Tag: Conservative Party

  • Mr Major’s Message to Conservative Party Association Chairmen – 29 December 1996

    Below is the text of the New Year message sent by Mr Major to the Conservative Party Association Chairmen on Sunday 29th December 1996.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    1997 will be a watershed year for Britain.

    At the election, people will face a choice. A choice of two futures.

    They can choose a future where prices and mortgage rates are firmly under control. They can choose a future that looks rosy, with the best economic conditions this country has seen for a century, created by millions of hard-working people and the government, together. And they can choose a future where British interests will be fought for in Europe.

    Or they can risk a future with an untried, inexperienced, unrealistic alternative. We will win that election, because on all three counts it is too risky to trust Labour with Britain’s future.

    I know how hard the British people have had to work to make life better in this country. As a result we have made real gains – more spending money, more jobs and record investment. But I know, too, how easy it would be to lose those hard-won gains.

    We will safeguard the stability and lasting prosperity of British families with a clear and reliable agenda for those who work hard. Here are my five economic pledges for stability and prosperity:

    Tax : Having cut the basic rate of tax from 33p to 23p, we aim to get it down to 20p. Labour has £30 billion spending pledges but will not say where the money will come from.

    Prices : We keep inflation firmly under control. Labour has no plan for controlling prices and no inflation targets.

    Mortgages : By keeping inflation and interest rates low, we will ensure that the repayment on people’s homes – their biggest monthly outlay – remains affordable. Labour cannot be trusted to protect people’s mortgages.

    Jobs : We will continue to help businesses create more jobs, particularly for the young. Labour would destroy jobs with the minimum wage and Social Chapter.

    Britain : We will fight for a Europe of globally competitive nation states, not a federal Europe. Labour would undermine our right to say “no” to policies that would harm our country, and sign up to the job-destroying Social Chapter.

    Only Conservatives can deliver and build on Britain’s stability and prosperity. The evidence is all around us. A hard-working family on average earnings is £1,100 a year better off than at the last election, after taking tax and inflation into account.

    Over the next five years, Conservatives will fight to build on the higher standards in our schools, to build on the better treatment in our hospitals, and to build on the increase in police numbers on the streets. We have built a platform for lasting prosperity in a tough and competitive world.

    Having come this far, people are now going to ask themselves if they are prepared to put their security and Britain’s success at risk.

    Every previous Labour government has mishandled the economy and every person has paid the price through higher taxes, mortgages, prices and fewer jobs. If a new Labour government acted as Labour has always done, we would all suffer.

    Labour’s aims are unachievable. They have made £30 billion of spending pledges, so everyone knows they will either put up taxes or run up the nation’s debt. They say they’d help the unemployed – but we all know that a minimum wage would price people out of jobs. They say they are on the side of the people, but they are determined to make them pay more for gas, electricity, water and telephones and reduce the value of their shares and pensions, by imposing a windfall tax on business.

    The real danger lies in the fact that Labour won’t say where the money is coming from. After seventeen years in opposition, they still won’t tell us how they would raise the money to achieve what they promise. This is an unbelievable stance for a party wanting the responsibility of government. It is not surprising that their deputy leader, John Prescott, says that it would be “stupid” to tell the people what their tax plans are.

    But this election will decide more than just how Britain is run. Our great country faces two futures.

    At the European Inter-governmental Conference in Amsterdam next year, the British Prime Minister will have to negotiate about the future of Europe.

    I have one overriding principle in my policy towards Europe: to put the British interest first. That is the best policy for Britain and our party. I want Britain to play a full part in building a Europe of nation states. Our agenda is to help make Europe more competitive, so all hard-working people will benefit.

    But I will firmly resist any policies that would damage Britain’s prosperity, or result in a significant shift of power to Brussels. As I have said before, if Europe goes federal, Britain will not follow.

    But there is another future.

    Imagine if Tony Blair represented Britain in Amsterdam. He says he would never be isolated in Europe, so he would just follow the crowd. He would sign up to the job-destroying Social Chapter. He would undermine our veto – our right to say “no” – in many crucial areas.

    While destroying Britain’s influence abroad, Tony Blair’s policies would dismantle Britain at home. He clings to the wreckage of a discredited policy – devolution. He says it is a priority for government, but it would undermine the United Kingdom. He would give Scotland a tax-raising parliament, Wales an assembly and England a series of regional assemblies. No-one can know the damage this would do to our country.

    Two futures. A united and successful Britain, holding its head up high in the world – as the respected Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development has just confirmed. Or a country weakened abroad and divided at home.

    Stability and prosperity, or a leap into the unknown. That is the choice.

    When people ask, “But isn’t it time for a change?” tell them that there is a stark choice. Do people want to see the achievements of 17 years, and the brightest of prospects for generations, handed over to a party that is inexperienced and will say anything to win power? We get the basics right, Labour will get them hopelessly wrong.

    It is not in my nature to walk away from a fight. I am not going to do so now. I look forward to your help in winning a fifth term in office.
    Happy New Year.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in London – 23 February 1996

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview in London on Friday 23rd February 1996.


    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, what is your reaction this morning to Mr Thurnham’s resignation?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well I am surprised, to be honest. I had a lengthy conversation with Peter and Sarah last evening and we had a very friendly conversation, a very amiable conversation and we were going to meet again next week. So I am a little surprised, I don’t quite know what happened after I finished my meeting with him.

    QUESTION:

    What will this mean for the debate on Monday on Scott?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t know that it makes any difference to the debate at all on Monday, I wasn’t sure what Peter was going to do, I don’t know what Peter is going to do now, but I expect that we will win the vote on Monday.

    QUESTION:

    Are you confident that you can win that vote?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Yes, I think we will win the vote on Monday.

    QUESTION:

    And will you ensure that there is indeed a division on that subject?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is not for me to ensure there is a division, I think the Opposition will probably ensure there is a division and I think we can rely upon them to do that. There is a capability for division. If the Opposition are entirely satisfied and don’t wish to divide, that is a matter for them.

    QUESTION:

    Is there a danger now, as Sir Teddy Taylor was saying this morning, of an election before the end of the year?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t believe so. I have always expected to go through to the spring of 1997 and I still expect to go through to the spring of 1997.

    QUESTION:

    This has been described as a betrayal by his own Constituency Association people, do you feel betrayed by what he has done?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Peter will have worked very closely with his constituency and his constituency will have worked very closely with him and very hard for him over the years, so I can understand that people feel very worried about this. I don’t think that is the sort of language that I am in the business of using. Peter has been a parliamentary colleague for a very long time. I am very saddened and disappointed at his decision. I am not quite sure what temporarily resigning the Whip means, but I am sure Peter will be in touch to say what it means.

    QUESTION:

    Is your door still open to him to come back?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    My door is open to every Member of Parliament almost all the time, I spend a lot of time talking to Members of Parliament.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Are you concerned about further defections?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am not expecting any.

    QUESTION:

    What would you say to any Tories who may be considering doing something similar?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think there are any, so I don’t think the situation arises.

    QUESTION:

    On Ireland, you will be seeing George Mitchell today, we understand you have had a number of meetings in the last 24 hours, are you hoping that the peace process in a meaningful way can be put back together in the next few days, with a summit perhaps?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have said repeatedly that I am not prepared to give up on the process, neither is John Bruton. We had a further conversation this morning. As you say, I will be seeing George Mitchell later on today, that is not to negotiate, it is to discuss what has happened and to update him on our thinking. And then I expect to be speaking to the Taoiseach again over the weekend. We are working towards a summit, we are not going to call a summit until we have done some further work. There is a huge amount of discussion and negotiation going on at the moment.

    QUESTION:

    Do you think you will meet him before you go to Bangkok?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It would be my hope to meet him before we go to Bangkok, I can’t be certain that that will be the case but that would be my wish if it is achievable.

    QUESTION:

    Sinn Fein were saying last night that the package that appears to be being put together, they were interested in and certainly wanted to look at. Do you feel that there is any realistic prospect at this stage that they can be brought back in, from what you are hearing?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    From what we have heard from Sinn Fein in the past, there ought never to have been a breach of the ceasefire. So I am a little sceptical about what I hear Sinn Fein saying, I think it is actions from now on we will wish to see from Sinn Fein and the IRA. I think we would be cautious about any words, we have been in the past, we now have every reason to be more cautious. It is actions we will wish to see from them. But we will continue and I hope we will be able to have a summit before the European Union/Asia Conference in Bangkok. I cannot be certain about that yet, and neither can John Bruton be certain about that. If we can achieve it, we will.

    QUESTION:

    What would Sinn Fein have to do, in your view, to get back into the process?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    These are matters that will become apparent over the next few days. Let us finish the discussions we are having and then we will make it quite clear.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview – 12 January 1996

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview, held on Friday 12th January 1996.


    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked what he thought of Margaret Thatcher’s speech].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think she will be very surprised by what she reads this morning. She said two things, first the huge danger of having a Labour Government and the way in which they would throw away what has been achieved in the last sixteen years. That is undoubtedly true and was set out very clearly in the remarks she made yesterday. Second, what is necessary to make this country prosperous. Some of the things she was talking about are already underway, improving prosperity for everyone, whatever class they may be. The economy is now in a state where we are able to return to a tax cutting agenda and able to improve public services.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he was failing the middle classes].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The incentives and opportunities are there at the moment. Ask people up and down the country what they want, they want opportunities for better and more secure employment. We have done better than any other European country. No other European country has as much of its adult population in employment as we do. They want to see crime falling. It is falling for the first time in 40 years. There is clear evidence of that. What you need to deliver prosperity to people is a secure economy that will last. We have delivered one out of a very difficult recession. We have delivered a platform for prosperity that we have not seen equalled for forty years. And I am going to build on that platform for prosperity. I do not intend to be pushed off course.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked what was meant by the term “No Nation Conservatism”].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    There are no “no nation” Conservatives. The Conservative Party has always been a one nation party. It is exactly what I’ve just been talking about. An inclusive society dealing with the problems people face. Things like crime, problems like jobs. Problems like achieving and maintaining prosperity, it has been a one nation Conservative Party since the beginning of time. Who could suggest differently? How could one possibly have a two nation party of any sort?

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked whether Margaret Thatcher has any relevance any more].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Lady Thatcher is a very important part of the Conservative Party. As I’ve been saying for a long time the Conservative Party is a broad church and everyone part of it has an input into our policy. But when it has had that input we set out what our policy is and we live and win in the centre right of politics. We are dealing with giving people a proper place in the future of this country. And by a proper place I don’t mean allowing others to be taking decisions for them, I mean introducing the lowest possible taxes so they can take their own decisions. I mean achieving the greatest possible personal ownership and opportunity so that they can take their own decisions. That’s what we’ve been seeking since 1979, it’s what we are doing now and it’s what we are going to go on doing.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if Margaret Thatcher had damaged party unity].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I read the speech and I rather imagine Lady Thatcher will be baffled by much of what she will have read this morning. What she was indicating in her speech yesterday was the damage to this country of a Labour Government. Now I share that view very strongly. No-one should think that the gains of the last 16 years would necessarily be safe under anything other than a Conservative Government. Lady Thatcher wants a Conservative Government just as much as I do. And that’s what we’re going to have.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked to comment on the reports that Germany might fail to meet the targets for economic convergence for the Euro].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I am surprised you say the latest news from Germany. If I may remind you, I have been saying not particularly in the case of Germany that I’ve been looking at the issue of convergence criteria for many years. I said at first it will not be done in 1997, others said, “yes it will, the European bus will roll on”, but it didn’t. I was right and they were wrong. They have been saying consistently they will be reached in 1999. I’ve been saying well, maybe, maybe. But not certainly. And now it looks increasingly across Europe others are starting to have doubts as well.

    It may yet turn out that we were right and other people were wrong. But whether they meet in 1999 or later, is not actually the important fact. The important fact is were the criteria to be met will the changes be good for this country and Europe and what will the impact be if some countries go ahead to a single currency and others don’t. And my alarm about the policy that is being developed by our European partners is that in my judgement they simply haven’t examined carefully enough and in the right sort of detail what the impact of this policy is. I want Europe to succeed because we’re part of it. But I don’t intend to stand to one side and watch them proceed with developments if they’re not in the general interest of Europe. And the case for progressing at the moment is emphatically not yet made.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if that would be accepted by all wings of the Conservative Party].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Don’t ask me about the left, centre left and the right of the party. It is the right stance for this country. I’m here in Downing Street to do what is right for the country. I’ve set out what I believe to be right. I will fight for what I believe to be right. And I will not be pushed off what I believe to be right. That’s why I have not taken short-term popular decisions.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked about the date of the General Election].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I expect there will be an election next year. There will have to be one before May next year.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he would rule out holding a General Election in 1996].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I could never rule out one, but I think there will be one in the early part of next year.

  • Mr Major’s Speech to 1995 Conservative Party Conference – 13 October 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech to the 1995 Conservative Party Conference, held in Blackpool on Friday 13th October 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    Introduction

    Today is Friday the Thirteenth. Remember it. This is the day I’m going to tell you how we’ll win the next election.

    And if anyone is superstitious they shouldn’t be.

    This is Margaret Thatcher’s 70th birthday and she won three elections in a row.

    So the omens are good.

    Many happy returns to Maggie today, and it’ll be many happy returns for us at the Election.

    We’ve won four and we’re going for five.

    All elections are important.

    But the next is a watershed.

    Because whoever wins will inherit the strongest economy for decades.

    We built that economy.

    It wasn’t easy.

    And I don’t know about you but I’m not in the mood to hand it over to Labour to wreck.

    So, Mr Chairman, we’re going to mount the fight of our lives. And when the time comes, we’re going to deliver the win of our lives.

    Leadership

    But first a bit of housekeeping.

    As you know, in June I resigned as Leader of our Party and called a leadership election.

    I did so because speculation was drowning out everything we were trying to do.

    How could you argue our case on the doorstep with that sort of thing going on?

    Well of course, you couldn’t.

    It had to end – whatever the risk.

    I might have lost. If I had I would still have been at this Conference. Still offering my full support to the Party, I believe is best able to govern this country.

    But I won.

    And today, face to face, I’d like to thank you – for your support – when the going was rough.

    Thank you, too, to my campaign team led so ably by Robert Cranborne.

    And there’s someone else who has always been there when the stakes were high.

    She’s here today too.

    Of course – I mean Norma.

    Labour

    But, that was yesterday.

    Today, we meet united, healed, renewed – and thirsting for the real fight – with Labour.

    Last week the Labour leader predicted that we’d wave the Union Jack. Of course. This Party has never waved any other flag and we never will.

    To win, Labour must persuade people this country is on its knees. Clapped out. Beaten up.

    They shouldn’t find that too difficult. That’s the way it always is – under Labour.

    But they know it isn’t true under the Conservatives. And the world knows it isn’t true.

    The world knows the only way our country would match their deception would be if they were running it.

    I don’t question Labour’s patriotism.

    But is a funny patriotism to rubbish our achievements – how shall I put it? – before breakfast, before lunch, before tea and before dinner, and then get up and do it again before breakfast – on the Today programme.

    I don’t doubt Labour’s good intentions : the road to hell is paved with them.

    They say they want to help businesses – so they’ll clobber them with the Social Chapter.

    They say they want to help the unemployed – so they’ll destroy jobs with a minimum wage.

    They say they want to treat the unions fairly – so they’ll give them privileges even Michael Foot didn’t dream of in the 1970s.

    I think Labour has been re-reading “1984” – the book that introduced “Doublethink”.

    You remember – doublethink is the trick of holding two contradictory beliefs at the same tine – and accepting both.

    It was the brain-child of another public school-educated Socialist. His name was George Orwell.

    But actually it wasn’t. That was his pen name.

    His real name – was Eric.

    His surname?

    You’ve guessed it. It was Blair.

    Eric Blair.

    He changed his name. I can’t say the same thing about my opposite number.

    He’s changed everything else. His politics. His principles. His philosophy.

    But – to the best of my belief – he hasn’t changed his name.

    At least not when I got up to speak.

    But he’s abandoned so much, so fast you never know.

    The Liberal Democrats support all Labour’s nonsense.

    But they’re neither here nor there.

    Because as we saw the other day, they’re the only party in British political history that has had its entire battle plans wiped clean off the media – by a goldfish.

    The Great Divide – Us Versus Them

    Mr Chairman, around the world, people now believe Britain is winning.

    But don’t let’s fool ourselves.

    I’m looking to the future.

    There’s still a lot to be done.

    The new Millennium will bring longer, fuller lives.

    Shifts in world power.

    More and more competition.

    Changes in technology, fast and furious.

    And, even with growing wealth, new welfare problems.

    That is the Millennium challenge. We have to respond to it.

    Explain to people the opportunities within their reach. Tell them what can – and cannot be done – and what the price will be.

    By telling them I mean really telling them. I don’t mean insulting them by trivialising issues for instant media consumption.

    I believe the public will respond to the plain truth.

    I believe they’re as sick as I am of politics by soundbite, by nudge and wink.

    No wonder people are turned off politics. The way some politicians conduct the debate would disgrace a nursery.

    There are only two ways to the future. Labour’s way. And there’s ours.

    Scratch beneath Labour’s rhetoric and you see the reality. Prescott, Beckett, Blunkett, Dobson, Cook. They believe a socialist state can do it all.

    If that were true the past 50 years would have been quite different. Cradle to grave socialism – I always thought that rather constrained way to go through life.

    But the State can’t do it all – and, what’s more, the State shouldn’t do it all.

    Beat Labour one more time, and we’ve beaten socialism for good.

    Our way – the Conservative way – is very different.

    We believe the Government should choose what Government should do – and do it better.

    Beyond that we should help individuals shape their own future. Help them – but not nanny them.

    Conservatism is choice.

    Choice is liberty.

    Blazon it on your mind.

    We should offer choice whenever we can.

    But there’s one thing in our Tory tradition that has inspired me, it’s our historic recognition that not everyone is thrusting and confident and fit. Many are not: and they deserve protection. With a Conservative Government they will always get it.

    Individual rights will be defended.

    Ownership will be encouraged.

    And, above all, we will stand for – and will protect – one United Kingdom, unbroken and undivided.

    The Enterprise Centre of Europe

    We Tories often talk of business and the need for success.

    It’s worth remembering why. It’s quite simple.

    If business makes profit, it provides jobs and pays taxes.

    And those people with jobs pay taxes too. Taxes pay for our teachers, our nurses and our public services.

    So we must make business more successful.

    We are in Europe – and rightly so. It’s the richest home market in the world.

    Half of our trade goes there.

    But half does not. And both halves are equally important.

    That’s why Malcolm Rifkind will actively pursue the vision of Atlantic Free Trade – refreshing our vital links with the Americas.

    If we’re to compete with America, Japan and the Pacific Basin, we must be the unrivalled Enterprise Centre of Europe.

    Let me spell out precisely what that means.

    It means high spending and high taxes are no longer an option. The state spends too much of our national wealth. We must get that share below 40 per cent – and keep it there.

    The state spends too much of our national wealth. We must get that share below 40 per cent – and keep it there.

    If the State spends too much, it taxes too such.

    In the recession, we had to put taxes up to protect the vulnerable.

    Now the recession is over, as soon as prudent, we must get taxes down again.

    And – be in no doubt – I don’t only mean income tax.

    I mean the taxes that damage investment and stultify wealth creation. I mean inheritance tax. I mean capital gains tax.

    We must cut them, and then – when affordable – we should abolish them.

    We receive more investment into Britain than any other European Country.

    This very day, the Queen will open Samsung’s massive new development in the North East.

    Fujitsu, Daewoo, Nissan, Black and Decker, NBC, Siemens have all decided their future is here.

    You don’t hear Labour talk of this.

    Of course not. These companies didn’t invest in a socialist Britain.

    They set up here because it’s a Conservative Britain.

    And they’ll only be followed by others if we keep Britain Conservative.

    Labour say they know how to run a market economy.

    I asked Humphrey the cat about that.

    I’ve the first time I’ve seen him move so fast.

    It took all the resources of the Royal Army Medical College to get him over the shock.

    Labour have stood in the way of everything we’ve done.

    Where were they when we cut inflation?

    When we faced down union power?

    When we fed life back into the corpse of so many nationalised Industries?

    Humphrey could answer the question. Humphrey knows. Like Macavity, Labour wasn’t there.

    They were the advocates of the easy options and they opposed every tough decision we took.

    Interest Rates up? Disgraceful, said Labour.

    Interest Rates down? Not enough, said Labour.

    Interest Rates the same? The Chancellor must act, says Labour.

    Always, always, always the easy option.

    So when they criticise us, just remind them of this.

    If we’d followed their advice, we’d have been in Carey Street.

    Unemployment has been coming down for two and a half years.

    But it’s still far too high.

    The best route to more jobs is more small businesses.

    We are the Party of small business. When I was a small boy, my bread and butter was paid for by my father’s small business. He made garden ornaments 40 years ago and some fashionable people find that very funny.

    I don’t.

    I see the proud, stubborn, independent old man who ran that firm and taught me to love my country, fight for my own and spit in the eye of malign fate. I know the knockers and sneerers who may never have taken a risk in their comfortable lives aren’t fit to wipe the boots of the risk takers of Britain.

    When my father’s business failed – because his health failed – I saw the price the small businessman may have to pay.

    I know the sacrifice they make for the dreams they have.

    They don’t know whether they’ll succeed.

    But they work as hard as they can.

    That’s why, as Ian Lang told you, we’ve set up the biggest consultation with business ever seen in this country – to find out what more we can credibly do to help then.

    Frankly, Mr Chairman, I think they’re heroes.

    Europe

    I know one thing: we mustn’t pile burdens on business.

    So let me say this to our friends and partners in Europe.

    Don’t ask me to sign the Social Chapter. I won’t do it.

    I don’t look for popularity abroad – I prefer to protect jobs right here.

    Don’t misunderstand me. I’m for Europe, not against it.

    And I intend to argue for policies that will help it succeed. Pressure to stop arguing and go with the European consensus is strong. It’s difficult to set rational argument against the last movement of Beethoven’s Ninth.

    We must be sympathetic, but we must stand our corner.

    We must ask our partners to understand our thinking and we must understand theirs.

    Against the background of the traumas Europe suffered over the past 60 years – war, dictatorship, civil war, military occupation – it’s not surprising to me that they look towards European unity as a guarantor of political stability. Of their decision never to go to war with one another again.

    Only twenty years ago, Greece, Spain and Portugal – new partners in Europe – were ruled by men in dark glasses and epaulettes.

    Now these countries are secure in the European Union.

    In a few years’ time – thanks in large part to British policy – they will be joined by Czechs, Poles, Hungarians and others, now liberated from Communist dictatorship.

    They are knocking on the door to entry and we want to tie them in to the democratic family of Nations.

    Because it’s in our British interest: a further guarantee that our children and grandchildren will never face the conflicts than cost the lives of so many of our fathers and grandfathers.

    Unoccupied, undefeated, the war left Britain with a very different perspective from the rest of Europe.

    If we want to persuade our partners that their policies for Europe are wrong – as I believe many of them to be – we must use our imagination to understand their feelings and their motives.

    We entered Europe,

    For prosperity.

    For co-operation.

    For a louder voice on that great Continent.

    But we did not enter it for a new tier of Government.

    We did not enter it for Socialism through the back door.

    And we did not enter it for a federal Europe.

    It wouldn’t work for us. Our partners must understand that it’s politically and constitutionally unacceptable.

    But that’s what Labour would agree to and I believe they are profoundly wrong.

    We will advance our arguments firmly and courteously in Britain and in Europe.

    For Britain for Europe.

    But underneath the rational argument we should not be misunderstood.

    If others go federalist, Conservative Britain will not.

    Welfare spending

    Mr Chairman, providing quality care for those most in need is a strong part of the Tory tradition.

    Shaftesbury and Disraeli were doing it when socialism was just a distant nightmare in most people’s minds.

    We are proud of our free National Health Service. We have fought to make it the best in the world in the next century. We have put more resources into health. Not just once, but year after year. And we are modernising it, so that it remains the best in the world.

    But, Mr Chairman, we are succeeding. People are living longer. And that success in health creates new challenges for our welfare system.

    The easy way out is to load the bills onto future generations – issuing blank cheques for our children to pick up.

    In other words, living on tick. I wasn’t brought up to do that. And I don’t think that it’s right for the country.

    We have already done more than anywhere else in Europe to build up massive pension funds.

    But because we live longer, we need to develop similar approaches to long term care – encourage new forms of savings, new kinds of insurance, more flexible use of pensions.

    That’s the next step forward in our welfare system, and one we are examining right now.

    We don’t have all the answers yet. But it is important that people know we’re addressing their long-term problems.

    It’s a huge challenge but it’s one we can’t duck and one we must get right. And it’s one that will only be met by recognising the money we spend has first to be earned through an enterprise economy.

    It’s a strong Tory tradition that you and I look after ourselves and our families before we turn to others to pay our bills.

    That’s why we need to target our welfare spending on those who need it.

    I don’t need anyone to tell me that the welfare system matters.

    I know what it’s like when the money for the week runs out by Thursday.

    But welfare should offer people a ladder back to the pride of self-reliance, not a trap for the poor.

    That’s why we’re designing a welfare system for the twenty-first century.

    Targeting benefits. Reforming pensions. And helping people from welfare back into work.

    But not tolerating those on welfare who won’t work.

    From next autumn, everyone who is unemployed will need to undertake a contract for work.

    A contract that makes it absolutely clear that they have obligations to accept paid work when it is available.

    Mr Chairman, we’ll continue to shape a welfare system that is generous to those in need. We can do no other.

    But it must be one that also reflects the basic Tory instincts of rewarding prudence, thrift and family responsibility.

    Education

    Education affects not just careers, but people’s whole lives. That’s why, when I became Prime Minister, I put education at the top of my agenda.

    I haven’t changed. But education has.

    Since then we’ve introduced regular tests. Made school inspection more rigorous. Given parents more choice and information.

    Today, three times as many young people become students as in 1979.

    Last year I told this Conference that we would make nursery education available to all 4 year-olds.

    We’re doing just that with vouchers: to put power and choice where it belongs: not in the hands of bureaucrats. But in the hands of parents.

    Choice. Choice. Choice. And all opposed by Labour.

    I still want to widen choice in education.

    Some years ago, we set up the Assisted Places Scheme. It helps children from low income homes to go to our best private schools.

    It’s been a great success.

    But Labour hate it.

    That’s true to form – they always claim to want to help people – but in return they demand that people know their place.

    And in Labour’s view there is no place for children of low income families in private schools. So they want to abolish the scheme outright. Labour’s message to them is: no choice for the poor.

    One of the schools that offers places to pupils on this scheme is in Edinburgh. It’s one of Scotland’s most famous private schools – Fettes.

    Quite a lot of famous politicians went to Fettes including – Iain Macleod.

    Iain Macleod was a One Nation Tory and wouldn’t he have been proud to see pupils of poor families at his old school – sent there by a One Nation Government.

    So am I. So I’m going to give more children that opportunity.

    We’re going to double the Assisted Places scheme.

    But I want to widen choice still further.

    So if parents want specialist schools, we should let them have them.

    And if they want religious schools, we should let them have them too.

    This isn’t a dogma. It isn’t elitist. It’s based on the belief that children are first and foremost the responsibility of parents: and they know what is best for their children.

    We also want excellence in education, so I believe we should let good schools expand.

    Bad schools should be closed.

    Of course, closing bad schools means a row. But it’s the right row to have and Gillian Shephard is prepared to have it.

    Not every child can benefit from the Assisted Places Scheme or private education.

    Real choice will come when every state school offers the highest standards – when every state school prizes discipline, when every state school puts learning before political correctness. Gillian is going to work with every good head and teacher to deliver that.

    Many parents believe they’ve found a way to higher standards already. They’ve chosen for their schools to become independent, self-governing schools: what we call grant maintained.

    These schools are in the state sector. Run by the Head and the Governors. They get their money from government to spend as they think fit.

    Their results have been outstanding.

    That’s why I want to enable all schools to become grant-maintained.

    But Labour want to destroy them – wipe out their freedoms and take away their budgets.

    These schools became self-governing after a ballot of parents. Parents chose independence. Labour want to wreck then without a ballot. Labour hate independence.

    So, parents at the next election – choice or no choice. That’s the choice.

    VE/VJ Day

    This year we have all remembered with gratitude the sacrifice our predecessors made for our forbears.

    VE Day and VJ Day were very special.

    Most of you would have attended some of the events or watched the remarkable television coverage.

    I was there. I found it immensely moving.

    The sense of pride was tangible.

    But Mr Chairman, unlike others, I didn’t hear people on VJ Day shouting out party political propaganda.

    For me, it was a day in which a free people paid tribute to those who kept them free.

    Back in June you will remember the huge commemoration which took place in Hyde Park.

    Let me tell you a story of that day.

    At the entrance to one stand was an elderly man trying to get in.

    He had no ticket – so the security guard was about to turn him away.

    But luck would have it, a brigadier was passing by. Not any old brigadier, but one of the organisers of VE Day. He saw something pinned to the chest of this elderly man.

    Not all of us would have known what it was. But the brigadier did.

    It was the highest award for gallantry in our armed forces: the Victoria Cross.

    The elderly man was immediately given a seat of honour on the platform.

    Later that day, I had the privilege of meeting him – and the other Victoria and George Cross holders.

    I learned that they receive a small annual payment.

    It was £100 a year. A figure set 40 years ago, before many years of inflation. It has never changed.

    It seemed to me that, in this year of all years, it should be changed;

    So to show that this country has not forgotten the bravest of the brave: it will be changed.

    From August this year that payment will be uprated to its original value. It will increase from one hundred pounds a year to one thousand three hundred pounds a year.

    Northern Ireland

    In the last year, life has changed in Northern Ireland.

    I want to make those changes permanent. To see the next generation there growing up in prosperity – and peace.

    Patience, determination and fairness have carried us a long way.

    No one has shown these qualities more consistently than Paddy Mayhew and Michael Ancram – Northern Ireland has been well served by them.

    But we’re not there yet. There are still some who, in one breath, say they’ve given up violence for good – and in the next warn that it could return. It needn’t, and it won’t, unless they themselves pick up the gun.

    But if it is to last, it must be a just peace. One that is fair to all sides.

    And a peace that is constructed away from the shadow of the gun.

    However long it takes, building this peace in this part of our United Kingdom will continue to stand at the top of our priorities.

    Britain in the World

    Mr Chairman, Britain has big interests in the world.

    We are the only nation at the hub of the European Union, the Commonwealth, NATO and the United Nations. We are a nuclear power and a member of the Permanent Five of the Security Council.

    Our armed forces are today serving in more than forty countries including Bosnia.

    I sent troops there in 1992. Not everyone approved but I believe it was right.

    They went to the Balkans for two reasons – to protect men, women and children from starvation, rape and genocide and to prevent a full scale war at the crossroads of Europe.

    They have succeeded superbly – often at great risk to themselves. We can be proud of what they have achieved.

    It now seems possible we may soon have an uneasy peace. I hope so.

    But our role will not end there.

    Help will be needed to monitor the peace and we will play our part in this.

    International influence creates international obligations – and we will meet them.

    The Constitution

    Mr Chairman, we can only continue to be a big player abroad if we remain one United Kingdom at home.

    We recognise that Scotland and Wales are Nations in their own right.

    Of course, if they insist they could ultimately go their own way. We could not properly stop them.

    At the moment there is a clamour for constitutional change as many see the Westminster Parliament as a long way away.

    Some say we would be more popular if we bent to this clamour: if in Wales we set up Labour’s expensive talking shop, or in Scotland we said:

    “OK. You want your own tax raising Parliament you can have it. Don’t blame us when it all goes wrong.”

    But that is not our way.

    We are the Conservative and Unionist Party.

    I will not trade easy votes today for constitutional chaos tomorrow.

    We are sensitive to people’s concerns in Scotland. So we are looking at more ways of giving people more say over decisions affecting their day to day lives.

    But it’s my duty to warn of the effect of Labour’s plans for the constitution.

    Labour are proposing changes to our Constitution for their own party political advantage.

    In Scotland they are running scared of the SNP – so they have promised to impose a tax raising Parliament in their first year.

    In Wales they are not so worried about Plaid Cymru so Wales would just get an Assembly.

    And in England they can’t make up their minds so there they might – or might not – impose regional assemblies.

    There is no demand for these in England. Labour only promise them in an attempt which fails to justify the over-representation of Scottish Labour MPs at Westminster.

    It is a straightforward gerrymandering and we might as well say so.

    In Scotland, the new Parliament would raise income taxes.

    I hope Scotland realises what this means.

    People in Scotland, uniquely, will pay higher income tax on the same income than people in England or Wales or Northern Ireland. To start with, a tartan tax of an extra 6 pounds a week for the average family.

    Let me ask you a question: if you were a businessman, wanting to invest and create jobs, where would you invest: in Scotland, where you’ll have to pay higher wages to compensate for higher taxes, or somewhere else? You know the answer to that.

    The Tartan Tax will do two things: it will pay for more bureaucrats and more politicians and it will begin the decline of Scottish prosperity. Neither of them are in the interests of Scotland.

    All that is only the start. Conflict with the Westminster parliament would be inevitable.

    And then – the siren voices of the separatists will foment mischief and demand an independent Scotland cut adrift from the UK.

    These are not distant problems. These are Labour’s plans for the first year of a Labour government.

    Mr Chairman, opinion polls tell us the Scottish people are not fond of the Government at the moment. But I’m fond of then and they are being deceived by Labour.

    Labour’s plans are an immediate threat to Scotland and a threat to the United Kingdom.

    We will continue to look for ways to improve the Government of Scotland. That is our duty.

    But we will resist these damaging plans with all our strength. That too, is our duty, and the Conservative and Unionist Party will fulfil it.

    Law and Order

    Mr Chairman, as I go round the country I talk to people about crime. What they want is to feel safe – at home and on the street.

    In the past two and a half years, recorded crime has fallen.

    Well and good. Now we must make sure that the fear of crime starts to fall, too.

    People want crime reduced and criminals caught and convicted. And so do I.

    So today, let me add to what Michael Howard told you yesterday.

    We’re going to step up the fight against crime. To hit it harder and harder and harder.

    Organised crime is big business on an international scale. And – at its centre – is drugs.

    When I see the sheer evil of the drugs trade I am devoid of sympathy for the men around the world who run it.

    They live lives of comfort, often of outward respectability, while they pour poison into the veins of millions.

    Today, no parent, however safe and prosperous their home, can be entirely easy in their mind that their children won’t be offered drugs.

    And that is true in some of our market towns as well as our big cities.

    Two weeks ago, here in Blackpool, a 17 year-old died having taken drugs.

    That boy’s whole future was snuffed out for profit.

    Let me tell you what we shall do.

    First, there can be no question of lifting our border controls. We are an island and we need them. Those controls are vital. They are not negotiable. And they are staying.

    Secondly, our tradition has always been to have local police forces.

    But local forces alone aren’t equipped for this sort of crime.

    So for the first time ever, we’re discussing with the police the establishment of a national squad. This will have one mission: to take on organised crime in this country and break it.

    The police will lead on this. They will have the support of the new National Criminal Intelligence Service, working with Customs, MI6 and GCHQ.

    But all our available skills are not yet involved in this battle.

    For many years the Security Service has protected us against espionage and terrorism.

    But they can’t help the police because it is illegal for them to do so.

    I think that’s absurd. And in an age when our children are more likely to be killed by a drug dealer than by an enemy missile, I think it’s indefensible.

    So this autumn, we will change the law. It’s time to let the Security Service into the battle for the public and against organised crime.

    Day by day, we are making more use of modern science against the criminal.

    We are already using Closed Circuit Television in public places across the country.

    This has been hugely successful. More cameras mean less crime.

    So over the next three years we will add 10,000 more cameras in town centres, shopping malls and public places in every part of the country. They will improve security for the shopkeeper and safety for the shoppers.

    But the most effective eyes are the policeman’s eyes.

    I want to make every street safe.

    Since 1979, we have recruited an extra 16,000 policemen – 500 in the last year

    That’s helpful. But not enough.

    I want to send an unmistakeable message to every criminal that there are going to be still more police on the streets.

    So let us tell Chief Constables now so they can plan ahead.

    So, Chief Constables, begin to plan. Because in the overall arithmetic of this year’s public expenditure settlement we have found the resources over the next three years to put, not 500 but an extra 5,000 police officers on the beat.

    Mr Chairman, I said we intended to intensify the fight against crime – and I mean it.

    Peroration

    Mr Chairman, after four terms, why a fifth?

    Because in a shifting world only we will build a safe future for our people and heal the scars of the past.

    Because we are building a more secure economy as the enterprise centre of Europe.

    Because we are reforming public service to make it more accountable to the public who pay for it.

    Because we stand for choice and excellence in education, and in the midst of the biggest revolution since Rab Butler.

    Because we will retain the old rock solid guarantee of the health service that care will be free at the point of delivery, and where improvement is necessary it won’t be treated as a sacred cow.

    Because defence and security of the realm and the safety of our streets are paramount concerns of our Party.

    We Conservatives are:

    – for the individual, not the state

    – for choice, not direction

    – for ownership, not dependence

    – for liberty, not control.

    These are the enduring things, the cornerstones of our beliefs. We have worked for them, cared for them, fought for them.

    We are building the greatest success for this nation that we have known in our lifetime.

    We will not surrender them to a light-weight alternative.

    We carry the scars of battle, yes, but they’re honourable scars. We know no other Party can win the battles for Britain that lie ahead.

    So when you go home – refreshed and uplifted, I hope, by our Conference – remember these things, and ask the people on the doorstep:-

    – Would taxes be higher or lower under Labour?

    – Would inflation be higher or lower under Labour?

    – Would there be more or less choice under Labour?

    – Would our defence be more secure under Labour?

    You and I only have to ask the question to know the answer.

    We stand for a wise and kindly way of life that is rooted in our history.

    Our hopes from our country are not tired.

    Our ambitions are not dimmed.

    Our message to our fellow country men is clear. Millions have still to make up their minds.

    The choice is theirs. Our Nation’s Future is at stake – and we stand ready to serve.

  • Mr Major’s Doorstep Interview in Huntingdon – 7 July 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s doorstep interview, held in Huntingdon on Friday 7th July 1995.


    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if there were still divisions in the Conservative Party]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the prospects are now very bright. We have sorted out many of the problems that were there. I think there is a huge determination in the Party to unite. What must worry the Labour Party is a united Conservative Party. And that worries the Labour Party because it means the battle will resume on policies and not on the trivia that has dominated political debate for the past 2 years. And once we get into the question of policy, I believe Labour’s policies are ruinous for this country.

    People have no real wish to go towards socialism. They do not want the policies the Labour Party advocate. And now we are back on the policy debate, I think you will see a very rapid change in the fortunes of the Conservative Party.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I do think Tony talks nonsense from time to time. If you actually look at the Labour Party’s European policy for example, the Labour Party have more dissenters on European policy than the Conservative Party.

    Tony Blair knows that very well. They have kept it very quiet. They have hidden it. They have managed to spend most of their time attacking the Conservative Party with soundbites. But the reality is that there is no unity in the Labour Party on that particular policy or many others. What Tony Blair is concerned about is that we will concentrate on policies such as education, where he would wish to deny choice. On health, where he would wish to reverse all our reforms and presumably stop a huge number of people being treated each year. On defence, where he would like to have another defence review; and no doubt cut defence in Europe where he is committed to a wholly federal European and we are not.

    Now there are very sharp differences on real interests to the British nation and what I have said right the way through this leadership campaign, and will say again, is that the British nation deserves a debate upon those issues and not the political claptrap about the Conservative Party from the Labour Party and from others that it has had over the past two or three years.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked about the Euro sceptics in the Conservative Party]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Our European policy is now absolutely clear. I have spelt it out without a shred of doubt. That is my policy. That is the policy of the Cabinet. The policy of the Party. And it is certainly the policy that businesses wish to follow.

    There are differences on Europe in all the parties. If anybody thinks Tony Blair’s party is united on Europe, then I suggest they go and talk to some members of the Parliamentary Labour Party.

    Across the broad strands of policy there is now unity.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It is a great issue and it has always been a great issue. You can find just as many Labour members taking part in similar rallies. They are sitting back at the moment because they do not believe it is necessary to do so. This is one of the great issues of British politics. People will express their views on it. But the majority view is quite clear. I have expressed it and the Party have endorsed it.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think we have got a very good Cabinet now. A Cabinet that stretches across all strands of opinion in the Conservative Party. The Conservative Party is not a faction. The Conservative Party is a national party that embraces people of all sorts of background; of all sorts of interests who share the broad Conservative philosophy. That is the sort of Conservative Party I joined. That is the sort of Conservative Party I grew up in. And it is the sort of Conservative Party I lead.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked about the Luton riots]

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have asked for a report on what happened in Luton during the last couple of nights. I do not yet have it and I would like to reserve comment until I have it.

  • Mr Major’s Speech in Westminster – 7 July 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech, held at a presentation meeting for the party leader, held at the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre in Westminster, London, on Thursday 7th July 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    It’s been a memorable fortnight.

    Challenges, walkouts, unprecedented rows.

    All at Wimbledon!

    And while that has been happening the Conservative Party has resolved its internal problems and prepared itself for unity.

    Mr Chairman, I have been a member of our party for all my adult lifetime.

    I was proud to work for it at constituency level.

    To be a Conservative Councillor.

    To be a Conservative Member of Parliament.

    To be a Minister in a Conservative Government.

    And to be Leader of our Party.

    So I feel greatly honoured to have been chosen again by my colleagues to lead it – and to have been given the greatest number of votes in a serious contest of any leader in its history.

    I intend to use those votes to fulfil the mandate I was given at the last election.

    And then, Mr Chairman, I intend to renew it at the next General Election.

    I wish to thank all those who helped my victory this week happen.

    Robert Cranborne and his team, who appeared from every part of our Party in Parliament and beyond, and who mounted such a superb campaign.

    They volunteered their time and energy to assist – and they did it magnificently.

    But, above all, the literally hundreds and hundreds of constituency associations and the thousands and thousands of party members who made their support of me so clear and decisive.

    Frankly, I preferred their correspondence to some people’s editorials.

    So, I am grateful to all those who supported me. But let me say this to those who did not.

    I am not a factional politician. The Government will continue to include and represent all parts of our Party.

    Conservatism is a broad river, fed by many streams. No part of our Party has a monopoly of wisdom.

    We are and we will remain a national party, with a message and an appeal to the broad masses of the British people.

    I believe that today the Conservative Party can face the future with renewed confidence.

    We’ve had a healthy debate – and cleared the air.

    And we’ve removed once and for all the distraction which had prevented for so long any opportunity of getting our real policies across to the public.

    As a result, our party can now be more united, more determined and more effective than at any time since the General Election.

    So let me tell you a little about our message – not in abstract generalities but in concrete examples.

    For months we have been looking at ways to take forward a radical Conservative agenda not just to the General Election but into the next millennium.

    This afternoon Gillian Shephard announced the introduction of vouchers to provide free nursery education places for all 4 year olds.

    Vouchers are a very Conservative idea.

    They put choice and power in the hands not of town hall bureaucrats, but of parents.

    They will spread opportunity not just to those who have parents who can afford to pay for nursery education, but to every parent of every 4 year-old in the land.

    And they enable there to be widespread provision not just in the state sector, but in the private and voluntary sectors too.

    Labour of course opposed this idea, just as they have opposed each and every education reform we have introduced.

    They opposed the National Curriculum – and now they say they were wrong.

    They opposed league tables – and now they say they were wrong.

    And they opposed tests – and now they say they were wrong.

    So just wait a few years. Today they oppose nursery vouchers.

    In three or four years’ time, Labour will be claiming that nursery vouchers were their idea all along.

    Our reforms of education took another big step forward yesterday with the merger of the Education and Employment Departments.

    As we approach the 21st century, we can no longer assume that people can stop learning at 16, 18 or even 21.

    The new merged Department reflects our understanding that if you are undertrained and underskilled you are more likely to be unemployed.

    We want people in work. So they need skills. And we took a major step forward yesterday in delivering my ambition for Britain to have the best qualified workforce in Europe by merging the Education and Employment departments.

    That is a vital part of building up skills for everyone. Of course, Labour opposed this change too. They gave us a typical 1930s cloth cap reaction.

    “You can’t care about the unemployed”, they said, “if you abolish the Employment Department”.

    What rot. It’s because we care for them that we’ve done it.

    Labour may see the unemployed as a special group who must be set aside from the rest of us and treated differently.

    I don’t. I see them as people – people who must be helped, encouraged and trained so that they can get a job as fast as possible.

    Under this Government unemployment has fallen by 600,000 in the last two years – further and faster than anywhere else in Western Europe.

    That is the best way to show that you care about the unemployed.

    You don’t do that by saddling this country with the burdens of the Social Chapter.

    And you don’t do it by imposing the job-destroying idiocies of a minimum wage.

    You do it, as we have done, by reducing the burden of regulation.

    By setting enterprise free.

    And, when it is in the British national interest to do so, by saying one short word to Brussels – No.

    Behind the day-to-day headlines Conservative policies are transforming Britain for the better. We need to carry those further – to develop and deepen those policies.

    Each month 41,000 new businesses start up. I want to entrench and expand that.

    Small businesses are the engines of growth for future wealth and employment.

    So we will hold a major series of conferences, starting this autumn, to listen to their needs and to [indistinct].

    And I am already convinced that when we can afford it, we should set our sights on the capital and inheritance taxes which act as a drag on enterprise. My aim is to see those taxes reduced, and if possible, abolished altogether. I make no promises when we can do that – but I do set it as an objective.

    Each week 3,500 homes are bought, 200 of them council homes.

    I want to see that accelerate – so that we have 1.5 million new home-owners over the next ten years.

    And, following our white Paper last week, we will introduce legislation to extend the Right To Buy still further to many Housing Association tenants. And we will help expand private investment in homes for rent too.

    As Conservatives, we spend huge sums on those in need. We never begrudge that. But we are determined to root out fraud and to encourage those who can provide for themselves to do so.

    Because no government which is serious about creating a platform of small government and low taxation can afford to ignore the challenges of the welfare budget.

    Peter Lilley has launched the biggest anti-fraud drive in the history of the social security system. And we have gone a long way to encourage self-provision in pensions.

    Now we need to go further – and we’re looking at proposals to make it easier for those who are wage-earners today to save and buy insurance to help provide care for themselves when they are tomorrow’s pensioners.

    Mr Chairman, this Party embarked on a path of radical reform in 1979.

    Unlike our opponents, we have not changed our principles or our values.

    This is still the only Party in Britain which believes in free enterprise, low taxes, individual liberty and responsibility, and a strong and proud nation.

    We now have a fresh team to take the fight to the enemy.

    Fighting hasn’t been easy over the last couple of years.

    Well, that will change.

    For we can now set out the very clear contrast between the two parties.

    Labour call for a Defence Review – but they mean deep new defence cuts. The country does not want that – and, Mr Chairman, I believe that our superb armed forces have earned the right to have a period of stability.

    Labour would deny choice in education for parents – with the exception, I suppose, of those Labour MPs who have exercised choice themselves and chosen to send their children to Grant Maintained Schools.

    Labour would reverse our health reforms – undermining the better patient care which Trust Hospitals are delivering, and taking away from GP fundholders their new freedoms.

    Labour have no economic policy targets for the level of tax, or for monetary policy. Ken Clarke wrote to Gordon Brown about all this – and has not received a reply. Why not?

    Tell us, Mr Brown. Can’t you read – or can’t you decide? Perhaps the new Department of Education and Employment has found its first client!

    And Labour’s badly thought-out devolution plans would threaten the very survival of the United Kingdom – just as their commitment to a federal Europe would undermine our sovereignty and destroy our independence.

    Mr Chairman, Labour offer us some very juicy targets.

    All of us. So let’s take aim at them. From every Minister in Whitehall to those on the real front line – the canvassers slogging up flights of steps in blocks of flats.

    Let’s have some fun ourselves.

    Switch the focus to Labour’s divisions. And wipe the smug smile off the face of the modern Labour Party.

    Mr Chairman, the Conservative Party, united, is the most powerful and effective political force in Europe.

    We have come through our time of trial – now we will be stronger and more united.

    We have the opportunity over the next two years to build on the strongest economic position our country has seen for decades.

    We have the chance to continue to roll back the state, to widen choice and opportunity for all and to bolster our country’s unity and standing in the world.

    We can now both explain our record and improve on it still further.

    The next General Election campaign beckons.

    The next Government will inherit the strongest economy this country has seen for very many years.

    We worked for it.

    We built it up.

    And I want us to inherit it. It’s in our hands.

    The choice is very clear.

    And last Tuesday we made it.

  • Mr Major’s Comments after Winning the Conservative Party Leadership Election – 4 July 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments following his victory in the Conservative Party leadership election, made on 4th July 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    Some days ago, when I called the leadership election, I did so in the knowledge that it would very likely be an election that was contested. It was contested and contested by a heavyweight candidate. We have now seen the verdict of the Parliamentary Party, a very clear cut decision, a decision in which I have received the largest share of votes that any Conservative leadership candidate has received in any seriously contested election. I believe that has put to rest any question, and any speculation, about the leadership of the Conservative Party up to and beyond the next General Election.

    I should like to thank all those under Robert Cranborne who worked so hard in my campaign over the last few days and to offer a special vote of thanks to those tens of thousands of silent people in the constituencies up and down the country who made clear their belief, by a truly overwhelming majority, that they believed that the policies we were pursuing were going in the right direction and that they wished me to continue in Downing Street as Prime Minister. I am very grateful to them for the support that they have given me over this period.

    We have had this election. I think it has aired matters of important policy interests for all of us. But the election is now over. The message that I would give to every Conservative, whether he is a Member of Parliament, a party member or someone who simply shares our philosophy and supports us in the country, is that the time for division is over. We have made our choice, it is a clear-cut choice I believe beyond any doubt whatsoever. The responsibility we have, the current responsibility and the historic responsibility as well, is to carry our case to the electorate so they can judge the Conservative Party for what they are, and not what they are sometimes represented as being by people who are not themselves members of the Conservative Party.

    Let me just say one thing in conclusion. This election has been decided by Members of Parliament in Westminster, not commentators outside Westminster with their own particular view. I believe that is the right democratic way to determine these elections.

    I have one final thing to say to you. This matter is now concluded. I shall now return to Downing Street and begin this evening to reconstruct the Government for announcements that you might expect tomorrow.

    Thank you very much.

  • Mr Major’s Speech at Conservative Central Council – 1 April 1995

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s speech at the Conservative Central Council Meeting at the International Convention Centre at Birmingham, on Saturday 1st April 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    We’ve had a great Conference here in Birmingham. Our first, but not our last.

    This Central Council has often in the past been a platform for a change in our fortunes.

    Three years ago – it was from a Central Council – we set out and won a general election many believed we would lose.

    I believed we would win – and so we did – in three weeks, with a recession at our throat.

    Now we have two years, with a strong recovery at our side.

    So let me tell you something loud and clear right at the start. I believe we will win again.

    I have no time for faint hearts.

    The next election is there to be won. By the party with the verve and tenacity to reach out to people and catch their imagination.

    We did it before. We can do it again.

    And I expect every single person in our Party to want it, and work for it, as hard as I will.

    To those who say look at the polls, I simply say this: it is possible to look at the polls too much and your principles too little.

    I have a way in life. I learned it as a boy. I offer it to you. Stick to your principles. Stick to your guns. However rough the going may be, just keep going.

    So today I’m going to tell you how we’re going to win back the faith and trust of the British people.

    Let me take you back to five years ago when I became Chancellor of the Exchequer. Let me tell you what was on my mind. I looked back on 50 years of a boom and bust economy. Good years. Followed by bad years. If the good years coincided with elections, you won. If they didn’t, you lost.

    Over generations, we slipped back economically as a country. I grew up in that period. Even from the back streets of Brixton I found it depressing. And I was determined to try and change it. To help our economy to grow and to beat other countries.

    For the truth is that without growth every year, no Government will be able to improve education and health, increase pensions, provide care in the community, better law and order or anything else.

    But I want those improvements.

    So I need long-term growth. A stronger, more prosperous country. That’s why we’ve had to do things that have disappointed our supporters and seemed against our natural instincts.

    You know what I mean. We are the Party of low taxes. But we had to put them up. Now the economy is growing again and we can look forward to bringing them down.

    We are the Party of law and order. But crime continued to rise. So we put through controversial measures to tackle it. Now recorded crime is beginning to fall – the largest fall for 40 years.

    We’re the Party of personal well-being. Yet, on our watch, unemployment rose to nearly 3 million. But we kept our nerve. We pursued the right policies. Now it has fallen 600,000; down 1,000 a day. It is now among the lowest of the large nations of Western Europe. It is falling fastest, too. And I believe it will fall far further.

    So times are changing. And so will the political climate. The country has been through a difficult period. No doubt we’ve made mistakes. But we have learned from them. We have weathered the storm. And now we are poised to return to our natural agenda from a position of strength. Unrestrained by the iron bands of recession, the country can look forward with confidence.

    – the economy grew last year by over 4 per cent;

    – we expect it to grow by at least 3 per cent this year and next;

    – prices are rising at the slowest rate most people can remember;

    – exports have risen at record levels as we win markets across the world;

    – manufacturing expanding again – and so, too, employment in it.

    In all we’ve done we have been playing for the long-term. My target is growth every year; higher living standards every year; manufacturing growing every year; public services improving every year – and to do that without fear of inflation.

    No one has achieved that before. It’s meant saying ‘no’ to short-term options. ‘No’ to fashionable ideas. ‘Wait’ for the tax cuts we all wish to see.

    It did hurt. I said it would. I told people in 1989 – “if it isn’t hurting, it isn’t working.” But now it is working. And the reality is – if we stick to present policies we will improve life for everyone and double living standards within 25 years.

    The prize at stake is that, after the next election, the Government in office will inherit the soundest, most secure economy of any Government since the 1st World War. It will be able to address its social and political agenda more freely than any predecessor.

    Mr Chairman, I want that Government to be a Conservative Government.

    It is a massive achievement. We can be proud of it. So let’s use every day and every hour and every minute of the next two years to tell people of the great future that lies ahead and once again earn their trust and support.

    That’s the fight ahead of us. I relish it. It is a fight we can win.

    Our work is long-term – but already it’s changing our country for the better.

    And while we’ve been doing this, where have Labour been? In the lobbies – in the TV studios – in the streets – against us, that’s where they’ve been.

    Now they say they’ve changed. They say they’re changing everything they’ve always stood for. They claim to be entering our world.

    If they want to fight us on that ground, I look forward to it. They’ve been squatting here a few months. We’ve been living here for centuries.

    Ours isn’t an off-the peg philosophy. We’re not trying out someone else’s ideas for size. We’re not putting on blue in this year’s spring fashion show because “red’s out”.

    Our policies flow from core convictions, gut instincts, beliefs and ideals we’ve all grown up with.

    In these debates we are in copperbottomed, mainstream Conservative home territory. And no slick, sloganising, snake-oil salesmen from the Labour Party are going to take it from us.

    Labour today is just one more synthetic PR campaign. The workers are out. The minders are in.

    Their ideas are picked up from opinion polls, techniques derived from advertisements, language copied from us.

    Nothing is original. All is derivative.

    And if there’s one thing we’ve learned lately, it is that trading in derivatives is a risky business.

    Let me illustrate Labour’s technique for you.

    Last week the Leader of the Labour Party said Conservatives don’t understand duty, nor do they act upon it.

    Frankly, for that comment, he deserved to be laughed at from Lands End to John O’ Groats.

    Duty, responsibility, self-responsibility are the core of the Conservative instinct.

    Perhaps, Mr Blair simply intended a casual political kick. After all, it’s the sort of scatter-gun, all purpose abuse that is the daily language of new Labour.

    The technique is old and effective – throw mud until it sticks.

    Well, I know this Tory Party.

    I grew up in it.

    I am of it – from the grass roots upwards.

    And I know we’re none of the things Labour claim and we never have been. Duty and responsibility are instinctive to Conservatives as a Party, and as people.

    Ask the huge number of Conservatives who run Voluntary Service, Meals on Wheels, Citizen’s Advice Bureaux, Red Cross shops, and a hundred thousand charities up and down the land.

    I will tell you who attack duty and responsibility. Those politicians who claim the state is responsible for everything and everyone.

    Those who believe the welfare state should cope with everything.

    Those who promise that whatever the problem is. the Government can cure it.

    And we know who those politicians are. And they’re not in the Conservative Party. They’re in the Labour Party.

    Mr Chairman, we Conservatives have not changed our fundamental values for 250 years. Our ambitions and hopes have moved forward. But our values have been constant.

    In 1979 we promised to get Britain off its knees and on its feet. To end hyperinflation, curb old style Union power, turn round loss-making nationalised industry, and begin to spread choke and ownership to everyone.

    We’ve done that. Now we must turn to the future.

    Some months ago I set in hand a massive exercise to build the next phase of Conservatism – a new agenda, not just for the next Election, but clear through into the next century.

    This work is in its early stages – but today let me restate some of the core values we stand for and lift the veil on some of the ideas we’re developing.

    First, that most fundamental of Tory instincts, the pursuit of prosperity and security for all.

    Prosperity begets security. But prosperity doesn’t drop as the gentle rain from heaven. It has to be earned.

    Our industry has to be competitive. Britain must mean business. Britain must believe, in business. Britain must reward hard work. And must welcome the healthy profits of success.

    I’ll tell you when we’ll know for certain that prosperity will grow in this country. When our leading companies are world beaters. When our exports are booming. And when Britain is a magnet for foreign investment. That’s when we’ll create new jobs and lasting wealth.

    Mr Chairman, I have news for you – that time is here. That time is now. Billion after billion of dollars, yen and marks poured into Britain by foreign investors. They’re not here for our weather. They’re here for our prospects.

    Toyota, Nissan, NEC, Samsung. Record inward investment. Attracted here not by sound bites, but by sound Tory policy.

    Mr Chairman, we’re here today in Birmingham, the heart of one of the great manufacturing regions of Europe. And I have good news for Birmingham. After decades of decline manufacturing is growing and expanding.

    Despite automation the number of jobs in manufacturing is growing as well.

    And something is happening today that I didn’t expect to see for years: Britain now has a current account surplus with Japan – and we’re selling them our cars, our televisions, our motorcycles and our cameras. Made in Britain. Sold in Japan.

    This is Britain as she was – making and selling goods of high quality to all parts of the world.

    And this is Britain as I want to see her.

    Our prosperity must be built on things we make as well as services we sell.

    We’re looking at how to improve services to industry. To see what more Government can do to help.

    Many of the things we sell will be made by small businesses. That is where the future jobs will come.

    So we’re looking at still more ways to encourage them.

    We’ll be making deeper cuts in regulation and red tape. And let no-one, anywhere, be in any doubt – we will resist pointless regulation in Europe.

    And that includes the Social Chapter of which Labour are so fond.

    There’s a world of new technology out there. We have to provide industry with the modern skills they need.

    Britain must be a world leader in the new industries of media and information technology. So we will soon announce new measures to ensure it is.

    Britain must have the best qualified workforce in Europe.

    By the year 2000 we are aiming for over 80 per cent of our young people to have 5 or more good GCSEs or their vocational equivalent.

    We want to make sure all our school leavers are good enough to get a job.

    We’ve made giant strides forward. Creating 41 new universities; bringing in tough new vocational qualifications to enhance skills and test the mind. We’ve set a long-term target of one child in 3 going into higher education. And, let me tell you today – we’ve hit it five years early.

    These changes will accelerate. They are the building blocks for prosperity. The humdrum, everyday policies that improve lives and build the security we seek.

    Mr Chairman, the second thing we stand for is a nation of opportunity.

    For the right to own and the power to choose.

    Ownership is the very core of Conservatism. We believe in a capital-owning democracy. Where people can do what they wish with more of the money they earn.

    We believe in a fair reward for hard work. And we’re going to carry those principles into the future.

    So let me tell you again today. We’re committed to continue cutting rates of income tax in the future – moving towards our long-term target of 20% as the standard rate. For us, the tax debate is how soon we can bring it down and by how much. Labour’s debate is about how much they should put it up.

    We Conservatives believe in thrift, with individuals encouraged to build up tax-free savings. That’s why we introduced tax-free TESSAs and PEPs. We want people to have the security and independence savings provide. And we want to do more to encourage them.

    I also hold dear the belief that people should be able to hand on security to their children, cascading wealth down the generations. Over the last decade we’ve doubled the threshold at which inheritance tax becomes payable. It’s been difficult to go further in the last two or three difficult years. But I’m committed to doing so as soon as we can afford it.

    I also want to provide more opportunity for people to help others. The talents and experience of pensioners are too often wasted at the moment. They should be used in ways that fulfil their lives and benefit the rest of us. It is high time that retirement was recognised as the opening up of new opportunity, not a drawing down of blinds.

    All of that also means building on that explosion of giving, and working and helping others that has marked the last twenty years. Do you know that 17 million people volunteer every year – 2 million more than 15 years ago? And the Labour Party insult them by prattling on about loss of community. Comments like that belittle those who give so much.

    But while they’ve been prattling, we’ve been planning.

    So in June we will announce a comprehensive programme for voluntary service. It will cover all ages. It will be the most far-reaching imitative ever. Not a centralised plan to compete with private effort – but one that will reach into the wellsprings of goodwill that are found in literally every street of our land.

    Nowhere is Conservative belief in opportunity and choice more important than in housing. The Right to Buy is not a chapter of history. It’s not yesterday; it’s today. 70,000 families a year are still becoming homeowners as a result of Right to Buy and similar schemes.

    But there’s always more to do. Too many people are still trapped in grey, impersonal housing estates. Shortly we’ll bring forward a Housing White Paper. It will show how we could offer a choice of decent housing for everybody – and extend home ownership still wider.

    On education, while I know this year’s settlement has been tight, I can assure you – education will be at the top of our priorities as the economy delivers further growth.

    I also want to see more Grant-maintained schools to underpin choice and opportunity – and this week Gillian Shephard announced we’re giving them new powers to borrow and build for the future.

    And, because opportunities start with the young, we will shortly also publish plans to fulfil our pledge to expand nursery education for all children aged four.

    These are practical steps to give people more control over their lives. Taken together, they amount to a massive and irreversible shift of power and choice from the state to individuals and their families.

    Mr Chairman, the third pillar of our beliefs is that we stand foursquare for decent commonsense values. That’s true across the board – but I want to concentrate today on the fight against crime.

    When I became Prime Minister I took the view that it was time to understand a little less and condemn a little more. By that I meant that we shouldn’t explain away why people commit crime. We should just say bluntly: “it’s wrong”.

    Michael Howard has been acting on this – toughening penalties, bringing in new ways to prevent crime, phasing out soft options like cautioning young offenders time and time again. I believe Michael deserves enormous credit for what he has achieved in the teeth of constant abuse every inch of the way.

    He deserves 100 per cent support from all of us – and he’ll certainly get it from me.

    Too much of that abuse has come from Labour. They know they have to talk about law and order. But talk is all they do. They talk tough and act soft. Time and again they have voted against our plans to prevent and punish crime.

    Mr Chairman, we stand for commonsense justice – delivered fairly but quickly. And frankly, I believe the administration of justice is often too slow, too complex and too costly. I’d like to change that.

    So we’ve asked a leading judge to look into court procedures in civil cases, to bring faster and less costly judgments.

    And we are also out to streamline criminal justice. That must include a change to the rules on disclosure. These place a very heavy burden on the prosecution and police, going beyond the balance that justice demands. Informants and witnesses can be put at risk. The police believe these rules should be changed – and we agree with them.

    I expect some of you know victims or witnesses who have felt shabbily treated on a visit to court – as if they came last, rather than first, in the order of priorities. So we’ll soon be sending out new standards for better treatment of victims and witnesses. It’s a terrifying experience to be a victim. And often frightening to be a witness as well. We should remember and respect those fears.

    In the war on crime we’re applying new technology. We’re introducing more and more closed-circuit television to help cut crime and delinquency in our city centres. Some people didn’t like it. But it’s been immensely successful. So we’ll now be working with business on comprehensive crime prevention measures in even more places.

    This month we’re giving police wider powers to take DNA samples to help catch criminals. We will build up a national DNA database – making life safer for the citizen and whole lot tougher for the criminal. It will be the first national DNA database in the world. And we’re moving at the same time towards a national fingerprint register too. This is using technology to catch crime. And in the battle against crime, it is right to use all the science at our disposal.

    Thousands of people want to help our police. So we are having a national call for volunteers to increase the number of special constables up towards 30,000. And those constables will be out on the beat.

    Mr Chairman, we are an open-hearted country to people in difficulties – and I hope we always will be. But we can’t afford to accept abuse of our asylum laws. And so this autumn there will be a new Bill to tighten the asylum rules.

    We are reforming the probation service – so that we’re able to bring in people of quality from all backgrounds.

    And we will be experimenting with tougher new penalties for young offenders. It is right to have an alternative to prison. But I don’t believe it should be a gentle Saturday afternoon stroll.

    And, yes, we must sort out problems that have arisen in some prisons. I was as angry as anyone to read of prison officers shopping for inmates. I am not against decent treatment. But I believe privileges should be earned – and stopped if behaviour is bad, So I can tell you today that from this summer a regime of sanctions as well as reward will begin to be seen in our prisons.

    We are ready to look at anything which will deter crime and make it more likely that we will catch criminals. That’s why I can also confirm that we will soon publish a Green Paper to canvass public views on possible ways to bring in identity cards. And I hope in the debate that will follow you will make your voice heard.

    Fourthly, Mr Chairman, just as we stand against crime, we stand for first class public services. Back in 1990 I set out to sweep away those old patronising couldn’t-care-less attitudes. Our people deserve better. I want Britain’s public services to be the best in the world.

    So we began a 10-year programme of change – performance standards, league tables, market testing, independent inspection, improved compensation, and proper attention to customer needs. An information revolution for the public. We’ve moved from a world in which bureaucracy wouldn’t even give you their names to one where the results of every school, every railway line, every police force, every council are published for all to see. It’s a programme that’s proving steadily more and more successful – and it’s growing day by day. We call it the Citizen’s Charter.

    Of course, services like health and education will always be provided in the public sector. But others need not. That’s why Britain led the world in denationalisation – moving lacklustre and loss-making public companies into the private sector.

    Privatisation has been a huge success. Perhaps that’s why it’s under such vicious attack from Labour. Prices have come down dramatically – phone bills, gas bills, electricity bills, they’re down again this week.

    Privatisation has worked wonders. And I don’t have a shred of doubt privatising British Rail will be a success. Nationalised British Rail has not delivered the service it should. It can and will be done better in the private sector.

    Labour talk of reversing the public sector changes we’ve made. They would throw hospitals, railways and schools back into turmoil.

    Dogma might win – but patients, passengers and pupils would all lose out.

    Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Mr Chairman, we stand for the nation – our United Kingdom. We are proud of its institutions, proud of its place in the world.

    We will do everything necessary to defend our nation. In the 1980s Conservative Governments stood firm against communism. The result? The cold war was won – among the greatest triumphs for freedom, free enterprise, for our ideals in all our history. 400 million people free of repression. It wasn’t Labour – old, new, borrowed or blue – that led the way down that long hard road. It was we, the Conservatives. And never let it be forgotten.

    Today Britain is a leader right across the world – at the UN, in the G7, in NATO and in Europe.

    We treasure our links with the Commonwealth – so strengthened by the return of South Africa. It’s wonderful to have her back – in the Commonwealth – where she belongs.

    Our influence in Asia and the Middle East is creating new opportunities for exports and trade.

    And we for our part – 50 years on from the end of the war – will never forget those unique and lasting ties we have to the United States.

    Britain has a world identity. But we also have a special place in moulding the future of Europe. You know well where I stand. In this dangerous and changing world this great alliance serves our vital national interest.

    Yes, we benefit from Europe – but we also want to shape Europe. A Europe of nation states, built on co-operation, not intervention. A Conservative Government will never let Britain lose her national identity, her eccentricities, her uniqueness that we love. A nation state is what we are – and a nation state is what we shall remain.

    And there’s another side to our nation. We love our traditions of sport, the arts, and our national heritage. But always in the past it was difficult for those causes to compete with the great claims on national resources like health, education and defence. That’s why I set up the national lottery – to provide more resources for these causes than they’ve ever had before. A little flutter. A chance to dream. And real benefit for the country.

    Mr Chairman, I care about the integrity of our country at home as passionately as I do for its interest abroad. So that is why we’ll work to expose the fantastic folly of Labour’s plans for a tax-raising Parliament in Scotland. Those ill thought out ideas would take us towards the break-up of the most successful partnership in our history.

    It would destroy jobs in Scotland, saddle all Scots with a Tartan Tax and damage our influence abroad. The nation we believe in is a United Kingdom – not half or a third or a quarter of one. We will continue to fight Labour on this, tooth and nail.

    Mr Chairman, there is another part of our United Kingdom that is particularly close to my heart. I will continue day and night to do what I judge to be right to bring long-term peace to the brave people of Northern Ireland.

    Mr Chairman, we have much to be proud of, we Conservatives. But we have much more still to achieve. Today I have shared with you just a few of the new ideas on which we are working. The work of government moves on – and, as it does, we are shaping the next phase of Conservatism.

    We have to remind people that the essential things we stand for are, as always, the things they believe in too.

    The pillars of Conservatism are as strong as ever:

    – to deliver a strong economy and competitive industry, built on a genuine belief in private enterprise – that is the basis for future prosperity and security;

    – to create a society where individual initiative, hard work, and thrift are recognised and rewarded. An open door society in which ever more people enjoy the right to own and the power to choose;

    – to maintain order and decency, respect for self and respect for others, reinforced by lasting respect for the law;

    – to ensure that Britain has the best quality public services – the best schools, the best hospitals – that British skill can create;

    – and finally, to ensure that Britain has a Government that will keep our country secure abroad and safe at home, a Government which puts the long-term interest of our nation first.

    Mr Chairman, those are the things we stand for. The things we are working for. They are why Britain needs a Conservative Government to lead this country into the next millennium.

    Yes, we have a tough fight on our hands. But I have never run away from any fight in my life. And this is one more battle that, with your help, I intend to win.

  • Mr Major’s Downing Street Press Conference – 16 January 1995

    Below is the transcript of Mr Major’s press conference, held at Downing Street in London on Monday 16th January 1995.


    PRIME MINISTER:

    Thank you all for coming this afternoon. I thought as we have now got into the New Year that it might be appropriate to take this opportunity to have a look across the political scene as it is at the moment.

    I think we are about to enter a particularly interesting phase, and let me firstly say something about the longer term. In around two years, maybe a little more, perhaps a little less, we are going to have to persuade the public once again to entrust us with government. After 17 years I do not believe that anyone should be complacent about that task. No party has a divine right to govern and no-one should expect a bouncy economy alone to ensure an election success.

    Last week I took some steps to put this country on course for the longer term. On Friday, with some senior colleagues at Chequers, I conducted a comprehensive review of Britain’s role in the world. We analysed both the risks and the opportunities in the immediate future. We looked at what we had to do to promote Britain’s national interest and we looked at the policies that we believe were right for Britain.

    A nation like ours, dependent for about one-third of its wealth on overseas trade, must promote its interests worldwide. We have for long been a global power and we will continue to be a global power, but in an increasingly competitive world, that means that we must single-mindedly pursue our interests around the world politically and commercially, we must all put Britain first.

    I plan to have further Chequers meetings to look at domestic and social policies – jobs, health, education, public services – and these will be critical in building up the government’s policies for the future. This is work similar to that undertaken before the 1992 election, but it will be much wider and with a much longer perspective.

    I have invited Secretaries of State to assemble policy groups, each in their respective areas, and the remit for these groups is to think both boldly and imaginatively. I want their prescriptions informed by a very wide process of consultation, with people in all walks of life, inside and outside the Conservative Party. The Policy Unit will also consult widely, external expert opinions will be sought, I intend to have the widest possible debate to build the next phase of Conservatism, to plan new policies for government in the new millennium.

    Over recent years I believe we have done what is right for this country. But I know that doing uncomfortable things, although often necessary in government, does not at the same time necessarily endear you to people. But if your policy is right, and you stick to that policy, the benefits do come through, and that is what I believe is now beginning to happen.

    The economic debate and the European debate have dominated politics for some time, the economy is now coming right, and I can now see a road to unity on European policy as we prepare for the Intergovernmental Conference in 1996 and 1997.

    But there is a political life apart from these two subjects. Jobs, education, health, personal choice and opportunity, the levels of tax, the quality of life in the public services, these are things that concern families in every part of the country. On the economy we have a broadly based recovery unlike any that we have seen since 1945. It is a recovery for the long term, it is not a flash in the pan, it is not fuelled by monopoly money. We are seeing confidence and growth restored to manufacturing industry, Britain is making things once more, as it traditionally did, and it is selling them to every corner of the world. People will feel the effects of this recovery only gradually, but as they do begin to feel those effects, they can have confidence that that recovery is going to last.

    We will continue to pursue privatisation for the best of reasons, to help improve the standards of service to the public. Frankly, I am not content with the service we have had over many years from British Rail, I want to remove British Rail for good from the stand-up comedian’s joke book and to turn them into the envy of the world, we did that with British Airways and I have every intention of doing that with British Rail as well.

    On education policy we are pursuing higher standards, more choice, more opportunity. Later this year we will come forward with our detailed proposals on nursery education, testing the National Curriculum performance tables, all of these are now beginning to lever up standards and people can begin to see that that is what is happening, the improvement is evident and we intend it to continue into the future.

    I am utterly committed to the National Health Service. Each year doctors and nurses care for more patients, a million more than since our reforms began. This year we are abolishing a complete layer of bureaucracy in order to target resources on patient care. The great reforms of recent years are in place and they are now settling down. It would frankly be folly to seek to tear up those reforms, it would introduce chaos and instability into General Practioners’ surgeries and into hospitals up and down the country. The result of that could only be to shift the focus away from the patient and better treatment for the patient.

    We will carry forward the sea-change in our approach to fighting crime. People want to know that crime does not pay, but that criminals do. The new measures which come into effect this year to come down hard on persistent young offenders and bail-bandits, for example, they will give the police more powers to put criminals behind bars and to make punishment fit the crime.

    Crucial to these reforms has been the operation of the Citizen’s Charter. The Charter has delivered better information and standards in both health and education and will do so right across government. It is, as it always has been, a ten year programme to improve public services. I do not believe that public services should provide a brusque response to the public or to be needlessly anonymous, they are there to serve the public, and to be accountable to the public, and that is the right sort of devolution.

    The consistent theme in these reforms is moving the decision-making process away from government and out to local people, that is the sort of devolution that I passionately favour, not devolution which creates extra tiers of bureaucracy with extra tiers of expense and extra tiers of frustration for most of the people in this country.

    We are opening up government steadily but significantly. The last two years have seen changes to our security and intelligence services, to the information available about government committees and departments. There have been changes following the Jopling recommendations in the way Parliament works; changes for the system of awarding honours; and changes to the decision-making process in Scotland. The British constitution is not a written constitution, but neither is it an unchanging constitution. But it should be changed only with care and with good reason, not in a careless fashion for political reasons. Above all, I am concerned to widen opportunity for everyone, whatever their start in life may have been. We want to help people meet their own ambitions and control more of their own lives.

    We have a crowded agenda in the years immediately ahead of us, but what we are also seeking to do is to fashion flow in a wider way than has been done for very many years, the direction of policy beyond the immediate future, and that work will start immediately.

     

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS:

    QUESTION (John Sergeant, BBC):

    Prime Minister, this has many of the characteristics of a press conference at the beginning of an election campaign, is it your intention to use this conference to mount an attack on the Labour Party, and Mr Blair particularly?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    What a tempter you are. The purpose of this press conference was to set out what I have just said to you, firstly, and secondly to honour the promise that I made to you, not necessarily you, John, but the Lobby and others generally in the summer, when I promised that from time to time I would have further press conferences so that you would have the opportunity to question me. If you wish to question me about the Labour Party, of course I will respond to the policy muddles that they are getting into on education, on British Rail, on devolution, on energy policy, on health and on a range of other subjects, but as you will notice, I did not myself introduce the subject.

    QUESTION (Peter Riddell, Times):

    You mentioned at the end of your statement about the constitution being changed with care, have you got any proposals yourself, particularly in relation to the Nolan Committee, will you be putting forward suggestions for improving say appointments to quangos and other matters being covered by Nolan?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I will be very interested to see what Nolan has to say. I think Nolan touches an area of concern that has been there for some time, and I think the Nolan recommendations will have to be looked at very seriously. I have not been invited to give evidence to Nolan, other members of the government will and where appropriate they will put forward particular ideas. But certainly we will wish to look very carefully at what Nolan recommends and very probably we will be seeking to implement much of it.

    QUESTION (Peter Snow, Newsnight);

    When you said in your New Year interview that at the Intergovernmental Conference on Europe next year you would not accept constitutional changes that would be damaging, did you mean by that that you would veto them or that Britain would not accept but the others could go ahead without you?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The agreements at the Intergovernmental Conference have to be agreed unanimously, that is the way in which the European Union works. I am not in the business of just going there with heavy boots to be difficult, but if people propose constitutional change that I think is inappropriate for Europe, or inappropriate for the United Kingdom, then I will not accept it, I have made that perfectly clear.

    QUESTION (Peter Snow):

    You will veto it?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    If you choose to use that word, yes most certainly I will veto it, I will not accept it. If I do not believe it is in the interests of the United Kingdom, or indeed in the interests of the wider European case, then I will most emphatically say so and I will most emphatically say ‘No’. But I also said in that interview that I do not myself believe that the 1996 conference is going to raise huge constitutional issues, I cannot be certain about that, I cannot be certain what the other 14 countries will introduce, any country can introduce any issue it wishes, but I do not at the moment expect great constitutional issues to be introduced, if they are I believe the time is inappropriate, if they are and I think they are significant and damaging then I will reject them.

    QUESTION (Elinor Goodman):

    Given that you say this press conference is in part to map out the future of Conservatism, and also you admit to give us the chance to ask questions about the Labour Party, is Downing Street the right place to have it or shouldn’t it be at Conservative Central Office?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    You are the first journalist I have ever known not to wish to take the opportunity of asking questions wherever they may be asked, Elinor. But as far as the direct point you make is concerned, I am mapping out the policies for the rest of this government and for future Conservative governments.

    QUESTION (Michael Brunson, ITN):

    Can I ask about rail privatisation. I know that you always say that every privatisation is unpopular, but would you not accept that this privatisation seems to be unusually unpopular, even among some members of your own party? And secondly, since at least the Labour Party is now prepared to say that they are committed to a publicly owned and a publicly accountable railway after the next election, would you not accept that that is going to give those who may wish to buy, particularly Railtrack, very considerable anxiety about getting involved in this privatisation?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    You have brought me the news of what the Labour Party’s policy is at 1550 on Monday afternoon, whether it will be the same tomorrow morning I suppose is a moot point, it does seem to have undergone rather a few changes over the last few weeks. Last week Mr Blair was not sure whether he would renationalise or not. Mr Prescott equivocated in radio interviews, before that Mr Prescott was certain he would renationalise, and so would others. So I am not entirely sure what their policy will be in the future, though I strongly suspect that this is the first part of the Danegeld to be paid for the support that Mr Blair will seek on Clause 4.

    But as far as your direct question of concern, as to whether this is going to be uniquely unpopular, I would simply suggest that you go back and look at what was said in many of the previous privatisations. If, for example, I refer to British Steel, what was it that the Labour Front bench, Donald Dewar I think it was from memory said about British Steel – “totally irrelevant to the real interests of the industry and based on dogma”, he said, ‘the Labour Party is unequivocally implacably opposed to it.” British Steel, privatised, is now one of the most efficient steel-makers in the world. This was the privatisation that was said not to be concerned with the real interests of the industry. What was it they said about British Airways, again it was poor old Donald Dewar who was the Spokesman “British Airways will be the pantomime horse of capitalism, if it is anything at all” said the Labour Party about the privatisation of British Airways.

    I do not think there are many people here at this press conference or who may watch this answer who doubts that British Airways is now one of the most efficient airways anywhere in the world. So I believe it can be with British Rail, I am just not satisfied with what British Rail has produced by way of a service in the last 40 years or so, I believe it can do better, I know it is controversial but I believe it can provide a better service. And many of the scare stories that there have been about mass hackings of the line are dealt with in the legislation which ensures that services are protected. So I believe yes we can proceed with it, yes we will be able to proceed with the flotation, and yes over time precisely the same impact will be had by a privatised British Rail as we have seen with electricity, gas, steel, telecoms and British Airways, the private sector will run it better and passengers will get a better service.

    QUESTION (Mike Brunson):

    And they will buy it?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    And they will buy it.

    QUESTION (Adam Boulton, Sky TV):

    On the question of the Union, how do you reconcile your attitude towards Northern Ireland, in which you say Britain has no selfish strategic interest and you have given the people the right of self-determination, to your attitude to Scotland, and would you be prepared to consider another referendum on devolved government for Scotland?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Well I was interested to see that the Labour Leader ruled out a referendum on legislation to introduce devolution to Scotland and Wales, I find that extraordinary if that is a settled position, but perhaps it will not be a settled position, perhaps it will change again. The distinction with Northern Ireland I think is very clear, in Northern Ireland we are not talking about a tax-raising assembly with the powers and authorities that would apparently be given to a Scottish Assembly. The danger with a Scottish Assembly, well there are many dangers with a Scottish Assembly, but I think there is a very real danger with that that it would firstly do dramatic damage to Scotland. And I say that with good reason. If Scotland is going to have the privilege of being more highly taxed, is Scotland going to have the degree of inward investment that previously it has had? I would suggest an inward investor would say: “But the Scots are more highly taxed, therefore there is going to be more pressure on wage demands, therefore my costs are going to be higher, therefore I am not going to invest in Scotland”. That is but one of a whole series of questions.

    The constitutional questions about what is proposed in Scotland are even more damaging. If Scotland is to have authority for education and health, and all health and education matters are to be settled by the Scottish Parliament, what rights would Scottish Members of Parliament have over those matters? None at all. What rights, therefore, should Scottish Members of Parliament have at Westminster over health and education in England, Wales and Northern Ireland? It is not credible. What in practise is being done in Scotland is that the Labour Party are well aware that they need a big majority of seats in Scotland in order to win a general election, they are very worried that the Scottish Nationalist Party would do very well in a general election, they are trying to out-bid the Scottish Nationalist Party in terms of winning seats, and they have now begun to realise the difficulties that that faces them. So they have offered an Assembly in Wales, but it seems a rather lesser Assembly, they do not regard that as important to Scotland.

    And then in order to square the circle they have said but we would have regional government all over England. There is no demand for regional government all over England, there is no demand for an extra tier of bureaucracy all over England. We are going to have, we are told by the Labour Party, a Premier for Scotland. Are we going to have a Premier for Wales? Are we going to have a Premier for Sunderland? Is his official residence going to be Roper Park? Who can tell? I could stretch to the corner of this room and back again the nonsenses that arise out of these devolution plans and the dangers that arise and I think those dangers are now becoming apparent, not just to the Conservative Party, but to Labour Members of Parliament in Scotland and in Wales and to people right across the country. They are just not thought through or thought out and they are immensely damaging.

    CHARLES RICE (EVENING STANDARD):

    Do you accept that if the Ulster Unionist MPs were to withdraw their support from the Government they could precipitate a general election a lot earlier than the two years you foreshadow and do you absolutely rule out paying Danegeld in any form to them?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I have made it perfectly clear all along that we propose to seek a settlement in Northern Ireland but that it can only be done by carrying with us the people of Northern Ireland. I have seen some of the concerns that have been aroused about what might be in the framework document which is the premise upon which I think you based your question. There is no question of joint authority with Dublin having authority over Northern Ireland; that was ruled out a long time ago and many of the concerns that have prompted stories over the last day or so are just out of date and wrong.

    PETER HAYES (CENTRAL TELEVISION):

    I work for an area in which you may recall you lost of one of your precious parliamentary seats fairly recently.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    All my parliamentary seats are precious, all of them!

    PETER HAYES:

    During the by-election campaign, one of your traditional supporters said to me that he accepted successes in Northern Ireland, he accepted success for example on the economy but he said: “What is new? What is the big idea taking us as Conservative supporters up to the next election?” What you you say to him?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think there a range of things if I may because this idea of one single, big idea is often a misleading proposition. Policy goes in a particular direction and the policy is going in the direction of moving as much authority and opportunity away from the centre and down to the individual and his family.

    The big idea is making sure that the people of this country have as much freedom, liberty and opportunity as they possibly can. That is the big idea that the Conservative Party has stood for for generations and stands for now. That is why we want the lowest possible level of taxation; that is why we have provided so much extra power and authority for self-governing schools and information for the parents in those schools; that is why we have taken the management of hospitals away from bureaucrats and put it actually down to National Health Service trust hospitals – 98% of hospitals are now trust hospitals.

    That is the drift and direction of policy; that is why we would much prefer to be cutting taxes rather than raising taxes, that is a matter of innate instinct for the Conservative Party, by instinct we cut taxes, we dislike raising them; we have had to do it, it has been damaging for us and I think as soon as we are able to reverse that prudently and safely on economic grounds we will do so.

    The idea that you seek for is to make sure that the individual, whatever fashion of life he may have, has the greatest amount of devolution of choice and authority to him or her; that is and always has been the big Conservative idea.

    TREVOR KAVANAGH (THE SUN):

    Prime Minister, in view of the recent disclosures both official and unofficial about the Royal Family, do you have any concerns about the standing and respect in which those members of the Royal Family are held?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I believe the Royal Family is a central glue in the constitution of the United Kingdom; I don’t see that changing. I know of everybody in public life in one form or another – it applies to the Royal Family, it applies to other people not just in elected public life – people expect very high standards all the time. think that has always been the position in this country.

    I think the underlying affection for the Royal Family remains immensely strong; I think that will manifest itself. From time to time, there are squalls which for a short term cause some difficulty; I think that is what they are, short-term squalls and the underlying affection, respect and admiration for the constitution of the monarchy itself will be untouched by this. I believe it will continue to endure and I personally believe it is immensely important for this country that it does.

    QUESTION (GMTV):

    Just a word about the people who have lost the whip. Do you accept that a couple of them may not actually wish to rejoin the Conservative Party despite the olive branches that you have proffered and what view do you take of that?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    It takes two to tango! The music has struck up, we will see who will take partners and when!

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, how soon do you anticipate you will be able to reassure those Unionists who suggested at the weekend that there might well be a general election this year and do you anticipate the search for a political settlement running into the next general election?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I can’t answer the second question; I don’t wish to put a time frame on the search for a settlement. I will go on searching for a settlement until we have a settlement because I believe that it is immensely important that we do so and I believe the prospects of a settlement exist.

    We will pursue the joint framework document. I think the fears that have given rise to stories, as I indicated a moment ago, are mistaken fears and I think it will become apparent that they are mistaken fears but if I may push aside the political element that you raise, I have said from the outset of this many times on the record – you will have heard me say it many times, I repeat it again – we will only be successful in bringing peace to Northern Ireland if we can carry with us all the people of Northern Ireland. That is why I am playing this with my hands open and the cards face-out on the table.

    Let me take the framework document since it has now been raised twice. When we have agreed the framework document with the Irish government, that isn’t something that is going to be imposed. The framework document will then be published for everyone to see; it is then for the constitutional parties to examine it, to consult it and to comment on it. It goes into the talks with all the constitutional parties; then, if they approve it, it goes to a referendum of all the people of Northern Ireland so the fear that there is some sort of deal in which joint authority is in some curious fashion going to be enforced over the people of Northern Ireland against their will is not going to happen and cannot happen. We have not got joint authority in the document, the document itself is for consultation; it will have to be approved by the political parties in Northern Ireland and when they have finished with it, it will have to be approved by all the people of Northern Ireland so they have a triple look on their own future and I believe that is the way to carry with this process all the people of Northern Ireland.

    There are ancient differences, feuds, fears that have been in Northern Ireland literally for generations; the only way to still them is for people to look carefully and cautiously at what is happening and decide for themselves that this is the right way to deliver peace.

    You asked whether we would have it by the general election. I can’t promise that. It is not necessarily a speedy process. I think it was – I hope it was – an Irish poet, Yates, who wrote: “Peace comes dropping slow!” and I believe that is right. I think it was the “Lake Isle of Innisfree” and if it wasn’t I will no doubt be told tomorrow! “Peace comes dropping slow.” I believe that is entirely appropriate to the way in which we are developing this question in Northern Ireland.

    Everybody – every sane and sensible person – wishes to see a permanent settlement in Northern Ireland. It cannot be done without patiently and carefully looking at each of the areas that need to be dealt with and trying to place in the right place on the chess-board all the pieces that will comfort the fears of the different groups and people of Northern Ireland. That is what we are trying to do and we will do it openly.

    JOHN CRAIG (DAILY EXPRESS):

    When you spoke to us in the sunshine back in the summer, you told us of your plans to reshuffle your Cabinet. Is the Cabinet you have got now the one that you would hope to lead into the next general election or can we expect some more changes between now and then?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    The next general election may be two-and-a-half years away but I certainly have no plans for changes now. I enjoyed that press conference in the garden; I did contemplate having it in the garden this afternoon but I wasn’t sure how generally popular that might be.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible] devolution for quite some time now, indeed since the last general election. Does it surprise you therefore to find in the opinion polls the majority swinging the other way, in the “Sunday Times” poll for example 49% for, 32% against?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think the debate on devolution is only just beginning. Why do I believe so many people favour it? I think instinctively in every part of the United Kingdom people are proud of being Scottish, Welsh, English or Northern Irish and instinctively asked about a Scottish Parliament “Would you like a Scottish Parliament?” I think the answer instinctively is likely to be yes. Asked: “Would you like to pay more income tax than anybody else in the vicinity?” the answer may be no. Asked whether you would wish to see companies disinvest, moving away from Scotland, creating more people unemployed, I think the answer would be no. Asked whether you want to be a little Scotland in the middle of a great European Community without having the negotiating strength of the whole United Kingdom, I think the answer would be no. Asked if you would like to be the United Kingdom equivalent of Quebec in Canada, I think the answer will be no.

    It is not only me, not only the Conservative Party who thinks that these plans are folly. Other people, as they begin to examine them, will see that underneath the general aspiration there are very dangerous and damaging policies indeed. I will spell them out in detail again if you wish but I think you all are aware of the things that concern me: the different taxation policy; the question of the rights of Members of Parliament at Westminster in Scotland; the fact that if there was a Scottish Parliament there would be no justification for the numerically over-large Scottish membership in the House of Commons.

    All those are issues of some importance but if a Scottish Parliament was established and then began to challenge the English Parliament on issues, as I believe would almost undoubtedly be the case over time, what are the difficulties that are going to arise at that stage? What happens if there is a backlash elsewhere in the United Kingdom against the Scottish Parliament? I am not speaking out against the wishes of Scotland, I believe I am speaking for the interests of Scotland in pointing out that what is proposed is not a proposition that will help the living standards of Scotland or the future of Scotland and I will continue to make that point until we have won the debate, won the argument and seen these damaging proposals ditched and gone for ever.

    ROBIN OAKLEY (BBC TV):

    Prime Minister, two of your biggest problems in running your party centre round the disunity on Europe and on the sleaze factor. Why have you moved from saying that the rebels have got to work their way back over months to saying they would be taken back within weeks? What strength will your whips have to exert any discipline in future if they are taken back quickly?

    On the sleaze factor, why are you not encouraging the Nolan Committee to look into the financing of political parties around which many people’s worries on the sleaze factor tend to concentrate?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I don’t think that is the remit of the Nolan Committee, it wasn’t set up to look at that and I don’t anticipate that it is going to look at that.

    On the first point, the question of the colleagues who don’t have the whip, it is up to events to determine when they come back. I indicated over the weekend that I thought on many issues they were very strong Conservatives indeed, they will wish to see a Conservative victory at the next general election. I don’t believe the issues of dispute that have caused this split are issues that it is impossible to resolve. I think some of the resolution is now in place and I think the rest of the resolution is now a clear path so I believe that they will come back. I can’t determine when they come back, it will need an agreement between both of us – as I indicated a moment ago, it takes two to reach such an agreement. I hope that they will decide to do so and I believe that is the wish of the 321 Conservative MPs in the House who have the whip.

    QUESTION (CH4):

    Prime Minister, could you foresee winning the next general election without lowering taxes substantially?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I can’t anticipate the next two budgets. I am in favour of lower taxes but only providing it is economically justifiable; we will have to wait and see whether that is the case. I don’t think it would be prudent for me to tell you now what will be in the next budget or indeed the budget after that.

    QUESTION (DON McINTYRE):

    Prime Minister, do you think that the current well-publicised deliberations of the CBI and others on executive pay are in the end going to result in some form of legislation on that topic?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think they are trying to produce a system where peer pressure works and I believe that is the right way to deal with it. I think peer pressure on executive pay and ensuring that shareholders and institutional shareholders perhaps in particular use their power as the owners of companies to ensure that top pay awards are satisfactory is right.

    The danger is, however ill-advised some of these very large pay increases may have been and however offensive they may have been to many people, once you get in the direction of determining pay for top executives, where do you stop? Do you stop just at the former nationalised industries? Do you look beyond that to other companies that one way or another serve the people? Do you actually look at football managers, editors of newspapers? Where do you stop? You are actually getting into a position where the Government is going to decide who is paid what in areas that are not owned by the Government. That has been tried in the past, it has never in the past been successful.

    I share the concern that many people felt about some of these pay increases and I don’t think anybody who knows me doubts that and I think most of you in this room know that very well but the question is in opposition you can play gesture politics, in government you can’t. In government, you would be asking us: “What are you going to do?” and when we had said: “We are going to do this!” you would have pointed out all the defects in that insofar as it affected other people and you would have been right to do so. Gesture politics is very effective if you are in opposition but it is not effective if your are a government and I think therefore that the tight way to deal with this is the way the CBI are doing, the establishment of the Greenbury Committee. The National Association Of Pension Funds and others have expressed similar views and that sort of peer pressure is the best way to get an effective answer in my judgement.

    QUESTION:

    Prime Minister, you said in your statement that you were going to seek advice from Conservative non-government groups in formulating your policies for the next century. Can you indicate what groups you have in mind and would you welcome members of the public writing in to tell you what they thought?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    They always have done in my recollection. Let me be clear. I certainly didn’t mean the Labour Party and the Liberal Party; I don’t think any advice from them would be likely to be productive. I had in mind people who are non-political, who are specialists in whatever it may be, transport, the environment. I anticipate utilising and inviting some of the specialists in areas of great importance to future Government policy to submit their views on what needs to be done and of course, if people have a particular interest or a particular knowledge we would wish to hear what their views are. We are not just looking at a manifesto for the next general election – let me emphasise that again – we are looking at a much wider and longer time-scale so that we can look at the next phase of development in the United Kingdom and the sort of policies that we think are appropriate both for Great Britain as a country internationally and also for individuals within great Britain and their own individual liberties, choices and opportunities.

    QUESTION:

    [Inaudible] a new strategic authority for Greater London?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    No, I have no plans to do so at the moment, no.

    QUESTION (RADIO COVERING THE NORTH-EAST):

    Could you offer a message of hope for the people in the North-East, particularly the unemployed who feel they have been betrayed by your Government?

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think unemployment is falling pretty rapidly in many parts of the country, not least of course the North-East. You put the point rather provocatively but I think many of the people in the North-East would look at some of the very large external investments providing jobs in the North-East and they might say to themselves would those investments have come to the United Kingdom and in particular would they have come to the North-East if it hadn’t been for the policies that the Conservative Government had followed and the answer to that question, as you will, know, is no, they would not have come to the United Kingdom and they would not have come to the North-East so I believe when they look at that dispassionately they will see the opportunities for increasing employment.

    What we have seen over the past two years is a continuing reduction in the level of unemployment; it has come down, frankly, faster than we imagined that it would and it is very welcome that it has done so and I hope what we are going to see in the months ahead is a continuing fall in unemployment and to make the reverse point, a continuing rise of the number of people in employment as well. The economy is set fair for that; although there is not a direct relationship between growth and job creation for a number of complex reasons, I hope that is the trend that we are going to see.

    QUESTION (MICHAEL WHITE):

    You are holding this press conference 43.5% behind in the polls, you say the economic recovery is coming through but isn’t it possible that if people feel as confident as you say they will they will take a chance on another government and if they don’t the reason why you are 43.5% behind is that “Daily Telegraph” readers feel all the insecurity which skilled workers – Labour voters – felt ten years ago when your free-market revolution began? Boris’s readers are as nervous as everybody else.

    PRIME MINISTER:

    Is Boris here. Oh there he is!

    You quote Gallup; Mori had a rather different figure which just indicates how volatile the opinion polls are at the moment, I have never been a great advocate of opinion polls on the question of voting at a particular time and that has been true in days when they have been favour to the Conservative Party as well as days when they have been less favourable to the Conservative Party.

    I believe that one can begin to see a great sea change in what has been put in hand over the past three or four years. We put a whole range of things in hand; we have produced a great deal of reform. Reform is often painful, it upsets people, people tend to object very strongly if their particular profession is being reformed; they certainly object very strongly if they face increased taxation they didn’t expect so there are a range of issues why people have had reason to feel disenchanted but because of the decisions that we have taken, because we accepted the unpopularity that went with those decisions, we can now see in the second half of this Parliament – and we are only just entering the second half of this Parliament – that we are on the most secure growth pattern for the economy that we have known for very many years indeed, that the education policies are delivering higher standards, better results, more young people in further education and better information for parents; that the health reforms are producing many more people treated, a wider range of treatments and faster treatment than ever before; and that in a whole series of other Government policies we can see a distinct improvement coming through so I believe the attitude does change. There is a fashion about these things. I think people will begin to see over the months ahead that the circumstances are changed, that many people who feel gloomy will begin to feel perhaps the gloom has been overdone and the prospects for them are much better.

    One of the things I believe affecting many of the people who feel very concerned is insecurity about their own employment prospects – you referred to Boris’s readers, I am sure that would be the case with many of those people – and yet we have seen for two years unemployment falling. In France, the nearest comparable economy to the United Kingdom in size and structure, you have unemployment at 12.8% and rising; here in Britain it is 8.8% and falling. That argues that we must have done something right and I believe as that continues to fall that message is going to echo very clearly in each and every part of the country and I will do my best to ensure that it does, Michael, as I am sure you will.

  • Mr Major’s Comments on European Policy – 7 December 1994

    Below is the text of Mr Major’s comments on European policy, made during an interview given in London on Wednesday 7th December 1994.


    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked why the whip was withdrawn from some Conservative MPs].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I think you have to realise precisely why that happened. I reached an agreement – not me as an individual but as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom – in 1992 on future finances of the Community. That agreement was endorsed by Cabinet, it got very wide support in the House of Commons, almost nobody criticised it across the floor or behind me. In 1994, we have to keep our word, we have to match the agreement with the legislation that enables that agreement to carry forward. Now suppose we have welched on that, suppose I had reached an agreement in 1992 and welched on it in 1994. How could I possibly have gone back to Europe and negotiated for 1996 in the intergovernmental conference? I simply couldn’t have done it.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if the decision had caused a split in the Conservative Party and if the MPs would have been more loyal if they still had the Conservative whip].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I hear what you say about what they say. If the British Government gives its word, a British Government must keep its word and if a British Government is unable to keep its word then it cannot continue in office. That is not a very hard principle to grasp but it must be apparent to everybody that that was the position. We made it perfectly clear to our colleagues that that was the position and some of them chose not to support us. Clearly, that couldn’t be left where it was.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if this would be damaging to him].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    I acted in the only way one could. If Members of Parliament vote against the Government on an issue that they know to be an issue of confidence, an issue that if we had lost it could have created a General Election, then you have to indicate that that isn’t satisfactory behaviour. If I had taken no action, you would have been asking me a quite different question; you would have been saying: “Why are you so weak as to let people vote against the Government on a three-line whip and perhaps wreck an agreement you had reached internationally?”.

    You know very well that if governments reach an agreement internationally, British Governments must keep their word. There can be no doubt about that, not now, nor at any stage in the future.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he was in a no-win situation].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    We had a second reading of the Bill in front of us. Let us suppose we had lost that second reading because people were not aware that this was an issue of confidence. We would now be facing a General Election. That would be the position we were in. I think my colleagues would have said to me: “Why didn’t you tell us that was the position?”, we did tell them that was the position. Most of them accepted that that was the position, they supported the Government and as a result the British Government has kept its word and in future when we negotiate people know that our word will be honoured. There is no doubt that that was the right thing to do.

    QUESTION:

    [Mr Major was asked if he agreed with some back-benchers that he had created this problem].

    PRIME MINISTER:

    That is patently absurd, isn’t it? I didn’t decide to vote against the Government. People knew precisely what this deal was, when I came back from Edinburgh they endorsed this deal, nobody complained about it then. The people who voted against us the other night, they haven’t complained in the interim. They knew very well what this deal was in 1992, they supported it in 1992. You cannot conduct government if you come back with an international agreement and your own party do not support that agreement. It was necessary to make that clear and when some chose not to support the Government it was inevitable that action was taken.