|
JOHN HUMPHRYS: David Willetts, forget about
the personalities for a moment, let's look at the policies. When Labour
were as soundly thrashed as you, not perhaps as soundly thrashed as you,
they went back to the drawing board and what they produced was a new party.
Forget about old Labour entirely, new Labour, new party. Are you going
to do that?
DAVID WILLETTS: We certainly need to have
a radical rethink. We do need to think through what the Conservative Party
stands for in the Twenty-first century. But in doing that we should be
drawing on Conservative principles, we should be sticking to our basic
beliefs, the importance of the family, the importance of our national identity,
and we can do that, and I think we can do what the party managed to do
so successfully after previous landslide defeats, after 1906, after 1945.
We should draw on the resource of the Conservative tradition to modernise
our party.
HUMPHRYS: But to look at Labour
again, the sorts of things they got rid of, and many of their members would
have said, these were absolutely core beliefs, unilateral disarmament,
Clause Four, that sort of thing went overboard. You don't have those exact
policies of course, but you have policies that you hold as dear as that.
Are some of those policies going to have to go? I'm trying to sort of test
how radical you are prepared to be.
WILLETTS: I think there will have
to be a wholesale review of our policies. I think that's very important.
But there's something even more important than that actually, which will
come before that which is that the character of Conservatism in today's
Britain, and I think it would be a mistake for us to get into lots of detail
on specific policies at this stage. What we should be thinking about is
the big picture. What is as Conservatives we believe? Winston Churchill
gave some very good advice to Rab Butler after 1945, he said the Conservative
Party should be offering a lighthouse, not a shop window, and I think that's
advice that we should heed again today and the starting point has to be
thinking through in very broad terms what we Conservatives are offering
the country, and then the specific policies will follow. I think it will
be a mistake to get into the detail of policy at this stage.
HUMPHRYS: What do you think it
means to be a Conservative today.
WILLETTS: To my mind it means first
of all, freedom, personal freedom, and freedom in a strong society, and
a society that is stronger if government does less. I think one of the
failures that we've got to learn from is that we presented the case for
limited government if you like in economic terms. Nowadays, I think it's
above all, it's an argument about that a good society is one in which people
don't turn to the state to do everything and if you limit the role of the
state you create more room for all the institutions and families and everything
else that gives life its meaning that stands between the individual and
the state.
HUMPHRYS: It doesn't sound very
radical. You've said exactly the same as that to me a year ago, five years
ago, fifty years ago.
WILLETTS: I think what's got to
change is that we've got to do it in a way that shows we're content, we're
comfortable with contemporary Britain. We should show that you know, we're
not harking back to some previous age, we're going to be a party that redraws
on what we see around us in Britain today, and so that for example I find
that people are very distrustful of politicians...
HUMPHRYS: ...always have been...
WILLETTS: ...I think that the vote
shows that there's more distrust of politicians than ever before. But what
we've got from the Labour government is a party that's bringing politics
into more and more nooks and crannies of our life. I think that less politics
would be a very good message, but I think also for us, we do have to tackle
the concerns that people have on, for example, Health and Education and
there we've got lessons to learn from this election as well.
HUMPHRYS: Does that mean then moving
to, trying to re-occupy the centre ground as Tim Yeo and Alan Duncan said.
WILLETTS: Well it's not a matter
of defining ourselves against the Labour Party. We should do what we Conservatives
think is right and what we Conservatives think is tackles the concerns
of the vast majority of people, mainstream people in this country. Now
it may be sometimes that involves saying things which are similar to things
that Tony Blair says, we shouldn't be embarrassed or worried if that's
the case, I think we will find that in many areas it involves that when
we are true to our beliefs we say things that are very different. And on
Health and Education for example, I think we will find, and we found it
on the doorstep during this campaign, that teachers, doctors, police officers,
are fearful of this incredible amount of political interference they have
from this government in their day-to-day decisions. If we're going to have
strong schools, strong hospitals, police forces that can get on with the
job, then they have to be trusted, instead of at the moment having to sort
of comply with every fatuous initiative launched by ministers in order
to get forty-eight hours of media coverage. So we can see the glimmerings,
but rather than get into the detail at this stage, I hope that my colleagues
will be thinking and talking over the next few months just about what they
believe as Conservatives and we should be proud of what we believe as Conservatives
and we should all be open and honest about setting it out and ...
HUMPHRYS: ...but, in a sense it's
you that's sort of hiding in the detail, because that was an answer about
detail, about telling on the doorstep that they don't like, you know police
don't like the fact they've got to do this, teachers don't like all the
forms they've got to fill in and that kind of thing. That wasn't really
what I was trying to get at, I was trying to get at much more fundamental
core stuff. And slagging off the Labour Party for the policies that have
just returned them with a landslide victory again doesn't suggest any deep
thinking does it?
WILLETTS: Well let me put it in
as broad a term as I can. The Conservative Party...
HUMPHRYS: ...without it being just
rhetoric...
WILLETTS: ...ok, I'll do my best!
The Conservative Party has been above all the party of personal freedom.
And that has meant that we have been the party of economic freedom and
through the 1980s it meant that those arguments about freedom were expressed
as above all economic arguments. And I think that one of problems is that
we've become the economics party, and people don't just want us to talk
about economics, they want us to apply that Conservative belief in freedom
across other areas of policy as well. And they want us to explain what
we believe not just in economic terms. I think that's something that's
very important. And I think secondly, and I hope you don't think this is,
this is slagging off a government, because they have just got this massive
majority, but I do think that if as Conservatives we believe in strong
institutions, the message that more and more politics and more and more
political interference is a threat to strong institutions and is not the
way to make them stronger is another powerful Conservative theme. But I
don't say that I don't personally, or any of us in the Party have got the
answers today, what I want us to have, and I believe we will have, is a
mature grown-up debate, after this second landslide defeat about what we
do and I thought where your report was wrong, if I may say so, was that
talking to all my colleagues over the past few days, very different from
'97, not a sense of people all ganging up to fight an internecine battle,
a very, I think a very different atmosphere in the party, that we have
got lessons to learn, we want to work together on it, we want to do it
in a co-operative spirit, there should be no personal abuse or personal
criticism of any individuals and not least because our activists, our party
members, those people that we wanted to have as parliamentary colleagues
and sadly haven't won their seats, will not tolerate it if any of us get
involved in those sort of personal arguments.
HUMPHRYS: Well Terry Dignan didn't
exactly have to beat those people over the head to offer what little personal
or great deal of personal abuse if that's your view, that they offered
in that film, there was plenty of it, the knives were going in.
WILLETTS: I think that what I have..what
I think you will find is that I think it would be true that for every person
that you interviewed for that package, is that we can only do this if we
draw on all the resources of the Conservative Party, that means not just
learning the lessons of our previous historic defeats but also drawing
on the expertise and the ideas and the thinking of all the senior figures
in the party. And I think..I hope whoever is the leader, is approached
in that spirit.
HUMPHRYS: You said you mustn't
rely..you mustn't be seen as the party of economic policy. Does that mean
that you would be prepared to rethink your approach to tax and public services,
that's to say, let's say tax and spend rather than tax and public services.
You're always said, you are the party is associated with cutting taxes,
that's how you want people to see you and reducing the size of the state.
Would you be happy in future, for people to see you in another direction.
I mean is that something that you are prepared to throw - not throw overboard
but to change, to amend.
WILLETTS: Well, I would approach
it in the spirit again that we must look at what's going on around the
world and I would look first to America and secondly at Europe and in America
what I saw with George Bush, a very impressive Conservative victory is
here was a guy, who for example had a policy on education vouchers but
he didn't say, in the rather lazy way that we've got used to it, I'm going
to introduce education vouchers, I'm going to have limited government,
I'm going to have school choice, he presented his policy in terms of the
need to raise educational standards in the most depraved parts of America.
In other words, he presented something that drew on ideas that were if
you like, right-wing, but he presented it, and I think quite rightly, as
it was above all resting on a commitment to offer a better education for
poorer Americans.
HUMPHRYS: Yeah, but as you say
that was seen as a right-wing - that was a right-wing policy.
WILLETTS: But what he did, was
it didn't say just oh, it has to be limited government and let's now apply
this, sort of across the board. He said, what is the best device, what
is the best means of raising educational standards in America and what
he tackled it on, he didn't get bogged down in the mechanisms, in the hows,
in the means, in all those technocratic questions. He began by people knowing
that he was committed to a high quality education for all Americans and
our starting point in education, to take that specific example, is therefore
we are committed to a high quality education for everybody in this country.
HUMPHRYS: Well of course you are,
you would be daft if you weren't.
WILLETTS: Yeah, but our problem
has been that as we've got preoccupied with means, we've forgotten that
we first of all have to establish credibility on that.
HUMPHRYS: Yeah, but you know what
politics is about, politics is about means, I mean it's all very well for
politicians to say, yes we want better education for everyone, but of course
you would say that. Then, they say well how are you going to do it Mr Willetts
and you can either say, we will tax people more, spend more on schools,
or you can say we will tax them less and have some sort of voucher system
- profound difference.
WILLETTS: But on tax, I think we..the
policies that we had for lower taxes, for pensioners, for families, for
savers, were on the doorstep when you explain them, but people hadn't registered
what they were and they didn't understand why we were offering them.
HUMPHRYS: So it's just about explaining
your policies more, not having new policies. I thought this was going to
be root and branch stuff.
WILLETTS: It does have to be root
and branch and I'm not..my personal view, for what it's worth, is that
we will have to have a review of every policy, stage by stage. But what
I'm saying...
HUMPHRYS: ..but in the same context.
WILLETTS: ..I don't think that
that is..I think it would be wrong for the party to get into the detail
of policy at this stage. What I think the party should instead be doing
is something much more broad brush than that and as I said, I was going
to go on to say, to talk about the lessons we can learn from Europe. I
mean Europe, we've still got the position where on the welfare state, something
that interests me a lot, Britain is to the left of continental Social Democrats,
let alone Christian Democrats. If you look at health or education in France
or Germany, we can see that those have much less centralised state
interference than we've got here and so we as Conservatives should not
be afraid of citing Europe as a positive example from which we can learn.
HUMPHRYS: Right, what you seem
to be saying so far anyway, is move rather than to the left, move to right.
So, let me try and test you on another policy - not a policy but an approach
if you like, because you don't want to talk about specific policies at
this stage of course. Inclusiveness - throughout the campaign, the family
- a husband and wife who are married and live together is the ideal. Which
rather suggests to many people that you are slightly out of touch with
the way life has changed - are you prepared to reconsider that?
WILLETTS: Well you say the ideal.
The way I approach it is quite simply on what the evidence shows about...
HUMPHRYS: ...what Mr. Hague said,
this is the best way of doing it, he said...
WILLETTS: ...about, what the evidence
shows about what is best for children, but I do think that we in the Party
again have to say...
HUMPHRYS: ...no, you see, he went
further, invest in society said Mr. Hague.
WILLETTS: Well what I'm saying
is that it's clearly best for children if at all possible, they are brought
up... by in a stable relationship by their parents and by and large that
all the evidence shows that's a married relationship. But it doesn't follow
from that that we sort of hate single parents, that we don't understand
that relationships break down, that many parents who are bringing up their
children on their own think they're often a responsible partner and that
they're doing the decent thing trying to bring up a child on their own...
HUMPHRYS: ...which is exactly what
you've been saying all along.
WILLETTS: But the point is that
again, people thought that we were the party that was anti things, not
in favour of things and what we've got to start off with is what we're
in favour of and I would say John, that I think all of this, the tone of
voice is very important, the tone of voice has to be one which is persuasive,
and the frustration that I had, and I'm sure many other candidates had
in the past few weeks, is that it wasn't so much the doubt, you never really
got to a specific policy because people didn't think that we had their
best interests at heart.
HUMPHRYS: So it's about presentation,
not policy?
WILLETTS: No, you're calling it
presentation, I would like to call it something...
HUMPHRYS: ...well tone of voice
is presentation really isn't it? I can either shout at you or I can ask
you exactly the same question in very gentle terms. Same question, different
tone. Different presentation.
WILLETTS: I think it's about the
character of the party and as the character of the party changes, so the
policies will be formulated in a way that draw on what we've established
as our party's identity.
HUMPHRYS: I'm not quite sure I
follow that but, so let me try one other way of testing you on where you're
heading. Europe now, a number of people in that film said that, look Ken
Clarke ought to be in the Cabinet, it's daft that he's not, we know what
his views are on Europe, ought he to be, in the Shadow Cabinet I should
say of course, ought he to be in the Shadow Cabinet? Because that would
tell us a great deal wouldn't it about your inclusiveness politically within
your own party.
WILLETTS: I personally would like
to see Ken Clarke and other leading figures in the party who are associated
with him, I would like to see them once more playing a significant, much
more significant role in the Conservative Party...
HUMPHRYS: ...within the Shadow
Cabinet perhaps?
WILLETTS: ...within the Shadow
Cabinet perhaps and I don't know...
HUMPHRYS: ...and allowed to, sorry,
it's important that I clarify this, and allowed to say the kinds of things
that he has said in the past, allowed to express his views about the desirability
of Britain joining economic and monetary union?
WILLETTS: Well I think that we
all know that Ken has very clear views on that and it's impossible to imagine
that he wouldn't express them. Now how, what those mechanisms would be,
I don't know, but it's not beyond the wit of man to work out a way in which
the Conservative Party, which is still now operating with just over a-hundred
and sixty members, we really ought to be able to draw on the talents and
the expertise and the wisdom of every significant person in the parliamentary
party and Ken is certainly one of those, and again, I think that the mood
in the party in the past few days has not been to go around trying to exclude
people, we do want to bring people like Ken in, and although most of us
in the party do have a very clear view that we do not want Britain to join
the Euro and that is clearly the majority view of the party, again, where
we can, where we can learn is that that doesn't mean that we hate Europe
and that there may be other areas where we can learn from Europe, I mean,
if I may quote an example in areas I've been shadowing, pensions, we all
complacently say oh Britain's got such marvellous funded pensions, they're
all way behind on the Continent, well I've noticed in the past few years
is that we've been losing ground and there is at last serious pension reform
going on in places like Germany. So the real challenge for us is in Opposition
is not to say everything in Britain is marvellous, they're all hopeless
on the Continent, in some of these areas, we can say actually they're getting
their act together, and under Labour, we're in danger of falling behind.
HUMPHRYS: Just a final thought
then on the leadership, I know you are not going to tell me who you support,
but can I assume, at least I am going to assume from what you've been saying
is that you don't want the social authoritarians running the party, in
which case of course you would not want perhaps Ann Widdecombe, Iain Duncan
Smith. Can I make that assumption?
WILLETTS: Well, I'm not going to
get into personalities, but I will say this, that as people get fed up
with this Labour government, and they will, will they be saying to themselves,
what we really need is stronger laws, more government intervention, a stronger
set of instructions about how to lead their lives, or will they be saying,
as I believe, we're fed up with the intervention, the regulation, the nannying,
the prissiness, treat us as grown ups, give us more shape, you know more
power to shape our own lives and I think that if that's going to be the
reaction of the majority of the British people and if that seems to me
to be consistent with basic Conservative principles, that's the direction
in which the party should go.
HUMPHRYS: Sounds more like Michael
Portillo to me than somebody else?
WILLETTS: Well, I'm not going to
get into personalities and I think that whatever happens, I believe that's
the direction in which the party should go.
HUMPHRYS: David Willetts, thank
you very much indeed.
WILLETTS: Thank you John.
|