................................................................................
ON THE RECORD
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 19.9.93
................................................................................
JOHN HUMPHRYS: Good afternoon and welcome to a new
series of On The Record.
As the Liberal Democrats assemble in
Torquay for the first of this year's party conferences I'll be talking to their
leader Paddy Ashdown. I'll be asking him about allegations of racist
campaigning by his party in Tower Hamlets AND about WHY people vote for his
party. If it's true that they're mostly protest votes how's he going to turn
THAT into solid support by the next general election? And what about his party?
We hear a great deal of "Commander Ashdown" but less of his troops? Are they
the same old Liberals in different colours..? We've been looking at them.
But first, it's conference time again
and the Liberal Democrats are the first of the parties to decamp to the
seaside. Their deliberations in Torquay have been sonmewhat overshadowed by the
row over their local party's tactics in that now notorious by-election in Tower
Hamlets. Paddy Ashdown is at his Conference in Torquay.
Good morning Mr Ashdown.
PADDY ASHDOWN MP: Good morning, John.
HUMPHRYS: Let's talk first about the Tower Hamlets
affair. You've set up an inquiry and everybody says, well done, that's exactly
what you should have done. The question perhaps though is why didn't you do
that sort of thing a lot earlier?
ASHDOWN: Because it wasn't necessary, the first
time I saw these leaflets was on Friday morning. Now you might argue that I
ought to have seen them earlier. One of the things the inquiry will be looking
into and on which they are perfectly entitled to criticise is the party's
handling of this matter but you may be certain of this John, we have taken this
deadly seriously, the inquiry we've held is... or we're going to hold, is one
in which there'll be independent voices including one from the CRE. It'll be
published and it will make recommendations. Now I want you to draw a
comparison between that and the way that Labour who, the Sunday Times to its
credit, has also put under the spotlight in this campaign, they published one
leaflet which also has a sentence which is possible to represent as having a
racist edge and they acted in a way which gave the BNP their chance. Labour
has not done anything to put its own house in order and some of the overheated
and ridiculous charges made by Jack Straw, most of which are inaccuracies
gathered the highways and byways which are simply untrue, perhaps might be
taken more seriously if Mr Straw and the Labour Party took the same kind of
clear and tough action that we have taken about the mote in their own eye.
HUMPHRYS: You said, I may argue, that perhaps you
should have done something about it or known about it earlier. That's exactly
what I would do. Let me take you back, if I may, to May 1990, when your party
put out a pamphlet purporting to be a Labour Party pamphlet with racist
overtones. Now clearly you knew about that because there was a court case as a
result of it and the court case found that this pamphlet was a fraudulent
device but apparently nothing was done about it within the party.
ASHDOWN: That's absolutely wrong. The court case
was bought by Labour against the Liberal Democrats, found in our favour and the
Labour case was dismissed.
HUMPHRYS: The court found it was a fraudulent
device, the document, that's absolutely right.
ASHDOWN: The court considered whether or not that
document infringed the law on electoral practices and it decided against and
the Liberal Democrats won that court case and Labour lost it. Now the terms of
this inquiry will look into the whole of this aspect and decide and make
recommendations about what needs to be done. But we at that stage put in place
certain mechanisms to ensure that this should not happen again. Those
mechanisms will now be looked at, if it has been proved that the mechanisms we
put into practice were inadequate to stop this happening again then I want to
know about that. But I want you to draw the comparison here John, and forgive
me if I say that the press, it does seem appear to have been somewhat partial
about this matter. We have taken this matter very seriously, it is my view
that the way that the Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party acted may have
given the BNP a chance they should never have had.
Since that day, we have spent our time
fighting against each other instead of fighting the BNP, taking increasingly
petty charges levelled by Mr Straw and I do think it's important if the Labour
Party is going to take this line that they will take equivalent steps to put
their house in order.
HUMPHRYS: Alright, well we...
ASHDOWN: And I would like to suggest to you that
maybe that's a question you should be asking them because one of the leaflets,
as I said to Mr Straw the other night, contains a line which is clearly with a
racist edge to it.
HUMPHRYS: But at the moment I have you here, Mr
Ashdown and I don't have Mr Straw. Now manifestly those mechanisms that were
put into place clearly did not work, were inadequate, well because in October
1992, and I have it here, there was another leaflet, this time issued by one
of your own organisations - Island Focus - "The Liberals say what islanders
want is important not what the CRE want". Now that is clearly carrying racist
implications - undertones.
ASHDOWN: John, let's wait and see. The reason
why I've put this inquiry into place is because I want it to look at these
matters and make recommendations. I want it to.... I do not know and when I
saw these leaflets I took immediate action...
HUMPHRYS: So you did see that leaflet, did you?
ASHDOWN: No, when I saw the leaflets on Friday,
the answer to that... the answer to your question is no. When I saw...
HUMPHRYS: Sorry, can I just be clear, sorry to
interrupt you, so that we've been clear about this. You didn't see that
October '92 leaflet at all?
ASHDOWN: No, I did not see that leaflet.
HUMPHRYS: Shouldn't you have?
ASHDOWN: Well you might argue that.
HUMPHRYS: Well I am arguing that.
ASHDOWN: Well John, our party's put out leaflets
in council by-election right across the country, many thousands of them. I
want to know why the mechanisms that were in place did not work. I take this
matter extremely seriously, I've set up an inquiry to provide me with the
answers to that and that... I'm not going to pre-judge the issue and you
wouldn't expect me to.
HUMPHRYS: No, I'm not asking you to do that.
ASHDOWN: The point is that I've set up this
inquiry, I want to know what happened, what the motives were. Let me be clear.
The idea that Tower Hamlets is a racist council is simply nonsense. Seventy
per cent of our membership are Bangladeshi. Most...many... we've got the
highest percentage of ethnic minority councillors in Tower Hamlets - Liberal
Democrats - than anywhere else in the country. The idea that is being put
about that they are racist is nonsense. (interruption) If I may finish
John.
HUMPHRYS: Alright.
ASHDOWN: When I saw these leaflets I questioned
them because they are capable of being mis-represented and the question I want
to know is whether or not that was the intention or whether it was an accident.
But this inquiry will look into that, it will look into the party's handling of
this matter, it has an absolute right to make criticisms and recommendations
about how this matter will be put right if indeed those mistakes were made.
Now I'm not going to pre-judge that now and you would not expect me to do so.
HUMPHRYS: And I'm not asking you to pre-judge the
inquiry, what I'm asking you to do is explain why you didn't take action
sooner. It's not as if you weren't warned about it. The Labour leader on the
council... may I just make this point, the Labour leader on the council wrote
to you and warned about it. Martin Downs, senior Liberal Democrat, wrote in
the Guardian: We, MPs and party officials were repeatedly pressed to take
action but nothing happened. David Bellotti apparently wrote to you earlier
this week and said, you should be doing something about it and you didn't do
anything about it, that's the implication.
ASHDOWN: You are unquestioningly and I....
unquestioningly and I think you shouldn't be, accepting the word of Mr Straw. I
Let me take the case of David Bellotti....
HUMPHRYS: Well is none of that true, I mean, I
read the letter for myself in the Guardian yesterday.
ASHDOWN: The David Bellotti statement you made is
untrue, as we clearly said yesterday, it is wholly untrue, wholly
unsubstantiated, it was categorically denied yesterday and I'm surprised that
the Press continued to run with that allegation today when you knew yesterday
that was untrue. I think you should look at some of Mr Straw's extraordinary
statements and perhaps just investigate them a little further. That is wholly
untrue.
HUMPHRYS: But what some people may find
extraordinary is that in spite of a number about what was going on in Tower
Hamlets, you as the leader of the party didn't say, look we've got to take
stock of this, let's set up an inquiry now, let's fire, let's sack from the
party anybody's who has been involved in anything about which we are really
dubious?
ASHDOWN: Every single thing that has come to my
notice, I have investigated. On one occasion I had to write to a councillor
because he made statements which were capable of being misrepresented in 1991.
That received publicity in the local Press even if you don't know about it.
But let me be clear, we have set up an inquiry to look into this matter, it
will look into the totality of it, it will look into the Labour Party's
literature as well. We are taking this very, very seriously. I don't think I
could have acted more decisively or more quickly on this matter, and I think
now it would be well worth while asking the Labour Party why they are not
taking the same thing. I will... I want to make this absolutely clear to you.
This inquiry will be thorough, it will make recommendations, if it wishes to
criticise the way that the party has handled this matter, it is entitled to do
so.
HUMPHRYS: And a final quick point, will..
ASHDOWN: I believe it should now be left to them
to make this...
HUMPHRYS: And a final quick point, will it be an
open inquiry?
ASHDOWN: Yes.
HUMPHRYS: So that we can go...
ASHDOWN: It's going to be open, it's going to
be...
HUMPHRYS: I mean, open in the sense that reporters
will be invited to attend and anybody else who wants to go?
ASHDOWN: Well, if reporters wish to attend, of
course they're perfectly entitled to attend. But it's... it will take evidence
from the public, anybody who wishes to put comments into it, it contains
independent people including, I hope, the Lord Leicester, probably the most
respected person in Britain on race relations. It will publish its results, it
will make recommendations and I come back to this question, which is the
central one. We take this very seriously, we want to know what's gone on. I
would like to know now why the Labour Party is not prepared to do the same
about its leaflets and its campaigning style and maybe that would be a question
that would be worthwhile asking.
HUMPHRYS: Paddy Ashdown, for the moment, thank
you, but please don't go away because we're going to take a broader look now at
what the Liberal Democrats are all about and what they really stand for.
Inevitably those famous victories at Newbury and Christchurch brought fresh
hope that the party which has been the bridesmaid for so long might be a step
closer to tripping up the aisle as the bride herself. But the past is littered
with promises of Liberal breakthroughs, only to be dashed at subsequent General
Elections.
However, since the Liberal Democrats DO
claim the right to be taken seriously will their policies stand the kind of
scrutiny they're sure to attract? Or will allegations of opportunism stick?
Terry Dignan reports.
******
HUMPHRYS: Now Paddy Ashdown, I'm sure there are
one or two little points you'd like to make out of that, as a result of that
film, but let me ask you first about the general proposition that as a party
you have prospered because of the protest vote?
PADDY ASHDOWN: Well, you are right. I want to make one
or two comments about it, because I've never seen such a preposterously biased
and partial report in my life. Let me take the protest vote. Are you denying
John that protest is a part of politics? If you are you are denying the basic
thrust of British politics over the last forty years.
HUMPHRYS: No, since you ask me the question I'm
asking you whether you accept that proposition.
ASHDOWN: Let me address it if I may in my own
words. The majority of people who vote Conservative do so to keep the Labour
Party out. The majority of people who vote Labour do so to keep the
Conservative Party out. Protest is part of the voting pattern of all political
parties. Of course I don't say that it's a part of the voting pattern of our
party. The point that matters is that in by-elections like Christchurch and in
by-elections like Newbury, and I've never been a person who believed a
by-election predicted the next election - it tells you where you are and in
the country elections right across the south of England where we're now the
largest party in all the counties of England, when people turned away from the
Conservatives they did not turn to Labour, they turned to us. Now, if you're
asking me to say as I guess you are that our job is as you rightly defined it
earlier on, to convert that protest into solid votes, that is right, that is
our task, but that's not a new phenomenon in British politics, nor is it one as
your report suggests exclusively suffered by the Liberal Democrats.
HUMPRHYS:: Well, I don't ....
ASHDOWN: This is the fact of matter...the fact of
the matter for the Conservative Party and the Labour Party as well, come to my
constituency, look at the facts and you'll discover that most people, I think
I'm right in saying something like fifty-five per cent of the people who voted
Conservative at the last election did it to keep Labour out. That's a protest
vote, so it's not something you can direct solely at us.
HUMPHRYS: I don't know that the reporter used the
word exclusive, but let's look at some of the suggestions. Let me put it no
stronger than that, that the Liberal Democrats aren't quite certain
occasionally what they're on about, and people may perhaps be just a shade
confused. VAT on domestic fuel - you would unequivocally scrap that?
ASHDOWN: Yes.
HUMPHRYS: No caveats?
ASHDOWN: No caveats. And let me tell you that -
why we're entitled to do that. It is because at the last election and the
charge of inconsistency comes pretty curiously from the Labour Party...from the
Conservative Party - at the last election we considered this fundamental shift
in taxation that we proposed away from the things we want - wealth, jobs,
value-added to the things we don't want, pollution, the use of energy and the
use of finite raw materials. In a consultative document much quoted by a
government minister, a consultative document in 1990, we considered VAT as a
mechanism to do that and we rejected it, so the difference is that we proposed
an energy tax at the last election - we rejected VAT. The Conservatives
campaigned incidentally up and down the country against us on that energy tax
and said it would wreck the country. As soon as they came to power they put
into practice the mechanism which we had rejected and did exactly what we were
suggesting during the general election. Now who is guilty of inconsistency
in this matter?
HUMPHRYS: So you don't want VAT on fuel but you
do want an energy tax? Now do you say to people, "Look, we don't like this
idea of VAT on fuel, but if we get into power you're going to have to pay more
for your energy"?
ASHDOWN: Yes, and let me be absolutely clear. I
think in every speech I made in Newbury and in Christchurch I make that
abundantly clear. We were not in favour of VAT on fuel, but we were in favour
of an energy tax, and here is the fundamental difference. The energy tax is
not raising money for the revenue, for the Treasury to bail the Conservatives
out for their mistakes, dumping the problems on the poorest. It was to be used
on a fiscally neutral basis with the money ploughed back into the economy
specifically to help the vulnerable who are now going to be so damaged by VAT,
specifically to fund energy-saving programmes like insulation and specifically
to reduce income tax. Now there is a fundamental difference between that
approach which is about the environment and which is about protecting the
vulnerable and the Conservative Party's approach which is about dumping their
mistakes on the poorest in the country and raising money to pay for their
mistakes, and of course we are entitled, perfectly entitled to campaign against
VAT on that matter, and when the charge of inconsistency comes to be laid I
would have thought that people might look at the Conservatives' record who
campaigned against us in the election on precisely this and did it
straight away afterwards.
HUMPHRYS: Well let me tell me where the charge
of - one of the charges of inconsistency arise, from this particular version
of the energy tax, the EC carbon tax, energy tax, whatever you want to call it.
Your document said we support it unequivocally - on the first page it said: we
support it. Alan Beith at the news conference at which that document was
released, said "I stress that we are not committed to the proposal in its
present form". Now you'll accept that's mildly confusing to people?
ASHDOWN: John, we are dealing with a
circumstance where we don't know the nation's economy, the economic situation.
The Chancellor of Exchequer won't tell us what he's going to do in November,
quite rightly so too, but he has all the figures to his hand, yet you ask us to
make a precise prediction.
HUMPHRYS: No, no, no, I'm not asking you to do
anything of the sort.
ASHDOWN: If I may finish, and of course we will
want to take into account the condition of the nation in our November budget
package and unlike Labour we always put forward an alternative budget
which is absolutely clear, and of course we will want to judge the condition of
the country when we come up to the general election. What we have established
in this document was a principle that we would wish to follow. How that
principle can be played through for the good of the economy depends on the
state of the economy at the time you come to put it into practice, not that's
not unreasonable I wouldn't have thought.
HUMPHRYS: Except that is it a principle to say,
and I'm quoting from the document, "We support the European Community proposals
for an energy carbon tax and would press for its immediate implementation at a
national level.
ASHDOWN: Yes.
HUMPHRYS: Not might - would!
ASHDOWN: That's exactly right and that would be
one of the principles that we should follow. I mean you claim that we
are unclear, we're not prepared to stand up and say that tough things are
necessary. Let me tell where we are absolutely clear. We are absolutely
clear on a proposition which is unique in British politics, that we want to see
a change in the system of taxation away from taxing wealth and jobs and towards
taxing pollution and energy. No other party puts that forward. That is a
principle of taxation that we've adopted. When you come to put figures on
that you will naturally want to look at the economy in the state that it is and
you put the figures on, but people are clear about where we stand, or at least
they should be.
HUMPHRYS: And I wouldn't dream of asking you for
precise figures at this stage because it may be a little while before you're in
power, but at the very least surely you can tell me whether, let's take the
little old lady, Mrs Smith who lives in her first floor flat, who's already
lagged up the eyeballs, she doesn't have any need for lagging - she is going to
have pay more for her fuel bills is she not? And the idea of recycling the
money isn't going to help her.
ASHDOWN: No question about that, but what she
will get, because we are committed to recyling the money not putting it into
the Treasury's pockets to pay for the Conservatives' mistakes, what she will
get is an adequate assistance in order to make sure that she is not left
vulnerable to this in the way that VAT does, so we're quite clear about this.
HUMPHRYS: Alright, and what about ....
ASHDOWN: ...and this is the important point, and
the difference between our proposal and the Conservatives' is that their
proposals dumps the problem on the poorest and most vulnerable in the country.
Our proposal will be put into operation on a fiscally neutral basis including
John, using some of that money to cut income tax.
HUMPHRYS: And what about the other Mrs Jones down
the road, who's rather better off than Mrs Smith, wouldn't qualify for income
support or anything, and she's also lagged up to the eyeballs, so she doesn't
need money to help her with lagging. She would end up paying more, full stop?
ASHDOWN: No, we have made it quite clear that
this is a fundamental change we want to see in our taxation system and insofar
as it generates money it will do so, that will used on a fiscally neutral basis
to reduce income tax.
HUMPHRYS: But the answer to that question is yes?
ASHDOWN: The answer is that she may pay more for
her fuel, but she may pay less for her income tax because that's the shift we
want to make. The total global, the total national burden of taxation will not
be changed by this and so it's a very clear proposal, a very interesting one
and totally different from the country's, from the government's, so the lady
down the road may well be saying, "Yes, out of my global income I have to pay
more for my fuel, but I'm now paying less in taxation because some of that
money will be ploughed back into that".
HUMPHRYS: Except that it seems that you are using
that money twice. You're recycling -
ASHDOWN: No.
HUMPHRYS: Well, let me explain why I say that.
You're recycling it so that you can help Mrs Jones and Mrs Smith with the
lagging for the house whether they need it - if they need it, but you're also
using it to offset other taxes?
ASHDOWN: Let me be clear to you, I've said to you
exactly how the money would be used, I don't know what it would generate, it
depends what level you set it, but it would be used in three areas, it would be
divided up if you like, in three areas, and they are in descending orders of
priority. One: to protect the vulnerable, two: to encourage the energy
efficiency through energy saving projects including insulation, and we have the
worse standards of insulation of any of the countries in the temperate
climates, and three: to reduce the level of income tax.
HUMPHRYS: It's got to go an awful long way hasn't
it?
ASHDOWN: But let me be clear John, what we have
said is that the overall burden on the nation will be, since this has been done
on a fiscally neutral basis, will be the same as it is under any other system
of taxation you put into practice.
HUMPHRYS: Right.
ASHDOWN: Now, that's a very clear principle, it
is a very remarkable one, it proposes a fundamental change in the system of
taxation, and for those who say we don't have an economic policy, they ought to
just address the fact that we are proposing the most fundamental change to
taxation that this country has ever seen.
HUMPHRYS: So that particular tax for instance, is
going to be, as you put it, 'fiscally neutral'. That means it's not going
to help cut the PSBR, government borrowing.
ASHDOWN: Let's address that, but again we've been
utterly clear about that and again during the Newbury by-election and the
Christchurch by-election, I made it absolutely clear that after you have made
the savings that are necessary within out public spending system, our
health system, our education system and our welfare system, if there is then
a question that is left over about how you raise the money, rather than cutting
that system below the bone, we are prepared to raise taxation. Labour's never
been prepared to say that, Conservatives have never been prepared to say that,
that is a principle of taxation on which we have been uniquely clear. The
other two parties, you have Gordon Brown on this programme and ask him, he will
not give you an answer that I give you categorically, that if there is no
other way to pay for PSBR, except to choose one of these two options, to cut
our welfare system below the marrow and below the bone, or to raise taxation,
we would like to see taxation raised. Full stop, end of story, absolutely
clear.
HUMPHRYS: Perhaps instead of Gordon Brown I
should have Alan Beith here and ask him, because he said 'we have massive
unemployment, which makes the debt problem spiral, we cannot tax our way out of
that spiral'.
ASHDOWN: Well that is correct, and you'd like to
tell me perhaps when he said that, because I know when he said that.
HUMPHRYS: Well I can tell you exactly yes, the
l7th of March, 1993.
ASHDOWN: Exactly John, in the circumstances of
the last Budget, and we made it clear in the last Budget that we did not
believe that taxation was right for the nation at that time, because it would
have plunged the nation deep into a recession which we are not yet on our way
out of. But Alan Beith went on to say, if your researchers have been good
enough to provide you with the rest. 'But that a raise in taxation will
have to be considered, probably in the autumn budget'. Now you can't get it
clearer than that.
HUMPHRYS: So the country has been transformed in
the few months between those two dates?
ASHDOWN: No, of course not, but you know as well
as I that in March there was no question that the nation was still sinking
deeper into recession. We now have a recession which is at least, in my
judgement ended, and although the recovery is not particularly strong. We made
it clear in our spring proposition, for the Spring Budget, that the spring was
not the right time, given the nation's economy, for raising taxation, but it
was an issue that would have to be faced later. Let me remind you when you,
when you accuse us of being unclear, that Labour refused to say even what it
would do at spring, let alone in the autumn..(interruption)...consistent
and clear.
HUMPHRYS: But you're happy to go to the electorate
saying we're going to put up taxes folks?
ASHDOWN: Well, I'm happy to go to the electorate,
and let me tell you this, that the opinion polls support us and not the
government, as you saw. We made this quite clear at the Christchurch
by-election, we say if the option is to cut our welfare system below the bone
or raise taxation, we are interested in justice in taxation, and this should
not be done through the indirect taxation mechanism, it should be levied on
income tax in a straight, honest and fair manner. Let me tell you this, that
when I went to meeting after meeting after meeting at Christchurch and
Newbury, and I asked people to raise their hands, do you want your welfare
system cut or are you prepared to pay extra in taxation, ninety per cent
regularly put up their hands.
HUMPHRYS: So the answer to the question was yes?
ASHDOWN: The answer to the question, the answer
to the question as it was with Alan Beith in March, is yes.
HUMPHRYS: I'm speeding up because we just...
ASHDOWN: Can you get it clearer than that.
HUMPHRYS: Absolutely not, thank you very much.
I'm speeding up because we're running out of time. PR, I saw you wince at a
reference in that film to PR. Well let me put this to you. Your manifesto
said reform of the voting system is the key to a successful future, is it still
the key, unequivocally?
ASHDOWN: Yes, unequivocally.
HUMPHRYS: And it doesn't matter if that places you
rather closer to the Labour Party than it does to the Conservative Party, that
you're not equidistant any longer?
ASHDOWN: I don't give a damn who it places me
closer to. I'm interested in putting forward the policies of my party,
they are distinctive, they do not belong to another party, the Liberal
Democrats are a distinctive and growingly powerful force in this country, we
are independent, we are hand maidens to nobody, nor shall we be, we stand for
what we believe in, and we believe a fundamental reform to the electoral system
is part of the reforms to democracy that we desperately need in this country,
to put politics more back in touch with the people of this country, I think the
gap between government and the governed is now growing dangerously wide. PR is
and remains essential to that, and the statement on your programme that we had
loosened our attachment to it is simply wrong.
HUMPHRYS: And Charles Kennedy's reference 'you can
only get so much constitutional form through in any one parliament', we
shouldn't take that too seriously.
ASHDOWN: Well of course, because at the end of
the day you have to plan your parliamentary programme, it's going to be tough
but don't be in any doubt about the importance that we attach to PR. What
Charles Kennedy was rightly saying is that, as you said yourself, we are known
for our commitment to PR, I would like the party to be known for its
commitment to an economic policy and to other matters, and whilst we have our
opportunity we'll sell that. And that incidentally, and that incidentally is
what was essential about that document, it laid a framework. It wasn't a
manifesto, of course not, three years to the election, it laid a framework
within which our policy would be framed, neither the Conservatives nor the
Labour Party could produce such a document. We are committed to opportunity,
opportunity for the individual, self-reliant individuals, strong communities
backed by an active government, that's our message.
HUMPHRYS: Paddy Ashdown, thank you very much
indeed.
...oooOooo...
|