...............................................................................
ON THE RECORD
BACKBENCH DISCUSSION
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC-1 DATE: 01.11.92
...............................................................................
JONATHAN DIMBLEBY: Between now and that vote on Wednesday,
the Government will use every available wile to limit the backbench rebellion.
They won't have to worry about Ian Taylor, he's a Euro-enthusiast and they
won't even try with Bill Cash, he's a Euro-sceptic and well beyond redemption;
but they will desperately want to secure waverers like Iain Duncan-Smith, who
inherited Chingford from Norman Tebbit at the last election and another new
boy, Nigel Waterson. Can it be done?
Bill Cash, it was reported a couple days
or so that you thought the motion was so mild that you might be able to vote
for it. I take it this was a form of character assassination?
WILLIAM CASH, MP: No, it was simply and soley that I
thought that it looked to me as if the motion could in fact have sought to
achieve things which it couldn't. I said it was a farce and that's what
basically what I think it is and I'm certainly voting against it, I made that
abundantly clear.
DIMBLEBY: And the basic simple reason for voting
it in?
CASH: Well because it's a centralising Treaty
and since the second reading there's been a massive change in the political
landscape not only in this country but also in Europe. We've torn up the ERM,
you've got the French referendum, you've got the Danish rejection and
therefore as far as I'm concerned the whole political landscape has changed
immeasurably.
DIMBLEBY: Ian Taylor, the.. what's widely regarded
as the anodyne wording of this motion, hasn't apparently hoodwinked Bill Cash,
is it in your view a motion for Maastricht game, set and match?
IAN TAYLOR, MP: No, I think what it is is a clear sign
that we wish to make progress on an issue which is central to the Government's
policy. You cannot disentangle Europe as if it was a discardable option, about
the efforts the Government have undertaken to revive the economy in this
country are inextricably linked with what goes on on the European side. You
have for example, a vast amount of inward investment into this country, fifty
thousand workers in this country are employed in Japanese companies.
DIMBLEBY: But should the waverers be in no doubt
that to vote for this is to vote on an issue of substance, namely attitude
towards Maastricht?
TAYLOR: Well, I'm not going to advise Bill Cash
how he should make his judgement...
DIMBLEBY: I doubt if he'd listen to you, but
anyway..
TAYLOR: He may do, but nevertheless I think the
argument here is one as to whether the Party in Parliament is going to back the
Prime Minister's judgement, that the progress towards ratification of
Maastricht is an essential part of the overall strategy of this Government.
DIMBLEBY: Now, Iain Duncan-Smith, waverering,
teetering still, where does that conflict leave you?
IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH, MP: Well I listened to the Government and I
listened to what's said about our position in Europe and my credentials on
Europe are very sound, I'm very pro-Europe. But I have to say that I read the
Treaty and the two don't match up. What's in the content here in the Treaty is
a centralising force, centralising Treaty, it is not a decentralising one.
DIMBLEBY: And do you judge the motion to be a
motion effectively committing the Government to going for ratification of that
Treaty.
DUNCAN-SMITH: Well I have to say that the Masstricht
process is something I believe that is above party politics because all parties
actually had it in their manifesto. I therefore say that if it is we should
vote on it as a single issue, it has nothing to do with confidence in the Prime
Minister who I fully support or the Government.
DIMBLEBY: So are you off the fence?
DUNCAN-SMITH: I've always been off the fence, I'm
against Maastricht.
DIMBLEBY: And what about the motion?
DUNCAN-SMITH: Well, I believe that I am unlikely to be
able to support the Government.
DIMBLEBY: Does mean that you'll probably vote
against.
DUNCAN-SMITH: Yes.
DIMBLEBY: Thank you.
Nigel Waterson, how are you leaning as a
waverer?
NIGEL WATERSON: Well, in the last few days I've decided
I definitely will be supporting the Government on this motion and I'll be going
through the lobbies on the Government side on Wednesday.
DIMBLEBY: Why?
WATERSON: First of all I'm not entirely convinced
there's a need for this particular motion, this paving motion it's so called,
secondly it does, really just commit us to discussing the Bill relating to the
Treaty again and thirdly, the Labour Party in my view foolishly have turned
this into a matter of confidence.
DIMBLEBY: And you are one of those who are
persuaded that in effect it has become a vote of confidence in John Major's
leadership?
WATERSON: Absolutely.
DIMBLEBY: And if you were persuaded otherwise, you
might go in another direction, but the fact that you regard it as a vote
of confidence is the defining point for you.
WATERSON: It's certainly one of the major reasons
I'll be supporting the Government on Wednesday.
DIMBLEBY: It is a vote of confidence Mr Cash.
CASH: Well first of all look at public
opinion, only twenty-eight per cent in today's opinion poll have said they're
in favour of it. Look at the factors Ian Taylor's just been talking about, the
question of jobs - Black Wednesday sent absolute fear and panic through the
country as interest rates rocketed up and what the Maastricht Treaty actually
does is to roll the Exchange Rate Mechanism straight back into the Maastricht
process.
DIMBLEBY: But what about John Major's position in
this? Mr Waterson says it's a vote of confidence in John Major, you are
prepared to see John Major be scattered to the four winds.
CASH: I'm saying that for example yesterday he
said that people in this country back Maastricht and I must say that the public
opinion poll today clearly demonstrates that's not the case. And by the way
our numbers I think are significantly higher than have been put out today in
The World This Weekend.
DIMBLEBY: What's the claim that you have against
the motion?
CASH: Well very simply that it is rolling back
to Maastricht..
DIMBLEBY: No no no, numbers we're talking about.
CASH: As far as the numbers are concerned then
we have got significantly more than twenty-seven and I think you will find that
there are probably about forty in round figures.
DIMBLEBY: Forty. Are you claiming...
CASH: We think it could be as high as that.
DIMBLEBY: If it's that you would in fact defeat
the Government even if the Liberal Democrats stick to the position outlined by
Ashdown, now are you saying that you believe and they're not just putting it
about as you'd be inclined to do in any case. Do you say you genuinely believe
that you have got the Government on the run and that they will be defeated?
CASH: It's significantly more than
twenty-seven and we believe it's well above thirty-five.
DIMBLEBY: In that case that would be almost
certainly defeat. Ian.
TAYLOR: Well I think we've got to bear in mind
that the Government has some many difficult issues ahead of it in the next few
weeks, it's got the expenditure round, it's got difficult negotiations on GATT,
it's got also the questions of clarifying with our partners detailed issues
such as subsidiarity. We need to back the Prime Minister's overall judgement
in this.
DIMBLEBY: Do you share the view then that Nigel
Waterson expressed that in the end this does come down to a vote of confidence
in the Prime Minister?
TAYLOR: Well we're over personalising it,
I think what it does do is show the Conservative Party in Parliament is
prepared to back the overall strategy of the Government. Europe is part of
that as I said earlier, it's not a discardable option and we can't expect
anyway to put Maastricht aside when we're brow beating the French trying to get
them to agree to make progress on the GATT talks.
DIMBLEBY: It's backing for the overall policy of
the Government, sorry you want to come in..
WATERSON: Yes, I just want to say there's another
point here that in this country and across Europe events are moving in our
direction, those of us who are sceptical about Maastricht and want to turn back
federalism, therefore although there are both good and bad things in the Treaty
it makes it much easier for people like me to support it because events are
moving in our favour.
DIMBLEBY: Iain Duncan-Smith, Waterson and Taylor
say there is an issue of confidence here at stake in the Prime Minister himself
or at least in the case of Iain in the Government's strategy overall. You're
prepared to ditch Major because you're so deeply opposed to the motion because
of what it represents?
DUNCAN-SMITH: No, I said earlier on that I don't
believe this is a matter of confidence in the Prime Minister at all and I think
actually Ian made that point. We're over personalising, it is not about the
Prime Minister's position. This is...
DIMBLEBY: Is Nigel Waterson duped on this?
DUNCAN-SMITH: I think he's mistaken but that's
a disagreement between the two of us. I actually happen to believe that this
Treaty fundamentally is wrong for Europe, it's not just that it's..I'm
anti-European, I'm not, I'm pro-European. This will put nation against nation,
things like the ERM stage two accord will actually have us going in front of
the Council under majority voting, being voted against for not being back in
the ERM, it going in front of the ECJ, they finding against us and then we're
back to...
DIMBLEBY: Okay, now look, you heard though Bill
Cash talk about the votes that he thinks are going to be with you, his hopes
there're up for forty, doubtless you hope the same kind of thing. That
does mean that John Major is defeated and there's no point in beating about the
bush, it's very clear it's a personal defeat because of what he said as well -
you can wear that?
DUNCAN-SMITH: Well, I happen to believe in a democracy
you have to go with the will of Parliament.
CASH: The most important thing here is what is
this doing to the United Kingdom, there is a massive transfer of powers from
Britain away to the European Community, this is a very centralising Treaty
and there's a great deal of disinformation put out, a union, duties imposed
upon people. The fact is that this is a massive centralising Treaty..
DIMBLEBY: Ian Taylor.
TAYLOR: Bill Cash has to understand that the
real centralisation occurred in the Single Act which was signed by Mrs
Thatcher. Yes it's absolutely true that that where qualifed majority voting
started, it's also very importantly true that we wanted that because we wanted
the whole of the single market programme pushed through against opposition of
certain other countries. Now if you don't get Maastricht you're left with what
Bill Cash and others think to be failures of the single market without any ....
CASH: I voted...I voted for the Single
European Act because I believe that it was going to do a lot of good to British
jobs, I still believe therefore that we can continue with that. But this other
Treaty is about Government, not about trade and the central bank is the most
centralising feature that anybody could imagine with unelected, unaccountable
bankers, effectively taking over the views and decisions of the voters of this
country.
DIMBLEBY: Nigel Waterson.
WATERSON: I'm convinced now that we must get
ratification out of the way as soon as possible so we can use what remains of
our presidency to stamp our authority and our agenda on the European Community.
DIMBLEBY: You want the Government to ratify, now
that's your...
WATERSON: I think we now have to get it out of the
way because it's actually stopping us doing what I'd like us to do.
DIMBLEBY: Do you agree what Andrew Rowe said in
our film that if you don't win this and Bill Cash does, that effectively John
Major's own powerbase is so eroded that he's finished.
WATERSON: I think there's some truth in that but I
don't think the Government is going to lose on Wednesday.
CASH: We can have a vote of confidence.
WATERSON: I just don't think the Government will
lose and I suspect enough members of the Labour Party will do what John Smith
did nearly twenty years and ...
DIMBLEBY: But if you think the Government...if the
Government does go down you do think effectively that's slow drawing curtains
for the Prime Minister.
WATERSON: I wouldn't go that far but it would
certainly be something of a blow to the.....
DIMBLEBY: Just on that Ian Taylor.
TAYLOR: Yes, just on that, if we were defeated
on Wednesday then how much more difficult would it be for the Prime Minister to
try to secure progress in the GATT round, how much more difficult would it be
for the Prime Minister to get progress on subsidiarity - exactly the points
that are worrying colleagues who are proposing to vote against on Wednesday,
it's counter productive from their point of view.
DIMBLEBY: Just one brief word.
DUNCAN-SMITH: Well the subsidiarity thing which is
absolutely core to this, it's quite vital to point out that what's in the
Treaty under 3B is so vague that the only way of making that cut is to actually
re-open the Treaty and amend it, no codicils will matter, and they're not going
to do that
VOICE IN BACKGROUND: ...and we can have a confidence motion.
DIMBLEBY: You can have a confidence motion, you
say. Gentleman, the four of you, thank you.
...oooOooo...
|