This transcript is produced from the teletext subtitles that are generated live for Newsnight. It has been checked against the programme as broadcast, however Newsnight can accept no responsibility for any factual inaccuracies. We will be happy to correct serious errors.
Lord Young - will his legacy last? 16/1/02
We are joined by Lord Hattersley,
former deputy leader of the Labour
Party, and also David Miliband, MP
now, but used to head the Downing
Street policy unit, and is credited with
writing two Labour manifestos. What
do you make of his concept of the
DAVID MILIBAND MP:
I think that Michael Young issued a
stark warning of the dangers of a society
in which instead of people being born
to rule, they are selected to rule. But I
think Britain's problem today is hardly
that we've got too much social mobility,
it's that we haven't had enough. Figures
that came out last year showed that only
800 young people from the bottom two
social classes made it to university last
So we're not meritocratic enough?
We're certainly not. My argument would
be that we need more social mobility in
Britain. But social mobility is, of course,
on its own, not enough. We need to raise
up the floor as well as break through the
Is that almost the reverse of what Michael
Young was saying?
FORMER LABOUR DEPUTY LEADER
No, it's an interpretation. It's far nearer
to what Michael Young said than what
the Prime Minister says. My last
conversation with Michael Young, in
September, was, we were discussing
whether the Prime Minister would be
a meritocrat if he knew what meritocracy
produced, which in Michael Young's view,
and in mine, it's just shifting patterns of
inequality - different people being unequal
at different times, but nevertheless
a fundamentally unequal society. Michael
believed, first and foremost, in the
redistribution David Owen talked about,
in order to produce a more equal society.
That's his abiding principle from before
the war until, I guess, when he died on
So in embracing the meritocracy, as Mr
Blair has done in terms, directly, has he
therefore uncounted everything Michael
Young has been talking about?
I don't think so. I think Michael Young
had an analysis that was born of real
social analysis. He went into poor
communities and tried to get to the roots
of those problems. I think the Government
can claim credit for trying, in a way
that Michael Young would approve of,
to tackle those root causes. But as well
as raising the floor, as well as trying to
create a society that is defined by more
social equality, we also want to create a
society defined by more social mobility,
where people do have the chance to raise
themselves according to their talents.
But they would be the people that he
described as members of the "lucky sperm
No. I think we're a long way from that
at the moment. As I said before, relative
social mobility hasn't changed in over a
century in this country. We must be a
party and a movement that wants to see
more social mobility.
I don't want to make this argument
between old and new Labour because
we're both here to pay tribute to Michael
Young, but Michael's last published
article was in the Guardian in September.
It was actually criticising the Government's
lack of egalitarian zeal. So there's no
doubt at all that whilst in some senses
we need more mobility, the failure to
attack inequalities and to talk obsessively
about equality of opportunity, not accepting
to the slightest degree that there is some
concern, or should be some concern,
for equality of outcome, really was
a denial of what Michael Young
stood for. He didn't only stand for the
concept of society I've tried to describe.
That was his greatest contribution.
But the Open University was
essentially his child. He thought
of it. My first conversation with
Michael Young, nearly 40 years ago,
was Michael Young saying, "We've
got to extend this to Africa. We
can have an Open University in Africa
if we only run it off radio rather than
television." He was a man of immense
vision, always wanting to push
forward the frontier of ideas.
Equality was only one of them.
Is anyone in your party innovating
like that now?
I think that if Roy or I achieved half
in our careers of what Michael Young
achieved from outside the political line
of work itself we'd from be proud of it.
You've written twice as many manifestos,
I went to see Michael Young. I went to
sit at the feet of the greatest manifesto
writer in 1995/1996. He only had two
pieces of advice for me. He said, "Whatever
you do, keep the sentences short. And
secondly, don't take any risks because we
have to get rid of the Tories."
He did take great risks in 1945. Herbert
Morrison, head of policy in charge, didn't
want to include the promises to nationalise
the public utilities, and Michael Young,
unbelievably, in connivance Ian Mikardo -
two more dissimilar men it's impossible
to imagine - actually persuaded party
conference, Michael Young behind
the scenes and Ian Mikardo with a rousing
speech on the conference floor, that
we ought to take the public ownership
of utilities very seriously and take them
as nationalised companies. He was
pushing the frontiers a bit to the left.
How do you reconcile the fact, David
Miliband, that on the one hand he was a
Socialist and on the other hand he
founded the Consumers' Association,
which some people said was very
non-Socialist and pro-individualist thing
I think Michael Young was committed
to empowerment. He saw that empowerment,
both of consumers and even of children.
His views on education were centred on
the idea you should empower children.
There wasn't much teaching involved in
his view of education. I think that
notion of empowerment, of popular
empowerment, be it of consumers or
employees, because I think he was
very committed to employee share
ownership, as well. That idea fits very much
within the Socialist and Social
But the people who do that kind of
thingżIt was famously said of him,
he wasn't suitable for the front bench
position. Do you think that was fair?
No, he would have been wonderful in
the House of Commons because he
was a very good, though rather quiet
speaker. But he could construct sentences,
which is the essential requirement of
people in the House of Commons. Not
everybody possesses it, but it's an
essential requirement. His views on
consumer power were very much related
to wanting to pat it down from the
articulate middle classes. He worked for
me when he became director of the National
Consumer Council when the consumer
business was nationalised. His entire
operation was trying to think of ways
of empowering the working classes, who
are normally inarticulate and therefore
got pushed around.
Thank you both very much.