Peter Murphy, IRN
Right, Prime Minister, if I could ask you first of all: the row over the signal satellite; why are you so concerned about it?
P.M.
Well, of course I am concerned if information is published which could be of use to our enemies and therefore damaging to our armed forces who defend us.
Peter Murphy, IRN
But if Duncan Campbell can find out this information, surely foreign intelligence agencies could find the same? Anyone could find it out.
P.M.
No, that does not necessarily follow at all.
The information should never have been found out. You are quite right about that but it does not follow that because one person has found it out another person could, but if someone does have it come into their hands [end p1] when it should not, you would expect them to behave responsibly and not publish it.
Peter Murphy, IRN
Of course, the complaint among MPs is not that it has been kept a secret; rather that the Government has handled it incompetently and it has been a bit of a fiasco that they did not stop publication.
P.M.
Well, you know, when you go to the courts, the courts are very rightly concerned to protect the liberties of people and they will not just give a blanket injunction not to publish. They are very strict about that and you can understand why. So you cannot just go and say: “Please! I want a blanket injunction against anyone publishing certain information!” An injunction has to be against named individuals and it has to be against a named publication and you have to have firm evidence of their intention to publish, so that limits what you can get, and the law is quite right to say that it is a very very serious thing to try to restrict publication. Therefore, you must have evidence against a particular individual and you must have evidence against a particular publication, and it is not always easy to get that evidence in time. [end p2]
Peter Murphy, IRN
Of course, journalists and politicians always get worked up about security stories. Do you think the general electorate really though take a great deal of notice?
Do you think they are happy to say: “We will leave it to the Government!” ?
P.M.
I think the electorate are very wise about this.
I think they are pretty disgusted when information is published, whether for gain or prestige—a strange kind of prestige—information which people know could be of use to the enemy. They do not expect that to happen. They do not expect people to behave that way.
This has been published by a left-wing publication. I find that very significant.
Peter Murphy, IRN
We have mentioned the electorate. There is a lot of speculation about this being an election year. Do you think it is going to be an election year?
P.M.
I do not know. I do not know. We look at when we shall have an election as we come up to each possible time, so I cannot tell you at the moment. All I can say is it will be by June 1988. [end p3]
Peter Murphy, IRN
The opinion polls, of course, are going up and down. The latest one puts the Labour Party ahead. It must be very difficult though for you when the Conservative Party is being put ahead for you to resist the temptation that may be put forward by many of your close colleagues to “Go to the electorate now because we will get back with a large majority!”
P.M.
No, it is not difficult to resist that temptation and it is not really a temptation, that is what I am saying.
We were elected with a good majority and the maximum period is five years. I think people expect you to have a pretty good part of that five years before you even consider going, and I do not think they like you just to go in just because opinion polls are particularly good and say: “Right! We will take that opportunity!”
Frankly, I expect to win the next election, not because of the opinion polls now but because when it comes up to an election we will have the very best case for governing Britain for the future and we shall be able to look at the achievements and people will look at that compared with the alternative and I personally think that they will return us and they will return us with a good majority, because when it comes to an [end p4] election you consider who is going to be the Government for the next five years and you do not really just think: “Well, the polls are good! I will go before I had thought of going!” No, it is not a temptation. It is irritating that I think that the press and media work up election fever, because I think that can be disturbing for some people. It creates uncertainty when there really is not any uncertainty.
Peter Murphy, IRN
So you would not even consider going to the electorate before you have been in office four years?
P.M.
You are trying to get things out! I believe you should have quite a good period before you even consider it. We did last time and we shall again.
Peter Murphy, IRN
The Labour Leader, Neil Kinnock, has suggested that you will in fact be forced to call an election; you will have to cut and run because of an economic crisis.
P.M.
Really? Well I must say the Labour Party has occasion to know a lot about economic crises. They were in one almost perpetually and they nearly made [end p5] this country bankrupt. Their stewardship was appalling and instead of making us one of the people in the IMF who actually give help to other people, they made us a supplicant going begging to them.
There is no possibility of that happening under this Government.
Peter Murphy, IRN
The point has been made though that the balance of payments position later this year could look pretty dramatic for the Government. We are sucking in rather more imports than you probably would expect or hope …
P.M.
We have had an enormous balance of payments over the past years and may I point out that the thing which the Labour Party hits out most—the City—is just about the greatest single contributor to our balance of payments. For the whole of the United Kingdom, the City earns net for our balance of payments, £7½ billion. It would be better if that were recognised and it would be better if people who make these wild allegations actually supported and encouraged those who earn so much not only for the City, but for the whole of the United Kingdom. [end p6]
Peter Murphy, IRN
But you must be worried about the level of imports that are being sucked in by consumer spending on items which, frankly, are probably not available British-made?
P.M.
Some items are not available British-made. There are some things which we make which compete very effectively with overseas goods.
On manufacturing exports, the volume is up and we have held our own in recent years against our competitors. We are doing very much better against our competitors in holding our own in proportion of world trade.
Yes, I am concerned sometimes that we import some things which we could just as easily make here, but Government Departments cannot make them; Government Departments do not make them; Government Departments are not good at creating business. They are very good at spending money, as are politicians, because they do it under politicians, but they are not good at creating business and that you have to leave to people themselves. You have to leave it to business to create more business; you have to leave it to young people who want to start up business on their own—and there are quite a lot of them—and if they look around as to what they can produce, they will find quite a lot of things that could substitute for imports that we are now getting, so that does give quite a lot of them an opportunity. [end p7]
Peter Murphy, IRN
On the subject of consumer spending, there is a lot of speculation once again about further tax cuts.
Experts suggest that tax cuts actually only help to fuel a consumer boom and suck in even more imports.
P.M.
Well not necessarily because, you know, quite a lot of Government expenditure can also suck in imports and quite a lot of investment in industry can also suck in imports, because quite a lot of machinery which we use, I am afraid, is produced overseas, so I would not necessarily make claims for one kind of expenditure as against another.
Also, do not forget we do have consumer choice in this country, but you know, we do make and produce a fantastic number of things which people here choose to buy. Some of our retailers make a point of buying in the home market and they go to various factories and say: “Look! We have been buying this abroad. I am sure you could produce it as well and at as low a price!” and they have made a point of going round doing that and there are several companies now which are producing for some of these very large retail chains and they are producing excellent goods of excellent value.
So really, let us give a leg up to manufacturing industry that is doing well; that is satisfying the consumer, instead of constantly criticising them. [end p8] After all, people who buy goods are often those who make other goods. Of course, you expect them to give the same amount of discrimination and expertise to the goods which they make as to the goods which they buy, to judge them on the same quality basis.
Peter Murphy, IRN
But returning to tax cuts themselves, are you still committed to the idea of cutting the basic rate of tax?
P.M.
Oh yes, of course. The basic rate of tax is too high. It is a great concern to us that when you have exhausted your personal tax-free allowances, which incidentally we have put up a great deal, when you have exhausted those you come into the first rate of tax at 29 pence in the pound, plus your national insurance contribution, so you are coming into something like 34 pence in the pound on the first pound of tax which you pay. It is very very sharp and it is a great disincentive as people come up to that level and as you sometimes hear them say, it is a great disincentive to going on and working overtime when you are on comparatively low incomes, that so much is taken away from you of the amount of your income which is liable to tax.
So yes, of course it is our objective, and even [end p9] if you take it steadily and go down steadily, so long as you are going in the right direction that is a good thing.
You cannot say what you are going to do in any particular budget. As it comes up to the time, you have to look at what it is wise to do, because as you know, we have kept down the borrowing and we have been very very wise to do so.
Peter Murphy, IRN
The latest opinion polls suggest that in fact the electors are not that convinced about the value of tax cuts when it comes to making up their minds in an election.
Do you think they really are worried or swayed by tax cuts?
P.M.
I think they are worried about what is going to be their net take-home pay. Some people who say they are not worried about tax cuts, nevertheless do not hesitate to put in very large claims for increased earnings. Those go straight on to costs. Costs reduce the amount we export or they make it more difficult for us to compete in the home market. The only way you can give them more net take-home pay without it going into industrial costs and therefore prices is to reduce taxation. [end p10]
Peter Murphy, IRN
Given that you have not yet obviously made up your mind on the date of the next election, but that there will be one, as you say, before June of next year, what do you see as going to be the major issues in that campaign?
P.M.
The major issues will be absolutely fundamental.
They first will be: should the Government take more and more powers and more and more control over your lives and more and more tax? That will be the Labour Party viewpoint.
Or is the whole task of Government not to have control over the lives of people, but to have a framework of law and regulations and, of course, defence, rule of law, and sound finance, which enable people to live their own lives in their own way, and so, of course, there will be great battles over things which we have done.
We have distributed and we still will go on distributing property much more widely among people, whether it is house ownership, whether it is share ownership, whether it is savings, building society accounts—and if you are doing that, you have a bounden duty to keep down inflation, to see that their savings are not eroded in value.
We have gone a long way towards, as it were, [end p11] giving the trade unions back to their members. That is not the Labour Party Way! They want to give the trade unions back to their bosses! That is also absolutely fundamental.
We have gone a long way to reducing inflation. That is absolutely critical.
We have gone not merely a long way, we have built up a reputation for sound finance year after year after year. This Government will always continue to be prudent.
And we have done far better by the Health Service than any other previous government of any political complexion.
Yes, of course, there is a lot more to do, but we have been steadily improving and steadily going in the right direction.
As all the figure will show, whether they are in amounts spent, numbers of doctors or nurses are way up; and their pay is up and the numbers of patients treated are up.
No-one says our problems are over. Far from it! But we have tackled them and we shall continue to tackle them.
So that is not a bad thing.
Education also will be quite, in my view, a major issue in an election. Some children are getting the kind of education they should—very very good—but others I am afraid are getting far too much political [end p12] indoctrination and the parents look to governments to say: “Now what are you going to do about that?”
Peter Murphy, IRN
Prime Minister, you did not mention unemployment. Your record on unemployment, frankly, is not very good at all.
Is that, do you think, going to be an issue in the forthcoming election campaign?
P.M.
Yes, I think it will, but I think people have a pretty good understanding of why we have unemployment, why we have unemployment over the whole of Europe—it is 16 million across the whole of Europe as you know—and what is happening about it, and I think that they would know that it would be a great deal worse had in fact the policies of the Labour Party been pursued, which would have led to roaring inflation and unless we had got inflation down, then our cost would have been right up and we could not compete in the outside world, and I think they know that we have got some of the best programmes for training we have ever had, particularly for young people, and as a matter of fact, our record on help for young people who are unemployed is very much better than that in Europe and our proportion of young people unemployed is smaller than that in Europe, so we are at last beginning to make some inroads into that. [end p13]
I think if they look at the figures, they will see that we have tried to do a lot more for the old areas of the north, where the old industries were, and they have suffered worst … there are areas, of course, of great prosperity in the north, but there are these areas where we had the old industries—shipbuilding, some heavy engineering, a lot of steel, a lot of coal—and they were heavily dependent upon those and those have suffered. But if you look at where the money has gone to help with unemployment, it has gone to those areas and also more money has gone on youth training to those areas and far more money has gone on the Community Programme to those areas, and the interesting thing to me is that things like the Youth Enterprise Allowance—people who have been unemployed for a few months want to start up on their own, but they are afraid to give up their unemployment benefit obviously; would they have enough if they started up on their own? So we developed something called a Youth Enterprise Allowance when for a year they will get an allowance of £40 a week so they have got a basis on which to start, and that has been taken up very well; also being taken up much much better in the north, and we are very pleased about that.
Peter Murphy, IRN
But are you not worried by those who say you have divided the nation between North and South, the “Haves” and the “Have Nots” ? [end p14]
P.M.
Yes, but it is not a true accusation. Wherever you have got areas which have been dependent upon some of the old heavy industries or dependent upon one particular firm, and those have industries have shrunk because in some cases the Far East and the countries round the Pacific have been able to produce more cheaply and in other cases one particular firm's products have gone out of business, where you have got those areas, whether it is north or south, they have suffered.
If you get a coalmine in Kent that has closed, it is just as important to that area in Kent as is a coalmine in another area. Where you get a tin mine in Cornwall having to close, it is just as much important as something else closing in the north.
It is those areas of the old industries and heavily dependent upon one industry that really have suffered and therefore, you want to try to get diversified industry. That is why we have a regional policy. That is why we have the regional incentive; something like £2 billion has gone to the areas of the north and Scotland and Wales and something like only £200 million—a minute proportion—has gone to the south.
So I think that North-South is an oversimplification.
Yes, to some extent there has always been a problem, though in days gone by do not forget it was [end p15] north that was very prosperous when those industries were booming and the south did not have such a good time.
From the beginning of the post-war period, there has been in income terms something of a North-South divide, but it has not varied proportionately very much over the last seven years.
There are jobs being created in the North; there are jobs being created all over the country, over a million jobs, quite a number of them in the North.
Inward investment is going into the North; we opened the Nissan plant—an enormous boost to the people of the North-East, doing well, and if you go and look housing is much cheaper in the North; transport costs are much cheaper because you do not have as far to travel to get to work. Marvellous countryside, excellent roads, excellent airports, excellent universities and we are now building and have built—I have seen a number of them—excellent hospitals, so the infrastructure is there and you have a people who are skilled in manufacturing and are learning other skills and I hope that more and more inward investment will go into those areas and perhaps some of our own companies will invest more in those areas because income-for-income, you get a much better standard of living in some of those parts than you do in the South-East. [end p16]
Peter Murphy, IRN
How do you explain to those people though in the areas which, as you say, were old industrial areas where industries have closed down, that their areas have not been written off, that you have not said: “The Conservatives do not get any votes in that area; we do not care any more!”
P.M.
We do! We do have representatives in that area and we hope to get more.
You look at some of the roads in that area. They are quite outstanding. The roads of the North-East were built under Conservative Governments largely.
I remember when Quintin Hailsham was Minister for the North-East. You go and look all round Manchester and the North West: the road system is excellent.
We have tried to get extra airline services to Manchester Airport. That is what makes an airport flourish—an excellent airport.
They have got the biggest university campus in Europe in the North-West, in Manchester. They have got three excellent teaching hospitals.
They have a fantastic school which used to be a direct grant school, the Manchester Grammar School—it has now had to go independent, nothing to do with this Government; we would have loved it to stay a direct grant school. [end p17]
You look in the North-East: marvellous countryside, excellent roads, very good universities, very good polytechnics, good hospitals being developed. The largest new shopping area is in the North-East—Gateshead—just newly-built. They have not gone there because there is no money there, because there is not spending power there, because there is not a good deal of prosperity there as well as problems. All of these things: a new big rapid transport system in the North-East. All of these things are happening and if you want more people to go there, just sing the great benefits of those areas and do not dwell always upon the problems.
Peter Murphy, IRN
You mentioned in passing the National Health Service and the increase in Government spending in that area.
Are you not worried though, no matter what the Government does, the public perception is of local hospitals being closed down, of hospitals understaffed and underfunded. How are you going to convince them that you actually mean what you say?
P.M.
Only by getting over the facts. The day I walked in here, seven and a half years ago, the amount being spent on the National Health Service was £7.3/4 billion. This year, [end p18] the amount being spent on the National Health Service is not £7.3/4 billion; it is not merely double that; it is more: it is £18.3/4 billion. That is way way way above inflation and, of course, rightly, so it should be. That money does not come from Government; it comes from the pockets of the people and you will find that today, on average, every family of four people on average contributes, through various forms of taxation, £26 a week to the National Health Service, whether they use it or not and it was only about something under £12 when I came into power. So people have been contributing a good deal more to the National Health Service. Yes, they have seen great new hospitals, great extensions and sometimes day centres for the elderly go up. Sometimes that has meant that smaller hospitals have to be closed, but I do say to people: “Look! You do want a good big general hospital. Supposing you go in for one thing and you have an operation, you get a complication. If you are in a big general hospital there are services, whether it is from a nerve specialist, whether it is from a heart specialist, there are all sorts of complications you could get; all the services are there!”
I know how strongly people feel about some of their small hospitals and there are fortunately still a lot left, and we are trying to enable them sometimes to keep them and if they would voluntarily also through the locality help to contribute to them, but the figures [end p19] are there.
Of course, there are still waiting lists. No-one is more anxious to get them down than we are. We were handed over massive waiting lists because there had been a big strike in the Health Service. Now those are coming down, but in some areas—like hip operations, cataract, heart—they are much much longer than we would wish and our first priority is to try to get those down.
Peter Murphy, IRN
One area, of course, where you have been forced to increase spending is on the AIDS campaign and quite rightly, but you must be very concerned at this particular issue. It is an apparent time bomb ticking away.
P.M.
Yes, one is concerned, but governments cannot prevent people from getting AIDS—but people can themselves, by the way in which they conduct their lives and that is what we are having to say to them: “Look! These are the dangers. These are where they arise. Now, if you do that, then you are liable to get AIDS!” and so it is our job to see that they know how it is transmitted from person to person. At the moment, about 90%; of the cases we have so far had have been through homosexual contact. That is not the only way. It can [end p20] also be transmitted heterosexually. It is our task to tell people where the dangers lie and for them to see that they do not do things which mean that they might be liable to AIDS.
It also, as you know, can be transmitted by needles, from drugs or anyone else who has to use a needle, if their needle has been used by a person who has AIDS.
We are trying to carry out our duty and it is over to the people then.
Peter Murphy, IRN
It must have been a difficult decision for you though, in view of your commitment to Victorian values and family life, to launch the present campaign against AIDS?
P.M.
They cannot be called “Victorian values!” . It is a misnomer. They are fundamental rules. They last from generation to generation. If people flout them—and Heaven knows, no-one is ever perfect—they should know what the consequences are with this comparatively new disease and they should know about it and it is our job to do that.
We would have recoiled, even months ago, from putting round a leaflet to every house, but as you know, unless people know, they might in fact get into dangers [end p21] which they do not suspect.
Yes, it was a difficult decision, because we discussed all kinds of things and I said: “Look! Do we really have to disturb older people by putting round these leaflets?” But colleagues felt that the matter was so serious that we really had to try to take every step. Older people can have a great influence on younger people. There is a great deal of discussion from younger people to older people and therefore we took the steps that we have taken and we hope it will be effective.
Peter Murphy, IRN
The Government, though, has been seen in some ways to condone permissiveness. I mean, do you have much sympathy with those like Manchester's Chief Constable, for instance, who take a much higher moral attitude to AIDS?
P.M.
You said something then: “The Government has been seen to condone …”
Peter Murphy, IRN
No, I said: “It may appear in some ways …” [end p22]
P.M.
Permissiveness is a matter for individual choice.
There are people who have made very very clear where they stand on these matters. It is a question of personal behaviour and that is a matter of personal choice.
Yes, some people have made their position very clear. Thank goodness they have, if they have come out for standards of conduct which will ensure that people will not be subject to these things! That is a matter for each and every person to decide. It is a matter for the Church how much emphasis they put on this—and some of them have put great emphasis upon it.
It is not for me in any way to limit what they say, but yes, I am very glad that some people have spoken out and said: “Look! If you behave this way, then the dangers both to you and to our whole society are very great indeed!”
Peter Murphy, IRN
Finally, can I turn to Northern Ireland, a problem not only for your own Government but to previous governments before you.
You managed to get the Anglo-Irish Agreement signed. There is now a campaign underway in the North of Ireland to once again try and have it reconsidered. Will you reconsider? [end p23]
P.M.
No, we have signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement. It has been endorsed by both Houses of Parliament and it will continue.
Peter Murphy, IRN
Are you happy with the way that it has progressed?
P.M.
It has not been in existence very long. I believe it is progressing. The Unionists were very worried about it at first. I believe they have reason to see that some of their fears have not come to pass, and that it would have benefits for them in the guarantees which they are given. That was always our hope, and we shall continue with it steadily, and I think that is right.
Peter Murphy, IRN
Are any items of it re-negotiable?
P.M.
There are certain things in it which give a possibility under certain circumstances of looking at it again at certain times, but that is a part of the Agreement itself. [end p24]
Peter Murphy, IRN
I wonder, in view of the fact that there is obviously an election campaign in the Republic, that perhaps a new government there may not be quite so sympathetic?
P.M.
I do not believe that a government in the Republic of Ireland would wish to abrogate the Anglo-Irish Agreement. I feel it would be very very unwise. The choice is for them.
But to abrogate an agreement which is reached not with a government but with a country would be a very very serious thing to do, and I do not believe they would do it.
Peter Murphy, IRN
Prime Minister, thank you very much!
P.M.
Thank you!