The European Union now shows more enthusiasm for the multilateral rules of the new World Trade Organisation than the

The European Union now shows more enthusiasm for the multilateral rules of the new World Trade Organisation than the Americans. To be sure, there are some major blemishes, such as the proliferation of questionable “anti-dumping” actions against East European andAsian products. The tide of economic liberalism also flows through trade policy. However grudgingly, the French signed up for the Uruguay round of world trade talks. Another bit of the Commission is producing financial services directives which try to bring reluctant or uncomprehending governments to face the reality of global financial markets. Another socialist commissioner, Martin Bangemann, is trying to expose Deutsche Telecom and other protected state monopolies to the commercial disciplines inflicted on British Telecom a decade ago.Comparable battles are being fought at industry level to hold back a Commission bent upon opening up electricity generation and gas supply to competitive market entry. This involves educating in free-market economics a right-wing French government which is trying to shield from competition one of its overmanned, loss-making, nationalised industries, Air France.

Neil Kinnock, as Transport Commissioner, has the job of breaking open the protected, inefficient world of European civil aviation. Even the European Court is becoming proactive in promoting competition and challenging restrictive practices.The economically liberal agenda has been sharpened by the single market, which has also enshrined “mutual recognition” of standards as a less intrusive governing principle than harmonisation for integration – something the more populist sceptics, who fret about obligatory square cucumbers and single-decker buses, appear not to have noticed.The full impact of this policy revolution is only just beginning to be felt, and in ways which make a nonsense of established stereotypes. Yet something important has changed with the apparent conversion of the left to European integration, and the evolution of the Thatcherite right into outspoken and rebellious scepticism.
The change is not just striking but also mystifying, since the right is winning the argument in Europe in favour of economic deregulation and privatisation. The Commission, so disliked by the British Eurosceptics, increasingly has a liberalisation agenda.

In my view there should be no questions at all.Birt: No questions in an interview?Me: Mr Birt, thank you very much.. Whether it concerns federalism or fish, the contours of the Westminster debate on Europe remain drearily familiar: Eurosceptics versus “pro-Europeans”, Brussels bureaucracy versus British sovereignty; the same tired arguments endlessly recycled. Why is he now getting a golden pat on the back? And why don’t any modern interviewers spot this dishonesty?Birt: It may be.. Me: I’ll tell you why It’s because they’re too busy thinking of the next question Well, I’ll tell you what’s wrong with modern interviewing Too many questions Not too much aggression, just too many questions. Me: You yourself have not been exempt from this sort of thing…Birt: No, I.. Me: But the argument simply doesn’t hold water After all, the man is already in the post He was lured there by less money. When heads of national corporations get huge pay rises and millions of pounds worth of share options, the usual defence is that to get the best man, you have to pay good money.Birt: Yes… Me: If you will just let me finish what I am saying, Mr Birt, just give me a chance to put my side of the case.

Now, you regularly hear Tory ministers criticised for leaping into highly paid jobs straight from the Cabinet, often with the firms they have been dealing with.This is often defended by fellow Tories with the argument that it is good for MPs to have outside interests and to live in the real world. But this is totally irrelevant to the accusation! Going into the City after a stretch in the Cabinet is not quite the same as an MP having an outside interest, is it?Birt: No, but.. Me: Another example. You ignore the fact that nobody in publiclife is capable of telling the truth any more, or even of using an honest argument May I give you an example?Birt: Yes, but… You have complained that modern interviewers are turning politics into an adversarial soap opera long before the media came along.

He wrote back: “If I ever do a biography, it will probably be one of Pontius Pilate – my favourite character in history. He is the only really honest man mentioned in the New Testament.”Birt: I really don’t see what that has got to do with.. Me: Then let me explain. Me: He says: “Mr MacWobbly, most experts who have studied your railway scheme have concluded that it will leave our rail network mutilated and bleeding to death. What do you have to say to this consensus among the authorities?”Then he leans back for the rest of the encounter and makes it clear by his faint, cynical smile that the only truthful part of the interview has just taken place.In fact, I am reminded of something that HL Mencken wrote in 1934, when encouraged by a correspondent to consider writing a biography.