................................................................................ ON THE RECORD RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 15.12.96
................................................................................ INTERVIEW WTH MALCOLM RIFKIND JOHN HUMPHRYS: Good afternoon. The European Summit is over and the moment of truth for the European Union is upon us, or so the Prime Minister believes. I'll be talking to the Foreign Secretary Malcolm Rifkind, about the Government's approach. The Tories are talking tough now, but would they give way when the crunch comes, that's after the News read by Jennie Bond. NEWS. HUMPHRYS: According to Jacques Santer, the moment of truth is approaching for the European Union. Mr Major agrees. Do we go forward to a closer political union or hold the line here. That will be decided in six months' time at the next European summit, when they will agree or not on a new Treaty. Before then, of course, there'll be a General Election here and we will have to decide who'll speak for us at that summit. If the Tories are back in power they say they will stand firm, no more integration, and we do have that power - the power to stop it. The Treaty must be agreed by every country, but would a Conservative Government be prepared to block it when push comes to shove? The Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, as we've heard, is on his way to Cyprus. I spoke to him at Heathrow Airport before he left, and I asked him if he was worried that our European partners are planning to stop us trying to stop them. MALCOLM RIFKIND: I don't think that's the way they look at it. You're quite right, some of them are keen on further integration, and if they wish further integration they will no doubt pursue it in certain areas. Our job is to protect our national interests just as they seek to protect their own. HUMPHRYS: But we're seeing, reported this morning, whether it's true or not, the French are terribly keen on setting up this special unit which would in effect, exclude us. They would oversee the details of the European Monetary Union - we would be excluded. RIFKIND: No, it's not quite as dramatic as newspapers inevitably try to present. What the French are considering is whether there should be a group of those countries that do join a Single Currency, whether they should have more effective political control over that Single Currency. Well, that's for the members of the currency to determine. I wouldn't complain about that. HUMPHRYS: But surely if they do that, then it would remove our influence, and one of the reasons for us maintaining a wait and see policy is that it enables to keep that influence. RIFKIND: No, you've misunderstood the point. The point is what might happen after a Single Currency is formed, amongst those member countries who'd seek to join it. Well, we have not yet decided as you know, whether we will wish to join such a Single Curreny but we can hardly blame those that do join wishing to actually exercise political control on matters affecting the Single Currency. HUMPHRYS: But if the suggestion is that it happens before the setting up of the single European.. what would your attitude be to that? RIFKIND: Well, first all there is all the indications are that even the Germans don't like the idea anyway and therefore it's unlikely to float, I think, I wouldn't frankly spend too much time on this, this is a French idea which has not yet generated any significant interest amongst even those countries likely to join the Single Curreny. HUMPHRYS: But they are pushing it are they, the French? RIFKIND: Not very visibly. HUMPHRYS: So you are not worried about it? RIFKIND: I'm not losing any sleep over it. HUMPHRYS: We've got the Inter Governmental Conference coming to an end or not as the case may be, within the next six months. You are telling us that Britain is going to be very tough on various issues that we don't like, that are included in this list of..shopping list if you like that some of our partners want, are you going to be as tough as you'd like us to believe? RIFKIND: I'm not telling you we are going to be tough, we have already laid down what we believe to be crucial requirements and objectives from the United Kingdom's point of view, and that's not unreasonable, other member states have indicated their priorities, their preferences, that's part of a negotiation. The real hard professional negotiation will be over the next six months right up to the Amsterdam Summit and it's going to need people who are experienced in negotiation, who actually knows what an international negotiation of this kind requires and that's why John Major is in such a strong position, he's one of our most experienced people in Europe for this type of hard struggle. HUMPHRYS: There is a point, well, yes, of course it's a negotiation, but there is a point at which you have to back off on all sorts of issues aren't there, because there are things that you want out of that Treaty. RIFKIND: Well that's the whole point of skilful negotiation is to get those matters that are crucial to your national interest if you need to compromise you compromise in areas that do not affect your national interest, but which may be helpful to other countries, now don't ask me to speculate which these are - the whole point of a negotiation is you do it in a very skilful way, keeping your cards very much with the face down so others do not know what your negotiating strategy is. HUMPHRYS: Well it's not a question of speculating is it, we know that there are some things that you will insist on getting out of that. RIFKIND: Oh yes, that we've made absolutely clear and for example we believe that the Social Chapter it should not be introduced by the back door, that is something in which the Prime Minister has made our position very very clear, we have to look after the interests of our fishing communities who have been gravely damaged by the way in which the quota hopping phenomenon has been distorted very much to our disadvantage so these are two clear examples which are fundamental to our objectives in the negotiation. HUMPHRYS: And there will be no deal unless they go along with us on those issues, that's absolutely clear is it? RIFKIND: Yes, we've made it very very clear. At the end of the day the Inter Governmental Conference reaches a successful conclusion when all the member states are content with the outcome, we have indicated we will not be satisfied with an outcome that does not address, for example, the two points I have just raised. HUMPHRYS: Incidently, on the fishing thing there is a vote in the Commons tomorrow night, which is why I gather you've had to leave a little bit earlier than you might have otherwise wished to go to Cyprus. RIFKIND: That's the way of the world we live in. HUMPHRYS: Are you worried you are going to lose that vote then? RIFKIND: No I hope we will win it, I don't see why we should not win it... HUMPHRYS: Hoping is one thing but... RIFKIND: Well I'm sorry I am not a fortune teller, I'm not prepared to make silly forecasts when I don't know the final outcome. We are in a very tight political situation, but I believe that in the fishing communities we need to continue to give support to a Conservative Government because no one else we look after their interest. HUMPHRYS: If you are to lose - as you say you are not a fortune teller - but if you do lose would you then expect Mr. Blair to put down a vote of confidence. RIFKIND: I haven't the faintest idea, Mr. Blair will try to exploit any opportunity, I don't blame him - that's what leaders of the Opposition are for. HUMPHRYS: What do you think if he doesn't? RIFKIND: Frankly I will assume that he knows we would win and therefore he wouldn't want to waste his credibility even more than he has done in recent weeks. HUMPHRYS: So, we are going to insist, sorry about the noise in the background there..... RIFKIND: That's not your responsibility.... HUMPHRYS: That's true, we can't be responsible for everything. We are going to insist, categorically, they must give us what we want on the forty eight hour week, that is to say we don't want the forty eight hour week, we have to have our demands met on that. RIFKIND: These are two of the crucial parts of the negotiation and you're quite right to emphasis the importance we attach to these. Of course, the negotiation goes far wider than that. What we are really involved in is a debate about what kind of European Union we wish to see develop. You know there's a very superficial argument you read about in the press and occasionally hear in the House of Commons, people who take opposite extremes, some saying we must leave the European Union, others saying we must go forward to some highly integrated European superstate. That's no part of the Government's thinking and it's no part of the thinking of most people in Britain. What Britain wants to see is a healthy, forward looking European Union which is a partnership of nations and by that we mean quite simply co-operating, we've got to made sense in the modern world to co-operate but not being lulled for political ideolgical reasons into unnecessary integration, common policies where they will be of little benefit to jobs, to prosperity, or to the well being of our citizens. HUMPHRYS: In other words we are reaching the moment of truth as Jacques Santer said. RIFKIND: Well these are nice apocalyptic remarks that people like using. I'm not quite sure it is quite as simple as that. There is a debate which won't be resolved in the next six months. This is a debate which is actually going to dominate the political life of Europe for a very good number of years to come. We may, at the moment, be in the minority so far as Governments are concerned but this isn't just a debate for Governments. It's not just a debate for politicians, what makes a modern world so different is we have a public opinion, in Britain and elsewhere in Europe, which is must more sophisticated, much better educated than ever before and therefore the debate about what kind of Europe is not just for politicians to participate but for the public as a whole. And when you look at it in that way, you see that the British Government actually has a lot of support on the continent with public opinion, as we saw in the French Referendum on Maastricht, when almost half the electorate rejected the kind of views being put forward by the political class in France. HUMPHRYS: You say the phrase like 'moment of truth' is a bit apocalytic, Mr Major has used it himself. Let there be no doubt, we are coming to the moment of truth on the future of Europe, and I quote him. RIFKIND: He was asked to comment on Jacques Santer's reference to a moment of truth. Of course there are certain matters which will be resolved in the Inter-Governmental Conference, we are seeing for example that on issues like qualified majority voting the other countries are very reluctant to go beyond rhetoric, and actually identify where they would be prepared to give up their veto. The only people who've actually said quite bluntly, quite easily, where they would abandon national protection, is our own Labour Party, Mr Blair, who quite happily throws away a major negotiating position and indicates what a soft touch he would be. Most of the governments of Europe are a bit more experienced than he. HUMPHRYS: You say it's the government (sic), but on the other hand you say that we are going to have to rely on the people of Europe, rather than on their leaders in some cases, because they know what they want, the leaders want other things. RIFKIND: I am saying there is a great debate about Europe's future, that's not just the property of the politicians, or the journalists if you will forgive me. That is a debate which in a modern democracy belongs to the public as a whole. Within France, within Germany, within Italy, there are many people who share the views that we as the British Government have argued for. So yes, we are often in a relatively small minority, and many of these issues if you compare our position with that of other governments, but in the battle for ideas, winning the battle of ideas, the debate is not just within Britain, it covers the whole of Europe, and rightly so, because there are big issues at stake. HUMPHRYS: But that's a bit like saying that the people have to change their leaders if they're going to get what they want in Europe, and what we think is right for them and for us. RIFKIND: Well, that's for each country to decide. That is for the people of France, the people of Germany, just as it will be for the people of Britain. I think the debate is much more vigorous here. What I am suggesting is that the debate is not about whether we should be isolating ourselves from Europe, or submitting ourselves to what the French or German governments want at this moment in time. This is a historic debate, we as Britains are part of Europe, we cannot avoid the facts of geography. We cannot avoid the circumstances which make our interests in many areas similar to that of other Western European countries, but we do have a duty to put forward very sincerely, very courteously, and very firmly our alternative vision of the kind of European co-operation that makes sense in the modern world, and that is a Europe of partnership, not a Europe of integration into a single super state. HUMPHRYS: Which is what some of those leaders clearly want, they no doubt... RIFKIND: There's no doubt some of them do. HUMPHRYS: And what you're saying is that if we are to have the sort of Europe we want, which is very different from that, then the
people of France for instance, and the people of Germany for instance, are going to have to get rid of Mr Giscard, and Mr Kohl. RIFKIND: Well, they got rid of Mr Giscard a number of years ago. I wouldn't like to correct you too much on that. HUMPHRYS: Mr Chirac we'll settle for instead. RIFKIND: No, there's two ways it can effectively go. Either the view that we have of Europe as a loose partnership of nations will prevail over the period of time ahead of us, and that will be very satisfactory. If that doesn't work out, then I believe the alternative is not us leaving Europe, the alternative is the kind of flexibility that our Prime Minister first raised when he spoke two or three years ago, and which has now become much more part of the debate throughout Europe. By flexibility, I mean, if some groups of countries wish to go for a closer integration, super nationalism, within the European Union, but others do not, then you have to find a formula that takes account of that and that is not just a theory, that is something which is going to become increasingly - in my judgement, inevitable, if the European Union, when the European Union, enlarges, to admit the new much poorer democracies of Central and Eastern Europe. HUMPHRYS: But if Chirac and Kohl stay in power, for instance, just to name the two of them, they're not going to tolerate that, are they? That's not what they are prepared to have. RIFKIND: I'm not sure you're right there, I think already both President Chirac and Chancellor Kohl have themselves raised the question of flexibility. At the moment their idea of flexibility doesn't coincide with ours, but in both cases, we and they both recognise that there may be a need over the years to come, for the European Union to accept as quite legitimate, quite reasonable, the fact that some countries go for tighter integration, others may not wish to or be able to do so, and therefore if Europe is to react in a positive way to that development of the debate, it must do so through a kind of flexibility that respects the national interests of each country. We insist on people respecting our national interests, I do not want to suggest that we can refuse to acknowledge what may be that national interest of other countries. The challenge is how you reconcile these. HUMPHRYS: But they have a way of getting round these problem, the French and the Germans have a way of getting round this problem, they have, as you say, a sort of flexible approach. And they are saying, in effect, let's do deals within Europe, amongst ourselves, those of us who want further integration can do our own deals. The others can stay outside if they so wish. We will use the institutions of Europe to do our own deals. Now you say, no, we're not going to wear that, we won't tolerate that, so it's you that's blocking them in this case. RIFKIND: Now hold on, you've missed a vital point. First of all the French and German ideas, have so far been repudiated, but not just by the United Kingdom, but by half the European Union. HUMPHRYS: That leaves the other half. RIFKIND: Well, precisely, but there is a debate in which half the countries say this is too rigid an approach, and the point that is at stake is that if you wish to have partial integration within the European Union, using the institutions of the European Union, that must be done on a basis acceptable to all the member countries. The institutions of the European Union belong to all the fifteen members, and therefore if they are to be used in some future structure, then it must be done on a basis which is acceptable to all the member states. HUMPHRYS: But if they are stopped from doing it within the European Union, then they will do it perhaps outside. RIFKIND: That's their sovereign right, we can't stop them any more than they can stop us. If countries wish to form as we've seen with the Schengen proposals, on frontiers, if countries wish to make arrangements outside the European Union, that is their sovereign right which they are entitled to do as they think fit. HUMPHRYS: And is it your view that that seems to be the only solution then. That is what will happen? RIFKIND: Not necessarily, these are the issues that are being discussed at the moment. We are at a very early stage in the negotiation. The Irish presidency when they produced a draft treaty a few weeks ago, acknowledged that the debate is at too early a stage to indicate where it's likely to end up. HUMPHRYS: Well, what else could it be, what other solution might there be. If they don't do it inside the Union, they do it outside the Union. What else? Where else do we go? RIFKIND: Well, that's precisely the point I am making. There is a healthy debate, I have no complaint about it. There is a healthy debate going on, history has meant that the United Kingdom is leading one aspect of that debate, calling for Europe as a partnership of nations. Chancellor Kohl is perhaps the most obvious representative of the alternative view of a more centralised highly integrated European superstate. It's a debate in Europe, it's also a debate within Britain, because in a number of important respects the Labour Party offer the alternative to German perspective of the kind of Europe we should move toward. HUMPHRYS: . . . they dispute that. RIFKIND: Well, I know they dispute it, it's significant they dispute it because they know it's unpopular with the public. The fact is, that in a large number of areas, they are actually going in the same direction as Chancellor Kohl. They wish to abandon our veto, in a whole range of areas, they wish to adopt the Social Chapter, they say there must be no permanent opt outs. We cannot actually see as credible Mr Blair saying to his European friends we will never be isolated in Europe, and then coming back to Britain and trying to persuade the British public that the veto is safe in his hands. You can't have it both ways. HUMPHRYS: But to go back to this notion of flexibility, if you can see, as we sit here, no other alternative, and we're very close now to the wire aren't we, six months now to . . . RIFKIND: Well, that's to the Amsterdam Summit, but that's not going to be the end of the debate. The future of the world will not be determined in the next six months. HUMPHRYS: The future of the world will not be determined in the next six months. The future direction of Europe almost certainly will be determined within the next six months. RIFKIND: If I had to predict a single most important event effecting Europe in the next two or three years it wouldn't be the Inter-Governmental Conference it will be when the European Union increases from fifteen countries to about twenty-five or twenty-six with the accession of the central and Eastern Europeans... HUMPHRYS: But you may not even get to that state because that can't begin to happen until after the IGC is concluded. RIFKIND: Yes but that will happen. The Amsterdam Summit of June next year will, in my judgement, mark the end of Inter Governmental Conference.. HUMPHRYS: If there's a Treaty. RIFKIND: There will be in one form or another because you know what will happen. Once our General Election has taken place then either we will win, which is what I believe will happen, and they will know that they will have to deal with the re-elected Conservative Government and I believe that our negotiating position will then be very strong. Or, alternatively, God forbid, Labour will win and the European Union will know that they will get, for nothing, on a plate, what they are most seeking because Mr Blair has already announced he would give away British interest in this respect. HUMPHRYS: Put Mr Blair aside. RIFKIND: I wish we would. HUMPHRYS: For the purpose of this discussion let's assume that you are in power. Mr Major has made it abundantly clear that there are things within that Treaty, that proposed Treaty that under no circumstances whatsoever will he accept. RIFKIND: Correct. HUMPHRYS: And those are things that our partners in Europe, many of them say absolutely categorically must be in that Treaty. RIFKIND: Of course they're saying that now but when we have won the General Election then they will recognise that Labour will not be able to get everything they would like and they will then be the kind of negotiation that always takes place at the end of such Inter-Governmental Conferences. We've been through this before. Mrs Thatcher when she went for the British rebate on the Budget was one country opposed by every other member state, once they realised how serious we were, once they realised we had been endorsed by British opinion then the serious negotiation began. HUMPHRYS: But you're telling me that there are things that from our point of view are entirely non-negotiable. RIFKIND: Yes. HUMPHRYS: Those things that we want and those things that we do not want and so you are expecting them to blink but us not to do so. RIFKIND: Our General Election will be the determinant. That's what some of them... HUMPHRYS: Why? RIFKIND: Because they will then either have re-elected a British Conservative Government which..whose position is very clear, with whom they will have to then negotiate or as some of them would hope they will get a soft touch because of a change of Government and a Government prepared to throw away our fundamental national interest. HUMPHRYS: So the leaders of Germany and France will roll over and say British Government has been re-elected therefore they have an electoral mandate but we'll do whatever they want to do. RIFKIND: No, you're presenting it in these colourful terms and I don't... HUMPHRYS: That's not colourful at all, it's the logic of what you're saying. RIFKIND: That's not what I'm saying at all. There are certain negotiating objectives which the French and the Germans have. I do not believe it's crucial to their national interest that there should be more majority voting at this moment in time. I do not believe it's crucial to their national interest to force us into the Social Chapter. HUMPHRYS: No but they believe it's crucial for the development of Europe as they see it. RIFKIND: No, no. They have certain national interests, we're not expecting them to abandon those interests. What we are expecting is them to fully respect our desire to maintain maximum control over our lives and not be subordinated into new European quasi-federal structures. Once our election is behind us that point of view will be much clearer and I believe then we will move to a successful conclusion in the negotiations. HUMPHRYS: Right, but it is a negotiation. That's the point. RIFKIND: Yes. HUMPHRYS: Right. In that case we are prepared to give up certain things just as you expect them to give up certain things. RIFKIND: Yes but I've mentioned earlier the fundamental ingredient of a successful negotiation is yes you make compromises in areas which do not significantly effect your national interest in order to get to the things that you'd really require. Now, of course, in any negotiation, it's never a hundred per cent for one side and zero for the other. Of course that is right and people who suggest otherwise are either extremely foolish or very evasive. So the secret of a good negotiation is to compromise in areas that do not have a significant impact on your own national objectives in order to get the things that most matter to your citizens. HUMPHRYS: Of course all of this might well be academic in the end from your point of view because you were reported the other day as saying the Tory Party is so split anyway we've got no chance of winning the next Election. RIFKIND: I said nothing of the sort. HUMPHRYS: The Glasgow Herald has you as saying that. RIFKIND: That is not necessarily the fact. HUMPHRYS: I accept that is not necessarily the Bible but is that your view? RIFKIND: No it's not my view as it happens, it's not my view. Of course I'm conscious that we have internal divisions in my Party, they exist in the Labour Party as well. Fifty Labour MPs recently attacked Tony Blair for his views on the Single Currency. Where the Labour Party are slightly better than we are is at concealing their internal divisions. But the reality is that there is a historic debate taking place in Britain, it certainly finds, the result of that is divisions in both the major parties, that is a simple fact of life. HUMPHRYS: But what we don't have is goodness knows how many, possibly hundreds of Labour candidates threatening to produce their own manifestos with their own views on Europe which do not coincide with the leadership's views on Europe. You do, that is a problem. RIFKIND: No, with respect what happens is that the media love picking up the odd mark of individual backbenchers... HUMPHRYS: You can hardly escape them. It's not as though we have to crawl around looking for them. RIFKIND: I'm not criticising you for that, I'm simply saying that is what happens. You pick up what you think are splendid headline catching remarks by individual backbenchers and then, because they claim, an individual claims .... HUMPHRYS: You're not telling me it's not going to happen. RIFKIND: Hold on, hold on a moment, don't get so excited. You get an individual backbencher who claims he speaks for two hundred MPs and therefore you produce a headline saying two hundred MPs. You don't know anymore than anyone else does and the fact is you love headlines, you love over-dramatising, you get disappointed when sanity breaks out and that ceases to be considered newsworthy. HUMPHRYS: We haven't had very much experienced of sanity in your terms breaking out. RIFKIND: Well we have more experience of sanity than the media. HUMPHRYS: You may be talking to different people in the Party in that case, I suppose that's possible. RIFKIND: We come up for re-election, you don't you see, that gives us a better contact with the public. HUMPHRYS: What about the latest story this morning that there's a dozen of your Europhiles, let's leave the sceptics for a moment, no doubt you'd like to do. A dozen of your Europhiles poised to join the Liberal Democrats. RIFKIND: You are not pointing out to the viewing public who may not have seen this exciting report, this is a claim made by a Liberal MP, who does not mention a single name and simply has a bit of fun and takes the press for a ride in the usual way. You mustn't be so gullible Mr. Humphrys. HUMPHRYS: There is a bit of evidence for this, we've had it before, we've had two of them leaving you for the Liberal Democrats. RIFKIND: I always think of you as a very highly professional interviewer but actually to base questions on the unattributable remarks of a Liberal MP, come off it. HUMPHRYS: Alright, final, very quite thought. Michael Heseltine says you're going to win by sixty seats. RIFKIND: Only sixty. HUMPHRYS: Only sixty. RIFKIND: I've never heard Michael being so modest in the past. HUMPHRYS: Your forecast. RIFKIND: I'm not making individual forecasts. We'll win and we'll win with a healthy working majority. HUMPHRYS: Clearly by more than sixty seats, if Mr Heseltine was being so... RIFKIND: I'll settle for a satisfactory working majority, but I'll..next time I see Michael I'll tell him not to be so modest. HUMPHRYS: Foreign Secretary, thank you very much. RIFKIND: Thank you. HUMPHRYS: And I was talking to Mr Rifkind a bit earlier this morning and that's it for this week. And indeed for this year, we'll be back after the holidays on January 19th. Have a good Christmas, see you in the New Year. Good afternoon. ...oooOOOooo...