................................................................................
ON THE RECORD
RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 17.3.96
................................................................................
HUMPHRYS: In an hour or so from now, the Leader of
the Liberal Democrats, Paddy Ashdown, will make a speech to his Party's
Conference. He'll talk about the state of Britain but what many of the
faithful would rather like to hear is what he thinks of the state of the Party
- in particular its relationship with the Labour Party. A year ago, Mr Ashdown
dumped the policy of Equidistance. It favoured neither Tory nor Labour and
made it clear that there would be NO support for the Tories from his Party.
Since then, well, as Aminatta Forna reports not a lot. And that's worrying
important people in both the Liberal Democrats AND the Labour Party.
HUMPHRYS: Charles Kennedy, Tony Wright thinks that
you haven't responded warmly enough to Mr Blair's overtures. Have you in fact
gone cool?
CHARLES KENNEDY MP: I don't particularly accept Tony
Wright's prognosis at all. I mean, he seemed to be the one going round in
circles in a London cab, as far as I can see, around Parliament Square. First
of all about Tony, you have to remember I heard him in a radio interview a few
months back, describing us as the scavengers of British politics, which is not
perhaps the most endearing of terms to use about another political Party. And,
secondly, I'm not particularly sure that Tony Blair has issued such massive
public overtures. Paddy Ashdown's job - as indeed Tony Blair or John Major's
job - is to do two things. First of all, to keep his Party united - that's
the basic requirement of Leadership - and, secondly, to position his Party as
well as he can to take advantage electorally and then politically of any
opportunities that arise at the General Election and beyond. And, I think, as
we're seeing in in Nottingham at this conference this weekend, he's done that
in a very astute fashion, which has brought the maximum degree of unity to the
maximum number.
HUMPHRYS: So what you are saying? There is
nothing in it for you?
KENNEDY: No, I'm saying that beyond the next
Election, we should be in a position to, first of all, have as many MPs with
votes behind them as we can in the next House of Commons - that is the
fundamental priority, the main requirement for us. And, then, in that House of
Commons, when we see how the chips have fallen as a result of the outcome of
the Election, if we can make common cause with others, particularly over
Constitutional reform, we should do so; as, indeed, we've been doing rather
successfully in the Labour Party, in the Scottish context, on the whole issue
of a Scottish Parliament.
HUMPHRYS: Ah, if you're going to make common
cause, then you have to kind of lay the ground for it. You have to prepare for
it, you don't want to surprise people with the extent of your enthusiasm do
you? So, what you've got to do is prepare ground and what we're seeing for
instance in the Liberal Democrat newspaper there, this sort of constant
carping, hedging and shuffling and all the rest of it that we heard about.
KENNEDY: Well, I don't quite recognise all this,
I have to say. I think that we are rather publicly with the Labour Party been
preparing ground on the Constitutional issues, as I say in the Scottish context
for six years, the past six years.
HUMPHRYS: That is one issue.
KENNEDY: Well but it's a fundamental one because
the great unwritten British Constitution, it strikes me, is like one of these
water mattresses. If you press down on one bit, it has an immediate
consequence somewhere else in the whole. And, I think, that if you in the
first year of a change of Government, whatever shape or form that may take
after the next Election, in the first year you're tackling Scottish devolution
and Scottish Parliament, how that affects the voting rights of Members of the
House of Commons, and so on and so forth, you immediately open up the whole
Constitutional agenda.
I think it's very important, and I've
said this publicly at Lib/Dem Conferences in the past, that we should be
publicly up front, discussing with others how we give effect to the
Constitutional change agenda that we share. I think that we've done more
thinking about this over a longer term than the Labour Party. I think the
extent to which the Labour Party are catching up and coming on board is welcome
and we should be unambiguous about that. We don't need deals behind closed
doors. I think we just have to be sensible and mature with people.
HUMPHRYS: Well, no, but-But being sensible and
mature is one thing, the sort of opportunistic criticism - that's a phrase I've
taken from John Dickie, from that film - is another thing.
KENNEDY: Well, I think that John's position where
he talks about - I think his basic thesis - was that we position ourselves,
whereas Labour think about policy. I don't really agree with that actually. I
would think that the criticism is quite the other way around, if anything, as
you see indeed at this Conference this weekend. We've got very detailed
hard-headed policies. I've just come from the IGC debate on our paper that I
chaired over our approach to that - far more detailed than anything the Labour
Party has produced. Yesterday, we had a very detailed and controversial
debate about the funding of Higher Education - again much more up front than
anything the Labour Party has produced. I would say Labour, at the moment, is
the Party of mood music, without much detail, far less a price tag attached.
We're much more the Party of detailed policy making.
HUMPHRYS: Oh, but what you're saying, what you're
trying to do is reassure the Labour Party, if you like, that if they want to
tango, you're quite happy to tango with them. I mean, you're saying to the
purists in your own Party, those who want the long march towards one goal, and
that is a Liberal Democrat Government: Don't know, don't do that because there
is something to be done here with the Labour Party.
KENNEDY: Well, I think that the something to be
done has to take this form:that we remain first and foremost an independent
political Party. We're not an adjunct, we're not a sub-set of anybody else and
that would be death for us if we ever get into that position. Secondly, as an
independent political Party, we can reach agreements, we can help - perhaps it
might be a minority, perhaps it may be a majority Labour Government, I don't
know the outcome of the Election, neither does anybody else - but we can be of
assistance where the Constitutional reform agenda is concerned.
HUMPHRYS: Right, so that in the long run, in the
long run - or maybe the short run who knows - you are going to be in a position
of influence. That's what you're after, isn't it? Quite clearly, sensibly.
KENNEDY: Yes and we hope - I would hope - that
what follows from that influence at a Parliamentary level is legislation and
that legislation then begins to give effect to a change in the whole structure
of the political system and that of course is not just in the interests of the
country, although we argue that. I shall be quite honest with you. That is
also in our interests and that's why we should keep our eye on that strategic
objective.
HUMPHRYS: But, beyond that constitutional issue
that you raised a couple of times this morning, it's not quite clear in which
direction you would like to influence a Labour Government, whether you want
them to be more moderate or whether you want them to be more radical, it's not
clear.
KENNEDY: I think the first thing I'd like the
Labour Party to be is specific.
HUMPHRYS: But, in which direction?
KENNEDY: Well, specific in terms of meeting one
of the obvious gaps in terms of social provision, terms of Constitutional
change which we're not going to get under this Government in terms of our whole
approach to Europe, through the IGC and beyond it. Now, the Labour Party
lacks a great deal of specificity over these matters at the moment. It's not
offering, I don't think, any of the clear cut policies that we've put forward
on Education for example, on our approach to Tax and Welfare, on our approach
to Europe. I think the first thing you've got to ask of the Labour Party is
where's the beef and I think that we've got to wait for that obviously. But as
and when we do see it then I think I can give you a more clear cut answer to
your perfectly legitimate question.
KENNEDY: But to the extent that you've seen it
already and accepting that they are being cautious, they're also being nothing
like as radical as you, are they?
HUMPHRYS: No and I don't-I'm not terribly
surprised about that. I mean if you take the Constitutional agenda, the
Liberal Democrats, before that the Alliance, before that the Liberals
themselves, have spent years, decades toiling and toying perhaps with some of
these Constitutional issues where others have come to it much more recently and
I think that it's understandable therefore that you can't accept-expect a Party
like the Labour Party overnight to suddenly embrace everything to quite the
same radical extent as we have. I think what's been very interesting - can I
for a moment give you an example of this? If you take the Scottish
Constitutional Convention as a blueprint.
HUMPHRYS: So-
KENNEDY: When we started out six years ago, if
somebody had said: the Labour Party in Scotland, given its predominant
Parliamentary position and the extent to which the first past the post
Electorial system serves its interests overwhelmingly, that they would actually
as a result of pressure only from the Scottish Liberal Democrats, who are - in
percentage terms, although not in seat terms - the smallest of the four
political groupings in Scotland, that Scottish Labour would turn round and
accept PR, the answer would have been send for the men in white coats. Now
after a process of several years, detailed amicable discussion, they came to
see the logic of that. I think that that will be repeated in quite a number of
other issues as time progresses.
HUMPHRYS: But, across a broader range of issues
they're likely to end up being much more moderate, much less radical than
yourselves.
KENNEDY: Well that may be the case and if that is
the case so be it. I don't object to us being cast in the role of the most
radical force in British politics. It doesn't cause me any loss of sleep
whatsoever, I think it's a rather good campaigning basis.
HUMPHRYS: So when you talk to Tories, as you do in
marginal Constituencies, and you say you actually ought to give the Liberal
Democrats support be cause we're a kind of insurance policy against a radical
red (phon) in (phon) tooth and claw Labour Government, it's not true is it?
You can't give them that assurance at all.
KENNEDY: Well I'm not sure that that is an
assurance that we've been seeking to give people anyway. First and foremost we
want people to vote for us on our agenda and I don't think you see - although I
disagree with the thesis there suggested in the film - is that I don't think
you are necessarily in our position going to lose votes by being radical or
being rather bold.
HUMPHRYS: Oh but come on, you know perfectly well
that when your people in the Constitutencies in Conservative marginals try to
persuade the Tories to vote for them, they say: you've got nothing to fear
from us, we're a bit like the Tories in truth, we're not like the Labour lot at
all so vote for us. You don't want to go all the way and vote Labour, come
half way and vote Lib Dems. That's what they say isn't it?
KENNEDY: Well I represent a Constituency which is
a fairly traditional part of the country, settled part of the country, rural in
the Scottish Highlands, and I have and have always had since 1983 the
Conservatives in second place against me. And, I can assure you that's not the
sort of watchy (phon) way I've gone about my politics at that level there. But
what I would say in response to the earlier point, is this: I think there is
more of a downside electorally and in terms of credibility for us, to be seen
to trim and be a bit disingenuous and not to be upfront with people than there
is for us to be quite certain and quite bold. I think if the trumpet sounds an
uncertain tune that is more damaging for us then in fact if we are crystal
clear with people about what it is we want to do.
HUMPHRYS: Which is to tell the Tories, for
instance, we are a truly radical- look at us on Tax, on Student Loans, on
Regional Government on Federal Europe, on the Environment. We are the radical
Party of Britain. Are you really going to pull in that Conservative support
with that message?
KENNEDY: Well I think there's an awful lot of
Conservatives out there who voted for Mrs Thatcher through the Eighties, voted
for John Major last time, who are dismayed by what's happened to their Party
and dismayed by the whole course of events under this Government. Now, what we
have got to say to those people is: Look, the future of this country, the
future of your children rests on a good Education system, rests on our future
in Europe. Neither of these can be safeguarded under the Conservatives. We've
got the most up front and constructive policies on those matters.
HUMPHRYS: But, those doubting Tories aren't going
to want to hear this message are they?
KENNEDY: Why?
HUMPHRYS: They're certainly not going to want to
hear let's talk of a sort of Federal Europe. You may dispute the word
'Federal' but we both know what we're talking about. We know what we're
disputing about.
KENNEDY: Let me be clear now I don't dispute the
word 'Federal'.
HUMPHRYS: Alright.
KENNEDY: I dispute the meaning ascribed to it in
this country. Federal means decentralising. It does not mean some kind
of insensible Brussels superstate that is not on the agenda - anyone's
agenda.
HUMPHRYS: Okay. But, greater European- Much
greater European integration. Then, let's use that as the description
instead. And, you'd go along with-
KENNEDY: Yes and much greater integration, John,
with ourselves being the only Party - we've just confirmed it in a vote, half
an hour ago at this Conference - the only Party offering people a categoric
referendum to endorse that greater European Union.
HUMPHRYS: Ah, but look these doubting Tories are
going to be much better off voting Labour, aren't they because Labour is going
to be the more moderate Party - the one that has certainty?
KENNEDY: Well, I think-I think, your beguiling
analysis overlooks two things. First of all, if you look at those parts of the
country where we are the principle challengers to the Conservatives, we are now
dug in with a degree of local and regional credibility, which the Labour Party
cannot hope to match. If you go to the West Country as the obvious example of
this, frankly, politics there is either Conservative or the known Conservative
choice - which is Liberal Democrat. That's the first point and the second
point is this: that if we are in any way, I think, to be seen to be hedging our
bets with people and somehow suggesting you can vote for us and not really get
change, I think, we miss the mood of the country.
There is, actually, an overwhelming
sense amongst Conservatives as much as amongst non Conservative voters
hitherto, in this country, that it is time for a change at the next Election.
Now, it would be madness for the Liberal Democrats to allow ourselves to be
backed into a corner. Worse still, to paint ourselves into that corner
ourselves when we were not seen as part of the process of change. We must be
and that's very important.
HUMPHRYS: Isn't the reality that if you do find
yourselves in that sort of situation - a situation where you can exercise - in
theory - a bit of influence, at the end of it all, you're going to have to
dance to the Labour tune because you've already said, you've made it perfectly
clear, you've ended equidistance, there's no way you could support the Tories.
KENNEDY: I don't agree about dancing to the
Labour tune and indeed if, again I come back to the one example. I'm sorry to
make this point three times, as it were but it is the one concrete example in
British politics of this at a Parliamentary or a national political level as
opposed to Local Government. We didn't dance to the Labour tune, in our
detailed Constitutional discussions over governments, as it affects one part of
the UK and I don't think you'll find us dancing to their tune anymore in other
respects. I think, what we can do - to echo the vocabulary Paddy Ashdown's
been using - is to have healthy competition between the two Parties and anybody
who went to Littleborough and Saddleworth By-Election and saw the face to face
confrontation between Lib Dem and Labour couldn't be under any illusions about
our capacity to deliver that, whilst at the same time, co-operating where it is
in our mutual interests and in the country's interests.
HUMPHRYS: Charles Kennedy, thank you very much.
KENNEDY: My pleasure, thank you.
...oooOOOooo...
|