The Prime Minister has briefed journalists on a range of issues including tuition fees, Northern Ireland and public services at his latest press conference.
Read the press conference in full
Prime Minister
Good Morning everyone. Well I don’t think anyone could fairly accuse the government of not giving you plenty to write about over the past few days. The Queen’s Speech programme set out a radical programme for the coming year, which underlines our determination to build a fairer country and to take the tough decisions necessary to equip the country for the future. We are now moving ahead, not just within The Queen’s Speech, but elsewhere as well, with major reforms that will transform our universities, complete the transformation of the asylum system, make our criminal justice system fit for the 21st century, rebalancing it in favour of the victim. Secondary schools will be seeing further moves to greater diversity, with more City Academies and specialist schools and greater personalised learning. The National Health Service will be driving through even further the choice agenda so that we will give all patients the choices that now only the well-off enjoy. By summer next year the existing choice agenda will be driven across the whole of the NHS. By the end of 2005 there will be choice actually at the point of referral for people within the NHS as capacity grows. By the end also of 2005 the new treatment centres will be doing some 350,000 extra operations in the National Health Service a year, all within the NHS but supplying some from the public, some from the private, some from the voluntary sector.
So there is a huge programme of reform, expansion and innovation in the public sector. And today we have put forward another major piece of reform when we publish our plans for the biggest change in the law on domestic violence for 30 years. By overhauling the law we will give our police and courts new powers to protect victims and their children from attack and harassment, and new powers as well to bring their attackers to justice. It is worth just pointing that there are on average 2 women who die every week from domestic violence in our country today. It will ensure at last that the law properly reflects modern society’s view that domestic violence is not something to be played down just because it happens behind closed doors or in the home. It is a serious problem, it is a major component incidentally of violent crime in our country.
Now I just want to focus for one moment also on the higher education reforms. There is actually a triple lot for fairness in the proposals we are making. First, it is important to emphasise the existing up-front fees are going to be abolished under these proposals. There will be no charges at the point of access, either for students or parents. On the contrary, we are actually reintroducing grants so that the least advantaged third of students are at least £1,000 a year better off than now, as well as getting part or all of their fee written off at the outset. Secondly, the existing uniform fee system is going to be abolished. Students don’t want all the same standard course at a uniform price. Variable fees will oblige universities to take more account of student demand and the value for money frankly of the course. Third, students will not have to pay a penny until they have actually graduated and are in work on a decent salary. Nothing will be paid until a graduate’s income reaches £15,000 a year, as opposed to £10,000 a year incidentally at the moment with the existing maintenance loans, and above that graduates will only pay a small increment of their additional income. It works out at something like £5 a week if you are earning £18,000 a year, and no rate of interest will be charged. So there is no penalty for paying more slowly, or taking a lower paid job, or taking a career break. I believe thanks to what I have described as a triple lot for fairness, there is nothing in these reforms to put students off going to university; on the contrary, university education will be free at the point of study, but fair at the point of repayment, linked to people’s ability to pay, and that is the principle of the scheme. The second reading will be by the end of January for the Bill. There will be absolutely no retreat from it. Everyone is going to have to make up their mind, because this is a reform that is utterly essential to widen access to university in a 21st century where more and more people will want to go to university, it is essential to keep up the quality of what our universities offer, and it is therefore essential for the future of the British economy in which our universities will play a major part.
As for the reforms and changes we have already introduced, we are actually seeing at the moment a clutch of new indicators which highlight that the investment and reforms we have put in place are indeed making a difference for the better to people’s lives. On the economy, the latest OECD report found that Britain’s record on growth, stability, jobs and debt was outstanding. We have probably weathered the downturn better than any other G7 country. On our Health Service, the independent Nuffield Report last week made it quite plain that the NHS is making steady progress and improving, and it is a diagnosis which will be confirmed tomorrow by the NHS Chief Executive, Sir Nigel Crisp, in a report which will also answer those who claim that the increase in resources has not led to an increase in productivity and output. On education, the primary school performance tables this week will highlight how the hard work of teachers and pupils has maintained progress on maths and English. And on asylum, we have met what was a pretty tough target I think most people thought at the time of halving the numbers of applications, and we have published our plans to complete the overhaul of the asylum system by tackling the abuse of appeals.
And on crime, I may say again yesterday when I was in Leeds I heard first-hand how important the changes in the criminal justice system and on anti-social behaviour are, and I do say to people it is often not an issue that is concentrated on a lot down here, but I can tell you out on the doorstep in local communities, anti-social behaviour is still the number one issue that people want tackled. And these new powers that are coming in February will make a huge difference.
So the message is very clear. Things are improving, but big challenges remain, which in the last few days have been heightened in their salient by the launch of the consultation exercise. I have already been at meetings in Bristol, South Wales and Leeds, and I simply say to you, whatever the cynicism about it, actually when people are given the chance to participate in a real policy debate about real policy, they grab it with both hands. And they are right, because as we say in the document we published last week, there are big policy challenges ahead, they are linked to the future, there are huge choices that have to be made about how we fund public services, how we personalise them, how we overhaul our criminal justice system, how we make our economy competitive for the future, and these are choices we will be discussing with people, then come back to them, set out the programme of the government and then people will have a choice at the next general election. So there it is.
Question and Answer Session
Question
Prime Minister, you have been told by your own people that as the Tuition Bill stands, you won’t get it through the House of Commons. You said just now that there will be no retreat. Can you be clear about that, you are not offering any further concessions at all. And if you lost something that big, what would it say about the reform agenda and your own position?
Prime Minister
Well it is a very serious question, isn’t it, and people are going to have to make up their minds in the next couple of months. And yes it is going to be tough and it is going to be a hard struggle to persuade people, but this is a reform that is absolutely central to the future of Britain and the future of the British economy. If we want people to be better educated and more people to go to university, and we want to be able to fund pre-school learning, adult skills, vocational training, we have got to find a fair method of funding it, and we cannot widen access, increase the amount of money going to universities, unless we have a balance between what the state pays and what graduates pay upon graduation. And that is the only fair choice for people. So yes it is going to be a big struggle, there are a lot of people still to persuade, but no there will be absolutely no retreat on the principles of this at all.
Question
In the past when there have been very tight votes in the Commons - Iraq, foundation hospitals - the Whips have said that this amounts to a vote of confidence. Do you regard this, if you like, flagship bill as worth a vote of confidence and could you really continue to have the authority, as leader, if you can’t get a Bill through to which you have attached such importance?
Prime Minister
I think, as ever, when I am asked questions like this, I never get drawn into great speculation as to what happens if you lose. It is not a very sensible basis on which to go forward, and I don’t believe we will incidentally. But look, there is no point in denying it, it is a very major flagship reform of the government and it has come about because we know that more and more people are going to want to go to university, our universities are strapped for cash at the moment. If we are not careful, we will be faced with the choice where we either restrict access to university, or even if we stick with a form of the present system, we will have a declining quality of university education. And I think it is a perfectly fair thing to say to people, no-one will be charged anything upfront, so the concept of tuition fees as they are at the moment will go, but there will be a graduate repayment system, linked to people’s ability to pay, but allows people to make some contribution back from the very large investment in their education. And I think what is interesting is that you have got one of these fascinating situations which you come across in politics where everybody who really looks at this realises the choices are tough and have to be made, and yet at the moment you have still obviously got a very strong emotional response against it. Now the job of political leadership is to try and turn people round on that.
Question
If you can’t turn them round, would you stay on as leader, if you can’t get this crucial Bill through as you see it?
Prime Minister
I believe we will get it through.
Question
But if tuition fees are such a brilliant idea, why did you rule them out explicitly on the manifest from the parliament in which you are now planning to legislate to introduce them. Was that a mistake or was that political opportunism?
Prime Minister
No, because there will be no introduction of this scheme obviously until after the next election, so it is perfectly consistent with what we said in the manifesto.
Question
… but it is not in principle.
Prime Minister
It is not technical at all, with respect. There is an election in between the introduction of the system and that is completely in accordance with what we said. We said we wouldn’t introduce top-up fees or any form of variable fee this parliament, we are not doing that. It is necessary to legislate however, and give universities the chance to plan ahead, because otherwise we are not going to be able to put our university system on a sound footing for the future.
Question
… made a pledge which effectively would keep the universities short of money and damage them for 5 years because you thought it would then appeal to the voters. What has changed in principle on this idea?
Prime Minister
What changes is this. In the first parliament we have actually introduced the concept of university fees. We now need to take that further. We have made a commitment that we have to honour for this parliament, but after this parliament, if we are re-elected, we have to move to a better and fairer system. And I simply say to you that the vast majority of people that I have talked to, and I have done a lot of meetings on this and talked to people in detail, the moment you point out to families that under our proposal they are not actually going to have to pay up-front fees at all. What people think at the moment, if they are just casually reading parts of the press, is that we are tripling the fee and they have got to pay it up-front. Actually no-one is going to pay any money up-front. Universities will have the freedom to charge more because they need that, and there will be no repayment until the student has actually graduated and is earning money, and the terms of the repayment are a lot more generous than the terms of the present maintenance loan. And the reason why it is necessary to do this, look around the world at what is happening - Australia has got a similar system, New Zealand, Canada, the United States of America. You look at the places whose universities are widening access, improving quality, they have all got a combination of payments from graduates and payments from the state. Now this is the choice, and with respect it is a choice for everyone, so you are quite right in saying yes it is a tough vote, of course my authority is on the line, it always is with these votes, but I am determined to do this, just as in the same way I am determined to drive through the changes in the Health Service, specialist schools and city academies, reforms of the criminal justice system, reforms of the asylum system, because this government has got to be a radical reforming government, making the changes necessary to equip this country for the future, or it does not have a purpose in government. That is why it is important.
Question
Are you certain the Chancellor backs you on this, and if he does, why doesn’t he come out and say so and help you win the vote?
Prime Minister
Well he has, he has made it absolutely clear he backs the policy. And let me say it is only as a result of the way that the Chancellor has run the economy, that we are able actually to increase the funding, which we have been doing, to higher education and to universities.
Question
So people are wrong to think the Chancellor secretly wants this proposal defeated because he argued against it in private?
Prime Minister
No, I think they are absolutely wrong to say that, because the Chancellor, as well as everybody else, as he has said incidentally, and said just recently, supports the notion that we need to widen access to universities, get more money into universities, and the best and fairest way to do it is a balance between the state and the graduate. And for the life of me, I am still waiting for the argument that tells me why that is not fair, tells me why it is actually fairer to say to the majority of the population, who have not been to university, some of whom are on very low incomes, we are going to have to raise your taxes to pay for people who are going to earn a lot more money as graduates. The reason I am actually very confident in the end we will win this argument, is that I think the case that I am making is a case that can be made on grounds of social justice, above all else actually, and it is a classic example. The reason why I think it is so important is it is a classic example of what I was describing last week as new routes to social justice. You know a few years ago you wouldn’t have done this, you would have said we will just bump up the amount of money the taxpayer puts in. Now I think people understand that in today’s world you are not going to be able to do it all just through the general taxpayer, and it isn’t fair to do it in that way.
Question
I know you have already said you don’t like answering, what if I lose questions, but let me ask you this about Northern Ireland. Last spring, when you invited us in here to announce that you were postponing the Northern Ireland elections, and we asked you why, you said it would be disastrous if an anti-agreement party like the DUP won, or did well, as they have now. Your worst nightmare must have come true on that. How long in the absence of the restoration of the institutions are you prepared to allow this to go on, and is there any possibility that if they fail to re-establish a power-sharing government that you will re-run the election?
Prime Minister
There is no point in pretending to you that I don’t think it was very important that we carried on with the situation we had prior to the election. On the other hand, you say is this the worst scenario I could have imagined. No, I could imagine a far worse scenario. After all, 70% of the population in Northern Ireland actually voted in favour of pro-agreement parties. Secondly, it was in the end a pretty close run thing. Thirdly, I understand from the DUP that they are saying that they still want some form of agreement to go forward. We will have to take it forward, and we will have to do acknowledging I hope the fantastic progress that has been made in Northern Ireland. And these things, you know they fall within pretty narrow margins. This was a margin that went for the DUP, it could have gone the other way, to the UUP. I don’t actually think overall the percentage of the vote of the UUP actually fell. So it is a more difficult situation, yes, but it is one we will have to manage, and we are used to managing difficult situations in Northern Ireland. But what is interesting to me is - tell me if I am wrong - but there is no sense that the political situation, which needs resolving, is going to lead to a security crisis. On the contrary, people are looking at how they work the thing out in a peaceful and democratic way.
Question
How long are you prepared to allow it to go in the absence of acts of completion, how long can you allow direct rule to continue?
Prime Minister
I can’t really say. I will be in a better position frankly once I have met the parties. As you know, the DUP met Paul Murphy yesterday, obviously I will meet them I would imagine sometime before Christmas and we will carry on working with the UUP, and the SDLP, and Sinn Fein as well, and let’s see if we can find a way through. In the end, all we can do is facilitate. But the majority of people in Northern Ireland - again put me right if I am wrong about this - but the majority of people actually do want to see devolved government up and running again, the question is on what terms, and that is what we have got to establish and I hope that we can.
Question
Given that you have got no democratic mandate through the election manifesto 2001 would you not be better advised on higher education finance to at least publish the 40 alternative models currently sitting in the Department for Education?
Prime Minister
Well you know you have got a choice to make, and I have made mine, and I am not opting for a quiet life over the national interest, and I believe the national interest to be absolutely engaged here with the question of public service reform generally, and in particular with getting a system of university finance that is fair, that widens access, that allows more people to go to university, that stops any family having to pay up-front fees, but says the graduate on graduation makes a contribution back into the system. Now you talk about 40 alternatives, I don’t know what those 40 alternatives are, but I can simply tell you this, that the only two alternatives on offer at the moment are restricting dramatically, dramatically, the number of students going to university by somewhere in the region of quarter of a million actually, or alternatively by putting
up general taxation for everybody in a way that I think the public would rightly consider to be regressive and unfair. Now if anyone has got any other alternative, I would like to hear it, but what you have got to do in these situations sometimes is to set out the argument for people and to try and persuade them, and that is what I am going to try and do. And I am not saying it is not difficult, it is difficult, but I am going to do my level best to do it.
Question
What is the point of a national consultation when on top-up fees in particular, and the public services reform in general, you have clearly made up your mind, you don’t have a reverse gear, is the consultation then just a sham?
Prime Minister
Yes, because we have got consultation on a number of things, so of course it is purposeful, because actually what you are doing is you are saying to people look, here are the challenges that we have on things like for example transport, on pensions, on the future direction of choice. We don’t go to this consultation and say we don’t have any ideas, we have got policies, some of the policies are actually established policies, as indeed they are on university finance, but what we are going to people and saying is look, here is how we see the future challenges, you tell us what you think, and there will be lots of areas in which of course there will be a direct influence on policy. But there is no point in us going back over policies we have already agreed.
Question
So it is not possible for the consultation to change your policies on the public services reform in general, not least the tuition fees?
Prime Minister
No, of course it is possible. For example, if you are talking about education, we are asking questions about the degree of independence schools should have from central and local government. Are you saying we are about, through this consultation, to scrap specialist schools, well no we are not going to do that. But the purpose of having the conversation with people is so that at least they understand how we see these challenges, and the directions we think are appropriate, and we get feedback from them. So there is a certain dialectic that then arises from that. So you know you have got to steer between two absurdities frankly: one is simply going to people and saying well here we are, six and a half years into government, tell us what you think because we don’t know any answers, which would be absurd, because obviously we believe that we have got answers to these problems; and then the other thing is going to people and saying well everything is simply set in stone. Now the policies we have clearly are the policies the government is going to introduced, we wouldn’t have had a Queen’s Speech before the consultation if that weren’t the case. But yes of course there are areas of public service reform, the criminal justice system, you can see it very easily where public input would be very important. The Antisocial Behaviour Bill arose out directly from consultations with the public, and in particular consultations I personally had with members of the public, going round the country and realising they wanted something done urgently about the problems on their doorstep. So I think there is a gap in between those two extremes of saying right, everything is already decided, and saying everything is simply up for grabs. We have got our policies, we have got our values, but of course there is a process of dialogue to see how those can be taken forward.
Question
Since you last had a press conference you have had another health scare. Are you going to undertake regular health checks, and if you do, are you going to tell the press and the public about them? How much are we entitled to know about your state of health now?
Prime Minister
Well there doesn’t seem to be much you don’t know, from what I can make out. I know you really wanted to ask me how I am feeling, and I am feeling great.
Question
You mentioned in your opening remarks about crime, and we have heard you in the House of Commons on a number of occasions say that you are winning the battle on crime, yet that doesn’t seem to be the situation on the ground. An official survey carried out for the West Midlands Police Authority showed that 1 in 5 people in Coventry last year was a victim of a crime, and they say that they are worried about nuisance youths, vandalism and burglary, and they don’t think there are enough police and they don’t think that the sentences are tough enough. What can you do, rather than just wheel out statistics, to reassure the people in Coventry and elsewhere that you are taking their plight seriously and are able to reduce these appalling crime levels?
Prime Minister
Well we are not simply wheeling out statistics, although it is worth pointing out, there is the British Crime Survey and the survey is clear, the results of that, accepted by everyone, that crime has fallen. What I constantly say to people though, even when I quote that statistic, is that makes not the blindest bit of difference to you if you are a victim of crime. And what I would say is very simply this. We are doing two things: we are increasing the number of police on the street and community support officers, which are very important in places like the West Midlands and elsewhere; and we are also, from next February, introducing antisocial behaviour measures that will allow the police to levy on-the-spot fines for antisocial behaviour, shut down houses that are used for drug dealing within 48 hours, close down pubs that are being constantly a source of disturbance, and those together with the new measures in the Criminal Justice Bill, even though some of them, because of the House of Lords had to be diluted somewhat, but still they are pretty much there in their full strength, those will make a considerable difference to people. So we are not simply saying look at the statistics, we are saying look at the numbers of police officers we are providing, the additional community support officers and the changes in the law. And I would just tell you, when those changes in antisocial behaviour come in next year, they will be a very, very big thing indeed. And I found when I was up in Leeds yesterday, the police are well aware that they are going to give them, for the first time, really significant powers of summary justice for antisocial behaviour.
Question
Your blessing of the Geneva Accord was signed yesterday, does that mean that you are turning your back to the roadmap, which is practically what the Israeli government wants the international community to do?
Prime Minister
No, I remain a supporter of the roadmap, but I think the Geneva Accord, the reason I gave a welcome to it is because I think that anything that promotes dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians about how we find a way forward is to be welcomed. And I think the very fact that the accord took place is an indication that underneath the terrible situation that there is at the moment in the Middle East, is a genuine desire on the part of many Palestinians and many Israelis to find a
peaceful solution to this problem. And I don’t think it should be seen however as inconsistent with the roadmap. Obviously it is part of something that goes much further, but the roadmap remains in my view essential and the issue is how you implement it.
Question
It isn’t being presented as an alternative to peace in the Middle East?
Prime Minister
Yes, but I don’t think it should be seen in dramatic terms frankly. The basic principles are still the same actually, it is about how do you create a viable Palestinian state and a secure state of Israel. And the very fact, I think the significance of the Geneva Accord really is that two groups of people - one Israeli, one Palestinian - have come together and said whatever the impasse at the moment, we believe we can find a way through. That is its importance and I think for that reason it is actually important.
Question
Can I ask what progress you are making in talks with the Americans about the British suspects in Guantanamo Bay, when do you expect them to be finally brought to justice after two years, and do you expect they will now return to Britain?
Prime Minister
Well we are still in discussion is all I can say at the moment, but there are the two alternatives that we have outlined and we are finding the talks with the Americans immensely co-operative.
Question
To turn to tuition fees, I am interested to know what the advantage is of waiting until the New Year? Are you expecting some sort of Christmas magic to work its miracle, or is there another strategy, are there going to be concessions?
Prime Minister
There is no change to the basic principles that I have outlined at all. That has been very clear, and frankly the end of January is not that far away. But it is I think important to explain to people, for example I think if you look beneath some of the opposition to this, some of it, it is true, is to the whole principle of tuition fees, but actually not a lot of it is on that basis, a lot of it is to do with for example the variability of the fee. Now I think that is an argument upon which people can be persuaded, because in the end I think you will find many universities, as some of them were saying yesterday, who say look it is pointless to force us to charge the same for every course at every university. And I think once those arguments are gone into in a bit more depth you can bring people round. I actually think there probably is a majority, even now, for: one, the concept of graduate repayment; and two, that that should be combined with the ability of people to get more help from poorer families. Now already I think those two principles are accepted. I think the issue is well should there be a variable fee or not, or how much should it be, and that is something I think that we can discuss. And all I say to you, and a lot of you I think would accept this, is that whenever you get a group of people gathered together on this and go into the detail of it, it is very hard for people to resist the force of the argument. That is not to say at the moment that they are not resisting it, because some people are, but I always maintain a healthy optimism in the ability to persuade people. And the other thing I think I would say to you, and I think this is difficult for all of us, from my generation a little bit younger, and certainly older, is the university sector today is of vital importance to the British economy. When 7, 8, 10% of school leavers were going to university, not so important, but the university system today is of vital importance to the British economy, because as we need more and more skilled, higher value added jobs, more people will go to university, and need to go to university, and the top countries in the world have got over 50% of their school leavers going to university today; and secondly, one of the most innovative and important things happening in the British economy is an increasing link and spin-off between universities and business, and so the university sector is no longer simply a focus of educational opportunity, it is also a very, very important part of the future of the British economy. So sometimes people say to me well why put quite so much authority on the line for university education, I think this is a fundamental change which will be very, very important for the future of Britain and the British economy. And a lot of people talk about whether it is necessary for more children to go to university, I totally reject this elitist idea that somehow there is some arbitrary limit we should put on the numbers going to university. In fact the best predictor of whether people go to university or not at the moment is whether they get two good A’ Levels at school. If they do, and more and more of them are getting two good A’ Levels, they go to university. So what does that show you - that it is actually the quality of secondary education that first of all determines it, and secondly it is determined by people’s knowledge that what they are getting when they are getting a university degree is actually a decent start in life. And when we then look at how do you fund that in circumstances where, go back a few years ago when I talked about education, education, education, everybody thought, you would have thought, I thought I was talking about schools, and basically I was talking about schools. Today when you talk about education you have got to talk about pre-school education, which all the evidence shows is increasingly important, then vocational training, because that is important for those that don’t take the academic route, and then skills throughout life. So you are talking about education in a completely different context from a few years ago, and that is what is important to explain to people, and therefore you cannot fund it simply by saying it all comes out of the general tax system. Why should someone who leaves school at 16 and then gets a skill and who is having to contribute money to pay for that skill, be in a situation where the state expects them to make a contribution but not someone at university. So when you look at this in greater detail, I think there are so many reasons of fairness that push you in this direction I think.
Question
Just on fees, one of the arguments you advance in favour of it is this traditional lifetime premium in earnings which graduates have always got. How confident are you that that will last long into the future if you get over 50% of graduates, at a time when many graduates already coming out of universities are going into relatively low paid jobs, and also facing demands from other Ministers in your government to make substantial contributions to their pensions, because we are told there won’t be any pensions around for them anyway?
Prime Minister
Still the evidence is absolutely clear that people earn more money as university graduates. And you know there is a reason why China and India for example, again people think it is slightly bizarre when I talk about this, but China and India are making a vast effort on university education now, and there is a reason for that. There is a reason why, if you look around the world today and you look at the top universities, whereas I reckon when I was at university you would have put a lot of European universities in the top 40-50, actually today there would be a predominance of American ones and you know there is a reason for that, they have got a system of funding that means they are generating a lot more money for our universities. And I don’t think there is any evidence that graduates aren’t going to carry on earning more money than non-graduates. On the contrary, even as it expands, even as the numbers expand going to university, it will still be the case that university education is giving you a big lift up.
Question
You cite India as an example, but many graduates from Indian universities are working in call centres, for example transferring from Newcastle, Lloyds, 1,000 jobs, where the graduates in India are going to earn £3,500. So it is hardly a shining example of what can be delivered by graduates.
Prime Minister
Let’s not exaggerate this. If you go to India and you go down to places like Bangalore and you see the information technology and biotechnology graduates working there, we are in a different world today, the 21st century is going to be dominated by some of these countries who OK their labour costs may be lower than ours at the moment, but these countries are catching up fast and we have got to move ahead. And that is why I am doing this. The whole reason we did the exercise last week was to talk about the future, because that is what politics has got to be about in the end. The task of political leadership is to tell people what you honestly believe the challenges of the future are, and we are not going to compete with these countries unless we are getting a highly educated skilled workforce moving up the ladder the whole time. And yes it may well be true that there are Indian graduates in call centres, there are probably some graduates here in call centres, but I can tell you there are a lot of Indian graduates now in new technology companies and they are beginning to make a lot of money and a lot of competition for Europe.
Question
The European Union had a specially commissioned report, which has not been published into anti-Semitism, which clearly indicated that there are extremist Muslims stirring up anti-Semitism throughout Europe, there have been attacks on synagogues, desecrations and the like. The Jewish communities around Europe are in fear of their lives in some areas. Number one, what can be done practically to stem the rising tide of anti-Semitism; number two, will you urge the European Union to publish the report, it was leaked, I have glanced through it and I have seen it is a well researched document; number three, will you urge Muslim leaders, responsible Muslim leaders, including religious leaders, to actually urge their young people not to go round stirring up anti-Semitism?
Prime Minister
I am not actually aware of the European Union report, but obviously it would be a sensible thing for it to be published, and perhaps I can come back to you on that one, I am just not aware of the ins and outs of it. I am aware however of the concern within the Jewish community here and elsewhere in Europe at anti-Semitism, attacks on synagogues, the desecration of synagogues, and we have just got to make it absolutely clear there will be no toleration of that at all, those people who are responsible should be severely punished. We are proud in this country to have a strong Jewish community, as well as a strong Muslim community, and I am quite sure that certainly all the Muslim leaders I speak to, leading members of it here, condemn these attacks fiercely and believe that they represent absolutely nothing to do with the true spirit of Islam, and I am sure that is true. Of course I will take every opportunity to remind people of that.
Question
… are you going to remind Cabinet Ministers, or had you done already, that they have a duty to avoid prejudicing criminal proceedings.
Prime Minister
I don’t actually believe that there will have been a prejudice to any trial that may take place of this particular individual. Obviously it is always important that we choose our words carefully, but it is important too people realise there is a real and present threat. Now whether this individual is involved or not will obviously be a matter for the police and the authorities.
Question
A two-part question. Recognising the parameters of your own privacy, there is an issue about your health. Just on the question of the irregular heartbeat, Bill Clinton is quoted as saying you told him years ago you had an irregular heartbeat and that you had problems with it. Is that true, or indeed is the content true whether he said it or not? And the second question is, isn’t the sheer scale of executive power that you enjoy, and it is greater than most other western leaders, actually bad for any young man’s heart?
Prime Minister
Right, well on the first all I can say to you is I have never had this condition before, it happened, it was over in a day and I was back at work. In relation to the second, the job of British Prime Minister is a busy and hectic job and I think I remember for most British Prime Ministers those before and after photographs that you so kindly provide in so many of the Sunday newspapers showing what you used to look like and what you look like now, but you know that is part of the ageing process and it is a tough job, but it is voluntary, as you know.
Question
Are you a glutton for punishment though or is it somehow in a macabre kind of way rewarding?
Prime Minister
Well the job is extremely rewarding, it is a privilege to do it, yes. Is that what you mean?
Question
Inaudible.
Prime Minister
No, well there you are.
Question
Every second day or so it seems there are front page stories about the level of terrorist threat in Britain at the moment, either raids, attacks thwarted or attacks being planned. You say there is a clear and present danger of course how great is that, how worried must Londoners and British feel in this lead up to Christmas? And while negotiations are still going on in Guantanamo Bay, is the British government inclined to accept the kind of terms the Australian government accepted last week as the deal around the terms of a Military Commission?
Prime Minister
Obviously what Australia accepts is a matter for Australia. We have got to look at it vis our own rules here, that is something we are still looking at now, and as I say that is a decision for your government. In relation to terrorism, there is no doubt there is a threat because these people are operating in most parts of the world, they have no compunction about taking the lives of innocent people and killing as many people as they can. On the other hand, people in Britain, because of our experiences in the past, I think know that we should remain vigilant but calm in the face of terrorism and determined to defeat it, and I think that is the general attitude of most people. And our security services, our intelligence services, our police do a magnificent job in protecting us, but of course we have got to remain permanently vigilant.
Question
Returning to Northern Ireland, have the events of the past few days increased your expectations of the DUP, and what will you say to the Rev Iain Paisley when you see him in Downing Street before Christmas?
Prime Minister
I will wish him a Happy Christmas I should think. No, we will have a discussion about the future, it is important, but we have got to find our way through again. In the end all that governments can do, and all the British government in particular can do in this situation, is try and facilitate progress, and I think, and hope, and believe actually that most people in Northern Ireland recognise Northern Ireland in December 2003 is a better place than Northern Ireland 10 years ago. There has been an election result, it means that the DUP is the largest Unionist party, just, but it is, and we have got to work with them and we will try and work with them. But in the end all I can do is try and help people to find arrangements that are satisfactory. And what the DUP, and I am sure they do, know is that with power also comes responsibility and they have got a responsibility now to people in Northern Ireland to try and make this process work and I hope they live up to that responsibility. But we will carry on obviously having discussions with the other political parties as well since, as I say, I think if you look at the overall balance, yes the DUP came out ahead, but the UUP actually did pretty well as well, so I think you would have to say it is a reasonably balanced situation.
Question
I am just wondering what you make of Zimbabwe’s threat to leave the Commonwealth, and if you anticipate the controversy over Zimbabwe will split the group along broadly racial lines at the summit in Nigeria at the weekend?
Prime Minister
I don’t think it will split the summit, I think people will note the present situation and move on, and what the Mugabe government decide is up to them. I just think it is a tragedy for people in Zimbabwe that as a result of the actions of that government that people suffer so much there, and the people that are suffering, the vast majority of them are the black population that are suffering.
Question
Now that you have decided to abolish up-front tuition fees, are you still rulling out a graduate tax, would that not now fulfil the funding crisis in universities? And as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, how concerned are you that the impact of the changes that you are trying to introduce in England will have on Scottish universities?
Prime Minister
I think it is perfectly consistent with devolution to have different systems and people are going to have to decide that, and in the end this will be decided as to how students regard this and regard the quality of the education that they are going to get. And we think that the graduate repaying system, abolishing the up-front fee, is the fair thing. And all I would say to you is I think there are an awful lot of parents who from a casual read of the press would think that they were going to now have to find £3,000 as opposed to just over £1,000 a year, but actually that is not true, they are not going to have to find anything now, the student will pay on graduation. And that form if you like, linked to ability to pay as well, that is the other thing that is important, it is not that you pay the same whether you are earning £20,000 a year or £50,000 a year, you pay what I think most people would regard as a reasonable amount to afford. It is not a pure graduate tax in the sense that it is sometimes used, but it is a fair system of repayment. And as I say, if you look around the world today, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States of America, possibly the four countries where if you look at the recent report on universities have the most healthy university sector, along probably with the UK, they have all got a similar type of system. If you look at the debate that has recently broken out in Germany, I don’t want to get into the intricacy of the German Government’s discussion on it, but their discussion was exactly about the same thing, because people realise in Europe today, unless we make sure our universities are offering high quality good education to a wider group of people, then it is going to have a bad impact on our economy. So I just come back to the argument, and you may think this is naïve optimism on my part, but I actually think that if you have the right argument you usually win, usually.
Question
Can you explain why the government is now supporting plans to create an EU military planning cell? Have you managed to convince the American administration that it would not undermine NATO, and how confident are you that the EU leaders will reach agreement on a new constitution at this summit in Brussels next week?
Prime Minister
Well there is some confusion here actually because the EU already has a planning cell. The question is whether there should be a standing operational headquarters and whether we should end up duplicating shape in some European structure. I don’t think we should do that, and we should certainly do absolutely nothing that is in any shape or form inconsistent with NATO, and we won’t. I haven’t gone through everything I have been through in the past few years to do anything that undermines NATO, but I am absolutely committed to European defence because I think it is important in circumstances where America is not engaged that Europe has the capability to act in these limited areas, because European defence is limited to peace-keeping, humanitarian and crisis management questions. And in particular, without European defence for example operating in Macedonia at the moment, we might have Balkan instability back. So it is important Europe has this capability, but obviously there is nothing that is ever going to dislodge the central cornerstone of our defence, which is in NATO.
Question
Under your proposals, if graduates continue to earn at a premium, won’t that premium steadily be eroded by the top-up tax they will have to pay to pay for their education, and since that tax will increase directly in relation to earnings, won’t you actually create a bizarre topsy-turvy wealth trap which will act as a disincentive for them to earn more because they know that they might go into another income tax band, and go into another band for repaying the top-up education tax?
Prime Minister
No, because what they will be paying back is the money that has gone into their education, which itself is only a fraction of what the education costs. The state is going to carry on putting a large amount of money into university education. People aren’t paying back the full cost of their education by any means, but they are making a contribution. And I don’t think people will do that at all. Also incidentally, one of the myths about this is that the maintenance loan, at the moment many students take out the full maintenance loan, which is a £12,000 debt at the end of their university career. There is no evidence whatever that people are not going to university as a result of that. On the contrary, I think you will find lots of students take out the maintenance loan, pay it back, and that after all is less than what we are describing for the tuition fees, and it doesn’t put them off because they know they are going to get a decent education at the end of it. And I think also sometimes people say well isn’t this a sort of blow to the middle class if you are introducing this system, the answer is no, one because no family, working class or middle class, is going to have to pay up-front fees, but secondly the middle class know as much as anybody that it is the quality of your education that also matters. And increasingly graduates are competing in a global context, so unless they are getting a quality education, you know in the end there is no point in having a cheap university education if it is a poor product at the end of it. And that is why if you look at how academic salaries have fallen behind, if you look at what the universities were saying this morning about an £8 billion worth of infrastructure backlog, you know we need more finance into the universities, that is accepted, the only question is how.
Question
You have talked about the fees, you have talked about what the universities want, if you take some of the Vice Chancellors for some of our leading universities, in particular Richard Sykes at Imperial, these Vice Chancellors are not talking about £3,000 a year, they are talking about £20,000 a year. You are talking about the creation of a market which will deliver a tertiary or four or five tier higher education system. What kind of assurances are you going to have to offer people in your own party that you will be creating a market that will need either some kind of government regulation, or just allowed to go to freefall, any price at all. That is what is the concern. And you have talked about the middle class, but you have not actually given any reassurance that they are not going to have to face a £80,000 debt at the end of a four year period.
Prime Minister
Well we have actually, with the greatest respect, we have said there is a £3,000 year cap on it, and if the caps change then …
Question
… £3,000 for a very limited period. You yourself know that that will never be able to stay in place for a long period?
Prime Minister
Yes, but the point is that if it is changed it is changed by government decision, so there has to be a process of change again that goes through the normal processes of government. The fact is, and we have actually given an undertaking for the next few years about the £3,000 cap. But what you are suggesting, with the greatest respect, look at what is actually happening in other …
Question
I am not suggesting it, it was Richard Sykes who suggested it.
Prime Minister
No, but you are suggesting that somehow students are going to be put off by this concept, that they are going to worry that they are not able to afford university education. Just look at what has happened in other parts of the world where the system has been introduced, look at the evidence. The most important thing is to look at the evidence of what is actually working in university systems where you are getting high rates of participation and high quality of university education, and in the end, people said, didn’t they, exactly the same when the concept of maintenance loans was introduced, and actually tuition fees was introduced in the last parliament. People said people would stop going to university, the middle classes would be put off, everyone would get worried about it. They didn’t. They adjusted because they know in the end it is a good deal. And a deal that says to the university student, we the state are going to put a big amount of money into your education, we are not going to charge you anything for it at all whilst you are going through university, but when you graduate and earn money, linked to your ability to pay, so if you earn more you pay more, but if you are earning less you pay less, we then want a contribution back, I think most people when they really reflect upon that will think it is a fair system. And the alternative is the one I am waiting for, because the alternative is that you make some ancillary worker in the Health Service on a very low income, who hasn’t been to university, pay more of their taxes in order to boost the funding for universities. And the other thing that I think you will find as well is this, I don’t buy at all this notion that everyone will simply want to charge the same. I think you will get some universities that will charge less, and I think you will get universities that charge more for one course and less for another. Again if you look round the world at where this type of system has been introduced, that is exactly what has happened, and people will make a very, very shrewd calculation as to where their interests lie in that.
Question
We have almost got to the end of the press conference without mentioning Iraq. On these occasions you are always very optimistic about Iraq, sometimes even a bit Polyannish about it when set against the facts on the ground. The last few days we have seen targeted attacks on coalition forces, sophisticated opinion polls saying the Iraqis are disappointed with the occupation, they want it to end as soon as possible, we hear privately that British officials with experience of counter-insurgency are privately telling the Americans they are doing it all wrong, counter-productive. How is your optimism on a scale of 1 - 10 today?
Prime Minister
Thank you for that.
Question
Inaudible.
Prime Minister
I know, I know. But I should say to you that first of all I don’t recognise your description of what the British security are telling the Americans. Secondly, I haven’t actually seen these opinion polls, these sophisticated opinion polls in Baghdad. The last ones I saw was that the vast majority of people were delighted that Saddam went and actually what they want is for the security to get better, of course they do. But I think, you know as I have said to you before, I certainly don’t take a rosy view of the security issues at all, they are very, very difficult at the moment, and it is a tragedy that we have coalition forces and ordinary Iraqis being killed. But I simply put two things in the balance against that. The first is that we are actually making the country better, these people are trying to stop us, and certainly from the contacts I have had with Iraqis, most of them understand that and realise it and support it. And the second thing is that we now have a political timetable that increasingly will transfer power into the hands of the Iraqis themselves. And we don’t want the occupation to go on a moment longer than it need, but on the other hand Iraqis don’t want us to leave until the job is properly done. And I am optimistic, yes, about the long term situation in Iraq because certainly the reports I get and the people that I talk to who come back from Iraq tell me that with all the security problems that are serious, nonetheless there is a considerable amount getting better, and that there is a lot happening within the economy and society there that is immensely positive. And I can tell you certainly that the only reports I have had back from the British in charge of the southern part are immensely optimistic about the future for that part of Iraq, although it is true they of course are deeply worried about the continuing terrorist and security threat. So I think that is the fair way of balancing it, and I believe that in the end the Iraqi people, with help from the security forces of Britain, the United States and our other allies, I believe we will win through. Yes I do believe that.
Question
On Guantanamo Bay and the question of the return of the British suspects, can you give us any idea of what the sticking points are and can you give us an assurance that no deal will involve any political interference with the independence of the prosecution service in this country? And one more general question, 2003 has been a pretty momentous year for you. If you could press the rewind button, are there any decisions that you would make in a different way? Do you have any regrets?
Prime Minister
Obviously the biggest decision was on Iraq, and no I don’t, but that is for the reasons I have gone over a thousand times. In relation to the first point on the detainees in Guantanamo Bay, of course there will be no interference with our own assessment, and the Attorney General’s assessment of what would be a proper trial according to our rules, and I am not going into detail on the issues that we are discussing at the moment, just suffice it to say we are discussing them and I hope we can reach an agreement, but if not then they come back here, as you know.
Question
… alluded to the decision by Lloyds TSB on the Newcastle call centre, which you will be aware of, and today Norwich Union have announced a very similar move. What is your view of all this and shouldn’t it be the case that British customers enquiring about their financial affairs should be dealt with by British call centres?
Prime Minister
I tell you my view, very, very simply. We live in an economy today which is global, in which there is going to be a lot of churning of jobs, in which the old concept of 9 - 5 jobs, that people kept the same job for many, many years, is changing and has already changed, and that the best thing that government can do is not offer a false prospectus to people that we can prevent these changes, but on the contrary help people through education, through skills, through an active employment service to find new jobs if they lose their existing ones. And it may be not what people always want to hear, but that is the truth. And it is the reason why we as an economy have managed to keep employment rising, and unemployment falling, even when virtually the whole of the industrialised world has not been in that position, is because we have maintained a very active employment service skills policy, you know the New Deal for the unemployed has been fantastically helpful for example, but we have not tried to pretend to people that we can stop what is happening in the global economy. And of course I feel desperately sorry for anyone whose job is at risk as a result of this change, but that is the way the world is today.
Question
… President Bush is ready to withdraw the tariffs he put on European steel. Do you consider this your personal success in convincing him?
Prime Minister
Well I simply don’t know what the decision is going to be, so perhaps before we comment on it we had better wait for it I would say.
Question
Are you being entirely straight with us about your health, because you have just aid you haven’t had this condition before, yet we read that you have discussed a condition to do with your heart with The Queen and with President Clinton, and you shrug all these questions off as if it is a … playing tennis, but it is something that we are all entitled to care about, aren’t we?
Prime Minister
Can I say how touched I am by your care, first of all, I really am. But if you don’t mind I am not going to go into alleged conversations with The Queen and so on, thank you very much.
Question
Do you agree with Dr el-Baradei that the deal on Iran’s nuclear programme is a potential win-win situation and can lead to a chapter of better relations between the EU and Iran? And also do you see the deal as a prime example of multilateral diplomacy standing up against US unilateralism?
Prime Minister
Well I don’t see it as the latter, no, but I think it is good that France, Germany and Britain cooperate together in achieving a result in respect of the inspection of the Iranian programme and I think it is very important we keep up the pressure on Iran, because it is potentially a dangerous situation and I hope Iran realises, and I am sure it does, that it has got to fulfil its obligations completely.
Question
Can I ask as a freelance, do you need to be a find upstanding character to be allowed to buy a national broadsheet newspaper?
Prime Minister
Do you need to be a fine upstanding character to buy a national broadsheet newspaper? Mmmm. I think if I was to start commenting on whether I thought anyone who owns broadsheets or any other type of newspaper in this country were fine and upstanding, I would be here rather a long time.
Question
You had to rely on the votes of Scottish MPs to win the vote on foundation hospitals, despite the fact that it has no relevance in Scotland. We could see a similar situation in relation to tuition fees. Do you think that is (a) fair, and (b) political sustainable?
Prime Minister
It is a consequence, as I said the other day in the House of Commons. We have got one class of UK MP, and that is the way and that is the way it should be actually in my view. And there are issues that used to be raised about this by ourselves back in the 1980s on various issues, but I think we should have one class of MPs, we always have and we should keep it that way.
Question
Given that polls show President Bush to be widely unpopular among the British electorate, and of course given the reception he received here in London, I am wondering what it is you know, or understand, about the President that the British public may not know or understand about the President?
Prime Minister
First of all I think actually the polls in the end showed that the majority of people wanted his visit to go ahead here. And I don’t really want to get into the intricacies of this poll versus that poll, but the reason that I have a close working relationship with the President is that we share the same world view about the terrorist and security threat of the early 21st century and I pay tribute to his leadership in dealing with it, and I think it is important that Britain and the United States of America carry on working strongly for that. Of course there were people who protested in London, that is their democratic right, and as we said at the time people can come and protest if they want, but I think at the same time there were many people who were delighted to see him and who welcomed him, not least in my own constituency.
Question
On the British stance on the European Constitution as it was presented recently by Mr Jack Straw, does it mean that Britain supports the Nice Treaty and the voting parities which resulted from the Nice Treaty, or once the British red lines are secure, Britain will support the Franco-German proposal for changing of this voting parity and different allocation of the votes?
Prime Minister
We think it is important that not just our red lines are dealt with, but the concerns of nations like Poland are dealt with too, and we have made that very clear to our Polish counterparts. And I think it is important that the process of discussion at the Intergovernmental Conference takes account of all the sensitivities, not just in our country but in your country too.
Question
Back on the Middle East question, you welcome the Geneva meeting dialogue. However, it is not really accepted by the countries, and what really counts in that part of the world is the American involvement. Given your relationship with President Bush, what role can Britain actually to facilitate much more acceptance of marrying the roadmap and the Geneva meeting and getting the Americans to play a more active role there?
Prime Minister
Well we just carry on making the case as to why it is important.
Question
There is an issue missing from the accord, that they deny the right of the Palestinians to return to their own land. What is the solution for them?
Prime Minister
Well the solution is to make sure that first of all we have a security plan that can give the Israelis sufficient confidence that everything is being done that is possible to be done to maintain security; and then for the Palestinian side that the reduction of the restrictions, because the Palestinians need these restrictions lifted. But it is very difficult when people are moving in from the Palestinian territories to Israel and these terrible terrorist events are happening, and then of course there are the reprisals and then more innocent people die. So what is important is to get a situation, this is what I believe is essential at the moment, where there is a short term security plan that builds sufficient confidence that everything possible is being done. And until that happens I think you are in a very very difficult situation, because the Israeli government come under enormous pressure to take tough security measures which lead to the consequences you are saying, and the Palestinians then feel more and more oppressed, more trodden down, more deprived of their basic rights, and so the whole cycle continues. But it can only be put into reverse, this cycle, if there was a basic security plan, and I really believe that. And I know people say to me well you know you have got to get the politics right, well you do have to get the politics right, but in a sense if I can just offer you this advice from our own process in Northern Ireland, which even despite the recent election result has in the end delivered a lot for people, when if you go back 10 years probably the Middle East peace process was in a better state than the Northern Ireland peace process. Right, well that is certainly not true today. And I tell you what I learnt through it, and that is there are certain points of time where you cannot make political progress unless there is some security confidence, and I think this is such a time. And I can stand here and tell you well there should be this concession made by the Israelis, or this should be opened here, or that should happen there, and you have got the two state solution. All of that is very difficult to make progress on whilst it is believed with some credibility that people are simply coming in, committing these terrible acts of indiscriminate terrorism and innocent people are dying. Now I am aware that Palestinians are dying too, that is true, but in the end that is why I say you are only going to role this process back once you get an initial security plan that allows the space for politics to work, and at the moment that space is not there, and the Geneva Accord is an interesting idea but until this issue of security is focused on, for the short term it is going to be very hard to get the medium and long term political planning necessary.
Question
… refugee camps are the issue of the terrorists coming through these camps?
Prime Minister
I think all these things are an issue and all of them have to be resolved politically, but the one thing for sure is they are not going to be resolved by terrorism, because nothing can happen whilst that terrorism continues. And it may well be that there are things that can be done that reduce the terrorism, and it is important that the Israelis have total confidence that a 100% effort is being made, even if people accept you are not going to get 100% results the whole time. But at the moment you don’t have that confidence. And so what I am really saying to you is, whatever I think should happen in this situation, whatever in an ideal world I would want to happen, I honestly tell you I don’t think anything will happen unless alongside the medium and long term planning there is at least some firm short term security plan that gives space for politics to work.
delicious
digg
facebook
