10/01/2012 BBC News at Ten

Tonight at ten, the Scottish Government names a date for a

referendum on independence. As tensions rise between London and

Edinburgh, the autumn of 2014 emerges as the the SNP's choice.

They should leave this to be a referendum that is made in Scotland.

Leave it to the judgement of the Scottish Parliament and the wisdom

of the Scottish people. A warning that no valid referendum

can take place without Westminster's approval.

The Scottish Parliament does not have the power to carry out a

referendum of any kind to do within independence -- with independence.

We will have the latest from Westminster and Holyrood.

Also tonne: Official approval for a new high-

speed railway from London to Birmingham initially, but it is

highly controversial. The infrastructure for rail or

travel at the moment is creaking. We have to move forward. It is

about the monumental outlay of money when the country is in dire

strait. In Syria, a defiant message from

the president. And where TV meets PC. It is the

In sport on the BBC News Channel, Mark Hughes is confirmed as the new

Good evening. The Scottish Government has named

the autumn of 2014 as its preferred date for a referendum on

independence. The announcement sets the First Minister, Alex Salmond,

on a collision course with David Cameron who wants the vote held

sooner rather than later. Mr Salmond said it was the most

important decision facing the Scottish people for 300 years and

it couldn't be rushed. From Is Scotland set to leave the United

Kingdom? Tonight, a possible departure date as Scotland's First

Minister dismissed claims by UK ministers that his planned

referendum was illegal. The date for the referendum has to be the

autumn of 2014. That's because this is the biggest decision that

Scotland has made for 300 years. If you are going to do things properly

and allow the proper processes to take place and have that debate in

the way this must be had then that is the date that we're going to

move towards. So I can understand that perhaps they haven't

throughout about these things, but they must resist the testimony

testimony the temptation to interfere.

In the Commons, the Scottish Secretary said Mr Salmond was

exceeding devolved power. He offered to resolve that, but with

strings attached. I think we should have this

referendum sooner rather than later. The legal uncertainty, the economic

uncertainty is bad for Scotland. It is bad for individuals whose jobs

are at the stake. Let's get rid of that uncertainty and what we're

offering here is to work with the Scottish Parliament and the

Scottish Government on behalf of the Scottish people so that we can

indeed get on with that big decision which none of us will make

anything bigger in our lives about whether Scotland should remain part

of the United Kingdom. If the referendum is in 2014, the

UK Government wants a straight question.

And UK ministers say the Electoral Commission should run the ballot,

not a new Scottish body, as proposed by Alex Salmond.

So tonight in two parliaments, Holyrood and Westminster, a

political battle is underway over how the referendum should be

conducted. A prelude to the much bigger conflict still to come over

the future of the 300-year-old Parliamentary Union between

Scotland and England. One legal expert said what matters is the

popular will. A democratic State has never

ignored the result of a referendum. So even an advisory referendum is

something which would carry its own political momentum and force the

hand of London into negotiations. I don't see any alternatives to that.

The Scottish Cabinet has signalled the start of the referendum process,

but will that be tested in the court of public opinion or the law

In a moment, we'll hear more from Brian Taylor in Edinburgh, but

first Nick Robinson is at Westminster. Nick, just to ask

where this leaves David Cameron tonight and how Westminster views

the stakes? Well, a clear message was sent from this Westminster

Parliament to the Parliament in Edinburgh today, Huw. And it was

this, talk to us about how to organise, not just a legal

referendum, but a referendum that is clear that, is fair, that is

decisive or we will see you in court. In other words, it could

herald what we heard today a unique, a first and historic clash in front

of the Supreme Court, just a few hundred yards away from this

Parliament over the respective powers of those two parliaments.

Westminster's case is very simple - when powers were devolved to the

Scottish Parliament, what was not devolved was the power to determine

their own constitutional future. That was technically legally what

is called a reserved power. The case being made in Edinburgh, I

believe, is simple - we can ask the Scottish people whatever we like,

whenever we like. The Prime Minister knew, of course, by doing

what he has done, he would play in one sense into Alex Salmond's hands

who would complain about an English Tory-led Government trying to

dictate to the people of Scotland, but his view was simple that he was

not going to allow the cannyest political operator in these isles,

Alex Salmond, to dictate not just the date of a referendum, but the

choice of question, including for example not just independence, but

the idea of devolution max and even who got to vote, 16 and 17-year-

olds not just 18 and above. He was not going to allow Alex Salmond to

dictate all that and determine that what is currenty the United Kingdom

would be divided on his terms. Let's turn to you Brian, we will

say straightaway, there is little sign of potential compromise today

if you look at the statements, but how do you think Mr Salmond and his

colleagues will handle this from now on? You are right about the

absence of compromise. The Scottish Secretary, Michael Moore smiled

wrilily when he said he was welcoming Alex Salmond's statement.

He knows, of course, that it is rather an act of defiance and an

act of disdain. Alex Salmond is saying he proceeds with his own

plans regardless of the views and the advice expressed from

Westminster. Might he he move, I think he might to some extent. It

is possible the Electoral Commission's status would be

recognised as the body to supervise and scrutinise and run the

referendum, but as of tonight, Alex Salmond is making no concessions,

giving no ground. He says he has the mandate and the authority

regardless of what Westminster says. Brian, thank you very much.

Brian Taylor there for us and Nick Ministers have approved what is

described as the biggest extension to the rail network since the

Victoria era. A high-speed rail network initially linking London

and Birmingham is meant to be ready by 2026 with extensions to

Manchester and Leeds after that. The bill for the entire project is

put at �33 billion, but ministers say the economic benefit is worth

it. Extra tunnelling was announced in response to environmental

concerns as Richard Westcott High Speed Two will be the longest

major new railway line for over a century. A a fleet of 220mph trains

cutting half an hour of a trip between Birmingham and London. It

is designed to take the pressure off Britain's busiest lines. It is

not just going to create the passenger capacity that we need,

the connectivity between our major cities that we need and the speed

that we need, it will support jobs, growth and pros and prosperity for

Britain. Super fast trains need straight track and that led to a

controversial route. Beginning at a rebuilt Euston Station in London,

where commuters and residents face years of disruption. It travels

north across some of England's prettyest countryside in the

Chiltern Hills. Extra tunnels have been added to calm fears. But for

protesters in one pub, it is not enough.

It is about the monumental outlay of money when the country is in

dire straits. The world is in dire straits, but we are in dire States.

We are talking about us. This will cost �1500, �1700 for every family

in England. Trains continue north passed

Warwick and Coventry to Birmingham where there is more support.

Good afternoon, how is it going? This businessman thinks it will

make the UK more competitive. If you look at the modern railways

today around the world, I travelled in China, I travelled in Europe and

what I see there is the ability to get it from A to B in short time

and that's really what is key to us here.

Next up, the Government wants to extend the line to Manchester and

Leeds. Total cost nearly � �33 billion. Stage one alone could

create 40,000 jobs and the Government says for every �1 it

spends, the economy could make up to �2.50 back. But some experts

question the way the Government has come up with its figures.

They have made an assumption that the travel time is wasted time and

that in fact people do nothing when they are travelling. Now they have

laptops and iPads and do productive work.

The UK does already have a high- speed rail line linking up Kent and

London and we're doing about 140mph on that train now. But the new

trains will be travelling at least 85mph faster than this. There is a

long way to go yet. MPs need to vote it through Parliament and even

without delays, it will be 14 years before the first passengers are

The Welsh Government says it will pay to replace PIP breast implants

for women who were treated privately. Last week they said only

NHS patients would have the implants replaced. It is thought

the measure could affect around 2,000 patients, but the Government

in Cardiff has set conditions on the offer. Women must prove they

sought redress from their private care provider and be resident and

In Syria, President Assad has blamed a foreign conspiracy for the

unrest and violence of the past year. In a defiant two-hour speech

he promised to use an "iron fist" to crush what he described as

terrorism. The main opposition, the Syrian National Council, says the

anti-government protests will continue and that more civilians

were killed today. John Simpson has It was a moment that people all

over Syria had been waiting for anxiously. This was only the fourth

time President Assad had spoken to the people like this since the

troubles began last March. Would he show a hint of compromise? Might

there be some way forward out of the conflict?

APPLAUSE He seemed relaxed enough as he came

on to the stage at Damascus University, almost like a candidate

up for election. His audience of hand picked loyalists represented a

definite body of opinion in Syria, people scared that the

demonstrations will end in the violent break-up of the country.

Most of the cities whose names are on the wall behind him have seen

demonstrations, but there was to be TRANSLATION: Our priority now is to

regain the security that our country has enjoyed for decades.

This can only be achieved by hitting the terrorists with an iron

fist. There will be no leniency for those using weapons to kill our

civilians. And yet, the demonstrations continued today,

there we have not been able to verify these pictures. According to

the opposition, 35 people were killed today alone. Arab League

observers currently inside Syria watched President Assad's speeches

as carefully as anyone. He was not complimentary about their mission.

TRANSLATION: De Arab League is just a reflection of the Arab situation.

If the Arab League had failed for six decades towards Arab interests,

we should not be surprised that it has failed to Dave. But who is

influencing President Assad to keep on cracking down on the opposition?

Hardliners in his own circle, certainly. But Syria's last major

friend in the region is Iran. And false like this worked in Iran

itself back in 2009. There were huge protests against a highly

questionable result in the presidential election. Eventually,

the demonstrators in Tehran and elsewhere were hammered into

submission. Just keep on toughing it out, Iran will be telling

President Assad, and you will succeed as well. But the crackdown

has not been enough so far to cow the demonstrators. Though, equally,

they have not yet made a decisive breakthrough. Today's speech

changes nothing. It is still Coming up on tonight's programme:

On the road to the White House, potentially. We report on today's

Now, in his first major speech of the new year, the Labour leader Ed

Miliband says his party has to change if it is to win the next

election. The approach that brought Labour victories in the past, he

said, would not work in a very different economic climate. The

speech was seen as an answer to critics of his leadership.

What is Labour for if it cannot spend money? That is the question

Ed Miliband set out to answer today. In government, he was able to

promise more cash for hospitals and schools. Well, no more. He

presented himself as a man who understands that his party must

change, finding new ways to help the least well-off in a time of

austerity. Whoever is the next Prime Minister will have a deficit

to reduce and less money to spend. That has profound implications, not

just for our country, but for my party as well. So, if he could not

protect the winter fuel allowance, he would force energy firms to cut

prices for pensioners over 75. He would make train companies keep

fares down on all of their routes. He would keep tuition fees low, he

says, by raising business taxes on banks. As for David Cameron's

claims that the Government was tackling irresponsible bosses...

say to the Prime Minister, who are you trying to kid? Nobody is going

to believe you came into politics to end crony capitalism. But now

that he has accepted that this is the battleground of politics, I say,

bring it on. But can that message will win over voters in seats like

Hendon in north London? Labour lost it at the last election and it

needs to win it back if it is to return to power. Ed Miliband knows

that come the General Election he will not be able to promise more

money to places like this. Instead, he will have to convince people

that he can fix the economy, while also helping those struggling to

make ends meet. The question is, is anybody listening? At this

playgroup, mothers said that Ed Miliband was right to focus on what

he calls the squeezed middle. But can he make things better? I very

much hope so. I don't know that he is the leader that we are looking

for, though. I think you need a leader with a real charisma. Tony

Blair had a number of issues, but he certainly had the charisma to

lead. The message is going the right way, but it is whether he can

deliver on what he says he can. recent days, Ed Miliband has faced

criticism from some of his party. His aides insisted the speech was

no relaunch of his leadership. But the polls are still pretty bleak.

Amongst Labour voters, only 54% are satisfied. 83% of Conservative

voters say they are happy with David Cameron. Basically, nobody

has become Prime Minister as leader of the opposition with these

ratings. Today's speech was billed as Ed Miliband's answer to critics

who say that he must do more to make Labour credible on the economy.

Some wanted to go still further. Even he admits he is yet to win the

argument. The race to win the Republican

nomination for US President has reached New Hampshire, the first

primary in the Republican nomination process. The eventual

winner will be taking on President Obama in November. Voting is under

way and polls are showing a slight fall in the lead enjoyed by Mitt

Romney. The New Hampshire contest is being watched very closely for

the way that deep economic concerns will affect the result.

Bonfire Night, New Hampshire style. No guy is thrown on the burning

pile of Christmas trees, but to listen to the Republicans roasting

President Obama, it is something of a surprise he is not burnt in

effigy. Candidates are fired up, even though this contest could go

on for months. Republicans in all 50 states should get to vote. But

these are early ones can make or break a campaign. They are all

arguing Obama's handling of the economy hasn't just been wrong, it

is un-American, leading the country down a ruinous road. We have a

President who is probably the most radical President in American

history. I think he takes his inspiration from the social welfare

states of Europe. He wants to make as an entitlement Society, where

government takes from some to give to others. You want to know what is

crushing business? This administration is crushing business.

But how do those extremely strong charges against the President play

with American voters? Particularly in a place like New Hampshire,

comfortable and prosperous, with lower unemployment and less poverty

than many other states. New Hampshire is filled with towns with

English names like Newmarket, Portsmouth and Manchester. Its

wealth was built on textile and paper mills. Manufacturing has

declined, but the new money spinner is tourism. This is Waterville

Valley, in the White Mountains. Republicans who feel America is on

a slippery slope want to reverse the slide, with tax cuts, less

government and red tape. The resort owner, from a well-known republican

family, says that Obama's policies are hurting his business. If I

don't know what the regulations are going to be, if I think government

is going to be too overbearing, I have to hold my cash, I cannot

expand will be creative, I cannot give my employees the benefits they

might need because I don't know But even in these hard times, to

some, harmony is more appealing than discord. The middle-aged crowd

taking in this band seemed middle of the road as well. Republicans

here do not seem to share the candidates' anger at Obama's

economics. They are saying things just to get elected. I think they

are saying things that are crazy, they don't mean it, but they have

to say it does to try to get the nomination. Well, they are

Republicans. I personally say... You La Repubblica? I am, but I

consider myself a liberal Republican. -- you are republican?

A lot of them running are too conservative. Polling is well under

way in a contest where harsh language is all about exciting the

party faithful, not winning the Lord Leveson, running the inquiry

into press standards, has given the first indication of his own

thinking after several weeks of taking evidence. He says it will

not be possible to change the way that newspapers are regulated by

just tinkering around the edges. Today's witnesses included editors

from the broadsheet press. They are titles at the top of what

used to be the broadsheet end of the newspaper market, anxious about

recent failings but as concerned as tabloid colleagues at what they see

as the threat to the freedom of the press. This was the assertion from

Lionel Barber, editor of the Financial Times. I strongly believe

that there is a public interest in freedom of expression itself.

after the phone hacking scandal, he said the industry had to change.

All of us, and I speak for myself, believe that, as a result, we need

to change the way we do business. Then from Lord Leveson, some

significant clues about how his mind is thinking. First, he doubts

the durability of wake-up calls. You will understand my concern that

there have been wake-up calls in the past and everybody has woken up.

And then it has all drifted off again. Lord Leveson suggested that

the press's problems might require a substantial remedy. It will not

be good enough, in my present view, and I am obviously listening and

will continue to listen with great care to everything everybody is

saying, but it will not do just to think that one can tinker around

the edges. As well as recognising its strengths, Lord Justice Leveson

asked to recommend remedies for the industry's problems. Ditching by

his Commons today, he seems to favour an organisation which is

independent, independent from the media and, importantly, from

government, to regulate the Now, the way we watch and use

television is set to be transformed in the years ahead thanks to

massive investment in new technology by big manufacturers.

The traditional function of the set in the corner of the living room is

changing. Television is becoming fully connected to the internet,

harnessing the full potential of the World Wide Web. This report

San Francisco, the gateway to Silicon Valley, where so much of

the technology which has changed our lives has been born. I had come

to see how the software firms here plan to transform another industry.

The internet revolution has been slow to hit television. Silicon

Valley believes it can now change our relationship with TV. One small

San Francisco software company, Dijit, has a big idea. Here is the

problem. Today is television have almost too much choice. Lots of

material and the form of movies, programmes, sports and so on. Lots

of set-top boxes. And all of these remote controls to get access to

the material. What if we took all of them away and replaced them with

one second screen, which would enable us to control access to all

of this television? Dijit believes this second screen, whether a

tablet computer war smartphone, can make choosing what we watch and