................................................................................
ON THE RECORD
INTERVIEW WITH PADDY ASHDOWN
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 29.05.94
................................................................................
JOHN HUMPHRYS: On the line from Yeovil, in the Clematis
strewn garden of his home there is their Leader, Paddy Ashdown. Good Morning,
Mr Ashdown.
PADDY ASHDOWN MP: Good Morning, John.
HUMPHRYS: Can we be clear about one thing. You
want the European Union to have more power than it has, at the moment?
ASHDOWN: We see a continuous and increasing
pooling of sovereignty at Europe, at the European level, where that is of
benefit to the British citizen. And, there are clear areas where it is; in
macro economics, in the protection of our environment and the construction of
the framework in which we can have a stable defence in the future. We see that
as a logical progression. There of course will be no change to the Maastricht
settlement but that will come up for review in 1996 and we believe that the
progress towards pooling sovereignty in those areas, which are of practical
benefit to Britain and British citizens, will, then, be have - have to be
addressed and we see steps that can be taken that progress that further.
HUMPHRYS: So, those who say the Liberal Democrats
would hand over great chunks of Britain's sovereignty are right, because you
say pooling sovereignty it means the same thing, doesn't it?
ASHDOWN: No, they're wrong. We see a progress, a
process that has been in place now for five or ten years. There are further
sensible steps that can be taken forward, where those are consistent with
Britain's interests and the interests of Britain's citizens. And, where I
think they are most substantially wrong, and you've seen a lot of scare
mongering and lies from the Conservative Party this last week. They won the
last election on the basis of a diet of lies and scaremongering and they're
trying to win this one as well on the same basis.
I don't think they'll succeed because I
don't think the British people are likely to be fooled twice, John. But, where
we show our colours most clearly is that we have our plans for Europe, we have
our ideas for Europe but, at the end of the day, we are the only party that
makes it absolutely clear that the consent for those plans must be obtained
through the ballot box from the British people.
So, we are the only Party which says
that we cannot go further than the British people give their specific
consent for through the ballot box, through in my view almost certainly a
referendum.
HUMPHRYS: But, where they're right, of course, is
when they say that we would lose the power to veto those things of which we
disapprove.
ASHDOWN: Prove that.
HUMPHRYS: Well, alright. One of your own comments
if you like: We want Ministers to make decisions in public and without single
nation vetos. Paddy Ashdown, December 1993.
ASHDOWN: Correct, and that is what exactly what
the Government has done. We want them to be able to do that. The Government
last used the veto in 1985.
HUMPHRYS: But the Government has fought to keep
the veto.
ASHDOWN: If I may just finish, John - nearly ten
years ago. So, they prefer not to use the veto, but that doesn't mean to say
that in certain areas the veto would not still be available. In fact, John, I
challenge you to find the word 'veto' in any European legislation. There is no
such thing as the veto. What there is is certain areas of policy which in order
for them to be decided upon have to have unanimity. And, unless there is
unanimity you cannot progress and we would see that being preserved in a number
of key areas. I'll give you two. One is the extension of the membership of the
European Union, in which there would have to be unanimity before the decision
could be taken amongst the member states. And, the second - and, incidentally,
backed by a absolute majority of the European Parliament - and the second is
executive decisions. For instance, those relating to budgets that the Council
operates in a quasi-Cabinet fashion.
Then, consensus would be required and,
for instance, in the case of Britain's rebate no decision could be taken to
alter that, unless that consensus was established. You may call that a veto,
if you wish. I would prefer to call it a unanimous decision-making process,
which is preserved in certain key areas.
HUMPHRYS: Well, let me put it into a different
sort of language, then, if you like. It is hypocritical of the Conservatives
who have resisted decision-making by qualified majority to use the paralysis
they have created to claim that Europe is incapable of developing - in this
case, a common Foreign policy. Again, your own words, the words in your
manifesto. No, you don't use the word 'veto' but everybody knows perfectly
well what you mean.
ASHDOWN: Well, John, the position is very, very
clear - that there will be no change until 1996. That's the summit conference,
inter-governmental conference that will, then take place then. We will
clearly propose that it's neccessary to move forward a step to the creation of
a common Defence and security policy. And, that will involve the use of - in
some cases - qualified majority voting. But, in the cases of ... area
of operations, for instance in Bosnia, nations would reserve the right to
withhold their troops from that just as they do under NATO at present. So,
it's a mixture of the two.
But, at all events, whatever proposals
are come up with, it is still subject to the consent of the British people
through the referendum. If you go out in the street and ask people about the
veto, the veto they want, if you insist on calling it a veto, is no one cast in
a secret Council of Ministers' chamber by a politician who claims to be acting
on Britain's behalf but won't say when the veto is used or what it's used for.
But, it's the veto in the hands of the British people exercised through the
ballot box, so that whatever package is arrived at about further steps towards
European Union, it is subject to the consent of the British people. And, the
Liberal Democrats are the only people who say that.
HUMPHRYS: Well, let me stop using the word 'veto',
then, and have somebody use it - somebody you'll know quite well. He has just
said that the European Union would be stultified if we did not abandon the
veto. David Steel.
ASHDOWN: Yes, read on.
HUMPHRYS: Well, look..
ASHDOWN: No no John, you're quoting from him so
you ought to finish the quote because he makes that point quite clearly that
that is in areas of policy and if you read on that quote you will discover that
he is saying exactly what I've just said: that in areas of policy, in areas of
legislative change, we want to see that the extension of qualified majority
voting. But in areas of executive decision making taken by the Council of
Ministers we are..we would persist with the unanimous procedure that is
currently in place.
Look, let's be clear about this - who
abolished the quotes unquotes "veto"? Mrs Thatcher. She agreed to that in
order to establish qualified majority voting; you would not have a single
market were that not the case, you would not have the environmental directives
that give us clean water and clean bathing beaches were that not the case. Who
extended qualified majority voting? Mr Major. By signing up to the Maastricht
Treaty; both Mrs Thatcher and Mr Major implicitly agreed that there was a case
for the further extension of qualified majority voting, now that's all we've
got in our manifesto, the Tories then put it in theirs.
HUMPHRYS: Right, where do you want to extend it?
ASHDOWN: Well I've told you where we'd extend it,
we'd extend it in order to create, for instance, the institutions of a common
security and defence policy...
HUMPHRYS: Can we take that one first if I may, may
we follow that up because you want to bring in..it's called the "second pillar"
or whatever it's called at the moment, you want to bring in foreign and
security policy within the European Union institutions.
ASHDOWN: We think that's a sensible way forward,
yes.
HUMPHRYS: So you would be handing over decision
making that now is made by Britain on key matters of foreign and security
policy to the European Union?
ASHDOWN: We'd be pooling our sovereignty in order
to be able to provide better defence for Britain, there's no other way of doing
it. We can't defend this country at our shores, NATO has proved that to us for
the last forty years. NATO, with the American likely withdrawal from Europe,
is unlikely to be able to fulfil that function effectively over the next ten
years. We have to build a second pillar for that; what we are seeking to build
at the European level is no more than Britain has had in NATO for the last
forty years and indeed, the Conservatives have argued that has been the
cornerstone of our defence. There shouldn't be much frightening I'd have
thought.
You see John, what is happening at
present is that the Conservatives, so divided amongst themselves - and you've
seenthe opinion polls today - dare not put forward any positive policies. All
they can do is criticise, scaremonger and lie about the policies of others;
indeed what they are doing now is dragging this whole debate down into the
gutter. The secret of the European elections will be..the winners in the
European elections will depend on deferential turnout and what Mr Major and the
Conservative Party have quite deliberately decided to do is appeal to the rabid
Right-wing in this country. I very much hope they do not succeed because if
they do they will do desperate damage to the servility and liberality and
tolerance of British politics and Mr Major is playing..is risking with all
that, he's risking all that essential quality of our society and our politics
in order to save his own skin and the Conservatives' skin and I think those are
very very discreditable acts. And I make this challenge to him: if he wants
seriously to inform the British people - before June the 9th - then let him
appear, I'll appear with him and I'm sure the Labour Party will too, and let us
debate these issue on television in front of the British people. That's the
way to inform people about what we stand for, that's the way to undermine the
lies and scaremongering and that's the way to treat the British people in the
way that I think they ought to be treated before this very very serious vote.
HUMPHRYS: Well we shall certainly pass on the
invitation to Mr Major and whoever is leading the Labour Party - well I suppose
it'll have to be Mrs Beckett at the moment wouldn't it - and you good self to
appear on this programme and debate those issues.
ASHDOWN: Love it, love to do it.
HUMPHRYS: We shall see whether that comes off or
not. But let's return to a central charge of the Conservative Party against
the Liberal Democrats, it is that you would substantially shift power from
London - that power which now resides in London - to Europe and you have just
said that you want to bring security and foreign policy into..take that into
the European Union institions. That is a substantial shift of power isn't it?
ASHOWN: But John, it is no more a shift of power
than was involved in the creation of a single market which Mrs Thatcher hailed
as one of her great achievements. That also did precisely that, it's the
continuation of a process that has been going on for thirty or forty years now.
HUMPHRYS: But it's substantial..
ASHDOWN: But if I may say to you..but let me
remind you that if we were to take further steps we make that, subject to the
wishes of the British people, the consent of the British people expressed
through the ballot box. We cannot and we're the only party who make clear that
we will not take the British people further than the British people are
prepared to go. That is the safeguard. We have our views on Europe and we
think the continuing development of Europe along the lines I've suggested is
the right way to go because it is in the interests of British citizens.
HUMPHRYS: Right, so what you're saying, when your
candidates go on the doorsteps you are saying "vote for us because we want move
much further than we have already gone". If I may just finish the question,
"we have agreed", for instance, "amongst our own councils that we want to shift
foreign and defence security policy across to Europe". You will be making that
perfectly "of course we'll give you a vote, but that is what we want you to
support".
ASHDOWN: You're suggesting that we're going to
shift the whole of foreign affairs and defence policy - of course we're not.
Britain will retain an independant role in foreign affairs, it will retain an
independent security responsibility for places like Falkland and Hong Kong, it
will have independant lines to persue elsewhere in the world but there are
elements of our foreign and security policy which would be better..if we were
to better applied, if we were to place those with other European countries,
pooling our sovereignty. Why? Because, as NATO showed us, it's the only way
to have effective defence and because it gives us a stronger voice in the
world, not wholesale but there is a role where it is to the advantage to
Britain to do that because that is of benefit to our citizens.
HUMPHRYS: And integrating our armed forces?
ASHDOWN: Well, we're already doing that. We're
..
HUMPHRYS: Up to a point...a very limited point.
ASHDOWN: Sorry?
HUMPHRYS: Up to a very limted point.
ASHDOWN: Oh no, it's not limited at all. I've
served in the Anglo-Dutch Marine Forces and that's a process already in place.
Go to Bosnia and you'll find we're already doing it as I've seen with my own
eyes, we're already working together.
HUMPHRYS: But.
ASHDOWN: And working together extremely
effectively, and after all I don't know why you're concentrating on this to
such an extent, because that's exactly what's happened with NATO. How did we
assure this country's defence. I happen to believe that the next decade will
be an extremely turbulent, an extremely dangerous and extremely difficult one,
as we see Europe plunged into instability as a result of the collapse of the
Soviet empire. Now, how does Europe, how does Britain assure its defence in
that kind of period. It can't do it by itself, it works with others. NATO was
the construct we've used until now and it will continue to be so in the future,
but I want to see a European pillar built on top of that or alongside it, and
you will see the proper co-ordination of our defence where it is of interest to
the nation with our European partners because that's where our interests lie.
HUMPHRYS: But we would end up with effectively a
European army, navy and air force..
ASHDOWN: No, rubbish.
HUMPHRYS: Which... well, what does integrating our
armed forces mean in that case?
ASHDOWN: What happened when you integrated our
armed forces in NATO. Did you end up with a NATO army and no British army.
The answer's certainly not.
HUMPHRYS: So it doesn't mean anything then?
ASHDOWN: Certainly not.
HUMPHRYS: It doesn't mean anything more than we've
already got?
ASHDOWN: It means building a European pillar
which is in all senses similar to that which has been the cornerstone of our
defence for the last forty years through NATO.
HUMPHRYS: Well then, so it hasn't changed. So
what do you mean when you ..
ASHDOWN: Indeed, that the principle doesn't
change at all. We're living in a different circumstance than we were thirty,
forty years ago. The Atlantic relationship which I very much want to preserve
is nevertheless diluting. The Americans are looking elsewhere. The collapse
of the Soviet Union has altered the terms of the security debate in the world,
and Europe is now coming together, so we're building a sensible European pillar
to assure our defence for the future. There are steps we can take that will
provide us with not only better defence but better cost effectiveness because
we'll co-ordinate weapons productions. That means you can reduce the amount of
defecne spending in order to achieve the same amount of defence. That's got to
be to the benefit of Britain. We propose no more than taking the sensible
steps that are necessary where they are of benefit to Britain and British
citizens.
HUMPHRYS: So when you talk about a substantial
shift of power you don't mean that at all.
ASHDOWN: Well, you will mean a substantial
further step. I mean ...
HUMPHRYS You can't run it both ways can you?
ASHDOWN: Was the single market a substantial
shift of power?
HUMPHRYS: Yes, of course it was, it changed a
great many things. But you're telling me that what you're now proposing in the
foreign policy and defence fields wouldn't change anything, even though it is a
substantial shift of power.
ASHDOWN: But you are making a terrible meal of
this, if I may suggest that you're..
HUMPHRYS: I'm trying to understand what you mean.
ASHDOWN: Maybe I'm not explaining myself
effectively. We're taliing about building a European pillr within NATO. We're
talking about moving forward in this sensible co-ordination of Europe's
defence. It doesn't mean to say we ditch NATO. Of course we don't, I
want to preserve that, but it's important the Europe has a European pillar. If
you want an example of what happens if you don't take a look at our failures in
Bosnia.
We want to be able to operate
effectively. It is my judgement that Europe will not be secure, nor will any
of the nations in Europe be secure unless Europe is prepared to project its
power around its borders to those instable states which are now threatening the
peace of Europe, and we've seen just how that can happen through Bosnia, it is
to my mind only sensible. We should be able to construct a sensible partnership
with our partners in order to pursue our foreign policy aims where that is the
best way to do it. It's not to say that Britian won't continue to have
independent areas to move by ourselves and to co-operate with our partners
where that can assure us of better defence at lower cost. I would have thought
that was pretty common sense.
HUMPHRYS: Alright, let's move on to the economics.
ASHDOWN; Substantial yes, startling or dangerous
no.
HUMPHRYS: Alright, we'll leave people to judge for
- to tell the difference between those. Let's move on to the economic area.
You would remove Britain's opt out. You, as far as the European Single
Currency is concerned, you're for it?
ASHDOWN: Well, I've no reason to believe that,
in any circumstances that I can think of, if a Single Currency was to be
created, either in whole or in part in the European nations, you could describe
any circumstances to me in which it would be in Britain's interests to be
outside that. The opt-out merely says to our partners that we're not serious
about this. It, actually, provides for a greater degree of speculation with
the British Pound. Certainly, in the run up to any convergence and any
monetary union. So my position - our position - absolutely clear. It is that
if a Single Currency comes about, my judgment is that it will happen later,
rather than earlier, it'll probably happen partially, with the Deutschmark
currency area and the French moving together.
If those circumstances..I cannot
perceive and have not yet have anybody describe to me circumstances in which it
would be in Britain's interests to be outside that, lose all the investment,
lose all the jobs, lose all the advantages of a Single Currency.
HUMPHRYS: Well, let me tell you about what people
see as the problem and that is that we would lose to a great extent our
economic independence, as they fear we would lose our foreign policy and
Defence independence..
ASHDOWN: Oh, John.
HUMPHRYS: ...the way you decide. Let me put a
final point to you, if I may. It's because of those sorts of points that they
say what Paddy Ashdown wants is a United States of Europe.
ASHDOWN: Well, that is rubbish. I mean, that's
the kind of thing the Conservatives say in this campaign of lies and
scaremongering, chiefly because they can't say anything positive without
splitting their Party. And, you see that very clearly. It is in Britain's
interest to work more closely with our European neighbours. Europe is
developing. I believe Britain should be part of that, should be shaping it but
that is subject to two clear safeguards. The first is that should only happen
where it's in the interests of our country and our citizens individually. And,
the second is, that it is subject - any step further that we take - is subject
to the consent of the British people, expressed through the ballot box.
That is clear. We are not...we are
leading in this. We are ahead, perhaps, of other people in this but at the end
of the day that's the job of a politician. If you want politicians who simply
follow the raw emotion which can be generated in Britain, well, you've got one
in the Conservative Party.
HUMPHRYS: Paddy.
ASHDOWN: If you want politicians who will do the
same by the polls, that's the Labour Party. But we're ahead of the country.
But, we are prepared to consult with them and abide with their decision.
HUMPHRYS: Paddy Ashdown, thank you very much for
joining us.
...oooOooo...
|