMPHRYS: ...what, membership,
membership of Europe?
BECKETT: ...it's an, it's an important
issue. It is an important issue, it's an issue where people have strong
feelings, the case is there to be made and it will have to be made, but
ultimately the British people will choose and will decide, as they've done
before, as they will again.
HUMPHRYS: But I mean, you're not
suggesting that any decision we might or might not take on the Euro would
affect our membership of the European Union are you?
BECKETT: I think it most certainly
could, and er, you know...
HUMPHRYS: ..Really?...
BECKETT: ... oh, don't don't say
that in that astonished voice...
HUMPHRYS: ...well, I'm surprised
because I haven't heard anybody suggest that before...
BECKETT: ...oh, come on, you must
have.
HUMPHRYS: ...well I've obviously
not been looking in the right areas...
BECKETT: ... People like Ted Heath
will say it at the drop of hat.
HUMPHRYS: Well, you're, you're
lining yourself up with Ted Heath now, ha, ha, interesting position for
a Labour Minister to take.
HUMPHRYS: Well, you're lining yourself
up with Ted Heath now is it, ha, ha. Interesting position for a Labour
minister to take.
BECKETT: There are, there are circumstances
in which there is cross-party agreement on these things. There are certain
par..., circumstances in which there is disagreement. I simply say to
you that anybody who looks at the issues knows perfectly well that if we
were to say that we would never join the Euro as a matter of sovereignty,
and that our being in the Euro and economic and monetary union was inconsistent
with the future direction of British policy that would raise all kinds
of questions. But these are matters to be aired and to be discussed when
we get to the stage where it's thought that Britain's passed the economic
test (INTERRUPTION). The issues of principle are there, the issues of
Britain's national interest are there, and of course it's for the people
to choose.
HUMPHRYS: Well, in that case Robin
Cook was dead right in your view wasn't he, when he said that our membership
of the Euro was inevitable, or at least that was the view. I mean if our
membership of the European Union ultimately rests upon our joining the
Euro then clearly these are very deep waters indeed.
BECKETT: Well, they've always been
very deep waters, and the issue of where our national interest lies, of
whether of not if there's a successful Europe at what point we would be
in a position to join it. These are very important issues, and they're
not easy issues because our two economies have not always worked in parallel.
They're getting a little nearer together but there's still quite a way
to go before any government could say to the British people: here is the
choice of the national interest for you to make.
HUMPHRYS But let's be quite clear
then. When, if we get this referendum the message from the government
- if you're in power at the time will be, if you vote against the Euro
you are jeopardising our position in the European Union. That's the message
is it?
BECKETT: Well, different people
will put the case in their own way. I personally take the view that it
could well, if we were to say that we would never join the Euro and if
the Euro were continuing, were a success, if there were no economic barriers
- you see people understand that it would be, could be a serious economic
problem for Britain to join the Euro in present circumstances, people accept
that, but if it was clear that there was no barrier other than one of a
routed decision not to accept that this is a structure that goes alongside
the single market introduced by Margaret Thatcher, a natural consequence
of it, many people would argue. And if people could see that there was
actually a serious, a potential serious, quite serious harm being done
to Britain's economic interests then that would be the balance of the decision
that they would have to take, and at some point may well have to.
HUMPHRYS: Okay. And final couple
of minutes just talk about another problem facing you. That is how you
are failing to get your legislation, or going to fail to get legislation
through. You've already lost a very important bill, the Criminal Justice
bill, restricting the right to some jury trials, because of what happened
in the Lords. It looks pretty bad for you doesn't it, when you can't get
important laws through, especially with a majority like you've got?
BECKETT: Well, we haven't got a
majority in the House of Lords. We haven't even got as many Labour peers
as Tory peers in the House of Lords, and so, you know, we always - Labour
governments, always have a problem in the Lords, but before...
HUMPHRYS: You've reformed them
of course.
BECKETT: No. We've completed stage
one of a reform. They're better than they were but there's still some
distance to go, and as I say we haven't, despite all the rubbish that the
Tories keep chanting about Tony's cronies, they have more peers in the
Lords than we do, so they can win votes in the Lords, particularly if others
line up with them, and they choose to do so. But you know, all this stuff
about, oh, unprecedentedly heavy legislative programme, never been known
- we've got in total, and we're including now emergency legislation which
they said they wanted, and which they said they would back, and they wouldn't
use against our programme, we've got a total of something just over forty
bills in this year's programme as a whole. Under Margaret Thatcher some
years they had over fifty, over sixty. In their first year of office
they had seventy-one bills, so yes, forty-ish is a substantial programme.
It is absolutely average for this stage of a parliament, and indeed it's
a lot less than Tory governments have sometimes put through without a whimper
from the House of Lords.
HUMPHRYS: Margaret Beckett, thank
you very much indeed.
HUMPHRYS: Well, that's the view
from Labour. So what about the Tories? Well, in spite of what Mrs Beckett
says, they are feeling pretty pleased with themselves at the moment. And
yet... even though Labour has taken so many knocks, the Tories don't seem
to be benefiting anything like as much as they should. I'll be asking
the Shadow Social Security Secretary, David Willetts, what he thinks they
need to do, but first, as Polly Billington reports, it may be that they
still haven't broadened their appeal enough to tempt back the voters who
deserted them at the last election.
POLLY BILLINGTON: Leaders past and present smile
down on the Tories of Luton North. It's a seat they must win back but though
poll ratings are the best for years do they have the right message to keep
their new-won support?
AMANDA SATER: We mustn't get complacent,
we mustn't take the electorate for granted. We have been working extremely
hard in Luton campaigning and we will continue to work hard campaigning
and getting out there and meeting the people. It is so important for them
to know what I represent and what the party represents.
BILLINGTON: The messages the Tories have
been sending out here in Luton and across the country over the past year
seem to have helped to improve their standing in the polls, they're tax
cutting, they're eurosceptic, they're tough on law and order and they're
pro the traditional family. But there are fears these policies appeal mainly
to the Tory core vote and winning elections is all about building coalitions.
Are the Tories' current messages likely to extend their appeal to those
people who deserted them last time? Or are they alienating would be Tories
they need to win the next General Election.
DAMIAN GREEN MP: What I think we haven't yet done
is win back enough people to win a General Election. Psephologists all
say that because of the vagaries of the electoral system, we need to win
something like forty-five per cent of the vote, actually to gain a majority.
So, therefore to do that we need to look at the groups that possibly are
still wavering and it seems to me the obvious group are people who probably
voted Conservative in the past through the 'seventies and 'eighties, but
who regard themselves as moderate practical people not driven particularly
by ideology, not driven by any great dislike of the state, or public services,
who used to vote Conservative and who ought to vote Conservative again.
BILLINGTON: William Hague's most recent
and apparently successful approach to getting the show back on the road
has been dismissed by opponents as jumping on every passing bandwagon.
And there's unease within the party's own ranks that the new sense of direction
could come at a price. Some insist that policies shouldn't just run well
in solid Tory territory but should also appeal to other sections of the
electorate often seen as no-go areas for Conservatives.
GREEN: It seems to me obvious to
say it but it's still needs saying that it's possible to be gay and Conservative.
It's clearly possible to be a single parent and Conservative. And it
shouldn't need to be said that it's possible to come from any ethnic minority
and be Conservative. We don't want cricket tests in the Conservative Party.
BILLINGTON: Luton is home to a thriving
Asian community, many of whom run the kind of small businesses that should
be fertile territory for Tory campaigners. But recent language used about
asylum seekers has led to concerns that some would-be Tories of all races
find the party's rhetoric distasteful. It's a fine line to tread; maintaining
the principled opposition to economic migrants without people concluding
the party hates foreigners.
PETER LILLEY MP: You've got a core message
which is firm and the opposition will try and ridicule it and misrepresent
it as harsh, so you have to be doubly sure every time you say something
that you preface it by remarks that make your position clear, that you
are not hostile to people from other parts of the world, that you rather
admire those who have the initiative and the drive to up sticks and try
and get here and exploit a legal loophole that's temporarily created a
possibility, but we have to be firm and say let's try and help them solve
the problems in their countries by means other than opening our borders
to unlimited immigration.
BILLINGTON: In Luton's leafy suburbs Amanda
Sater can be sure that strong messages on tradition will chime with many
voters' views. But some Tories are concerned that those who don't live
in traditional families may be put off by too much emphasis on marriage.
The pro-family position of the party could alienate people who in every
other way share Conservative values.
GREEN: It needs not to condemn
people for being gay and one or two of my colleagues genuinely and sincerely
hold different opinions from me about this, but I think that that's not
the way forward, that we do have to make it clear that there is a sphere
of private life, of everyone's private life into which politicians should
not intrude.
BILLINGTON: Amanda Sater has to get every
possible vote if she's to overturn Labour's majority of nearly ten thousand.
Targeting to reach out beyond sturdily Tory voters is now the responsibility
of Steve Norris who stood as the party's candidate for London Mayor. But
others are sceptical. They believe basic Conservative principles should
have broad appeal.
DAVID RUFFLEY MP: I have to be careful here because
Steve Norris has a remit in the Conservative Party to look at targeted
groups. Some of us generally take the view that Conservatism shouldn't
get obsessed with target groups. I don't think we should try and ghettoise,
whether it be specific groups, whether it's targeting the gay vote or targeting
the black vote or the Asian vote, those are important groups in society,
but they will benefit as we all will from a sensible lower tax economy.
BILLINGTON: The Tory leader of Westminster
Council has decided that it's electorally as well as morally responsible
to reach out to all voters, across the borough he runs. It's a way of
showing those who wouldn't generally regard the Tory Party as a comfortable
home that the Conservatives have positive policies relevant to them.
SIMON MILTON: We need to expand the Conservative
message, we need to start talking to people who for some years we have
stopped talking to and people who may not traditionally be seen as fruitful
grounds for recruiting for the Conservative Party may do so if we can actually
open up economic opportunities to them and give them the chance to benefit
from the economy, from jobs, from better education in the future and I
don't think that that's something that the Conservative Party should be
ignoring.
BILLINGTON: Many Conservatives believe
that in order to broaden their appeal and win the general election their
priority must be to persuade people that they care about public services.
But with tax cutting as part of the party's identity and a perception
among the electorate that they are for the private sector and suspicious
of public provision, they have some way to go to persuade voters that public
services like health and education are safe in their hands.
GREEN: The Conservative Party has
never had any problem feeling emotional and visceral attachment to public
services like the Army and the Police. What I want to see is us to have
the same emotional attachment to defending and enhancing the prospects
of teachers and people who work in the NHS. And people who work in a welfare
state, generally. Because that I think accords with the general view of
moderate, sensible people in this country.
BILLINGTON: Luton voters, like voters everywhere,
are concerned about issues like education, health and social services.
With a commitment to low taxation the Tories might find it hard to convince
the vast bulk of people who use state provision that there won't be cuts.
The public's fear of losing services or having to pay for them might obscure
the Conservatives' low tax, pro-choice message.
SATER: People don't like paying
tax, I go out in Luton streets every day, people are saying they are fed
up of being taxed. What people want is to pay less tax and have more money
in their pocket to spend as they do, they don't want politicians spending
their money for them. They want to spend it themselves.
RUFFLEY: There is a moral argument
here, it isn't just about low tax parties being successful in the polls
as they certainly were in the eighties, I don't think that argument applies,
it's an argument about saying British people can spend their own money
better than governments can.
BILLINGTON: But some think tax cutting
on its own is so much hot air. In Westminster, the council always used
to compete with Wandsworth, another Tory authority, to have the lowest
council tax in the country. Not any more. The council is spending more
on services which residents want, including a big rise in spending on street
cleaning. The belief is that residents don't mind paying more for good
services. If they're well run, paying higher council tax bills won't feel
like pouring money down the drain.
MILTON: There is a danger that
if you only talk about tax year after year then you talk yourself into
a situation where you feel that there are no other issues which matter,
and the reality is that there are a whole range of issues that people care
about, tax is only one of them and you can't elevate it to the exclusion
of those issues if you're going to run a city successfully, and I think
that we are having that debate in our party and it's one which we are changing
minds on because people recognise that there can be such a thing as tax
cuts at the expense of the kind of city that people want.
BILLINGTON: The Tories have come to see
how Luton's famous hatmakers fashion new ideas out of basic materials.
Efficient, client-led enterprises epitomise all the methods the Conservatives
think the private sector does best. And in an era of increasing consumer
choice, they believe the idea that one size fits all is dead. Instead they'd
like to encourage more people to opt out of public provision, and take
up private alternatives specially tailored to their needs, be that health
insurance or pensions. The danger is Labour will accuse them of wanting
to privatise everything.
LILLEY: The Labour Party by dint
of repetition have convinced people that the Conservatives somehow have
on an agenda of privatising by which they mean actually making people pay
for their own health at point of need so that if someone finds themselves
in the accident and emergency unit if they haven't got their credit card
with them they won't be treated,
GREEN: We do need to be enthusiastic
about State schools and about the NHS. Most Conservatives are, in their
private life, there's just a peculiarity of tone that we sometimes seem
to adopt that we are rather grudging about the fact that these services
are provided by the State. It seems to me wholly realistic to say that
for as far ahead as we can see, the bulk of healthcare, the bulk of education
in this country will be provided out of general taxation, that the State
will procure it.
BILLINGTON: Can the Tories consolidate
and extend their support in time to win a general election that's likely
to be held next year? And will their views strike a chord with the voters
they need to attract? Their upbeat mood may not last long if too many
people give them a hostile reception on the doorstep.
HUMPHRYS: Polly Billington reporting
there.
JOHN HUMPHRYS: David Willetts, if it's
true that you haven't yet done enough to be sure of winning the next General
Election - and I'd guess you'd agree that that probably is true broadly
- then what are you have got to do is broaden your appeal to potential
Tory voters isn't it.
DAVID WILLETTS: We've certainly got to
show that we don't just have robust policies on Europe and robust policies
on tax and the economy but that we are also tackling the social problems
that affect this country and you will hear a lot about that over the days
of our Conference. We will talking about pensioners, we will be talking
about the Health Service, we will be talking about raising standards in
schools, yes and we need to develop the strong positions that people recognise
in some areas and make clear that we've got policies across the whole waterfront.
HUMPHRYS: But the worry for you
is that they will look at what you have said about spending, about public
spending, see that you are going to spend less than a Labour government
would spend and therefore conclude that there will be cuts in public services,
bound to be compared with what a Labour government would spend, because
I know you will spend more but you are not going to spend as much as a
Labour government would.
WILLETTS: We are going to spend
more and we are going to spend more within the growth of the economy and
every elector is entitled to expect of their ministers and their government
that they're sufficiently competent to deliver high quality Health Service
and high quality education without having to take an increasing share of
the total national income. We will spend more but we won't spend more than
the rate of growth of the economy and I think Labour have made a big mistake
getting into this argument and I was amazed by what Margaret Beckett was
saying earlier, they are saying that from now until kingdom come they are
going to have public spending growing more than the economy and therefore
taxes going up indefinitely. You've just seen a taxpayers' revolt..
HUMPHRYS: ..not quite what she
said, it must be said..
WILLETTS: ..but that's a consequence
of what they are committed to. They are saying they have got to have public
spending growing steadily, more rapidly than the economy.
HUMPHRYS: But you talked there
about high quality health, which one would expect you to do, you talked
about high quality education which one would expect you to do. Now you
are committed to matching Labour's spending on health, you are not committed
to matching Labour's spending on education which makes people think, well
they are not that serious then about education are they, not one of their
big priorities.
WILLETTS: But William Hague the
other day, only on Wednesday, was in Birmingham, visiting an inner city
comprehensive school with Theresa May, explaining how our education policies
would mean more money directly getting to the school and the head teachers
and the teachers are fed up with the red tape and the instructions from
David Blunkett and with too much money being withheld for special schemes.
That money instead isn't going to get through to help individual pupils
and individual schools and that means that individual schools will be better
off under our plans.
HUMPHRYS: That may be true in some
cases clearly, if it actually works, but the fact is if you say we'll match
their spending on health but we will not match their spending on education,
people are bound to think that that - education - is a lower priority than
health, bound to. I mean there is no other conclusion.
WILLETTS: Well I think the conclusion
they can draw from our policies on education elsewhere is that we care
a lot about raising educational standards in this country..
HUMPHRYS: Not enough to say we'll
match Labour's spending.
WILLETTS: Well, when Michael Portillo
is Chancellor, as I hope and believe he will be, he will be looking across
the waterfront to ensure that we have the right public spending policies
that backup our priorities and schools are certainly going to be a priority
but he will indeed be looking for areas where Labour are wasting money
and spending in inefficiently and badly. In my area of social security
we have identified savings. I think the New Deal is a complete disaster.
The New Deal is not helping unemployed people into work, that's an area
where we can save money. There are areas were we can save money without
the core public services that people care about being affected and I think
that's what the electorate expect of their politicians.
HUMPHRYS: They expect you, if you
say that education is our priority, which you've always done in the past,
they expect you to say we will spend - as you have already made a commitment
for health, they expect you to make precisely the same commitment for education
and if you don't they are entitled to assume that you will therefore spend
less on education than on health.
WILLETTS: Yes but you see the difference
is that on education we have got a policy that involves changing radically
a funding formula for schools so that more money goes to schools. What
our education policies do deliver is more money for the individual school
and that's what teachers and head teachers care about. And we have also
identified elsewhere significant savings.
HUMPHRYS: Can I offer you one possible
explanation as to why you made the commitment on health and you have not
made the same on education..
WILLETTS: ..I'll be fascinated
John...
HUMPHRYS: ..well good, it's this.
Health was in the headlines for a very long time, NHS in crisis, the papers
were absolutely jammed packed full of it and you said to yourselves, as
good politicians, public concern about this, we'll jump on that bandwagon.
We haven't had the same....it's the bandwagon question, you jumped on it
because you said this is what people are really worried about and of course
when people are losing relatives in conditions that maybe shouldn't have
happened, very emotive, very very powerful political issue. Not the same
sort of thing with education, yes long-term of course, you saw the bandwagon,
you jumped on it.
WILLETTS: Can I say on this bandwagon
question, having sat in William Hague's Shadow Cabinet for quite a while
now, we've had deep and important discussions, not just on health and education,
we discussed fuel duty back at the time of the budget and said at the time
of the budget, long before these protests, we will vote against these increases
in fuel duty, I've been working on pensions reform, how we can offer a
better deal for current pensioners for a long time in advance of the pensioner
protest about seventy-five pence. What does happen, it's true, is that
when these issues get onto the headlines and into the public consciousness,
then there is attention to our policies, but it's not the case that we
sort of suddenly think, oh we'd better have a policy on this. I can assure
you and if you look at the record you will find we already had clear and
effective policies and on pensioners we had a very clear policy on pensioners
and now it's becoming....
HUMPHRYS: ...what you are doing,
you're lumping all the money that Labour is already giving to the poorest
pensioners, money incidentally that you didn't give when you were in power,
I mean this is the important point. You see the poorest pensioners are
- the point that Margaret Beckett made- are a lot better off because of
what Labour did, you didn't do when you were in power and now you're saying
we're going to give them a lot more money actually, it isn't a lot more
money, it might only be a few pence, forty-three pence I believe in the
case of many on the basic state pension. So when you work it out...
WILLETTS Well, you say ours is
a gimmick. First of all our is getting rid of the gimmicks. One of the
reasons why we've been listening to pensioners and acting on what they've
told us is they don't want all these complicated gimmicks. They want money
in the basic state pension, and that's what we're offering them, and even
if there were not a single extra penny going to pensioners ours would still
be the right policy and a better policy, because they want the money as
part of their contributory pension. There is actually three-hundred-and
twenty million pounds extra going to pensioners, and that's very important
because it means that we can say to all pensioners that they'll be better
off under us by varying amounts because the schemes that Labour have brought
in are so complicated.
HUMPHRYS: But sometimes only pence,
I mean even less than Gordon Brown's seventy-five pence - let's be honest
about it..
WILLETTS: But this is a real increase,
this is an improvement in living standards on top of inflation. But what
we've also announced today and what we can say today is that if the up-rating
is not two pounds and three pounds which is what the inflation forecast
has currently been but if the up-rating is not two pounds and three pounds,
but if the up-rating in November is more than that, we will implement that
up-rating, we'll accept that up-rating and we will still do our reform
package on top, and that means that pensioners will be better off under
Conservatives and they'll have a better more honest, more straightforward
way of receiving their pension under us.
HUMPHRYS: But again people, and
the point that Margaret Beckett made again, are entitled to judge you
on your record, and you did not do what the Labour government has done,
which is increased the poorest pensioners' income year on year, on year,
on year.
WILLETTS: Well, you see there is
a myth here. I mean I've been reading in the papers all week Labour
ministers going round saying of course we've been putting all this extra
money into the poorest pensioners. It simply ain't true..
HUMPHRYS: ...Minimum Income Guarantee
not true...
WILLETTS: ..well that is what was
Income Support in our day and which rose in real terms in value in our
day.
HUMPHRYS: Not as much as it's risen
under the Labour Government..
WILLETTS: The main way they've
spent money is on these complicated special schemes like the winter fuel
payment which are not targeted on the poorest pensioners, and those are
the schemes that we're instead going to consolidate into the basic state
pension, and indeed that three-hundred and twenty-million pounds of extra
money is particularly going to go to the pensioners aged over seventy-five
who tend to be the poorest pensioners. So actually what we're proposing
is better targeted on poverty amongst pensions from the measures that it
replaces, and I'm very proud of that package.
HUMPHRYS: Your policies for pensions
in the future, young people today who are going to be drawing their pensions
in thirty years' time or whatever it happens to be relies very much on
them as it were going private, and if the stock market does
well they will do very well, but that's going to increase suspicion isn't
it that you don't really like state provision. I mean it's a point that
Damian Green kept making during that film that you're kind of, that you
appear to be unenthusiastic about it. You've got to be - he used the word
enthusiastic - you've got to be enthusiastic about it, and he used another
word - grudging, that was the word that I wrote down. You sounded grudging
about your whole attitude to state provision.
WILLETTS: Well, I think you'll
have heard that what I was saying for current pensioners was anything but
grudging. What we're talking about for current pensioners is something
that listening to pensioners, they have told us they want and we're strongly
committed to it, and for the future we're offering younger workers an option.
We're saying that if you want to do this we will enable you to build up
a real fund.
HUMPHRYS: You want them to do that
don't you. I mean that is what you want them to do.
WILLETTS: We're going to be very
careful,. We're not saying this is compulsory, we're saying this is simply
an extra freedom which we're offering people, anybody who wants to stick
with the basic state pension can do so and of course we've got a policy
for pensioners, current pensioners which will ensure that they will get
a substantial increase in the value of the state pension. So this is freedom,
but freedom without any losers.
HUMPHRYS: In the very broadest
sense you're taking a bit of a gamble with this election strategy aren't
you. You're banking on the fact that people say yes, of course we like
loads of public spending, but actually when it comes to them going into
the polling booth they refer tax cuts, and you're banking on that aren't
you?
WILLETTS: No, what you're seeing
at the moment and I think that's the fascination of Labour's Conference
last week as against our conference coming up - what you saw at Labour's
Conference was Labour retreating to their core, more old style socialism,
we even had Tony Blair wearing a red tie, and what more significant indication
can you have than that. And what you'll see at our conference is Conservative
social policies on health, on schools, on pensions now, on pensions in
the future which will show that we're the party that is reaching out to
middle Britain in the way that Tony Blair has failed to do.
HUMPHRYS: David Willetts, thanks
very much indeed for coming here.
WILLETTS: Thank you.
HUMPHRYS: On Saturday, the Ulster
Unionists are holding their annual conference with very little to cheer
about. They lost their second safest seat to the Democratic Unionists
in a by-election and David Trimble is fighting to hold on to his leadership,
if he's thrown out the peace process is in very serious trouble indeed.
Iain Watson reports from Northern Ireland.
IAIN WATSON: It's tough at the top; in
the Ulster Unionist Party, leadership challenges seem to be coming round
with increasing frequency. David Trimble's hold on power is uncertain.
But there are fears that if he goes, the peace process will be gone with
him.
David Trimble's political
future could be decided within weeks. Senior members of his own party are
now denouncing him as a lame duck leader and even his closest allies are
saying his hold on high office is in danger. But the real danger is to
the peace process itself. A senior official for the Northern Ireland office
told On the Record 'without Trimble, we're doomed.'
JEFFREY DONALDSON MP: I think there has got to be a change
of policy and if there isn't a change of policy then I think the party
as a whole, never mind the leader, is in deep deep trouble.
KEN MAGINNIS MP: In a major UK party you wouldn't
find a policy change leading to a leadership change, but emotionally people
are now tied into, they've paid for where we are with their own blood and
hence that could lead very easily to a leadership change and I believe
a leadership change, under those circumstances would give us thirty years
of turmoil.
BRIAN COWAN: We want to see a situation
where everyone survives in the forthcoming period because these are the
people who are the architects of the agreement, these are the people who
have given the commitment to the Agreement.
WATSON: Trimble's grasp on his
own party has been slipping; he narrowly survived a leadership challenge
in March, gaining just fifty-seven per cent of the vote. In May he called
on his party to support his decision to share power with Sinn Fein at
Stormont - even though the IRA had refused to decommission any of its
weapons in advance. This time, he gained only 53% backing. Now, his opponents
are saying his leadership is about to be consigned to history.
It's party time for the 'No Surrender' faction of Unionism - The Reverend
Willie McRea - a member of Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionist Party - snatched
South Antrim at a by-election ten days' ago. This had been the Ulster Unionists'
second safest seat. Many of David Trimble's MPs are now worried that this
spectacle may be repeated in the general and local elections next year.
Pro-Agreement Unionists, along with the Northern Ireland Secretary, blame
the candidate.
DAVID BURNSIDE: I think there will be a
lot of spin doctors trying to use the line, "Oh well, there are - there's
this great swathe of new Unionism out there. Sitting out there, doesn't
vote, so, everything's perfect out there, and they didn't vote in this
by-election because Burnside was sceptical about the agreement, and somehow
they're going to vote in the future." That's dangerous. Because that's
fooling yourself of the feeling of the Unionist population. Everybody who
was on the ground in South Antrim knows, the Unionist community is disillusioned
WILLIE ROSS MP: If we lose in such a very
moderate liberal constituency, heaven knows what the position is going
to be in the others, certainly much worse.
WATSON: David Trimble is on foreign
territory. As Northern Ireland's First Minister, he attended a meeting
with his Southern Irish counterparts in Dublin last week. A new grouping
in his own party, called Re-Union, say it's time he was more vocal about
the benefits of the Good Friday Agreement. And the Irish government say
he has much to be proud of. The Republic's long-standing, constitutional
claim over the North has been peacefully put to rest.
COWAN: I think great credit has
to be given to David Trimble and to those like him in the Unionist Party,
who have for example by their negotiating stance, they have brought about
changes in Articles 2 and 3 of the constitution which no rejectionist by
means of the less constructive, means by which they were going about things,
would ever achieve.
ALEX KANE: I think one of the troubles
with the Agreement is that it wasn't promoted. It became, even though
we adopted it, it became the policy that dare not speak its name, to some
extent and if the leadership is not seen to have a total loyalty to the
Agreement, it makes it very difficult for your grass roots - now I think
there are a lot of benefits within the Agreement
WATSON: Evidence that the Good
Friday Agreement is working in practice was on display here in Dublin Castle.
Ministers from both sides of the Irish border met to discuss areas of common
concern - such as tourism, and funding from the European Union.
But David Trimble and other pro-Agreement Unionists say that unless there's
progress on the two major issues which concern them - the decommissioning
of paramilitary weapons and reform of the policing service in Northern
Ireland - then his leadership, and with it all the institutions of the
Good Friday agreement, could fall.
Some say that nothing short of divine intervention may overcome one of
the most intractable difficulties -the reform the Royal Ulster Constabulary.
Proposals from the former Conservative Cabinet minister Chris Patten are
before parliament. These would change the name of the force, reduce its
manpower and scrap its badge. All this is seen as essential if Nationalists
are to be persuaded to join up. But some Unionists would prefer to leave
the Agreement behind than see Patten's proposals implemented in full.
BURNSIDE: This agreement was not
meant to destroy the Royal Ulster Constabulary, that's not why I voted
for it, that's not why many Unionists voted for it, here and now, like
me are very disillusioned. If it's Patten a hundred per cent, it brings
down the Agreement in my opinion because he operated outside the Terms
of Reference and that's what David Trimble has said as well.
WATSON: In June, Cyril Ramaphosa
from the ANC and the former Finnish president, Maarti Ahtasari, visited
Downing Street following an inspection of IRA weapons dumps but nothing
has happened since. Perhaps to encourage a new gesture from the IRA, the
government announced plans for further troop withdrawals from Northern
Ireland and the abandonment of extradition proceedings against Republican
terrorists. But another inspection of IRA arms won't be enough to satisfy
sceptical Unionists.
JEFFREY DONALDSON: Well the first arms inspection
didn't save South Antrim, it didn't stop the DUP winning that seat - who
in their right mind is going to suggest that a second inspection is going
to save the Ulster Unionist Party from electoral meltdown?
WATSON: The waterfront
hall in Belfast symbolises a growing sense of confidence in the city during
a period of relative quiet. But, over the past year, it's doubled as
the venue for many of David Trimble's battles with his own party. The
Ulster unionists will gather here for their Annual Conference next Saturday.
Even those close to David Trimble say he'll get a reception somewhat less
friendly than Tony Blair received at the hands of the Women's Institute.
But Trimble's opponents say he'll try to suppress dissent by packing the
meeting with his own supporters and controlling the agenda; the real showdown
will have to wait. Trimble's opponents plan to call a meeting of the party's
ruling Ulster Unionist council for later this month and demand substantial
policy changes which could make his position as leader untenable.
ROSS: I would expect the
council meeting to be called within the relatively near future; I would
expect at that council meeting there will be demands for policy changes
in regard to the Patten report on the RUC and policy changes in regard
to weapons - no guns without government is still the basic demand.
DONALDSON: Well, I think that what we have
to do is, urgently review our continued participation in a power sharing
executive, that includes Martin McGuinness, and Barbara de Brun, Sinn Fein
IRA ministers, in the absence of any decommissioning by the IRA. That may
mean that the executive has to be suspended until decommissioning has happened
or it may mean that we have to withdraw from the executive in the absence
of decommissioning.
KANE: If that policy is endorsed
by the Council, I think David Trimble's position would probably become
untenable because he would be a First Minister, in name only, because he
would have been forced to withdraw by his own party and I don't think the
IRA would shift. I don't think nationalists would shift, I don't think
the government would shift and I think Trimble would shift, I think he
would probably choose to fall on his sword at that stage.
WATSON: Jeffrey Donaldson gained
credibility with the anti-agreement unionists by walking away from negotiations
just before the Good Friday agreement was signed. He had concerns as to
whether decommissioning would ever be delivered, and over the early release
of terrorist prisoners. At thirty-seven, he's in no rush for the Ulster
Unionist leadership. But his opponents say, if David Trimble falls, he'll
try to step in to the vacancy
KANE: If he doesn't strike now,
someone else will strike, and the danger of Ulster Unionist politics, is
that leaders tend to stay much longer than expected.
DONALDSON: My priority is to ensure the
Ulster unionist party is placed back on a firm footing -whatever it takes
to do that I will not shirk my responsibility as an elected representative
and I hope that that will be the same for others.
WATSON: So you won't rule out standing?
DONALDSON: Well we haven't got a leadership
contest at present and therefore there is nothing to stand for, but at
the end of the day it is absolutely essential the Ulster Unionist party
grasp these issues. There is a crisis of confidence at the moment, there
is no doubt about that and that needs to be dealt with, that requires firm
leadership and I think everyone now is watching and looking to see what
David Trimble will do, will he provide that firm leadership?
MAGINNIS: Those who talk about
going back to strong leadership forget that strong leadership never achieved
anything. well it did, it achieved the Anglo Irish agreement. And that
wasn't very clever. That was a huge slide down a very unpleasant slippery
slope for Ulster Unionism. Do they forget that? Do they forget the coffins
that they walked behind?
WATSON: But David Trimble can take
control of events, says the defeated South Antrim candidate . As party
leader, he could call a meeting of the Ulster Unionist council himself
and steal a march on his opponents by taking a tougher line on decommissioning
and policing. David Burnside says this would avoid an assault on his leadership
and help heal divisions.
BURNSIDE: I think he's got to set
deadlines - deadlines on decommissioning, hand over a real product. Guns,
hundred of guns, and tons of explosives. I think it's better to lead
from the front rather than have the party dragging, dragging the policy
endorsement out of the party organisation, I think it would be much better
if David led from the front, and I hope he does.
ACTUALITY.
WATSON: At a rally of the pro-Agreement
Re-Union group, there was plenty of talk about fighting for a tolerant,
inclusive unionism. But if David Trimble now takes a tougher line on decommissioning
and policing, he may leave himself with little option in the future but
to withdraw his party from the power sharing executive. This would lead
to the second review of the peace process - and pro-Agreement unionists
say that's nothing to cheer about.
KANE: It just about survived the
last one, and I think we are back to the problem as well, if the previous
review and suspension didn't resolve the dilemma, there's no reason to
believe that a second one will, because I think the real issue here is
IRA weapons and all weapons, loyalist weapons as well and I cannot see
how Ulster unionists pulling themselves out of an executive will encourage
the IRA to actually hand over their weapons
WATSON: But for some unionists,
getting the policy right is more important than propping up the current
leader - or the Good Friday Agreement, in its present form.
DONALDSON: It is a very perilous political
process that stands or falls on the fate of one individual. And let's
look at that. Surely if that is the case then the agreement is so fundamentally
flawed, it is so fundamentally weak that it needs to be reviewed.
WATSON: Northern Ireland has come
a long way since the Good Friday agreement was signed two-and-a-half years
ago. In the next few weeks, the province will find out if the peace process
has enough momentum to overcome the current difficulties, or whether David
Trimble's leadership, and perhaps even the process itself, are nearing
journey's end.
HUMPHRYS: Iain Watson reporting.
And that's it for this week, we're back on BBC One next at the usual time,
12 o'clock, see you then and here is our Website for those of you on the
internet in the meantime. Good afternoon.
22
FoLdEd
|