................................................................................
ON THE RECORD
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 15.12.96
................................................................................
INTERVIEW WTH MALCOLM RIFKIND
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Good afternoon. The European Summit is
over and the moment of truth for the European Union is upon us, or so the
Prime Minister believes. I'll be talking to the Foreign Secretary Malcolm
Rifkind, about the Government's approach. The Tories are talking tough now,
but would they give way when the crunch comes, that's after the News read by
Jennie Bond.
NEWS.
HUMPHRYS: According to Jacques Santer, the moment
of truth is approaching for the European Union. Mr Major agrees. Do we go
forward to a closer political union or hold the line here. That will be
decided in six months' time at the next European summit, when they will agree
or not on a new Treaty. Before then, of course, there'll be a General Election
here and we will have to decide who'll speak for us at that summit. If the
Tories are back in power they say they will stand firm, no more integration,
and we do have that power - the power to stop it. The Treaty must be agreed by
every country, but would a Conservative Government be prepared to block it when
push comes to shove?
The Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind,
as we've heard, is on his way to Cyprus. I spoke to him at Heathrow Airport
before he left, and I asked him if he was worried that our European partners
are planning to stop us trying to stop them.
MALCOLM RIFKIND: I don't think that's the way they look
at it. You're quite right, some of them are keen on further integration,
and if they wish further integration they will no doubt pursue it in certain
areas. Our job is to protect our national interests just as they seek to
protect their own.
HUMPHRYS: But we're seeing, reported this morning,
whether it's true or not, the French are terribly keen on setting up this
special unit which would in effect, exclude us. They would oversee the details
of the European Monetary Union - we would be excluded.
RIFKIND: No, it's not quite as dramatic as
newspapers inevitably try to present. What the French are considering is
whether there should be a group of those countries that do join a Single
Currency, whether they should have more effective political control over that
Single Currency. Well, that's for the members of the currency to determine. I
wouldn't complain about that.
HUMPHRYS: But surely if they do that, then it
would remove our influence, and one of the reasons for us maintaining a wait
and see policy is that it enables to keep that influence.
RIFKIND: No, you've misunderstood the point. The
point is what might happen after a Single Currency is formed, amongst those
member countries who'd seek to join it. Well, we have not yet decided as you
know, whether we will wish to join such a Single Curreny but we can hardly
blame those that do join wishing to actually exercise political control on
matters affecting the Single Currency.
HUMPHRYS: But if the suggestion is that it happens
before the setting up of the single European.. what would your attitude be to
that?
RIFKIND: Well, first all there is all the
indications are that even the Germans don't like the idea anyway and therefore
it's unlikely to float, I think, I wouldn't frankly spend too much time on
this, this is a French idea which has not yet generated any significant
interest amongst even those countries likely to join the Single Curreny.
HUMPHRYS: But they are pushing it are they, the
French?
RIFKIND: Not very visibly.
HUMPHRYS: So you are not worried about it?
RIFKIND: I'm not losing any sleep over it.
HUMPHRYS: We've got the Inter Governmental
Conference coming to an end or not as the case may be, within the next six
months. You are telling us that Britain is going to be very tough on various
issues that we don't like, that are included in this list of..shopping list if
you like that some of our partners want, are you going to be as tough as you'd
like us to believe?
RIFKIND: I'm not telling you we are going to be
tough, we have already laid down what we believe to be crucial requirements and
objectives from the United Kingdom's point of view, and that's not
unreasonable, other member states have indicated their priorities, their
preferences, that's part of a negotiation. The real hard professional
negotiation will be over the next six months right up to the Amsterdam Summit
and it's going to need people who are experienced in negotiation, who actually
knows what an international negotiation of this kind requires and that's why
John Major is in such a strong position, he's one of our most experienced
people in Europe for this type of hard struggle.
HUMPHRYS: There is a point, well, yes, of course
it's a negotiation, but there is a point at which you have to back off on all
sorts of issues aren't there, because there are things that you want out of
that Treaty.
RIFKIND: Well that's the whole point of skilful
negotiation is to get those matters that are crucial to your national interest
if you need to compromise you compromise in areas that do not affect your
national interest, but which may be helpful to other countries, now don't ask
me to speculate which these are - the whole point of a negotiation is you do it
in a very skilful way, keeping your cards very much with the face down so
others do not know what your negotiating strategy is.
HUMPHRYS: Well it's not a question of speculating
is it, we know that there are some things that you will insist on getting out
of that.
RIFKIND: Oh yes, that we've made absolutely clear
and for example we believe that the Social Chapter it should not be introduced
by the back door, that is something in which the Prime Minister has made our
position very very clear, we have to look after the interests of our fishing
communities who have been gravely damaged by the way in which the quota hopping
phenomenon has been distorted very much to our disadvantage so these are two
clear examples which are fundamental to our objectives in the negotiation.
HUMPHRYS: And there will be no deal unless they go
along with us on those issues, that's absolutely clear is it?
RIFKIND: Yes, we've made it very very clear. At
the end of the day the Inter Governmental Conference reaches a successful
conclusion when all the member states are content with the outcome, we have
indicated we will not be satisfied with an outcome that does not address, for
example, the two points I have just raised.
HUMPHRYS: Incidently, on the fishing thing there
is a vote in the Commons tomorrow night, which is why I gather you've had to
leave a little bit earlier than you might have otherwise wished to go to
Cyprus.
RIFKIND: That's the way of the world we live in.
HUMPHRYS: Are you worried you are going to lose
that vote then?
RIFKIND: No I hope we will win it, I don't see
why we should not win it...
HUMPHRYS: Hoping is one thing but...
RIFKIND: Well I'm sorry I am not a fortune
teller, I'm not prepared to make silly forecasts when I don't know the
final outcome. We are in a very tight political situation, but I believe that
in the fishing communities we need to continue to give support to a
Conservative Government because no one else we look after their interest.
HUMPHRYS: If you are to lose - as you say you are
not a fortune teller - but if you do lose would you then expect Mr. Blair to
put down a vote of confidence.
RIFKIND: I haven't the faintest idea, Mr. Blair
will try to exploit any opportunity, I don't blame him - that's what leaders of
the Opposition are for.
HUMPHRYS: What do you think if he doesn't?
RIFKIND: Frankly I will assume that he knows we
would win and therefore he wouldn't want to waste his credibility even more
than he has done in recent weeks.
HUMPHRYS: So, we are going to insist, sorry about
the noise in the background there.....
RIFKIND: That's not your responsibility....
HUMPHRYS: That's true, we can't be responsible for
everything. We are going to insist, categorically,
they must give us what we want on the forty eight hour week, that is to say we
don't want the forty eight hour week, we have to have our demands met on that.
RIFKIND: These are two of the crucial parts of
the negotiation and you're quite right to emphasis the importance we attach to
these. Of course, the negotiation goes far wider than that. What we are
really involved in is a debate about what kind of European Union we wish to see
develop. You know there's a very superficial argument you read about in the
press and occasionally hear in the House of Commons, people who take opposite
extremes, some saying we must leave the European Union, others saying we must
go forward to some highly integrated European superstate. That's no part of the
Government's thinking and it's no part of the thinking of most people in
Britain. What Britain wants to see is a healthy, forward looking European
Union which is a partnership of nations and by that we mean quite simply
co-operating, we've got to made sense in the modern world to co-operate but
not being lulled for political ideolgical reasons into unnecessary
integration, common policies where they will be of little benefit to jobs, to
prosperity, or to the well being of our citizens.
HUMPHRYS: In other words we are reaching the
moment of truth as Jacques Santer said.
RIFKIND: Well these are nice apocalyptic remarks
that people like using. I'm not quite sure it is quite as simple as that. There
is a debate which won't be resolved in the next six months. This is a debate
which is actually going to dominate the political life of Europe for a very
good number of years to come. We may, at the moment, be in the minority so far
as Governments are concerned but this isn't just a debate for Governments. It's
not just a debate for politicians, what makes a modern world so different is we
have a public opinion, in Britain and elsewhere in Europe, which is must
more sophisticated, much better educated than ever before and therefore the
debate about what kind of Europe is not just for politicians to participate but
for the public as a whole. And when you look at it in that way, you see that
the British Government actually has a lot of support on the continent with
public opinion, as we saw in the French Referendum on Maastricht, when almost
half the electorate rejected the kind of views being put forward by the
political class in France.
HUMPHRYS: You say the phrase like 'moment of
truth' is a bit apocalytic, Mr Major has used it himself. Let there be no
doubt, we are coming to the moment of truth on the future of Europe, and I
quote him.
RIFKIND: He was asked to comment on Jacques
Santer's reference to a moment of truth. Of course there are certain matters
which will be resolved in the Inter-Governmental Conference, we are seeing for
example that on issues like qualified majority voting the other countries are
very reluctant to go beyond rhetoric, and actually identify where they would be
prepared to give up their veto. The only people who've actually said quite
bluntly, quite easily, where they would abandon national protection, is our own
Labour Party, Mr Blair, who quite happily throws away a major negotiating
position and indicates what a soft touch he would be. Most of the governments
of Europe are a bit more experienced than he.
HUMPHRYS: You say it's the government (sic), but
on the other hand you say that we are going to have to rely on the people of
Europe, rather than on their leaders in some cases, because they know what they
want, the leaders want other things.
RIFKIND: I am saying there is a great debate
about Europe's future, that's not just the property of the politicians, or the
journalists if you will forgive me. That is a debate which in a modern
democracy belongs to the public as a whole. Within France, within Germany,
within Italy, there are many people who share the views that we as the British
Government have argued for. So yes, we are often in a relatively small
minority, and many of these issues if you compare our position with that of
other governments, but in the battle for ideas, winning the battle of ideas,
the debate is not just within Britain, it covers the whole of Europe, and
rightly so, because there are big issues at stake.
HUMPHRYS: But that's a bit like saying that the
people have to change their leaders if they're going to get what they want in
Europe, and what we think is right for them and for us.
RIFKIND: Well, that's for each country to decide.
That is for the people of France, the people of Germany, just as it will be for
the people of Britain. I think the debate is much more vigorous here. What I
am suggesting is that the debate is not about whether we should be isolating
ourselves from Europe, or submitting ourselves to what the French or German
governments want at this moment in time. This is a historic debate, we as
Britains are part of Europe, we cannot avoid the facts of geography. We cannot
avoid the circumstances which make our interests in many areas similar to that
of other Western European countries, but we do have a duty to put forward very
sincerely, very courteously, and very firmly our alternative vision of the kind
of European co-operation that makes sense in the modern world, and that is a
Europe of partnership, not a Europe of integration into a single super state.
HUMPHRYS: Which is what some of those leaders
clearly want, they no doubt...
RIFKIND: There's no doubt some of them do.
HUMPHRYS: And what you're saying is that if we are
to have the sort of Europe we want, which is very different from that, then the
people of France for instance, and the people of Germany for instance, are
going to have to get rid of Mr Giscard, and Mr Kohl.
RIFKIND: Well, they got rid of Mr Giscard a
number of years ago. I wouldn't like to correct you too much on that.
HUMPHRYS: Mr Chirac we'll settle for instead.
RIFKIND: No, there's two ways it can effectively
go. Either the view that we have of Europe as a loose partnership of nations
will prevail over the period of time ahead of us, and that will be very
satisfactory. If that doesn't work out, then I believe the alternative is not
us leaving Europe, the alternative is the kind of flexibility that our Prime
Minister first raised when he spoke two or three years ago, and which has now
become much more part of the debate throughout Europe. By flexibility, I mean,
if some groups of countries wish to go for a closer integration, super
nationalism, within the European Union, but others do not, then you have to
find a formula that takes account of that and that is not just a theory, that
is something which is going to become increasingly - in my judgement,
inevitable, if the European Union, when the European Union, enlarges, to admit
the new much poorer democracies of Central and Eastern Europe.
HUMPHRYS: But if Chirac and Kohl stay in power,
for instance, just to name the two of them, they're not going to tolerate that,
are they? That's not what they are prepared to have.
RIFKIND: I'm not sure you're right there, I think
already both President Chirac and Chancellor Kohl have themselves raised the
question of flexibility. At the moment their idea of flexibility doesn't
coincide with ours, but in both cases, we and they both recognise that there
may be a need over the years to come, for the European Union to accept as quite
legitimate, quite reasonable, the fact that some countries go for tighter
integration, others may not wish to or be able to do so, and therefore if
Europe is to react in a positive way to that development of the debate, it must
do so through a kind of flexibility that respects the national interests of
each country. We insist on people respecting our national interests, I do not
want to suggest that we can refuse to acknowledge what may be that national
interest of other countries. The challenge is how you reconcile these.
HUMPHRYS: But they have a way of getting round
these problem, the French and the Germans have a way of getting round this
problem, they have, as you say, a sort of flexible approach. And they are
saying, in effect, let's do deals within Europe, amongst ourselves, those of us
who want further integration can do our own deals. The others can stay outside
if they so wish. We will use the institutions of Europe to do our own deals.
Now you say, no, we're not going to wear that, we won't tolerate that, so it's
you that's blocking them in this case.
RIFKIND: Now hold on, you've missed a vital
point. First of all the French and German ideas, have so far been repudiated,
but not just by the United Kingdom, but by half the European Union.
HUMPHRYS: That leaves the other half.
RIFKIND: Well, precisely, but there is a debate
in which half the countries say this is too rigid an approach, and the point
that is at stake is that if you wish to have partial integration within the
European Union, using the institutions of the European Union, that must be done
on a basis acceptable to all the member countries. The institutions of the
European Union belong to all the fifteen members, and therefore if they are to
be used in some future structure, then it must be done on a basis which is
acceptable to all the member states.
HUMPHRYS: But if they are stopped from doing it
within the European Union, then they will do it perhaps outside.
RIFKIND: That's their sovereign right, we can't
stop them any more than they can stop us. If countries wish to form as we've
seen with the Schengen proposals, on frontiers, if countries wish to make
arrangements outside the European Union, that is their sovereign right which
they are entitled to do as they think fit.
HUMPHRYS: And is it your view that that seems to
be the only solution then. That is what will happen?
RIFKIND: Not necessarily, these are the issues
that are being discussed at the moment. We are at a very early stage in the
negotiation. The Irish presidency when they produced a draft treaty a few
weeks ago, acknowledged that the debate is at too early a stage to indicate
where it's likely to end up.
HUMPHRYS: Well, what else could it be, what other
solution might there be. If they don't do it inside the Union, they do it
outside the Union. What else? Where else do we go?
RIFKIND: Well, that's precisely the point I am
making.
There is a healthy debate, I have no
complaint about it. There is a healthy debate going on, history has meant that
the United Kingdom is leading one aspect of that debate, calling for Europe as
a partnership of nations. Chancellor Kohl is perhaps the most obvious
representative of the alternative view of a more centralised highly integrated
European superstate. It's a debate in Europe, it's also a debate within
Britain, because in a number of important respects the Labour Party offer the
alternative to German perspective of the kind of Europe we should move toward.
HUMPHRYS: . . . they dispute that.
RIFKIND: Well, I know they dispute it, it's
significant they dispute it because they know it's unpopular with the public.
The fact is, that in a large number of areas, they are actually going in the
same direction as Chancellor Kohl. They wish to abandon our veto, in a whole
range of areas, they wish to adopt the Social Chapter, they say there must be
no permanent opt outs. We cannot actually see as credible Mr Blair saying to
his European friends we will never be isolated in Europe, and then coming back
to Britain and trying to persuade the British public that the veto is safe in
his hands. You can't have it both ways.
HUMPHRYS: But to go back to this notion of
flexibility, if you can see, as we sit here, no other alternative, and we're
very close now to the wire aren't we, six months now to . . .
RIFKIND: Well, that's to the Amsterdam Summit,
but that's not going to be the end of the debate. The future of the world will
not be determined in the next six months.
HUMPHRYS: The future of the world will not be
determined in the next six months. The future direction of Europe almost
certainly will be determined within the next six months.
RIFKIND: If I had to predict a single most
important event effecting Europe in the next two or three years it wouldn't be
the Inter-Governmental Conference it will be when the European Union increases
from fifteen countries to about twenty-five or twenty-six with the accession
of the central and Eastern Europeans...
HUMPHRYS: But you may not even get to that state
because that can't begin to happen until after the IGC is concluded.
RIFKIND: Yes but that will happen. The Amsterdam
Summit of June next year will, in my judgement, mark the end of Inter
Governmental Conference..
HUMPHRYS: If there's a Treaty.
RIFKIND: There will be in one form or another
because you know what will happen. Once our General Election has taken place
then either we will win, which is what I believe will happen, and they will
know that they will have to deal with the re-elected Conservative Government
and I believe that our negotiating position will then be very strong. Or,
alternatively, God forbid, Labour will win and the European Union will know
that they will get, for nothing, on a plate, what they are most seeking because
Mr Blair has already announced he would give away British interest in this
respect.
HUMPHRYS: Put Mr Blair aside.
RIFKIND: I wish we would.
HUMPHRYS: For the purpose of this discussion let's
assume that you are in power. Mr Major has made it abundantly clear that there
are things within that Treaty, that proposed Treaty that under no circumstances
whatsoever will he accept.
RIFKIND: Correct.
HUMPHRYS: And those are things that our partners
in Europe, many of them say absolutely categorically must be in that Treaty.
RIFKIND: Of course they're saying that now but
when we have won the General Election then they will recognise that Labour will
not be able to get everything they would like and they will then be the kind of
negotiation that always takes place at the end of such Inter-Governmental
Conferences. We've been through this before. Mrs Thatcher when she went for the
British rebate on the Budget was one country opposed by every other member
state, once they realised how serious we were, once they realised we had been
endorsed by British opinion then the serious negotiation began.
HUMPHRYS: But you're telling me that there are
things that from our point of view are entirely non-negotiable.
RIFKIND: Yes.
HUMPHRYS: Those things that we want and those
things that we do not want and so you are expecting them to blink but us not to
do so.
RIFKIND: Our General Election will be the
determinant. That's what some of them...
HUMPHRYS: Why?
RIFKIND: Because they will then either have
re-elected a British Conservative Government which..whose position is very
clear, with whom they will have to then negotiate or as some of them would hope
they will get a soft touch because of a change of Government and a Government
prepared to throw away our fundamental national interest.
HUMPHRYS: So the leaders of Germany and France
will roll over and say British Government has been re-elected therefore they
have an electoral mandate but we'll do whatever they want to do.
RIFKIND: No, you're presenting it in these
colourful terms and I don't...
HUMPHRYS: That's not colourful at all, it's the
logic of what you're saying.
RIFKIND: That's not what I'm saying at all. There
are certain negotiating objectives which the French and the Germans have. I do
not believe it's crucial to their national interest that there should be more
majority voting at this moment in time. I do not believe it's crucial to their
national interest to force us into the Social Chapter.
HUMPHRYS: No but they believe it's crucial for the
development of Europe as they see it.
RIFKIND: No, no. They have certain national
interests, we're not expecting them to abandon those interests. What we are
expecting is them to fully respect our desire to maintain maximum control over
our lives and not be subordinated into new European quasi-federal structures.
Once our election is behind us that point of view will be much clearer and I
believe then we will move to a successful conclusion in the negotiations.
HUMPHRYS: Right, but it is a negotiation. That's
the point.
RIFKIND: Yes.
HUMPHRYS: Right. In that case we are prepared to
give up certain things just as you expect them to give up certain things.
RIFKIND: Yes but I've mentioned earlier the
fundamental ingredient of a successful negotiation is yes you make compromises
in areas which do not significantly effect your national interest in order to
get to the things that you'd really require. Now, of course, in any
negotiation, it's never a hundred per cent for one side and zero for the other.
Of course that is right and people who suggest otherwise are either extremely
foolish or very evasive. So the secret of a good negotiation is to compromise
in areas that do not have a significant impact on your own national objectives
in order to get the things that most matter to your citizens.
HUMPHRYS: Of course all of this might well be
academic in the end from your point of view because you were reported the other
day as saying the Tory Party is so split anyway we've got no chance of winning
the next Election.
RIFKIND: I said nothing of the sort.
HUMPHRYS: The Glasgow Herald has you as saying
that.
RIFKIND: That is not necessarily the fact.
HUMPHRYS: I accept that is not necessarily the
Bible but is that your view?
RIFKIND: No it's not my view as it happens, it's
not my view. Of course I'm conscious that we have internal divisions in my
Party, they exist in the Labour Party as well. Fifty Labour MPs recently
attacked Tony Blair for his views on the Single Currency. Where the Labour
Party are slightly better than we are is at concealing their internal
divisions. But the reality is that there is a historic debate taking place in
Britain, it certainly finds, the result of that is divisions in both the major
parties, that is a simple fact of life.
HUMPHRYS: But what we don't have is goodness knows
how many, possibly hundreds of Labour candidates threatening to produce their
own manifestos with their own views on Europe which do not coincide with the
leadership's views on Europe. You do, that is a problem.
RIFKIND: No, with respect what happens is that
the media love picking up the odd mark of individual backbenchers...
HUMPHRYS: You can hardly escape them. It's not as
though we have to crawl around looking for them.
RIFKIND: I'm not criticising you for that, I'm
simply saying that is what happens. You pick up what you think are splendid
headline catching remarks by individual backbenchers and then, because they
claim, an individual claims ....
HUMPHRYS: You're not telling me it's not going to
happen.
RIFKIND: Hold on, hold on a moment, don't get so
excited. You get an individual backbencher who claims he speaks for two
hundred MPs and therefore you produce a headline saying two hundred MPs. You
don't know anymore than anyone else does and the fact is you love headlines,
you love over-dramatising, you get disappointed when sanity breaks out and that
ceases to be considered newsworthy.
HUMPHRYS: We haven't had very much experienced of
sanity in your terms breaking out.
RIFKIND: Well we have more experience of sanity
than the media.
HUMPHRYS: You may be talking to different people
in the Party in that case, I suppose that's possible.
RIFKIND: We come up for re-election, you don't
you see, that gives us a better contact with the public.
HUMPHRYS: What about the latest story this morning
that there's a dozen of your Europhiles, let's leave the sceptics for a moment,
no doubt you'd like to do. A dozen of your Europhiles poised to join the
Liberal Democrats.
RIFKIND: You are not pointing out to the viewing
public who may not have seen this exciting report, this is a claim made by a
Liberal MP, who does not mention a single name and simply has a bit of fun and
takes the press for a ride in the usual way. You mustn't be so gullible Mr.
Humphrys.
HUMPHRYS: There is a bit of evidence for this,
we've had it before, we've had two of them leaving you for the Liberal
Democrats.
RIFKIND: I always think of you as a very highly
professional interviewer but actually to base questions on the unattributable
remarks of a Liberal MP, come off it.
HUMPHRYS: Alright, final, very quite thought.
Michael Heseltine says you're going to win by sixty seats.
RIFKIND: Only sixty.
HUMPHRYS: Only sixty.
RIFKIND: I've never heard Michael being so modest
in the past.
HUMPHRYS: Your forecast.
RIFKIND: I'm not making individual forecasts.
We'll win and we'll win with a healthy working majority.
HUMPHRYS: Clearly by more than sixty seats, if Mr
Heseltine was being so...
RIFKIND: I'll settle for a satisfactory working
majority, but I'll..next time I see Michael I'll tell him not to be so modest.
HUMPHRYS: Foreign Secretary, thank you very much.
RIFKIND: Thank you.
HUMPHRYS: And I was talking to Mr Rifkind a bit
earlier this morning and that's it for this week. And indeed for this year,
we'll be back after the holidays on January 19th. Have a good Christmas, see
you in the New Year. Good afternoon.
...oooOOOooo...
|