................................................................................ ON THE RECORD INTERVIEW WITH PADDY ASHDOWN RECORDED FROM TRANSMISSION BBC-1 DATE: 29.05.94 ................................................................................ JOHN HUMPHRYS: On the line from Yeovil, in the Clematis strewn garden of his home there is their Leader, Paddy Ashdown. Good Morning, Mr Ashdown. PADDY ASHDOWN MP: Good Morning, John. HUMPHRYS: Can we be clear about one thing. You want the European Union to have more power than it has, at the moment? ASHDOWN: We see a continuous and increasing pooling of sovereignty at Europe, at the European level, where that is of benefit to the British citizen. And, there are clear areas where it is; in macro economics, in the protection of our environment and the construction of the framework in which we can have a stable defence in the future. We see that as a logical progression. There of course will be no change to the Maastricht settlement but that will come up for review in 1996 and we believe that the progress towards pooling sovereignty in those areas, which are of practical benefit to Britain and British citizens, will, then, be have - have to be addressed and we see steps that can be taken that progress that further. HUMPHRYS: So, those who say the Liberal Democrats would hand over great chunks of Britain's sovereignty are right, because you say pooling sovereignty it means the same thing, doesn't it? ASHDOWN: No, they're wrong. We see a progress, a process that has been in place now for five or ten years. There are further sensible steps that can be taken forward, where those are consistent with Britain's interests and the interests of Britain's citizens. And, where I think they are most substantially wrong, and you've seen a lot of scare mongering and lies from the Conservative Party this last week. They won the last election on the basis of a diet of lies and scaremongering and they're trying to win this one as well on the same basis. I don't think they'll succeed because I don't think the British people are likely to be fooled twice, John. But, where we show our colours most clearly is that we have our plans for Europe, we have our ideas for Europe but, at the end of the day, we are the only party that makes it absolutely clear that the consent for those plans must be obtained through the ballot box from the British people. So, we are the only Party which says that we cannot go further than the British people give their specific consent for through the ballot box, through in my view almost certainly a referendum. HUMPHRYS: But, where they're right, of course, is when they say that we would lose the power to veto those things of which we disapprove. ASHDOWN: Prove that. HUMPHRYS: Well, alright. One of your own comments
if you like: We want Ministers to make decisions in public and without single nation vetos. Paddy Ashdown, December 1993. ASHDOWN: Correct, and that is what exactly what the Government has done. We want them to be able to do that. The Government last used the veto in 1985. HUMPHRYS: But the Government has fought to keep the veto. ASHDOWN: If I may just finish, John - nearly ten years ago. So, they prefer not to use the veto, but that doesn't mean to say that in certain areas the veto would not still be available. In fact, John, I challenge you to find the word 'veto' in any European legislation. There is no such thing as the veto. What there is is certain areas of policy which in order for them to be decided upon have to have unanimity. And, unless there is unanimity you cannot progress and we would see that being preserved in a number of key areas. I'll give you two. One is the extension of the membership of the European Union, in which there would have to be unanimity before the decision could be taken amongst the member states. And, the second - and, incidentally, backed by a absolute majority of the European Parliament - and the second is executive decisions. For instance, those relating to budgets that the Council operates in a quasi-Cabinet fashion. Then, consensus would be required and, for instance, in the case of Britain's rebate no decision could be taken to alter that, unless that consensus was established. You may call that a veto, if you wish. I would prefer to call it a unanimous decision-making process, which is preserved in certain key areas. HUMPHRYS: Well, let me put it into a different sort of language, then, if you like. It is hypocritical of the Conservatives who have resisted decision-making by qualified majority to use the paralysis they have created to claim that Europe is incapable of developing - in this case, a common Foreign policy. Again, your own words, the words in your manifesto. No, you don't use the word 'veto' but everybody knows perfectly well what you mean. ASHDOWN: Well, John, the position is very, very clear - that there will be no change until 1996. That's the summit conference, inter-governmental conference that will, then take place then. We will clearly propose that it's neccessary to move forward a step to the creation of a common Defence and security policy. And, that will involve the use of - in some cases - qualified majority voting. But, in the cases of ... area
of operations, for instance in Bosnia, nations would reserve the right to withhold their troops from that just as they do under NATO at present. So, it's a mixture of the two. But, at all events, whatever proposals are come up with, it is still subject to the consent of the British people through the referendum. If you go out in the street and ask people about the veto, the veto they want, if you insist on calling it a veto, is no one cast in a secret Council of Ministers' chamber by a politician who claims to be acting on Britain's behalf but won't say when the veto is used or what it's used for. But, it's the veto in the hands of the British people exercised through the ballot box, so that whatever package is arrived at about further steps towards European Union, it is subject to the consent of the British people. And, the Liberal Democrats are the only people who say that. HUMPHRYS: Well, let me stop using the word 'veto', then, and have somebody use it - somebody you'll know quite well. He has just said that the European Union would be stultified if we did not abandon the veto. David Steel. ASHDOWN: Yes, read on. HUMPHRYS: Well, look.. ASHDOWN: No no John, you're quoting from him so you ought to finish the quote because he makes that point quite clearly that that is in areas of policy and if you read on that quote you will discover that he is saying exactly what I've just said: that in areas of policy, in areas of legislative change, we want to see that the extension of qualified majority voting. But in areas of executive decision making taken by the Council of Ministers we are..we would persist with the unanimous procedure that is currently in place. Look, let's be clear about this - who abolished the quotes unquotes "veto"? Mrs Thatcher. She agreed to that in order to establish qualified majority voting; you would not have a single market were that not the case, you would not have the environmental directives that give us clean water and clean bathing beaches were that not the case. Who extended qualified majority voting? Mr Major. By signing up to the Maastricht Treaty; both Mrs Thatcher and Mr Major implicitly agreed that there was a case for the further extension of qualified majority voting, now that's all we've got in our manifesto, the Tories then put it in theirs. HUMPHRYS: Right, where do you want to extend it? ASHDOWN: Well I've told you where we'd extend it, we'd extend it in order to create, for instance, the institutions of a common security and defence policy... HUMPHRYS: Can we take that one first if I may, may we follow that up because you want to bring in..it's called the "second pillar" or whatever it's called at the moment, you want to bring in foreign and security policy within the European Union institutions. ASHDOWN: We think that's a sensible way forward, yes. HUMPHRYS: So you would be handing over decision making that now is made by Britain on key matters of foreign and security policy to the European Union? ASHDOWN: We'd be pooling our sovereignty in order to be able to provide better defence for Britain, there's no other way of doing it. We can't defend this country at our shores, NATO has proved that to us for the last forty years. NATO, with the American likely withdrawal from Europe, is unlikely to be able to fulfil that function effectively over the next ten years. We have to build a second pillar for that; what we are seeking to build at the European level is no more than Britain has had in NATO for the last forty years and indeed, the Conservatives have argued that has been the cornerstone of our defence. There shouldn't be much frightening I'd have thought. You see John, what is happening at present is that the Conservatives, so divided amongst themselves - and you've seenthe opinion polls today - dare not put forward any positive policies. All they can do is criticise, scaremonger and lie about the policies of others; indeed what they are doing now is dragging this whole debate down into the gutter. The secret of the European elections will be..the winners in the European elections will depend on deferential turnout and what Mr Major and the Conservative Party have quite deliberately decided to do is appeal to the rabid Right-wing in this country. I very much hope they do not succeed because if they do they will do desperate damage to the servility and liberality and tolerance of British politics and Mr Major is playing..is risking with all that, he's risking all that essential quality of our society and our politics in order to save his own skin and the Conservatives' skin and I think those are very very discreditable acts. And I make this challenge to him: if he wants seriously to inform the British people - before June the 9th - then let him appear, I'll appear with him and I'm sure the Labour Party will too, and let us debate these issue on television in front of the British people. That's the way to inform people about what we stand for, that's the way to undermine the lies and scaremongering and that's the way to treat the British people in the way that I think they ought to be treated before this very very serious vote. HUMPHRYS: Well we shall certainly pass on the invitation to Mr Major and whoever is leading the Labour Party - well I suppose it'll have to be Mrs Beckett at the moment wouldn't it - and you good self to appear on this programme and debate those issues. ASHDOWN: Love it, love to do it. HUMPHRYS: We shall see whether that comes off or not. But let's return to a central charge of the Conservative Party against the Liberal Democrats, it is that you would substantially shift power from London - that power which now resides in London - to Europe and you have just said that you want to bring security and foreign policy into..take that into the European Union institions. That is a substantial shift of power isn't it? ASHOWN: But John, it is no more a shift of power than was involved in the creation of a single market which Mrs Thatcher hailed as one of her great achievements. That also did precisely that, it's the continuation of a process that has been going on for thirty or forty years now. HUMPHRYS: But it's substantial.. ASHDOWN: But if I may say to you..but let me remind you that if we were to take further steps we make that, subject to the wishes of the British people, the consent of the British people expressed through the ballot box. We cannot and we're the only party who make clear that we will not take the British people further than the British people are prepared to go. That is the safeguard. We have our views on Europe and we think the continuing development of Europe along the lines I've suggested is the right way to go because it is in the interests of British citizens. HUMPHRYS: Right, so what you're saying, when your candidates go on the doorsteps you are saying "vote for us because we want move much further than we have already gone". If I may just finish the question, "we have agreed", for instance, "amongst our own councils that we want to shift foreign and defence security policy across to Europe". You will be making that perfectly "of course we'll give you a vote, but that is what we want you to support". ASHDOWN: You're suggesting that we're going to shift the whole of foreign affairs and defence policy - of course we're not. Britain will retain an independant role in foreign affairs, it will retain an independent security responsibility for places like Falkland and Hong Kong, it will have independant lines to persue elsewhere in the world but there are elements of our foreign and security policy which would be better..if we were to better applied, if we were to place those with other European countries, pooling our sovereignty. Why? Because, as NATO showed us, it's the only way to have effective defence and because it gives us a stronger voice in the world, not wholesale but there is a role where it is to the advantage to Britain to do that because that is of benefit to our citizens. HUMPHRYS: And integrating our armed forces? ASHDOWN: Well, we're already doing that. We're .. HUMPHRYS: Up to a point...a very limited point. ASHDOWN: Sorry? HUMPHRYS: Up to a very limted point. ASHDOWN: Oh no, it's not limited at all. I've served in the Anglo-Dutch Marine Forces and that's a process already in place. Go to Bosnia and you'll find we're already doing it as I've seen with my own eyes, we're already working together. HUMPHRYS: But. ASHDOWN: And working together extremely effectively, and after all I don't know why you're concentrating on this to such an extent, because that's exactly what's happened with NATO. How did we assure this country's defence. I happen to believe that the next decade will be an extremely turbulent, an extremely dangerous and extremely difficult one, as we see Europe plunged into instability as a result of the collapse of the Soviet empire. Now, how does Europe, how does Britain assure its defence in that kind of period. It can't do it by itself, it works with others. NATO was the construct we've used until now and it will continue to be so in the future, but I want to see a European pillar built on top of that or alongside it, and you will see the proper co-ordination of our defence where it is of interest to the nation with our European partners because that's where our interests lie. HUMPHRYS: But we would end up with effectively a European army, navy and air force.. ASHDOWN: No, rubbish. HUMPHRYS: Which... well, what does integrating our armed forces mean in that case? ASHDOWN: What happened when you integrated our armed forces in NATO. Did you end up with a NATO army and no British army. The answer's certainly not. HUMPHRYS: So it doesn't mean anything then? ASHDOWN: Certainly not. HUMPHRYS: It doesn't mean anything more than we've already got? ASHDOWN: It means building a European pillar which is in all senses similar to that which has been the cornerstone of our defence for the last forty years through NATO. HUMPHRYS: Well then, so it hasn't changed. So what do you mean when you .. ASHDOWN: Indeed, that the principle doesn't change at all. We're living in a different circumstance than we were thirty, forty years ago. The Atlantic relationship which I very much want to preserve is nevertheless diluting. The Americans are looking elsewhere. The collapse of the Soviet Union has altered the terms of the security debate in the world, and Europe is now coming together, so we're building a sensible European pillar to assure our defence for the future. There are steps we can take that will provide us with not only better defence but better cost effectiveness because we'll co-ordinate weapons productions. That means you can reduce the amount of defecne spending in order to achieve the same amount of defence. That's got to be to the benefit of Britain. We propose no more than taking the sensible steps that are necessary where they are of benefit to Britain and British citizens. HUMPHRYS: So when you talk about a substantial shift of power you don't mean that at all. ASHDOWN: Well, you will mean a substantial further step. I mean ... HUMPHRYS You can't run it both ways can you? ASHDOWN: Was the single market a substantial shift of power? HUMPHRYS: Yes, of course it was, it changed a great many things. But you're telling me that what you're now proposing in the foreign policy and defence fields wouldn't change anything, even though it is a substantial shift of power. ASHDOWN: But you are making a terrible meal of this, if I may suggest that you're.. HUMPHRYS: I'm trying to understand what you mean. ASHDOWN: Maybe I'm not explaining myself effectively. We're taliing about building a European pillr within NATO. We're talking about moving forward in this sensible co-ordination of Europe's defence. It doesn't mean to say we ditch NATO. Of course we don't, I want to preserve that, but it's important the Europe has a European pillar. If you want an example of what happens if you don't take a look at our failures in Bosnia. We want to be able to operate effectively. It is my judgement that Europe will not be secure, nor will any of the nations in Europe be secure unless Europe is prepared to project its power around its borders to those instable states which are now threatening the peace of Europe, and we've seen just how that can happen through Bosnia, it is to my mind only sensible. We should be able to construct a sensible partnership with our partners in order to pursue our foreign policy aims where that is the best way to do it. It's not to say that Britian won't continue to have independent areas to move by ourselves and to co-operate with our partners where that can assure us of better defence at lower cost. I would have thought that was pretty common sense. HUMPHRYS: Alright, let's move on to the economics. ASHDOWN; Substantial yes, startling or dangerous no. HUMPHRYS: Alright, we'll leave people to judge for - to tell the difference between those. Let's move on to the economic area. You would remove Britain's opt out. You, as far as the European Single Currency is concerned, you're for it? ASHDOWN: Well, I've no reason to believe that, in any circumstances that I can think of, if a Single Currency was to be created, either in whole or in part in the European nations, you could describe any circumstances to me in which it would be in Britain's interests to be outside that. The opt-out merely says to our partners that we're not serious about this. It, actually, provides for a greater degree of speculation with the British Pound. Certainly, in the run up to any convergence and any monetary union. So my position - our position - absolutely clear. It is that if a Single Currency comes about, my judgment is that it will happen later, rather than earlier, it'll probably happen partially, with the Deutschmark currency area and the French moving together. If those circumstances..I cannot perceive and have not yet have anybody describe to me circumstances in which it would be in Britain's interests to be outside that, lose all the investment, lose all the jobs, lose all the advantages of a Single Currency. HUMPHRYS: Well, let me tell you about what people see as the problem and that is that we would lose to a great extent our economic independence, as they fear we would lose our foreign policy and Defence independence.. ASHDOWN: Oh, John. HUMPHRYS: ...the way you decide. Let me put a final point to you, if I may. It's because of those sorts of points that they say what Paddy Ashdown wants is a United States of Europe. ASHDOWN: Well, that is rubbish. I mean, that's the kind of thing the Conservatives say in this campaign of lies and scaremongering, chiefly because they can't say anything positive without splitting their Party. And, you see that very clearly. It is in Britain's interest to work more closely with our European neighbours. Europe is developing. I believe Britain should be part of that, should be shaping it but that is subject to two clear safeguards. The first is that should only happen where it's in the interests of our country and our citizens individually. And, the second is, that it is subject - any step further that we take - is subject to the consent of the British people, expressed through the ballot box. That is clear. We are not...we are leading in this. We are ahead, perhaps, of other people in this but at the end of the day that's the job of a politician. If you want politicians who simply
follow the raw emotion which can be generated in Britain, well, you've got one in the Conservative Party. HUMPHRYS: Paddy. ASHDOWN: If you want politicians who will do the same by the polls, that's the Labour Party. But we're ahead of the country. But, we are prepared to consult with them and abide with their decision. HUMPHRYS: Paddy Ashdown, thank you very much for joining us. ...oooOooo...