Iain Duncan Smith - former Conservative leader

Question: In several of the speeches that you made as leader, the Easterhouse estate in Glasgow featured prominently. Did your visit there have a big personal impact on you and your approach to social justice issues? Was it a turning point?

Iain Duncan Smith: I think it is for others to describe whether it appeared to be a turning point. For me it was as though, at last, I understood what I had been trying to figure out for some time. It suddenly became clear to me what the problem was and in some senses where the solution lay. Not what the solution was but where it lay - there is a significant difference in that statement.

So it was really a combination of Easterhouse and Gallowgate, Jim Doherty's family support group, and a mixture of Sandy Weddel at the Baptist church and Bob Holman who is a Christian socialist who has become a very good friend. I have such a high regard for him and for the others.

And what I was coming face to face with was just how bad it can be on the ground in the fourth largest economy in the world, and how little people around Britain understand what is going on underneath their own rather cosy environment - perhaps not so cosy now.

I made a speech in which I said that society is being hollowed out from within, and that too many people have a false view of what is actually going on. What is happening in so many of these inner city areas is almost a complete collapse of the vital structures that are needed to create a balanced and stable life which enables young people and children to benefit from what is available within the fourth largest economy in the world.

Therefore what is happening is there is a zone of exclusion which is growing. It isn't growing because people want it to be like that, it is growing because it infects the area around it.

Bob Holman put it to me in a way that I think is about right. He said: "The inner city is not a place, it's a state of mind."

That explains in a nutshell what is happening in our county towns and even down to large villages. You are getting massive drug abuse now, Friday night violence which is at a level you would never have expected 10 years ago, family breakdown in some of these areas that were never considered the Moss Sides of this world.

So what it helped me understand was the causes of this and then where the solutions lay.

The solutions lie, hugely I think, in the people in the community who are successful in combating this - bringing families back together, getting kids of drugs rather than teaching that there is a safe way to use them.

There are people who are demanding of their community a commitment to be different from the way that they have become accustomed to - and getting it with massive success.

As I went around the country I discovered more and more of these small community groups and charities. Some Christian-based, some not, but mostly sharing much the same set of values.

So it was a very value-based approach rather than an accommodating approach, and one which made demands, gentle though they may be, on the community.

They work together to rebuild - they don't rely on government or local government. The solution to their problem is not money from on high, though money is important, but more particularly it is structure and a commitment to that community.

A commitment to your family, from your family to the community, and from that community to the next community. It is a series of interlocking commitments.

What that told me is that fundamentally something is wrong with the way we govern ourselves. In this Westminster hothouse this is never discussed.

It is collapsing all around us and it is as if we live on an island here were we think we will never be affected because there is a big gulf between us but in fact we are being affected.

The more difficult this becomes and the greater the problems that exist out there, the more irrelevant we become to the public.

Things like 'who's up and who's down', when I was leader who was against me, who is against Blair - the public don't care. They tell me, "we are not interested in all that, it is an irrelevance to us, we don't care what goes on there because it doesn't seem to mean very much to us".

The point they were making was, "we don't think that any of you care a damn about what is going on here".

That is a shocking moment when you realise that you sit here as an elected representative when in fact you could be a million miles away from the rest of Britain.

They are not the metropolitan elite who live and work around us, and who have 'lifestyle choices'. How many times do we debate lifestyle choices? They are so different from this, they don't have choices.

They just have lives that stop. Choices aren't choices any more, they become addictions. Those addictions become collapse and in battling this a false move means that you wake up the next morning and some kid is curled up in the next corner dying of a heroin overdose.

It is like that, and when you confront it face-to-face there is a change that takes place. It is a change because you have so many things that are important from a political standpoint, and then suddenly you have new priorities and those come sharply into focus. You realise that unless we put this back together this country is in serious trouble 10 or 15 years ahead.

It becomes important to plug Westminster, and my party in this case, back in to these areas. Not to lecture and lead but to learn what is working and why the things that fail are failing.

The wastage of money from national and local government is just breathtaking. Projects, programmes, consultants, schemes, ideas from some think tank but meanwhile the battlers battle on. They succeed, or when they fail perhaps it is because they got a couple of things wrong.

We do our level best to stop this happening because we can't cope as national politicians with this multitude of different groups and ideas, so what we try to do is lock them into compartments, take them over or lock them out.

For the most part what happens is they are locked out because they don't often bid for government money. They are scared of the bureaucrat with a clipboard who arrives with targets and who says, 'you got five people off drugs last year so the target for next year is seven'.

What they don't realise is that getting five people off drugs is part of an overall programme for rebuilding the community. They might next year only get two or three off drugs, but that isn't their target. Their target overall is to get everybody off drugs but to do it by rebuilding families or structures. If they say that there is no extra money without the extra targets then you start focusing in on just that one aspect of what is going wrong, and then you lose the other work that is being done. They cease to be a community group because the community gets no real direct benefit and turns its back, then the government decides it doesn't need them any more and says 'goodbye', and the group is finished.

It happens to groups all over the country. They say they fear the hand of government, and fear the embrace even more.

Duncan Smith on the 'Westminster village'

Question: How do you go about bridging that gulf between Westminster and inner city Britain?

Iain Duncan Smith: I think it is hugely important for us to realise that our priorities need to be their priorities. At the moment they are not, and they are seldom seen as their priorities.

Things like drug addiction, family breakdown, problems concerning vulnerable children, the massive problem of crime. There is a culture out there of the gang and the gun. It is replacing, in some cases, for those kids, their families. It has all the structures of the family and it is attractive to them. We need to understand why this is happening and how to battle it.

Policy has made it really difficult for married couples to stay together financially, you need to rectify that and make it easier to make the choice easier. You need to assist those projects that help people get off drugs rather than managing it through methadone. It has become a nightmare problem in these areas where many are addicted to methadone, with young men on these replacement drugs for two, three or four years and nobody cares.

Putting families back together is the number one priority. Then understanding where our money goes and ultimately allowing these small groups to access them and being prepared to risk their failure.

It is difficult to get government and bureaucrats to risk failure, but we have to do that to get success. The parallel is small businesses, which fail more than they succeed but the success is vital.

In this sector, small charities and community groups, they do fail because they are often run by social entrepreneurs who don't always get it right. We need to understand how to help them without taking them over, and risk the fact that some are just not going to succeed.

That is what the Centre for Social Justice which I set up is doing. We have a network to swap information about what works in one community so others can avoid the mistakes.

If we learn about the things that don't work we can get Westminster politicians to understand that their size 10s trample on people's dreams.

I want my party there. Social justice is about helping people to help themselves out of these problems, not, as the welfare state so often as become, a way of dictating to them how they should live their lives.

I think naturally they will find that stability if we can find ways to help them towards it.

Duncan Smith on Conservative values

Question: That idea of individual empowerment is a traditional Conservative approach, but has there been resistance to it within the party?

Iain Duncan Smith: I think the problem, the party and I have said this, is that the problem for the Conservative Party has allowed ourselves to be narrowed down, often by our opponents who have redefined us.

Too often we have allowed ourselves to become redefined, and we have actually quite enjoyed the redefinition.

Where the Centre for Social Justice is based, Hawkstone Hall, was where William Wilberforce set up the anti-slavery movement, where Lord Shaftesbury set up the Ragged School movement and the tower is called the Lincoln Tower because President Lincoln's family donated the money to build it in memory of him because, they said, he drew all his inspiration for social reform from what took place in that building.

Those are three conservatives, so when people say to me social justice is not for the Conservative Party, I say I don't know when that stopped.

The public has grown to have a narrow view of us because we have allowed ourselves to be narrowed. We are the party only of a couple of issues.

But this isn't an ideological party, it is a party of values. So we need now to take the party and stretch it back out again, to demonstrate to the public that this element of how they live their lives is critical to us and is actually the number one priority.

Saying it isn't going to do anything because people are cynical. They need to see us do it.

That is what the Centre is all about, to demonstrate that we are on their side.

Question: Are there policies the party should adopt or change, or is it a question of getting the tone of debate right?

Iain Duncan Smith: It is a mix of everything, but it ultimately ends up with what our policy priorities are, dealing with the most vulnerable groups in society. Pensioners and children are the most at risk, particularly in these difficult areas.

So in essence it is a policy issue, but it starts first of all with a sense. The biggest problem that my party faces is that the public, when they look at us, don't have a sense that we are on anyone's side particularly.

Getting that sense of us so that they can say that the people in this party are decent people who do care, that then licenses you to talk about some of the other political issues that are often dominant.

Our problem is that no one is listening because they just don't have a sense that it really matters if they listen. They want to know that when they vote for us that we are not just good for them but good for their neighbour.

It is the 'good for my neighbour' bit that is vital if they are to get a broad sense of us. When they get that sense then, in their eyes, we become a serious party of government. So social justice is getting people to feel good about their vote, not selfish but that they have done something good and voted to improve the quality of life of the British people.

Duncan Smith on social justice

Question: Is the social justice agenda not just good in itself then but important electorally?

Iain Duncan Smith: When you do something good and for the right reasons, and I do genuinely believe this is for the right reasons, to improve the quality of life of the worst off in society, it has got to be a mission for us.

The figures show that the bottom 10 per cent have got worse off under Labour, yet people still think of them as though they are helping these groups. What we need to demonstrate is that there is a better way to do it.

So you do something good for the right reason. What you then hope is that the public sees you are doing that and gives you credit for it.

What you can't do is go through the motions presentationally because that is so venal and shallow. They are not stupid, they are tired of politicians with pet phrases. This is a real discipline, not just to get everybody to talk the language but to do it.

I would love to take some of my colleagues out to these community groups, get people to live and work there for a while.

It is utter commitment and it is hard. It is going to be unbelievably hard because you can't just say the words and move on.

I want people to commit in a very, very deep way.

Duncan Smith on the party leadership

Question: The Centre for Social Justice is hosting some speeches by the leadership candidates, is that progress?

Iain Duncan Smith: I opened it up to everybody if they wanted to do it and we are listening very carefully to what they have to say.

What is interesting is all the candidates have chosen to come and cleave to the concept of social justice which I guess is a good starting point now.

We are beginning to move, but I think we need to make that move more than just lip service. It now needs to be action.

Question: Is it fair to say that traditionally the view would have been that this is an agenda for a leader from the left of the party, but now it is an agenda for the right too?

Iain Duncan Smith: I am trying to break that down. I think the left-right division post-cold war is an irrelevance.

The press is still hooked on it but I don't think it means anything any more. What does left and right mean when the concept of communism and out-and-out socialism has collapsed?

It leaves you only with endeavour, that people look at you and want to get a sense that you are ok.

My political party now has got to be able to let the public understand not that we hate things and are against things - they have a pretty good idea about that - but what they need to know is whose side are you on? What is your positive sense? Why should we listen to you and what are you doing that makes you worth listening to?

Question: Is the agenda then also useful for convincing the public you are in touch with the modern world?

Iain Duncan Smith: It has to be, but not in the shallow sense of, for example, not wearing ties. People aren't so easily fooled. Something has to be deeper than that.

Your commitment to them has to be much deeper now. Before the cold war they would judge things in terms of left and right and when one lot fails the others come in. The public now are being much more selective and they take the view that they doesn't have to make that decision.

Duncan Smith on the general election

Question: Has the last election result helped to convince the party of your arguments?

Iain Duncan Smith: I hope so. I think what the last election proves is that elections are won and lost in the period between elections, not at the time of the campaign unless it is neck-and-neck when you go into it.

The sense of who you are has to be in place by the time the election is called because you can't give people a sense of who you are in a few weeks.

So it is a full time programme. I was trying to do it as leader. I am not leader any more but I hope the next leader will pick this up. This needs a very disciplined approach - what we say, the way we behave, what we do, who we are on the sides of, all has to be out of the same mould. This is our number one priority. To believe it people need not just to see it but to sense it, this is critical now.

Question: Is there a recognition that 'dog whistle' issues can only take the party so far and this is what needs to be focused on if the party is to progress further?

Iain Duncan Smith: I never quite understood what the 'dog whistle' thing was all about, it seems to me that it is not quite so simple as that.

The truth for the Conservative Party is that we should stop dividing people up into core voters and non-core voters. Some of the people who voted for the Liberal Democrats over the last two or three elections could, in terms of their beliefs on policy, be described as more core than the people who remained with us.

They are there because they don't feel there is another dimension. They are unhappy and uneasy with a party they feel is just not broad enough to govern across a range of issues.

Our job is to broaden that out through this process. Not because we want to be elected because if we do that they will see straight through us. It has to be because we believe this is right for Britain first and foremost.

It takes time but when people get a sense of it they will begin to give you the credit. When they give you the credit they will begin to listen to you as they will not listen to anyone they don't have any respect for. The important thing is to get that respect back.

Duncan Smith on transatlantic challenges

Question: You are planning a trip to America for a conference. Post-Katrina and the social justice issues that emerged in New Orleans, what lessons are you hoping to pick up?

Iain Duncan Smith: It is quite fortuitous that this is the first conference on social justice that will bring together elements of the key players in the English speaking world.

We have Canadian parliamentary representation, Australian, the UK - myself and David Willetts are going over - and we have got the White House attending. Senator Rick Santorum, who will be one of the key people for what happens to the Republicans over the next 10 years, is going to make the Lincoln Address.

The event is organised by the Centre for Social Justice in conjunction with the Heritage Foundation and the Sagamore Institute for Policy Research in the United States.

It is the first time that the phrase 'social justice' is being used by conservatives in a transatlantic sense. We are taking it over to America to sell the concept to them and we are finding a ready market suddenly.

New Orleans makes the point a little stronger. If Republicans in the United States want to be seen as really genuine players in improving people's quality of people's lives in areas like New Orleans then I think this is the route that they have to take.

I think there is a re-cleaving of Republicans to a concept in the mould of 'compassionate conservatism' but going much further.

It is fortuitous in the sense that we will be able to discuss issues surrounding inner city problems which New Orleans highlights dramatically - although some of the reporting on it has not been particularly good because it has missed some of the key factors. There were problems in New Orleans beyond any city in the United States.

It is very big and I think that is why the White House is wanting to take a part in this and hopefully we can interest people further.

Question: Usually when we talk of political ideas crossing the Atlantic, it is from the US to Britain.

Iain Duncan Smith: There is a flow, a two way flow, but this is very important.

I am enormously pleased that we have been able to get this off the ground even though it is only just over a year since we launched the CSJ.

While I am over there I will also be making a speech on the war on terror and Iraq, and then we shall be focussing on social justice.

I am pretty certain Rick Santorum is going to challenge his own side on this, as I am with the Conservative Party, to say that unless you re-engage with this you will lose the hearts and minds of the American people. He is a true believer in this.

It is quite remarkable that we are having the first conference on social justice that brings together conservative Australians, Americans and Britons to discuss what they all have come to agree is a problem in each of the countries.

There is this gulf that is widening, and how do you improve the quality of life for people in the worst situations.

So in a sense we have exported this but we are getting a ready audience now.

The idea that you get four sets of people coming together as conservatives to discuss social justice, you almost need to take a step back to think about it. It is phenomenal that conservatives are now seriously considering this so I am absolutely over the moon about it.

Duncan Smith on the 'third way'

Question: There has been an issue for conservatives here and in America about how they respond to the Blair/Clinton centre ground approach. Is this the way to challenge the 'third way'?

Iain Duncan Smith: I come back to the idea that left and right are almost irrelevant.

The key thing for us in Britain is that we have to regain the sense that we are effective and capable of doing these things.

What you call the centre ground I really just call common ground, the ground of people's experiences and their aspirations. We are not on that, but this takes us foursquare across it and allows us therefore to occupy territory which others have been sitting on without much effect.

We need to be there. It is not about looking for a gulf between the two parties, it is about recognising that the other party is failing and to drive them off territory where frankly they are doing no good at all.

That is our challenge, but it is a challenge based on what we believe is right. I can't stress this enough, the way to change this is to believe passionately in this and to act on your passionate belief - not because you think tomorrow the polls will change.

The important thing is that it is about making sure you are on the side of people who will genuinely change lives for the better.

If my party can understand this is what it is about then they will also understand what scale of a commitment this it. It is massive.

I am really offering them the biggest and hardest route that I could possibly give them, but it is also the most rewarding.

To do it, they have to really commit. It is a full-scale commitment, right the way to the next election and beyond. If we are lucky enough to get into government to govern this way and if not then we have to continue with this programme until people understand we mean it.

It is that moment when they wake up and say, 'I think these guys are for real, I think they are ok'. At that point we are licensed to be a potential government, but not until then.

Duncan Smith on the challenge for Conservatives

Question: Is the party now heading in the right direction, and have the leadership contenders convinced you they are true believers in this?

Iain Duncan Smith: It is very difficult to know, obviously, who genuinely believes it and who just pays lip service to it. You will only know when they become leader really.

But what is interesting is that they think it is important enough for them to come to the Centre. That sort of commitment is important.

When Ken [Clarke] came to the Centre to speak I think he learned a lot while he was listening to what we were talking about.

He said he was fascinated by a DVD we showed, with a very moving part where a woman who has been on drugs all her life, having got off the drugs talks about what it is like when you realise how much of your life you have wasted on drugs.

It is moving, and it was done without government help.

The government right now is a disaster when it comes to drug rehabilitation. We have the worst record in almost the western world, certainly in Europe.

America is better than us now at getting kids off drugs. We have no places on rehab, a few detox units. It is a mess really, an absolutely unmitigated mess.

When you think how many of the young kids in prison today are there because they got addicted to drugs. There are a high number of young offenders and re-offenders and a massive amount of it is to do with drugs, crime relating to drugs.

If you could get these kids off drugs when you get them the first time then the likelihood of them re-offending is very small afterwards.

If you leave them as addicts when they leave the prison they will either die from overdosing or they will be back on the streets again and be back in the second time around.

When someone goes back into prison twice then it is almost certain they will go in three, four, five times and it is terrible.

So learning from these groups and understanding this process is critical, and I hope the candidates do.

Question: Will that also be your key message in your address to the Conservative conference?

Iain Duncan Smith: Yes, I will be challenging the conference. The point I want to make is that I am not asking Conservatives to be something they are not. I am asking them to be something that they already are.

What I want from the Conservatives is that their politics mirrors their life, not the other way around.