29/09/2013 Sunday Politics Scotland

Maureen, folks. Welcome to the programme. David Cameron should out

his scheme to help house-buyers. Is he merely stoking a new house price

bubble? As the activists gather in Manchester for their party

conference, we will have the results of an exclusive survey of Tory

councillors. I will be speaking to William Hague. Ed Miliband has made

headlines with his pledge to freeze energy prices for 20 months but as

the new policy stack? Caroline Flint to intimate. -- joins me. And on

Sunday Politics Scotland: A plum slot for the Scottish Conservative

leader at conference - speaking before the PM. Do the Tories "get"

Scotland ahead of the referendum? With me are a trio of top political

commentators. All three will be With me are a trio of top political

tweeting their thoughts, or in some cases just their thought through the

show, using the hashtag #bbcsp. The Conservative Party conference gets

under way in Manchester this afternoon. We have already been

bombarded with a series of policy announcements, a tax break for

married couples of up to £200 per year, more money on life extending

cancer treatments and, last night, the news that the second stage of

the Chancellor's Help To Buy scheme will start next week. That is

brought forward from the start of next year. David Cameron says it is

all about helping hard-working people. Right now, you can't get,

it's very difficult to get, a 90% or 95% mortgage. That means a typical

family with two people earning 20,000, 25,000, they are being

asked, to buy an average house, they 20,000, 25,000, they are being

are being asked to find a £40,000 deposit. They can afford the

mortgage payment, but they can't get the mortgage. They can't buy their

flat or house. As Prime Minister, I'm not going to stand back while

people's aspirations to get on the housing ladder, to own their own

flat or home, is being trashed. That is why we need to act. A predictable

attempt by party leadership to kick-start the conference with

eye-catching policies. The polls show a big bounce for Ed Miliband

and the Labour Party, with decent numbers for UKIP. What do party

activists think about David Cameron's leadership and the

challenge posed by UKIP? Adam Fleming has been meeting Tory

councillors as they travel to their party conference.

For the Conservatives this weekend, all roads and trams lead to

Manchester for their party conference, and as a scene setter we

asked ComRes to survey councillors are Finland and Wales. Councillors

asked ComRes to survey councillors like Tom, packing for conference at

home in Wellingborough. Immigration is an issue for him. He thinks there

are pros and cons. But we found that 54% of his colleagues feel

immigration has had a negative impact on the UK. I think it

reflects into this wider issue of our relationship with Europe. People

are very concerned about the possible influx of ovarian and

Romania emigrants. Obviously the issue of Europe is very big. --

Ukrainian. His colleagues in Corby are worried about the rise of the UK

Independence Party. In our survey, nearly a quarter of Conservative

councillors thought that their party should make a pact with UKIP. The

concern is, yes, will they take votes away from ourselves in 2015?

If that happens, maybe we don't get back in. Maybe a partnership is the

way to go. It depends what they want and we want. But we should be

talking about them. A pact? Depends what they say, anything is possible.

What would you like to see? Ideally, from my point of view, a national

pact. David Cameron arrived in Manchester last night. Around the

same time as these activists from London. I broke the news to them

that in our survey just 26% of Tory councillors think that the prime

ministers in touch with the lives of ordinary people. The same at all

Conservatives, you don't judge people by their background. It's not

where they come from, it is where they are going to. It is not a

where they come from, it is where problem that he is a bit on the posh

side? Cull you might describe him like that, I would not use those

words. Explain your T-shirt, it is a phrase that a senior Cameron person

is alleged to have used about you? It is a humorous way of letting the

party now that we are here to say what we think. Members are

important. We are not going away any time soon. A sentiment you will hear

a lot at this conference, because just 22% of councillors in our

survey said that David Cameron was any good at listening to the people

that work hard for his party. That was Adam. Joining me now from the

Conservative Party conference in Manchester, Foreign Secretary

William Hague. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Good morning. Over one in

five Tory councillors in our survey support a pact with UKIP at the next

election. Why do you think that is? If it is one in five, it means a

large majority did not want a pact with UKIP at the next election. They

have noticed that UKIP, in local elections, has been receiving votes,

some of which would otherwise have been for the Conservatives. I think

we have to make sure that people understand that at a general

election they are choosing between a Conservative and Labour Government,

as David Cameron as Prime Minister or Ed Miliband. If people want to

get a referendum on Europe, the only way to do that is to have David

Cameron as Prime Minister. I think a general election is different from

the local government perspective. It is pretty unusual, some might say

unprecedented, for a large chunk of one of the big parties in this

country to want to go into coalition one of the big parties in this

with a smaller party before an election. When has that ever

happened? Looking at your survey, three times as many didn't want to

do that. As ever, with a survey, with statistics, you can highlight

it whichever way around you want to. The point is, we are not having

pacts with other parties, electoral pacts with other parties. You rule

it out? That is not going to happen. What we do want is to have a pact

it out? That is not going to happen. with the voters, if you like, as we

have often done in the Conservative Party. We have won over the voters

of other parties to support our policies and Prime Minister. That is

important with those people that say they want to vote for UKIP. By

default, they would produce a Labour government in the exact opposite of

many of the things they intend, if they would otherwise vote

Conservative and decide to vote for UKIP instead in a general election.

That could help to produce a Labour government. The chairman of the 1922

committee, the elected voice of Conservative backbenchers, he says

your party should spell out what had once back from the European Union

before next year's European actions. Do you agree? We will be spelling

out some things in the European elections. I will be talking about

this later on today. For instance, about the need the UK and the

European treaties the concept of ever closer union, a concept that in

Britain we have never really believed in. We would like that to

be changed, with all of the consequences that would flow from

that. We will be setting out the examples and principles of the

changes we want to say. Certainly over the next year, not only before

the European actions but the general election, if you are saying, let

have the exact list of anything that we are going to be able to

negotiate, that is difficult because there will be a negotiation of a new

deal in Europe if David Cameron as Prime Minister after the next

election. To some extent, that has to be negotiated. Only 11% of your

own councillors feel that people in their area think that George Osborne

is in touch with ordinary people. Why is he seemed to be so aloof? It

is not for me to explain why people say what they say in surveys. The

important thing is what we are delivering for the country. What

George Osborne is delivering his renewed economic growth. 1.4 million

new jobs in the private sector, help for hard-working people, by reducing

the tax for 25 million of them. The Help To Buy scheme that we are

highlighting today. That is what really matters to people, actually,

I think you will find. Let's talk about helping ordinary people. Ed

Miliband is guilty freeze energy prices. What are you going to do

about energy prices, we already asked energy companies to put people

on their lowest tariffs. This has not been amended. -- implemented.

Why not? This is going to happen within this government. It is going

to happen within this government when the... Why hasn't it happened

now? People are suffering now from rising energy prices. It has not

happened because my colleagues have been implimenting it. In the case of

Ed Miliband's policy, if you are asking why it has not yet happened

under this Government, it didn't even survive a few our's scrutiny in

opposition. In a few hours he had to concede that if there was a big

change in oil prices then the policy would not work. The trouble is, it

would dry up some of the investment in the energy industry. I don't

think it is a credible promise. For a party that presided over council

tax bills doubling in the next government, -- last government, it's

not very credible. Why is George Osborne going against the European

Union to protect banker bonuses? Well, we don't want to see the

European treaties used in a way that they should not be used. It's not

necessarily over this particular issue. It is over the power that the

European Union has over our lives and over this country. Can the

bankers look after themselves? We should be able to decide those

bankers look after themselves? We things in our own country. We have

never signed up to such matters in European institutions. If you allow

one thing that wasn't meant to be decided to be decided, you find

one thing that wasn't meant to be there are another ten or 20 things

that affect many other people. We are very vigilant about what we call

competence creep, with the European Union taking more powers than it was

meant to have. That is one of the reasons why people do want a

referendum, do want a new deal in Europe. That is what we intend to

give them. Let's look at in competence creep. A big city

institution, ICAP, fined for fixing the LIBOR rates. The founder of that

company has donated £5 million to your party. Shouldn't you give it

back? Aren't you ashamed to accept that money? He has donated his own

money to the Conservative Party. Which he made out of ICAP. As people

have to other parties, people are free to do that and they should be

free to do that. I am not aware of any plan for that to be repaid.

Because you can't afford to. Let's recap this. We have seen Tory MPs

parrot propaganda lines from the energy companies this week. We have

the Chancellor going to court energy companies this week. We have

fight for unlimited banker bonuses. We have a top Tory donor the centre

fight for unlimited banker bonuses. of yet another city scandal. Ed

Miliband is right when he says you lot are on the side of the vested

interests so the rich and powerful, isn't he? Well, again, look at the

record. I just did! 1.4 million extra jobs in the private sector, 25

million people with a tax cut, a Help To Buy scheme which is going to

help so many people, particularly young people have the house that

they need and deserve for the future. Council tax bills held down,

welfare reform so that it pays to work. Actually, this is a government

achieving things for hard-working people and that will be highlighted

to this conference. While President Laugharne he's

talking about peace, the Iranians are speeding up their nuclear

weapons programme. -- is talking. It would be hard to say from week

to week whether it is speeding up or slowing down but they are

continuing with it. That is why we say the new message - the new words

- from Iranian leadership are very welcome. I said that to the Foreign

Minister in New York over the last few days but it is the actions that

will count. At the moment, the nuclear programme continues. We

have agreed to commence negotiations on that and that will

be a very important test as to whether actions will match the

words. When will we know it if we are being strung along? He has

strung as a long in the past as a nuclear weapons negotiator. When

will we know if he is not just doing that again? Over the next few

weeks, it will be a very important time. He has said there should be

more transparency over the Iranian nuclear programme. It is not

transparent in many regards at the moment. The atomic agency is asking

for information that is not being given. One test is, in the coming

weeks, will they give more information? The information that

the international of authority is asking for about their nuclear

programme. We will be able to form a view of this in the coming weeks

or months. It is important we test their new willingness to talk to us

and negotiate with us. It is important to find out whether they

are serious about it. You are asking, is the nuclear programme

really continuing? Are they really going to be realistic about

negotiations and offer something they have not offer before?

Speaking of being strung along, what sanctions would President

Assad face if, in six months - the Year, Syria still has a chemical

weapons arsenal. In the resolution we voted through the UN Security

Council on Friday night, is the commitment that the Security

Council will take measures under Chapter seven of the UN Charter in

the event of non-compliance. Does that allow full force? I did not

catch that. Does that allow for force? It is similar to the

Security Council resolution about Iraq, which most people concluded

in not allow full force. It does not specify that. It talks about

terms seven of the charter. That is a message of the whole UN Security

Council that there will be measures - there will be consequences - if

the Assad regime does not comply. Russia has a lot riding on this. It

has a big commitment. I have spent a lot of time at my Russian

counterpart over the last week. Russia has said, this is something

you will have to do. We will work with Russia and others very closely

to check there is compliance will this resolution. Given the progress

that has been made, you must be very glad that the British House of

Commons stopped your rash to force against Syria. -- rush. The reason

Commons stopped your rash to force has happened is because there was a

credible threat of military action. President Obama did not get it

through Congress. They have not had the vote in Congress. There is no

other explanation as to why the policy changed. It was because

there was a debate about military action in the West that the policy

changed on theirs. That is why it changed. We were not in a rush for

military action. The boat put to the House of Commons was to have

another Aotearoa after the inspectors reported. It was before

we got to that point that the inspectors reported. It was before

Russian and Syrian policy changed. We need to make sure that works in

practice. Thank you. What do you make about this rushing forward

with the help to buy scheme which was meant to start next year -

coming forward mad to the next couple of weeks? I think it is a

terrible policy. The Treasury Select Committee, Perez a

fundamental problem with the Government having an interest in

mortgage lending. -- there is a fundamental problem. It should have

been set much lower to exclude London and the South East where

houses are dramatically overvalued. Many economists think freezing

energy prices is a terrible policy. These policies can be popular. If

you have no chance of getting a deposit, the Government will make

that possible because it will guarantee a big chunk of the

deposit. Do not forget George Osborne tried every single lever.

It looked like he could not do anything to get the economy moving.

It is moving. They have pulled it forward and there are signs it is

recovering. The reason why they are doing this is they want to show

this week at the conference there are real sort of understandable

issues you can explain very simply that really up going to improve

people's lives. The Conservatives were slightly spooked by Ed

Miliband's speech last week. The language used by David Cameron this

morning was that the tax policy was nuts. Much more cautious and --

language about the energy price freeze. They are nervous that Ed

Miliband may be touching a nerve on that one. What we will get this

week, I suggest, his Tory populism to counter Miliband populism. I

week, I suggest, his Tory populism think we will see that and it will

be a mistake. As long as it is think we will see that and it will

about The Picture, they are on relatively strong ground. When the

political conversation changes to more fiddly things, particularities

of energy prices or living standards, things that are some way

below that picture, I do not think they can win a bidding war with the

Labour Party. It is about borrowing against a party that stands for the

rectitude at a macro economic against a party that stands for the

It is about getting the conversation back to where

It is about getting the before the Labour conference, which

is unemployment, GDP growth and the warming economic picture. That does

not pay energy bills. Does not sound that the Tories have anything

not pay energy bills. Does not to counter the price freeze. -- it

does not sound. They have had a week to think about a great attack

line and they do not add anything. They have just said, the lights

will go out. Now they're saying, it will not

the credibility test. Ed Miliband said, if there were a big spike in

energy prices, he would not be able to keep his freeze in those

circumstances. to keep his freeze in those

credibility test. It to keep his freeze in those

politically acute announcement but it is about credibility. Being seen

as serious and grown-up is worth it is about credibility. Being seen

more than any burst of popularity. My worry about the announcement is

more than any burst of popularity. with the election campaign, it

begins to lose credibility, begins to seem a banana republic. It looks

a lot less wise than it did last week. I disagree. Every time energy

bills go up and they will continue to go up, it will be a reminder of

how much people are being hit in the pockets. People know by energy

prices are going up. There is a structural change in the world that

was not there before - China and India. These energy companies may

be making huge profit but, at the end of the day, what is driving up

the cost of fuel is China and India. Ed Miliband, great man that he is,

I am not sure he can take on the people Sammir on that one. How dare

you! -- the People's Army. Ed Miliband came out fighting at

Labour's Conference in Brighton last week. Dogged by criticism over

the summer of his leadership style and lack of policies, Mr Miliband

tried to demonstrate his strength of character with a series of bold

announcements, and attempted to position himself on the side of

ordinary Brits. The Labour leader told party members he would stand

up to the strong and take on the vested interests that hold back our

up to the strong and take on the economy. In a speech in which he

jokingly referred to himself as an action hero, Mr Miliband promised

to switch the forthcoming business action hero, Mr Miliband promised

tax cut from large firms to smaller businesses. He said he would force

big firms to train at an apprentice every time they bring in a worker

from outside the EU. He hinted that increasing the minimum wage would

be increased. He bowed to take on developers with a use it or lose it

threat to landowners and pledged to build 200,000 homes each year by

threat to landowners and pledged to 2020. He promised to freeze energy

prices and reset the energy market. The next Labour government will

freeze gas and electricity prices until the start of 2017. That

freeze gas and electricity prices provoked a rash of headlines -

hailing the return of red Ed macro. It has also given him a spike in

the polls. And Labour's Shadow Energy Secretary Caroline Flint

joins me now for the Sunday Interview.

Ed Miliband says, our energy market is broken and does not work. In

what way is that market to date different from the one Labour left

behind in 2010? We have six companies that dominate the energy

sector. It is the same. They generate energy, and sell it on to

us. What we recognise and Ed Miliband recognised when he was

Secretary of State and asked for more information from the company

Secretary of State and asked for is on hold serve costs and profits,

all the things we have done to mitigate against that in terms of a

warm front programme and everything else has not dealt with the

fundamental problem that the Horsell market is too secretive and

it is too much about such supply. - - the wholesale market. We have

been raising with the Government in a co-operative way the argument for

resetting the market. It has got worse in terms of speed at which

prices have gone up. Labour put wholesale and retail together. It

was the start this dates back to Margaret Thatcher and the

privatisation. We took some reforms to reset the market. We have

realised it was not working and it was broken and we need to reset it.

Ed Miliband will be the first to say we did not do enough from 2005

onwards. Let's have a look at what happened to energy prices under the

Labour government. Electricity up 67%, gas up 139%. Overall prices up

by 48%. The market was broken and the Government as well. From 2005,

we saw prices biking as wholesale prices went up. The tick action on

the one Front programme, decent homes for social housing. -- we

took action on per warm front programme. Trying to do things

around social obligations needs to be looked at. Gas and electricity

bills are high partially as a consequence of the market you

presided over but as a consequence of Labour policy. Beds have a look

at the breakdown of dual fuel - gas and electricity bill. -- let's have

a look. The supply costs of getting it to us and so on. The policies

that were introduced by your government - Green levies - are

adding almost 10% to has told energy bills. £112 on average bill

of 1188. You have put the bill up. Eight -- social and green

obligations amount to £112. That helps the poorest insulate homes.

Overwhelmingly, looking at your graph and the figures I have,

wholesale costs are worth more than half. What we have seen, based on

figures we now have, in Eni macro, a wholesale costs fell by 39% and

that was not reflected in our bills. Do you have plans to do anything

about the £112? If you took that off, you could cut bills by 10%

tomorrow. Or if you were in power. It is important that restimulate

the opportunity to grow clean energy. It -- we stimulate. If we

do not have clean energy, we will be beholden for ever-more to fossil

do not have clean energy, we will fuels that are depleting. It will

create jobs and bring in investment will start in the last few years,

we have seen investment in renewable energy half. -- in

investment. If I could go back to competition in the markets,

whatever advance there are, looking at whether the money raised through

energy companies to deliver energy efficiency, is that doing as well

as it might? Could it be better delivered by another agency? They

are fair questions. We need to get ahead of that and look at the

market. Can we make the market will competitive make sure when there is

downward pressure on wholesale prices, that is reflected on our

bills? That is the bigger picture argument. Also the freeze to help

people during that period. As you complain about the energy

prices, it was as a result of your actions. Ed Miliband introduced the

climate change act. He admitted prices would have to rise to pay for

decarbonisation. He said, we are prices would have to rise to pay for

going to minimise the costs as much as possible, but it is true there is

not a low-cost energy future out there. It is important that we

address the pressures on bills, but also recognise that if we are going

to build a better future where we can have more home-grown British

energy and, in the long-term, cheaper, we need to invest in

renewables. Truth is it is about the market. I acknowledge I acknowledge

eyes what you say about the 112. I am not going to disagree. But

wholesale prices have fallen. They fell in 2009, we got a reduction in

bills of 5%. Which are saying that the big companies are overcharging

customers. We are seeing profits going up, but we haven't seen the

amount of investment suggested by going up, but we haven't seen the

those profits coming through. But that £125 is going to get worse,

because your leader said in his speech in Brighton that Labour will

have a world leading commitment in Government to take out all carbon

from energy generation by 2030. That is not that far away. By 2030, no

more coal generation, no more gas generation, only much more expensive

nuclear and much more expensive renewables. It cannot be done

without bills going up even further? Hang on a second. The 2030 target to

remove carbon from the electricity supply, we have said we

your commitment is to get rid of all carbon from power generation by

2013. Only electricity. So you still have gas? We will need gas for

decades to come. We will still need gas the decades to come, we are only

talking about electricity supply. You will be increasingly dependent

on expensive nuclear, EDF are currently demanding the double of

the market price, and renewables which are four times the market

price, our bills are going up under your policies. And the Coalition 's

policies, too. On the clear, we did take a decision that we needed to

revitalise our nuclear power sector help us meet our targets in terms of

clean energy and make sure it could do the heavy lifting. Totally agree.

The government at the present time are engaged in discussions with EDF

about what the price should be, I don't know what that's going to be.

It's important that stands up to scrutiny in terms of value for

money. But I go back to our market reforms. We won't just have a

contract the difference for nuclear, we will have it for renewables as

well. That makes it even more important that we have a transparent

markets in which energy is bought and sold so we can have a riposte

reference price in which those issues can be judged against. --

robust. Michael Gove recognised at the other night that the market

wasn't working, the Daily Telegraph use the term cosy cartel, and we

have former advisers to David Cameron and former ministers saying

something needs to be done and I'm surprised David Cameron doesn't

acknowledge that. You are going to freeze prices for 20 months and then

you will, with a new regulator. Will that regulator have the power to

control gas and electricity prices? What the regulator will have existed

at a rate responsibility to monitor the wholesale cost will get doesn't

have. -- statutory responsibility. As result, it will have the power

that if the wholesale prices fall, it can force the energy companies,

if they don't pass on reductions in bills, but it will not have what we

see in some parts of the EU, in 15 countries, they have a variety of

price controls which at things below inflation and what have you. In

France, Spain, Italy. It won't do that, because we are looking at a

temporary price freeze to reflect the reduction in wholesale prices in

the last few years to give the British public some respite from

ever climbing bills while we get our reforms, because of the end double

this, what we want is a competitive market that is more transparent. But

we do believe it is right that we need a regulator that has much more

of a role in making sure that market is working effectively. Are you

accusing the energy companies of profiteering? I am accusing them of

overcharging, yes, of overcharging, of not passing on wholesale

reduction in costs to their customers. I am accusing the

companies of making profits in a way which undermines the consumer.

Because I do believe that the level of profits that they have passed on

to their shareholders is high compared to the reductions they

could have provided the consumers. Let's look at the evidence. In the

last fiscal year, they made combined earnings of £4 billion.

Where in these figures is the profiteering? My figures, their

reporting to the regulator and to work done by other organisations,

show that in Centrica 's case, they have something like an eight button

to return on profit margins on the retail side, that goes up to

something like 24% on their generation side. They have passed

on, in terms of their profits, something like 74% through dividends

to their shareholders... But they're just invested £3 billion! I am just

reporting the information that has been passed on to the regulator. But

they have never accused them of profiteering. I have... Can I do is

finish my point. It is acknowledged that across the sector, across the

big six, something like 60% of the profits have gone over to

shareholders as dividends, in the guise of Centrica, it is 74%. In

that example, even though they have their highest profit margins, they

have invested the least. So I think it is fair to question... None of us

really know what the true price of energy is and that is why our policy

to reform is necessary. Finally, if they continue putting prices up,

even after your price freeze, if they don't invest in the way they

do, do you rule out wholesale nationalisation? Absolutely, I want

a more competitive market and that is why we are resetting

Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up:

"Better Together" or Better Apart? We've heard from Yes Scotland, now

it's the turn of the pro-union campaign as both sides tussle over

who will debate with whom. I think I will keep my eyes set on the Prime

Minister, on the organ grinder, in this particular campaign. You could

hardly do it with somebody who has no control over these issues. Nice

try, but no one is going to fall for it. We'll put that to the leader of

the "Better Together" campaign, Alistair Darling. And a prime slot

for the Conservative leader Ruth Davidson at the party's conference

in Manchester - do the Tories now "get" Scotland? Two weeks ago we

heard from the First Minister as the one year countdown started to the

referendum. With 353 days to go now, we'll talk to his main opponent. But

the two men won't speak to each other as the argument rages about a

TV debate showdown. With that issue and more, here's Steven Godden with

his "capital look" at ""Better Together"". Take a stroll through

the centre of Edinburgh and almost everywhere you turn, there is an

unmistakable landmark, but the political climate, what you see is

great piles of and mortar, and it depends on your own perspective.

Take the castle. An early stronghold of Scottish kings, today it

generates millions as a tourist attraction, but the centuries it has

also been home to British army soldiers, assemble, ""Better

Together"" supporters say, of the protection and security offered by

the union. The big banking institutions were at the centre of

the recent financial collapse, but supporters of the union would argue

it is -- its interconnectedness helped people whether the storm and

it would do again if necessary. With the year to go milestone having

passed by with much fanfare, campaigners are taking their message

to the doorsteps in a bid to hammer it home. The main message we have

seen from "Better Together" is it has the rest of both worlds, at the

moment this is not a debate between Scotland and the rest of the UK, it

moment this is not a debate between is a bait here about the best future

for Scotland and from our point of view, we have the best of both

worlds, we can take decisions here in Scotland but we are part of a

whole, a community of nations across these islands will stop stop.

Supporters of independence have a different perspective. According to

them, Scotland is being led down a dark path that plays on a fear of

the unknown, the accusation is that the "Better Together" campaign are

attempting to scare voters by suggesting that in an independent

Scotland, a fright looks round every corner. Accused of being short on

answers, yes Scotland say the upcoming paper will flesh out the

campaign for independence insisting project fear, as it has been dubbed,

is destined to fail. The important thing is, get the government you

vote for in Scotland, we don't often get that. Set the agenda, take part

in democracy, and let's make your community and your country what you

want it to be. I think that's the bonus that people are tapping into.

As for the debate itself, something of an awkward triangle has emerged.

Alistair Darling, the leader of the better campaign in pain, wants to

debate with Alex Salmond, who says he's not interested, and he says he

wants to debate with the organ grinder, David Cameron. This week,

David Cameron has written to Alex Salmond says he won't face him and

he should face Alistair Darling instead. One of those questions that

need to be answered ahead of the big Western next September.

I'm now joined live from Edinburgh by the former Labour Chancellor and

leader of the "Better Together" campaign, Alistair Darling. Thanks

for joining us. First, let's look at this TV debate issue. The Prime

Minister, reiterating that he wouldn't debate with Alex Salmond

and it was up to you to debate with him. But Alex Salmond says David

Cameron is in an impossible position. He is willing to step in

and take part in the debate but not actually debate the issue itself. We

know what Alex Salmond is up to here, he wants to make this a

contest between Scotland against England. People aren't going to fall

for that. This is a debate we need to have within Scotland is to the

future of our country. Where do we stand, where do we go from here?

When Sami people get their information from television, it

would be a huge mistake not to have a debate between those of us who

live in Scotland, who have about on this referendum, as to the key

issues, whether it is Europe, pensions, we saw bogus claims being

made this week, all in relation to the currency of the future of our

country. Alex Salmond 's problem is not David Cameron, it is that he is

failing to convince the people of Scotland, it is an argument he needs

to have within Scotland not outside. But who do you percent apart from

the voters of Edinburgh South West? I am part of a campaign seeking to

persuade people that we are stronger together as part of the UK. In this

campaign there will be two opposing sides, "Better Together" against the

SNP side. It is up to each of us to decide who we put forward but I can

see what Alex Salmond is up to, he wants to make it at contest between

Scotland and England, he wants to create divisions where there

shouldn't be. Rather than continuing this silly posturing, he would be

better to knuckle down join with us, speak to the broadcasters and see

what we can arrange. Instead of calling it posturing that you not

think it is natural progression from the two men signing the Edinburgh

agreement? David Cameron has made clear that he regards this as being

a matter of the people living in Scotland who are going to vote in

the referendum next year. He has said it is up to the people of

Scotland. Alex Salmond is saying he does not want to debate with the

people of Scotland, he wants to debate with someone else. David

Cameron has said he's not going to debate, so why doesn't he accept

that, we should start dealing with issues that matter, like pensions.

When you have Nicola Sturgeon saying that somehow we can retire earlier

and it was affordable, but then admitted that she had no idea what

the cost was, or when we discovered that Scottish schemes would have to

be fully funded, this is one issue which the Scottish people deserve to

have debated so that people can actually understand the risks, they

can understand what the Nationalists are offering. If the pensions is

anything to go by, it will be an act of fiction. With Alex Salmond saying

he wanted to debate with the organ grinder, what does that make you? Do

you find that offensive? Know, if you have no Alex Salmond for long

enough, these things run off your back. -- if you have known him. I am

not bothered about name-calling. The people of Scotland, there is every

chance that if this remains as a political spat that people will turn

off. None of us can afford that. This is the biggest issue affecting

people living in Scotland, within 300 years. We deserve better than

political posturing. What we are entitled to is a proper debate where

we can look at the facts and reach a decision in a grown-up way, that is

what I will pursue. We are looking at the one-year countdown, two weeks

on from that, how significant is the one-year countdown for your

campaign? The campaign will gather pace between now and next September,

I have already said on numerous occasions, it's a ludicrously long

campaign but that was Alex Salmond 's decision. What we need to do

between now and then is look at the things that will matter in deciding

whether or not we want to become independent, look at things like

what currency we will use. If there isn't a currency union, what does

that mean for Scotland? I mentioned pensions. You can't have a debate

that depends upon all these claims being made, which falls apart

whenever experts look at them. In issues like Europe, defence, these

are the issues people want to see discussed, they want to consider the

facts before it comes to a decision. We will continue to make a positive

case for being part of the UK, we will also not be put off challenging

some of the lead Chris claims being made by the Nationalists which we

have seen fall apart. The King at the polls, do you sometimes think it

will be fine, do you think you are in danger of being complacent? --

looking at the polls. The don't knows could play a big part in the

campaign. I have been around long enough to know that opinion polls

are all very well. There are a lot of people who have to make their

minds up, people can shift either wager in the course of what is a

very long campaign. This campaign won't be finished until the polls

close in September next year. It is better to be ahead and behind, let's

not kid ourselves, but there is an awful lot of uncertainty around and

all the more reason why people in Scotland are entitled to have a

grown-up debate on television and the other media so they can discuss

these issues. The things that will affect their job prospects, their

security in their old age and what is looking best for Scotland as a

whole. A lot of that could be resolved with the publication of a

white paper coming out in November. I know you are ready and waiting to

pounce on currency, pensions, debt. Do you think this mega C -- negative

response could backfire on "Better Together"? Every time I'd do

interviews like this I make the Together"? Every time I'd do

point that there is a positive case for remaining part of the UK in

terms of the opportunities that come for our people, as well as the fact

we can share risks. You mentioned the collapse of the banks five years

ago, which I couldn't have done if I was just crying on a Scottish

Treasury, it wouldn't have been big enough. There is our influence on

the EU and the cultural and emotional ties between the countries

of the United Kingdom. But in Russian to this white paper, I am

seriously concerned, as a result of what we saw, that the Scottish

Government is producing statistics which are highly dubious and dodgy.

Frankly, I expect better and there is a real risk that the civil

service, who will serve fearlessly...

We have spoken about pensions but I want you to pick up on the point

about the scaremongering. I know Better Together they scaremongering

Bingle but this has been a fairly negative campaign so far. Let me

finish. What is the real positive case for the union? What is the

positive case for remaining in the United Kingdom? I will give you two

examples of what you call negativity. We asked where the legal

opinion was that nothing would change as far as Europe concerned.

There never was a legal opinion. You may say that is negative, I think a

public service was done there in exposing that claim for what it

was. Secondly, I will mention pensions again. You cannot go around

saying, don't worry, we will pay you more pensions... You have mentioned

pensions several times. I have. What is the positive case for Britain?

Let me finish this. What I am saying is that women people make claims

that don't stand up, you call it negative asking about them but I

think people deserve to know. -- I am saying that when people make

claims. If you look at the big economic case, for jobs and

prospects, you have a market of 60 million people, not 5 million. If

you take away our universities, some are world-class, they have access to

UK research funds which would not have. If you look at the vast

resources the images can draw on because whilst it might be

administered separately it is part of one that stretches across the

United Kingdom. Also, it is not just the opportunities which we depend

upon to get jobs but the risk-sharing. The fact that we have

an ageing population that is spread across the shoulders of 60 million,

not 5 million. We have huge benefits from being able to share those risks

if something goes wrong, as we have seen in the banking crisis. I have

mentioned, there are very many powerful cases. We have one of the

oldest economic, social and political unions and it works

because there are strong ties and bonds between the two others. You

asked for the positive case, there it is. I want one final point.

Results this week revealed only 80% of people here think they are

Scottish and British. That was quite a surprising result and perhaps bad

news for your campaign. You may consider yourself to be Scottish and

are now less Scottish than believing -- for believing we are better as

part of the United Kingdom. This was a snapshot in 2011. You're talking

about Paul's earlier, it is very interesting. I believe we can

convince the majority of people that there is a strong and -- strong case

for being Better Together as part of the United Kingdom. We will continue

to do so and ask hard questions. Alistair Darling, thank you very

much. The north-west of England is hosting

this year's UK Conservative party conference. Thousands of Tories from

across Britain are heading to Manchester and many from Scotland

are heading south too. The party appears to be taking the referendum

seriously, with Ruth Davidson being granted an absolutely plum slot this

year. The PM arrived in Manchester

yesterday evening. At this stage, David Cameron needs to start putting

the trips an election footing for 2015. -- the troops. The Tories have

a good news story to tell the economy as looks like there is

turning. Labour perhaps have their own positive tale with a plan to

freeze energy prices. It comes across as being on the side of the

people. While the Conservatives might be regarded as a little

distant. The Tories will want to ensure they side with ordinary folk.

There is also a very clear message to voters in Scotland. All the facts

and figures stack up for the UK but I want to say very clearly that we

want you to say. We think that the United Kingdom is better off with

Scotland insider, not just dropped on being better off. He was the man

who enabled the referendum to happen. Although Mister Cameron

doesn't want to be the Prime Minister who lets Scotland leave the

UK on his watch. The Tories are hypersensitive to the needs of

Scotland. The Strathclyde omission is looking at more powers for

Holyrood. To be clear, the menu of what is on offer will be made after

the referendum. All the party leaders, conservative, Liberal

Democrat, leader, -- labour, have all said that there is an open

discussion and debate about what powers can be devolved, how we get

into an even better shape. Let's have that debate after discovering

whether Scotland wants to stay or go. Ruth Davidson is the woman

leading the party's charge in Scotland. The Tories claim they have

been revitalised by the referendum campaign. A commitment to the fight

ahead is evident from where they have decided to place her speech,

right before the PM's Before we came on-air this morning, I caught up

with the Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson before she

headed to conference. I began by asking her if the Tories

now "got" Scotland. First of all, I don't accept the premise of your

question. I am passionate about Scotland and the Conservatives that

I know are passionate about Scotland and the United Kingdom. We have said

that we want to take a full part in the campaign going forward. We are

the most committed on the union side of any of the three men parties, as

polling has shown. -- three main parties. We strongly believe that

Scotland's best days are ahead of it, as part of the United Kingdom.

Will then not BACs of unknown faces in the crowd? Not many Scottish

Tories. On the contrary. We'll take a big contingent. If you're talking

it elected Westminster MPs then we would like have more but our MSP

group will be down. Over 100 councillors across Scotland, an

activist based and over 1000 people have said that while they are not

members of the Conservative party, they want to stand and fight with us

on this issue. A big issue to Margaret Thatcher at the

conference. If Scotland finally getting over her, do you think? Are

you finally put in her memory to rest to help revitalise your party?

If you are talking about Margaret Thatcher's popularity, good to

remember that her general election in 1979 when she recorded a double

the votes that Alex Salmond got in 2010 or 2011. She had a residence in

Scotland but was very rising. Not just in Scotland but right across

the UK. While there were many people that think, in fact, she has been

voted Scotland's best and worst peacetime feminist by Scots. She

does polarise. Not just by the contribution that she made, not just

across the UK, but in terms of fighting the cold war, fighting for

freedom. -- peacetime Prime Minister. It is right and proper

that at the Conservative party conference, that we recognise her

achievements. You are writing in one of the Sunday newspapers about the

changing Conservative party. I have the toxic legacy, as many people

have been putting it, is now over. -- perhaps the toxic legacy. I never

called at that. Do you think you are now trying to get over that, to

refresh the party? Are you trying to put that images? We are working hard

in Scotland. After 1997, when we lost all of our MPs at Westminster,

it was very difficult for the party, it was hard for us not to be trendy

little bit and we perhaps did. We perhaps spent too long talking to

ourselves and are not different people across the country. I am

trying to change that. Working very hard to bring forward policies,

bring forward people to generate policies that matter to them,

perhaps not Conservatives. We are also changing the face of the

Scottish Conservative party. We are attracting a large number of younger

people, people in the 18-25 age group in our second best voting

group. We are seeing a new generation of conservatives become

elected. More than one third of our councillors in the 2012 election

have never stood before, many in their 20s and 30s. We have a good

young candidate at the more or less. You will see changes in the future.

Lots of changes on the face of it but do you think it could still be

regarded as the nasty party? In a new book, serialised in the Sunday

Telegraph, David Cameron is quoted as talking about Same Sex Marriage

Bill "if I had known what it was going to be like, I would not have

done it. " Does that suggest that is the real face of the Conservative

party question why absolutely not. I have had on relations with the prime

ministers and he is 100% committed to Same Sex Marriage Bill stop he

believes that love is love and commitment is commitment and that

the time is right for people who love each other and are committed to

have that recognised by the state and not have the Government tell

them that their love is less valid than other people. He feels

incredibly strongly about that and so dry. But Ed Miliband stole a real

market on the Conservative party with his promise to freeze energy

prices if he becomes PM. What can the Conservatives do? It looks like

you are on the side of a vested interest and not of ordinary people.

First of all, I think it was a headline grabber from Ed Miliband, I

will give you that, but it started to fall apart is that as he said it.

Not with ordinary people. Your own commentators have said so. If you're

looking at how to be on the side of ordinary people, look at what we

inherited and what a Conservative government has done. 1.4 million new

private-sector jobs. 25 million people having their taxation cut.

2.4 million taken out of tax altogether. That matters, not just

because of the numbers but, because it is the best way to improve

people's life chances, prosperity and opportunity, to make sure that

they get a job and work. That those jobs are there and that they get to

take, keep more of that money and run pocket. So this is the fight for

more of -- for the 2015 election Mister Mark when it comes to the

referendum, yours seem at the conference is why Britain is put

together. Looking at the Scottish census result when most people see

themselves as Scottish and not British, that is not good for the

Conservatives, is it? I do not recognise how you have got from one

to another because I feel Scottish, I would always say that I am

Scottish first and British after. But that does not mean that I did

not want to remain part of the United Kingdom. I think that is true

for a number of Scots and if we are... And you are using research

there, if you're looking at boat across the country, consistently, a

number of Scots say they feel the same. There are 11 months to go

until the referendum and we will fight for every vote. We will show

why we are better off financially, have more stability, safer, but the

opportunities that we have going forward are standing with our

friends and neighbours in the other home countries. Let's look at what

might be an offer after the referendum if there is a no sold.

The Strathclyde commission will vote back. Will you give the Scottish

people a real genuine offer about what might be available. -- if there

is the no vote. What we have said and have been perfectly transparent

from the beginning, we have asked Lord Strathclyde to go away with

experts, real leaders in their field, not just in politics and how

Westminster and Holyrood works, not just constitutional law, not just

economics at business people and the sort of people for whom it is

important that you have the constitutional right but it is what

you do with it that counts. How do we make life better for ordinary

Scots? How do we have devolution improve the life chances and job

prospects of Scots? The only restriction is that I have given a

Strathclyde commission and panel of experts is that they have to come

back a good time before the referendum so that the people of

Scotland can see what they come up referendum so that the people of

with. I am not going to prejudge what the come back with something

and I have not put any restrictions on what they look at. They can look

at any of policy that they so wish that that will return back before

the referendum so that people can see what is on the table.

You're watching Sunday Politics Scotland from the BBC and the time

is just after midday. In a moment, we'll be taking a look at the Week

Ahead with our guests of the day - the blogger Kate Higgins and Richard

Sullivan, Chair of the Glasgow Conservative Association. But first,

let's cross to Graham Stewart for Reporting Scotland.

Good afternoon. The flu vaccine is being offered for

the first time to every child in Scotland, in the form of a nasal

spray. It's part of the country's largest ever immunisation programme,

which has been launched by First Minister Alex Salmond, who received

the vaccine in a surgery in Aberdeenshire. A fifth of the

Scottish population will be offered a free flu vaccine, including people

aged over 65 and those with conditions that put them at greater

risk. The First Minister is urging eligible Scots to get protected

before the winter. A climber has died in Wester Ross.

Around 1:45pm yesterday, the emergency services were called to a

man who had collapsed in the Beinn Dearg hills. Attempts to revive him

failed and he died. Next of kin are being informed.

Now for a look at today's weather. A cracking afternoon of weather

across the country, including those areas that had cloud and rain

yesterday. Much better. There will be a bit of a breeze from the south

east and certainly across eastern parts, more cloud. In that sunshine

in the West, feeling warm. Even for the Northern Isles, after a damp,

cloudy morning, improving the dry and bright conditions. Staying dry

and settled into the season. That is the forecast for now.

That is all for now. Thanks Graham. Now in a moment,

we'll be discussing the big events coming up this week at Holyrood, but

first, seven names will be in the election

to replace the former MP. The Scottish and UK governments were set

to agree an early decision. The two governments should strike a deal

before Christmas. Supporters were clear about the consequences. MSPs

at Holyrood discuss controversial plans to scrap the need for evidence

to be backed up uncorroborated income rated court cases. Nearly two

thirds of people in Scotland identify themselves as Scottish

only, according to results from the latest census. It was the first

survey to include a question on national identity. And a new shared

equity scheme designed to help people get onto and up the housing

ladder was unveiled by the Scottish Government. They said the scheme

could be a game changing initiative for the industry. Now let's look at

the big stories of the week and what's in store for the week ahead.

Joining me now is the Burdz Eye View blogger Kate Higgins and Chairman of

the Glasgow Conservative Association, Richard Sullivan.

Thanks to joining me. First, let's look at it together. The Alistair

Darling interview, this arguing going on about who will debate with

whom, what do you make of what he had to say? Let's set out people 's

rentals. A list that Darling is effectively a backbench opposition

MP with too much time on his hand. Alex Salmond is the Democrat can the

elected First Minister of Scotland. There is an issue about parity and

respect. David Cameron is his equivalent in the UK in terms of

being elected Prime Minister. There is no doubt that the debate should

be between the two democratically elected leaders of Scotland and the

UK. Why make it Scotland versus the UK, that is his point? That is what

the debate could be seen as? The issue is that David Cameron is the

issue of the UK -- promised of the UK and a supporter of the union.

Alex Salmond is it critically elected leader -- the democratically

elected leader of Scotland, that is who the debate should be between. I

think the point made about McHattie parity is a good one. But I is

essentially a debate between a Scot against another Scot. He is always

telling the Prime Minister to keep out of Scotland 's business, so he

really is just wanting to cherry pick as to when he wants to engage

with the Prime Minister or not, which is wrong. Better to die --

"Better Together" is led by Alistair Darling, I think he's the best

person to abate against. But who does Alistair Darling represent? The

same point as what was said about Alex Salmond presenting Scotland, he

doesn't in terms of this debate, he represents the people who agree with

him. Otherwise they would be 100 isn't agreement that Scotland should

be independent. The same goes for Alistair Darling can he represent

the Scots like me. But nobody elected Alistair Darling. The people

elected Alex Salmond and the SNP to form the Scottish Government.

Knowing full well that a referendum on independence was part of the

platform. So they voted for the SNP and our First Minister to lead

Scotland in that debate, nobody elected Alistair Darling into his

position. What do you make about the more general debate, we have had the

set piece interviews from Alex Salmond and Alistair Darling, what

about the debate going ahead for the year? I think it's really exciting,

it is hotting up, we are off the presses and into the substance of

the debate. And there are big issues to be debated, I found it helpful in

terms of setting a deadline for when people need to put forward their

options and their case to the people of Scotland so we all have time to

do that. I have to say the Scottish Government is working to that

timetable, it will publish its White Paper well before Christmas, when we

get the options from the various parties, who knows, whether we get

them before the referendum or not remains to be seen. A campaign that

is too long, as Alistair Darling was saying? I think so, a lot of people

are feeling the fatigue of this, but I think both parties have to up

their game. I think there is a year to go, we are getting to the issues,

I do a lot of the issues we have had so far, pensions, Europe, they need

to be clearer and less duplicity between both groups. Because there

is counter argument counterargument. I think it should be a more honest

debate. Let's look at your party, you restore what of the Tory party.

We have this interview with Ruth Davidson. The party...

Do you agree? Yes, I spoke at a public meeting during the week where

got a random applause for everything I set and the Labour candidate

didn't, or indeed the nationalist. I do know that is my own charisma

perhaps! But I have been a candidate at various elections since 2004 and

the reception of the doors to buy have personally had has changed, it

is warmer. What do you make of Ruth Davidson 's leadership? She able to

shed the toxic brand? As it was regarded by many? I think one of the

things that is positive is as Ruth says, they are bringing in younger

people into politics. I might not agree with younger people supporting

the Conservatives but more people in politics is a good thing. But she's

up against it. She is detoxifying the brand but she has her UK

counterparts coming out and taking us into legal battles to defend the

bankers, you have the hated bedroom tax doing its worst in terms of

hitting the most vulnerable in Scotland as well as other welfare

reforms and you have also got news of the latest Tory donor to be mired

in a city scandal. If that is the justification, she has her work cut

out. One other story, a call for the shake-up of the Yes campaign, Blair

Jenkins has been handed an almost impossible task, a quick reaction

from you? It is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. It is the

product, not the way it is structured. Blair Jenkins, an

impossible task? They say they have clearly defined goals and everything

is where they want it to be. Yes Scotland has always been about a

grassroots campaign, it is huge, it grows day by day. Margo should be

listened to carefully, she has important things to say, what we

need to do is make sure there is a role for all the fantastic people

who are on the advisory board, because they are fantastic at taking

the positive message of what independence could mean two Scots

will stop I've heard them speaking at panels, I think there is a role

for all of them to play. We will have to leave it there, thank you

both very much. That's all from the us this week. I'll be back at the

same time next week. Until then, goodbye.