................................................................................ ON THE RECORD RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 13.10.96
................................................................................ INTERVIEW WITH SIR JAMES GOLDMSITH HUMPHRYS: Well there we are Sir James Goldsmith, that's what it's all about. The hidden agenda of your campaign is that you are not merely pro-referendum - you are anti-Europe. SIR JAMES GOLDSMITH: I'd like to comment on the three major
points there on the programme. HUMPHRYS: We'll deal with the programme as we go through but if you deal with that question I'll pick up the other points as we go through; I will indeed. GOLDSMITH: Well it's wrong. I happen to be, but not the Party, the Party's wholly agnostic, but I've always made my own personal position clear, the Party just wants a referendum on the fundamental issues and the fundamental relationship between Britain and Europe. Insofar as what I want myself, I happen to want a Europe of nations, sovereign nations who co-operate where we can do things together better than independently, that's a personal view and our Party fortunately - our Party is fortunately made up of free-spirits. A large number free men and women are multiplicity views. My personal view, which will only come about if we get a referendum and which will represent no more than one vote by the way is that we need a Europe of nations co-operating as sovereign nations. But we and I would like to go on just to answer your question, it is entirely wrong to say that we are targeting Tories or Europhiles. We have made it absolutely clear that we are targeting all those who are against a referendum on the fundamental issues of Europe and the reason why we study people's record is because we are not interested in what they say, who's going to take the words...you know as there's an old saying "that only fools believe political commitments". The one thing which is clear is that you have to look at the act not the words. HUMPHRYS: Exactly, all right. Well let's do that and let me just remind people of what your advertisement says in that all the papers, every single newspaper this morning, nearly six hundred Referendum Party candidates will be standing in the next General Election fighting every seat where the leading candidate has failed to defend your right to vote on the future of this nation. Now, Ken Hind, we saw him in that film, wrote to you and said "I will vote for a referendum" and yet you're putting up a candidate against him and he's the leading candidate in that constituency GOLDSMITH: Good for him but he has not in my view demonstrated from the facts that he is for a referendum. HUMPHRYS: How else can he do that apart from saying he will. GOLDSMITH: By his acts. Let me tell you what we're doing, let me explain to you what we're doing. We've created a litmus test and that litmus test shows every occasion on which sitting members have had the opportunity to vote for a referendum and whenever they have done so they get a certain number of points, whenever they've failed...voted against or abstained they get no points and therefore we have a pointing system of what they've done, not what they've said. Today they all say it before, most of them say it
before it was what they did. Now - if I may just finish this. This does not just concern Conservatives, it concerns members of the Labour Party, it does not just concern Federalists or anti-Federalists, it's everybody. I mean we are not standing against a number, quite a large number of pro-Referendum Labour Members of Parliament. HUMPHRYS: Indeed, absolutely but let me take you at your word there because you said don't judge them by merely their words, judge them by their deeds. That's what I understood you to say fine. Michael Spicer, a sitting MP who has had the opportunity to vote on a referendum on Maastricht because there was an amendment during the Maastricht debate in 1993, he voted for a referendum but you're putting up a candidate against him. GOLDSMITH: Michael Spicer's history is one of moving with the wind. He has moved with the tide, he was on the Left-wing of Mr Heath's Government, he moved and became a dry. I do not believe in what he says and his voting record is not impeccable. HUMPHRYS: So this advert is positively misleading. GOLDSMITH: It is not positively misleading, what we are saying is and we've said it in our statement of aims which have been advertised over and over again, that we will put up candidates wherever the leading candidate, in our view, is not committed to a referendum on..the fundamental issues. HUMPHRYS: Spicer's not only committed to it, he's done it, he's actually proved it, he's voted for a referendum GOLDSMITH: He's also voted in a pretty, tricky way on other occasions. HUMPHRYS: Ah, well. That's the point, isn't it? GOLDSMITH: I don't want to got into Mr Spicer, I want to got into the overall situation. HUMPHRYS: Absolutely so do I. GOLDSMITH: Let me, let me, let me explain: Whether you take a Federalist of the Left, like Ken Livingstone and I quote him because he's allowed me to quote him. He said in his letter that I could do so. He's a Federalist and he's a Left wing member of the Labour Party. We're not going to stand against him because he believes in democracy and believes in a referendum. Among our candidates we have, of course both Socialists and-we have Socialists, Lib Dems and Conservaties but we also have Federalists and anti-Federalists. Let me give you an example. There's a man called Goldsmith - no relation by the way - John Goldsmith, he happens to be a Federalist but he happens to believe that it needs the legitimate backing of the people to go in. He is a candidate of ours. His wife, who's a racing driver, also no relation, Gillian Goldsmith, happens to be anti-Federalist - she's also a candidate. It shows by the way how it splits through families. HUMPHRYS: Yah, but let me pick you up you see on what you said earlier. You judge people by their actions rather than by their words. Now you say that the Party is agnostic on the question of Europe, in the sense of so long as people support the referendum - that's clearly what this advertisement tells us - they will have your support. As long as candidates against (phon) them. As long as you're satisfied. But let's look at the people whom you're not putting candidates up against. They are the committed, let's get out of Europe, brigade. GOLDSMITH: No, Sir, they're not. HUMPHRYS: Well, are you putting it against-Are you putting that to Ken Livingstone? GOLDSMITH: Ken Livingstone is a typical example. HUMPHRYS: But are you putting up a candidate against any of the- those who lost the Whip, the so-called Whipless wonders - no you're not! GOLDSMITH: Because they've all voted for referenda, every one of them. HUMPHRYS: Yes. GOLDSMITH: And, that's why. But the point is if you take-Among the Socialists, there are some Federalists who are for a referendum and we will not be putting up candidates against them and among the Conservatives and Lib Dems, if you take the Lib Dems, there are two Lib Dems who actually voted on 11 June for the Referendum Bill. I believe them to be both Federalists for the very simple reason that the Party is very Federalistic - they call themselves Super Nationalists and they seem unanimous on the issue. I haven't asked them but they-All I wanted to see was whether or not they were in favour of a referendum - both voted. They had the courage to vote even though Paddy Ashdown asked them to abstain. Neither of them will have a candidate against them. They are Federalists who voted for a referendum. So, this is-this business of targetting the Conservatives and of only going for those who are-who have one view on Europe which is anti-Federalist is nonsense. On the other hand, to go in your direction, of course a bulk of the people who want a referendum are those who want a change in the direction which we're going and therefore automatically- HUMPHRYS: Yah. GOLDSMITH: -architecturally, the bulk of people who want a change want a referendum. HUMPHRYS: Right. GOLDSMITH: Whereas those who are satisfied to drift in to a Super National state, a single European state and to lose our sovereignty are happy at the ways things are going because all three Parties are leading them there and therefore automatically we are-our backers are in the main those who happen to hold my personal views in varying ways and that is to say that the way we are going at the moment needs change. HUMPHRYS: Right. And, now we get to the real agenda, don't we? GOLDSMITH: And we have-and, we have-No, Sir! That was the architecture but we have entirely respected our views that whether somebody is Federalist or anti-Federalist, whether somebody is Socialist, Lib Dem or Conservative if he has voted - or she has voted - for a referendum on the substance of substantial issues in a way which is credible. We will not stand against them! HUMPHRYS: This is the real agenda, isn't it? Whatever the referendum question that you put - and, we don't know what it is yet, because you haven't told us - whatever the referendum question finally if there is one turns out to be what it really amounts to is: do you want to stay in Europe, or do you want to pull out of the European Union. That's what it comes down to, isn't it? GOLDSMITH: No, sir. You're simplifying it! Firstly, we haven't put a question. HUMPHRYS: No? GOLDSMITH: And the reason why we haven't put a question is that we happen to believe in methods of establishing questions. HUMPHRYS: Yeah. But, whatever question- GOLDSMITH: No, no, no, no, no! You said- HUMPHRYS: -you put that is how it will come out in the long run.... GOLDSMITH: No, no, no, no! Let me finish. We have, in fact, endorsed the best question so far that came from the House, which is backed by a cross Party from all the Parties, which was on the eleventh of June and we endorsed it - not because of its language - which was
Parliamentary language - but because it addressed the issues. But, the question, as I will make clear, at our conference in Brighton - the question which will have to be determined Constitutionally through the House or through the Speakers' Conference, the question must address the four principal points of view. HUMPHRYS: And, the MPs- GOLDSMITH: The four principal points of view, which the British public hold, which are either to stay as we are and go drift into a single new European state, giving up our soverignity, our independence, indeed our nationhood. Secondly, joining a Europe of nations is another alternative, which is one I mentioned before. The third one is going back to a free trade area - the EFTA - which was the original one. And the fourth idea is the possibility of getting out and getting out. HUMPHRYS: Exactly. GOLDSMITH: And, there must- HUMPHRYS: So, three of those options are for getting out and the fact is that the MPs- GOLDSMITH: They are--NO! Please! You must not say that! HUMPHRYS: But, of course, they are! GOLDSMITH: A Europe of nations is-That is complete and utter- HUMPHRYS: You know perfectly well-You know perfectly well- GOLDSMITH: I'm sorry. HUMPHRYS: -that the notion of going back to Brussels and saying: let us renegotiate the Maastricht Treaty, which, effectively, means the Treaty of Rome- GOLDSMITH: One-No, no, no, no, no! I will not- HUMPHRYS: And, changing our status in Europe is a nonsense. They would say: away with you! You can't stay in on those terms! GOLDSMITH: Nonsense. You don't know what's happening in Europe. Firstly, I want to get your facts right. Of those four options: One is for getting right out, one is for returning to a free trade area- HUMPHRYS: The effect of the other three is the same. GOLDSMITH: One is for returning to a free trade area, one is for creating it- HUMPHRYS: Getting out. GOLDSMITH: That's not getting out. HUMPHRYS: Of course, it is. GOLDSMITH: It's a return to a free trade area, which is what we went into. HUMPHRYS: Exactly. But, it's not what we're in now. GOLDSMITH: Of course, getting out of our present situation, not getting out of Europe. HUMPHRYS: But, the idea of being able to renegotiate it on those terms is preposterous! GOLDSMITH: And, one-This is what I'll come to, in a moment, where you're entirely wrong, and the other one is a Europe of nations, which is creating a really, valid Europe - a strong one - which is based on its true pillars, the pillars of its intonations (phon), but which is a Europe. And, that's by no means getting out. That's building a valid and strong Europe. That happens to be what I'm for. HUMPHRYS: But, the notion which- GOLDSMITH: But, the one which is going to destroy Europe is the present one. You've got it entirely wrong. It it the supernational state that will destroy Europe. But, I must come back. I know I followed your question. But, I must come back and be allowed to answer one or two of the criticisms made in the film. It says there - I just noted it down - it says using my wealth to bend the normal, democratic process. HUMPHRYS: Right. Then, I'm going to come to that. Let me come to that because Michael Heseltine raised this very point. GOLDSMITH: OK. HUMPHRYS: He levelled a criticism at you and, effectively, what we're talking about here is that this anti-European agenda, if you like, is going to do enormous damage to Britain because you will be able simply to get out of Britain. You have homes all over the place, you can leave Britain, you won't have to live with the consequences - that's what he's saying. GOLDSMITH: Let me-Let me answer the fundamental question, rather than the trivial point made by Mr Heseltine. The fundamental question, if you analyse it: am I using my wealth to bend the normal democratic process? The answer is exactly the opposite. The European Commission spends over two hundred million pounds per annum in propaganda, so as to bend the democratic process. It is pure propaganda. HUMPHRYS: But, what about- GOLDSMITH: Wait a minute! No, wait a minute. It has stifled the debate in this country, so that we were giving up our soverignity by default without a debate. Now, it needed a man with money to be able not to level the playing field but to start to put some balance into it. HUMPHRYS: Alright. GOLDSMITH: Therefore, the idea- HUMPHRYS: Final point, then. Final very quick point, if I may. You make your point. GOLDSMITH: The idea that it is I who have been bending the democratic process makes the-exact opposite of the truth. What is bending the democratic process is the propaganda system of using two hundred million pounds of taxes... HUMPHRYS: But, it also makes the point that they're you are-You're- GOLDSMITH: Yes, but it's a very, important point. And, and I must finish this point. And, it also says that I'm trying to buy power - who for? Not for me. I'll resign the day we have a referendum. The Party will dissolve - it's in the Statutes. Who am I trying to buy the power for? If I'm trying to put money for you to be able to vote on whether or not your nation continues. I seek no power. We will dissolve - it's in our articles. If we want to have power, it's for you and others in this country to be able to decide in the future of their own nation. HUMPHRYS: Sir James Goldsmith. Thank you very much, indeed. GOLDSMITH: Thank you very much.