............................................................................... ON THE RECORD BACKBENCH DISCUSSION RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION: BBC-1 DATE: 01.11.92 ............................................................................... JONATHAN DIMBLEBY: Between now and that vote on Wednesday, the Government will use every available wile to limit the backbench rebellion. They won't have to worry about Ian Taylor, he's a Euro-enthusiast and they won't even try with Bill Cash, he's a Euro-sceptic and well beyond redemption; but they will desperately want to secure waverers like Iain Duncan-Smith, who inherited Chingford from Norman Tebbit at the last election and another new boy, Nigel Waterson. Can it be done? Bill Cash, it was reported a couple days or so that you thought the motion was so mild that you might be able to vote for it. I take it this was a form of character assassination? WILLIAM CASH, MP: No, it was simply and soley that I thought that it looked to me as if the motion could in fact have sought to achieve things which it couldn't. I said it was a farce and that's what basically what I think it is and I'm certainly voting against it, I made that abundantly clear. DIMBLEBY: And the basic simple reason for voting it in? CASH: Well because it's a centralising Treaty and since the second reading there's been a massive change in the political landscape not only in this country but also in Europe. We've torn up the ERM, you've got the French referendum, you've got the Danish rejection and therefore as far as I'm concerned the whole political landscape has changed immeasurably. DIMBLEBY: Ian Taylor, the.. what's widely regarded as the anodyne wording of this motion, hasn't apparently hoodwinked Bill Cash, is it in your view a motion for Maastricht game, set and match? IAN TAYLOR, MP: No, I think what it is is a clear sign that we wish to make progress on an issue which is central to the Government's policy. You cannot disentangle Europe as if it was a discardable option, about the efforts the Government have undertaken to revive the economy in this country are inextricably linked with what goes on on the European side. You have for example, a vast amount of inward investment into this country, fifty thousand workers in this country are employed in Japanese companies. DIMBLEBY: But should the waverers be in no doubt that to vote for this is to vote on an issue of substance, namely attitude towards Maastricht? TAYLOR: Well, I'm not going to advise Bill Cash how he should make his judgement... DIMBLEBY: I doubt if he'd listen to you, but anyway.. TAYLOR: He may do, but nevertheless I think the argument here is one as to whether the Party in Parliament is going to back the Prime Minister's judgement, that the progress towards ratification of Maastricht is an essential part of the overall strategy of this Government. DIMBLEBY: Now, Iain Duncan-Smith, waverering, teetering still, where does that conflict leave you? IAIN DUNCAN-SMITH, MP: Well I listened to the Government and I listened to what's said about our position in Europe and my credentials on Europe are very sound, I'm very pro-Europe. But I have to say that I read the Treaty and the two don't match up. What's in the content here in the Treaty is a centralising force, centralising Treaty, it is not a decentralising one. DIMBLEBY: And do you judge the motion to be a motion effectively committing the Government to going for ratification of that Treaty. DUNCAN-SMITH: Well I have to say that the Masstricht process is something I believe that is above party politics because all parties actually had it in their manifesto. I therefore say that if it is we should vote on it as a single issue, it has nothing to do with confidence in the Prime Minister who I fully support or the Government. DIMBLEBY: So are you off the fence? DUNCAN-SMITH: I've always been off the fence, I'm against Maastricht. DIMBLEBY: And what about the motion? DUNCAN-SMITH: Well, I believe that I am unlikely to be able to support the Government. DIMBLEBY: Does mean that you'll probably vote against. DUNCAN-SMITH: Yes. DIMBLEBY: Thank you. Nigel Waterson, how are you leaning as a waverer? NIGEL WATERSON: Well, in the last few days I've decided I definitely will be supporting the Government on this motion and I'll be going through the lobbies on the Government side on Wednesday. DIMBLEBY: Why? WATERSON: First of all I'm not entirely convinced there's a need for this particular motion, this paving motion it's so called, secondly it does, really just commit us to discussing the Bill relating to the Treaty again and thirdly, the Labour Party in my view foolishly have turned this into a matter of confidence. DIMBLEBY: And you are one of those who are persuaded that in effect it has become a vote of confidence in John Major's leadership? WATERSON: Absolutely. DIMBLEBY: And if you were persuaded otherwise, you might go in another direction, but the fact that you regard it as a vote of confidence is the defining point for you. WATERSON: It's certainly one of the major reasons
I'll be supporting the Government on Wednesday. DIMBLEBY: It is a vote of confidence Mr Cash. CASH: Well first of all look at public opinion, only twenty-eight per cent in today's opinion poll have said they're in favour of it. Look at the factors Ian Taylor's just been talking about, the question of jobs - Black Wednesday sent absolute fear and panic through the country as interest rates rocketed up and what the Maastricht Treaty actually does is to roll the Exchange Rate Mechanism straight back into the Maastricht process. DIMBLEBY: But what about John Major's position in this? Mr Waterson says it's a vote of confidence in John Major, you are prepared to see John Major be scattered to the four winds. CASH: I'm saying that for example yesterday he said that people in this country back Maastricht and I must say that the public opinion poll today clearly demonstrates that's not the case. And by the way our numbers I think are significantly higher than have been put out today in The World This Weekend. DIMBLEBY: What's the claim that you have against the motion? CASH: Well very simply that it is rolling back to Maastricht.. DIMBLEBY: No no no, numbers we're talking about. CASH: As far as the numbers are concerned then we have got significantly more than twenty-seven and I think you will find that there are probably about forty in round figures. DIMBLEBY: Forty. Are you claiming... CASH: We think it could be as high as that. DIMBLEBY: If it's that you would in fact defeat the Government even if the Liberal Democrats stick to the position outlined by Ashdown, now are you saying that you believe and they're not just putting it about as you'd be inclined to do in any case. Do you say you genuinely believe that you have got the Government on the run and that they will be defeated? CASH: It's significantly more than twenty-seven and we believe it's well above thirty-five. DIMBLEBY: In that case that would be almost certainly defeat. Ian. TAYLOR: Well I think we've got to bear in mind that the Government has some many difficult issues ahead of it in the next few weeks, it's got the expenditure round, it's got difficult negotiations on GATT, it's got also the questions of clarifying with our partners detailed issues such as subsidiarity. We need to back the Prime Minister's overall judgement in this. DIMBLEBY: Do you share the view then that Nigel Waterson expressed that in the end this does come down to a vote of confidence in the Prime Minister? TAYLOR: Well we're over personalising it, I think what it does do is show the Conservative Party in Parliament is prepared to back the overall strategy of the Government. Europe is part of that as I said earlier, it's not a discardable option and we can't expect anyway to put Maastricht aside when we're brow beating the French trying to get them to agree to make progress on the GATT talks. DIMBLEBY: It's backing for the overall policy of the Government, sorry you want to come in.. WATERSON: Yes, I just want to say there's another point here that in this country and across Europe events are moving in our direction, those of us who are sceptical about Maastricht and want to turn back federalism, therefore although there are both good and bad things in the Treaty it makes it much easier for people like me to support it because events are moving in our favour. DIMBLEBY: Iain Duncan-Smith, Waterson and Taylor say there is an issue of confidence here at stake in the Prime Minister himself or at least in the case of Iain in the Government's strategy overall. You're prepared to ditch Major because you're so deeply opposed to the motion because of what it represents? DUNCAN-SMITH: No, I said earlier on that I don't believe this is a matter of confidence in the Prime Minister at all and I think actually Ian made that point. We're over personalising, it is not about the Prime Minister's position. This is... DIMBLEBY: Is Nigel Waterson duped on this? DUNCAN-SMITH: I think he's mistaken but that's a disagreement between the two of us. I actually happen to believe that this Treaty fundamentally is wrong for Europe, it's not just that it's..I'm anti-European, I'm not, I'm pro-European. This will put nation against nation, things like the ERM stage two accord will actually have us going in front of the Council under majority voting, being voted against for not being back in the ERM, it going in front of the ECJ, they finding against us and then we're back to... DIMBLEBY: Okay, now look, you heard though Bill Cash talk about the votes that he thinks are going to be with you, his hopes there're up for forty, doubtless you hope the same kind of thing. That does mean that John Major is defeated and there's no point in beating about the bush, it's very clear it's a personal defeat because of what he said as well -
you can wear that? DUNCAN-SMITH: Well, I happen to believe in a democracy you have to go with the will of Parliament. CASH: The most important thing here is what is this doing to the United Kingdom, there is a massive transfer of powers from Britain away to the European Community, this is a very centralising Treaty and there's a great deal of disinformation put out, a union, duties imposed upon people. The fact is that this is a massive centralising Treaty.. DIMBLEBY: Ian Taylor. TAYLOR: Bill Cash has to understand that the real centralisation occurred in the Single Act which was signed by Mrs Thatcher. Yes it's absolutely true that that where qualifed majority voting started, it's also very importantly true that we wanted that because we wanted the whole of the single market programme pushed through against opposition of certain other countries. Now if you don't get Maastricht you're left with what Bill Cash and others think to be failures of the single market without any .... CASH: I voted...I voted for the Single European Act because I believe that it was going to do a lot of good to British jobs, I still believe therefore that we can continue with that. But this other Treaty is about Government, not about trade and the central bank is the most centralising feature that anybody could imagine with unelected, unaccountable bankers, effectively taking over the views and decisions of the voters of this country. DIMBLEBY: Nigel Waterson. WATERSON: I'm convinced now that we must get ratification out of the way as soon as possible so we can use what remains of our presidency to stamp our authority and our agenda on the European Community. DIMBLEBY: You want the Government to ratify, now that's your... WATERSON: I think we now have to get it out of the way because it's actually stopping us doing what I'd like us to do. DIMBLEBY: Do you agree what Andrew Rowe said in our film that if you don't win this and Bill Cash does, that effectively John Major's own powerbase is so eroded that he's finished. WATERSON: I think there's some truth in that but I don't think the Government is going to lose on Wednesday. CASH: We can have a vote of confidence. WATERSON: I just don't think the Government will lose and I suspect enough members of the Labour Party will do what John Smith did nearly twenty years and ... DIMBLEBY: But if you think the Government...if the Government does go down you do think effectively that's slow drawing curtains for the Prime Minister. WATERSON: I wouldn't go that far but it would certainly be something of a blow to the..... DIMBLEBY: Just on that Ian Taylor. TAYLOR: Yes, just on that, if we were defeated on Wednesday then how much more difficult would it be for the Prime Minister to try to secure progress in the GATT round, how much more difficult would it be for the Prime Minister to get progress on subsidiarity - exactly the points that are worrying colleagues who are proposing to vote against on Wednesday, it's counter productive from their point of view. DIMBLEBY: Just one brief word. DUNCAN-SMITH: Well the subsidiarity thing which is absolutely core to this, it's quite vital to point out that what's in the Treaty under 3B is so vague that the only way of making that cut is to actually re-open the Treaty and amend it, no codicils will matter, and they're not going to do that VOICE IN BACKGROUND: ...and we can have a confidence motion. DIMBLEBY: You can have a confidence motion, you say. Gentleman, the four of you, thank you. ...oooOooo...