Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

TV Interview for ITN

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: London
Source: ITN Archive: OUP transcript
Journalist: Julian Haviland, ITN
Editorial comments: MT was interviewed by BBC and ITN in London between 1100 and 1300, immediately before her departure for the Party Conference in Blackpool. The interview was broadcast on ITN News At One.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 1439
Themes: Conservative Party (history), Economic policy - theory and process, Taxation, Labour Party & socialism, Trade union law reform, Strikes & other union action

MT

… There is a difference between cutting taxes, which gets you extra production, and reflation. Reflation—inflation on top of inflation—means increasing the amount of money. It's quite possible to have some direct cuts of taxation and have those compensated for by increases in production. That's the whole reasoning of it. If you give people some incentive to go for—if you make it worthwhile to work, they will. And if you look back…

Julian Haviland, ITN

[talking over MT] Conservative tax cuts are good and Labour tax cuts are bad?

MT

No no no. It's how you do it. That was not what I said, Julian, and you're deliberately misleading—or unwittingly misleading. Er, that was certainly not, reflation is increasing money supply. You can in fact have direct cuts, cuts in direct taxation which in fact give you increases in production and therefore they are matched—the increase in the pocket is matched by increase in production of goods. And that's all right.

Julian Haviland, ITN

If you're prepared to use oil revenues to cut taxes—as you say—you could cut the equivalent of five pence off the standard rate of income tax by 1980. Are you offering cuts on that scale?

MT

Ah, well by 1980 you'll never quite know where the financial position will be. Certainly by 1980 you should be getting more revenue in from oil. Now I believe that one of the ways in which you should use that should be to give incentives to people. When you go abroad, and as you know I did a short tour in America, one thing that really strikes you is that's it's a land of opportunity. It doesn't matter what your background is, you've got a chance to do well. Er, good pay for hard work, efficient work and then you can keep quite a lot of it and you can build up your own capital and independence out of earnings. That's what I want to see in this country. What we've got here, even an old age pensioner wrote to me about this week. She said: “I've just had my rates bill, I'm paying so much to the local authority to provide me with things I don't want that I haven't got enough left to buy things I need” . That's one of the reasons why you need to cut tax—to give people more choice in how they use their money. [end p1]

Julian Haviland, ITN

I would like to stick to North Sea oil. Your colleagues, in their latest pamphlet, say that an improvident Labour government might fritter away the oil resources …

MT

Oh, quite possible quite possible.

Julian Haviland, ITN

But you are preparing to buy votes with oil. Is that prudent?

MT

No no no. I'm not preparing to buy votes with oil. I'm preparing to carry out the policies which I believe in. I believe government takes too much tax out of the people's pocket. I believe the people want more of their own earnings to spend themselves.

Julian Haviland, ITN

Why is your party's lead in the opinion polls slipping away?

MT

Uh, I don't know, uh, but it quite often happens during the summer recess, first because Parliament isn't sitting. But then I don't always believe the polls …

Julian Haviland, ITN

Could it be that they're getting some things right?

MT

[talking over Haviland] I didn't always believe the polls when they were very high. But don't forget that sort of argument was used in 1969, Julian. The then Labour Prime Minister said: “Good, we're going up in the polls” . He said “I've got a ninety majority in the House of Commons” —which this Prime Minister hasn't— “we'll take an election” . He lost the ninety and we won by about thirty. I'll gladly repeat that. Now you interrupted and asked a question. Let me answer that one too. You said “Could it be the government's getting some things right?” The IMF's getting it right. The government wouldn't put it right, daren't put it right because its own left-wing. [sic] Only when it's had to borrow more money did it have to put the, do the things which we've been saying it should do for ages, and it shows how sound our policies were.

Julian Haviland, ITN

Can I turn to the trade unions and the closed shop? Your party is still talking, aren't they, of imposing in law rules for negotiating closed shops, if voluntary agreement fails. Is that right?

MT

Er, it's right that we are prepared to introduce certain measures of legislation if we can't get agreement. But there are two things which I must point out which you really would need legislation for. One is that under this government—which after all used to stand up for people at work, but not now—under this government a new very damaging law has been introduced, namely that a man or woman can be sacked from their job without compensation, however well they may have done that job, merely because they won't join a union. They can be put out on the streets, and there are times when we've got a nationalized industry that wouldn't be able to earn their own living. That's the legacy of this government to the working people of this country. I believe that is wrong, I believe most people think it is wrong. You must at least if you're sacked and have no means of earning your living have a right to compensation. A right to compensation must be founded on law, it can't be founded on agreement. The [end p2] second thing is, you really ought not to have unions having that amount of power over individual men and women without any recourse to a court of law.

Julian Haviland, ITN

Well, are you saying, aren't you say … are you saying that, that the unions really do see eye to eye with you, or that you will constrain them by law if they don't? You can't say both things can you?

MT

I am saying that it's my job to do what I believe it is right to do to protect the individual, against any source of power, and that we should do. And I believe we should have the support not only of the majority of the people, but of the vast majority of trade union members.

Julian Haviland, ITN

Three weeks ago you surprised people by saying on ITV that you would consider a referendum if there were a major confrontation between a government led by you and the trade union movement. Now on reflection, do you believe that a referendum could ever solve an industrial dispute?

MT

I think, well the, the particular … the particular question that was put to me was: “If it went right up to the last resort, what do you do?” Now if it comes to the last resort one thing a government must be certain before it takes action is that it has got the full support of the people behind it. Now, there's only one way to put a single issue to the people—that's the way we have done once, over Europe. It is the way … of a referendum. It's a way quite frequently used in other countries. It's a way that we haven't used much, very much here because on the whole the problem of having … [pause] a very powerful minority impose its will on the majority is a comparative new one. Now if you've got new problems, you must be prepared to consider new methods. After all—and the Conservative Party has been in existence for 200 years—it hasn't been in existence that long without being prepared to adapt and all the time to bring in new, sometimes exciting, things so that we are right up to date with modern problems.

Julian Haviland, ITN

How would a government's effective power be increased if it won?

MT

Well, of course it would. All your power is drawn from the people. Because if that small powerful minority knew it had all the people against it, are you suggesting it wouldn't alter their view? And don't forget society—please let me make this point—don't forget society cannot exist unless most people are prepared to behave towards others as they expect others to behave towards them. You can't say to another person: “I'm entitled to strike and put you out of work but you have no rights to strike against me whatsoever”

Julian Haviland, ITN

So it wasn't an off the cuff remark you made?

MT

[speaking over Haviland]

Of course it would be … I first got very interested in a referendum when we had the bill over the European matter and I went and looked at some of the background of it. Er, Balfour and Churchill were great supporters of a referendum, so it's got a pretty respectable background.

Julian Haviland, ITN

Thank you very much.