................................................................................ ON THE RECORD MARGARET BECKETT INTERVIEW RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 27.9.98 ................................................................................ JOHN HUMPHRYS: Margaret Beckett, if we accept that the most radical thing about New Labour is the promise of a new politics and ending the divisions that have allowed the Tories to stay in power for so long this century, then that means that you have to support some form of PR, Proportional Representation, doesn't it. MARGARET BECKETT: No, I think one of the things that has bedevilled the debate, not just on the left but across British politics, has been this assumption that somehow there is a kind of answer to everything in changing our electoral system. There's no such thing as a perfectly fair electoral system. There are different degrees of fairness in different choices. Now, I think that it is the policy issues that the people of Britain care most about. They want to see a reformed Welfare State, because what we have now is what was divised fifty years ago- HUMPHRYS: Sure, come on a little bit.. BECKETT: -and just sort of added on to. They want to see better housing, they want to see education and health service transformed. These are the things that are key to them. Now of course there is a perfectly legitimate discussion and debate and at some point perhaps decision about Proportional Representation to be made. It's hung around as long as I can remember as a debate but the idea that somehow it's the solution to all the problems, well I'm a sceptic about that. HUMPHRYS: Well not so much being a solution to all the problems but the old electoral system is the old politics, isn't it. It symbolises the old politics apart from anything else, apart from its practical effect. It's symbolises old politics. BECKETT: No, I don't agree with that. And I think that the whole way some of that debate is put is very much a diversion. Our electoral system is easy to understand. People know how to make it work. A lot of the people who argue that somehow you can't be radical unless you change our electoral system very much believe that in the seventies and the eighties and the nineties the British people were cheated of the election results that they wanted. I don't believe that, I never have. I mean I would have liked to have believed it. I wish that the British people didn't consent to the continuation of a government headed by Margaret Thatcher or by John Major, but I'm afraid that it's very much my view that then they did not want a Labour Government. And heaven only knows, lots of people told us over those years that they never would want a Labour Government again that somehow they couldn't elect a Labour Government, but when they wanted to my God they did. HUMPHRYS: But you would accept that it is time to reunite the Liberal and Socialist traditions. BECKETT: I certainly accept that we have a great deal to learn from each other. There are areas where- HUMPHRYS: Not quite the same thing is it? BECKETT: There are areas where we agree and have common ground, there's much that is of value and worth in the Liberal tradition, just as there's much of value and worth in the Labour tradition. And if we can recognise that in each other and put those things together and work together on the things about which we agree, that's fine. But every great political party is already a coalition of interests. That's why it's a great political party and not a sect. HUMPHRYS: But that reuniting is never going to have full expression is it, unless you can bring together the two parties with an electoral system on which both approve and at the moment we know perfectly well what the Liberal Democrats think of the present system. BECKETT: Well the Liberal Democrats have argued for a long time the present system in some way cheats them of greater representation in the Commons, again- HUMPHRYS: And you have encouraged them in that belief. BECKETT: No, I think that's profoundly mistaken and again at the last election we saw that where people decided that they did want Liberal Democrat MPs instead of for example Conservatives, they got them. It's perfectly easy, they know exactly how to do it. They didn't want to do it before, that's all. HUMPHRYS: But if that's profoundly mistaken why has Tony Blair gone to all the trouble of setting up a commission with the clear understanding, if nothing else, if not actually spoken, that you will take heed of what it recommends, of the promise of a referendum and all the rest. What's behind all of this if nothing is going to come of it in the end. BECKETT: It has to be properly looked at and
examined. Tony inherited a commitment, as you know, to a referendum on Proportional Representation- HUMPHRYS: Would he prefer to throw that out if he hadn't had to inherit it. BECKETT: No, I simply mean that sometimes people talk as if that's something he put in place. He didn't put that in place but of course he accepts it as we all- HUMPHRYS: But not enthusiastically? BECKETT: No, I wouldn't even say that. You would have to ask him that. I actually think there's a great deal to be said for the British people being given a chance to express their own voice. Heaven knows there are large numbers of people, particularly if I may say so with respect, in the Liberal Party, who've claimed to speak for the British people on this issue for a very long time. So, let the British people speak. But if they are to express a view, then it's only sensible that there's a background of some sort of proposals against which that view can be expressed. And that's why, because of giving effect to that policy, that's why Tony set up the Jenkins Commission. So that different views can be heard and expressed to give a flavour and an understanding to what that decision's about. HUMPHRYS: It sounds as if you've reached your view already, you're not going to be persuaded. BECKETT: I've never disguised the fact that I am quite sceptical about these matters but I've also- HUMPHRYS: Very. BECKETT: I've also always made it clear that while I may think that the British people would be making a mistake to give more power to the politicians away from themselves, which is what every system of Proportional Representation in effect means, if that's what they want to do, that's for them. I've never said that we must prevent them from doing that. If that's really what they want, if they really think: we don't want all this power, let the politicians deal with it all. Well, that's their choice. HUMPHRYS: But, we're going to have a referendum as you say, we're going to have a campaign therefore for and against the proposition, whatever the proposition may be. You'll campaign against change will you? BECKETT: Well we're a long way from deciding how that campaign will be handled. HUMPHRYS: Sure, but you've said you've always been prepared- BECKETT: Certainly my view has always been bordering on the sceptical but we don't know yet what the Jenkins Commission is going to recommend so it's a little bit of a hypothetical question at the moment. HUMPHRYS: Well it is and it isn't because it's going to recommend change. We know that, there's absolutely no question of that. I mean afterall giving it to a man like Jenkins, Lord Jenkins, Roy Jenkins to chair, you know we know what his view is, he is about as senior a figure in the Liberal Democrats as it's possible to be. We know that he, as he's said a thousand times, that he believes the present system is simply not on for very much longer. BECKETT: To be fair they were actually set up to say, if you were going to change what form of change would there be. HUMPHRYS: Quite. BECKETT: So it isn't that they are bound to recommend change because that's what they will all think is right. They were asked to say, if you are going to change, what do they think are the sort of best and more likely- HUMPHRYS: So therefore they will come up with some recommendations for change. BECKETT: So they will come up with some proposals. HUMPHRYS: Precisely. So if you are opposed to change, therefore it follows doesn't it, that you will campaign against it. BECKETT: I said I'm sceptical about change. I have always been sceptical about change. HUMPHRYS: Can you be persuaded. BECKETT: I've never had a closed mind on the subject. I simply say, let's see what they come up with and then let's judge whether we think it has enough merit to recommend. HUMPHRYS: It seems pretty likely though, doesn't it, listening to you, and indeed plenty of other people - I mean how many people at this conference are saying the same sort of thing as you, only in much much stronger language. It rather seems as if we're not - new Labour is not going to go down this radical path. This is one of many radical paths down which it will not wish to go. BECKETT: No, I think it's much too early to come to any kind of conclusion. We don't have proposals from the Jenkins Commission, we haven't had the referendum, you know we are at a very early stage. HUMPHRYS: About the referendum - will we have it before the end of this parliament? BECKETT: Well, there has to be legislation to give effect to a referendum, and obviously you know you usual mantra. I can't predict the contents of any Queen's speech. HUMPHRYS: No, no, but ... BECKETT: We're very .. It was in our manifesto, we're making.... HUMPHRYS: Your manifesto,... you anticipated my question. BECKETT: We're making very strong progress on our manifesto commitments. We haven't got to that one yet. HUMPHRYS: But you are the Leader of the House, and therefore you will be in a position to help or hinder whatever legislation may or may not come along, so if you can't say yes.. Of course you can't tell me what is going to be in the Queen's speech next time or the time after that, but if you can't actually give a commitment that this is going to happen before the end of this parliament, then it rather says something doesn't it about your intentions. BECKETT: No, our basic,....no, it doesn't say anything at all, and it isn't my job as the Leader of the House to pursue my own opinions or prejudices. HUMPHRYS: You understand the way the House works and the business of the House, and your responsibilities. BECKETT: Yes, it's my job to help to carry out the government's programme, and the commitment was in our manifesto, and it's one of the things that we shall be looking at as that programme develops. HUMPHRYS: You're backing off aren't you? BECKETT: No. HUMHRYS: The government's backing off this one. BECKETT: I think a lot of people want to come to conclusions before we've even had the discussion, and I've never been keen on doing that. HUMPHRYS: But it would be very easy for you to say if this was something that you felt strongly about, that the government felt it was committed to it on account of its manifesto promise and all that, it's terribly easy to say "Yes, this is something we've put in the manifesto - we're going to do - of course we're going to do it". I mean, if I may say so, the Jenkins Commission point is a complete red herring. We've already acknowledged, both of us have accepted that of course Jenkins will recommend change. I wasn't a question of will there be change but what kind of change, as you yourself very clearly pointed out. So why do we have to say let's wait for Jenkins? You know, this was some kind of waiting for Godot. We know Jenkins is going to come. BECKETT: I hope and generally expect that by the time of the next election the party will have delivered on its manifesto commitments. HUMPHRYS: Including this one? BECKETT: I have no reason to doubt that, but a government.... HUMPHRYS: You can't give a commitment. BECKETT: No, I'm not saying that John. HUMPHRYS: You are. BECKETT: I'm saying it's one of our manifesto commitments. I certainly can't commit what's going to be in the next Queen's speech, and we have to look at our electoral timetable and our legislative timetable, but all I can say to you is, it is a manifesto commitment and this government has set itself to carrying out it's manifesto commitments. HUMPHRYS: But if you have your way the British people will .. BECKETT: Oh, I've never been against the British people having their say. I've been against the people who want to speak for them without consulting them. HUMPHRYS: Have their say in this parliament. BECKETT: Could well be. HUMPHRYS: Could well be. Could well be - that's all you're going to get on that one. Alright, then look at something else then - Lords' reform. Now that's another.... BECKETT: Well, that's one of the reasons why I have to be a little cautious about what could be in the legislative programme, because Lords' reform yes, is another manifesto commitment, an important one, but it could be a time consuming one. HUMPHRYS: Yes, it could be very time consuming. Except that of course, what we know so far, is the first bit of Lords' reform. We're going to get rid of the hereditaries and that's that. The tricky bit, the really difficult bit is what replaces them. We've no idea what that's likely to be have we? BECKETT: Well, the government expects to produce some proposals, a sort of Green Paper kind of basis, alongside proposals to change who has the right to vote in the existing House of Lords, so there will be ideas there for people to discuss to get a flavour of what people have in mind. HUMPHRYS Mm.. when? BECKETT: Again, you know I can't prejudge timetables, but I think probably quite soon. HUMPHRYS: Quite soon, so you're not backing off on this one? BECKETT: As I say the Queen's speech is in November, and people do get awfully sniffy about not judging in advance. HUMPHRYS: But what you're saying is that because of the problems with the House of Lords and various other things, a referendum before the end of the parliament is unlikely and I can conclude can I, that you are backing off that? BECKETT: No, I didn't say that at all. I'm not saying that and you can't conclude any such thing. All I'm saying is, you want me to give a commitment as to the timing of legislation on a referendum. Now, I'm not prepared to do that. HUMPHRYS: Quite a lot of people too. Paddy Ashdown's another one who'd rather like that. BECKETT: And you know, I can't at this moment do that, and one of the reasons that I can't is because we have a very tight legislative timetable in the near future. HUMHRYS: But all the time can be found for things can't they, if governments feel that they're sufficiently important. We've seen that on a number of occasions. Can I just remind what you saw Tony Wright who you saw him on the film there... Tony Wright saying, "we've got to do this to break the mould of British politics, to give the centre Left its historic opportunity. This is a huge test" It does rather seem as though this test is not going to be faced up to for a while doesn't it? BECKETT: Well, Tony didn't make it quite plain what he meant by that, but I know that that has been HUMPHRYS: But you know his view? BECKETT: That has been his view for a very long time, yes, and he's entitled to his view. HUMPHRYS: Alright. Let's talk about the economy. The Prime Minister has told us that you've got to keep your nerve if things get rough. He might have said when things get rough because things always get rough don't they. Whatever happens to unemployment you've got to keep your nerve, you're going to stick to your guns, is that it, whatever happens to unemployment? BECKETT: What the Prime Minister's basically saying is that we have made some decisions for the framework of economic policy which we think sets the right pattern for the long term. The investment in Britain in the long term, investment in education and in training, investment in employment through the new deal, a lot of things like that, that will only as people like yourself often used to point out to us before the election, will only actually bring results in the longer term as we go through the parliament, and we believe it is important not to lose sight of what you need to improve Britain's economy in the long term and not to be to use the old clique - not
blown off course by short term events to the extent that you jeopardise that. But nobody's saying that unemployment is unimportant, no-one is saying that it isn't extremely important to try and get the right kind of opportunities for work and to fit people to take those opportunities. That is exactly the sort of long term programme the government's pursuing. HUMPHRYS: Yes, well, fit people to take opportunities, if they are there to be taken. If they are not there to be taken then, not a lot of point in training some youngster for a job that ain't there! BECKETT: Well, we're all very mindful of that. I mean one of the things, there was a lot of criticism under the previous government, both of the quality of some of the training schemes and so on that were put in place, and also the fact that sometimes, even if they were of good enough quality, they didn't always lead to employment. Now of course, nobody can guarantee a job with every training place. But it is a very important part of our work, to try and make sure that there is access to employment, as well as access to the skills that make you able to take that employment. HUMPHRYS: It's going to be very difficult, isn't it, for you to, to use the Prime Minister's expression "hold your nerve" to keep this tough stance up, when things really get - I mean we've already seen some indications haven't we, that you're beginning to crack a little bit at the edges. I mean jobs go in the North East, Peter Mandelson says they can have another hundred million quid. David Blunkett says another thirty eight million quid at the TUC. We saw the old beef farmers getting another, whatever it was, eighty-seven million pounds, some months back, because they were having a rough time of it. And this, all of this is happening, I mean these are signs that you're beginning to give a little as the breeze gets stronger and produces a powerful wind. These are all things before that wind has turned into any kind of strong gale. BECKETT: Well, I think we're sort of going on the one hand, from the proposition that the government is indifferent and won't do anything to the proposition that it's- HUMPHRYS: No I wasn't saying that at all. I was was saying that what will happen, this is the theme of this interview really isn't it, that New Labour may not actually be that new when push comes to shove, because if what we see and we are seeing it and we're going to see more of it, a lot of jobs going and problems arising, you will actually give way, in the face of those pressures. That's what I'm suggesting. BECKETT: But I mean I'm not sure what you imply by the phrase give way. There isn't a change in our overall approach and our economic direction. HUMPHRYS: Intervening, you know, bailing people out, bailing jobs out. BECKETT: Well, what people like Peter and David were talking about were how we implement the programme of investment, the government's put in place. HUMPHRYS: So none of that was new money then, that was all public relation stuff was it? BECKETT: No - the government's public spending programme is, for any government is a very large one and we've set the broad framework over the next two or three years, within which people will work, but of course there are a lot of day to day decisions to be made and in those day to day decisions, it's right and sensible to use the opportunities that we have as we build up training programmes. We create job opportunities and so on to make sure that that is particularly looked at in areas where there has been some economic shock of the kind there was in the North East. Where basically, the bottom fell out of what was thought eighteen months or two years ago, to be a thriving market. Now you can't change that. If the bottom has fallen out of the market, if something that's sold for a few pounds is now selling for ninety P, then alright, that's the way of the world. But then you say okay, how can we use the tools we have at our disposal, the basic decisions that we've made, about how we run the economy and the changes we make, how can we use them, is there something particularly that we can do here. It's common sense surely. HUMPHRYS: Well, yeah, but the problem with that is that you talk about the tools that you've got. You actually have fewer tools than the government used to have in the past. You gave away interest rates to the Bank of England. We've now got Tony Blair saying effectively, "we're going to stay with our no increases in income tax pledge" for the next parliament as well as I understand it. You may correct me if you think that that's wrong, but that's certainly the impression of the interview he gave to The Independent. So, there isn't an awful lot you can do, is there? BECKETT: I don't think that he, I mean I read the interview in The Independent, I'm just trying to call those phrases to mind. I don't think he was making an absolute categorical statement. HUMPHRYS: Well, can I help you, my gut feeling is that there is a longterm trend away from higher personal tax rates. BECKETT: I think that's right. I mean .. HUMPHRYS: It's a pretty clear signal isn't it? BECKETT: That's-but that's not quite the same same thing as saying final policy decisions about the shape of something in another parliament had been made. But certainly, I think it is true to say, that there is an increasing international trend to look at different patterns, changing patterns of taxation and that. I mean, Will Hutton on your interview a few moments ago was saying, you know maybe the government should look at the possibility of some tax cuts, so, the whole climate of that kind of discussion has changed. HUMPHRYS: So your gut feeling is, is to think of tax cuts rather than increases in income tax? BECKETT: It depends on the circumstances of the day. But certainly at this moment in time, I think Tony is entirely right to say that there is a general international move towards that kind of change in the pattern of taxation, and I was interested to hear Will Hutton making the point that that was something that was valid at the moment. There may be other times in the economic cycle, when that wouldn't be the right course of action to pursue. I mean Nigel Lawson famously completely got his timing wrong and caused a huge boom bust recession, by doing exactly that. HUMPHRYS: Welfare reform, now that was the big undertaking of this, this was the, if anything is New Labour, that's it, isn't it, welfare reform, radical restructuring, cutting the bill, spending the money better and so on. Using the money for other things. We've yet to see anything radical, and you've been there for quite a little while now. We've seen an awful lot of reviews, and there still are reviews going on into this and that and the other, but nothing radical. BECKETT: It's eighteen months actually that we've been there which personally I- HUMPHRYS: And eighteen years in opposition before that to think about these things. BECKETT: -personally I don't think, oh, yeah but, if there's one thing that does irritate me, if I may say so, it is when people make that point, because life changed a great deal over those eighteen years- HUMPHRYS: Of course. BECKETT: -the whole social security system changed over those eighteen years. So the notion that you know, you could have thought of it eighteen years ago, you have to adapt to changing circumstances. HUMPHRYS: ...the Year Zero the minute you walked into Number Ten. BECKETT: It's the principles, it's the principles that matter in welfare reform and the principles are that we want to make sure that our Welfare system underpins the capacity to work, helps people to get work where work is available and that if it isn't available, it supports them properly. Those are the basic principles. There is no field of policy more difficult, more riven with the need to scrutinise every little bit of detail, because there are always knock-on effects and it's the net effect of the changes that you make that is important. There's no field of policy worse for that than Social Security. Even tax reform pales into insignificance beside the complications. HUMPHRYS: Sure. BECKETT: So I think that what is absolutely crucial, is to do that basic groundwork to try to get it right. And the more you wish to be radical, to reshape a Welfare State so that it works with the grain of today's society and today's family life, today's working history. The more you want to do that, then the more you need to think and to consult and to lay the groundwork but not to rush too much, because somebody says "If you haven't done it today, you're not radical". HUMPHRYS: I take that point but some things don't change really and if your commitment is, as it clearly is, to try to trim that budget so that you can use the money for other things, there are only a certain number of ways that you can do that, there seem to me anyway to be four. You can tax benefits can't you, you can pay the benefits to fewer people, you can means test, you can pay less, and you can privatise various things like pensions or whatever. Those are the four choices aren't they. And it's very difficult for you to accept any of those. BECKETT: The biggest impact on the Social Security budget during the eighties and the nineties was the impact of that enormous increase in unemployment and the mass unemployment that we saw during those years. HUMPHRYS: Pensions is bigger than that. I mean far bigger than that, forty-six per cent of the budget, Disability Benefit is bigger than that. BECKETT: The impact of that was absolutely enormous and the impact of the steps that were taken by the previous government to try and reduce those numbers was enormous. So those are the areas that you have got to look at. But as you rightly said a moment ago, when we were talking about jobs and about training and so on, you don't do those things overnight, particularly not if you want to do well and you want people to have a sound future. HUMPHRYS: Sounds as if you have given up on it a bit doesn't it, Bill Morris seems to think that. You sacked Frank Field from his job because he thought the unthinkable - I mean - backing away again. BECKETT: Frank himself is the first to say that he believes the government is committed to reform and that he believes the government will continue with reform. HUMPHRYS: Ask him the next question after that though and then he gives you a rather different answer, doesn't he. I mean you've got to do radical things and he keeps telling you you've got to do radical things and you don't want to do radical things. If you'd wanted to do radical things you'd have kept Frank Field in his job, wouldn't you and said: now lead us down this path, lead us down this New Labour road. BECKETT: It is hugely important that what you do in such a difficult area is not merely radical but it's well thought through, it's practical and it will actually work and have the effect that you desire to have. And one of the - the history of Social Security legislation is littered with unforeseen consequences. So I think that Alistair Darling is a highly intelligent and competent member of the Cabinet and- HUMPHRYS: No doubt very cautious. BECKETT: -and very much committed to making proposals for Welfare Reform that will work. I have every confidence, if anybody can get it right, he can. HUMPHRYS: On the other hand he may do what others have done in the past, tip his toe in the water, find it's a bit too hot, or a bit too deep and step back up the beach a little. BECKETT: Well you wouldn't want him to rush in a get it wrong would you. HUMPHRYS: Well, but you see, I wonder how long you can go on saying this about every single issue that ever arises, you know. BECKETT: Every single issue that ever arises. HUMPHRYS: Yes. BECKETT: I've lost track of the statistics but it's something like that half, two thirds of the manifesto commitments that we made have actually - are actually on the way to being carried out, or have been carried out already. For the last year, eighteen months, members of the public, people in the business community and so on, have all been saying to us, for heaven sake slow down. I don't think anybody can accuse this government of hanging about and not acting. HUMPHRYS: What I've picked out here are the things that distinguish, really distinguish.. as I say, the theme of the interview is distinguishing New Labour from old Labour and that's why I've chosen - I mean another good example of this in a sense, certainly it's a great test for you, is Europe and the Euro. Gordon Brown has said, made it very clear, Tony Blair has agreed with this, that you are in favour of it in principle and yet, you are not out there on the streets arguing for it are you? We heard that again in that film. BECKETT: We are out there trying to make sure that people understand, first that we have to prepare for the impact of the Euro, irrespective of whether we go in or not and when we go in, if we do. HUMPHRYS: That's acknowledged. BECKETT: If that's what the British people and the parliament and the government all decide. And also, we are very much doing everything we can to encourage people to make preparations so that if that choice is made- HUMPHRYS: That's quite different. BECKETT: If the British people do decide to go in we actually can .. HUMPHRYS: That's quite different. BECKETT: Well. HUMPHRYS: Well it is. I mean as David Yelland said- BECKETT: They are both very important components of the debate. HUMPHRYS: But the point that David Yelland, the editor of the Sun made, was he was suggesting that you are actually being rather dishonest here, because privately you are saying to him and others one thing, publicly you are saying absolutely nothing at all. BECKETT: No, I don't think that's right. I mean what we have been saying, consistently from the beginning is that, first of all, contrary to what the previous government tried to pretend, the Euro is going to go ahead. Secondly, that contrary to what they're trying to pretend it is going to have a very very substantial impact. I mean there are terrifying figures about the number of people in the small and medium sized business community who have been given the impression by our predecessors that this is somehow going to pass them by. It isn't going to pass anybody by. HUMPHRYS: But the fact is that you have been scared off by those front pages. Now that front page that David Yelland produced saying that Tony Blair- BECKETT: Don't forget - I think it's about six months ago that the Bank of England said that it would probably take four to five years for the preparations to be made should Britain wish to join the Euro. Now that's a huge amount of work, and it's no good people talking as if - Oh well you know,... you just sort of decide this is what you're going to Life is not like that, and the key thing now is to encourage people in the - among the public, in the business community to prepare for the Euro happening, because it will and to prepare for our decision when it comes. HUMPHRYS: Margaret Beckett thank you very much for joining us. BECKETT: Thank you. ...oooOOooo...