PLEASE NOTE "THE ANDREW MARR SHOW" MUST BE CREDITED IF ANY PART OF THIS TRANSCRIPT IS USED On 4th December 2011 Andrew Marr interviewed Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. ANDREW MARR: Now then, I'm joined by the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg. Good morning. NICK CLEGG: Good morning. ANDREW MARR: Looking through the papers - not just today but the last few days, actually ever since the Autumn statement - the overall consensual position is that the economy is just going to go through a grim sort of frozen trudge for years ahead in a way that changes the whole mood of politics in this country. NICK CLEGG: No, I think it has been a very tough week because we've all had to recognise and reconcile ourselves to the fact that, as the Office for Budget Responsibility said, that the kind of knock that we took as a country in 2008 when the banking system blew up was much more serious than we even thought then, that it's going to take longer to recover from that; and that a number of other things have happened which have delivered further blows to the British economy - notably of course the increase in energy prices, commodity prices and inflation going up over the last year or so. And I think that has meant that people have suddenly thought, gosh, the time of recovery is going to be further away than we thought. That of course does create a great deal of anxiety, which is why I think it's so important as a country we don't allow ourselves to become kind of divided, don't sort of think that it's private sector versus public sector, north versus south, employer versus employee. That we as a government need to redouble our efforts to show, even more so than before, that what we're doing is being done as fairly as possible because otherwise you can't expect everyone to support these difficult decisions. ANDREW MARR: (over) Well much more to talk about, but you mention "as fairly as possible". There's been a great deal of criticism of the Autumn Statement in its effect on poorer families and particularly families with children. The government's own figures suggest that 100,000 more children will be moved into poverty as a result of the measures being taken and that the people worst affected in terms of what they lose are - you know - hardworking families below and up to the average wage. NICK CLEGG: Well I don't want to enter into the sort of undergrowth of how these statistics are arrived at, but some of them really are … you know the way they're calculated is a bit ropey. So, for instance, the Cha… ANDREW MARR: (over) Well I'm sorry … NICK CLEGG: (over) Can I … ANDREW MARR: (over) … both of those I gave you are government figures. NICK CLEGG: Well no, actually the child poverty figure is one which is a relative one. So it means, for instance, that if you help pensioners - as we are, we're delivering the biggest single increase in the state pension which has been delivered for many, many years - that actually statistically means you're somehow not helping children, which is a ludicrous thing to say and it doesn't take into account many of the other things that we are doing that make a big difference. So, for instance, we've announced this week something very close to my heart. That we're going to massively expand - double - up to 260,000 families the number of young toddlers at the age of two who will get fifteen hours of free childcare for the first time ever. Why? And that doesn't show up in the statistics. Why is that important? Because we know that if you give a toddler at the age of two, or indeed three, four, five - we're also delivering extra pre-school support - you really give them the best possible start in life. ANDREW MARR: (over) But you're now … Sorry, you're now in a situation where if you're going to give to some group, you have to take from another because of the way the numbers … So you give to toddlers, but you've taken away what many people were relying on, which was an uprating of child benefit? NICK CLEGG: No, we're actually increasing child tax credit by a full 5.2 per cent. That's an average £130 increase for British families. And let's remember on that one, in particular, that helps people, families who are in work or out of work. And our calculations are … ANDREW MARR: (over) Sorry, the above inflation promise that people thought had been made has been taken away again, hasn't it? NICK CLEGG: No, what we've done, to be very precise, is we've said two components of the working tax credit, we're freezing them for a year. We froze other parts of the working tax credit for three years. That's what we announced last year. We're saying … So in cash terms no-one loses out. But what we're doing, as I've said, on the other … ANDREW MARR: (over) …Except there's inflation, so they do. NICK CLEGG: Well … But in cash terms, they get the same amount. So one of the components is worth about £2,000, just shy of that, and it'll remain exactly that value next year. But can I just … It's very important, this. I make no apology at all for us having had to make … making yes difficult choices, but in those difficult choices prioritising the poorest. And that's why we've said that if you've lost your job through no fault of your own … And the spectre, the fear, the anxiety of unemployment is clearly greater now than it's been for a very long period of time. Many people know of other people - cousins, relatives, neighbours, colleagues - who've lost their jobs, and worry about their own job security. And I think it's right for us as a government to say, when we have to take difficult decisions, if you've lost your job through no fault of your own, you will have benefits and support fully uprated by inflation, over 5 per cent, in order to get you back into work … ANDREW MARR: (over) And is … NICK CLEGG: (over) … whilst also protecting children through the full uprating of the child tax credit. Those are choices. ANDREW MARR: And is it true that that choice, that uprating came about because the Liberal Democrats insisted on it in arguments with the Conservatives? NICK CLEGG: Look, I mean I read constant sort of post-mortems about who said what in these discussions. In government, particularly in coalition government, of course you have constant discussions and debates and so on, but you take … ANDREW MARR: (over) But your people were briefing this as one of your successes, weren't they? NICK CLEGG: But we take the decision collectively. I have been very open all along that I think when you are faced with invidious choices - and they are invidious choices, there are no easy choices left bluntly to this government, as there are not to many other governments in the developed world - you have to be guided by a basic sense of what is right for the poorest and the most vulnerable. And that is what we've done by uprating the benefits for the poorest, for the most vulnerable. ANDREW MARR: And in terms of the future, is Danny Alexander right when he says that you're going to have to go into the next election with another 30 billion of spending cuts? You have to take the decisions about where they're going to go, but you have to go into that election promising that? NICK CLEGG: Well clearly now all - this is the interesting thing politically - before this week, there was only one party, the Labour Party, that was advocating more savings after the next General Election. Now all three parties are moving towards a situation where we will have to explain to the British people where and how we make additional savings after the next General Election. That much is obvious. We've been very upfront with people as a party and as a government, and I have as a Liberal Democrat in this coalition government, about what we think the country can afford. Now the details about how you do that - how you do it fairly, the mix between tax and spend - all of that is still of course open to debate. ANDREW MARR: So you're … I mean people are talking about a lost decade and comparing us with Japan, as you know. But if your party is going to go into the next election talking about £30 billion of cuts - as are the Conservatives - you are in effect going to be in lockstep. You now have to see this together through as a coalition government … NICK CLEGG: (over) Look listen … ANDREW MARR: (over) … don't you? NICK CLEGG: … Tony Blair and Gordon Brown committed to John Major's spending envelopes in 1997. No-one said that Tony Blair and John Major were identical. This happens quite often that parties actually, despite all the sound and fury, agree on the overall need to make sure that we live within our means as a country. Where the debate will be - this is what I totally accept - and where the Liberal Democrats will be entirely independent and we will be very keen to push our - I think - unique mix of economic credibility and fairness and that sort of blend that I think we represent in British politics is how you arrive at those overall figures. And that's where there'll be a lot of legitimate debate … ANDREW MARR: (over) A lot of people … NICK CLEGG: … up to and through the General Election. ANDREW MARR: But the problem of course is that people can't see any difference between yourself and the Conservatives. I've just asked you about a difference and you said no, no, no, we don't go into that. NICK CLEGG: (over) No, no. Well, Andrew, I've already in these last few minutes pointed out to you that it was something I was very keen that we should do to support the most vulnerable in this Autumn Statement, and we've done that. That I was very keen that we deliver on the new entitlement, the increased new entitlement to two year old toddlers. That's something that everybody knows is something I've been promoting for over a year. That for instance in the … ANDREW MARR: (over) And sorry … NICK CLEGG: Can I just … On the tax system, the centrepiece tax policy of this government to lift more and more people on low incomes out of paying any income tax altogether has come straight from the front page of the Liberal Democrat manifesto of last year into government. So clearly … ANDREW MARR: (over) And at the time of the next election, you would be able to go into an election with a distinctively different plan for the economy than the Conservatives … NICK CLEGG: (over) Well Andrew, let me, let me give you … ANDREW MARR: (over) … after five years of working closely together? NICK CLEGG: … let me give you two examples. (laughs) I'm not going to now start writing … ANDREW MARR: (over) No, no … no, no. NICK CLEGG: … a manifesto four years in advance; still less budgets several years in advance. But it is clear, for instance, that if we're going to try and make the sums add up in the future, the Liberal Democrats as a party would always be less inclined to spend a whole lot of money on replacing the Trident system like for like. We've been very open about that. I personally believe - and have done for a long time and I've been very open about that - that we should be asking millionaire pensioners to perhaps make a little sacrifice on their free TV licence or their free bus passes. These are all things where we don't agree as a government right now, but where those arguments will play out in the years ahead. ANDREW MARR: (over) Okay, you mention … NICK CLEGG: (over) And that's the natural battleground of British politics - is to be upfront with the British people that we need to make savings, to agree in overall terms what those savings need to be, but then to have the really key debate about who are the winners and who are the losers. ANDREW MARR: Well winners and losers then. At a time when people on average earnings are having a really, really tough time … NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: … is it fair that, for instance, last year FT 100 executives were getting I think 49 per cent average increase in what they were taking home? Executive pay remains something which appears to a lot of people out of control. NICK CLEGG: I agree with you. I think the revelation that top executives of some of our top companies were receiving up to 50 per cent pay increases even though their companies weren't doing any better was a real slap in the face for millions of people in this country who are struggling to make ends meet. I think we now need to call time on excessive and irresponsible behaviour … ANDREW MARR: (over) Ah! NICK CLEGG: … in the public sector. Just as we have been … ANDREW MARR: (over) In the private sector? NICK CLEGG: In the private sector, sorry. Just as we've been quite tough on unsustainable, unaffordable things in the public sector, we now need to get tough on irresponsible and unjustifiable behaviour of top remuneration of executives in the private sector. ANDREW MARR: Okay. NICK CLEGG: What do I mean by that? ANDREW MARR: (over) I was going … Exactly. NICK CLEGG: Well look, I don't mean - let's be clear - I don't mean the government starts going around setting pay rates in the private sector. That's not what I mean at all. In fact I believe that people should be well paid if they succeed. What I abhor is people who get paid bucket loads of cash in difficult times for failure. That has got to ... ANDREW MARR: (over) But is there any way that politicians can actually intervene successfully? NICK CLEGG: (over) Yes. Well the way we're doing it, we've consulted with business groups. That consultation ended just a few days ago. We're going to come forward with proposals next month. And the kind of things we're looking at - we haven't decided definitively yet - the kind of things we're looking at is, for instance, to break open this closed shop of remuneration committees, which seems to be too often an old boys … ANDREW MARR: (over) Yeah, I sit on your remuneration committee. I give you a big increase and all that, yeah. NICK CLEGG: (over) Yeah, yeah, I scratch your back, you scratch my back where there's not proper scrutiny of how executives are paid. ANDREW MARR: (over) But can you make companies stop that? NICK CLEGG: Yes of course you can. Of course we have got plenty of means by which we as a government can make sure that the remuneration committees are opened up. Shareholders should be given a proper say. They own the companies, after all. ANDREW MARR: Yuh. NICK CLEGG: Far too often shareholders are given a blizzard of information they don't understand and they then don't have a binding say over what executives get paid. ANDREW MARR: What about employees? NICK CLEGG: Well I also … we've also consulted on whether there is a case for putting employees on those remuneration committees. We're also consulting, for instance, on whether you should publish information on the ratio between the pay of top executives and the average pay, the median pay in those companies… ANDREW MARR: (over) Because Will Hutton has argued, for instance, that it shouldn't be more than twenty times. NICK CLEGG: Yuh. Now there was a High Pay Commission, independent High Pay Commission which reported recently. I think they did really extremely good work. It's worth looking closely at that, and we are if not in agreement with everything they've said, certainly in agreement with many of the points they made. And they have suggested that there should be more transparency in the relationship between pay for those at the very top and those who are working in the boiler room of these companies. And I'll tell you why I think that's so important. I can't stress enough. These are tough times for everybody whether in the private or the public sector, whether you're a nurse or a factory worker … ANDREW MARR: Yuh. NICK CLEGG: … whether you're - you know - a taxi-driver or whether you're a civil servant, and I think we need to make sure that people in the public sector don't feel that they are doing all the heavy lifting; that people who are in a sense living by a completely different rule … ANDREW MARR: Okay, I … NICK CLEGG: … in the private sector are also held to account. ANDREW MARR: … I think people watching will absolutely understand the politics of it, but what they'll want to know is is this more than rhetoric? Are you prepared, for instance, to bring forward legislation early in the New Year to make sure that some of these things actually happen? NICK CLEGG: If legislation is required for the kind of things we're consulting on now that we're going to put forward proposals in January, of course we will do so. As I say, there's no question of this government - and I think it would be ridiculous if we were to even suggest that - of sort of setting pay. ANDREW MARR: Right. NICK CLEGG: But greater transparency, less of a closed shop in the remuneration committees, greater kind of openness and accountability by which executives are paid in the first place … ANDREW MARR: Right, okay. NICK CLEGG: … so it's related to what they actually do and succeed in doing. ANDREW MARR: We're slightly short of time, so let me move straight onto the Eurozone. NICK CLEGG: Yuh. ANDREW MARR: Angela Merkel is right, isn't she, when she says that there has to be fiscal union if the Eurozone is going to hold together? NICK CLEGG: I think she is right when she says that the design of the currency union as it is is lop-sided and needs to be changed so that it's buttressed … ANDREW MARR: (over) Which in turn will mean a treaty change. It has to mean a treaty change? NICK CLEGG: Well that's where the devil gets into the detail. Now I have always been very outspoken against a socking great big treaty change. We open the whole Pandora's box and people say they want this changed and that changed. ANDREW MARR: (over) But if national economies are going to have to obey central rules, I can't see how the treaty can not be changed. NICK CLEGG: Well there are actually quite a lot of provisions in the treaty as it exists. Which this is the great tragedy, by the way. I was a supporter of our entry into the Euro many, many years back … ANDREW MARR: (over) Yes. NICK CLEGG: … and I was a supporter because I believed what was written in the treaty about the rules that should have been respected by the countries … ANDREW MARR: (over) And you've changed your mind? NICK CLEGG: No, what I have responded to clearly is the fact that those rules were not adhered to. That's the great tragedy. And bluntly it was the French and German governments back in 2005 who signalled that there was going to be a free for all, that the rules shouldn't be adhered to. If those rules had been stuck to in the first place, we wouldn't now be in the trouble that we are … ANDREW MARR: (over) But we're now in a … NICK CLEGG: (over) and therefore it's right, it's right that they should be strengthened. I would like to see those rules strengthened with the minimum amount of institutional fuss because I think if you open this whole thing up into a naval gazing exercise, then that would be very damaging to the urgent need to make sure that we fix things in the Eurozone … ANDREW MARR: (over) It would also … NICK CLEGG: (over) … not only for their benefit, but for ours too. ANDREW MARR: Yes. It would also trigger a referendum in this country about our relationship with Europe, so my next question is: Could the coalition survive a referendum on our relationship with Europe? NICK CLEGG: Well I don't think there needs to be a referendum for the simple reason that the change … ANDREW MARR: (over) The Prime Minister's promised one. If there is a treaty change, he's promised a referendum. NICK CLEGG: No, the referendum will only take place if there is an additional surrender of sovereignty from us to the European Union, to Brussels. ANDREW MARR: (over) I thought any substantial treaty change will trigger a referendum. That's what David Cameron said. NICK CLEGG: (over) No, no, no. Let me be very clear. The test, which we've legislated on, is if we, the United Kingdom, give up more sovereignty in a big way to the European Union … ANDREW MARR: (over) So no referendum? NICK CLEGG: (over) … the changes which are now required are changes which are required in the Euro 17. The dilemma for us as a country … ANDREW MARR: (over) Very briefly - I'm sorry because we are coming to the end of this - if no agreement is reached next weekend, how serious is that for the British economy and for the Euro? NICK CLEGG: I think it is … ANDREW MARR: (over) Is it the end for the Euro? NICK CLEGG: I think it is extraordinarily grave if no agreement is reached. Perhaps not every "T" crossed and every "I" dotted, but we need to have a clear roadmap if you like towards the stablisation, strengthening of the Eurozone. Let's not forget - it's very important - whatever your views on Europe, 3 million people in our country depend for their jobs on our role within the European Union. That's not something we should give up lightly. ANDREW MARR: For now, thank you very much indeed Nick Clegg. END OF MAIN INTERVIEW END CHAT AFTER NEWS: ANDREW MARR: What do you make of Lord Hutton's intervention by the way on pensions? NICK CLEGG: Well I think he's in a sense stating the obvious, which is that as circumstances are tough … ANDREW MARR: Yuh. NICK CLEGG: … it's important that we get a good reasonable deal. And I'm glad he's recognised that what we've put forward is credible and reasonable. ANDREW MARR: Yeah, yeah. And we were cut off just now. If we don't get agreement on the Euro, that could be the end of the Euro. Some of your MEPs are saying the same thing. NICK CLEGG: Oh I think there's no doubt, in my view, that the whole edifice upon which the Eurozone was based is now skating on very, very thin ice indeed. And I think everybody knows that and that's why obviously we must protected Britain's interests and we must make sure that our interests are always promoted - particularly the integrity of the single market upon which we depend - but any reasonable person must wish the French and the Germans and others all the best of luck in sorting this out … ANDREW MARR: (over) Otherwise it's going to be a catastrophe. NICK CLEGG: … because it hits us. ANDREW MARR: Alright. Thank you very much indeed.
| 
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
Bookmark with:
What are these?