................................................................................ ON THE RECORD PETER LILLEY INTERVIEW RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 4.5.97
................................................................................ JOHN HUMPHRYS: Peter Lilley, you said that..you and others, creating unity is what matters. What makes you think that you can do
that? PETER LILLEY: For the last five years I've led a team which spans the whole spectrum of opinion within the Conservative Party successfully, drawing on the strengths of all the different strands of the Party. We've taken twelve bills through Parliament, not a single person has dissented. I think that's an all time record in an area which is very contentious and in the past has divided the Party. So I've shown in practice that if you're prepared to give a lead, but draw on the strengths of different strands of opinion in the Party you can unite it, and it's very important that we do that across the whole spectrum of policy. HUMPHRYS: And where the great divide is, clearly is Europe. So let's have a look at that. Single European Currency first, that's the big one. Are you saying, as far as a Single European Currency is concerned, will this be your position: we are against it on principle and that's that or are you going to continue effectively, continue Mr Major's approach which is..has been purely pragmatic. LILLEY: Our approach has been to negotiate until we have to decide and the point of decision is approaching fast. I actually believe it would be easier to get unity on that decision, which will be opposition to any Labour proposals to take us into the Single Currency in this Parliament, than might have appeared before this Election, because whatever
approach you take, whether it is of constitutional principle or of business pragmatism it's tending to lead in the same direction. People have found on the doorsteps that though they may not have been interested themselves in the constitutional arguments they've had to answer the questions put by the electorate: can Britain remain a self-governing country if it doesn't have a currency? - will it still have control of other aspects of economic policy? - can there be a Single Currency in Europe without a Single European wide government to run it? And I think most of them have come to the conclusion which I've always had that it's very difficult to imagine that it would be possible for that to go ahead without further moves towards a federal state with which we are all opposed, all of us across the whole spectrum of opinion. Likewise, there are those who approach it from a pragmatic stance who are interested in the business pros and cons and whether or not this is a sensible step at this stage and so on. I think that the very evidence that our economy is at a different stage of an economic cycle, its cycle moves differently from the Continent makes a lot of people very weary for us going into an experiment which hasn't even been shown to work where countries move in unison and clearly we would be very much the most difficult to accommodate within that. So I suspect, it would be easier to get a broad measure agreement that we should oppose a Labour attempt to take us in.
And of course there's every sign from these stories that Tony Blair was going to appoint David Simon - a good friend of mine by the way - but a total Euro-enthusiast...(interruption)...indeed he came and spoke in my constituency to my association but he's a Euro-enthusiast. He was to be made European Minister days after Tony Blair had been telling the Electorate that he was a Euro-sceptic, he'd been wrapping himself in the Union Jack, he'd been telling the Sun readers that he was on their side. That inconsistency is going to be exposed and the British people will find WE are the spokesmen for their true instincts. HUMPHRYS: So let's try and pin you down a bit more on that, then. You're saying quite clearly: we would be opposed to going into a Single European Currency during the lifetime of this next Parliament or forever? LILLEY: Politicians can only ever deal in the foreseeable future and all politicians constitutionally can legislate for is a Parliament. We cannot bind a future Parliament, but that is the clear position I think we should take during this Parliament. HUMPHRYS: So you will therefore be in outright opposition, not just to Mr Blair but to Kenneth Clarke? LILLEY: No, I think Kenneth Clarke has said that he can well envisage practical grounds when he would think it was not in Britain's interest- HUMPHRYS: Oh, indeed but that's very different from what you've just said. LILLEY: Oh, well, I've said that I think there will be a convergence between those who approach this on practical grounds and those who approach it on Constitutional grounds which will lead us to oppose a Labour proposal that we go in. HUMPHRYS: Will what you have said though be enough to satisfy those supporters of Mr Clarke's view, which is different from yours? LILLEY: I think they will welcome the fact that we recognise that both the strands - the pragmatic and the Constitutional - have to be brought together and as it so happens events and factors are pushing them together. It would be very hard for a lot of people even if they were keen on the abstract idea of a Single Currency, or even of a federal Europe to argue that it is definitely in Britain's interest to join it when our whole economy is out of phrase with the European-the Continental countries. HUMPHRYS: There's a danger isn't there though, that that approach that you've just spelt out won't please either side? It won't be enthusiastic enough nor sufficiently sceptic. LILLEY: I think people have an instinct for unity. They want a sensible policy, they want a clear lead, they know that the point of decision is approaching and that clearly must be given. That they don't want just a balance of opinions but a clear lead and they will welcome that as long as it is in a way that draws on the strengths of the different -
the pragmatic and the Constitutional tradition within our Party. HUMPHRYS: Aren't you looking for unity here where there can't be any? It's wishful thinking in effect, because there are those Europhiles who believe we've got to stay in Europe wherever it goes; there are those who are opposed, who think we've gone too far already and we've actually got to start re-claiming the powers that we have handed over. LILLEY: I don't think so. We had to formulate a clear position for the Amsterdam Inter Governmental Conference. We spelt it out in a White Paper. It was very clear, it commanded support across the whole Party; it was anti-Federal if you like. I prefer to think of it as being simple pro-British. It said Britain wishes to retain its powers to govern itself while co-operating closely with our partners on the Continent. And there is the evidence, that when actually you do have to reach the point of decision making, the party can unite as long as it's given a clear lead as we were there. HUMPHRYS: Mr Clarke this morning described this problem over Europe as 'the cancer at the heart of the Party' and his solution
is to cut it out in effect by offering a free vote on all European matters. Would go you along with that? LILLEY: Well we've had free votes in 1972 on the principle of joining the Common Market for example, and there could be similar occasions when that would be essential but I can't really envisage an Opposition not having a collected view on important legislation going through Parliament, for example, to take us into a Single Currency. And such legislation, if Tony Blair - as all the indications are - has ambitions to do that, such legislation would have to be brought in before the end of this year. The idea that we could all just say it's a free vote and Her Majesty's Opposition had no view on it isn't really realistic and in practice, as I say, I think the Party would be far more united in Opposition to that. Not least because it would be such a betrayal of the Electorate for Tony Blair to move in that direction when he'd given assurances otherwise. HUMPHRYS: Well, it may be but there would be those who weren't united - the history of the Party tells you that - and you heard people on this programme this morning. LILLEY: Well- HUMPHRYS: But, let me just-let me just pursue this sort of - if I may - for a moment. Given that there will be those - there may be those - who don't stand behind you in that position, and you're the leader, would you, then, say: right, stern measures against those people. Would you be a tough leader, in that respect? LILLEY: I would certainly expect people to give their loyalty to the Leadership. I believe, too, the aftermath of this defeat - an element of which was definitely the disunity in the past - we can expect a greater willingness for people to coalesce around the Leadership and to respond to strong leadership. HUMPHRYS: Could you serve under a Clarke leadership in a Shadow Cabinet led by Mr Clarke? He's already said this morning that-effectively said that he couldn't serve under for instance a Redwood leadership. If he maintains his unsatisfactory position, as you put it. LILLEY: If the 'phone calls that I've received since my candidature was announced last night - the avalanche of calls I've received - is anything to go by that is a hypothetical question. HUMPHRYS: There's been an avalanche? LILLEY: Of 'phone calls to me - yes! Ah, I'm not saying there's an avalanche of everybody 'phoning up and saying: yes, we will join your campaign. But given that I have meticulously refused to organise any Leadership campaign, or even - and, I'd actively discourage all those who had urged me to lead to put forward my name, or float my name, over the last year or two - the fact that so many people have been ringing up continuously - if you've been trying to get through to me you'd have found it virtually impossible over the last twenty-four hours - has been very encouraging and the breadth of support and width of support has been very encouraging, too. HUMPHRYS: Here's another reason. You talked about Europe being one of the reasons why you lost because it divided the Party. Here's another reason, isn't it? You said in the Mail on Sunday this morning that the Tories have got to get away from the caricature of themselves as hardfaced men without a social conscience or a social dimension, interested only in the pocket book. What did you mean by that? LILLEY: I think, we've allowed ourselves - partly, through failing to respond to a remorseless line of criticism over eighteen years that we are simply a Party that believes in self-interest and the pocket book. To obscure another very strong element of the Conservative tradition which is generous, it believes that we will have an obligation to help those in need and that's a matter of pride - not regrettable necessity. That - and, when I first became Social Security Secretary I chose as my text the remark by Samuel Johnson that the test of a civilised society is generous provision for the poor. We have to recognise that we have that element and we have to fight back against those who've tried to paint us as just sort-of the Party of yuppiedom. HUMPHRYS: So, you're gonna look again at the balance struck again between public spending on public services and spending our tax money? LILLEY: We don't necessarily fulfill our obligations to others simply by spending their money for them. We have committed ourselves to tough control of public expenditure but it still means that something like forty per cent of the nation's income will be controlled by the Government - that means for two days out of five, you're working for the Government and three days you're left with the money you earn to look after your own family. I think that is quite enough. What is quite clear is that Tony Blair in his - what was essentially a false prospectus - has raised expectations that much more can be achieved, much more can be given, whilst still remaining within that limit - that's not on. HUMPHRYS: But, as far as you are concerned - your Party is concerned - you give the impression - rightly or wrongly - of not liking public spending. Is that an impression you have to change? LILLEY: We have to recognise that there is a strong role for public services within that limit that we set - forty per cent - it ought to be possible to provide decent public services. If we have a growing economy, then, forty per cent of a growing economy is much better than a larger proportion of a stagnant ecnonomy and that has always been what Socialism has provided us .... HUMPHRYS: Right, but, if you don't you might have to spend more to maintain those public services that people are concerned about? LILLEY: We, sadly found - and, that's one of the things for which we've drawn the penalty - that in the depths of recession we had to increase taxation to ensure that we did meet our obligations to those hit by the recession. HUMPHRYS: And, no regret about that? You take pride in that fact. LILLEY: Well, it was a necessity - it was a sad necessity. I, certainly, don't welcome the recession, or the fact that it was deeper, longer and had more dramatic effect on our tax revenues than we expected and that we hadn't prepared people for that. HUMPHRYS: But, again, that makes you sound like a reluctant spender? LILLEY: Well, I think, all politicians- HUMPHRYS: Or reluctant helper, if your prefer? Perhaps, that's a better word. LILLEY: Spending and helping are two different things. There is an absolute necessity to help those in need and I don't feel reluctant about that. I've always put the focus within my Department on helping particularly the disabled people. That seems to me that should be a matter of pride, that we now spend four times as much as the last Labour Government. We ought to be emphasising that and getting more credit for it and that was the point that I was making - that we've allowed ourselves to be caricatured as people who aren't interested in those in genuine need, which is untrue. HUMPHRYS: But-But the Party as an oversight (phon) isn't your problem. That you, yourself, might be seen as one of those hardfaced men, in part because you're so associated now - partly because of the things you announced just before the Election - that with the private sector you see a dominant role, perhaps, for the private sector in Welfare. LILLEY: No, I want to see people given the opportunity to provide for themselves and to work for themselves so that they don't need Social Security and gosh, most of them would want that, too. In the sphere of Pensions, I said that we were the Party - and, indeed, the only Party - pledged to guarantee the basic State Pension for this and future generations and to make it affordable by backing it with investments which would be built up over people's lifetime. And, that received a wide measure of support across the whole political spectrum, including newspapers that are normally hostile to us. And, it's going to be fascinating to see how someone like Frank Field, who has obvious sympathy with these ideas, copes in a Government which, rather disreputedly, in the opinion even of the BBC, which pointed out that what Tony Blair was saying was, simply, wrong- HUMPHRYS: I don't think the BBC ...... LILLEY: -tried to raise fears on it, anyway, to analyse the facts (phon). HUMPHRYS: But, who are these-But, but, who-who? you talked about the hardfaced men this morning, I mean, who are they? Because you sound now - you're delivering much the same message as before? LILLEY: We've allowed those criticisms to go on without countering and refuting them and rebutting them enough and putting over positively the broader spectrum of Conservative philosphy, which isn't-it certainly relies on the free market but it, also, has other aspects which we've understated and not got credit for apparently. HUMPHRYS: Right. Let's talk about Constitutional changes that the Labour Government is going to introduce. The first year is going to be dominated, indeed, by discussions and change in the Constitution. Your position on devolution now, as a Party, is untenable now, isn't it because you've been saying you're the Party of the Union - no, no, no to devolution - and, now, the people of Wales, the people of Scotland have said: no, no, no to you - you're an English Party. You have to change your view, don't you? LILLEY: There are still, I think, a majority of people in Scotland and Wales who want to remain part of the United Kingdom. They - many of them may think that it's possible to do so with devolved Parliaments. We have to ask remorselessly and relentlessly the West Lothian question: how is that to be achieved without answers which are unacceptable in Scotland, as well as the rest of the United Kingdom. HUMPHRYS: Right, but you've asked that question throughout the campaign and the people of Wales and Scotland have said: We've also - Scotland in this particular case - we've also considered that and we've told you what we think. We've not a single MP in Scotland, so you can't carry on saying we've got to ask this question can you? LILLEY: Well, remember what happened last time Labour introduced devolution proposals. They began very popular in Scotland, they end up with a referendum after the process in parliament had shown what it really meant and how it potentially undermined the union and damaged Scotland, not least with higher taxes, that ended up with fewer than forty per cent of the Scottish people supporting it. So that if we put these arguments in a principle fashion we will be doing a service to all those Scots and Welsh who want to remain part of the kingdom and whom have a ... HUMPHRYS: So your views haven't changed. If you're leading your view stays what it's been? LILLEY: Oh, it's absolutely - a key part of this parliament we'll be dealing with those arguments. HUMPHRYS: Can we just talk about you as a personality now, because the personality of a leader matters clearly. Everybody knows, we heard it on that film from Kim Catcheside a few minutes ago that you're very clever, you're very competent. Do you have a powerful enough personality? LILLEY: I don't think we need to worry about the sort of glitz and glamour of politics. I have exerted my personality towards selling my policies. HUMPHRYS: Different when you're leader though. LILLEY: If you're leader you have to deploy some of those talents to selling yourself, and I will with effect. HUMPHRYS: You're regarded though aren't you, as one of the invisible men, I think the expression was a while back, of British politics - a bit colourless? LILLEY: I used to joke about my low recognition when I was first appointed in the Cabinet. All people first appointed in the Cabinet lack recognition. Alas I'm no longer able to trade upon such jokes because I am, it seems when I walk about the streets, universally recognised, and actually I have to say the response of people is rather kind, and they come up and say nice things. That perhaps just tells us about the politeness and courtesy of the British people, but they do recognise me. HUMPHRYS: The comparison with Ken Clarke inevitably is going to be made, the ebullient Ken Clarke, very colourful figure. LILLEY: Well, he's a great character, and I have great respect for him. We each have our own personalities. I've been in the business of selling policies of marketing and presenting the government rather than marketing and presenting myself. As leader one has to do the latter as well, and I will. HUMPHRYS: Some say that - maybe this is wishful thinking on their part, who knows - but some say that you're making a pitch for this job in the hope that it will raise your profile, you'll become a more significant figure and you'll get a better job in the Shadow Cabinet then - Chancellor of the Exchequer or something like that. Is that the underlying motive? LILLEY: No. After a devastating defeat I want to win. I want to win this election and then I want to win the next General Election, and I think I am actually best placed in the Party to unite it, the Party, and to rebuild the Party and to renew the Party which has got to be done at great speed and with absolute thoroughness in time to win back that majority in Westminster which we need at the next election. I don't hold with this idea that we have to expect it to take ten years. It didn't take ten years to get back after the Labour landslide in nineteen-forty-five. Rab Butler began the process of renewal of the Party. I shall start that process of renewal as leader and we will ensure that the Conservatives restore themselves to a position where they can gain a majority, and restore their rapport with the British people. HUMPHRYS: Peter Lilley, thank you very much indeed. LILLEY: Thank you. ....oooOOooo....