|
JOHN HUMPHRYS: And now then, we are going
to talk to Stephen Byers. Mr Byers, petrol, the cost of petrol, massive
political issue at the moment and the truckers are saying you've got to
cut the price but they are not alone in this any longer. The Daily Mail
did their own survey as you may have seen this morning and they discovered
that the majority of people - the Mail on Sunday obviously - the majority
of people are on their side. Now (A) did this surprise you and (B) are
you going to listen to them?
STEPHEN BYERS MP: Not really a surprise. I think
those of us that witnessed the events in early September knew that there
was a depth of feeling about the level of duty on fuel. I think what we've
got to do in government is to put it really in the round and to say we
look at the whole panoply of taxes rather than just looking at one particular
aspect. I think that what was interesting is that we had on Friday the
report from the OECD which looked at taxes in the round and said that as
far as the United Kingdom was concerned, compared to the major European
countries, we had lower income tax, lower taxes on business, lower rates
of VAT and so on. So I think that when people look at the overall tax burden
they should recognise that in fact we have been able to reduce tax, reduce
corporation tax, reduce income tax and they get the benefits from that.
HUMPHRYS: Well reduce some taxes
but no by any means all and we'll come on to that in a moment. But Stephen
Allembritis, you maybe heard him in the film back there, who runs the Small
Business Association, he said we would like to see a straight cut, a straight
fuel duty cut.
BYERS: I've got no doubt that everybody
would like to see their taxes reduced. I mean no-one actually likes volunteering
to pay income tax or pay any form of tax. What we've got to do is to have
a fair system of taxation which also balances the need for good public
services and on Wednesday, when the Chancellor has his pre-budget report,
he'll have to balance a number of competing demands. You know we want more
money for pensioners, we want to make sure money goes into our schools
and hospitals. We'd like to see other taxes reduced and it's a question
of balance and it's a question of making the right decisions. But the important
thing is that we don't make decisions for good headlines next Thursday
in four days' time. We make decisions that in four years will be in the
interests of the United Kingdom, our economy and our public services.
HUMPHRYS: I think what puzzles
people about that answer and obviously it's entirely in line with what
Tony Blair and everybody else says, is that it's not as if Gordon Brown
doesn't have a large amount of money to, to I say give away, I mean give
away is hardly what Chancellor do is it - but maybe sixteen billion pounds,
who knows, I don't suppose you're going to tell me what the figure is.
But it's not as if cutting a little bit off tax, fuel tax, would actually
mean they'd be no money left for schools or hospitals. I mean he does
have an awful lot of money there doesn't he?
BYERS: Well the campaigners are
arguing for a twenty-six pence reduction in a litre, that's actually twelve
billion pounds...
HUMPHRYS: ..but everybody says
that's entirely unrealistic. I mean you're not going to cut it by twenty-six
pence a litre are you, but they are saying, you know, Stephen Allembritis
says let's have a little cut, let's have a little cut.
BYERS: Well that's, sorry that's
the figure that the campaigners are arguing round. What we need to do
and I looked at the figures before I came on, if you turn the clock back
to 1989, there was a budget surplus then of seven billion pounds. We know
what Nigel Lawson did, he played for the short term and what happened was
that three years later there was a budget deficit of twenty-one billion.
In 1993, a budget deficit of forty-seven billion, so what we can't afford
to do, is to take short term measures which will be popular in three or
four days' time but in fact would not be in the long term best interests
of our economy and that's what we've got to do. These are difficult decisions
but we've got to plan for the long term, no short term measures, planning
for the long term is what we're about.
HUMPHRYS: What business wants to
do is to plan for the long term as well and they say it isn't just cost
that concern them but it's regulation, you have over burdened industry,
the CBI says the cost of new measures and administering them is thirteen
billion pounds, that's what it's costing them, the British Chambers of
Commerce say ten billion pounds and that's based on your own regulatory
impact units figures. These are enormous costs and you came into office
saying we are going to reduce regulation, not increase it.
BYERS: Well the difficulty with
those figures is that they mix up two quite different issues...
HUMPHRYS: ..Chambers of Commerce
using their own figures?
BYERS: What they've done though
is they've included not just the bureaucratic burden, the cost of administration,
they've also included the cost for example of paid holiday entitlement.
Now we make no apology for introducing the right to four weeks paid holiday,
we make no apology for introducing a national minimum wage or for extending
the period of maternity leave, those are basic decent standards that people
in work should have. Those costs reflect delivering on those obligations.
HUMPHRYS: They reflect both things
don't they..
BYERS: ...well they do because
if you strip out the administration, it comes down to what three million
pounds a year to administer the National Minimum Wage, three million pounds
a year to administer the Working Time Directive, that's administration.
HUMPHRYS: The Institute of Directors,
another organisation that knows a thing or two about these things, says
sixty-two per cent of smaller firms have taken on more staff to deal with
the extra red tape, sixty-two per cent?
BYERS: I find that figure almost
unbelievable in fact because we are taking about small amounts of money
being committed to provide these very important decent standards...
HUMPHRYS: Small companies, I mean
that's the point and they can't afford it. I mean many of them are on
the brink anyway, you know how many go bust as it is.
BYERS: I think if you look at the
figures you'll see that there are actually a million more people in work
today than there was in May 1997 so clearly the economy is doing very well.
I think when we look at what we have been able to achieve the economic
stability that we are delivering, most businesses say that's the real prize
because they don't want inflation to be shooting ahead or interest rates,
they want to be able to plan ahead with confidence and we've been able
to provide that with the economic stability that we now have.
HUMPHRYS: But you can't suggest
they're not concerned about this regulation, they say, let me just give
you a little list, I mean for the benefit of viewers as much as anything,
fifteen, fifteen major measures have come in since you've been in office.
Now they are things like the Minimum Wage which you would defend, of course,
on the basis of social justice and all that, but Working Time Directive,
Maternity Leave, Parental Leave, Family Emergency Leave, Trade Union regulation...
I could go on and on...
BYERS: ..giving decent rights to
part-timers..
HUMPHRYS: ..and you may say that
in every single case these are justified. You can pick out each one but
if you add them all together and then go to the companies that have to
administrate it all, it becomes a great burden on them. You wouldn't deny
that?
BYERS: What we've got to distinguish
is that all too often and the Conservative Party does this, is that they
talk about cutting red tape and in fact it's code for attacking decent
standards in the workplace. Now if people say to me there is red tape,
there's a bureaucratic burden on business, I would be the first to take
action to stop that. I've done it, I've done it in relation to the National
Minimum Wage, I've done it in relation to the Working Time Directive. But
what I will not do is compromise decent standards in the workplace. The
Minimum Wage is here to stay, the right to paid holidays is here to stay,
extending Maternity Leave is here to stay, giving decent rights to part-time
workers is here to stay. It doesn't just benefit the individual, it's actually
good for business as well.
HUMPHRYS: Alright, the thing is
you have set up your own regulatory taskforce and look at the different
units that are involved here. We have a Regulatory Impact Unit run by Mo
Mowlam on the programme a few minutes ago, a Better Regulation Taskforce
led by Lord Haskins, Small Business services, regulatory reform ministers
in each department and so on and so on and so on. And it sounds excellent.
When you look at it you say because what all these different things are
meant to be doing is cutting red tape and making life easier for businesses
and all that, in truth they are not doing anything, they are not stemming
the flow of new regulation and red tape. Lord Haskins himself has said
as much.
BYERS: Well what they are doing,
I think you are confusing the two issues as well John, if I can say so,
what they are doing is making sure that we don't introduce regulations
that create the sort of burdens which I can understand why business...
HUMPHRYS: So you are not concerned
about cutting out old regulation?
BYERS: Well I certainly am concerned
about that and that's what these various bodies are doing, they are reviewing
the regulations which are there already and I have to say every government
has over-regulated. That's my view. And I think there should be a presumption
against regulation.
HUMPHRYS: But why aren't we seeing
a bonfire of the regulations then?
BYERS: Well because that's that's
the sort of language which Michael Heseltine used and wasn't terribly successful
so we are not going to repeat his mistakes, but what we are doing, systematically,
is reviewing the regulations that are already there and we will repeal
them when it is appropriate to do so.
HUMPHRYS: When?
BYERS: And most...well there is,
I think, we'll wait until the Queen's Speech, there may be some proposals
there. In terms of new measures, we're making sure that we don't regulate
as a first option, but we'll look at other ways first, so codes of practice,
incentives is often a more desirable way than regulation.
HUMPHRYS: Well, yes, but what they
want you to do is to get rid of a lot of regulations that exists and that
are a pain in the neck for them. You acknowledge that there, let's make
this point, because you said, oh, bonfire, no, no, no, Heseltine tried
that, and that was no good. I mean, we haven't even had the beginnings
of a little smouldering fire in a kitchen stove have we, I mean, nothing
is going on here.
BYERS: Well, I think the important
issue here, and this is why these figures I think are so misleading...
HUMPHRYS: ...as long as you don't
deny that....
BYERS: ...well, I, there are some
regulations which are being repealed. I mean, we can, we can do more,
or course we can. I think we've now got measures in place which will ensure
that we can do that, however, what we mustn't do is to make the mistake,
and these costs actually do that, when you talk about thirteen-billion
pounds of red tape, that includes providing decent standards for people,
probably includes things like, the entitlement to paid holiday, like extending
maternity leave. Now we are not going to change those basic policies because
they deliver decent standards for people in the workplace. Now if there
is a real debate to be had about regulation, about administration, about
bureaucracy, then let's have it. But don't let's use that as code for
an attack on the rights of literally millions of working people.
HUMPHRYS: What happened to your
regulatory reform bill. That was going to be a key part of your de-regulation
agenda. We, we had a draft bill published in April, since then it seems
to have disappeared, or ..INTERRUPTION ...I wrong?
Can you guarantee it's gonna come about very soon.
BYERS: Well, I can't tell you what's
in the Queen's Speech, that's er at the beginning of December...
HUMPHRYS: ...no, but you know very
well what the attitude to it is in government.
BYERS: Well, I think we need to
find, if we can find parliamentary time, for what is a very important bill,
then we can bring it before the House of Commons and I am hopeful that
given the priority we attach to this particular area, that it may well
appear in the Queen's Speech.
HUMPHRYS: On the other hand it
may not, in which case of course, it's not going to happen before the election.
BYERS: Well I can't tell you on
the programme what will be in the Queen's Speech. Let's just wait a few
more weeks. But given the priority we attach to this area, I think the
Queen's Speech will be, will be of interest.
HUMPHRYS: Hmm. But a bit worrying,
isn't it, because this was as you said a key part of your deregular...,
I mean if you are telling me now that, that, that it is going to happen,
absolutely fine, a lot of people will be relieved at that, but, is that
the message?
BYERS: Well, I can't tell you that,
because I can't tell you what's in the Queen's Speech...
HUMPHRYS: ...well I know you can't
but what...
BYERS: ...but what I can say is
that we've had a bill in draft, so we've been able to consult on that,
it's been widely welcomed, I think if we're looking towards the Queen's
Speech, I would hope someone with responsibility in this area that their
space will be found for the measure. But we'll have to wait 'til the beginning
of December.
HUMPHRYS: Alright. And in the
meantime business wants a moratorium on new regulations.
BYERS: Some business actually wants
us to introduce more regulations, and this is the great dilemma. Some
businesses say they need minimum standards so that there's fair competition.
What we need to have I think is a presumption against regulation. We
need to look at alternative means, like for example, codes of practice
and incentives for the sorts of conduct that we want to promote, and only
when it's essential should we look at regulation, but there are circumstances
when business itself says yes, this is an appropriate situation in which
regulations should take place.
HUMPHRYS: But the problem is there
are more in the pipeline, aren't there?
BYERS: Potentially, there may be
other measures. I mean, we want to, we've said clear in terms of employment,
we want to ensure that there's a proper balance in the workplace, but before
we introduce any new measures, there will be full and effective consultation.
I'm particularly aware of the way in which small businesses have to deal
with these matters, so I think we want to think small first, to make sure
we don't introduce measures that may be quite easy for big business to
accommodate but which would cause great difficulties for small businesses
and we're looking at ways in which we can achieve that.
HUMPHRYS: And where in that category
does the paid parental leave come in? Because of course, many companies
do not want it, more people will take it up, if it is paid. Where does
it come? How important is it for you?
BYERS: Well, I'm leading a review
across government in this whole area of maternity leave and pay, and also
parental leave. What we're trying to do is to make sure that working parents
can balance the responsibility of being a good parent with holding down
a job. We don't do very well in the United Kingdom in this area at the
moment, I think we can make substantial progress, I want to do it with
business, working alongside us, to ensure that we can provide good opportunities
and basic standards for working parents. I think we can achieve that with
business support.
HUMPHRYS: Well, with business support,
but as I say, many business people, we saw one of them in the film, say,
we just can't afford, we'd have to administer it, once again, this is the
problem, isn't it? Once again, business would have to do the administering.
It would cost us a lot of money because an awful lot of people would take
it, so (a), we would have to administer it and (b), we would have to pay
one-hundred-and-fifty pounds a week maybe, that's er, that's what some
people are saying I think, we would have to pay that to the people who
want to take it. It's a problem.
BYERS: Well, the challenge, I think,
for me, is to, is to take business with me in delivering on this very exciting
and very important agenda. And what struck me, and we've had a round of
consultation over the last ten weeks, is that business is beginning to
recognise that there is a business case for having better provision for
working parents, and I've been very struck by the positive response that
we've received. Now what that means is that when I, we introduce a Green
Paper, probably before Christmas, outlining our proposals, it'll be one
that will be balanced, recognising the needs of working parents, but also
recognising that if we get it wrong, there will be an unacceptable burden
placed on business, and it's getting the balance between the two, that
will be the real challenge. But I think from the meetings that I've had,
that there is an agenda that we can move forward on, which will be of great
benefit to working parents, but is one that business will sign up to as
well.
HUMPHRYS: How, how might that work
then? I mean, it's hard quite to see where the compromise could be here?
BYERS: Well I think there are a
number of ways in which an active government working alongside business
can perhaps take some of the burdens off business that you've touched on,
taking our own responsibility in this area, and ensuring that business
can recognise that it's in their long-term interests to have more family
friendly policies in the workplace.
HUMPHRYS: What about workers' councils?
Again, something that business is totally opposed to. They think it would
make life hugely more difficult for them. You were opposed to it. You
fought it in the council of ministers in Europe. It now seems you may
be dropping your opposition.
BYERS: We don't agree with the
directive on information and consultation which I think is the particular
directive that you're referring to, we think that we should be developing
a partnership approach in the United Kingdom, which suits our own labour
market, and that's the direction in which we intend to go. There is a
minority, a blocking minority, in the European Commission, which will means
that, means that we believe we can protect our position, now but it is
an area where we think we should come up with our own domestic arrangements..INTERRUPTION..and
developing a sort of partnership approach, one where there is effective
consultation so that people know exactly where they stand is the direction
in which we would wish to go, but once again, it's doing it with business
and with the trade unions.
HUMPHRYS: So what are we looking
at here, legislation on that?
BYERS: We have no proposals to
legislate, we've said very clearly that there will be no new legislation
in this whole area of employment law this side of a General Election, what
we have said though is that we will obviously review the steps that we've
taken so far and if there are deficiencies, or if changes need to take
place, then obviously we will need to reflect upon them.
HUMPHRYS: The Euro, something else
that the CBI and everybody else gets very agitated about, we heard from
Peter Mandelson this week, who, along with yourself is regarded as a great
enthusiast for the Euro, when the time is right, I accept all of that,
however, what Mr Mandelson said this week was talking about firing the
starting pistol, that was his phrase, firing the starting pistol for the
referendum which, if it comes, it won't be coming for years ahead, it seemed
to be a considerable rowing back from his previous position, are you rowing
back as well?.
BYERS: Well, I'm a Euro pragmatist,
which is the same position as Eddie George, the Governor of the Bank of
England, and what I do believe is that we've got to take this decision.
HUMPHRYS: Eddie George does not
want the Euro. But there you are...
BYERS: No, no, he made it very
clear, He placed some very interesting evidence before the House of Lords
Select Committee on this particular matter, where he said he was sort of
pragmatic, and that's the right position to be in because this whole area
has been dominated by dogma for far too long, and what we've got to do
is simply put our national interests first and I happen to believe the
policy of the Government, which is very clear, we'll do an early test in
the next parliament....
HUMPHRYS: Not very early seemingly!
BYERS: No. the policy is the same.
Early in the next parliament we will test the five conditions laid down
by the Chancellor. I think what Peter was saying reflecting the point
the Prime Minister made just a couple of weeks ago was if there was to
be a referendum today or tomorrow then certainly I wouldn't be voting in
favour of joining because the conditions are not right.....
HUMPHRYS: Nobody's suggesting a
referendum today or tomorrow the question is what early in the next parliament
means, and what Mr Mandelson seemed to be suggesting was it was some years
away, even if you win the next election, some years away from that.
BYERS: Well, I don't know when
the next election is to be.
HUMPHRYS: Let's guess at May....
BYERS: Well, you can't just guess
John. What - May two-thousand and two? Or May two-thousand and one.
You see it becomes a bit of a foolish question.
HUMPHRYS: We know from Mo Mowlam
that she's not going to be in a job in whenever it is - whatever time next
year she said, so ....
BYERS: Well if Mo knows....
HUMPHRYS: Well, anyway there we
are...
BYERS: Well, if Mo knows when.....
HUMPHRYS: We've only got fifteen
seconds left, so tell us then what you, how you... in one sentence how
you define early in the next government.
BYERS: The important thing is to
explain to people why joining a successful single currency would be in
the national interests because of currency stability, but also to say that
the conditions have to be right, the economic conditions have to be right,
and we'll keep the option open, there'll be a genuine choice for the British
people, that's what we're offering.
HUMPHRYS: Stephen Byers, thank
you very much indeed.
|