NY QUOTES USED MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO MURNAGHAN, SKY NEWS

DERMOT MURNAGHAN: So then, the Conservatives are preparing for one of the most divisive votes of this government, on gay marriage. Will it tear the Tories apart or will those who vote against it find themselves on the wrong side of history? In a moment I’ll speak to Culture Minister Ed Vaizey and former Children’s Minister, Tim Loughton. Let’s say a very good morning then to the Culture Minister, Ed Vaizey. First of all Mr Vaizey, how divided do you estimate your party to be over gay marriage?

ED VAIZEY: Well we’ll see what happens in the vote on Tuesday, various numbers have been bandied about but what I would say is that it is a good natured division, if I can put it that way. I saw the clip from the Chairman of Surrey Heath saying that he and Michael Gove his MP had agreed to disagree and I think that’s very much the tone within the Tory party and within the parliamentary party. I’ve had emails on the subject of course and a lot of them are in sorrow rather than in anger as it were. I’ve got a view, some of my constituents have a different view, I have a view and some of my fellow MPs have a different view but I don't think it’s tearing the Tory party apart.

DM: It’s interesting what you say about some of your constituents, obviously you are in touch with them and we read about this being replicated in many, many MPs constituencies, Conservative MPs constituencies around the country and that this is really affecting the grassroots, that they’re peeling away on this.

EV: Well I have emails from the constituency, some are members of my party and some are not members of my party, so it’s a range of different people, it tends to be people, you know, people have strong views on this issue and they let me have their views but we have a debate about it. I’ve had a public meeting on the issue as well but people debate in a civilised way so going back to your original point, is this going to tear the Tory party apart, no I don't think it will. I think there is a difference of opinion amongst colleagues but it is a civilised debate.

DM: So what you are saying is that you’ll be divided when you have a vote, it’s a free vote of course and you expect many Conservatives to go into a different lobby from you but after that, it will all be smoothed over and business as usual?

EV: The Tory party has been divided on issues like this before, it’s been divided on issues like civil partnerships, it’s been divided on issues like Section 28, people have different views and on an issue like this they also tend to have strong views but as I say, all I can say is from my own experience that it seems people are exchanging those views and as the Tory chairman from Surrey Heath said, agreeing to disagree.

DM: But this is a battle between, some within the Conservative party will be aware of this, that you feel it’s about the Notting Hill set, the modernisers like you who are making the calculation that it’s better to be out of touch with some members of their party than it is being out of touch with the country as a whole. Is that the calculation that the leadership has taken?

EV: I don't think that’s the calculation the leadership has taken, I think that parliament will probably pass this Bill, it will certainly I think vote with a significant majority at second reading and the people who will be voting that will be MPs representing constituencies up and down, up and down the country so I don’t think those are the Notting Hill Set at all. I think those are people that recognise that equal civil marriage is an important step towards equal rights for all people.

DM: But do you feel this is about that we’re living in a modern 21st century society and we should be on the right side of history, that’s your feeling isn’t it?

EV: No, I think it’s about doing the right thing. So equal civil marriage has come here before parliament, I support it and I will vote for it and I think it is right that people in a loving relationship have equal access to the institution of civil marriage and that’s important and what is also important is that there is a very thorough listening exercise, very important protections for religious organisations so in that sense people’s concerns that they might be forced to do things that they don’t want to support, particularly religious marriages, be protected in this Bill. I think that’s equally important.

DM: Okay but that’s an argument with some people that has not had any resonance. You use that word important an awful lot, just say for the people why it is so important at this time, at this time of deep, deep economic troubles that here is the leadership of the Conservative party going off, some people say, at a tangent.

EV: Well people always use this argument that it’s never the right time. If they oppose a piece of legislation they’ll say it is the wrong time to do this as there is so much more going on. They’re right, there is a lot more going on, the important education reforms that Michael Gove is pushing through, there’s the HS2, the biggest rail civil engineering project for over a century, there’s welfare reform, there’s police reform, there’s cutting the deficit, there’s reducing government spending – all of these things are being done by the coalition government. These are really important changes, some of which have been put off for far too long – pension reforms, the reform of state pension, very important. Equal civil marriage is not distracting the government from these important tasks, equal civil marriage will have a second reading on Tuesday, it will have a committee stage, it will go through like a normal Bill, it is not distracting the government from a huge range of very important issues.

DM: But how do you look in terms of the tactics of it all? We know that you’ve been discussing sugaring the pill for those that oppose it within your party by announcing tax breaks for married couples but apparently you’ve decided not to do that. Why not? If you do support marriage why not give people tax breaks to encourage them?

EV: Well that’s not my decision, it’s the Prime Minister and the Chancellor who decide tax policy and from what I read about what the Prime Minister said in response to that issue was that he was very supportive of tax breaks for marriage, he has made it a central plank but he is going to do it when he can afford to do it and I gather from the newspapers that it has been ruled out of the budget but I am of course not privy to all that is in the budget, only a very few people are.

DM: You know as much as me. Okay then Mr Vaizey, very good to see you, thank you very much indeed, Ed Vaizey, the Culture Minister there. Well let’s get the views of the Conservative MP, former Education Minister Tim Loughton who joins me now from Sussex. A very good morning to you, Mr Loughton, I know you listened in to what your colleague Mr Vaizey had to say there and I know you take a different view. Why is this not the time then to be discussing gay marriage?

TIM LOUGHTON: I think what Ed said was actually right, one this isn’t going to tear the Tory party apart, it’s good knocking copy in the media but we’ve got through things like this before and it’s on a free vote. But he also reeled off a whole lot of important things that the government needs to concentrate on at the moment and quite a lot of things that were in our manifesto and which made it to the coalition agreement which we’ve yet to deliver and haven’t done and yet gay marriage is something that we had no Green Paper, no White Paper, no manifesto commitment of any party to, it wasn’t in the coalition agreement and all of a sudden it is taking huge priority. It is going to take up a lot of parliament time and it is going to set MP against MP and we don’t need it.

DM: Is that your only objection to it then, just parliamentary time or do you have a fundamental disagreement with gay marriage?

TL: No, of course I’ve got a fundamental disagreement. There are three things here, the first one is process which is about why are we having this now without that mandate, there are more important things to do. Secondly though, it is all about redefining marriage. This is a huge move. For centuries and centuries and centuries, before religions and before governments, the understanding of marriage has been between one man and one woman, it’s been the foundation of family life, that’s the religious services that many of us go through but it is also the secular belief as well. This is a huge redefinition of something that has survived many, many centuries. Who are we, who is this government, who is this country, to determine, impose, nationalise a new definition of marriage which will have huge implications? Whether you agree with them or not, there are many people in this country of various different religious faiths who hold great store by the traditional view of marriage, who are very sensitive to what may happen and we need to respect that. There’s a third part of all this and it’s a what next thing because many of us just don’t believe that these protections, so called quadruple lock in the Bill, which are quite a nonsense actually if you look at them, will actually hold up in the courts and will certainly be challenged very quickly in Europe. Then you’ll have people of faith, whether you agree with them or not, who hold very seriously to those faiths, will be forced to go along with gay marriage against their will. And what about teachers? Michael Gove has been saying, oh he won’t do anything that will undermine teachers who disagree with that – well we’ve heard that before about other people and they’ve been taken to the European Court and they’ve not won. There’s a huge what next impact of all of this so it’s badly thought up legislation, it’s full of pitfalls actually as well. It’s the wrong time for it and there are many much more important things we can get on with that we can all rally behind and concentrate, making sure that the government is doing what most people want in this country and that is to sort out the economy.

DM: Okay, but then you say after all that that it won’t divide the party. Okay it may not divide the parliamentary party but what about in your constituency and in so many other constituencies where we hear that Conservative activists, who feel very strongly about this issue, are saying well look, I’m not going to support the Conservatives any more, I’m moving on or I’m going to remain inactive?

TL: There is a lot of that, this is not easy. This is an issue where people are saying why are we doing this? Why is the Conservative party doing this, why is the government doing this at this time? I didn’t go out and vote for you at the last election, or go out and help you knocking on doors, delivering leaflets for the Conservatives at the last election, to all of a sudden have gay marriage apparently as our biggest priority and we need to support it. So people are questioning, are we getting our priorities right and I have a deal of sympathy with that. So at a time when we’ve got mid-term problems in the opinion polls, that’s not unexpected, we don’t need something like this which is a free vote issue, this is not Conservative party policy, government policy setting people against each other, it’s something which is a free vote, a conscience issue, which transcends parties as well. There is going to be quite a lot of Labour MPs I know voting against the Bill next week but I haven’t seen any interviews with Labour MPs asking if they are going to be tearing themselves apart within the Labour party over it. So this is not helpful, it’s the wrong time, it’s something that we don’t need now but we are going to have a constructive and grown up debate about it and we’ll agree to disagree as Ed says.

DM: Lastly, Mr Loughton, can I just ask you as a former Education Minister, the story on the front page of the Observer newspaper today which no doubt you’ve seen, which says that sections within the Department for Education sanctioned some kind of Twitter campaign against those it deemed to be opponents or unhelpful and that you were Tweeted against, described as a lazy and incompetent narcissist obsessed only with self-promotion. Would you like an investigation into what was going on at the DFE while you were there?

TL: [Laughs] Well one, I haven’t seen the Observer this morning and …

DM: You must have seen that tweet.

TL: … and my internet has just gone down but I’ve seen some tweets. It wasn’t a tweet actually, it was a supposed DFE senior source informing a Spectator journalist. I have asked and various others have asked already the Permanent Secretary at the Department to investigate that because if that did come from somebody within the Department for Education it seriously breaches the Civil Service and Special Advisor Code, depending on where it may have come from but also I think it brings the Department for Education into disrepute so I think very quickly they need to clear that up. If they’ve got qualms against me then let’s put it on the record but I hope in my two and a half years as the Children’s Minister, I was pretty industrious. I worked hard for vulnerable children and I hope we achieved quite a lot and I think most people who know me, my record will speak for itself. It needs to be cleared up but it’s another Westminster Village story, let’s get on to the big issues.

DM: Okay, Mr Loughton, thank you very much indeed, Tim Loughton.