Speeches, etc.

Margaret Thatcher

TV Interview for BBC Election Call

Document type: Speeches, interviews, etc.
Venue: BBC Studios, Lime Grove, London
Source: BBC Written Archives: transcript
Journalist: Sir Robin Day, BBC, chairing
Editorial comments: 0905-1000 broadcast live. The interview was also broadcast on radio.
Importance ranking: Major
Word count: 10098
Themes: Monarchy, Conservative Party (organization), Defence (general), Defence (Falklands), Economic policy - theory and process, Education, Employment, Industry, General Elections, Monetary policy, Pay, Public spending & borrowing, Taxation, Foreign policy (USSR & successor states), Health policy, Labour Party & socialism, Local government finance, Trade union law reform

In Cue

And now ELECTION CALL. Here's Sir Robin Day.

Day

Good morning, and here we are with the last ELECTION CALL for this Election at least. And it's your ELECTION CALL this morning to the leader of the Conservative Party, the Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Margaret Thatcher. Whether you're listening to us on Radio Four or watching us on BBC 1, the number to ring with your questions for Mrs. Thatcher is 01–580–4411. That's 01 if you're outside London, 580–4411. And don't forget, if we do pick your call to question the Prime Minister, we'll call you back so you don't have to pay the cost of your question and Mrs. Thatcher's answers. The first question comes from John Crawford in Carlisle. Mr. Crawford, it's your ELECTION CALL to Mrs. Thatcher.

Crawford

Good morning. Mrs. Thatcher, you've continuously told us that we're pricing ourselves out of a job. Now can you honestly say that it would make a difference if we all took a pay cut, say about £10 across the board?

Thatcher

I can't say that about everyone. It varies from company to company. Some companies' products are very competitive and the wage negotiations must bear some relation to the product and to output. I think it's quite ridiculous to try to deal with pay wholly without any regard to the output of the firm in which you're working. [end p1]

Day

Mr. Crawford.

Thatcher

Let me see Mr. Crawford. I can't …   .

Day

Sorry, I thought you had.

Thatcher

No no, I can't see him. Where am I suppo … I can only hear him.

Day

Well that's right, he's on the telephone. Go ahead Mr. Crawford, with your supplementary.

Crawford

Yes. Well in fact I don't think it answered the question. Do you think it would make a difference if we took a pay cut?

Thatcher

Well look, what I'm saying is that as far as people who work in business are concerned, their wages must be negotiated according to the company for which they work, what they're producing and the cost of the product. Some people have taken a pay cut to keep themselves in a job; others are doing very well, they're getting higher productivity because they're having a lower number of people working there and they're using the latest technology. I don't think necessarily you can say that there should be a general thing. In the public sector, certainly, one could then spend more on equipment and more on capital goods. That, frankly, would create more jobs. Indeed, I'm often saying to people, Look, if you take out more in wage increases in the public sector for yourselves, then it means that we've got less to spend on building, on the latest equipment, on the latest books and so on. And therefore that does have an effect. But frankly, I doubt very much whether there's any possibility of anyone in the public sector taking a 10%; wage cut. I think what we have to do each time is try to negotiate very realistically on their wages, taking inflation into account but not necessarily coming up to it. And also having regard to what other countries are doing. Because although sometimes I think we've done quite well in the public sector wage increases of say, about 4%;, then I turn round and look in Germany and it's 2%;, and then I look to Japan and they had no increase in the public sector this year. And then I'm a little bit bothered naturally, because the burden of our bigger pay increases has, [end p2] in the end, to be borne by industry. So I think it's more a question of trying to keep them level at the moment in the public sector, or reasonable increases and not very large ones.

Day

Mr. Crawford, have you made up your mind how to vote?

Crawford

Well not to this moment, no I haven't.

Day

Do you want to ask Mrs. Thatcher one question which might help you decide? What are you thinking of voting? Tory, Labour or Alliance?

Crawford

Well I have a leaning towards Labour at the moment because they seem to have some clear cut policies you know. But …

Day

Tell Mrs. Thatcher why you've got a leaning to Labour and which policies you think they've got which are clear cut which influence you and she'll answer that.

Crawford

Well they're willing to do something which has worked in the past. They're willing to put money in to creating jobs, which has worked in America in the past. It worked under Roosevelt.

Thatcher

Well in fact, if you look under Roosevelt ‘New Deal’, the actual fall in employment in this country over the same period, fall in unemployment, was slightly greater than it was in the same period in the United States. And if you look at the time the big spending came with the ‘New Deal’ in the United States, it was not until about 1988. Indeed, Franklin Roosevelt was constantly saying that he really wanted to balance his budget within a certain length of time. So I think actually if you look at the detail of the ‘New Deal’, that doesn't necessarily hold up. Now if you're going to put more money in, the first thing you're going to have to think is where does it come from? And it can only come from either taxing the people, and that means that you're taking money that they would otherwise spend or save, to spend in a different direction. So it's not extra expenditure or capital saving, it's spending it in a different direction. (Crawford speaks but unclear)

Thatcher

(Speaking over) Alternatively you're going to borrow it and that, I'm [end p3] afraid, would put interest rates up. And my great struggle is to try to keep interest rates down. Because particularly if you're looking at the construction industry, people often can't afford to build if the interest rates are very high. And they can't afford to expand their business if they're going to have to pay very high interest rates. So the first thing, if any party says we're going to spend, spend, spend, you say, where are you going to get the money from—which is the people or industry—and what, by spending it in that direction, are you going to stop? You have been right Mr. Crawford, I think, in one thing, by saying if people took a less increase in wages then there would be a bigger amount to spend on capital. That of itself would create more jobs. But that's a rearranging your spending, rather than spending more.

Day

Mr. Crawford, thank you. Other people may follow up those questions. I go now to Kenneth Williams in Birmingham. Mr. Williams, it's your ELECTION CALL to the Prime Minister.

Thatcher

Mr. Williams.

Williams

Good morning Mrs. Thatcher.

Thatcher

Good morning Mr. Williams.

Williams

In your interview with Sir Robin Day on PANORAMA last Tuesday, (Yes) you said firstly that you would rather be dead than red, and secondly, that you would be prepared to press the nuclear button against what you call “our sworn enemies”. Since through the spread of radioactive fallout, the whole world would be affected by your action, on what grounds do you assume the right to condemn hundreds of millions of people to suffering and death? When most of them are quite unaware of the dead versus red question, and are, in fact, pre-occupied with the daily problem of where they're going to find their next meal?

Day

(Unclear) … Mr. Williams.

Thatcher

Well now, Can I deal first with the dead than red. I think probably what I said was not that I would rather be dead than red, but pointed out that a lot of people who were red have been put to death by communism [end p4] by one means or another. You look …   .

Williams

(Talking Together) I can't agree with that …   .

Thatcher

I said put to death …   .

Williams

No, no, I watched the interview very very carefully.

Thatcher

Well look at Solzhenitsyn, look at Solzhenitsyn.

Day

Hold …   . hold on, don't let's … You've made a long question, let the Prime Minister answer and then you can come back again Mr. Williams. Carry on Mrs. Thatcher.

Thatcher

Look at Solzhenitsyn's testimony of what happened under Stalin. And of course there are many people who tried to rebel against being red—in Czechoslovakia and in Hungary.—And the tanks rolled in over them. And then of course if you look in Afghanistan, I remember people coming to see me from a village where the women and children had taken refuge. When the Soviet soldiers came in they took refuge in the irrigation system; it was a well known thing that you could take refuge there. They found out where they were and as you may imagine, no one came out alive. So just remember that when you're talking about the tyranny of the Communist system.

Williams

(Speaking together) I do remember all this Mrs. Thatcher.

Thatcher

Now may I then go on to the point about having a nuclear deterrent, is if you say look, I've got it but I'll never use it, it ceases to be a deterrent. The point about having a deterrent is that you say, look if you use yours on me, please remember that I too have a button to press, and I can wreak as much damage and havoc upon your country as you dan on mine. The whole point of the nuclear deterrent is that it is there to deter, and in fact it has kept the peace in Europe for 38 years. Kept not only nuclear peace, it's kept conventional peace as well. Because I sometimes think that those who are against nuclear weapons—and I am one of those—but think that somehow conventional war is comfortable. It isn't. The nuclear deterrent has stopped both nuclear war, because it is a balance of terror; It's also stopped conventional war in Europe, and it's also stopped [end p5] another terrible form of war, chemical or biological. Because you know, we did disarm unilaterally in chemical weapons, hoping that the Soviet Union would follow our example. They didn't, they just piled them up. So my point about saying, yes of course, if you've got a nuclear deterrent you have to be prepared to press the button. Because that deters anyone else from using nuclear and also from crossing the NATO line on conventional.

Day

Mr. Williams, your turn.

Williams

Well first of all, I didn't misunderstand what Mrs. Thatcher said in the interview with you Sir Robin. She did say “I would rather be dead than red”. And so the statement she made at the very beginning was to confuse the issue. She actually used those words. And there must be a film record of what she said.

Thatcher

Well we'll get it out, we'll get the …   .

Day

Well we haven't got it here. But proceed, you make your point and the Prime Minister makes hers. Continue with the rest of your point.

Williams

The second point I'd make is this. That she didn't answer the question which is, on what grounds do you assume the right to condemn hundreds of millions of people to suffering and death? These people being quite unconnected with your argument with the Soviets. The people in South America, the whole of Africa, India, Indonesia …

Day

Okay, we needn't go round the continents in the world. You made your point very effectively. Prime Minister.

Thatcher

The point is the deterrent in Europe has stopped in Western Europe the suffering and the death. It has deterred. If you look at the length of time between World War 1 and World War 11–21 years. And then there was another terrible war. We've now had 38 years peace in Europe. The deterrent, a balance of terror as Winston called it, has stopped another terrible war in Europe. But where people have not had nuclear weapons, my goodness me, there've [end p6] been 140 conventional wars around the world since the last World War. In those conventional wars more than 10 million people have lost their lives. The point is, by having nuclear weapons we have preserved life; where there have been none I'm afraid the conventional wars have taken a terrible toll.

Day

Mr. Williams, thank you very much. Other questions on that subject no doubt, meanwhile, Dr. Islam Majid, if I pronounce you correctly, in Ware, East Hertfordshire. Dr. Majid.

Majid

Good morning Prime Minister.

Thatcher

Good morning. Dr. Mayid? (ph)

Day

Mayid (ph) yes. Is that correct Dr. Mayid?

Majid

Dr. Majid …

Day

Majid, I'm so sorry.

Thatcher

Dr. Majid.

Majid

Like the cricketer.

Day

That's right.

Thatcher

Ah, well of course we should have that. Shouldn't we?

Majid

Good morning. I'm a general practitioner in a village, so my question therefore apparently will be about National Health Service. (Yes) We have two hospitals which are seven miles away from us; one in the east, one in the west. And recently in both the hospitals the maternity beds have been closed. And in one of the hospitals the beds for alcoholics have been closed.

Day

Sorry …

Thatcher

I find it very difficult to hear.

Day

…   . Mr. Majid, I'm sorry, the telephone is a bit bad. Hold on Dr. Majid, the telephone line's a bit bad. Can you put your question quite briefly. Because I know the Prime Minister wants to answer it and doesn't want to miss this one. But without going into too much detail, what is your [end p7] question and speak fairly slowly.

Thatcher

There are two hospitals, I got that amount, but I …

Majid

Yes, two hospitals which are seven miles apart, and the maternity beds and the alcoholic beds have been closed. Now few days ago I had to send an emergency with a bleeding pregnant mother, to 15 miles away in a local hospital. I would be grateful if you could tell me that on one hand the number of doctors and the nurses have been increased, and on the other hand that the beds are being closed right, left and centre.

Thatcher

Some of the beds are being closed, but indeed, the number of patients being dealt with in hospitals is far greater, because the hospitals are managing to deal with them far more efficiently. And by concentrating their services they're now dealing with something like 2 million more patients a year, than they were previously. So the number of patients, by working the way in which they are, the number of patients they're able to deal with, has increased. And it is one of the great debates, Dr. Majid, in which people hold different views. Do you concentrate your medical services in the bigger hospitals where you can have absolutely every facility, or do you keep more of the cottage hospitals? And one tries in fact to have something of both. I mean I personally would like some cottage hospitals still to stay, because I think there are many things that they can do which don't need to go to a big hospital. But there are at the moment either being built or being designed, some 140 hospitals. And I know that the battle will rage, but I assure you that more patients are being dealt with, and there is indeed, difference within the medical service as to how—and views—as to how best to deal with them. When we get a question of closing a hospital, as you know, it has to go out to consultation, and then it comes to the Minister. And some we accept the recommendation of the regional hospital authority that they should be closed, and some we keep open. And we try to look at each case on its merits Dr. Majid. [end p8]

Day

Dr. Majid, forgive me if I don't come back to because your telephone line was not as good as we would like. But no doubt that subject can come up again. Next call from Michael Nixon in Burnham-on-Sea in Somerset. Mr. Nixon, it's your ELECTION CALL to Mrs. Thatcher.

Nixon

Good morning. I wonder if Mrs. Thatcher could tell me why she steadfastly refuses to borrow money to reflate the economy, thus getting people back to work again? Yet on the other hand she encourages people constantly—namely council house tenants—to borrow money to buy houses that they already live in anyway?

Thatcher

But we do borrow money Mr. Nixon. The question about borrowing is you have to keep borrowing within your capacity to pay the interest and to repay the capital. Which is exactly what a mortgage is all about, and why anyone who's buying a house is not allowed to buy a house at any price, but to buy a house when we can repay the interest and the capital within a reasonable time. This last year we borrowed about £9½ billion in order to finance some of the things which Government spends. If we, in fact, were to go on and borrow a lot more, the interest rates would be bound to rise, and already the amount which we're paying out in interest year by year on the national debt, is a considerable burden on public expenditure. Don't forget that it's cumulative year after year, and each year you have either to reborrow money that was lent to you 20 or so years, or pay it off. And the cumulative increase in the interest that we're paying on the national debt, is already a considerable burden on public expenditure. So, yes, we do borrow, but we believe in keeping our borrowing within reasonable and prudent limits.

Day

Mr. Nixon.

Nixon

Yes, well it seems to me that the money that you're borrowing and spending, you're spending on the wrong things. If you were to borrow money to get people to work to produce things, that would then earn money to pay that interest. [end p9]

Day

Just one second if I may. Mr. Nixon, you're an unemployed person are you?

Nixon

I'm not unemployed at all, no. I just …   . (Unclear)

Day

(Speaking together) Oh, well …   . I've … given information that you are unemployed. I don't know why I was given that inform …   . I was anxious for this … Prime Minister to know this if it was true. I apologise if I've got it wrong.

Thatcher

First. If I'm going to borrow money I've got to borrow it from somewhere. I've either got to borrow it through national savings or through pension funds, putting their money in gilts. And if we borrow more in Government that means less is available to go to private industry in order to do the expansion that they need to do and to re-equip their business. Secondly, if I put more borrowing into the market, I will probably have to pay higher interest rates. Indeed, that's been a feature of the last 10 to 15 years. We how have to borrow at far higher interest rates than previously, and that in fact puts up the cost of borrowing to everyone—in particular to industry. And then you find some expansion schemes or some restocking or some new construction schemes, will not take place because they just plain cannot afford the interest. So before you start to spend, you always have to say, now look where is the money going to come from? And by Government borrowing that, what, indeed, what other expenditure or construction is going to stop? And we think that at the moment we've got the position about right, and if we hadn't then the interest rates would be much higher than they are. As it is, the interest rates are down from what they were; inflation is a long way down, and we hope inflation is going to go down further and therefore the interest rates will come down.

Day

Final comment Mr. Nixon?

Nixon

Well the more the interest rates come down and the inflation comes down, it seems to me that unemployment goes up, And they are counterproductive. You're paying money out for people to do nothing and that seems very very inflationary to me. They produce absolutely nothing, where they [end p10] could be working and producing goods that the whole world needs, and we could sell them to them.

Thatcher

But Mr. Nixon, if those people who are unemployed, would work for the amount of money they get for unemployment, then your theory would be right. And we often pay them a little more or try to, on the Community Enterprise Programme. And okay, it's a little bit more money, it's one of the special plans. We spend £2 billion on special schemes to help the unemployed and put them to work that otherwise wouldn't be done. And that is a very very useful programme. But the first thing you have to say if you're going to produce goods, is who is going to buy them? If they buy them from highly subsidised things, subsidised by Government, are they putting other companies out of business who do not get subsidies? That's one of the things you have to ask, or who else is going to buy them? You can't just have mountains of cars. Good heavens, unfortunately, we've got mountains of butter and wheat in Europe. You can't just pay people to produce things and have enormous mountains, someone has to buy them. Right, if people can produce things and someone else buy them, then there's no problem. The finance will come to enable them to do so. But it's the marketing of the goods and the salesmanship. And again I say to you, if you're going to borrow or spend, first, where does it come from? Secondly, does it put the interest rates up? Thirdly, does it put out of business someone who is already working and working well and producing goods that are competitive in this country. I could go on, I already have problems for example, when we give considerable subsidies to firms to go into development areas. And then we will get complaints from other companies which don't get those subsidies, who say, Look, do you realise the effect you're having on us? So it is quite complicated and I believe at the moment we've got the balance about right. And what we're doing is putting grants on a considerable scale to small businesses start and grow, and to new products because the jobs are going to come in the new technologies and not by keeping some of the old jobs artificially in existence. [end p11]

Day

Thank you Mr. Nixon …

Thatcher

Thank you Mr. Nixon.

Day

You're half way through or nearly half way through, our ELECTION CALL to the Prime Minister. The number to ring is 01 if you live outside London, 580–4411. And you can hear it on Radio Four and watch it on BBC television. Our next caller is Eileen O'Grady in Barnsley in Yorkshire. Eileen O'Grady, it's your ELECTION CALL to Mrs. Thatcher. Eileen O'Grady.

O'Grady

Yes …   . (Good morning) …   . I'd like to ask Mrs. Thatcher and her Party, why she didn't abolish the rates like she promised to do when she got in the last time?

Thatcher

No, I didn't promise to abolish the rates in last time's Manifesto. That goes back to a Manifesto—I think it was 1974 in October, which Election we lost—when the domestic rates were costing very very much more. Far less came in from domestic rates than now comes in. And by this time rates have become a problem not only with the domestic rate payer, but also with the commercial rate payer and with industry. I met a person the other day who'd started up a small business, who was complaining bitterly because he was having to pay rates of £2,000 per year per employee. And he said, “I can't carry on like that”. So we had to deal with the whole thing. Now rates brings in £11 billion a year. Now I have to think of two things: Can I buy increased efficiency; persuade local authorities that they can spend less and still get the same level of services? It can be done in some areas, I think Birmingham is one where a Conservative Council has now put down the rates by very very very much better management than previously. Second, I have to look right across the board to the domestic rate payer, the commercial and the industrial. Now I can't do without that £11 billion, and I can't, I feel, put it on income tax or Value Added Tax. And so we thought the best thing to do was to bring in legislation, first against the very big spenders, because they are the worst of all about putting up increased rates, the limit the increases which they can charge. And secondly, because that [end p12] might not be enough, to bring in a general power of Government to limit the increases in rates, both to domestic and to shops and to industry. And so that is what we're going to do and I hope that it will take a lot of the worry away from people. Because they really can't go on paying the increases that they have been paying in the past.

Day

Eileen O'Grady.

Thatcher

I think that's better than putting it on to either income tax or to Value Added Tax, because that, too, would have immense problems. [end p13]

Day

Eileen O'Grady, what do you say to that?

O'Grady

Well, I'd like to ask the Prime Minister if she's going to do anything about the rates this time, if she gets in?

Thatcher

This time round, the rate has of course already been fixed. We shall hope to bring in legislation assuming we're elected … and not one single vote except postal votes have yet been cast, we shall hope to bring in legislation in the first period of Parliament. It will then take a time to get through, but again we hope that by the measures that we've already taken to be able to keep down the rate increases, apart from 18 or 19 big spenders this year and we haven't had those, and I think they're nearly all Labour controlled, then the average increase in rates would only …   . would have been nil, I know averages conceal a multitude of sins, but the increases in general have steadily been getting smaller, so that is a help. But then the legislation will take a time to work and I must be absolutely can did Mrs. O'Grady it'll take a year to go through, so I doubt whether it will be on before … and fully operative before 1985/86. But in the meantime, the policies we have been pursuing have been helping.

Day

Thank you Eileen O'Grady for raising the question of rates. We go now to Trevor Bell in London. Trevor Bell, it's your ELECTION CALL to the Prime Minister:

Thatcher

Mr. Bell, good morning.

Bell

Hello. Good morning Sir Robin, good morning Prime Minister.

Bell

My question is this:

Thatcher

He's quite right—Sir Robin. Thank you very much, I didn't mean the other day to demote Sir Robin, I was concentrating so much on the questions that I quite forgot and of course he did get his accolade as Mr. Day. And it's quite a proud name to bear. Now Sir Robin shall we go ahead?

Day

We will indeed. Trevor Bell, I'm sorry you were interupted by the Prime Minister's kind intervention, but go ahead with your [end p14] important question.

Bell

Yes, my question is this: Few would disagree, being in a dangerous nuclear age, now more than ever great diplomacy and sensitivity is required by the world's leaders. That being the case, would Mrs. Thatcher take this opportunity to reassure the nation by denouncing and disowning speeches at her own Conservative Party Youth Rally, who shouted remarks such as ‘Let's bomb the Russians’, and more particularly and more importantly, will she denounce and disown the thousands of extremists who cheered ecstatically when these remarks were made?

Day

Prime Minister, before you answer, may I mention that we've had a lot of similar calls this morning—a great many.

Thatcher

Look first, I agree, that you need diplomacy and sensitivity when you are dealing with negotiations with the Soviet Union. But you also need to deal with them from strength. You get nowhere when you're dealing with a very, very strong alliance if you try to deal from weakness—ever. Secondly, very, very limited shots of that Rally were shown, if you looked at the whole thing you would see that it was really just plain fun and those youngsters were cheering. They were just cheering because they were having tremendous fun there, and I really think if someone is going to take out one tiny little sentence …   . and show it, wholly out of context, giving a wholly false impression, and then people are really going to take it out of context—not look at the whole thing—of course they were cheering. Almost whatever was said under those circumstances by a person whom they all adore …   . and I really just begin to wonder what has happened to our British sense of humour. I take all kinds of things said against me and about me, all right, if it's done in entertainment take it as entertainment. That's all it was … and if you'd like to have a look at the whole thing, then I'm sure you'll find that no offence was given or meant.

Day

Trevor Bell, what do you say to that?

Bell

It was actually a presidential style rally which was [end p15] called specifically to applaud Mrs. Thatcher, and it was designed to attract maximum publicity, and it seems to me that every comment from the platform was intended as a reflection and an endorsement of Mrs. Thatcher's policies. If it was a joke, it was in bad taste. What was most worrying was the fact that it seemed to catch the mood of the meeting. What would British people, for example, have thought if we'd heard that a speaker at a Communist Party rally in Moscow (be he an entertainer or a politician) had shouted ‘Let's bomb Britain’ to ecstatic applause? How would that have helped fight for peace?

Thatcher

These weren't speeches. I came on afterwards and made the speech. And if you wish to argue with anything political was said, please argue with the only political speech which was made, which was mine, and I will answer any single question on that. Before that it was entertainment, it was entertainment by some marvellous entertainers and I think that if you're going to take as a political pronunciation what is said in entertainment, long before the political part of the rally begins, then I think you are hopelessly wrong. It's like taking what Mike Yarwood and Janet Brown may say as serious political subjects. They don't, they give immense pleasure. I watch them sometimes, I too get immense pleasure from being … people poking fun at me. Just take it as the entertainment …   . and I hope you would …   . have a look at the whole thing in context, and then I think you'll find that it was not offensive …   . do not take …   . the entertainment as serious.

Day

Prime Minister …   . Mr. Bell wants to know …   . and many other callers I understand, whether you will disown this joke if it can be called a joke, about ‘Let's bomb the Russians’ which was cheered by your supporters … this is the point which is worrying.

Thatcher

No one at all is talking …   . politically about bombing the Russians. Every single thing I do is to deter any hostility of any kind breaking out. May I make that perfectly clear. And no one was [end p16] seriously suggesting anything to the contrary at any time.

Day

But people are wanting to know whether you think it's funny Prime Minister—that joke—was it a funny joke? If so, what was funny about it?

Thatcher

I'm asking you to look at the whole tape, and I am saying no one is thinking of bombing the Russians … every single thing …   . Sir Robin I'm sorry …   . Sir Robin, every single thing I do, every single political thing I do is to deter war from ever starting …   . make …   . may I make that perfectly clear. Not only nuclear war but conventional war which is terrible. Everything, so please don't take it any other way.

Day

Thank you Mr. Bell for raising that. We go next to Keith Downington in Mid-Glamorgan. Mr. Downington, it's your ELECTION CALL to Mrs. Thatcher.

Downington

Good morning.

Thatcher

Good morning.

Downington

My question is this Mrs. Thatcher: Are you in favour of the proposed …   . Mr. Tebbit 's legislation, which allows trade union members to contract out of paying a levy to the Labour Party? If so, do you not think it right that people, such as myself, should be allowed to exercise the similar right to contract out of having to pay part of my dividends as a company shareholder, to a party that I do not in any way support?

Thatcher

Well you can always go along to a company meeting, object strongly, turn out the directors, sell your shares or anything. Your job is not at stake in any way. What we were trying to make certain was that … that those contributions paid through the trade unions, and no one's trying to stop contributions being paid through the trade union movement. No one's trying trying to stop it at all. What we're trying to make certain is that those contributions are paid voluntarily, and therefore you can do that [end p17] in a number of ways, and so what Mr. Tebbit is saying, that first he will consult with the trade unions to ensure that those contributions are paid wholly voluntarily. Now what's wrong with that? You wouldn't want them to be taken compulsory. If through companies you do not like it, please go along to the general meeting. The equivalent thing in companies would be to insist I suppose, that every single shareholder paid a contribution, unless he contracted out, that is not so at all. What one wants to be … to make certain is that the contributions paid, and the Labour Party must be financed, and no one's trying to stop that, that the contributions are made fully voluntarily. Wouldn't you think that was right?

Day

Mr. Downington?

Downington

Well to a certain extent yes, but you see there's another thing which worries me very much about this particular piece of legislation, and it's that I think it's going to be very unhealthy for democracy because we've seen in the newspapers over the last three or four weeks flooded with Tory advertisements. I gather that the Conservative Party has a phenomenal advantage in terms of financial superiority, and I get the feeling that the other parties are going to be starved of funds which is going to result in very, very …   . if you like poor …   .

Thatcher

They're not going to be starved of funds by action we take. May I read you out …   . because you're talking about legislation … may I read you out just exactly what the manifesto says. “Consultations on the Green Paper” (that was the one that we've had out for quite a long time)” have confirmed that there's widespread disquiet about the how the right of individual trade union members not to pay the political levy operates in practice through the system of contracting out. We intend to invite the TUC to discuss the steps which the trade unions themselves can take to ensure that individual members are freely and effectively able to decide for themselves whether or not to pay the political levy. In the [end p18] event that the trade unions are not willing to take such steps, the government will be prepared to introduce measures to guarantee the free and effective right of choice.”

Day

What's your objection to that Mr. Downington?

Downington

Well I still think it's politically motivated. Basically designed to injure the Labour Party.

Thatcher

No …   . look, I am the first to say and to expect that the Labour Party must be properly financed. You couldn't carry on democracy unless the parties were properly financed. The question is that those financial contributions are given freely and voluntarily. You used to have to contract in to pay the levy, the law was changed by the Labour Party to say that you have to contract out. Sometimes it's not ever easy to contract out and not everyone knows about it. But first, before any legislation was ever contemplated, and I don't think the word legislation was actually mentioned, I say … we would be prepared to introduce measures … first, we found there's disquiet about it, that the consultations have already taken …   . secondly right. Let's then discuss it with the TUC to make certain that the choice is free and effective … I would think that's right.

Day

Mr. Downington, thank you. We go next to Roger Stern in Suffolk. Mr. Stern, it's your ELECTION CALL to the Prime Minister.

Stern

Thank you.

Thatcher

Mr. Stern, good morning.

Stern

My village has got the same population as the Falkland Islands. And our village school is going to be closed. The cost of keeping it open would be about a hundredth part of a million pounds. Wouldn't our school be of better use for money than wasting £454 million a year, eight thousand miles away?

Thatcher

I think you're asking two very different [end p19] questions. I think in defending British sovereign territory in the Falklands and in South Georgia, and in defending the right of people who've been there—some of them for seven generations—and who are British and who wish to be British and who did not displace any other population, I think it was absolutely right to do and if we hadn't done that, there'd be many, many more territories in the world trembling because a tryant could walk in and take them, and no one would be prepared to defend them. So let's leave that one aside. I have been very careful not to bring that into this election, because I felt that people from all parties were absolutely behind that campaign, and it would not be right to deal with it Party politically. Now let's come to village schools. I will tell you that I like village schools, because it keeps the heart in a village, and that I wish to do. But then, there comes a time when the number of pupils is so small that you can't keep it open. Now the question is, what is that number and what is the alternative school, and of course you have to consider the effect on small children of being bused out of the village, really for rather a long time and going to school all day, so I start basically on the side of trying to keep village schools because certainly for the young children I think it's very much better that they're in their village and they don't have to spend such a long time away from home, and I also think that some of the village schoolteachers are absolutely marvellous. But there does come a time when you can't keep them open because a number of pupils is too small and sometimes you do say to the parents, look, if they went to a school, it may be in another village, the facilities would be very much better. Now you consult over these, and you consult locally, and then you have to consult through the Ministry, and each and every one is considered separately. I share, if I might say absolutely candidly, some of your doubts about some of the figures that are given about saving money, because by the time you've paid the transport for children to go from their village to the other village where the school is, [end p20] because you have to pay those costs if you're transporting them when they'd like to stay at home, then I sometimes do doubt the figures. But the question is how long do you keep it open, and when do you say all right, we really must go to another village. There have been occasions when parents, having objected to the school being closed, have in fact been very pleased with the education their children have got, and some where they would have preferred to keep them at home.

Day

Mr. Stern, would you like to come in there?

Stern

Yes I would, I mean …   . you know, it seems to me all comes down to money, and it's a straight case of are you going to waste your money on something …   . I mean, I believe her electoral jaunt over to the Falklands Islands cost enough money to keep our school open for the next twenty-five years. It's pure money and you're wasting money, and we want money spent on good, useful purposes, not thrown away …   .

Thatcher

Mr. Stern, I'm not sure whether we're talking about the Falklands or whether we're talking about village schools. Village schools may be partly about money but they're also …   . it's also Mr. Stern, partly education. There does …   .

Stern

No, in this case it's pure money …   . it's a good school, it's a big school …   . but they've got one …   . not five miles away which they want to make a bit bigger and therefore …   . you know …   . it's pure money in this case.

Thatcher

Well Mr. Stern, I can't answer about a particular village school, what I've tried to indicate are the general rules we use … to try to decide, and first you make your views known locally, and then if the local authority still wishes to close the school and send the children to another school, then you make your protest to the Ministry and they have to take them into account before deciding. [end p21]

Stern

You still haven't explained why you wasted all that money in the Falklands. I mean surely it's not a deterrent, you wouldn't … you wouldn't do the same thing if the Spaniards invaded the Rock tomorrow, I mean that would be …

Thatcher

[Name omitted in text.] I believe——

Stern

…   . spreading even more guts on the ground for the sake of glory that would …

Thatcher

I believe that what we did … I think that you're not so much interested in village schools as in——

Stern

I can assure you I am, I've got a son, I want to go to it.

Thatcher

All right. I believe what we did in the Falklands was totally right—the alternative——

Stern

Why——

Thatcher

… was to allow a Fascist——

Day

Mr. Stern …   . Mr. Stern, just let …   . hold on …   . hold on. Mr. Stern. Just let the Prime Minister answer your——

Stern

She has——

Day

Hold on, you keep raising one … the point is we can't hear anything if two people talk at once. So just let the Prime Minister have her point now and then you can come back again, okay.

Stern

Right thank you.

Thatcher

The alternative was to allow a Fascist invader to keep his ill-gotten gains and to hold away over British people. A Fascist invader and you've heard about the 30,000 disappeared ones. No, Mr. Stern. Had we done that Britain would have had no reputation, no reliabilities as staunch ally and someone had to say to an invader, no.

Stern

If …   . if there's a word of truth in that, why did you ally yourself with an even bigger Fascist dictator in Chile and if [end p22] words you said was true, why wasn't there a single count …   . country in United Nations who voted, you know with us when we said we've got every right to invade, every country in the world either condemned us or set that to one side.

Thatcher

When we had the Security Council resolution …   . When we had the Security Council resolution we were overwhelmingly supported and the Argentina invasion was overwhelmingly rejected—indeed that was one of the great things about United Nations Security Council—overwhelming——

Day

Hold on Mr. Stern.

Thatcher

People rejected the Argentina.

Day

Hold on Mr. Stern, I just want to ask, are you saying that we should have done nothing about the Argentina occupation of the Falkland Islands, nothing at all?

Stern

Of course, we should …   . we should have done a great deal.

Day

What do you suggest to the Prime Minister she should have done, other than liberate them?

Stern

Well I've got a copy here of a Reuter … report from the coming from you know Reuter report coming in saying that there is good chance of an agreement about four hours before she torpedoed the Belgrano——

Thatcher

None at all.

Stern

Did she honestly not know about that Reuter report?

Thatcher

I have indicated that first the Peruvian proposals were only a sketchy outline, secondly, they did not reach London until after the attack on the Belgrano, thirdly, that we went on negotiating about Peruvian proposals and then we went on for another fortnight because it became clear that the Argentinians were more interested in negotiating through the United Nations and the negotiations moved to the United Nations and we carried on with those negotiations through Peres de Cuellar. You may remember the many many pictures of Sir Anthony Parsons coming in and out of the United Nations, of those [end p23] negotiations, they went on for a further fortnight before we landed, before we landed.

Stern

That was too late.

Thatcher

Perhaps you remember the day before the Belgrano when our Task Force arrived. The very considerable attack that was mounted on our Task Force by the very very effective Argentina airforce and I am only too relieved——

Stern

…   . the Belgrano though.

Day

No Mr. Stern, just hold on for a moment—we'll have to take you off the line.

Thatcher

… accusations being made against me is not …   . otherwise Mr. Stern the accusation I would be facing was why did I do nothing and leave either the Hermes or the Invincible or other ships to be sunk. I am glad you are not making that accusation against me today because of the action which, when the ship was a danger and you heard what the Chief of Defence Staff said the other day that we actually took action in defence of our own ships and our own boys who were upon them.

Day

There you are Mr. Stern, you had a long run there and we've come a long way from village schools. Now let's go to Frank Ormiston in York, Mr. Ormiston, it's your ELECTION CALL. Are you an unemployed person?

Ormiston

Yes, that's right.

Day

From what … from what work?

Ormiston

Well I'm a graduate.

Day

You're what?

Ormiston

A graduate.

Thatcher

In what?

Ormiston

English.

Day

Go ahead Mr. Ormiston:

Ormiston

Has Mrs. Thatcher any intention of attempting [end p24] to heal the divisions that have been exascarbated in Britain during the last four years. I'm thinking particularly of the gap between employed and unemployed and North and South and other regions?

Thatcher

I don't believe that it's a gap between North and South. You will find that there are some parts in the South that have heavy unemployment. If you look for example in Birmingham, some of the people there will say, look because we have not had regional aid, a lot of factories have been opened in other regions that would otherwise have opened in the West Midlands. So I don't think …   . I don't believe in the argument that it's a gap between North and South. When it comes to unemployed then we have 26 million unemployed in the OECD countries, it's something that has afflicted the whole of the Western world because of the depth of the world recession. We're all of us devoting our policies, our thoughts as to how to get people who are unemployed back into productive and genuine jobs in the future. That's why we've got so many policies designed to do just that. We're trying to keep inflation down. This government has cut the tax on jobs which Labour imposed, the National Insurance surcharge thereby putting £2 billion back into industry. We've done everything possible by tax incentives and loans to help new businesses to start because that's where new jobs are going to come from. We've also got a very active programme on helping new products in the new technologies and now a very big research and development programme following the Alvey report between universities, companies and government to do the kind of research and technology that would be too big and cost too much for anyone to do on their own——

Day

Mr. Ormiston——

Thatcher

And also a very big training programme——

Day

Mr. Ormiston——

Thatcher

So we're very active in trying to help as much as we possibly can and in grants of course to people like British Layland so that they can continue but getting better and better all the time. [end p25]

Day

Mr. Ormiston:

Ormiston

Yes, it's mainly on the regional question I'd like …

Thatcher

On the what, Mr. Ormiston?

Ormiston

Sorry?

Thatcher

On … I couldn't catch——

Ormiston

The regional——

Thatcher

Regional.

Ormiston

I accept of course that there is, it's too simple just to say North and South but the fact is that the regional policies which have been pursued ever since the war really have just set region against region in …   . in that they've been competing for it. I mean you said that the West Midlands have got firms because of regional aid, but they could quite easily have perhaps gone elsewhere which obviously other regions would feel hard done by. And secondly, you mentioned the new technologies. Well, there's been considerable aid to those …   . to those industries, I accept that the vast majority has gone to the Thomas Valley region, I mean there's one or two in the North-West, one or two in the West Midlands but it's done nothing really to …   . to help unemployment in the regions, the South-West, the North of Scotland, Wales——

Thatcher

Well look in Scotland certainly the regions do compete and I can't stop them competing because naturally they go overseas, the Scottish Development Agency and the Welsh Development Agency and says, look come to Scotland or come to Wales and that means they're being very active and trying to get firms in their own region. As a matter of fact, of the new electronics, I think you're not quite right about Scotland, nor indeed about Wales—there are over 40,000 jobs in the new electronics in Scotland, that's rather more than are employed in Steel or shipbuilding and so the new electronics are actually providing jobs in Scotland and of course they're provided jobs also in connection with the very extensive oil development. Also INMOS—I know because I insisted that INMOS went to one of the regions, they had their research establishment already set up in Bristol and I said, look if we're going [end p26] to give you more money, you simply must go to one of the regions of highest unemployment and they're setting up now at Newport. So what you're saying really isn't quite true and one of the most exciting things I think is going round and watching the extent to which we're getting these new technologies in Britain, having made something of a slow start.

Day

Thank you Mr. Ormiston. I'd like to go to Paul Gosling, in Leicester. Mr. Gosling, it's your ELECTION CALL to Mrs. Thatcher.

Thatcher

Good morning Mr. Gosling.

Gosling

Thank you—good morning. I'd like to ask Mrs. Thatcher about what seems to me her contradictory nuclear policies towards Cruise and Tridant. On the one hand, we're saying that we trust America absolutely to give America sole physical control over Cruise missiles and which they could use them if they wanted to launch a nuclear war from Britain without the agreement of the British government or the British people. Yet on the other hand, we are buying for twelve thousand million pounds, the Trident missile system which is an independent nuclear missile which implies that we in fact do not trust America all that much. Do we need an independent deterrent?

Thatcher

No Cruise is an American weapon which they are not charging us for. An American weapon on British soil, on Italian soil and Pershing on German soil. It's an American weapon on British soil. You've get that combination of things and of course an American weapon on British soil, we have an agreement which is called a joint decision which has been the same joint decision arrangements that have applied to American bombers with nuclear weapons on our soil since the day of Attlee and Truman. We updated that to deal with Cruise missiles, on or off site. This … it is the nature of this … an American weapon in British soil which leads to the particular arrangements we have for joint decision. Trident or Polaris is our absolute last resort nuclear deterrent. It partly is seconded to NATO so it is part of the NATO arrangements and then of course there are specific NATO arrangements [end p27] for consultation and decision and it is partly an absolute last resort, nuclear deterrent here and I think any government would be most unwise, indeed, I think irresponsible to give up that nuclear … independent nuclear deterrent. We've paid for it, the submarines are built here, the nuclear warheads are built here. We purchased the missile mechanism to deliver them from the United States but they're wholly purchased by us and wholly independent. So it becomes a British weapon operated on British submarines and that of course is wholly within our control.

Day

Mr. Gosling:

Gosling

Mm, no I'm totally unhappy with that. On the one hand, America still has total physical control and agreements mean absolutely nothing in war-like condition. It doesn't matter what you've agreed what actually is going to happen is that the people have physical control, use those weapons in the way that they think is best which is not necessarily and probably wouldn't be the way that would be best for the British people——

Day

Just let me interrupt there Mr. Gosling. Are you saying the Prime Minister should have got or sought what is called dual key control so that we share in the physical control?

Gosling

No I'm saying that I don't think that that is true. I do agree that without dual control clearly we do not have any control. I mean I don't think we should have American Cruise missiles on British soil at all.

Day

Well that's a separate point. Would you deal with that.

Thatcher

We have of course American nuclear bombs, an American aircraft on British soil—they have to leave their bases and we have exactly the same arrangements for joint decision on those as we have gor Cruise missile. Cruise missile in a way is a non-piloted weapon whereas the nuclear bombs of course are piloted on an aircraft … we have exactly the same arrangements [end p28] applied to them, to Cruise missiles as we have to existing nuclear weapons and when the Cruise missiles go in it's a modernization, it's not an extra nuclear capability, it's a modernization of the existing nuclear capability which I'm afraid is now outdated.

Day

There we are Mr. Gosling, thank you. We come to our last caller now. Charles Nicholas in Edinburgh. Mr. Nicholas, it's your ELECTION CALL to the Prime Minister:

Thatcher

Good morning Mr. Nicholas.

Nicholas

Good morning to you Prime Minister. I was interested to hear your stressing the … sometimes it's not over easy for people to opt out of paying political levies as part of their union views and that you would like people to opt in. This rather conflicts with the difficulty some people around the country have had in getting into your meetings during the election time and it does seem to me that perhaps your cause could have been better served by having open meetings instead of not … ticket only meetings such as we had here at George Watson's College in Edinburgh. It would rather …

Day

Okay, you've made your point. Prime Minister:

Thatcher

Mr. Nicholas we have had many open meetings. Indeed, they've appeared on television. They've been absolutely splendid. I've been amazed at the number of people who have turned up when I've gone on whistle-stop to Dereham market place, there must have been 1500—at Leicester … Leicester marketplace, absolutely packed and after speaking from even the back of a lorry I've gone through the crowds, I don't think any Prime Minister has ever had as many crowds or gone through them in the way in which I have, it's been absolutely splendid——

Nicholas

But these … …   . are not announced in advance to such a great degree as meetings where you hire the halls and you hire schools and colleges and take over and fix the meetings, they're not announced in such a degree, your movements and I understand for secu, rity reasons sometimes have to be very careful— [end p29]

Day

One final sentence Prime Minister:

Thatcher

Whether they have been announced or not, many many people have been there and turned up and I've loved seeing them and being questioned and I love being questioned Mr. Nicholas, as you know, I love the dialogue, I love the debate and I've had a lot of it.

Day

There we have—and we've had it in this programme and there we have to end ELECTION CALL and my thanks to the Prime Minister, Mrs. Thatcher and thanks to all of you who have rung in or have tried to do so as you will understand, many have called but few have been chosen——

Thatcher

Thank you Sir Robin.

Day

Your questions—thank you Prime Minister again, your questions have made it a notable contribution to the democratic process. Thank you very much and as we get towards the end of this election campaign after all the speech making and persuading and cajoling and appealing and the polls and the predictions and the party broadcasts, I often like to think of those lines of G. K. Chesterton, “Smile at us, pay us, pass us but do not quite forget, we are the people of England and we have not spoken yet”.

This is Robin Day, a very good morning to you.

Out

ELECTION CALL was presented by Sir Robin Day. The producers were Chris Lougley and Peter Estall. The editors were Caroline Millington and Alastair Osborne.

And as Sir Robin has just said that of course was the last ELECTION CALL in this election period.