Dr Robin Niblett CMG
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Chatham House, if I can keep saying that, even though we’re not physically being able to meet today. But welcome in particular to this meeting on The Future of Liberal Democracies, and a very strong welcome to Tony Blair, former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, and former Foreign Secretary, Jeremy Hunt. Great to have both of them with us to kick off this early year meeting on such an important topic. And I want to just remind you all, this is actually the first in a series of meetings that we will be holding on The Future of Liberal Democracies, and their alliance relationships. A series that we’ve devised in co-operation with Jeremy Hunt, with Jeremy, who made this topic, along with the rule of law, one of his hallmark issues during his time as Foreign Secretary in which, as I think you all appreciate, is especially topical right now, and not least with all of the events taking place in the United States, but also around the world. And I will let Jeremy explain a little bit in a minute himself his own motivations for working with us on this meetings’ series that will take place through the course of 2021.
I do want to say, from the point of view of Chatham House, as Director of the Institute, that as we start our second century, and that’s what we’re doing now in January of 2021, one of our global goals is more accountable and inclusive governance. And strong liberal democracies are going to be playing an absolutely pivotal role in that, in achieving that goal, both our US and Americas Programme, and our Europe Programme are doing some very interesting project work on that topic. But so are our other regional programmes, Africa, Asia-Pacific, Russia-Eurasia, Middle East, all of them looking into the issues of state building, state strength, accountable governance, and being able to preserve and strengthen those democracies that are already in place.
So, with this in mind, we will be continuing this topic through 2021. Jeremy Hunt’s going to be holding some more conversations. We have also, with his good grace, he’s being able to engage some other former Foreign Secretaries, David Miliband, and also William Hague, to help us in this process. But we will be bringing all those ideas together, with some very interesting, I think, and diverse practitioners from around the world, all bringing their different perspectives on the future of democracy.
What it leads me to say right now is a couple of housekeeping issues. Number one, this meeting is on the record, I think self-evidently, not least given the large number of our members who joined us today. Please could you submit your questions through the ‘Q&A’ function on Zoom, the bottom of your screen. We will not be using the ‘Chat’ function, or the ‘Raise Hand’ function, for that purpose. And we really do look forward to some interesting questions from you after Jeremy and Tony Blair have had a chance to engage riveting conversation. So, with that, I’m going to hang back and hand over to Jeremy Hunt. Jeremy, great and really looking forward to running this series with you. Thanks very much for your input.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you very much indeed, Robin. During one of last year’s never-ending lockdowns, I decided to write a book on this big issue that I wrestled with as Foreign Secretary, namely, whether open societies and liberal democracy really has a secure future, given that within this decade, for the first time in our lifetimes, the world’s largest economy will not be a democracy. And it’s such a big question that I decided I should interview a number of current and former world leaders, and I’m delighted to do so in collaboration with you and your brilliant team at Chatham House. You know, you are probably the preeminent think tank on these issues and so, it’s a great privilege for me to do that.
And I’m even more delighted that our very first interview in the series is with former British PM, Tony Blair, who needs absolutely no introduction. Except, perhaps, to say that his interventions on testing and vaccination strategy during the pandemic have been extremely insightful and, indeed, a very good predictor of government policy, more than a decade after he stepped down. So, that, and, of course, he’s very well known for his opposition to Brexit, and he has asked to open with some comments, not just about the future of liberal democracy, but Britain’s role in the world post-Brexit. So, first, we’ll hear Tony’s comments, then I’m going to ask him some questions, and after that, we’ll have questions from the audience. So, over to you, Tony.
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Right, thank you very much, Jeremy, and thank you to you and to Robin and Chatham House for the invitation to speak about a post-Brexit Britain and its role in the world. So, many, many thanks, and it’s a – in case anything goes wrong with the technology, I’m not used to giving speeches in this format. And before anyone gives – whenever I’m in front of this particular backdrop, I should point out this picture behind me, it’s not especially for the occasion of talking about Britain. It’s actually a painting of a mural in Northern Ireland, during the course of the Northern Ireland Troubles, just FYI.
So, right, so I’m going to give some remarks, and then Jeremy and I will have a conversation, and other questions. I campaigned so long and so passionately against Brexit because I believed it to be a strategic error and not just of policy, but of destiny, and I haven’t changed my mind about its wisdom. But reality is reality, we have done it, we must live with it, and we should make the best of it. As I’ve said recently, if a return to Europe is ever to be undertaken by a new generation, Britain should do it as a successful nation that Europe is anxious to embrace, not as a supplicant with no other options. In any event, we should make a virtue of necessity and see in Brexit’s consequences an opportunity and an obligation to renew our country and its place in the world.
To succeed post-Brexit, my basic case is that Britain will have to make some radical changes. It’s no longer leave or remain but change or decline. Brexit obliges this precisely because without such changes, Britain’s future is inevitably poorer and weaker. Now, Brexiteers will often balk at this stark statement, but this is where any sensible debate about the future must begin, because just as Brexit is a reality, so are the short-term consequences of doing it. It’s not to say that long-term, these consequences cannot be reversed, and Britain’s future be bright. I believe it can be. But it is to recognise that if we leave the decision-making forum of the world’s most significant political union, and de-liberalise our trade with the world’s largest commercial market, both of them on our doorstep and on our continent, the immediate effect cannot seriously be other than to lose political power and face more difficult economic circumstances. The right response, therefore, is to treat Brexit as a sort of jolt, as a catalyst for change, which is necessary even without Brexit, could’ve been done without doing Brexit, but which by the challenge it poses us, focuses our mind and Brexit somehow enables.
So, this is a short speech, some framing thoughts that, frankly, each of them would merit a long essay. The first point is this, a country is more influential and powerful externally, if it is successful internally. People will pay more attention to us, treat our views more considerately, be more willing to be our allies if our economy is strong, our society cohesive, if people look at us and see a nation to emulate. Britain has core strengths, some world-class companies, including a new technology, a preeminent financial sector, our universities, great centres of innovation, the English language, a good geography. And for all the divisions over Brexit, I believe we’re still broadly a socially tolerant liberal democracy. Neither climate, nor identity politics, divide us with anything like the rancour, for example, in the United States.
So, we should take these strengths, and we should build on them. The aim should be to put us at the forefront of technology innovation and make Britain the best place in the world to do business. We’re going to need major reforms to our public services, welfare, our regions and our infrastructure, as part of a big vision, big plan for the economic and social renewal of the country. Easy to say, hard to do, especially post-COVID-19, and we can’t afford to lose any part of the UK in the process. Second, we need to review and reshape our alliances. One thing I learnt, in my ten years as Prime Minister, is that alliances only really solidify if you’re prepared to spend political capital to secure them. Anyone can be friends when the going is easy. It is when your allies see you taking tough decisions to lock in the alliance that the respect and, therefore, the leverage, is earned.
So, we need to recreate points of connection and depth with our two key allies: Europe and the United States. Even after Brexit, there’s plenty we can do with Europe: climate change and future pandemic preparedness, energy co-operation, aid, a common front on aspects of foreign policy and defence. With imagination, I could see us also co-operating with European countries in areas as diverse as the regulatory framework for big technology, or in research and development. I fear the unresolved issues after the Brexit deal will be a potential impediment, but, nonetheless, if we subordinate narrow nationalist politics to genuine national interest statecraft, we can work together in a productive alliance with European countries.
With the United States, the emphasis of the new Administration on climate change gives us an immediate point of partnership with the Climate Summit in Glasgow this December. Likewise, our G7 leadership should allow us to work closely with the US, over how we plug the yawning gaps in the global health infrastructure system exposed by COVID-19. Our alliance with America has deep, deep roots, in security, defence, and economy, and we can add to them. We could, for example, become partners in development, and building support for liberal democratic values. Power is shifting East, and in a few decades, the world’s geopolitical power structure will look very, very different. India will eventually be a global giant, and we should put enormous effort into that relationship.
The last two decades have seen Britain forge a modern position within the continent of Africa, and this is a continent on the move, and on the up. We’ve huge relationships with the Gulf in the Middle East. We’ve developed a close relationship with Japan and Southeast Asia over time. So, the point is, post-Brexit Britain’s still got a lot going for us, but we need to redouble the work to prove the value. Third, China is its own special issue. At present, Western countries are without a strategic framework for engagement, they’re torn between seeming to appease a much more aggressive and powerful Chinese state and turning China into a 21st Century equivalent of the Soviet Union.
Europe is going to be under heavy pressure from the United States to be allies in what is virtually the only bipartisan area of foreign policy in the United States, which is confrontation of China. The UK, with, again, some creativity, can try and bridge these positions, charting a path to ensuring at least some space for dialogue and co-operation with China, even as the West confronts and competes where necessary. Fourth, we have a strong Foreign Office, now with the old Department of Development within it. I was not in agreement with the merger, I’m opposed to the cut in aid because I think we’ll weaken our global claims. But we still have a big budget, the merger, if properly used, could make more coherent our foreign policy offer, and make it weightier.
Fifth, of course, our armed forces are globally admired. We should invest in them and make them at the cutting edge of military innovation in personnel, assets and deployment. We should aspire also to be thought leaders. We can’t alter our size, but countries do in the old cliché punch above their weight, and that should be our ambition. When I look at some of the countries my institute works with, they may be small population countries, but their reach is disproportionate to their size. The UK’s a larger country, but the principle’s the same. They have, however, all of these countries that punch above their weight, they’ve got one thing in common, and that is political leadership prepared to take tough, courageous, bold decisions.
And here is where the state of British politics makes me queasy. Both main political parties have contradictions to resolve. The Brexit coalition, which brought the Conservative Party its election victory, consists of some who see Brexit as the facilitator of a new reforming global Britain. And others, notably in the old Labour seats of the North, who see Brexit as allowing us to return to the nation we once were. One is small ‘r’ radical, the other, small ‘c’ conservative. The Labour Party also has a tension, between its modernising wing, which sees radical change as coming from new forms of economic and social capital, and then its old small ‘c’ conservative left, which believes that solutions lie in the return to traditional institutions of collective and state power.
Therefore, the colossal downside risk for Britain is that the political debate continues in conventional directions. Who spends on taxes more? Who supports most the NHS? Who’s most generous with welfare? Umpteen versions of who preserves the status quo best, when it’s only by rigorous analysis of the way the world is changing that we’ve any actual prospect of securing the future. Now, these contradictions can be resolved, and a strong, successful outward-looking Britain can arise, post-Brexit. But only if we accept Brexit of itself doesn’t make it so, and without action and leadership, Brexit will only exacerbate the challenge the forces of change at work in the world present us, unless we make a supreme effort to understand these forces, harness them, and make them our servant.
So, this is the moment of truth for the pro-Brexit and anti-Brexit camps alike. The answers aren’t going to be found in outdated ideology, but in unifying values, clarity of thinking, competence, and delivery. And this is the political space, therefore, post-Brexit, that we have to inhabit. The alternative is inextricable decline. Thank you.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you, Tony, for those thoughts. As ever, challenging to both sides of the political spectrum., and thank you also for clarifying that that mural is not a throwback to Cool Britannia, but it’s actually about something much more substantive and serious. In the speech, you talk about the need for rigorous analysis of the way the world is changing. And the Centre for Economics and Business Research said recently that because of the pandemic, China will now overtake the US as the world’s largest economy in 2028. Now, Elon Musk, who has just become the world’s richest man, once said, “The foundation of war is economics.” So, should those of us who believe in democratic values, open societies, liberal democracies, should we be worried?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Yes, we should be worried, and because the central challenge of liberal democracy, in my view, is not the one that we often think it is. We tend – both Politicians and media tend to think that the challenge is to do with transparency or accountability. It’s actually not, it’s to do with efficacy. The challenge to democracy is, can you get stuff done? In a world of change, you’ve got to change. So, if you take, for example, the healthcare debate in the UK, I mean, at the last election, you could’ve had the same debate on healthcare in the 1980s. And you’re probably too young to remember, but those were the debates back then, right? You know, Labour would say – or the Tories would say, “We’re going to – we love the health service, we’re going to spend more.” And Labour would say, “We don’t really love it and we’re going to spend even more.”
So, the question for healthcare today in the 21st Century’s how do you utilise technology, develop innovative treatment, how do you pay attention to public health and prevention, and not just cure? How do you make sure you get the right intersection between social care and the rest of your healthcare system? Questions that require you to change systemically the way that you work, and the problem for democracy is that it’s finding reform and change very difficult, and that’s why it’s lurched into populism. Because the populist comes along and says, “Look, it’s an easy solution.” Right, you build the wall, or you do the Brexit, or whatever, and, of course, the solutions aren’t easy, they’re really difficult and require deep systemic change.
So that is the challenge of liberal democracy today, and it’s a challenge because for the first time in the world where I notice I’m going to countries, for the first time in my political lifetime, I’m going to countries. And whereas the conversation I would’ve had with them 20 years ago, if they weren’t a democracy, they say, “That’s our ambition, though. It’s just we can’t get there at the moment.” Or “It’s going to take us time.” Or “We’re on a steady progress towards it.” And now the conversation’s different, frankly. The conversation’s often, “You know, you guys just don’t seem to be working very well.” So, that’s what I think. Yes, I think we – I’m – look, I happen to believe in liberal democracy passionately, don’t misunderstand me. But our challenge is effectiveness, it’s how do we make change for our people in a world that needs change.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
So, let me just unpick some of that. One of the things that people want with an effective government is proper managing of the economy. And, indeed, one of the reasons we defeated the Soviet Union was our economic superiority, and our superiority particularly on technology. And you said, in your comments just then, that you thought Britain needs to be at the forefront of technological innovation. But right now, there’s a big debate as to whether China will in fact be the one that develops superior technology, partly because they have looser rules on privacy, which will give them an advantage with big data and AI.
So, how important is it, even if China becomes a larger economy overall, for the West to stay ahead on tech? And if we want to do that, how should we?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
It’s hugely important, and we can do it by keeping our universities really strong and developing, because they are the centres of innovation. I mean, you look at the great stuff that’s coming out, even in the course of the pandemic, most of it starts with universities. You’re going to need a strong environment for enterprise, for people starting businesses. You’ll need to invest heavily in your education system. You need to make sure that your infrastructure is fully up to date. And we have an advantage over China, which I think will find it increasingly difficult, if the more repressive position of the state starts to give people who want to start businesses and are enterprising and interested in innovation, given the sense that they can only do that within the confines of the state.
But we’re also going to have to change our way of thinking. I mean, it is to my mind absurd that we don’t already have biometric ID. Right, if you want to solve a lot of the problems that you’ve got around welfare fraud, and from welfare fraud, through to immigration, you need a system of identity and all these arguments around privacy have been completely overtaken by technology. You know, so what you may remember a few years back when DeepMind was doing that experiment in the London hospitals, and the – you know, the clattering they got from it. But in the end, of course you should be using technology and data, and there are all sorts of ways you can protect privacy. But if you’re not – we’ve got a massive opportunity with the National Health Service to be using data in a constructive way, and to fuel the next wave of innovation as a result.
So, that’s what I mean by saying it requires political leadership that’s prepared to analyse the way the world is and take the bold decisions to get there. But some of it – none of it’s going to be easy.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Around the time that you became Labour Leader, a writer from the US called Francis Fukuyama wrote a book called The End of History, in which he basically said, “Liberal democracy has won, game over.” Then you look at what happened on Capitol Hill last week, and also, the big social divisions we’ve had in the wake of the Financial Crisis. Do you think we’ve just been too complacent about the superiority of Western political systems?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
I mean, sure, yes. The question is, what have we lost that could’ve circumvented some of these issues? And, again, I’m just going to be very blunt with you about it, Jeremy. We lost a strong radical political centre. That’s the place where the best change comes from in the world today, because the solutions are not really ideological, and the problem for the West is, it got a bad dose of ideology, just at the time when the technology revolution was needing those solutions a completely – you know, out of date. Values matter, it’s not that, you know, values and ideals don’t matter, but the practical job of making your societies fit for purpose, and making sure, for example, that people’s wages can carry on rising, ‘cause you’re lifting productivity. You know, those in the end are resolved, I’m afraid, by people who understand the way the world is, and acting with the right values and making the right changes, and that’s what we’ve lost.
And, I mean, this is just my view, you know, a lot of people disagree with it, but I think the fact that the centre then became the place to protect the status quo, in an era of where people want change, it kind of corroded the centre, and it went off – you know, you can see it in our own politics. Your party went off after Brexit, my party went off after Jeremy Corbyn and, you know, hey presto, here we are.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Isn’t the critique of the centre, that Politicians who espouse centrist policies just made one really huge screw up, which is that they lost touch with a very important chunk of their electorate, whether in Britain, the US or Continental Europe? Which is, essentially, those parts of the electorate that don’t have university degrees, it’s about half of US voters, about two-thirds in Europe. And if you look at Attlee’s cabinet, for example, half of the members of that Cabinet had blue-collar backgrounds, but by the time you came to power, it was, I think, just one of your Cabinet Ministers had a blue-collar background. So, do we not need to put that right?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Yeah, a few, more than one. But I don’t really think this is correct analysis, actually. First of all, by the way, inevitably, as – you know, your Ernie Bevins today would be going to university. It’s just the way it is, right? As education improved and more and more people went to university, this was inevitable. And so, you know, people like John Prescott, Alan Milburn, were very – were bound to be exceptional by the time you start to get to that period of time. But the other thing is that, you see, the centre, to hold it, you always have to hold – for example, for the Labour Party, we always had to hold together a coalition of very traditional working-class, aspirant working-class, and the socially liberal. If you look at the – what New Labour had, it was those elements together.
And, you know, as I say, I’m always happy to take responsibility for the things that I actually did in government, but we did not ignore that working-class element when we were in government, which is why even in 2005, we retained the vast majority of those seats that have now fallen to the Conservatives. No, it was in fact the Labour Party moving away from both that aspirant working-class and traditional working-class and becoming locked into the sort of far-left, plus socially liberal, that lost us a huge chunk of our constituency. So, I think it’s – and, you know, in the end, the way that you – the centre that I’m describing, the way it keeps those people with us, is to be carrying on making change.
It’s only when it becomes the place of the status quo and just says, “Look, all these people, and we’re reasonable, and all those other guys chasing Donald Trump and Brexit, they’re unreasonable.” You’re never going to win the debate on that basis. You’ve got to be in touch with those people but showing how you can improve their lives in a practical way. And that’s, I’m afraid, what we – we lost, and that’s why for an issue like immigration, you know, all the time I will always say to people, I’m in favour of immigration into the UK. I think it’s done an immense amount for the UK. But you can’t treat it as an issue that people don’t care about or be indifferent to their anxieties. So, I would always say you’ve got to have a system with rules, otherwise you’ll get one with prejudices.
So, you know, these are the things that keep you together. That’s why law and order for me was a Labour issue, ‘cause in working-class communities, they’re the people that suffer from law and order and not the people who can afford to live in a nice part of town.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Before we move on to the audience, I just want to ask you a couple of things about the international picture, because many people think that the Western alliance has totally broken down, and you made a fascinating comment about how real alliances are actually forged in adversity. So, what needs to happen to put together the group of countries, not all in the West, actually, by any means, but who believe in open societies? And what’s Britain’s role in making that happen? Robin Niblett, of Chatham House, argued this week that global Britain is something that needs to be earned, and not declared. Do you agree with that?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Yeah, I 100% agree with that, and I think he put his finger on a very, very important point, I guess, in the sense, is the point I’m making, too. But with the G7, we’ve got a chance to do something here. I mean, you’ve got two major issues in which the West should show leadership, which is COVID and climate. Those are both issues where Britain, as the leader of the G7, can play a real part. I mean, the absence of global co-operation of the pandemic, as, you know, you and I have both said, Jeremy, has been shocking. It’s been a real abdication of leadership. And what is very clear to me now about the pandemic, is that we’re just in the new phase of it. So, you’re going to find, in the next year, I think, that we’re going to have to be adapting vaccines to new strains of the disease. And the thing that’s really changed, in my view, about the disease in the last few weeks, which is why there’s this enormous global pressure to acquire vaccines, is that most policymakers thought you would have three phases to this pandemic.
You’d have a starting phase where you lockdown, you’d then have a second phase where you have control of the disease, but were living with it for a time, and then you’d have a third phase, reasonably steady, where you rolled out the vaccine. What’s happened is that second phase has collapsed. You’re now lockdown, or mass vaccination. And so, for Britain, for example, leading the G7 at the moment, it could be mobilising how we make sure we cure some of the problems that have been exposed in the manufacturing and production, in the research and development, data surveillance. We could be plugging some of those gaps now, so that if, in the autumntime, we’re having to develop a new vaccine, or even the summer, new vaccines, in order to deal with new strains of the disease, we’re doing it far faster.
And we do it – again, Britain could play a real part in saying we can’t have a situation where the wealthy countries get the vaccines first, and the poor countries have got to wait several months later. So, no, there’s no doubt that it – the earning point is really important. I mean, I can’t tell you how often I learnt this lesson when I was Prime Minister: if you don’t commit, and committing is always painful, you don’t get anything back in return. And what often happens with Politicians and political leaders is they feel their own politics so keenly, they don’t see the other person’s politics. And I can just tell you, you forge those relationships and those alliances where your – the leader you’re sitting opposite sees you taking some pain, in order to make that alliance work. Then they’re with you.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you, and I’ve just got a couple more questions for you, Tony, and just to tell everyone else, if you want to ask a question to Tony, please type it into the ‘Chat’ function, and then I will relay those questions to Tony. But you did generously say you were happy to talk about your own record, and I wonder whether I could just ask you about a couple of aspects of that, which have some salience in modern politics. And one of them, and you talked about committing, and your probably biggest international commitment was to Iraq. And I just wonder whether you think some of the challenges we face in the Western alliance relate to a loss of moral authority from military endeavours like Iraq, but not just Iraq, Libya could be another one, which haven’t turned out as expected?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
I don’t think it’s a loss of moral authority, but what people question is whether – because I think most people who are sensible don’t question the motives behind it. I think what people question is, did it work out in the way that – what was planned? And the answer to that, is no. So, the issue, really, is what lesson do you learn from that? And I suppose, again, what I would say is you’ve got to be careful that you don’t learn the wrong lesson. You’ve got to learn the right lessons and not the wrong ones. The right lesson is that when you’re – when – and this was a lesson we learnt again with the Arab Spring, frankly. Is that when you remove the dictatorship, which has been suppressing a whole set of forces within a country for a long period of time, then once you remove that dictatorship, those forces come to the surface, and you’re in a whole new stage of conflict.
But learning the lesson, you therefore – which is the lesson a lot of Politicians have learnt, and you therefore stay out of all of these situations, well, you know, that is what means that the future of Syria today is going to be determined by Russia and Iran, who’ve, by the way, committed over ten years. And Libya, probably, I don’t know, Turkey, Russia are probably the two main players at the moment there, even though we were instrumental in removing the regime.
So, I think – no, I think the important thing is to – is, yes, of course to ensure that whatever you’re doing is done accordance with the right principles and for the right purposes, but I still think the basic point about commitment is clear. And, you know, you’re not going to be able to determine the future, for example, of what is happening – you take what I think is the next big arena, which is the Sahel, in the Northern part of Sub-Saharan Africa, where you could get new waves of extremism and migration. I mean, are the Western nations really committed to try to help that situation? Much of which, by the way, has come from the destabilisation of Libya. I’m not sure that we really are. But if we don’t, in some years’ time, we’ll be faced with the consequences of that.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Finally, from me, and before we move on to the audience, you talked in your comments about the importance of holding the country together in this post-Brexit period. Have things gone according to plan, in terms of the devolution settlement that you gave to Scotland?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Well, when I was in office, I would say that after the initial creation of the Scottish Parliament and devolution, it wasn’t really a major factor, for me, as a Prime Minister. I think what happened subsequent, and what has put Scottish independence back centre stage again, are two things. First of all, the Labour Party lost its position in Scotland completely, but I think for reasons that were avoidable. And, really, the only effective opposition that’s come to the SNP in the last decade was actually when Ruth Davidson was the Conservative Party Leader in Scotland. But that’s a whole other discussion. And the second thing was Brexit put it back on the agenda again. I mean, you know, I’m not just making a sort of crass anti-Brexit point, but, I mean, the fact is, it’s given the Nationals a whole new lease of life. ‘Cause don’t forget, there was actually a referendum in 2014, and Scotland voted to stay in the UK.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you. Well, we’ve got a lot of questions, and we’ve got to finish at 2 o’clock. But I’m going to try and get through as many as I can, and I may group some of them just to try and make sure that we can get through all of them. But let me just start with this question from Leslie Birch, who says, “It seems to me the US and UK Constitutions are out of date, and we are no longer representative democracies. Do you agree, and what reforms would you advocate on the constitutional side?”
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Are we not representative democracies?
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
This is not my question I have to say, but you know.
Rt Hon Tony Blair
I think we are, but I…
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Constitutional reform.
Rt Hon Tony Blair
But – so, I mean, to be absolutely blunt about it, I was always a sceptic that you could solve a political problem, what is essentially a politics problem, with constitutional change. Which is not to say I don’t – you know, I exclude those things and we did a lot of constitutional changes at government. But, no, I think the basic point is that politics has become deeply polarised, and in the end, democracy is not just about a form, it’s about a substance and a spirit. And you can have a form of democracy, as people casting their vote, but if one half of the country hates the other half of the country, you’re going to find, as the Americans have just found, that legitimacy starts to get challenged, even when it really shouldn’t and can’t be on any sensible basis.
And that’s the biggest worry. That’s why I say my view is the spirit of a democracy is people being prepared to disagree with each other and still be amicable with each other. And when you get – and social media, of course, itself is a revolutionary phenomenon in the political arena. When you get these violent separations and opinion, that is when democracy can be put at risk, and I think that is – I would focus more on that political challenge, ‘cause I don’t think, in the end, any amount of constitutional change could solve that. Apart from, by the way, in the American context, ensuring that they stop changing their constituency, so that they’re now just red or blue. That is going to be a huge problem for America in years to come.
But I don’t – I think there’s a political challenge here, not a constitutional one, is my honest opinion.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you. Now we’ve got a couple on international relations. [Inaudible – 42:06] from the Kuwait News Agency asks, “What’s the best way to engage with China?” And Domenic Carratu says, “David Miliband recently talked about the Age of Impunity. Given that we’re not likely to confront militarily Russia, China or Iran, do you support an interventionist foreign policy?”
Rt Hon Tony Blair
So, on the first, in my view, what we need with China is what I call a strategic framework for engagement with China, and not a series of ad-hoc reactions to individual actions of China. So, the thing we have to understand about China is, China is now a risen power, and it’s right that it is one of the big powers in the world. It’s right by dint of history, civilisation, size of population, size of economy, and now technology innovation. The problem is that, over the past few years, China has come under a much stricter and stronger control of the Communist Party again. It’s reasserted a very iron grip on the country, and that’s meant more repression internally, and more aggression externally.
In my view, the basic principles should be that we need the strategic framework, we should accept we confront China where it’s doing things that are unacceptable, or contrary to our basic values. We will have to compete with them, but this competition’s going to be natural. But we still need to co-operate with them in certain key areas. Climate is one, the pandemic is another, actually stabilising the global economy, yet another. So, there’s no way out of, in my view, that engagement with China.
The question is, what’s the best format to do it in? And in my view, there is where America and Europe should try and form a common position, and Britain can play a part in trying to reach that common position. ‘Cause the most dangerous thing would be if you have these two rival powers, America and China, and Europe starts to navigate between them. I think that would be a mistake, because, in the end, the Chinese system will have to evolve. I don’t think you can keep that tight grip on a people that’s going to become increasingly prosperous over time. So, we need to do that very carefully.
I’m in favour of intervening where it’s, you know, necessary or sensible, and where it can be done, you know, to protect our interests, but that doesn’t always mean, you know, hard military power. You know, people forget we also – apart from military interventions, we created the Department of International Development, we’ve trebled the aid budget. And, you know, our co-operation with the United States on aid brought about the PEPFAR Programme in the US, which is probably the biggest life-saving programme the Continent of Africa has ever seen.
So, you know, there are lots of different ways you can – I’ve always seen this isolationism versus interventionism, to me, it’s never been about do you put your country’s interests first, or someone else’s interests first? I’ve always seen it as part of enlightened self-interest to be prepared to intervene in the world. But, as I say, that doesn’t necessarily mean militarily.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you. Now a question from Federico Bianchi, who’s Head of Press for the EU Delegation to the UK, but it’s not about Brexit. It’s about the role of social media and disinformation, and how, in a democracy, do we balance the need to uphold our values of free speech, with avoiding being weakened or threatened, in a way that we saw on Capitol Hill last week?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Yeah, it’s a great question. I honestly wish I knew the answer to it, but I don’t. I mean, social media makes political life very, very difficult today, and it can’t really be the case that the CEOs of these companies take the decisions of who gets a platform and who doesn’t. So, I think there’s going to be – and a scenario, by the way, there’s no reason why the UK and Europe shouldn’t work together on this, to look at what is the right regulatory framework for social media. And if there’s one – you know, and I spoke a bit about Britain being a thought leader. You know, one of the good things about Britain is, you know, we tend to be, you know, most the time, quite reasonable people and, you know, we share an immense amount in common with European countries, even if we’re now out of the EU. And I think getting the right framework for this is going to be important. Because, again, to go back to the point about democracy, if you can’t exchange information in a reasonable way with some – at least some approximation between facts that are accurate, and facts that aren’t, it becomes hard to have a democratic political debate. And I think this whole – you know, I’ve been saying for a long time, this issue to do with social media, technology companies, you’ve got to take this out of the realm of that – of the corporate, and it’s got to become a public interest debate with some public interest regulation around it.
Now, quite what that is, is the thing that I think it’s really difficult. But the present situation can’t be maintained, and I think the public themselves are anxious now about the damage that social media debate does to our political system.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you. Now, this is Diego Salama from the United Nations University, and he says, “What role should the UK play in the UN, and the multilateral system in general? And how do we justify our seat and our permanent veto on the Security Council?”
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Well, you know, it’s – there’s a very strong case for the reform of the UN Security Council. But having tried to initiate a debate about this when I was Prime Minister, and simply failing to get anywhere with it, you know, I’m not sure there’s a very easy solution. ‘Cause Britain’s not thinking about its place on the Security Council, but on the other hand, of course you look at the world today and say well, India shouldn’t be permanent member of it, Germany, Japan, and then you just start running through a whole series of countries.
I think the UN system needs deep reform. I think it will be great if Britain played a part in leading that debate. But, you know, my experience with these things is they only come about when they’re forced by necessity, and I want Britain to play a – there’s no reason, outside of Brexit, why Britain shouldn’t be a strong multilateral partner, both in the UN and elsewhere. And, you know, we’ve still got even with the proposed cuts a very large, significant aid budget, and a great footprint on the ground, in many parts of the world. So, I’m happy for us to play a part in the UN and our other multilateral buddies. But I do think our multilateral system needs deep reform, and I would include the UN in that.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
And from Tom Harris, “You talked about the number of challenges that we’ve got to face, including China, and political relations with other countries. Does having a more liberal US President make that easier?”
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Well, it – American policy’s going to be more predictable, and it’s going to be more multilateral. So, in that sense, yes, I think is the answer to that. I think the only thing I think is important is that the new Administration, which has got, I mean, a lot of very talented people who were part of the Obama Administration. But, you know, the world of 2021 is not the same as the world of 2017, and I think it’s – yes, it will be easier with this Administration, but we need a lot of creativity and new thinking, as well as just being prepared to sit down at the table with all our allies and get along. And you can see this, you know, there will be some very tricky issues between America and Europe. Even if there’s a great desire all to work together, even this Biden Administration’s going to be saying, “Yeah, but come on, on China, what are you guys – are you guys with us, or are you not with us?” You know, and on NATO they’re going to be saying, “Yes, of course we’re not going to treat you like Donald Trump. But by the way, we agree that you should be increasing your defence spending.” So, I think, yes, it will be easier, because it will be a lot more predictable. But I don’t think – we shouldn’t settle back into our comfort zone. You know, that’s – that would be a mistake.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you. Now, a couple of questions, Waseek says, “What does the centre need to do,” as in I think centrist thinkers, “need to do in Britain to evolve against the polarisation of toxic identity politics being imported from the US?” And Kamina Banga asks, “Can democracies really bring about systemic change when the parliamentary term is just four to five years?”
Rt Hon Tony Blair
So, the way – you know, my view, especially for progressive politics, identity politics is a complete dead end. If you end up fighting on that basis, you’re just going to end up probably with large periods of Conservative Government. For me, the challenge for progressive politics, to put it in very simple terms, and I think the same is true, the challenge to the centre, is focus on what is the big real-world change? And the big real-world change is technology. So, technology’s going to change and should change everything. It’s going to change the way we work. Well, it already is changing the way we work. It changes the way we interact with each other. It’s going to change every single area of policy you can think of.
If you have a discussion today, even with – in areas where you don’t think of technology being the dominant thing, but you sit down with some people in the Defence Sector today, 50% of the conversation’s about technological change. You know, we’re going to have – here and round the world, we’re going to have electric vehicles that are driverless, right? We’re going to find, as artificial intelligence progresses, that whole sectors of the economy get changed massively. So, my view is, it’s rather like the 19th Century Industrial Revolution, if you look back in history, Whigs and Tories carried on arguing about old things, years into the Industrial Revolution. It took politics a long time to catch up with the real-world change, and the best way to overcome a lot of the divisions is to take this revolution and say, “Well, look, how do we make it work for people?”
How do we make sure that we can improve their lives through this, which, of course, by the way, most of this technology’s going to be enormously enabling. And that’s the thing, so you rise above the identity politics by having a unifying economic and social message, which is making this revolution work for people. And I honestly believe that those group of Politicians that understand this technology revolution, master and harness it, will be the ones that win.
And the second question was around the…
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Four to five, the short parliamentary term.
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Yeah. Yes, well, I think it’s less to do with the parliamentary term. It’s to do with – it’s to do, really, with having a clear vision, and policy, and being prepared to drive it through in circumstances – right, the thing I learnt about government is, when I was making reforms, the rhythm was almost always like this. You proposed a reform, people told you it was a bad idea, whilst you were doing the reform it was hell, and after you’d done the reform, you wish you’d done more of it. And, you know, people forget this now, but if you go back in – when Margaret Thatcher was making her reforms and be it with someone you agree to disagree. I mean, there were times when she fell into third place, you know, in the politics. And, you know, in the end, the problem today, I think you’re not going to get out of four or five-year terms. But the problem is, you’ve got to be – you’ve got to articulate a vision and then really get behind it and spend your political capital on trying to push it through. And I learnt this too late, in fact, in some ways in my time as Prime Minister, because in the end, there isn’t any change you’re ever going to make that isn’t painful, and therefore, the risk is – and this is the challenge of democracy, in a sense. The risk is, you’re so busy trying to remain popular that you just sort of keep the status quo and dabble with it here and there. When, as I say, in an era where the world’s massively changing, if you’re not adapting to that change, you just get left behind.
And I think that is the big challenge, but it can only be – it’s a challenge that’s easier to meet if you’re – you know, in the end, you’ve got to trust the people. You’ve got to have a bold, clear vision and say, “Okay, it’s going to make – mean changes, they’re going to be difficult. It’s going to be very hard going, but we’re going to see it through.” And my view is that that politics still wins, in the end. But the problem is a lot of Politicians particularly with social media battering them today, you know, they think that’s just a suicidal kamikaze type mission.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
So, we’re coming to a close, but I’ve just got three final questions, if I may? The first is from Julia Macfarlane of ABC News, and it relates directly to what you said about getting ahead of the curve on the technology debate, and she’s talking about the decision by Twitter to ban Trump. And she asks, “Should we have specialised ethics committees to decide whether or not governments should have ultimate control or regulate private companies, such as Twitter and Facebook?”
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Yeah, so my institute put out a paper on this a few months back. I mean, I think you’ve got to treat these companies to a degree as public interest companies, and, no, it can’t be right that the CEO of the company decides whether the President of the United States has a platform or not. So, you’re going to have to find some way of getting a system of regulation that is not simply driven by the views of the company. So, I think this will be – this is a big – you know, it’s a part of what is a big debate, which is how do you regulate these large technology companies that have an influence, politically, of an outsize amount? And I don’t think you can do that unless you accept, to a degree, they are public interest companies, and not just private corporates.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you, and a question from James Strong, who says, “There’s a lot of negativity in the world at the moment. What are you optimistic about in 2021?”
Rt Hon Tony Blair
You know, what I’m optimistic about is that on one level, if you see what this pandemic has posed us as a challenge, you know, we – the world has carried on functioning. I mean, it’s been tough and difficult, but I’m optimistic about the opportunities of technology, technological change. I’m optimistic, because even – you know, I spend a lot of time out in the Middle East, I see things happening there that make me optimistic. The Israel-United Arab Emirates Accords, for example, which I worked on quite a lot, and then, I spend a lot of time in Africa, which is the poorest continent in the world. Its population’s set to double.
But I feel in the countries we’re working in, okay, COVID poses very special problems. But the quality of government’s getting better, the life of the people’s getting better, life expectancy’s going up, we’re actually getting on top of the killer diseases and even though the challenges are immense, there is real progress. And you take a step back and look at the arc of the last 30/40 years, you know, the world’s lifted more people out of poverty than ever before in human history. So, I’m – I remain optimistic. I’m just not quite so optimistic as I was about Western democracy right now.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Thank you. I’m just going to exercise Chair’s privilege, if I may, and give the very final question to my ten-year-old son, John, who just wants to ask a very quick final one. So, I’m just going to let John sit in my chair. There we are.
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Hi, John, how are you?
John Hunt
Good, thanks.
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Nice to see you again.
John Hunt
Do you think the climate crisis will be over by the time I’m your age, or do you think the world is going to end?
Rt Hon Tony Blair
I think it’s going to be over by the time you’re even younger than me, ‘cause I’m now quite old. But I think the key to it will be having the ingenuity and creativity to develop the science and technology that allows us to develop sustainably. So, I was just talking about Africa a moment ago. If the population doubles, and the people will need to get the same things that we take for granted in the West, so they need electricity, and transport, and power generation and all – and building. We’ve got to help them do that in a way that’s clean and green, and you can only do that if you invent the science and technology to allow us to do so.
But we’re getting there. You know, we’re doing a lot better than we did. You know, before you were born, when I was in – the Prime Minister, solar power and wind power were considered pretty weird and not very viable things and, today, they’re a major part of our energy production. So no, I am optimistic about this, John. You will be younger than me by the time we’re on top of this issue.
John Hunt
Thank you.
Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt
Well, Tony, thank you very much indeed, and that’s been a fascinating discussion on a huge range of things. So, on behalf of me, but also on behalf of Chatham House and all our audience today, a very big thank you for your time. To the audience, we will have future interviews, and we’re hoping the next one will be with Dr Henry Kissinger, and possibly the Canadian Deputy Prime Minister, Chrystia Freeland and we’ll also have former Foreign Secretaries William Hague and David Miliband in the chair, so we hope you’ll join us for those. But in the meantime, Tony, thank you for a fascinating discussion, and some really interesting insights on the big challenges we face.
So, it’s a really weird thing, but if we could just give a virtual clap to Tony, and I will say thank you to everyone, and this concludes the session. Thank you all very much, indeed.
Rt Hon Tony Blair
Thank you. Thanks, Jeremy.
