................................................................................
ON THE RECORD
MARGARET BECKETT INTERVIEW
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 27.9.98
................................................................................
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Margaret Beckett, if we accept that the
most radical thing about New Labour is the promise of a new politics and ending
the divisions that have allowed the Tories to stay in power for so long this
century, then that means that you have to support some form of PR, Proportional
Representation, doesn't it.
MARGARET BECKETT: No, I think one of the things that has
bedevilled the debate, not just on the left but across British politics, has
been this assumption that somehow there is a kind of answer to everything in
changing our electoral system. There's no such thing as a perfectly fair
electoral system. There are different degrees of fairness in different choices.
Now, I think that it is the policy issues that the people of Britain care most
about. They want to see a reformed Welfare State, because what we have now is
what was divised fifty years ago-
HUMPHRYS: Sure, come on a little bit..
BECKETT: -and just sort of added on to. They want
to see better housing, they want to see education and health service
transformed. These are the things that are key to them. Now of course there is
a perfectly legitimate discussion and debate and at some point perhaps decision
about Proportional Representation to be made. It's hung around as long as I can
remember as a debate but the idea that somehow it's the solution to all the
problems, well I'm a sceptic about that.
HUMPHRYS: Well not so much being a solution to all
the problems but the old electoral system is the old politics, isn't it. It
symbolises the old politics apart from anything else, apart from its practical
effect. It's symbolises old politics.
BECKETT: No, I don't agree with that. And I
think that the whole way some of that debate is put is very much a diversion.
Our electoral system is easy to understand. People know how to make it work.
A lot of the people who argue that somehow you can't be radical unless you
change our electoral system very much believe that in the seventies and the
eighties and the nineties the British people were cheated of the election
results that they wanted. I don't believe that, I never have. I mean I would
have liked to have believed it. I wish that the British people didn't consent
to the continuation of a government headed by Margaret Thatcher or by John
Major, but I'm afraid that it's very much my view that then they did not want a
Labour Government. And heaven only knows, lots of people told us over those
years that they never would want a Labour Government again that somehow they
couldn't elect a Labour Government, but when they wanted to my God they did.
HUMPHRYS: But you would accept that it is time to
reunite the Liberal and Socialist traditions.
BECKETT: I certainly accept that we have a great
deal to learn from each other. There are areas where-
HUMPHRYS: Not quite the same thing is it?
BECKETT: There are areas where we agree and have
common ground, there's much that is of value and worth in the Liberal
tradition, just as there's much of value and worth in the Labour tradition. And
if we can recognise that in each other and put those things together and work
together on the things about which we agree, that's fine. But every great
political party is already a coalition of interests. That's why it's a great
political party and not a sect.
HUMPHRYS: But that reuniting is never going to
have full expression is it, unless you can bring together the two parties with
an electoral system on which both approve and at the moment we know perfectly
well what the Liberal Democrats think of the present system.
BECKETT: Well the Liberal Democrats have argued
for a long time the present system in some way cheats them of greater
representation in the Commons, again-
HUMPHRYS: And you have encouraged them in that
belief.
BECKETT: No, I think that's profoundly mistaken
and again at the last election we saw that where people decided that they did
want Liberal Democrat MPs instead of for example Conservatives, they got them.
It's perfectly easy, they know exactly how to do it. They didn't want to do it
before, that's all.
HUMPHRYS: But if that's profoundly mistaken why
has Tony Blair gone to all the trouble of setting up a commission with the
clear understanding, if nothing else, if not actually spoken, that you will
take heed of what it recommends, of the promise of a referendum and all the
rest. What's behind all of this if nothing is going to come of it in the end.
BECKETT: It has to be properly looked at and
examined. Tony inherited a commitment, as you know, to a referendum on
Proportional Representation-
HUMPHRYS: Would he prefer to throw that out if he
hadn't had to inherit it.
BECKETT: No, I simply mean that sometimes people
talk as if that's something he put in place. He didn't put that in place but of
course he accepts it as we all-
HUMPHRYS: But not enthusiastically?
BECKETT: No, I wouldn't even say that. You would
have to ask him that. I actually think there's a great deal to be said for the
British people being given a chance to express their own voice. Heaven knows
there are large numbers of people, particularly if I may say so with respect,
in the Liberal Party, who've claimed to speak for the British people on this
issue for a very long time. So, let the British people speak. But if they are
to express a view, then it's only sensible that there's a background of some
sort of proposals against which that view can be expressed. And that's why,
because of giving effect to that policy, that's why Tony set up the Jenkins
Commission. So that different views can be heard and expressed to give a
flavour and an understanding to what that decision's about.
HUMPHRYS: It sounds as if you've reached your view
already, you're not going to be persuaded.
BECKETT: I've never disguised the fact that I am
quite sceptical about these matters but I've also-
HUMPHRYS: Very.
BECKETT: I've also always made it clear that
while I may think that the British people would be making a mistake to give
more power to the politicians away from themselves, which is what every system
of Proportional Representation in effect means, if that's what they want to do,
that's for them. I've never said that we must prevent them from doing that. If
that's really what they want, if they really think: we don't want all this
power, let the politicians deal with it all. Well, that's their choice.
HUMPHRYS: But, we're going to have a referendum as
you say, we're going to have a campaign therefore for and against the
proposition, whatever the proposition may be. You'll campaign against change
will you?
BECKETT: Well we're a long way from deciding how
that campaign will be handled.
HUMPHRYS: Sure, but you've said you've always been
prepared-
BECKETT: Certainly my view has always been
bordering on the sceptical but we don't know yet what the Jenkins Commission is
going to recommend so it's a little bit of a hypothetical question at the
moment.
HUMPHRYS: Well it is and it isn't because it's
going to recommend change. We know that, there's absolutely no question of
that. I mean afterall giving it to a man like Jenkins, Lord Jenkins, Roy
Jenkins to chair, you know we know what his view is, he is about as senior a
figure in the Liberal Democrats as it's possible to be. We know that he, as
he's said a thousand times, that he believes the present system is simply not
on for very much longer.
BECKETT: To be fair they were actually set up to
say, if you were going to change what form of change would there be.
HUMPHRYS: Quite.
BECKETT: So it isn't that they are bound to
recommend change because that's what they will all think is right. They were
asked to say, if you are going to change, what do they think are the sort of
best and more likely-
HUMPHRYS: So therefore they will come up with some
recommendations for change.
BECKETT: So they will come up with some
proposals.
HUMPHRYS: Precisely. So if you are opposed to
change, therefore it follows doesn't it, that you will campaign against it.
BECKETT: I said I'm sceptical about change. I
have always been sceptical about change.
HUMPHRYS: Can you be persuaded.
BECKETT: I've never had a closed mind on the
subject. I simply say, let's see what they come up with and then let's judge
whether we think it has enough merit to recommend.
HUMPHRYS: It seems pretty likely though, doesn't
it, listening to you, and indeed plenty of other people - I mean how many
people at this conference are saying the same sort of thing as you, only in
much much stronger language. It rather seems as if we're not - new Labour is
not going to go down this radical path. This is one of many radical paths down
which it will not wish to go.
BECKETT: No, I think it's much too early to come
to any kind of conclusion. We don't have proposals from the Jenkins
Commission, we haven't had the referendum, you know we are at a very early
stage.
HUMPHRYS: About the referendum - will we have it
before the end of this parliament?
BECKETT: Well, there has to be legislation to
give effect to a referendum, and obviously you know you usual mantra. I can't
predict the contents of any Queen's speech.
HUMPHRYS: No, no, but ...
BECKETT: We're very .. It was in our manifesto,
we're making....
HUMPHRYS: Your manifesto,... you anticipated my
question.
BECKETT: We're making very strong progress on our
manifesto commitments. We haven't got to that one yet.
HUMPHRYS: But you are the Leader of the House, and
therefore you will be in a position to help or hinder whatever legislation may
or may not come along, so if you can't say yes.. Of course you can't tell me
what is going to be in the Queen's speech next time or the time after that, but
if you can't actually give a commitment that this is going to happen before the
end of this parliament, then it rather says something doesn't it about your
intentions.
BECKETT: No, our basic,....no, it doesn't say
anything at all, and it isn't my job as the Leader of the House to pursue my
own opinions or prejudices.
HUMPHRYS: You understand the way the House works
and the business of the House, and your responsibilities.
BECKETT: Yes, it's my job to help to carry out
the government's programme, and the commitment was in our manifesto, and it's
one of the things that we shall be looking at as that programme develops.
HUMPHRYS: You're backing off aren't you?
BECKETT: No.
HUMHRYS: The government's backing off this one.
BECKETT: I think a lot of people want to come to
conclusions before we've even had the discussion, and I've never been keen on
doing that.
HUMPHRYS: But it would be very easy for you to say
if this was something that you felt strongly about, that the government felt it
was committed to it on account of its manifesto promise and all that, it's
terribly easy to say "Yes, this is something we've put in the manifesto - we're
going to do - of course we're going to do it". I mean, if I may say so, the
Jenkins Commission point is a complete red herring. We've already
acknowledged, both of us have accepted that of course Jenkins will recommend
change. I wasn't a question of will there be change but what kind of change, as
you yourself very clearly pointed out. So why do we have to say let's wait for
Jenkins? You know, this was some kind of waiting for Godot. We know Jenkins
is going to come.
BECKETT: I hope and generally expect that by the
time of the next election the party will have delivered on its manifesto
commitments.
HUMPHRYS: Including this one?
BECKETT: I have no reason to doubt that, but a
government....
HUMPHRYS: You can't give a commitment.
BECKETT: No, I'm not saying that John.
HUMPHRYS: You are.
BECKETT: I'm saying it's one of our manifesto
commitments. I certainly can't commit what's going to be in the next Queen's
speech, and we have to look at our electoral timetable and our legislative
timetable, but all I can say to you is, it is a manifesto commitment and this
government has set itself to carrying out it's manifesto commitments.
HUMPHRYS: But if you have your way the British
people will ..
BECKETT: Oh, I've never been against the British
people having their say. I've been against the people who want to
speak for them without consulting them.
HUMPHRYS: Have their say in this parliament.
BECKETT: Could well be.
HUMPHRYS: Could well be. Could well be - that's
all you're going to get on that one. Alright, then look at something else then
- Lords' reform. Now that's another....
BECKETT: Well, that's one of the reasons why I
have to be a little cautious about what could be in the legislative programme,
because Lords' reform yes, is another manifesto commitment, an important one,
but it could be a time consuming one.
HUMPHRYS: Yes, it could be very time consuming.
Except that of course, what we know so far, is the first bit of Lords' reform.
We're going to get rid of the hereditaries and that's that. The tricky bit,
the really difficult bit is what replaces them. We've no idea what that's
likely to be have we?
BECKETT: Well, the government expects to produce
some proposals, a sort of Green Paper kind of basis, alongside proposals to
change who has the right to vote in the existing House of Lords, so there will
be ideas there for people to discuss to get a flavour of what people have in
mind.
HUMPHRYS Mm.. when?
BECKETT: Again, you know I can't prejudge
timetables, but I think probably quite soon.
HUMPHRYS: Quite soon, so you're not backing off on
this one?
BECKETT: As I say the Queen's speech is in
November, and people do get awfully sniffy about not judging in advance.
HUMPHRYS: But what you're saying is that because
of the problems with the House of Lords and various other things, a referendum
before the end of the parliament is unlikely and I can conclude can I, that you
are backing off that?
BECKETT: No, I didn't say that at all. I'm not
saying that and you can't conclude any such thing. All I'm saying is, you want
me to give a commitment as to the timing of legislation on a referendum. Now,
I'm not prepared to do that.
HUMPHRYS: Quite a lot of people too. Paddy
Ashdown's another one who'd rather like that.
BECKETT: And you know, I can't at this moment do
that, and one of the reasons that I can't is because we have a very tight
legislative timetable in the near future.
HUMHRYS: But all the time can be found for
things can't they, if governments feel that they're sufficiently important.
We've seen that on a number of occasions. Can I just remind what you saw Tony
Wright who you saw him on the film there... Tony Wright saying, "we've got to
do this to break the mould of British politics, to give the centre Left its
historic opportunity. This is a huge test" It does rather seem as though this
test is not going to be faced up to for a while doesn't it?
BECKETT: Well, Tony didn't make it quite plain
what he meant by that, but I know that that has been
HUMPHRYS: But you know his view?
BECKETT: That has been his view for a very long
time, yes, and he's entitled to his view.
HUMPHRYS: Alright. Let's talk about the economy.
The Prime Minister has told us that you've got to keep your nerve if things
get rough. He might have said when things get rough because things always get
rough don't they. Whatever happens to unemployment you've got to keep your
nerve, you're going to stick to your guns, is that it, whatever happens to
unemployment?
BECKETT: What the Prime Minister's basically
saying is that we have made some decisions for the framework of economic policy
which we think sets the right pattern for the long term. The investment in
Britain in the long term, investment in education and in training, investment
in employment through the new deal, a lot of things like that, that will only
as people like yourself often used to point out to us before the election, will
only actually bring results in the longer term as we go through the parliament,
and we believe it is important not to lose sight of what you need to improve
Britain's economy in the long term and not to be to use the old clique - not
blown off course by short term events to the extent that you jeopardise that.
But nobody's saying that unemployment is unimportant, no-one is saying that it
isn't extremely important to try and get the right kind of opportunities for
work and to fit people to take those opportunities. That is exactly the sort
of long term programme the government's pursuing.
HUMPHRYS: Yes, well, fit people to take
opportunities, if they are there to be taken. If they are not there to be
taken then, not a lot of point in training some youngster for a job that ain't
there!
BECKETT: Well, we're all very mindful of that. I
mean one of the things, there was a lot of criticism under the previous
government, both of the quality of some of the training schemes and so on that
were put in place, and also the fact that sometimes, even if they were of good
enough quality, they didn't always lead to employment.
Now of course, nobody can guarantee a
job with every training place. But it is a very important part of our work, to
try and make sure that there is access to employment, as well as access to the
skills that make you able to take that employment.
HUMPHRYS: It's going to be very difficult, isn't
it, for you to, to use the Prime Minister's expression "hold your nerve" to
keep this tough stance up, when things really get - I mean we've already seen
some indications haven't we, that you're beginning to crack a little bit at the
edges. I mean jobs go in the North East, Peter Mandelson says they can have
another hundred million quid. David Blunkett says another thirty eight million
quid at the TUC. We saw the old beef farmers getting another, whatever it was,
eighty-seven million pounds, some months back, because they were having a rough
time of it. And this, all of this is happening, I mean these are signs that
you're beginning to give a little as the breeze gets stronger and produces a
powerful wind. These are all things before that wind has turned into any kind
of strong gale.
BECKETT: Well, I think we're sort of going on
the one hand, from the proposition that the government is indifferent and won't
do anything to the proposition that it's-
HUMPHRYS: No I wasn't saying that at all. I was
was saying that what will happen, this is the theme of this interview really
isn't it, that New Labour may not actually be that new when push comes to
shove, because if what we see and we are seeing it and we're going to see more
of it, a lot of jobs going and problems arising, you will actually give way, in
the face of those pressures. That's what I'm suggesting.
BECKETT: But I mean I'm not sure what you imply
by the phrase give way. There isn't a change in our overall approach and
our economic direction.
HUMPHRYS: Intervening, you know, bailing people
out, bailing jobs out.
BECKETT: Well, what people like Peter and David
were talking about were how we implement the programme of investment, the
government's put in place.
HUMPHRYS: So none of that was new money then, that
was all public relation stuff was it?
BECKETT: No - the government's public spending
programme is, for any government is a very large one and we've set the broad
framework over the next two or three years, within which people will work, but
of course there are a lot of day to day decisions to be made and in those day
to day decisions, it's right and sensible to use the opportunities that we have
as we build up training programmes. We create job opportunities and so on to
make sure that that is particularly looked at in areas where there has been
some economic shock of the kind there was in the North East. Where basically,
the bottom fell out of what was thought eighteen months or two years ago, to be
a thriving market.
Now you can't change that. If the bottom
has fallen out of the market, if something that's sold for a few pounds is now
selling for ninety P, then alright, that's the way of the world. But
then you say okay, how can we use the tools we have at our disposal, the
basic decisions that we've made, about how we run the economy and the changes
we make, how can we use them, is there something particularly that we can do
here. It's common sense surely.
HUMPHRYS: Well, yeah, but the problem with that is
that you talk about the tools that you've got. You actually have fewer tools
than the government used to have in the past. You gave away interest
rates to the Bank of England. We've now got Tony Blair saying effectively,
"we're going to stay with our no increases in income tax pledge" for the next
parliament as well as I understand it. You may correct me if you think that
that's wrong, but that's certainly the impression of the interview he gave to
The Independent.
So, there isn't an awful lot you can do,
is there?
BECKETT: I don't think that he, I mean I read the
interview in The Independent, I'm just trying to call those phrases to mind. I
don't think he was making an absolute categorical statement.
HUMPHRYS: Well, can I help you, my gut feeling is
that there is a longterm trend away from higher personal tax rates.
BECKETT: I think that's right. I mean ..
HUMPHRYS: It's a pretty clear signal isn't it?
BECKETT: That's-but that's not quite the same
same thing as saying final policy decisions about the shape of something in
another parliament had been made. But certainly, I think it is true to say,
that there is an increasing international trend to look at different patterns,
changing patterns of taxation and that. I mean, Will Hutton on your interview a
few moments ago was saying, you know maybe the government should look at the
possibility of some tax cuts, so, the whole climate of that kind of discussion
has changed.
HUMPHRYS: So your gut feeling is, is to think of
tax cuts rather than increases in income tax?
BECKETT: It depends on the circumstances of the
day. But certainly at this moment in time, I think Tony is entirely right to
say that there is a general international move towards that kind of change in
the pattern of taxation, and I was interested to hear Will Hutton making the
point that that was something that was valid at the moment.
There may be other times in the economic
cycle, when that wouldn't be the right course of action to pursue. I mean Nigel
Lawson famously completely got his timing wrong and caused a huge boom bust
recession, by doing exactly that.
HUMPHRYS: Welfare reform, now that was the big
undertaking of this, this was the, if anything is New Labour, that's it, isn't
it, welfare reform, radical restructuring, cutting the bill, spending the money
better and so on. Using the money for other things. We've yet to see anything
radical, and you've been there for quite a little while now. We've seen an
awful lot of reviews, and there still are reviews going on into this and that
and the other, but nothing radical.
BECKETT: It's eighteen months actually that we've
been there which personally I-
HUMPHRYS: And eighteen years in opposition before
that to think about these things.
BECKETT: -personally I don't think, oh, yeah
but, if there's one thing that does irritate me, if I may say so, it is when
people make that point, because life changed a great deal over those eighteen
years-
HUMPHRYS: Of course.
BECKETT: -the whole social security system
changed over those eighteen years. So the notion that you know, you could have
thought of it eighteen years ago, you have to adapt to changing circumstances.
HUMPHRYS: ...the Year Zero the minute you walked
into Number Ten.
BECKETT: It's the principles, it's the principles
that matter in welfare reform and the principles are that we want to make sure
that our Welfare system underpins the capacity to work, helps people to get
work where work is available and that if it isn't available, it supports them
properly. Those are the basic principles. There is no field of policy more
difficult, more riven with the need to scrutinise every little bit of detail,
because there are always knock-on effects and it's the net effect of the
changes that you make that is important. There's no field of policy worse for
that than Social Security. Even tax reform pales into insignificance beside
the complications.
HUMPHRYS: Sure.
BECKETT: So I think that what is absolutely
crucial, is to do that basic groundwork to try to get it right. And the more
you wish to be radical, to reshape a Welfare State so that it works with
the grain of today's society and today's family life, today's working history.
The more you want to do that, then the more you need to think and to consult
and to lay the groundwork but not to rush too much, because somebody says "If
you haven't done it today, you're not radical".
HUMPHRYS: I take that point but some things don't
change really and if your commitment is, as it clearly is, to try to trim that
budget so that you can use the money for other things, there are only a certain
number of ways that you can do that, there seem to me anyway to be four. You
can tax benefits can't you, you can pay the benefits to fewer people, you can
means test, you can pay less, and you can privatise various things like
pensions or whatever. Those are the four choices aren't they. And it's very
difficult for you to accept any of those.
BECKETT: The biggest impact on the Social
Security budget during the eighties and the nineties was the impact of that
enormous increase in unemployment and the mass unemployment that we saw during
those years.
HUMPHRYS: Pensions is bigger than that. I mean far
bigger than that, forty-six per cent of the budget, Disability Benefit is
bigger than that.
BECKETT: The impact of that was absolutely
enormous and the impact of the steps that were taken by the previous government
to try and reduce those numbers was enormous. So those are the areas that you
have got to look at. But as you rightly said a moment ago, when we were talking
about jobs and about training and so on, you don't do those things overnight,
particularly not if you want to do well and you want people to have a sound
future.
HUMPHRYS: Sounds as if you have given up on it a
bit doesn't it, Bill Morris seems to think that. You sacked Frank Field from
his job because he thought the unthinkable - I mean - backing away again.
BECKETT: Frank himself is the first to say that
he believes the government is committed to reform and that he believes the
government will continue with reform.
HUMPHRYS: Ask him the next question after that
though and then he gives you a rather different answer, doesn't he. I mean
you've got to do radical things and he keeps telling you you've got to do
radical things and you don't want to do radical things. If you'd wanted to do
radical things you'd have kept Frank Field in his job, wouldn't you and said:
now lead us down this path, lead us down this New Labour road.
BECKETT: It is hugely important that what you do
in such a difficult area is not merely radical but it's well thought through,
it's practical and it will actually work and have the effect that you desire to
have. And one of the - the history of Social Security legislation is littered
with unforeseen consequences. So I think that Alistair Darling is a highly
intelligent and competent member of the Cabinet and-
HUMPHRYS: No doubt very cautious.
BECKETT: -and very much committed to making
proposals for Welfare Reform that will work. I have every confidence, if
anybody can get it right, he can.
HUMPHRYS: On the other hand he may do what others
have done in the past, tip his toe in the water, find it's a bit too hot, or a
bit too deep and step back up the beach a little.
BECKETT: Well you wouldn't want him to rush in a
get it wrong would you.
HUMPHRYS: Well, but you see, I wonder how long you
can go on saying this about every single issue that ever arises, you know.
BECKETT: Every single issue that ever arises.
HUMPHRYS: Yes.
BECKETT: I've lost track of the statistics but
it's something like that half, two thirds of the manifesto commitments that we
made have actually - are actually on the way to being carried out, or have been
carried out already. For the last year, eighteen months, members of the public,
people in the business community and so on, have all been saying to us, for
heaven sake slow down. I don't think anybody can accuse this government of
hanging about and not acting.
HUMPHRYS: What I've picked out here are the things
that distinguish, really distinguish.. as I say, the theme of the interview is
distinguishing New Labour from old Labour and that's why I've chosen - I mean
another good example of this in a sense, certainly it's a great test for you,
is Europe and the Euro. Gordon Brown has said, made it very clear, Tony Blair
has agreed with this, that you are in favour of it in principle and yet, you
are not out there on the streets arguing for it are you? We heard that again
in that film.
BECKETT: We are out there trying to make sure
that people understand, first that we have to prepare for the impact of the
Euro, irrespective of whether we go in or not and when we go in, if we do.
HUMPHRYS: That's acknowledged.
BECKETT: If that's what the British people and
the parliament and the government all decide. And also, we are very much doing
everything we can to encourage people to make preparations so that if that
choice is made-
HUMPHRYS: That's quite different.
BECKETT: If the British people do decide to go
in we actually can ..
HUMPHRYS: That's quite different.
BECKETT: Well.
HUMPHRYS: Well it is. I mean as David Yelland
said-
BECKETT: They are both very important components
of the debate.
HUMPHRYS: But the point that David Yelland, the
editor of the Sun made, was he was suggesting that you are actually being
rather dishonest here, because privately you are saying to him and others one
thing, publicly you are saying absolutely nothing at all.
BECKETT: No, I don't think that's right. I mean
what we have been saying, consistently from the beginning is that, first of
all, contrary to what the previous government tried to pretend, the Euro is
going to go ahead. Secondly, that contrary to what they're trying to pretend
it is going to have a very very substantial impact. I mean there are terrifying
figures about the number of people in the small and medium sized business
community who have been given the impression by our predecessors that this is
somehow going to pass them by. It isn't going to pass anybody by.
HUMPHRYS: But the fact is that you have been
scared off by those front pages. Now that front page that David Yelland
produced saying that Tony Blair-
BECKETT: Don't forget - I think it's about six
months ago that the Bank of England said that it would probably take four to
five years for the preparations to be made should Britain wish to join the
Euro. Now that's a huge amount of work, and it's no good people talking as if
- Oh well you know,... you just sort of decide this is what you're going to
Life is not like that, and the key thing now is to encourage people in the -
among the public, in the business community to prepare for the Euro happening,
because it will and to prepare for our decision when it comes.
HUMPHRYS: Margaret Beckett thank you very much for
joining us.
BECKETT: Thank you.
...oooOOooo...
|