................................................................................ ON THE RECORD RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 19.9.93 ................................................................................ JOHN HUMPHRYS: Good afternoon and welcome to a new series of On The Record. As the Liberal Democrats assemble in Torquay for the first of this year's party conferences I'll be talking to their leader Paddy Ashdown. I'll be asking him about allegations of racist campaigning by his party in Tower Hamlets AND about WHY people vote for his party. If it's true that they're mostly protest votes how's he going to turn THAT into solid support by the next general election? And what about his party? We hear a great deal of "Commander Ashdown" but less of his troops? Are they the same old Liberals in different colours..? We've been looking at them. But first, it's conference time again and the Liberal Democrats are the first of the parties to decamp to the seaside. Their deliberations in Torquay have been sonmewhat overshadowed by the row over their local party's tactics in that now notorious by-election in Tower Hamlets. Paddy Ashdown is at his Conference in Torquay. Good morning Mr Ashdown. PADDY ASHDOWN MP: Good morning, John. HUMPHRYS: Let's talk first about the Tower Hamlets
affair. You've set up an inquiry and everybody says, well done, that's exactly
what you should have done. The question perhaps though is why didn't you do that sort of thing a lot earlier? ASHDOWN: Because it wasn't necessary, the first time I saw these leaflets was on Friday morning. Now you might argue that I ought to have seen them earlier. One of the things the inquiry will be looking into and on which they are perfectly entitled to criticise is the party's handling of this matter but you may be certain of this John, we have taken this deadly seriously, the inquiry we've held is... or we're going to hold, is one in which there'll be independent voices including one from the CRE. It'll be published and it will make recommendations. Now I want you to draw a comparison between that and the way that Labour who, the Sunday Times to its credit, has also put under the spotlight in this campaign, they published one leaflet which also has a sentence which is possible to represent as having a racist edge and they acted in a way which gave the BNP their chance. Labour has not done anything to put its own house in order and some of the overheated and ridiculous charges made by Jack Straw, most of which are inaccuracies gathered the highways and byways which are simply untrue, perhaps might be taken more seriously if Mr Straw and the Labour Party took the same kind of clear and tough action that we have taken about the mote in their own eye. HUMPHRYS: You said, I may argue, that perhaps you should have done something about it or known about it earlier. That's exactly what I would do. Let me take you back, if I may, to May 1990, when your party put out a pamphlet purporting to be a Labour Party pamphlet with racist overtones. Now clearly you knew about that because there was a court case as a result of it and the court case found that this pamphlet was a fraudulent device but apparently nothing was done about it within the party. ASHDOWN: That's absolutely wrong. The court case was bought by Labour against the Liberal Democrats, found in our favour and the Labour case was dismissed. HUMPHRYS: The court found it was a fraudulent device, the document, that's absolutely right. ASHDOWN: The court considered whether or not that document infringed the law on electoral practices and it decided against and the Liberal Democrats won that court case and Labour lost it. Now the terms of this inquiry will look into the whole of this aspect and decide and make recommendations about what needs to be done. But we at that stage put in place certain mechanisms to ensure that this should not happen again. Those mechanisms will now be looked at, if it has been proved that the mechanisms we put into practice were inadequate to stop this happening again then I want to know about that. But I want you to draw the comparison here John, and forgive me if I say that the press, it does seem appear to have been somewhat partial about this matter. We have taken this matter very seriously, it is my view that the way that the Liberal Democrats and the Labour Party acted may have given the BNP a chance they should never have had. Since that day, we have spent our time fighting against each other instead of fighting the BNP, taking increasingly petty charges levelled by Mr Straw and I do think it's important if the Labour Party is going to take this line that they will take equivalent steps to put their house in order. HUMPHRYS: Alright, well we... ASHDOWN: And I would like to suggest to you that maybe that's a question you should be asking them because one of the leaflets, as I said to Mr Straw the other night, contains a line which is clearly with a racist edge to it. HUMPHRYS: But at the moment I have you here, Mr Ashdown and I don't have Mr Straw. Now manifestly those mechanisms that were put into place clearly did not work, were inadequate, well because in October 1992, and I have it here, there was another leaflet, this time issued by one of your own organisations - Island Focus - "The Liberals say what islanders want is important not what the CRE want". Now that is clearly carrying racist implications - undertones. ASHDOWN: John, let's wait and see. The reason why I've put this inquiry into place is because I want it to look at these matters and make recommendations. I want it to.... I do not know and when I saw these leaflets I took immediate action... HUMPHRYS: So you did see that leaflet, did you? ASHDOWN: No, when I saw the leaflets on Friday, the answer to that... the answer to your question is no. When I saw... HUMPHRYS: Sorry, can I just be clear, sorry to interrupt you, so that we've been clear about this. You didn't see that October '92 leaflet at all? ASHDOWN: No, I did not see that leaflet. HUMPHRYS: Shouldn't you have? ASHDOWN: Well you might argue that. HUMPHRYS: Well I am arguing that. ASHDOWN: Well John, our party's put out leaflets in council by-election right across the country, many thousands of them. I want to know why the mechanisms that were in place did not work. I take this matter extremely seriously, I've set up an inquiry to provide me with the answers to that and that... I'm not going to pre-judge the issue and you wouldn't expect me to. HUMPHRYS: No, I'm not asking you to do that. ASHDOWN: The point is that I've set up this inquiry, I want to know what happened, what the motives were. Let me be clear. The idea that Tower Hamlets is a racist council is simply nonsense. Seventy per cent of our membership are Bangladeshi. Most...many... we've got the highest percentage of ethnic minority councillors in Tower Hamlets - Liberal Democrats - than anywhere else in the country. The idea that is being put about that they are racist is nonsense. (interruption) If I may finish John. HUMPHRYS: Alright. ASHDOWN: When I saw these leaflets I questioned them because they are capable of being mis-represented and the question I want to know is whether or not that was the intention or whether it was an accident. But this inquiry will look into that, it will look into the party's handling of this matter, it has an absolute right to make criticisms and recommendations about how this matter will be put right if indeed those mistakes were made. Now I'm not going to pre-judge that now and you would not expect me to do so. HUMPHRYS: And I'm not asking you to pre-judge the inquiry, what I'm asking you to do is explain why you didn't take action sooner. It's not as if you weren't warned about it. The Labour leader on the council... may I just make this point, the Labour leader on the council wrote to you and warned about it. Martin Downs, senior Liberal Democrat, wrote in the Guardian: We, MPs and party officials were repeatedly pressed to take action but nothing happened. David Bellotti apparently wrote to you earlier this week and said, you should be doing something about it and you didn't do anything about it, that's the implication. ASHDOWN: You are unquestioningly and I....
unquestioningly and I think you shouldn't be, accepting the word of Mr Straw. I Let me take the case of David Bellotti.... HUMPHRYS: Well is none of that true, I mean, I read the letter for myself in the Guardian yesterday. ASHDOWN: The David Bellotti statement you made is untrue, as we clearly said yesterday, it is wholly untrue, wholly unsubstantiated, it was categorically denied yesterday and I'm surprised that the Press continued to run with that allegation today when you knew yesterday that was untrue. I think you should look at some of Mr Straw's extraordinary statements and perhaps just investigate them a little further. That is wholly untrue. HUMPHRYS: But what some people may find extraordinary is that in spite of a number about what was going on in Tower Hamlets, you as the leader of the party didn't say, look we've got to take stock of this, let's set up an inquiry now, let's fire, let's sack from the party anybody's who has been involved in anything about which we are really dubious? ASHDOWN: Every single thing that has come to my notice, I have investigated. On one occasion I had to write to a councillor because he made statements which were capable of being misrepresented in 1991. That received publicity in the local Press even if you don't know about it. But let me be clear, we have set up an inquiry to look into this matter, it will look into the totality of it, it will look into the Labour Party's literature as well. We are taking this very, very seriously. I don't think I could have acted more decisively or more quickly on this matter, and I think now it would be well worth while asking the Labour Party why they are not taking the same thing. I will... I want to make this absolutely clear to you. This inquiry will be thorough, it will make recommendations, if it wishes to criticise the way that the party has handled this matter, it is entitled to do so. HUMPHRYS: And a final quick point, will.. ASHDOWN: I believe it should now be left to them to make this... HUMPHRYS: And a final quick point, will it be an open inquiry? ASHDOWN: Yes. HUMPHRYS: So that we can go... ASHDOWN: It's going to be open, it's going to be... HUMPHRYS: I mean, open in the sense that reporters will be invited to attend and anybody else who wants to go? ASHDOWN: Well, if reporters wish to attend, of course they're perfectly entitled to attend. But it's... it will take evidence from the public, anybody who wishes to put comments into it, it contains independent people including, I hope, the Lord Leicester, probably the most respected person in Britain on race relations. It will publish its results, it will make recommendations and I come back to this question, which is the central one. We take this very seriously, we want to know what's gone on. I would like to know now why the Labour Party is not prepared to do the same about its leaflets and its campaigning style and maybe that would be a question that would be worthwhile asking. HUMPHRYS: Paddy Ashdown, for the moment, thank you, but please don't go away because we're going to take a broader look now at what the Liberal Democrats are all about and what they really stand for. Inevitably those famous victories at Newbury and Christchurch brought fresh hope that the party which has been the bridesmaid for so long might be a step closer to tripping up the aisle as the bride herself. But the past is littered with promises of Liberal breakthroughs, only to be dashed at subsequent General Elections. However, since the Liberal Democrats DO claim the right to be taken seriously will their policies stand the kind of scrutiny they're sure to attract? Or will allegations of opportunism stick? Terry Dignan reports. ****** HUMPHRYS: Now Paddy Ashdown, I'm sure there are one or two little points you'd like to make out of that, as a result of that film, but let me ask you first about the general proposition that as a party you have prospered because of the protest vote? PADDY ASHDOWN: Well, you are right. I want to make one or two comments about it, because I've never seen such a preposterously biased and partial report in my life. Let me take the protest vote. Are you denying John that protest is a part of politics? If you are you are denying the basic thrust of British politics over the last forty years. HUMPHRYS: No, since you ask me the question I'm asking you whether you accept that proposition. ASHDOWN: Let me address it if I may in my own words. The majority of people who vote Conservative do so to keep the Labour Party out. The majority of people who vote Labour do so to keep the Conservative Party out. Protest is part of the voting pattern of all political parties. Of course I don't say that it's a part of the voting pattern of our party. The point that matters is that in by-elections like Christchurch and in by-elections like Newbury, and I've never been a person who believed a by-election predicted the next election - it tells you where you are and in the country elections right across the south of England where we're now the largest party in all the counties of England, when people turned away from the Conservatives they did not turn to Labour, they turned to us. Now, if you're asking me to say as I guess you are that our job is as you rightly defined it earlier on, to convert that protest into solid votes, that is right, that is our task, but that's not a new phenomenon in British politics, nor is it one as your report suggests exclusively suffered by the Liberal Democrats. HUMPRHYS:: Well, I don't .... ASHDOWN: This is the fact of matter...the fact of the matter for the Conservative Party and the Labour Party as well, come to my constituency, look at the facts and you'll discover that most people, I think I'm right in saying something like fifty-five per cent of the people who voted Conservative at the last election did it to keep Labour out. That's a protest vote, so it's not something you can direct solely at us. HUMPHRYS: I don't know that the reporter used the word exclusive, but let's look at some of the suggestions. Let me put it no stronger than that, that the Liberal Democrats aren't quite certain occasionally what they're on about, and people may perhaps be just a shade confused. VAT on domestic fuel - you would unequivocally scrap that? ASHDOWN: Yes. HUMPHRYS: No caveats? ASHDOWN: No caveats. And let me tell you that - why we're entitled to do that. It is because at the last election and the charge of inconsistency comes pretty curiously from the Labour Party...from the Conservative Party - at the last election we considered this fundamental shift in taxation that we proposed away from the things we want - wealth, jobs, value-added to the things we don't want, pollution, the use of energy and the use of finite raw materials. In a consultative document much quoted by a government minister, a consultative document in 1990, we considered VAT as a mechanism to do that and we rejected it, so the difference is that we proposed an energy tax at the last election - we rejected VAT. The Conservatives campaigned incidentally up and down the country against us on that energy tax and said it would wreck the country. As soon as they came to power they put into practice the mechanism which we had rejected and did exactly what we were
suggesting during the general election. Now who is guilty of inconsistency in this matter? HUMPHRYS: So you don't want VAT on fuel but you do want an energy tax? Now do you say to people, "Look, we don't like this idea of VAT on fuel, but if we get into power you're going to have to pay more for your energy"? ASHDOWN: Yes, and let me be absolutely clear. I think in every speech I made in Newbury and in Christchurch I make that abundantly clear. We were not in favour of VAT on fuel, but we were in favour of an energy tax, and here is the fundamental difference. The energy tax is not raising money for the revenue, for the Treasury to bail the Conservatives out for their mistakes, dumping the problems on the poorest. It was to be used on a fiscally neutral basis with the money ploughed back into the economy specifically to help the vulnerable who are now going to be so damaged by VAT, specifically to fund energy-saving programmes like insulation and specifically to reduce income tax. Now there is a fundamental difference between that approach which is about the environment and which is about protecting the vulnerable and the Conservative Party's approach which is about dumping their mistakes on the poorest in the country and raising money to pay for their mistakes, and of course we are entitled, perfectly entitled to campaign against VAT on that matter, and when the charge of inconsistency comes to be laid I would have thought that people might look at the Conservatives' record who campaigned against us in the election on precisely this and did it straight away afterwards. HUMPHRYS: Well let me tell me where the charge of - one of the charges of inconsistency arise, from this particular version of the energy tax, the EC carbon tax, energy tax, whatever you want to call it. Your document said we support it unequivocally - on the first page it said: we support it. Alan Beith at the news conference at which that document was released, said "I stress that we are not committed to the proposal in its present form". Now you'll accept that's mildly confusing to people? ASHDOWN: John, we are dealing with a circumstance where we don't know the nation's economy, the economic situation. The Chancellor of Exchequer won't tell us what he's going to do in November, quite rightly so too, but he has all the figures to his hand, yet you ask us to make a precise prediction. HUMPHRYS: No, no, no, I'm not asking you to do anything of the sort. ASHDOWN: If I may finish, and of course we will want to take into account the condition of the nation in our November budget package and unlike Labour we always put forward an alternative budget which is absolutely clear, and of course we will want to judge the condition of the country when we come up to the general election. What we have established in this document was a principle that we would wish to follow. How that principle can be played through for the good of the economy depends on the state of the economy at the time you come to put it into practice, not that's not unreasonable I wouldn't have thought. HUMPHRYS: Except that is it a principle to say, and I'm quoting from the document, "We support the European Community proposals for an energy carbon tax and would press for its immediate implementation at a national level. ASHDOWN: Yes. HUMPHRYS: Not might - would! ASHDOWN: That's exactly right and that would be one of the principles that we should follow. I mean you claim that we are unclear, we're not prepared to stand up and say that tough things are necessary. Let me tell where we are absolutely clear. We are absolutely clear on a proposition which is unique in British politics, that we want to see a change in the system of taxation away from taxing wealth and jobs and towards taxing pollution and energy. No other party puts that forward. That is a principle of taxation that we've adopted. When you come to put figures on that you will naturally want to look at the economy in the state that it is and you put the figures on, but people are clear about where we stand, or at least they should be. HUMPHRYS: And I wouldn't dream of asking you for precise figures at this stage because it may be a little while before you're in power, but at the very least surely you can tell me whether, let's take the little old lady, Mrs Smith who lives in her first floor flat, who's already lagged up the eyeballs, she doesn't have any need for lagging - she is going to have pay more for her fuel bills is she not? And the idea of recycling the money isn't going to help her. ASHDOWN: No question about that, but what she will get, because we are committed to recyling the money not putting it into the Treasury's pockets to pay for the Conservatives' mistakes, what she will get is an adequate assistance in order to make sure that she is not left vulnerable to this in the way that VAT does, so we're quite clear about this. HUMPHRYS: Alright, and what about .... ASHDOWN: ...and this is the important point, and the difference between our proposal and the Conservatives' is that their proposals dumps the problem on the poorest and most vulnerable in the country. Our proposal will be put into operation on a fiscally neutral basis including John, using some of that money to cut income tax. HUMPHRYS: And what about the other Mrs Jones down the road, who's rather better off than Mrs Smith, wouldn't qualify for income support or anything, and she's also lagged up to the eyeballs, so she doesn't need money to help her with lagging. She would end up paying more, full stop? ASHDOWN: No, we have made it quite clear that this is a fundamental change we want to see in our taxation system and insofar as it generates money it will do so, that will used on a fiscally neutral basis to reduce income tax. HUMPHRYS: But the answer to that question is yes? ASHDOWN: The answer is that she may pay more for her fuel, but she may pay less for her income tax because that's the shift we want to make. The total global, the total national burden of taxation will not be changed by this and so it's a very clear proposal, a very interesting one and totally different from the country's, from the government's, so the lady down the road may well be saying, "Yes, out of my global income I have to pay more for my fuel, but I'm now paying less in taxation because some of that money will be ploughed back into that". HUMPHRYS: Except that it seems that you are using that money twice. You're recycling - ASHDOWN: No. HUMPHRYS: Well, let me explain why I say that. You're recycling it so that you can help Mrs Jones and Mrs Smith with the lagging for the house whether they need it - if they need it, but you're also using it to offset other taxes? ASHDOWN: Let me be clear to you, I've said to you exactly how the money would be used, I don't know what it would generate, it depends what level you set it, but it would be used in three areas, it would be divided up if you like, in three areas, and they are in descending orders of priority. One: to protect the vulnerable, two: to encourage the energy efficiency through energy saving projects including insulation, and we have the worse standards of insulation of any of the countries in the temperate climates, and three: to reduce the level of income tax. HUMPHRYS: It's got to go an awful long way hasn't it? ASHDOWN: But let me be clear John, what we have said is that the overall burden on the nation will be, since this has been done on a fiscally neutral basis, will be the same as it is under any other system of taxation you put into practice. HUMPHRYS: Right. ASHDOWN: Now, that's a very clear principle, it is a very remarkable one, it proposes a fundamental change in the system of taxation, and for those who say we don't have an economic policy, they ought to just address the fact that we are proposing the most fundamental change to taxation that this country has ever seen. HUMPHRYS: So that particular tax for instance, is going to be, as you put it, 'fiscally neutral'. That means it's not going to help cut the PSBR, government borrowing. ASHDOWN: Let's address that, but again we've been utterly clear about that and again during the Newbury by-election and the Christchurch by-election, I made it absolutely clear that after you have made the savings that are necessary within out public spending system, our health system, our education system and our welfare system, if there is then a question that is left over about how you raise the money, rather than cutting that system below the bone, we are prepared to raise taxation. Labour's never been prepared to say that, Conservatives have never been prepared to say that, that is a principle of taxation on which we have been uniquely clear. The other two parties, you have Gordon Brown on this programme and ask him, he will not give you an answer that I give you categorically, that if there is no other way to pay for PSBR, except to choose one of these two options, to cut our welfare system below the marrow and below the bone, or to raise taxation, we would like to see taxation raised. Full stop, end of story, absolutely clear. HUMPHRYS: Perhaps instead of Gordon Brown I should have Alan Beith here and ask him, because he said 'we have massive unemployment, which makes the debt problem spiral, we cannot tax our way out of that spiral'. ASHDOWN: Well that is correct, and you'd like to tell me perhaps when he said that, because I know when he said that. HUMPHRYS: Well I can tell you exactly yes, the l7th of March, 1993. ASHDOWN: Exactly John, in the circumstances of the last Budget, and we made it clear in the last Budget that we did not believe that taxation was right for the nation at that time, because it would have plunged the nation deep into a recession which we are not yet on our way out of. But Alan Beith went on to say, if your researchers have been good enough to provide you with the rest. 'But that a raise in taxation will have to be considered, probably in the autumn budget'. Now you can't get it clearer than that. HUMPHRYS: So the country has been transformed in the few months between those two dates? ASHDOWN: No, of course not, but you know as well as I that in March there was no question that the nation was still sinking deeper into recession. We now have a recession which is at least, in my judgement ended, and although the recovery is not particularly strong. We made it clear in our spring proposition, for the Spring Budget, that the spring was not the right time, given the nation's economy, for raising taxation, but it was an issue that would have to be faced later. Let me remind you when you, when you accuse us of being unclear, that Labour refused to say even what it would do at spring, let alone in the autumn..(interruption)...consistent and clear. HUMPHRYS: But you're happy to go to the electorate saying we're going to put up taxes folks? ASHDOWN: Well, I'm happy to go to the electorate, and let me tell you this, that the opinion polls support us and not the government, as you saw. We made this quite clear at the Christchurch by-election, we say if the option is to cut our welfare system below the bone or raise taxation, we are interested in justice in taxation, and this should not be done through the indirect taxation mechanism, it should be levied on income tax in a straight, honest and fair manner. Let me tell you this, that when I went to meeting after meeting after meeting at Christchurch and Newbury, and I asked people to raise their hands, do you want your welfare system cut or are you prepared to pay extra in taxation, ninety per cent regularly put up their hands. HUMPHRYS: So the answer to the question was yes? ASHDOWN: The answer to the question, the answer to the question as it was with Alan Beith in March, is yes. HUMPHRYS: I'm speeding up because we just... ASHDOWN: Can you get it clearer than that. HUMPHRYS: Absolutely not, thank you very much. I'm speeding up because we're running out of time. PR, I saw you wince at a reference in that film to PR. Well let me put this to you. Your manifesto said reform of the voting system is the key to a successful future, is it still the key, unequivocally? ASHDOWN: Yes, unequivocally. HUMPHRYS: And it doesn't matter if that places you rather closer to the Labour Party than it does to the Conservative Party, that you're not equidistant any longer? ASHDOWN: I don't give a damn who it places me closer to. I'm interested in putting forward the policies of my party, they are distinctive, they do not belong to another party, the Liberal Democrats are a distinctive and growingly powerful force in this country, we are independent, we are hand maidens to nobody, nor shall we be, we stand for what we believe in, and we believe a fundamental reform to the electoral system is part of the reforms to democracy that we desperately need in this country, to put politics more back in touch with the people of this country, I think the gap between government and the governed is now growing dangerously wide. PR is and remains essential to that, and the statement on your programme that we had loosened our attachment to it is simply wrong. HUMPHRYS: And Charles Kennedy's reference 'you can only get so much constitutional form through in any one parliament', we shouldn't take that too seriously. ASHDOWN: Well of course, because at the end of the day you have to plan your parliamentary programme, it's going to be tough but don't be in any doubt about the importance that we attach to PR. What Charles Kennedy was rightly saying is that, as you said yourself, we are known for our commitment to PR, I would like the party to be known for its commitment to an economic policy and to other matters, and whilst we have our opportunity we'll sell that. And that incidentally, and that incidentally is what was essential about that document, it laid a framework. It wasn't a manifesto, of course not, three years to the election, it laid a framework within which our policy would be framed, neither the Conservatives nor the Labour Party could produce such a document. We are committed to opportunity, opportunity for the individual, self-reliant individuals, strong communities backed by an active government, that's our message. HUMPHRYS: Paddy Ashdown, thank you very much indeed. ...oooOooo...