On Sunday 25 April Andrew Marr interviewed Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats. Please note 'The Andrew Marr Show' must be credited if any part of this transcript is used.  Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats on the Andrew Marr Show |
ANDREW MARR: Nick Clegg is different, of course. Right in the middle of this crucial and finely balanced election campaign, he announced he was taking the day off to spend with his family. Now he's under fire over his own background, his policies on immigration, crime, Europe, defence, but he insists the Liberal Democrats offer people the practical hope that so many people are looking for. Nick Clegg joins me now. Welcome. NICK CLEGG: It's good to be here. ANDREW MARR: In your wildest dreams at the beginning of this campaign, did you ever expect it to be like this? NICK CLEGG: Oh I think it's taken everyone by surprise. ANDREW MARR: Including you? NICK CLEGG: Of course, of course. But the one thing which I've always felt for a long time has been there is a sort of almost suppressed you know desire amongst many, many people in Britain for more choice in politics. You know in so many other walks of our lives, we have a lot of choice - from the mobile phones we use, the holidays we go on, the food we buy - and only uniquely in politics are people being told you can only choose between two old products, if you like. So I always knew at one point … You know all the evidence has been there for ages. ANDREW MARR: You must have woken up the day after that first debate and thought stat me, or whatever we can say on a Sunday morning, I didn't expect this? NICK CLEGG: Well no. But, as I say, I think there has been this disaffection with the way things have been going on in politics for a long time. The last two general elections, remember, more people didn't vote than voted for the winning party if you needed any sign that alarm bells were ringing about the state of our democracy before this. ANDREW MARR: Okay. NICK CLEGG: I think what's happened is that this has now become crystallised in a sense because of the innovation of the leaders' debates and it's given people that hope, that enthusiasm that this time things might be different. ANDREW MARR: Let's turn to some of the policies themselves. NICK CLEGG: Sure. ANDREW MARR: Immigration. NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: You moved from using the word 'amnesty' to 'earned citizenship', and I slightly wonder why. But, nonetheless, whichever it is, how many people are we talking about? NICK CLEGG: We can't tell bluntly because this is all about a problem which has been caused by a succession of Labour and Conservative governments presiding over chaos in the immigration system and allowing large people to come here illegally. Now can I just because this is very important? We can have two choices in this: we can deny the problem exists and come up with the most you know bizarre solutions like I think Gordon Brown says he's going to deport people when he doesn't even know where they live; or we can try and do something about it. If we deny it … ANDREW MARR: (over) Alright, you have made this point. NICK CLEGG: Yeah, but if we deny it … See this is the thing that I think needs explaining. If we deny the existence of this problem, this pool of people who are living here in the shadows of our economy, the only people who benefit are criminal gangs and criminal employers. ANDREW MARR: Let's not deny that then … NICK CLEGG: And one other … ANDREW MARR: No, let's not deny the problem … NICK CLEGG: Yeah. ANDREW MARR: … and let's look at the sort of numbers that people have been coming up with, seem quite plausible to a lot of those working with migrants and looking at the issue. About 1.1 million people is a figure used on the front of the Sunday Times this morning. They'd all be allowed to bring with them or bring in at least one other member of the family. So you're talking about an increase in the population, in the official population of the country, of something like 2 million people. NICK CLEGG: (over) No, I think that … ANDREW MARR: (over) Is that really acceptable? NICK CLEGG: … I think that is an absurd exaggeration. I'll tell you why - because we're setting the bar quite high. ANDREW MARR: (over) But if you don't know the number of people, you can't know it's not a million. NICK CLEGG: Well, Andrew, again I don't think people have been perhaps kept informed by a succession of Conservative and Labour governments. They've been running a secret amnesty for years. It's called The Fourteen Year Rule. Under the Fourteen Year Rule, which has been introduced by both Conservative and Labour governments, if you can show you've been here for fourteen years, you pretty well get automatic right to reside in this country. The difference is Labour and the Conservatives, they shout and scream about this - oh no, we can't touch this. Secretly they actually administer a unqualified amnesty. What I'm saying is bring this out into the open, set the bar high. You've got to show that you've lived here for ten years, you haven't broken the law since you've arrived, that you speak English, you want to pay taxes, that you're prepared to do community service when you come out of the shadows of the economy. And that at the end of that process all we're giving is a two year work permit so that you can work here legally before your final status is determined. ANDREW MARR: (over) And all I'm saying to you … NICK CLEGG: I think that is better … ANDREW MARR: I understand … NICK CLEGG: … than having an ad hoc amnesty under both Conservative and Labour governments. ANDREW MARR: I understand the argument you're making. All I'm saying to you is if you don't know the number of people involved, it could well be a million people or more than a million people, and thus more than 2 million people in total. NICK CLEGG: Well the research that has been done is that those qualifications, those criteria sorry of how long you've been here, that you can show that you've got a clean record if you like since you've been here, that you speak English, you want to pay taxes and so on would dramatically reduce the number of people who would venture in the first place to try and qualify for that. But I mean the question I have of other people who object to this idea is what are you going to do about it? ANDREW MARR: Alright. NICK CLEGG: They're here. It's a problem. ANDREW MARR: We can ask them. But a country you know well - Spain - also Italy, when they produced an amnesty, there was a big increase in illegal immigration because people thought oh well, if they've done it once … NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: … they'll do it again. NICK CLEGG: No, that's why clearly the other side of the coin, which is this is … My approach to this, our approach to this is a one-off solution to a big one-off problem created by the chaos in the immigration system under a succession of Labour and Conservative governments. Clearly the other side of the coin is that you tighten the borders, and I am very clear that I want to see the reintroduction of … ANDREW MARR: (over) And you say you'd never do this again, this will never happen again? NICK CLEGG: Oh no, it's a one-off thing. It's absolutely one-off. It's one-off, and at the same time you introduce the exit controls so you know who's going out of this country as well as coming in - again abolished by Labour and Conservative governments. ANDREW MARR: Sure. NICK CLEGG: You introduce a border police force. So you tighten the borders - we have every right to do that - but then you clean up this problem, which has been created as a sort of legacy problem over several years. ANDREW MARR: Still on immigration. NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: Your regional quota, which David Cameron has mocked during the two leaders' debates so far, a lot of people still don't understand. I still don't understand quite how it would work. Let's suppose that somebody is given right to come here and work in the West Country. NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: Works for a firm for a couple of years and then actually wants to move. Or loses his job or her job. Wants to move and spend most of the time with the family in Birmingham or London or whatever. I can't see any way in which a central government could stop that happening. NICK CLEGG: No. What you do is you make the employers liable, so that an employer who employs someone who's come into this country on a work permit will look at the work permit. By the way … ANDREW MARR: Revenue and Customs can't go round the country chasing people. NICK CLEGG: No, what Revenue and Customs can do and should do and aren't doing enough of, precisely because of the chaos in the immigration system, is going after unscrupulous employers who are employing people illegally. ANDREW MARR: Yeah, but that's the past. I'm talking about your system in the future. NICK CLEGG: (over) Well no, no. No, no, this is exactly what we would do in the future. So you'd have much more stringent controls on employers. It's what they do in Canada, it's what they do in Australia. It works. And the way … ANDREW MARR: (over) The employer says, "I'm sorry, they've just pushed off. They've vanished. I don't know where they've got to." You can't then penalise the employer for that. NICK CLEGG: No, no. Sorry, an employer would not be able to employ somebody unless they could see in the work permit that they're entitled to work in that area. It's incredibly simple. ANDREW MARR: What I'm asking you is what happens then … NICK CLEGG: Oh I see. ANDREW MARR: … when the employee then vanishes off to another part of the country where you didn't want them to be working? NICK CLEGG: Well … ANDREW MARR: You can't stop them doing that. NICK CLEGG: You can't physically stop them moving. ANDREW MARR: No. NICK CLEGG: What you can do is make sure that it becomes so uncomfortable for employers to employ people on work permits which they're not entitled to employ people on that that becomes a real problem for employers. ANDREW MARR: I just don't see … If the sanction is only against the employer and the employer can't chase people up around the country … NICK CLEGG: (over) No, but Andrew … ANDREW MARR: … I don't see how the system works. NICK CLEGG: With respect, you're missing the point. The employer's job is not to chase up people once they've left the job. The employer's job … ANDREW MARR: Then they'll just move. NICK CLEGG: Well they might move, but where do they move to in a system where employers will be much more stringently discouraged from employing people who don't have the right work permits in the first place. It's the way it works in Australia, it's the way it works in Canada. You put much greater onus on employers only to employ people who come here under what's called the Second Tier Immigration Status in the points based system recently introduced by the government. As I say, that points base … ANDREW MARR: (over) And if they bring their families in, how close to the place of work do the family have to live? NICK CLEGG: We're not, we're not suggesting that where the family lives should be determined by the work permit of the person who's taking up the job, but of course the natural pattern of behaviour is that people tend to live and work in you now geographically similar locations. But the point is this. You've got a points system already, right, which requires people who are coming into this country under the so-called second tier to show they have a sponsor for their arrival into this country, they've got a job to do. And all we're suggesting … ANDREW MARR: (over) All I'm saying is you can't stop people moving around the country once they're here. NICK CLEGG: Of course you can't … ANDREW MARR: No, exactly. NICK CLEGG: That's not a claim that … That would be an absurd claim. What you can do … ANDREW MARR: (over) But that … NICK CLEGG: … is stop employers … You can stop employers employing people who are not entitled to work in that area. It's the way they do it in other countries. I think we should try it here. ANDREW MARR: And you want to get migration, immigration into this country generally below 160,000? NICK CLEGG: No, I mean I think … ANDREW MARR: Do you think the current rate is too high? NICK CLEGG: I think this nonsense of numbers which the Conservative Party's indulging in is a nonsense. For starters, of course, we're part of the European Union where we can't suddenly pull up the drawbridge, and that's where most of the immigration in recent years has come from. What you need to do is restore confidence in an immigration system which works and which is fair. And the three main pillars of that are better controls of our borders, cleaning up this problem of illegal immigration caused by Labour and Conservative incompetence, and making sure that people only come here and work in areas that can sustain their arrival. ANDREW MARR: Let me ask about Trident … NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: … the replacement of Trident. I am confused. NICK CLEGG: This is feeling like a rehearsal of the leaders' debates. ANDREW MARR: Well take it that way if you wish, by all means. But looking through the statements made by yourself and by other Liberal Democrat spokesmen, I am confused as to whether you expect Britain to have a nuclear deterrent in the future or not. NICK CLEGG: We think there is. We have a nuclear deterrent and we're not suggesting we scrap it. That's the first thing. ANDREW MARR: There will be a nuclear deterrent of some kind? NICK CLEGG: There's going to be a nuclear deterrent for a long time. The Trident sub… ANDREW MARR: (over) If you're a CND supporter, don't vote Lib Dem because you're going to get rid of nuclear weapons? NICK CLEGG: Do not vote for the Liberal Democrats if you think what we're advocating is immediate unilateral disarmament. We're not. We're saying it's something much more specific, which is that we have this Trident cold war nuclear missile system, which will go on for many, many years. You don't need to make a decision - all the experts say this in the military services and elsewhere - that you don't need to make a decision for at least another parliament about whether you renew it or not. And the submarines which run the system will last into 2024, 2025. ANDREW MARR: But you've put this on the debate. You've put this on the agenda of the election campaign. NICK CLEGG: Yes, but shall I tell you why? ANDREW MARR: You can't, therefore, not discuss in some detail … NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: … what your alternative would be. NICK CLEGG: Sure. Okay, well let me explain. The first thing is, which is the point I've been seeking to make - and both David Cameron and Gordon Brown refuse to accept this - is that they say let's hold a defence review after the next General Election. Okay, hallelujah, all the parties seem to be saying let's have a defence review on this big, big issue of what we pay for in our military services, what kind of military services we want, what kind of threats we're going to face. They irrationally are saying we are going to exclude (before having that review) one of the biggest items of expenditure - namely £100 billion up to twenty … over twenty-five years for a place in Trident on …. ANDREW MARR: (over) That £100 billion figure. Just a couple of years ago, the official Ministry of Defence figure for the cost of replacing Trident was £20 billion or thereabouts. NICK CLEGG: Well the Ministry of Defence … ANDREW MARR: You're wildly out on this calculation. NICK CLEGG: Well no, that's not true. If you look at the letter from Field Marshal Lord Bramall earlier this week and a number of other very senior military figures, their estimate is around 80, 85, £87 billion. Another study suggests up to £100. £100 billion rather. £100 billion, when you take into consideration the maintenance costs, the decommissioning costs and of course the cost overruns that seem to characterise … ANDREW MARR: (over) The substitute is going to cost a huge … NICK CLEGG: Well can I … ANDREW MARR: I mean are we talking about cruise missiles, tomahawk missiles? What are we talking about? NICK CLEGG: The kind of alternatives - and Ming Campbell published a report on this for us very recently - could include, for instance, just very simply, accepting that under the Trident system you no longer have a continuous at sea deterrent, so that you just don't have the Trident system deployed at sea continuously. ANDREW MARR: Fewer boats? NICK CLEGG: Fewer boats. And not providing you know continuous sea coverage. You could extend the life … ANDREW MARR: So fewer boats or older boats? NICK CLEGG: Or older boats. Or you could use the astute class submarines and use cruise missiles. Those are all alternatives. ANDREW MARR: But since you're … I mean you're against nuclear power, but you are contemplating nuclear weapons. Where are you going to get the plutonium from? NICK CLEGG: (laughs) Well clearly if you maintain a nuclear weapon system, you can make sure (and particularly with our very close cooperation with the Americans) that you get the right materials. But all I'm saying is why when you're at this great crossroads as a nation as to what we spend money on and what we don't spend money on … ANDREW MARR: Yuh. NICK CLEGG: … when the threats are changing, when I agree with President Obama that the biggest threat that we're going to face is terrorists with dirty bombs, not cold war nuclear threats, why do you write into the script - which is what David Cameron and Gordon Brown want to do … ANDREW MARR: Yes. NICK CLEGG: … the one thing, the one thing that is almost certainly outdated … ANDREW MARR: (over) Alright, okay. NICK CLEGG: … which is a like for like replacement of Trident? ANDREW MARR: Okay. You mentioned Gordon Brown. You're quoted this morning saying "How on earth … You can't have Gordon Brown squatting in No 10 just because of the irrational voting system." That's in the case of a hung parliament. What do you mean by "squatting in No. 10"? NICK CLEGG: Well what I meant was - and if you read the interview, I think it's fully reflected in it - that there are now indications that Labour might come third in terms of the you know number of people voting for the different parties. All I'm saying is it seems to me that it's just preposterous, the idea that if a party comes third in terms of the number of votes, it still has somehow the right to carry on squatting in No. 10 and continue to lay claim to having the Prime Minister of the country. ANDREW MARR: This is very important because in the past you haven't said whether the number of votes or the number of seats was most important to you. Now you've come off that fence. You're saying the number of votes … NICK CLEGG: (over) No, I'm talking about two different things, Andrew. ANDREW MARR: (over) … is the crucial thing. NICK CLEGG: (over) What I … No, that's not right, that's not right. ANDREW MARR: If Labour come third in the popular vote, Gordon Brown can't stay in No. 10. NICK CLEGG: You're confusing two things, Andrew. What I've said in the past, which is that I think a party which has got the most votes and seats - which in other words has got the strongest mandate but without an absolute majority - has got the right to seek to form the government. ANDREW MARR: Sure. NICK CLEGG: What I'm saying here is pointing at a very, very irrational possible outcome of our potty electoral system, which is that a party that has spectacularly lost the election because fewer and fewer people are voting for it than any other party, could nonetheless (according to constitutional tradition and convention) still lay claim to providing the Prime Minister of the country. ANDREW MARR: So let's be crystal clear on this. NICK CLEGG: (over) And by the way. I mean ask Gordon Brown this, but I'm assuming he would also accept that would be a very irrational outcome. ANDREW MARR: Well let's just be crystal clear about it. Let's suppose the outcome is that Labour lose the election in terms of number of votes cast around the country, but because of the electoral system have the largest number of MPs in a hung parliament. You would not support Gordon Brown remaining as Prime Minister under those circumstances and you would not go into any kind of relationship with Gordon Brown which would allow him to stay Prime Minister? NICK CLEGG: Absolutely. I think a party which has come third and so millions of people have decided to abandon them, has lost the election spectacularly, cannot then lay claim to providing the Prime Minister of this country. ANDREW MARR: If the Labour Party came back (and there's endless briefing about this to journalists at the moment) … NICK CLEGG: Sure, of course there is. ANDREW MARR: … and said Gordon Brown is stepping aside. We now have Alan Johnson or we're going to have David Miliband coming in as an unelected Prime Minister. We would like to go into alliance with you - partly to change the electoral system - what would you say? NICK CLEGG: Well I mean here we get into the sort of 'what if' territory I find very difficult to anticipate. I personally think … (Marr tries to interject) Well can I just try and answer your question? I imagine that both David Cameron and Gordon Brown are going to have problems with their own parties if they fail to deliver on all the sort of expectations they've raised. I think both of them are clearly going to be quite insecure leaders in their own parties. David Cameron because he's you know almost complacently assumed he's just going to waft into No. 10, and it doesn't look as if that's going to happen; and Gordon Brown because he will have led his party to the worst election outcome for Labour in very, very many years. So it's not for me to second guess how their parties then react to leaders and leaderships that have not succeeded. ANDREW MARR: (over) That's what I thought you might say … NICK CLEGG: (laughs) Well … ANDREW MARR: … if I may say so is that if the Labour Party lost the election, changed their leader in some sort of slight of hand way and offered to go into a coalition with you, that would be a democratic outrage. NICK CLEGG: Well what I'm … As I said, firstly it's not for me at least I think, or indeed for anybody outside the Labour and Conservative parties to sort of speculate on their woes after the election and what they then choose to do with their leaders. Secondly, I've been very, very clear that the things I want to pursue in any environment after the General Election are not about handpicking other politicians. It's about delivering the commitments on which we are campaigning during this General Election campaign. And if I can just for one moment sort of dwell on those because that's really what I do passionately care about - hard wiring fairness into our tax system; transforming our education by giving real one to one care and smaller class sizes to children; a new approach to the economy. I think people have become very enthusiastic over the last week or so about the idea of a new approach to politics. Now what we need to do is harness that enthusiasm and say let's do something different on the economy as well. We're the only party saying split up the banks, make them lend to viable British businesses, a new approach to the economy where we never again allow our economy to be held hostage by one clique in one sector in banking as it is, and of course our radical programme of constitutional and political reform in Westminster. Those are the things I care about and I've been really up front with people. ANDREW MARR: Sure. NICK CLEGG: If they want any clue about what the Liberal Democrats will do, that is our starting point. It's not a secret, it's not a state secret. ANDREW MARR: Sure. NICK CLEGG: It's not in some file labelled 'top secret'. That is what we will deliver. ANDREW MARR: And of those four things … NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: … you'd be doing very, very well to get either of the parties to agree to all of them. Horse trading of course would happen in a hung parliament. How important is voting reform? Is that negotiable? NICK CLEGG: My own view is that one of the things that this exciting General Election campaign has done is it's made what used to be a rather pointy-headed debate about electoral reform actually something which more and more people are concentrating on because more and more people are realising how utterly irrational it is that Gordon Brown has been in power when only 22% of people voted for the Labour Party at the last General Election. David Cameron thinks that he can somehow inherit power rather than earn it with a sort of similar fraction of support from the British people. And you've got hundreds and hundreds of Labour and Conservative MPs who complacently think that they can have jobs for life when only a minority of their constituents in their constituencies actually vote for them. I think people are realising this just isn't on. It's not fair, it's not democratic, and crucially it's shut out millions and millions of people who've been taken for granted by the old parties. ANDREW MARR: So … NICK CLEGG: (over) I think one of the reasons why young people … ANDREW MARR: Sorry, is that a yes to it's non-negotiable? NICK CLEGG: It's more than a yes. I don't think any party can now, after the sort of … after the huge changes we've seen over the last week or two … And millions of people, young people rushing to register to vote and saying we want to make this our election, we want to assert our right to vote. ANDREW MARR: (over) So voting reform is non-negotiable? NICK CLEGG: I think it is more than that. I think it is unavoidable for any party whatever the outcome. You cannot now duck the fact that we have a political system, an electoral system which is completely out of step with the aspirations and the hopes of millions of British people. ANDREW MARR: So how … NICK CLEGG: And a political system can't survive for very long if it's that out of whack with the rest of the country it's supposed to be representing. ANDREW MARR: How important is it, therefore, for you that David Cameron has refused now to rule out voting reform? Is that a breakthrough moment? NICK CLEGG: To be honest, I just can't follow what David Cameron … I mean one moment he's telling people that if they don't do what they're told and vote for the Conservatives, he's going to get his friends in the City of London to sort of tear the house down in the markets. The next moment he's got Ken Clarke charging around saying there's going to be political Armageddon if there's a hung parliament. And now he's sort of saying well maybe I'll look at you know changes. They've got to make up their mind. I think what the Conservatives have discovered, much to their dismay, is they've been completely … they're out of step. They're out of step with a country that's moved on, that doesn't want these tired old choices and these old battalions of British politics, and they're now trying to scramble around to catch up. ANDREW MARR: It sounds to me that you think the Labour Party is seriously on the slide at the moment in this election campaign. NICK CLEGG: Well I think the Labour Party has a fundamental problem which any government … any party does when they've governed for a long time. They're trying to govern as a party of renewal when they have a record of failure. ANDREW MARR: And you have big philosophical differences with them. You would like ultimately to replace them as the progressive force in British politics? NICK CLEGG: I think if you look at our agenda of tax reform, so that no-one pays any tax on the first £10,000 they earn, hard wiring fairness into the tax system, educational reforms, you get real social mobility. That is a liberal progressive agenda whose time I think has come. ANDREW MARR: So you can't both want to replace them and embrace them? NICK CLEGG: Well I think there are lots of people in the Labour Party who I understand why they voted for Labour back in 1997. I didn't vote for Labour in 1997, but even I got caught up in the excitement back then after 18 years of an increasingly tired, inward looking Conservative government of this freshness of the Labour Party. They offered all this hope. Thirteen years later social mobility's gone down, inequality's gone up. We've had the bankers hold a gun to the rest of the British economy. We've got this implosion in legitimacy … ANDREW MARR: You can't work with these people. NICK CLEGG: No, what I'm saying is … No, well it's not the people. It's the people who supported and the people who had those hopes … ANDREW MARR: Yeah. NICK CLEGG: … of something fairer and better, I think are looking for a new home … ANDREW MARR: But you could. NICK CLEGG: … and they are finding it in the Liberal Democrats. And that is exciting. ANDREW MARR: Could you sit round a cabinet table with David Cameron? NICK CLEGG: I could sit around a cabinet table with anyone who agrees with me that what we need to do is hard wire fairness into the British … into the tax system. ANDREW MARR: Including Gordon Brown? NICK CLEGG: Anyone … Look if miracle of miracles Gordon Brown or David Cameron or indeed anybody else actually decides that they agree with the big changes - both political, social land economic - that we are advocating, fundamental reform, fundamental change that we are advocating in this election campaign, I am not … ANDREW MARR: (over) And you have to go back to your party in those circumstances though, don't you? You've got this triple lock and you take that seriously. You have to go back to your own MPs … NICK CLEGG: (over) I think any leader worth their salt would of course seek to bring their party along with them, and I would do that. ANDREW MARR: Right. Just a couple of questions about you yourself. You've come under the spotlight both for your background and your expenses and so on. NICK CLEGG: Sure. ANDREW MARR: You're just as posh as David Cameron, aren't you? NICK CLEGG: Well I'm very, very lucky and I've never hidden it. I've had a very, very lucky upbringing. ANDREW MARR: You're not really an outsider is I suppose the more important point? NICK CLEGG: I don't think I've ever pretended to be something I'm not. I am sort of who I am. But I think what I represent, I think what my party represents is something different. And you know you can't fault the Liberal Democrats. You can't fault me for arguing consistently for a different approach to the economy. We were the only party to argue for reform of banking years ago when we were being shouted down … ANDREW MARR: Right. NICK CLEGG: … the only party to object to the illegal invasion of Iraq, and the only party arguing for new, clean politics. ANDREW MARR: Nick Clegg, thank you very much indeed for joining us. NICK CLEGG: Thank you. INTERVIEW ENDS
| 
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
Bookmark with:
What are these?