Young
The Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Mrs. Margaret Thatcher. Good morning Prime Minister.
Thatcher
Good morning.
Young
Sorry! I'll start again and open your microphone. You did say good morning actually.
Thatcher
I did indeed.
Young
But nobody heard you.
Thatcher
I'm so sorry.
Young
Can I go back to The Times of a week yesterday which said: ‘To go to the country at the very first sign of recovery is to throw into relief the Opposition's charge of cut and run. It would lend credibility to the assertion that the buzz of economic recovery may be destined to peter out, for if it were not so why the rush to seek the approval of the electorate?’
Thatcher
Well, let me put in my way, I believe they're right in thinking that there's economic recovery on the way, and I think most economic commentators believe that too. I want Britain to get a fair chunk of that recovery. But I know full well that the people who can invest, who can plan the future are looking at what may happen at an election. They say there's a party which is pledged to devalue the currency, pledged to have policy of [end p1] inflation, pledged to hand over more power to the unions, and pledged to pull out of Europe—our largest market. They're not going to have confidence to invest in face of that, that's why I've got to terminate the uncertainty and then I hope and believe that we have a reasonable chance of winning, then I hope they'll invest in a big way. Will be able to get the benefit of the recovery and the jobs here.
Young
Yet, the further argument is, you see, that if you really know it's going to get better, people tend to say, well if she knows it's going to get better why doesn't she hang on because her case will then be that much stronger?
Thatcher
Yes, but I also know that there are many decisions being held up, and I do want that investment in Britain. And you know, I've always thought of the long term in Britain, how we're going to create jobs in the long term, how we're going to get things right for the long term, and we must—if we miss the opportunity when recovery is coming—it may not come again.
Young
Now, another argument which has been put forward—this is on the same subject incidentally—is that by going early you lose certain (what is implied as key legislation) for instance there's the Police Bill, and after all one of your strong planks in the election was law and order, there's also the Privatisation of the Telecommunications Bill, you see, and you're in a way I suppose, are you not giving Opposition leaders a stick to beat you, with because they are saying: well if she's prepared to lose such important measures as that in order to have an early general election, what on earth is wrong?
Thatcher
Well, I've got the majority of them. By far the biggest majority, and if we went on to October and had an election then first, I should have a much shorter year in which to have all the new bills. If we get it over now we then have a very long session—you'd get a State opening at the end of June/beginning of July, and we can have a really long session, which gives us a really long run to get at all those big bills. So I think that's much much more important, than prolonging this terrible uncertainty now. [end p2]
Young
Right. Well I don't want to dwell on this particular thing too long, because you must be fairly fed up with it. You had a lot of it in the last … .
Thatcher
Well, there is another point which you haven't touched on Jimmy, as one of the most important of all. I've given you the internal reasons, I think there's a really very, very big reason that effect all our futures. I don't think that Russia is really going to seriously negotiate on disarmament until she knows the result of this election.
Young
Right. I'll come onto to disarmament in a second if I may. But just to finalise … . I mean, one of the central issues—one of the central issues on which the election's going to be fought is going to be the government's handling of the economy, I mean Mr. Foot will make sure of that.
Thatcher
Of course.
Young
Last year manufacturing investment—26%; down on 1979. Company profits—60%; down on the election level, so I suppose what the public listening to this will say: okay, fine, you say things are going to get better, now what hard evidence can you actually provide, that this economic upturn, which you say really does exist, is just around the corner and headed our way?
Thatcher
Can I just say one thing about the early figures you gave—yes, we have a world recession. Yes, there are similar figures coming out in Germany, across Europe and the United States, and in the whole of the Western World. Why then, in the face of those do we think now there's a recovery? That's a point you put to me. You come out of recovery in a number of ways, but one of the most telling ways is when your construction industry starts to turn up, that was the way we really started to get out of it in the thirties. Now we've got record house-building for ten years on private house building, in the first quarter of this year. You're finding a similar increase in construction in the United States. We've also got very nearly a record on home improvement grants, that's one very good sign. We also have [end p3] enormously increased retail sales, we have record sales of cars. Now this … . these are two things—construction and quite good sales of products. Now what we have to make certain is that we make those products here, but those are two very good signs indeed. A third one is that having struggled and struggled we've got the lowest rate of inflation for fifteen years, and that's good news for everyone. It's good news for planning for the future.
Young
Right. I was going to move on to inflation, because in a recent interview for a magazine, you said: Inflation might lead to more jobs over an eighteen month or two year period, but after that it leads to higher unemployment and that is the way I will not go. i.e. boom followed by bust. You didn't actually say that, I'm saying that. But, wouldn't you accept that at some stage, some stage of the game, there has to be some sort of modest controlled reflation in order to control jobs?
Thatcher
Look … .
Young
To create jobs I mean.
Thatcher
Can one explain that the object of having honest money is to see that your currency is backed by the work of your people. That's the only thing at the end, there's no gold to back it, it was always an artificial backing. So you've got to keep the supply of money in line with the output of goods and services. Now you always have a bit more than that, we have a bit more than that—our extra money supply's between the order of 8 to 12%;. Now that extra supply can go two ways. It can either go into increased prices or it can go into increased production. So in a way we have that extra, and we have had that little bit extra for some time. Which way it goes depends upon which way industry develops, so the little bit extra is there and has been there. We're gradually squeezing out the inflation and we're hoping therefore that the extra will gradually be taken up by increased production. But we've already provided that opportunity, but we've done it in a sound way.
Young
You see, I think a thing that puzzles some people, certainly it puzzles the lay-man, is if roads need doing let us say, and [end p4] if railways need electrification let us say, isn't it better to pay people for doing something rather than to pay them for doing nothing?
Thatcher
Yes. Where do we get the money from? I could give you an enormous list of things that I would love to have done, and I then say, where am I going to get the money from? If I print it then the value of every pound in your pocket will go down by the extra amount I print.
Young
Yet, you have to pay the unemployed just the same you see.
Thatcher
Yes indeed, indeed but the unemployment is very, very much less of course, than it would cost to pay people to build roads, to build railways, to build new hospitals, to build new schools. And every pound extra we spend I have to go to the ordinary working folk and to companies. That's the problem.
Young
Does that mean then that we're never again going to have new roads, new railways, new hospitals, new schools?
Thatcher
No. As you get new production going, new production in your factories, new services, so you get increased prosperity, so we get more pounds genuinely produced, so taxation from more pounds gives us more income into Government, so we're able to have better roads, better railways, better hospitals. But the whole thing depends upon how many goods and services can we produce that we and overseas people will buy. They create the wealth and there is no short cut to its creation.
Young
Right. Now two things if I may ask you. As recently I think as yesterday, the Financial Times … . not notoriously (?) a supporter of the Labour Government I suppose … .
Thatcher
The pink one.
Young
Yes, the pink one. Saying: No Government deserves a second term of office unless it can reasonably promise to bring unemployment down. And linked to that in the same magazine interview to which I referred earlier, you said, that you are convinced that the current higher unemployment figures will soon subside. Now, I suppose immediate questions [end p5] that come to mind are what firm evidence do you have that they will soon subside? How soon is soon? And to what kind of level will they subside?
Thatcher
That depends upon the partnership between government and industry. Government has to do certain things. Getting inflation down is one of them, because if we don't other people will and then they'll have the edge over us in competition, but that is never enough. You do have to give incentives to people in order to produce more, and you have to give incentives to them tax wise to stay here. And my goodness me, this Government really did that. To all the people in middle management and those who can start small businesses and is self employed, so you've got inflation down, incentives to enterprise to stay here. The third thing is, you've got to help new businesses to start. We've got the best programme for that ever. The fourth thing is we have a sheer inventive genius in this country, we're not always good enough at bringing the products to the market or turning them into profit. So we've got a scheme to help those to come to the market, and the fifth thing is I've got the biggest training scheme for youngsters we've ever had. I want some good to come out of this recession. We've had to go round industry and commerce to find 450,000 places, take on our youngsters for a year's training. Get them into the habit and custom of industry and commerce. All of that is being done. In the end, governments do not produce the new products, they don't design them, they don't go into the factories and manage, that's up to business, and I have to rely and say: We created the first industrial revolution, we've created many new inventions, many new products. I believe that genius is still in our people. I believe we can work together, and that is the way to create the jobs of the future. That is my belief, that is my policy, that is my strategy for jobs.
Young
You've certainly given a lot of reason why unemployment should come down, that is absolutely true. But as I say, in the magazine interview you said you are convinced that unemployment figures will soon subside. Now, as I say, at the risk of repeating myself, how soon do you think soon is, and to what kind of level could you bring it down? [end p6]
Thatcher
I cannot tell you. It does not wholly depend upon me. We have problems for example in steel, there's vast over production of steel in the world, as every under developed country wants its own steel mill. We can't stop them. It has effects on us. I can't stop some people from going on strike. I may think they're absolutely crazy, every time they do it they hurt not only their own industry, they hit small business and they hit Britain's reputation, and they stop orders coming. I can say, I'll create the conditions. We will, as far as government can, give you the opportunities, but you must take them and the responsibility for the future prosperity of this country depends upon everyone. Government and people alike.
Young
You have Opposition parties, the Alliance and the Labour, promising things like a million unemployed … . a million less unemployed, a million fewer in the dole queues within the lifetime of the next Parliament if they win. Now, I mean are you willing to make a commitment, are you willing to make a promise?
Thatcher
No, because I don't think they can make a promise honestly. The only way they can create one million extra jobs is by putting them into government or local government service. And that means that straight away we have to take more taxes away from profitable industry, profitable services in order to pay for bigger government expenditure. Jimmy, government … . industry and commerce is screaming that it's paying too much tax. We've had to reduce the taxes on industry. They're screaming they're paying too many rates. What you're going to do at the price of putting one million more into government service or public sector service is going to be to put costs on industry and commerce they can't bear, and it's going to put out more jobs there they'll ever produce in government. So, it's such a short sighted policy.
Young
But summing that up, so I get it clear, I think what you're telling me is that you certainly cannot promise that if you won the general election, if you were re-elected you cannot promise that unemployment would come down? [end p7]
Thatcher
I can say that if you go my way that is the best, and I believe the only chance of getting unemployment down, and creating jobs for the future. It's customers that create jobs—customers. Win back our customers by efficient industry. There's no earthly good producing efficient things that people won't buy, so it's efficient industry, good design products, then we shall get the jobs. There's no short cut.
Young
Prime Minister, let's have a break and have some music and then we'll come back and do some more.
Thatcher
Lovely.
Young
With me in the studio Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Mrs. Margaret Thatcher … .
Young
And in the studio with me the Prime Minister, the Rt. Hon. Mrs. Margaret Thatcher. Could we perhaps move on to the EEC, which is of course … . obviously going to be important in this election, and is a bone of contention with a lot of people. Do you think that you're going to succeed in getting the right and what I think you describe quite often as the right, equitable budget deal?
Thatcher
A fair deal for Britain, as far as payments to the community are concerned, yes I do. First, if any of the other heads of government were in my position, paying the amount which we are paying, they'd take up precisely the same view and they know it. As a matter of fact, Germany is the other main contributor, and also they know from previous experience that we fight our corner, and we shall go on fighting until we do get a fair deal. So we shall. It would be easier if they'd come to a reasonable agreement quickly.
Young
Now, the Labour policy of course, should they win, is to take us out of the EEC, and in fact the Daily Mirror it's true to say this morning in their leader, calls their policy ‘reckless’ and they're not known to be supporters of yours I suppose, but what do you think would be the [end p8] consequences of Labour taking us out, if they were able to take us out that is?
Thatcher
I think that it would be absolutely disastrous. The confusion would be enormous. I mean, 43%; of our exports go to Europe. It's our biggest trading area, and there are jobs in exports. And then, so many companies choose to invest in Britain because they know there's a free market entrance to the whole of Europe. So we'd lose a lot of export jobs and industry's geared up to Europe. We'd lose all the investment that would otherwise come here, and that's job too. And then I think the confusion in the world, for an idealistic reason, which I think is just very, very important. We believe in democracy, it's important that democracies are seen to work together, and that we create an area of stability for the world. This matters—it matters to everyone—in some respects it matters more than anything else, because there are so many peoples the world over that would love to have the things we take for granted. But I think that would be terrifying to take us out, terrifying for the future of democracy, and terrifying for the future of jobs.
Young
To a lot of people you say, you've mentioned working together and so on. To a lot of people listening, if there's one thing the EEC seems not to do is to work together, they all seem to be arguing with each other?
Thatcher
Well, what's wrong with arguing? We are a free association of countries. I mean, we're not like the Warsaw Pact, though the Russia [sic] and all the satellites, where the moment they tried to shake themselves free or do anything different from what Russia says, in roll the tanks. We're a free association of countries, we argue our own corner. But don't families argue?
Young
Do you … are you saying that we are in fact so integrated I mean as far as trade is concerned and the manufacturing industry, we're so integrated, are you saying the Labour couldn't really take us out successfully … .?
Thatcher
Only in total confusion. Total confusion. [end p9] I mean, we have a free trade of goods within, insofar as other barriers being put up, I mean we're trying to get them down. And it would be total confusion and industry … . all of sudden find barriers put up against her when she tried to export into Europe, so exports would be more expensive. It would be confusion would reign.
Young
What about it as a general election issue, I mean whatever the rights and wrongs of being in or out, there are a lot of people in this country who one imagines wouldn't mind seeing us out of the … if the truth were known. Do you think it could be a vote winner for Labour?
Thatcher
Look, there are always a certain number of resentments and feelings that one has, but you must never, never, never let the little differences cloud the enormous importance of standing together. Surely our generation learned this from the last … . if you've got something really worthwhile keeping, democracy, freedom, liberty, stand together, particularly when you've got a whole group of countries just across the NATO line, which are held together by force.
Young
Yes. But you're going to have to have some … . will you be going to Stuttgart do you think for a start, you're going to have to do some pretty tough talking before you get the equitable budget that you talk about … .
Thatcher
Oh, we've already done some pretty tough talking and we shall go on doing pretty tough talking. I had hoped that it would be settled by Stuttgart. Stuttgart is in the last week unless it's changed, and I'll have to consider whether one could go at that time and how far we've got If it were just a question of doing the final negotiations there, obviously one would go. But we have an election on, Italy has an election on, but if we don't get it there we'll have to get it I think pretty soon after. What I am certain is that having negotiated with me before, the Common Market's in no doubt that we shall go on until we get a fair and equitable agreement for Britain.
Young
Do you mean my money Prime Minister?
Thatcher
I mean that we pay a reasonable contribution [end p10] to the club of Europe, of course we do. We don't expect to be subsidised by anyone. We pay a reasonable contribution, and we expect other countries to pay a reasonable contribution—no more—no less—but a reasonable contribution. Right now it's unreasonable. And that won't do.
Young
Perhaps I can ask … . let me ask you about trade unions and the trade unions in this election at any rate, seem to be playing a particularly active part or are about to play a particularly active part in the planning of the Labour Party's policies and so on. Now, four years ago you said that the balance of power had slipped too far in the favours of the trades unions. Where do you think that balance is now?
Thatcher
It's better. We've done postal ballots, if they want them we've done … changed the law in secondary picketing, we've done something about the closed shop particularly to strengthen the right of the individual trade union member against the powers of the trade union. That's very, very important indeed. We have removed immunities under certain conditions and now we must go further in the next bill, which we'll present I hope after the election assuming we're returned, because we took a view—I think it was the right one—and it was a step by step approach to reducing the powers of the unions—vis-a-vis the employers, vis-a-vis the people at large, and also with regard to their own members. And because we've taken it steadily we've kept … and because we've done things for individual trade union members against their union, we've kept the vast majority of trade union members with us. Indeed, I expect we'll get an increasing number of trade union people voting for us and supporting us. Because our policy is a fair one, and they don't like … . the great feature about the British people, trade unionists or not, the whole lot of us, is we don't like being pushed around in any way.
Young
Mr. Foot, of course yesterday said, you'd been pushed and pulled in every direction in terms of the general election.
Thatcher
It was a very studied comment wasn't it?
Young
What about trade union legislation because as recently as the first of this month you said that in that area you said, and [end p11] mean that you've given up perhaps hope of ever achieving legally binding contracts let's say?
Thatcher
We had to consider that during the coming Parliament particularly procedural agreements. I think that's the most important thing, because we saw that during the water strike. There was a procedural agreement, unfortunately it didn't stop a strike, it should have done. And we shall have a look at that. We shall consult with it. We've had a document we've consulted about a number of things for example like secret ballots for the election of certain trade union officers, I think that's very, very important, because if you get reasonable officers into trade unions I think that your main problem is over. And then we shall certainly have to have a look at how far we can go with procedural agreements, we shall have to consult about that.
Young
You see, you would say reasonable officers into trade unions … your problems are over. I suppose some trade union members would say reasonable officers by your standards, but perhaps not reasonable officers by our standards?
Thatcher
Oh no, no, it's not we who'd be electing them. It would be secret ballots of members of trade unions—secret ballots … .
Young
So you will still press on with legislation then in the area of the trade union … .
Thatcher
Oh indeed, yes. Oh indeed yes, we would have a Bill to bring in during the next Parliament, during the first session of the next Parliament.
Young
Can you ever see yourself moving closer to trade unions? I mean do you think trade unions have a constructive role to play in the running of a successful industrialised country, and if so, what role do you think that is?
Thatcher
Yes of course. Of course they do. And I think throughout most of the private sector, relations between management and workforce on the shopfloor are excellent. We couldn't have the export [end p12] record we have if they weren't. I think we have trouble in some of the big nationalised industries, in the public sector and in one or two big industries like cars. But on the whole, the vast majority of British industry's working well, whether they're represented by trade unions on the shopfloor, or whether they're represented just by works councils. But of course, co-operation between management and workforce is enormously important to the success of any industry. And in most industries that I've visited it goes very well indeed. You must have that co-operation. But it's got to be reasonable.
Young
Can you ever see it going as far as we found it was in Japan when we visited there, where government, trade union, banks and employers and so on all seemed to work very closely together?
Thatcher
I think we have to recognise that the Japanese culture is totally different from ours, and I don't think that you can just lift one particular feature from the culture and say it should work here. But I do note that when Japan sets up here in business she sets certain conditions, she says if we're going to invest in Britain then it will be one company, one union. And the trade unions agreed. So you don't get difficulties about restrictive practices or leap-frogging in pay claims, one company, one union. And the people who go to work for that Japanese company here know that high standards are expected, and they like it, and they live up to those high standards. So Japanese companies when they invest in Britain are very successful, and it's very interesting. People far prefer to rise to a challenge and live up to high standards than anything else.
Young
Just as a matter of interest, why do you think it's possible for a Japanese company therefore, to get an agreement with a trade union on exactly the sort of things which I assume you would like to get an agreement, but you can't?
Thatcher
Because they're setting up a company afresh—a new company. We often find the same thing here when we have new companies set up, or for example you have docks in a new area. Look at Felixstowe—fantastically successful—marvellous. When you set up afresh you can set up [end p13] certain conditions and people like to live up to standards. I mean, I wouldn't have a future if people didn't like to live up to standards. I like to live up to standards, I think you set disciplines, things to improve on, look at every sportsman. He gets to the top, he wins by living up to standards, by improving, by competing, by saying I can do it—or we can do it.
Young
Right. Let's break there … . [end p14]
Young
And back we go to the Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Mrs. Margaret Thatcher. Perhaps I could ask you about foreign policy and defence.
Over the past four years, you've taken a very strong line on the Soviet Union, particularly on the … . on the question of arms limitation. Now do you think that more progress might have been made if we'd acted as a kind of middle man if you like between the Soviet Union and the Americans. I mean geographically that is more or less where we find ourselves anyway. Do you think we could have been more constructive than we have?
Thatcher
No, I think the most constructive thing is to stick together with our allies in NATO. None of us could defend ourselves alone. We defend ourselves by sticking together, not only within Europe but across this great partnership, across the Atlantic of Europe and America. Europe is part of America's defence, America's … American effort is part of our defence. We must negotiate together. We have done some things by creating our own initiatives. One very telling thing. We've been very active in getting rid of chemical weapons. We got rid of our stockpile of chemical weapons many years ago. We in fact disarmed in a one-sided way. Hoping to goodness Russia would follow. Ah, but she didn't. She built up her own stockpile.
Young
Now, when you say, we disarmed in a one-sided sort of way hoping that the Soviet Union would follow, presumably you are taking a little swipe there at the Labour government's proposal … . or the Labour proposals?
Thatcher
A big swipe.
Young
(Laughs) Not a little swipe … . a big swipe.
Thatcher
Oh a big swipe. A fundamental swipe. You do not—if you really hate nuclear weapons as I do—you do not say we'll have one-sided disarmament and throw out all the American bases, leave all the weapons in the hands of our sworn enemies and then hope to goodness they'll negotiate. Of course they won't. They'd be only too delighted if we disarmed nuclear weapons on our own [end p15] and throughout nuclear bases and left them to give all theirs. The only way to get them to the negotiating table is for them to know that we are strong and we are determined not to be fooled by their arguments. Then they will come to the negotiating table and then we'll be able to negotiate disarmament on both sides. And that's the way we'll get far bigger reductions in nuclear weapons than by any other way.
Young
Can I go back to something you said earlier on … it was right back at the beginning of the programme actually, when we hadn't yet moved onto defence and you said we'll get no action from the Soviet Union until we see the result of this General Election. Now are you seriously … are you seriously saying that the Soviet Union is waiting to see if the Labour Party wins this General Election?
Thatcher
I am say … yes I am indeed. I think that they would not come ahead … come forward with disarmament proposals while there was an election in Germany. You know there was a similar issue between the two sides there and Chancellor Kohl won and that was the first battle of getting two-sided disarmament. Now we've got another battle because we are the really other major nation in Europe, Italy also will … is … . is a staunch member of NATO. Now, they're hoping to goodness that they can keep all their nuclear weapons and by various arguments, various devices fool us into giving up ours. Or by bogus counting, fool us into saying we will take away nuclear weapons although they've been our shield and our deterrent for the last 38 years.
Young
Let me ask you Prime Minister about the deploying of Cruise and Pershing because it is said that when Helmut Schmidt wanted them for the … in the first place that what he actually wanted them for, he may not have said in so many words, but he really wanted them as a bargaining chip which was strong enough to negotiate away the Russian SS20's. Now, I'd like not to get into a number game if we can avoid it, because it does get awfully complicated. But is your attitude to the Russian vis-à-vis of Cruise and Pershing is it we'll deploy unless you come to an agreement of some kind or is it, we're going to deploy anyway, whatever you do? [end p16]
Thatcher
No. If … . if the Russians said that they would take down all their SS20's and they'd allow people in to verify that they were doing that, then there need be not one single Cruise or Pershing deployed. But right now, the Russians have updated their missiles of that particular group to the SS20's, we haven't—we've got the old ones here which are nuclear bombs flown by aircraft. The Cruise and Pershings update those—they substitute the nuclear bombs flown by aircraft, they substitute those by a Cruise which of course is a pilotless weapon, it takes as long to get there as the old aircraft and nuclear bombs. They've modernised theirs, and ours will soon be updated. If they take theirs down, they needn't have any of that class here——
Young
But that's not …
Thatcher
And then you'll have genuine nuclear disarmament of that class.
Young
Right. Right, well zero option I suppose is the ideal thing really. But, is that realistic? I mean you can't realistically think the Russians are going to do that are they, because they're not.
Thatcher
No they're not. And everyone says, right come to the conference table in Geneva and agree a number less than the number you've got. No bogus counting, no fudging, agree a number and then we need only deploy up to that number. But we will start deployment, we have to because you've modernised yours, we've got to modernise ours. And how many we deploy will depend on the Soviet Union and the Soviet Union, right now is hoping that she needn't negotiate. She's hoping she can keep the lot.
Young
Now what——
Thatcher
And that Britain will be fooled into not having any and that would be disastrous to NATO. The nuclear balance, nuclear deterrents have been part of what's kept our peace.
Young
What about the issue of who controls the American Cruise and missile system which is causing a lot of concern here. It is actually a throw-back isn't it, to … . a front page of the Daily Mirror which you remember many, many, many years ago, “Whose Finger On the Trigger”? [end p17]
Thatcher
Well, we've had American nuclear bombs and American aircraft here since the agreement between Mr.—President Truman and Mr. Attlee about the control of those. That agreement was confirmed by Mr. Truman and Mr. Churchill, it's been confirmed by every President and every Prime Minister since and that is joint decision which means those weapons would not be used without the agreement of the British Prime Minister. That joint decision remains, that joint decision would apply to the modernised version of the nuclear bomb which would be Cruise on or off base.
Young
Now again, rightly or wrongly, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament has made a lot of progress. I mean, it made a lot of progress on the continent as well. I know you will say that Kohl won in Germany in the end anyway, so you know it didn't make as much progress as it ought to have had. But nonetheless, do you think that these movements made sufficient progress on this issue for the Labour policies on disarmament and we're actually talking about a General Election situation here which you, like they want to win—for the Labour policies to be attractive to the electorate?
Thatcher
The true peace movement belongs to the government that have through present policies kept peace in Britain and security and peace with freedom for 38 years. We want peace, not at the expense of freedom but peace with freedom. The true peace movements are those that have pursued the NATO policies which have kept their peace. Peace is too precious to risk it now.
Young
Well let me ask you, at any rate, one more question on this particular issue if I may. We were talking about Dr. Kohl just now and … . and I must say he's certainly not the Russian's best fan because as you quite rightly said, they didn't want him elected in the first place. Nonetheless, he's going to Moscow on July 4th to meet Mr. Andropov to, he says, and I quote him “Continue a dialogue and with goodwill to offer the Russians political, economic and scientific cooperation”. Now I know you sent Malcolm Rifkind to Moscow recently but do you think a strong case could be made for a new person to visit the Soviet Union and talk to Mr. Andropov?
Thatcher
Well I do not expect to visit the Soviet Union [end p18] quickly but I think that Chancellor Kohl 's policy is this, if I might explain it. When you are in a strong position—that is to say, when you know you have equal strengths to them—that puts you in a very much better position to negotiate. You know you can negotiate looking face to face.
Young
Right.
Thatcher
Much stronger and you have much more respect then you can say right you have a totally different way of life, we have a totally different way of life but let's see what contacts are to our mutual benefit. The moment you start to weaken your own position you forfeit your respect, you put your own freedom of security at risk and I think you're in a much lesser position to have a dialogue that equals.
Young
So is your timetable then—and obviously I don't want to put words in your mouth and you wouldn't let me anyway, but is your timetable then deploy first but then possibly visit Moscow and talk to Mr. Andropov after?
Thatcher
Well I don't see why we should always go to Moscow to see Mr. Andropov, do you?
Young
Would you like him to come here?
Thatcher
And Mr. Andropov has never set foot in a non-Communist country. He has never breathed the air of freedom. He doesn't know what it's like and this is one of the problems when you're dealing with Communist countries. They don't understand what it's like for people to have human rights which don't depend upon governments.
Young
Nonetheless, you see——
Thatcher
I'm not going to ask Mr. Andropov here. What I think is it would be better if we had a few conferences where Mr. Andropov came perhaps to a neutral country outside the Soviet Union——
Young
Towhich you would go?
Thatcher
But eventually you know, it is better that we talk. Right now we do it, you see, we talk at the Madrid Conference, you know which was updating all Helsinki agreements when we tried to get more human rights [end p19] accepted so we do talk in various conferences. I just don't think that everyone should stream to Moscow to see Mr. Andropov.
Young
No I think … . I think people would feel that something was being done if they could see you and he face to face. Whether it's in Moscow or whether it's in London or whether it's in a neutral corner is another matter.
Thatcher
I think that … . I think that in many respects one would like to talk to people and indeed you know the Deputy Prime Minister of Hungary came to see me the other day and someone from Poland come to see us and we do talk among the Warsaw pact countries. I go to China, they have a different way of life from us but they're not threatening us. Even if the Warsaw pact, Russia is the greatest threat to the freedom of the West and she doesn't hesitate to use her tanks to roll in and not only to the satellite countries but Afghanistan we must never never forget that. But even with that, you can talk from a position of strength.
Young
And you would talk, would you?
Thatcher
Do things which … . oh yes, to do things which are to our mutual advantage only from a position of strength. Because in the end you know, we do hope to influence people. We have to influence them to give our own people a better way of life.
Young
Let us have one last break if we may, because we're running out of time and then perhaps we could just——
Thatcher
Are we talking too much?
Young
No, no, not at all. And then perhaps we could finalise things. So the Prime Minister with me in the studio, and we'll be back with her for—well a final five minutes or so directly we've heard this.
(Music)
[end p20]Young
With me in the studio and indeed she has been since ten past eleven or so is the Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Mrs. Margaret Thatcher.
Prime Minister, we're coming to the end of the programme. Now, perhaps I could ask you about things to come. Peter Shore, recently at the end of last month actually in The Guardian described the forthcoming General Election as, he said “The most important election since 1945, with an immense ideological and practical gulf between the two main political parties”. Would you say that's a fair and accurate assessment?
Thatcher
I would. I do think it's an extremely important election. I believe that the Labour Party wants to change the sort of society which we have. I believe it wants to go to a much much more controlled society, more State … . more State industries, more State control, bigger taxation. I believe that the British people don't want it.
Young
Well now, let me ask you, supposing, for the sake of an argument that there weren't a clearcut result to the election, they were a hung parliament let's say, would you do a deal with the minority party or parties of some kind, if it were necessary?
Thatcher
You ask this every election. I was asked it last time. I've seen other governments have to fight elections and then go and have to do a horse trading deal behind the scenes of minority parties. It doesn't make for strong, clearcut government. I believe this government has been strong, it's done the right things, and it's stuck to them and I go for a clear and good majority because I believe that that's best for Britain and of course I believe it's best for my party. But I believe it's best … . it's in Britain's interest to return my party with a strong majority.
Young
Now you said just now what the Labour policies would be, should they happen to win the election. Now, if you won the election, what would be your priorities for your second term of office, and incidentally, I must say that before you were elected … won the last General Election you were [end p21] kind enough to say in here, that you were aiming at two terms of offices because you would need that—two terms of office, you'd need that in order to do what you wanted. And I see you're now saying that you would need three?
Thatcher
I think that we have brought a fundamental change in Britain. Britain has regained her own confidence and self respect and she's got a new regard and admiration from abroad. Now that isn't just the Falklands. We've got it because we started to do the right things economically and I believe people accept that, they do wherever I go in the factories, they know that we're doing the right things and they know we're steadfast in doing them and we'll continue to do those things because it's that that creates the wealth and we're really rather proud that throughout a deep recession, we've nevertheless been able to protect the purchasing value of the pensioners' pension, we've been able to improve the National Health Service and we're spending a record amount on each pupil in education. And we have a record number of teachers compared with pupils. So there really has been supreme management—it's all been done by getting rid of quite a lot of controls, by freeing up the British people, we're marvellous people. The fundamental thing about us is whether we're the twenty-three and a half million in work or the three million who unfortunately haven't got work, whatever part we come from, we all come from all walks of life. We're united by a common belief that this is a free country and it's going to stay that way and that that is worth defending and we're going to defend it.
Young
Prime Minister, it's a great pleasure to talk to you on the programme again. Thank you very very much for coming in.
Thatcher
Thank you.
Young
The Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Mrs. Margaret Thatcher.