=================================================================================== .................................................................................... ON THE RECORD JIM WALLACE INTERVIEW RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC TWO DATE: 16.5.99 .................................................................................... JOHN HUMPHRYS: Everyone said the election of a parliament for Scotland meant politics in this country would never be the same again. Well they were right. It took just over a week for Labour to do a deal with the Liberal Democrats in Scotland which has produced a coalition government. I spoke to their leader Jim Wallace earlier this morning, he is going to be the deputy first minister in Scotland soon, he is up in the Orkneys when I walked to him. I asked him first, what principles the Liberal Democrats had to concede to get seats at the table of power? JIM WALLACE: We¹ve actually come to an agreement with the Labour Party to have a partnership government for four years, which will not only allow us to implement our principles, and implement our policies too. And I think that¹s a very important thing for Scotland. We¹ve preached for years, not only for a Scottish Parliament but for a new style of politics. A politics where we get away from tribalism, where parties can co-
operate. We¹ve said that if you had proportional representation, it was likely that parties would have to co-operate, we have shown our willingness to do that and indeed it¹s an opportunity for us to put our principles and our polices into practice. HUMPHRYS: But you¹ve conducted your campaign on the basis that university tuition fees would have to go. No question about it. All you¹ve got from the government, from Labour is a promise of an enquiry. Now that does not guarantee the promise that you made. WALLACE: And we have made it clear in this partnership agreement that Liberal Democrats still maintain that tuition fees should go. We have not abandoned that position. What we have, I think what became abundantly clear is that the Scottish Parliament couldn¹t, by a simple one line resolution abolish tuition fees. Certainly we couldn¹t renegotiate the whole of the funding of Scottish further and higher education in a matter of four days. Where we have also got the Labour Party to accept that there¹s got to be an enquiry that will look at the issue of tuition fees, it will also take into account the much wider aspects of student hardship, that was something which we also fought the election on. The fact that we are concerned that tuition fees and the general funding of students is a barrier for many people, particularly on poorer incomes to go to university or college, that when they are there many young people are actually dropping out. What we are having is an enquiry into both tuition fees and into the wider aspects of funding of higher education, life-long learning. We will make the Liberal Democrat Party our representations to that enquiry which we will underscore our opposition to tuition fees, we will be wanting obviously to tackle too the issue of student hardship and I hope many of the other bodies too, who have been expressing opposition to tuition fees will join us in making a very compelling case to the enquiry as to why tuition fees should go. HUMPHRYS: Well that¹s all well and good but let me remind you, if you need any reminding, of what you said before the election: Œif people want to abolish tuition fees, not discuss the abolition, if people want to abolish tuition fees they should vote Liberal Democrat.¹ That¹s what you said on April 9th, on May 4th you said: Œfees are dead as of next Friday.¹ What¹s happened in between. WALLACE: Well it is clear that in the Scottish Parliament, all parties are signed up, there was a consultative steering group which looked at the procedures and processes of the Scottish Parliament. All parties are agreed that before any legislation takes place there should be a pre-legislative enquiry. In fact the Scottish Parliament doesn¹t actually have executive power until the 1st of July. I¹ve already tabled a motion which can be debated, it doesn¹t require executive power, a motion which will actually instruct the executive to set up the committee of enquiry, the terms of reference, the timescale, the membership of that enquiry will be subject to the approval of Parliament. But if in fact we had not entered this agreement, there still had to be lengthy procedural process, there also would had had to be a pre-legislative enquiry dealing with some of the issues which I¹ve already referred to. HUMPHRYS: What a shame you did not - what a shame you didn¹t say all of that before the election instead of making these absolutely firm commitments. WALLACE: I think every party is quite committed to using the pre-legislative process, I think one must assume that every party who¹s talking about tuition fees knew that that would have to..that that would be part of the process. And you know, we will still maintain our opposition to tuition fees and arguably it may even be that a committee of enquiry that can be set up before the Parliament will ever have an opportunity to examine the issue - will have an opportunity to examine this issue, it will be able to get on with its work much earlier. HUMPHRYS: And how long is it going to take, this committee, to report. WALLACE: The time scale will be a matter for the parliament, the motion will be submitted to the parliament for its approval with regard to time scale. But what I do, would draw your attention to, that in the agreement which Donald Dewar and I signed on Friday, it is stated that this committee should be set up as a matter of urgency. We do think it is a matter which should be examined very quickly. There will be important information which the committee will have to examine. We have argued, along with some of the other parties, that the existence of tuition fees is a barrier for many people to apply to universities - a six per cent drop this year in applications and will be obviously be looking to see whether that feeds through to the number of admissions. Actually a bigger drop from the number of applications from mature students, these are the issues which we will be presenting to the committee of enquiry and arguing that tuition fees should go as part of an overall package which will actually increase access for people to further and higher education. HUMPHRYS: So you talk about urgency. What are we talking about - weeks, months? WALLACE: I¹m not going to get hooked on a time scale but it¹s a matter which.. HUMPHRYS: Why not? WALLACE: Š.we want to see done quickly. It¹s a matter we want to see done quickly. We were also, during the context of the negotiations which we were having during these past days, one of the issues we wanted to find out, was you know if you were actually to move say to abolition, what are the practical implications of that. When in fact could you, you know actually deliver on the abolition of tuition fees. Now, in as much as almost all financial arrangements for people going to university in the forthcoming academic year, applications have been made, the student awards branch has been processing these. I mean it was clear you couldn¹t even get the legislation through before the start of the forthcoming academic year. The official advice we were given is that it would be very difficult even to do it for the year 2000/2001, given all the administrative upheaval it would lead to. 2001/2002 was said to be the earliest date where this could be achieved. So in fact there should still be some time, good time to get things in place for that date. HUMPHRYS: So when you were taking about it being abolished, definitely being abolished next Friday as you put it, what you actually should have said, was we hope possibly, perhaps, maybe, Friday 2001 or something. It¹s not quite what you promised is it. WALLACE: As I said, I mean all parties who were making similar promises, saying that tuition fees could be abolished at a stroke, we all know there¹s rhetoric used in elections, all parties knew full well that the actual Scottish Parliament didn¹t even have the legislative competence until the first of July and that in fact there must be a pre-
legislative procedure. I am sure that I made that point at some stage. HUMPHRYS: I don¹t know that you did, you see.. WALLACE: I thinkŠI mean I¹ll not say definitely but I do know it¹s something that I was aware of and have actually discussed in the context of some of the debates and discussions and press conferences during the election campaign. HUMPHRYS: I have to say I don¹t recall you or any of your colleagues saying Œactually, when we talk about abolishing tuition fees this is rhetoric, you know it¹s notŠ it¹s just an election campaign isn¹t itŠ¹ WALLACE: I¹m not saying that - Come on John - I¹m not saying that the actual abolition was rhetoric but to say that it actually could be done by the following Friday, well everyone knew that that couldn¹t possibly be done. Parliament didn¹t even sit until the following Wednesday, so I think anyone who actually, you know, was examining it with anything approaching a rational and sensible mind knew that there would have to be legislation, would know given that all parties were signed up to a pre-legislative process, that that would involve some enquiry. HUMPHRYS: Okay, so are your Liberal Democrat MSPs now committed, absolutely committed to voting for whatever that enquiry concludes? WALLACE: No. You can¹t commit anyone to vote in advance of the outcome of an enquiry when we don¹t know what the outcome will be. HUMPHRYS: So the coalition could fall apart? WALLACE: We will as a party put our evidence to that committee which will include our case for the abolition of tuition fees. Our agreement which we¹ve signed on Friday makes it clear that both parties will have to evaluate the conclusions of the committee of enquiry and clearly we will be free to come to our own decision on that. The objective is that we should be able to find a way forward but you know the possibility must be that we can¹t. We obviously hope that the Committee of Enquiry will be recommending the abolition of tuition fees and given the number of people, the Conservative Party, the Scottish National Party, the National Union of Students, many many individuals that have been writing to me about this, the number of bodies which will be making the case for the abolition of tuition fees, it will be a very compelling case that the Committee is faced with. HUMPHRYS: Ah, but you never know as you say with committees, you can¹t pre-judge the outcome of the committee so if the committee, if the enquiry says well actually we don¹t think that tuition fees ought to be abolished, will you then stick to your principles or will you say - okay, we¹ll go along with that. WALLACE: Well, as the Agreement says we will have to evaluate the conclusions of the committee. We¹ll have to see if that¹s what they do, decide what their reasons are for doing that, we¹ll obviously have to look at too what the wider issues are with regard to tackling student hardship, but you know I¹m not going to concede at this moment that that¹s what the Committee is going to come up with and I think some of those who have been attacking us seem to have very little confidence in their ability to make a case for the abolition of tuition fees. We¹ll be making the case for the abolition of tuition fees and I believe it will be a very compelling case indeed. HUMPHRYS: But it may not work out the way you wish as you say. Let¹s have a look at something else - beef on the bone. Now another very clear manifesto commitment, you will end the ban, page seventeen of your manifesto. Now you seem to be saying: Œas soon as medical advice indicates it will be safe to do so.¹ Well we already know what the medical advice is from London at any rate that it is not safe to do so, so what are you going to do, are you going to end it or not end it? WALLACE: Well obviously Scotland has its own Chief Medical Officer. This is, I can assure you, an issue which was discussed and debated at some length in our negotiations. We were given the very unequivocal advice from Scotland¹s Chief Medical Officer that his advice at the moment is that it¹s not safe to do so. I think it¹s a very brave politician that would ignore that but let me also make this clear, the present government indicated to us that nothing would please them more than to be able to lift the ban on beef on the bone and our agreement makes it clear that the minute, the second we get the signal that it is safe to do so, that ban will be lifted and I very much hope that will be sooner rather than later. HUMPHRYS: Ah, but there was no point in your manifesto promise then was there? I mean it was another one of those, what was it, a bit of rhetoric again was it, saying we¹re going to end the ban. I mean it was quite clear, you said: Œwe will end the ban¹ . WALLACE: It is a clear objectiveŠ.. HUMPHRYS: I¹m a bit puzzled between objectives and promises to be honest. WALLACE: Well, as I say, when you¹re actually faced with catagoric unequivocal evidence and advice rather, you cannot just blithely toss it aside particularly, I mean if there was to be a further increase in the cases of CJD, then I think there would be a very heavy responsibility on you if you cast that aside. But let there be no doubt both the Labour Party and ourselves would see nothing better than the ability to lift the ban on beef on the bone. The procedures are in place to be activated the minute we actually get the all clear to do so. HUMPHRYS: Alright, one more manifesto promise then, that¹s on the Skye Bridge - Œwe will abolish the toll¹ that¹s page twenty-four of the manifesto. Now you¹re saying tolls will be frozen at the current level. Another bit of rhetoric? WALLACE: No, well look, I think you¹ve also got to put this into some kind of context John. We didn¹t win the election. We didn¹t get an outright majority. HUMPHRYS: No, but you made a lot of promises, and what I¹m saying to you right through the beginning of this interview is that you are now prepared to let go of those promises, your pledges, your principles in order for a seat at the table of power, that¹s the whole point of this interview. WALLACE: Look, what I also said was the more Liberal Democrats there are, the more of our manifesto we would be able to implement. Clearly unless you¹ve got an overall majority you cannot reasonably or rationally expect to be able to implement the whole manifesto. What we have achieved is something like forty-eight items in our manifesto that have nowŠ that will now be part of the programme of government, that¹s on average one a month for each month of this parliament. We been able to get substantial additional investment into education to recruit teachers, to invest in books and equipment. We¹ve actually also been able to invest money to help poorer students at the moment even pending the outcome of this enquiry. The access funds that help students suffering hardship at university has increased to fourteen million pounds. We¹ve got a substantial package of measures for Scotland¹s rural areas. We¹re now going to have a Minister for Rural Affairs, measures directly to help the farming communities - a number of measures that would not be there but for Liberal Democrat participation in this administration. Now with regard to the Skye Bridge tolls - right we¹ve not been able to get everything we want there but what we do have is a freezing of the tolls from now until the end of the contract period. Now that wasn¹t being offered by Labour before the election, that¹s something that Liberal Democrats have managed to extract as a part of this agreement and I can tell you I¹m sure there¹s many people would like to know that their costs were fixed for now until.. for the next fourteen years. HUMPHRYS: Jim Wallace, thanks very much indeed.