20/10/2013 Sunday Politics Scotland

Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Alex Salmond says a vote for Scottish independence would be an

"act of national self-belief". His deputy Nicola Sturgeon joins us live

from the SNP conference in Perth. Is Whitehall meddling too much in

local affairs? Communities Secretary Eric Pickles joins me for the Sunday

Interview. Senior coppers face their own

questions in Parliament this week over the Andrew Mitchell affair. So

has plebgate damaged trust in the police? A former detective and a

critic of the police go head to head.

And on Sunday Politics Scotland: We'll be at Grangemouth for the

latest in the oil refinery dispute. And we'll be in Perth, speaking to

the First Minister the day after his leader's speech.

All of that to come. And the Home Office minister sacked by Nick

Clegg, who says his party is like a wonky shopping trolley, which keeps

veering off to the left. He will join us live at noon. With me to

unpack all of this, Nick Watt, Helen Lewis and Iain Martin. They will be

tweeting throughout the programme, using hashtag #bbcsp. It is the last

day of the Scottish national party conference in Perth. We have

discovered that Alex Salmond has been on the same diet as Beyonce.

The SNP leader compared his attempts to lose weight with the campaign for

independence - lots achieved so far, 20 more to do. In a moment, I will

be joined by the deputy leader of the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon. First,

they report on the independence campaign. September 18 2014, the

date of destiny for Scotland, the day when these campaigners hope its

people will decide to vote yes for independence. In a recent poll, only

14% said they knew enough to vote either way. That is unlikely to

change any time soon. I think the Scottish people will be going to the

polls next year still not knowing an awful lot of stuff which is

important, because the outcome, in terms of taxation, debt, exactly

what will happen to the allocation of assets between the two countries,

will come about as a result of negotiation between a Scottish

government and the UK Government. That is not stuff which will be

known year. At the moment, polls suggest Scotland will decide to

remain within the UK. A recent survey found that 44% of those

questioned planned to vote no, 25% yes. But interestingly, the

undecideds were at 31%, suggesting that Alex Salmond's task might be

tough but not impossible. There are a number of reasons which make a

vanilla campaign a good idea. It does not put off cautious voters, it

allows for people to imagine their own version of what independence

will be like, and crucially, it allows for the yes campaign to take

advantage of any mistakes by the no campaign. In other words, the yes

campaign are not out there with big ideas, they are just waiting for the

no campaign to trip up. What we do know is that whatever happens next

September, Scotland will be getting more power. From 2016, a separate

income tax regime will come into force, giving the Scottish

Parliament control over billions of pounds of revenue. What we do not

know yet is how the alternative would pan out. There are issues

which would be raised by independence, issues about how the

national debt is allocated, what the currency will look like, how an

independent Scotland would balance the books, because it would have a

bigger job to do, even down the Whitehall government has to do.

Those are really big issues, which a Scottish government would have to

face, on top of whatever negotiation it had to have with the UK

Government. The Scottish government's White Paper on

independence, two to be published within weeks, should fill in some of

the banks. But how Scotland votes in September may yet be determined by

what it feels rather than what it knows. And joining me from Perth is

Scotland's Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon. Nicola Sturgeon, we

meet again! Hello, Andrew. Former leader of the SNP Gordon Wilson

said, if this referendum fails, it will fail on the basis that people

put their British identity ahead of their Scottish identity, so we have

got to attack on the British identity - what does he mean? Gordon

Wilson is a very respected, much loved former leader of the SNP. My

view is that I do not think the independence referendum is really

about identity. I am secure and proud of my Scottish identity, but

this is a decision about where power best lies. Do decision-making powers

best lie here in Scotland, with a government which is directly

accountable to the people of Scotland, or does it best lie in

Westminster, with governments which, very often, people in Scotland do

not vote for? That is the issue at the heart of the campaign. Let me

just clarify, you do not agree with him, that you need to go on the

attack with regard to the British identity of Scottish people? No, I

do not think we are required to attack British identity. It is

absolutely compatible for somebody to feel a sense of British identity

but still support Scottish independence, because Scottish

independence is about a transfer of power. It is about good government,

accountable government, ensuring that decisions are taking here in

Scotland, by people who have got the biggest stake in getting those

decisions right. I represent a constituency in the south side of

Glasgow, and if you speak to many people in my constituency, if you

ask them their national identity, many of them would say Irish,

Pakistani, Indian, Polish, and many of them will vote yes next year

because they understand the issue at stake, which is the issue of where

decisions are best taken. It looks like you are changing tack ex-, you

have realised the softly softly approach, of saying that actually,

nothing much will change, we will still have the Queen, the currency,

and all the rest of it, is moving over towards voting for a left-wing

future for Scotland... Well, I know that what we are doing is pointing

out is pointing out the choice between two futures. If we vote yes,

we take our own future into our own hands. We make sure that for ever

after, we have governments which will be in demented policies which

we have voted for. If we do not become independent, then we continue

to run the risk of having governments not only that we do not

vote for, but often, that Scotland rejects. We are seeing the

dismantling of our system of social security. There are politicians in

all of the UK parties who are itching to cut Scotland's share of

spending. So Scotland faces a choice of two futures, and it is right to

point out the positive consequences of voting yes, but also the

consequences of voting no. But you are promising to reverse benefit

cuts and increase the minimum wage. You would renationalise the Royal

Mail, though how you would do that nobody knows. You are promising to

cut energy bills. These are the kind of promises that parties make in a

general election campaign, not in a once in 300 years extra stench or

choice. Is the future of Scotland really going to be decided on the

size of the minimum wage? -- existential choice. A yes vote would

be about bringing decision-making powers home, but we are also setting

out some of the things an SNP government would do, if elected. A

decision on what the first government of an independent

Scotland would be would not be taken in the referendum, that decision

would be taken in the 2016 election. And all of the parties will put

forward their offers to the electorate. We are setting out some

of the things which we think it is important to be prioritised. These

are things which have a lot of support in Scotland. We see the pain

being felt by people because of the rising cost of energy bills, there

is widespread opposition to some of the welfare cuts. So, we are setting

out the options which are open to Scotland, but only open to Scotland

if we have the powers of independence. Given that you seem to

be promising aid permanent socialist near Varna, if Scotland is

independent, if you are right of centre in Scotland, and I understand

that is a minority pursuit where you are, but it would be a big mistake

to vote for independence, in that case, wouldn't it? No, because the

whole point of independence is that people get the country they want,

and the government a vote for. So, right of centre people should not

vote for independence? No, because people who are of that political

persuasion in Scotland get the opportunity to vote for parties

which represent that persuasion, and if they can persuade a majority to

vote likewise, then they will get a government which reflects that. That

is the essence of independence. Right now, we have a Westminster

government which most people in Scotland rejected at the last

general election. That is hardly democratic. It is right and proper

that the SNP, as the current government, points out the

opportunities that would be opening up. Can I just clarify one thing,

when we spoke on The Daily Politics earlier last week, you made it clear

to me that Alex Salmond, we know he wants to debate with David Cameron,

but you made it clear to me that he would debate with Alistair Darling

as well, and Mr Carmichael... He made it clear yesterday. Well, he

said to the BBC this morning that he would only debate with these people

after he had had a debate with Mr Cameron, so who is right? I was

making the point last week, and Alex Salmond was making it yesterday and

this morning - let's have that agreement by David Cameron to come

and debate with Alex Salmond, and then Alex Salmond, just like me,

will debate with allcomers. So if he does not get the David Cameron

debate, then he will not do the others, is that right? Let's focus

on is wading David Cameron to do the right thing. So, in other words, he

will not debate, yes or no? Members of the SNP government... We know

that, but what about Alex Salmond? He said yesterday, we will debate

with all sorts of people, including the people you have spoken about,

but David Cameron should not be let off the hook just putting aside the

independence issue, energy prices are now even playing into the SNP,

so every political party has to do something about energy prices. Yes,

it is clearly it is interesting is the difference between the SNP and

the Labour approach. Ed Miliband electrified the party conference

season when he said he would freeze energy prices for 20 months,

seemingly having an amazing control over the energy market, where we

know that essentially what pushes prices up the wholesale prices on

world market. What Nicola Sturgeon is talking about is actually saying,

this amount is added to your bills for green levies, and we are going

to take them off your bills and they will be paid out of general taxation

in an independent Scotland. That is a credible government, making a

credible case, very different to what Labour is saying, although

playing to the same agenda. So, Labour has got a populist policy,

the SNP has also got a populist policy, the one group of people that

do not have a decent response to this is the coalition? Exactly. What

the SNP also have is a magic money pot, so that speech yesterday, you

are right, it was very left wing, social democratic, but there was

none of the icing like Labour has been talking about, with fiscal

responsibility. I think that is the difference between the two. We know

what the Tories would really like to do, all of these green levies which

were put on our bills in the good times, when they were going to be

the greenest party ever, the Tories would like to say, let's just wipe

out some of them, put the rest on to some general government spending,

but they have a problem, which is in the Department of Energy and Climate

Change. Not only that, they really are stuck now. But there is

something in the free schools debate this morning, the parties are now

determined to send a message to their potential voters at the next

election, that they are trying to fight their coalition partners. Do

not expected any change in coalition policy or free schools policy before

the election, but we can expect to hear the parties try to pretend that

they are taking on their coalition partners. Mr Clegg has said, we

would put this free schools policy into our manifesto, so is it not

possible that the Tories will say, if you give us an overall majority,

we will cut your electricity bill because we will get rid of these

green levies? I think that is entirely possible. The Tories know

that they are stuck on this, they do not have a response to Ed Miliband.

How much should ministers in Whitehall medal in local decisions

across England? In opposition, David Cameron said he wanted a fundamental

shift of power from Whitehall to local people. He said, when one size

fits all solution is... Eric Pickles described it as "an

historic shift of power". But the Communitites and Local Government

Secretary can't stop meddling. In the past few months Mr Pickles has

tried to ban councils from using CCTV cameras and "spy cars" to fine

motorists... Told councils how to act quicker to shut down illegal

travellers' sites... Criticised councils who want to raise council

tax... Insisted councils release land to residents hoping to build

their own property... And stated new homes should have a special built in

bin storage section. It seems not a week goes by without a policy

announcement from the hyper active Mr Pickles. So is the government

still committed to localism, or is it all about centralism now?

And Communities Secretary Eric Pickles joins me now for the Sunday

Interview. Welcome. Nice to be here. You said

in July you were going to give town halls the power to wreak their local

magic. So why issue diktats from Westminster? It is not about giving

power to local councils, it is going beyond that to local people. If

local councils refuse to open up their books, we have to go straight

to local people. You have attacked councillors using so-called spy

cameras to enforce parking rules. Why is that your business? Because

there is an injustice taking place. You cannot use fines to raise money

and that is plainly happening. If you get yourself a ticket from a

CCTV, it could be days or weeks before that lands on your doorstep

and you have virtually no possibility to be able to defend

yourself. But just leave it to people to vote out the council then.

We are trying to enforce the law and it clearly states that you cannot

use parking fines in order to fund general rate. So why are you not

taking them to court if they are breaking the law? There have been a

number of court cases taken by local residents. I am there to stand by

local residents. Your even trying to micromanage, allowing motorist 's to

park for 15 minutes in local high street. Why is that your business?

I'm trying to ensure that local authorities understand the

importance of the town centre. If you look at all opinion polls, right

now there is a five-minute leeway but there are many cases of people

being jumped on by parking officials for quite trivial things. It is

about saying, surely I can go and get a pint of milk. But a party that

dines out on localism, that is a matter for local people, not the men

in Whitehall. I have to be on the side of local people. That person

who wants to go and get a pint of milk. Ultimately it is a matter for

them. It is a matter for the council. But a little bit of

criticism is not a bad thing. You have now declared war on the wheelie

bin and suggested that new homes should have built in storage

sections. You just cannot help meddling! I suppose that is

possible. You are a meddler! I am in charge of building regulations and

planning. So I may have some responsibility there. Another one,

interfering in local planning decisions. A couple of places, you

ruled in favour of developers. They want to build over 200 houses

against the wishes of the parish and district councils. The local MP said

the Secretary of State's decision runs roughshod over any concept of

localism. Now I have to be a blushing violet because of course

this is still potentially subject to judicial review. I have to act

properly. And Apple went is entitled to justice. -- an applicant. A local

authority has a duty to ensure that is adequate housing for people in

their area. This was not a decision that I took as a personal decision,

it was on the advice of an inspector. But you contradict what

David Cameron himself said in 2012, he spoke about a vision where we

give communities much more say and local control. People in villages

fear big housing estates being plonked from above. You have just

done exactly that. After a proper quasi judicial enquiry. What we have

is planning framework which local people can decide where it goes. But

they cannot say, nothing here. They have to have a five-year housing

supply. Previous to this government decided exactly where houses would

go, now local people can take the lead. Anna Silbury said because of

the way your department rules, local authorities now have no alternative

but to agree development on green belt land. I do not accept that. I

think around Nottingham there are particular problems with regards to

the green belt. The matter has been referred back.

the green belt. The matter has been want to see development on the green

belt but on Brownfield site. We want to see underused land. But you have

to remember why we have the green belt. Not

to remember why we have the green nice, it is their to prevent

conurbations bumping into one another. Your

conurbations bumping into one is vocal about the need to deal

what he calls the historic under provision of housing. Shelter says

we need 250,000 new homes per year. provision of housing. Shelter says

Houston statistics are getting there, but nowhere near that. --

housing. You cannot there, but nowhere near that. --

localism agenda as well as meeting housing demand. I do not accept

that. We inherited a position where the lowest level of building since

the 1920s was in place. But it has steadily improved. It does take a

while. You cannot have a localism agenda where people call the shots

on housing as well as meeting the housing demand. People have a duty

to ensure that future generations have somewhere to live. You cannot

pull up the drawbridge. There is nothing incompatible between that

and localism. Because someone has to be the voice of those people who are

going to live there and to make sure there is the proper amount. Plans

now exist for more than 150,000 homes to be built on protected land,

including the green belt. That will mean riding over local concerns.

Each application will be taken on its own merits. To suggest that

there is an assault on the green belt is as far from the truth as you

can imagine. Should Andrew Mitchell get his job back if the years

exonerated? I would be honoured to sit with Andrew Mitchell in the

Cabinet. I have always believed his version. But it is a matter for the

Prime Minister who he has in government. He would have no problem

in seeing him back in Cabinet? government. He would have no problem

Absolutely not. Your mother answered Vulcan junior minister Nick balls

said about the Royal Charter for the press, there's nothing we have done

that troubles me as much as this. Is that your view? It is not. I accept

the compromise agreement put together. If the press want to have

an additional protection that the Royal Charter offers, then they can

move into the system. But if they want to continue independently that

is acceptable to me. But you previously echoed Thomas Jefferson,

you said for a free society to operate the river of a free press

has to flow without restriction. That is what I said at the time. We

had to find a compromise. And that seems to me to be a better

compromise. Let me just show you this little montage of pictures that

we have. I could not be happier! Then you are in the Desert and there

you are in San Francisco. Then you are in the casino. That is my

personal favourite. These students took a cardboard cutout of you and

took it round the world with them. Did you ever think you would become

a student icon? I always felt secretly that that might happen one

day. But it came earlier in my career than I thought! Why would

they do that? I think they thought I could do with a bit of an airing! I

went to Norfolk earlier, but that looks better. Thank you.

On Wednesday senior police folk, including chief constables, will be

questioned by MPs about what's become known as Plebgate. That's the

incident in Downing Street last year which led to the resignation of the

government chief whip Andrew Mitchell. Last week the Independent

Police Complaints Commission questioned the "honesty and

integrity" of police officers who met Mr Mitchell following the row.

So do scandals like this affect public trust in the police? Here's

Adam Fleming. It's a story of politics, the

police, and CCTV. No, not Andrew Mitchell, but an MP's researcher

called Alex Bryce and his partner Iain Feis.

It started on a summer night in 2011. They'd been in Parliament.

After a few words with a police officer, Ian was wrestled to the

ground. Alex came to have a look and the same thing happened to him. Both

were arrested and charged. These pictures emerged on day one of their

trial. A trial that was halted because the police version of events

just didn't match the footage. A lot of people with incidence like this

which we experienced, people think there is no smoke without fire. So

when we said we did nothing wrong, people would think police just would

not do that. There is always that underlying view that some people

have. I think that has been challenged and people who know us

believe that. This year the Met apologised and paid compensation.

And it's led to an unlikely sort of friendship. When the truth came out

about the Andrew Mitchell story I actually sent him an e-mail to

congratulate him about the truth coming out. He did send a reply

acknowledging that. So where are we with THAT saga? Remember last

September? Andrew Mitchell had a row with police at the gates of Downing

Street about his bike. He lost his job as chief whip after accusations

he called the officers plebs. That, he's always denied. This week the

police watchdog the IPCC suggested that three officers may have lied

about a meeting with him at the height of the scandal. Add that to

the charge sheet of cases that haven't exactly flattered the

police. Like the revelation of a cover up over Hillsborough. The

prosecution of an officer from the Met over the death of Ian Tomlinson

during protests in 2009. Along with news that undercover officers were

told to smear the family of Stephen Lawrence. During Thursday's protest

by teachers in Westminster the police operation was really, really

relaxed. And recent scandals have done nothing to affect society's

view of the boys and girls in blue - or should I say hi-vis. About 60% of

the public say they trust the police. And that's not budged since

pollsters started measuring it 30 years ago.

Of course, in Britain, crime is down, so the perception might be

that the police is doing a good job. And the rank-and-file recently

seamed pretty chipper at this awards ceremony. Is it a good time to be a

police officer? It is a good time. Despite all of the headlines? Still

a good time. But speak to officers privately, and they say Plebgate is

affecting how the public see them. Some of them also think

politicians, the Tories especially, are enjoying that a little too much.

Adam Fleming reporting there. Going head-to-head on this issue of trust

in the police, a Sunday Mirror columnist and Peter Kirkham, former

chief inspector. Peter Kirkham, let me come to you first. Plebgate, the

cover-ups over John Charles De menace, the death of Ian Tomlinson,

the industrial deception over Hillsborough, why is the culture of

deceit so prevalent in the police? I do not agree there is a cultural

deceit. These are all individual incidents which raise individual

issues. I would suggest that your short headline summarising each of

them has taken the most negative view of it. How can you be positive

about the police's behaviour over Hillsborough? It remains to be seen

with the inquiry but we are probably talking about a handful of senior

officers, dealing with the paperwork. Well over 100 testimonies

being doctored by the police. Well, those testimonies were true to start

with, so the officers have told the truth, and they have been changed

for some reason. By the police. By the police all lawyers we have got

this thing that the police conflates everything. There are 43 forces,

there is ACPO, there is the College Of Policing... People say it was a

handful of police officers, it wasn't, it was six senior police

officers who were alleged to have doctored 106 D4 statements. Even

today we are hearing that more than 1000 officers are yet to be spoken

to about Hillsborough. -- 164. Do we pretend that Hillsborough, and some

of these examples, are the exception rather than the rule? What is the

evidence that this is now prevalent in our police? I think there is a

lot of evidence, and Plebgate is probably the thing which has

clinched it. The public want to know, how deep does this girl? The

audacity of a group of policemen who think they can set up a Cabinet

minister. Five of those who were arrested and bailed still have not

been charged. One of those officers actually wrote an e-mail pretending

to be a member of the public. I do not see what the problem is in

prosecuting them for that. Taking Plebgate, there are loads of

different bits of that incident. There is the officers on duty in

Downing Street, the issue of who leaked the story to the Sun, there

are the officers who claim to have been there who would appear not to

have been there, and then we have got the West Midlands meeting

issue, which has sort of been resolved this week. There has been

misconduct. But at a lower level. But it is the audacity of an

organisation which thinks it can take on an elected minister and

destroy him for their own political purposes, at a time when the

Government are cutting please pay, when they are freezing their

pensions and reducing their numbers. It looks very much to all of us, the

public, that the police are at war with the government, and they are

going to do anything they can to discredit the Government. The police

would have every reason to be at war with the Government, because there

if there is a crisis of trust... But it looks like they fitted up a

Cabinet minister. That remains to be seen, it is being investigated. We

know that those Birmingham officers, they totally misrepresented to, if

not lied outright, about what was said. Again, that is a

misrepresentation of what happened. If you actually go and look at what

is said, it is plain from the context, they were saying, he has

told us nothing new. But he had in the transcript, it said he hadn't.

He would not admit he had used the word pleb. He apologised profusely,

he said it would never happen again, he said many things that he had not

said before. I agree, which is presumably... Thereon many police

forces in this country, they have one of the toughest jobs in the

land, they end up getting involved in almost anything which happens in

society, and there are obviously a number of difficult examples, but

what is the evidence that it is out of hand, other than just several bad

apples? This bad apples argument, we people worry that if you can set up

a Cabinet minister then you can set up anyone. I disagree. We are yet to

year what has happened at the gates of Downing Street. What we know

about the gates of Downing Street is that we were told by the police

officers that passers-by had her this incredible row where

Mitchell's file rant was appalling. We now know that is not true. We

don't know that there was no one around. But it is clear that the

Police Federation and elements within that jumped on this as a

politically motivated campaign. I have always said that politics

should be kept out of policing. I think this was just too overly

political. Do we need a better way of monitoring the police Rune Master

we need a more competent tarmac every police officer... Your Mac

that is the police force your God. This It's approaching 11:40am.

You're watching the Sunday Politics. Good morning and welcome to Sunday

Politics Scotland. Coming up on the programme: I'll be live in

Grangemouth ahead of a planned demonstration - as the conflict

continues between the employees and the management at the plant.

Fresh from his leadership address to the SNP party conference, the First

Minister Alex Salmond joins us live from Perth.

And Andrew Carnegie, Robert the Bruce, Barbara Dickson and

by-election upsets. That's what Dunfermline's famous for. So who

will be crowned victorious on Thursday?

A demonstration organised by the Unite union is due to get underway

at Grangemouth this lunchtime. It's been a tit-for-tat affair this week.

There had been a strike planned - it was called off. But the plant's

operators Ineos said for safety reasons they had to close the

operation down just in case. Talks have been held but there's no sign

of a breakthrough in what has become a particularly bitter dispute. The

next deadline is tomorrow night when staff are due to return letters the

company has sent asking them to agree to new pay and pension

conditions. The company's owners are due to discuss the outcome on

Tuesday. Andrew Anderson is there for us now. Is what is the purpose

of this demonstration? You described it as a bitter dispute. It is one of

the biggest and most veteran disputes, I would suggest, in

Scotland for the last 20 years. As you can see, workers are gathering

the year for a rally due to start at 12 o'clock. As they see it, they are

fighting for their livelihoods and the life of this plant. It is one of

the biggest of its type in Europe and it has been in Grangemouth and

grown over the past 90 years. It produces about 80% of the petrol

that we buy in Scotland and about 10% of the oil that comes in from

the North Sea. Management say it is losing ?10 million per month and

they want workers to sign up to new pay and conditions. Those include an

end to the final salary pension scheme, a freeze on conditions and

shifting alliances. Unite have taken out full-page adverts in which they

make a series of accusations against Ineos. They say they are holding the

workers and Scotland to ransom. The stakes are very high. It is a bitter

dispute and one that has political ramifications as well. It started

over a dispute over a union official and now has become wider. How

crucial will this week be for the plant? This is perhaps the most

crucial week in the plant's 90 year history. The company had given the

workers a deadline to sign up to this new pay and conditions package.

They have bypassed the union and gone straight to the workforce and

delivered papers to their homes at end of last week. They have been

given until 6pm tomorrow to indicate whether they are willing to sign

up. If they are not, he is saying that if they don't, the

prospects for this plant are bleak and Ineos has already suggested it

could close by 2017. If workers sign up, they are promising millions of

pounds of investment to guarantee the long-term future.

There was a rousing reception for Alex Salmond yesterday as he

addressed the SNP faithful in Perth - their last full gathering before

next year's independence referendum. The First Minister told delegates

they were the independence generation and that a yes vote next

year would be, for Scotland, "an act of national self-confidence and

self-belief". He also confirmed we'll get the Scottish Government's

prospectus for independence in their white paper on the 26th of November.

Confidence is clearly high, yet polls seem to suggest that a

majority of the public isn't yet caught up on that wave of

enthusiasm. So what does Mr Salmond have to do to make his dreams a

reality? From Perth, David Porter reports.

It is a pretty apt question and one that is increasingly focusing minds.

Where is the ship going to sail to? It will be more than a decade before

these children can vote at next year their parents well. Alex Salmond

relishes the role of captain. He likes to lead from the front. As the

good ship independence sets sail, is Scotland bound for a new course or

will the SNP's hopes founder. As he consults his political charts, a key

theme is a major sing -- emerging. The key thing is who can be trusted

to make the best decisions for Scotland? Our own Parliament or a

Westminster system which barely represents the votes or values of

the Scottish people? But he knows nothing in politics goes entirely to

plan. The opinion polls are yet to move his way. Those close to him say

he will leave nothing to chance. Here's a campaigner but a man with a

clear vision of what Scotland should have. Yet to the opinion polls are

still resolutely unfavourable. What the opinion polls tell you is about

people whose default position is now. They just need to be persuaded.

But there are a big group who wants to be persuaded. The job of the yes

campaign is to persuade them over the next months. I think that is

perfectly possible. He, too, will be the town that is set. Tone is very

important. As we move towards the vote and the publication of the

white paper, as people begin to engage in the arguments, what will

independence look like? It is important for the yes campaign to

focus on the positives. Be under no illusion, if we don't vote yes,

Westminster will turn of the screw. Despite ramping up the rhetoric,

senior figures insist they will remain positive. We are all Scots

and people who live in Scotland. Everyone has a right to different

views. So long as we remember that we are involved in a historic and

exciting debate, I am sure we will have a yes vote and come out a bit

stronger and more respectful. As a student of political history, Alex

Salmond is aware of the importance of events. Developments at

Grangemouth are just one example of how the agenda can change at a

moment 's notice. It is a very difficult trick he has got to do. He

has to persuade people of his vision but also reach people who are not

associated with the yes campaign or the SNP. He must reach into the

middle ground of politics and persuade people that it is a safe

thing to do to go for a better future. But he must do that in a way

that makes it not appear obsessed with the SNP or yes. Those on board

now it won't be plain sailing. They insist the referendum can be won.

Well, the First Minister Alex Salmond joins me now from the last

day of the SNP conference. Good afternoon. Let's start with the

situation in Grangemouth. Is Ineos holding the country to ransom?

Sorry, I don't have a monitor here. On Grangemouth, I will concentrate

absolutely on saying on tarmac her I believe we can get out of the

impasse. This is what I think should happen. I think Unite should give a

no strike without strings guarantee. Once that is done, Ineos should fire

up the plant. Then consultations should take place against the

background of a working plant, not a plant that is lying cold. Both union

and management say they see a great future for the complex F investment

comes in. If they both support that investment and build on these

aspects of common ground and get the plant working again, then the other

consultations can take place on a much better atmosphere than at

present. Workers are told they have to make a decision by tomorrow.

Would you ask the company to polls on that? This is so important. The

key aspect that I can see is that if we have all of this taking place,

the exchange of press releases and tweeting and arguments back and

forward against an idle plant, that is the underlying difficulty for the

company and for the workforce and for Scotland. Let's get the plant up

and running so that everyone has a vested interest in coming to terms

in a plant that is working as opposed to the present situation,

which is wholly dangerous for the workforce and the Scottish economy.

I grew up in Linlithgow. The fires burning in Grangemouth have been

part of my life as long as I have been alive. These fires are no alt

-- now out. In terms of the long-term future of the plant, when

you have talked to Ineos, have you discussed nationalisation? I have

discussed investment in the plant and what the Scottish Government

could do to support it. There are also discussions with the government

and the green investment bank. Is nationalisation and option? When I

talked to Unite I asked them if they wanted the Scottish Government to be

discussing it investment plan. They said yes. I am concentrating on

getting the plant up and running and an investment to secure the plant's

long-term future. The union and the company agree that Grangemouth has

an exciting long-term future. Let's try to bring the parties together,

get the plant up and running and look about that investment to secure

its long-term future. You said yesterday that

renationalisation of the Royal Mail is a priority for you and you have

nationalised Prestwick Airport. Have you had any conversations about

nationalising Grangemouth? If this was just a political interview and

people's lives were at stake with one of our major industrial plants

idle and cold at the moment, I would go into a whole range of politics,

but I am trying to concentrate on what I believe will help, finding

common ground. For example, I have seen the agreement that was almost

made at ACAS in the early hours of last Wednesday morning. That

agreement was within touching distance of being made. Despite

everything that has been set on either side, I don't think we were

very far from making an agreement last Wednesday morning, and

therefore trying to get back into the situation where the plant is up

and running and people can have these discussions in a more

constructive and productive atmosphere seems to be a priority

for the Scottish First Minister and the Scottish government at the

present moment. I will not be deflected on that and I will not

enter into aspects which would be controversial on either side. I am

trying to build on the common ground for the sake of the plant and the

workforce and for the sake of the Scottish economy. Let the Askew a

bit about what you said in your speech yesterday -- let me ask you.

How much detail will the White Paper gives on taxation, for instance? You

support the aims of the Scottish Common Weal movement, the idea of

following a Scandinavian or Nordic model on economic policies. Will we

get greater levels of taxation in an independent Scotland, in the White

Paper? The White Paper will lay out the basis of the independence

settlement. That means what we'll take Scotland to between a yes vote

in the referendum next year and the spring of 2016. This is

fundamentally not about the policies of the SNP all of the Scottish First

Minister, but about the democratic right of people in Scotland to

choose a government of their own. The second point of the White Paper

will lay out the vision of the SNP. That means, what we would do if we

were chosen to be that government. As part of that, but we get taxation

levels? As far as the aims of the Scottish Common Weal are concerned,

it is to look and consider some of the item is being put forward as is

right and proper, because they are interesting and substantial

arguments. In terms of SNP policy, I don't think you have been short of

SNP policies over the last few days, for example, Nicola Sturgeon's

attack on food bills in Scotland, to take the necessary spending as far

as energy efficiency is concerned. My clarion call yesterday to set a

minimum wage at ?6 31 -- ?6.31 per hour... First minute, that is my

point. You have given us a lot of spending commitments for an

independent Scotland. People may well ask, how do we pay for that?

Don't people deserve to know the answer to that question as part of

the SNP's policies ahead of the referendum? The White Paper will not

lack detail on the SNP's vision for an independent Scotland and this

conference has not lacked detail on policies. The ask about

affordability. May I remind you that in 2011-2012, the last year for

which we have figures, there was a relatively better physical situation

in Scotland comparatively to the UK -- fiscal situation. If you took it

over five years, the average has been over ?2 billion better for

Scotland than for the UK. Let's start from the acceptance that

Scotland is in a stronger relative fiscal position than the UK as a

whole, and it will be a -- a good basis from which to chart the

policies for an independent Scotland. The key thing is how the

policies must make the country more prosperous and just, and that is

what the SNP have been outlining this week. Can I have some clarity

on your earlier interview on the BBC this morning? You said that what you

had disposed of the Prime Minister comedy would debate with all and

sundry. Is that mean that if David Cameron continues with his position

of saying no, that you are unlikely to debate with Alistair Carmichael,

Darling and others? It was not meant to be a literal disposition! It was

a figure of speech. I was saying that we should debate Prime Minister

to First Minister first, and once we get that debate, and I think it must

happen for reasons I outlined yesterday, on the basis that David

Cameron is pulling the strings on this debate and therefore he has to

take democratic accountability... If he continues to say no, what effect

does that have? I intend, by one means or another, to tempt the Prime

Minister into that television debate, because I think it is

fundamental that it is Prime Minister to First Minister,

different prospectors for the future of Scotland, it will then get into a

debate of basically any other candidates that the no campaign care

to field. But if he is tempted by your offer, will be other debates go

ahead and molest? I think the task is to make sure that he cannot

sustain that position. I did say there is an alternative, of course.

I said he could either step up to the plate or get out of the debate.

What he can't do is take the present position, which is that we have a

fusillade of secretaries of State he wanted to take -- dictate the terms

to Scotland but not subject themselves to democratic

examination. It is a straight choice. Either step up to the plate

as Prime Minister or agree to get out of the debate and that seems to

be pretty fair. My preference, incidentally, would be to get him

into a debate and let the? Prospectus for the future of this

country be absolutely clear, First Minister of Scotland to Prime

Minister of London. Thank you very much.

The final few days of campaigning will take place in and around

Dunfermline this heat ahead of Thursday's by-election. It was

called after Bill Walker resigned following his conviction for

domestic abuse. He was originally enacted as an SNP MSP in 2011 but

latterly became an independent. Bread-and-butter issues have

included schools services and hospital closures. It is a close

thing between the SNP and the Labour Party as to -- as they take their

campaigns to wet and windy doorsteps.

The medieval central -- centre of Dunfermline, no stranger to

political intrigue, once the seat of royal power. King Robert the Bruce

is famous in the wider constituency. Who will emerge the

glorious and he will be consigned to history? As the Lib Dems campaign in

this by-election, they are encouraged by former glories. This

place is known for its political upsets. Willie Rennie, the current

leader, knocked at Labour in 2006. People are now coming back to was

mainly because people remember the very hard-working team that they had

here. Willie Rennie is a well cant face and name on the doorsteps you.

People remember how hard he worked as an MSP. They want is that strong

Lib Dem team back again. The Conservatives' James Beattie is a

young entrepreneur with a cider making business. Pressing the

economy forward as one of his aims. We want to make banks think about

cheaper mortgages. That is a positive thing in an area like this

where people aspire to buy their own home. We have seen an income tax for

nearly 2.5 million people. David Cameron has announced a national

insurance could for small businesses, which is great for group

-- for Scottish businesses. And we want to cut income tax. West in

Blair Hall, Labour's candidate is Kara Hilton. She has been criticised

by the SNP in one of the key policy battle grounds. They claim she has

distanced herself from the Labour school closure programme. That is

critical -- hypocritical, she says. The reason for the by-election is

also brought up. The only reason we are having this by-election in

Dunfermline is because of Bill Walker and the fact that Alex

Hammond and Nicola Sturgeon ignored all the warnings about this man.

Dunfermline deserves better than a disgraced wife-beater as an MSP.

This election gives us the opportunity to give Dunfermline and

MSP to campaign on everyday issues that affect people here in our

town. The SNP say they have apologised about Bill Walker and are

focusing on other issues. Health is a key part of the SNP's campaign. We

have put through a strong message that we are having a constructive

dialogue with the chief executive. I'm pleased that I have already had

a dialogue with him to work out a timetable for a diagnostic and

treatment centre here at the Queen Margaret, including a midwife

modernity led unit -- midwife led that -- maternity unit. Those are

the challenges in this campaign and as the winner gets grim in

Dunfermline, there are others hoping for a breakthrough. We are calling

for there to be improved public transport serving the town on both

in terms of regulation of buses and serving the Western villages as

well, with people being forgotten about that. There are many people

here who are open-minded and undecided and have not firmly come

down on one side or the other, so they will listen and read my

material. It is a hopeful sign. I will work with them to improve the

state of concern them and Scotland. There should be a partnership

between the government and the people. Back at the Abbey, the

legend about Robert the Bruce and the spider's attempt to reach a Web

is probably good advice for potential politicians. If at first

you don't succeed, try again. We will have live overnight coverage

of the counter this Thursday on BBC Two. I will speak to all of the

candidates tomorrow night in a special Newsnight Scotland hustings

programme, which starts at 10:30pm. For now, here is the Rune Master, as

he was described in the Observer this morning, Professor John

Curtice. What are the rooms are saying? The first thing to realise

is this is a tough fight for the SNP. They only had a 2% lead over

the Labour Party back in 2011 will stop in fact, even though they won

the seat, this was the 13th lowest SNP share of the vote on the

occasion that election. In truth, is a by-election, he constituency they

won in 2011, between Labour and the Lib Dems. It is a tough fight. Is --

governments usually don't do well in by-elections. The lowest swing was

back in 2005 in Cathcart. Even that kind of swing, small blow out is --

small though it is would be enough to unseat the SNP. Although they are

still writing relatively high in the polls, they are not as high now as

they were in 2011. It is difficult to see how the SNP are going to hang

on, or to put it conversely, if they do manage to defend this

by-election, I think they will be able to regard it as a stupendous

achievement. What can a by-election which is about hospitals and schools

and other issues, tell us about next year's independence referendum? In

truth, not a great deal. This is a battle which primarily is being

fought about local issues such as schools and hospitals and police

stations in much the same way as the Aberdeen dons side by-election a

couple of months ago was primarily about a particular roundabout and

the state of Aberdeen's roads. There is a body of people out there who

think the SNP are indeed doing a good job of running Scotland's

government, he might still be willing to vote for them in a

Scottish Parliament election, but may well not as yet be willing to

vote yes in a referendum. Equally, people will often just use a

by-election to say, hang on, not quite so happy with things and I am

going to issue a word of caution to the incumbent government. Either

way, these are not considerations that are relevant to the referendum.

I don't think, unless we see something remarkably spectacular

decline in the SNP vote, I think, in truth, we will probably say this is

too much what you would expect for a government in mid-term and the

political caravan will move on. Thank you very much.

You are watching Sunday Politics Scotland from the BBC. Still to

come, a look at the week ahead with the Guardian's Scotland

correspondent Severin Carrell, and former SNP MSP and historian

Christopher Harvie. First, the latest news from Reporting Scotland.

Good afternoon. The First Minister has called for both sides in the

Grangemouth dispute to meet on common ground so the plant can be

"fired up again". This is the scene at the plant as a

workers' rally gets underway. Ineos management has asked the Unite union

not to call further industrial action this year. Unite said it

would agree, but only if there were no cuts. Speaking on the programme,

Mr Salmond said it was critical for Scotland that Grangemouth goes back

on-line. This is what I think should happen. I think Unite should give a

no strings, no strike guarantee. Then, Ineos should fire up the plant

will stop and then consultations on terms and conditions should take

place against the background of a working plant.

The SNP conference in Perth will end this afternoon with a rally for

independence. Our political editor Brian Taylor is at the city's

Conference Hall. The conference will close this

afternoon with a rally for independence. Although the entire

event has been just that. There has been substance. The Justice

Secretary stressed his determination to press ahead with reforms and

mandatory demand for corroboration in the Scottish courts system. He

says one in ten domestic abuse cases. The prosecuted because of it.

Extra money was announced for college bursaries and student

loans. An eight-year-old girl is being

treated for serious facial injuries after being mauled by two American

bulldogs in Glasgow. The incident happened in the Garthamlock area of

the city on Friday evening. Police say the dogs have been seized and a

man and a woman in their 30s have been charged under the Dangerous

Dogs Act. Now, the weather. More sunshine today than recently.

We still have persistent rain and strong winds overshadowed. -- over

Shetland. There will be rain and possibly some hail.

Now, in a moment, we'll be discussing the big events coming up

this week, but first let's take a look back at the week in 60 seconds.

A company pled guilty to health and safety failures after a double sank

on the Clyde. Scottish gas customers face bigger bills than the rest of

the UK after a decision by the owners to increase prices. Shares in

Royal Mail went up in price on the company's first day of full

trading. The government claims they are under price. Andy Murray

received his OBE from Buckingham Palace. He said he was almost late

due to a random drug test. I was just getting ready and they turned

up. I was worried I would be late but to the taxi driver did a good

job. Edinburgh zoo have confirmed they are no longer expecting a hand

at birth. -- Panda. Now, the week ahead.

And I'm joined this week by the historian, author and former SNP MSP

Christopher Harvie. And from Perth - where he's been at the SNP

conference for the last few days - the Scotland correspondent for the

Guardian Severin Carrell. Let's start with the situation at

Grangemouth. The headline is 24 hours to save Grangemouth. I think

it is important and the policies we bring to their net are ones we have

to think of very carefully. It may not be just a case of

nationalisation. The Scottish Government should be prepared to go

to accompany like Statoil. Rather than activities in the early 2000s

which of land that is -- landed us with these companies. Alex Salmond

is urging both sides to get back around the table. People are

worried. It is a high-stakes game. The problem for the Scottish

Government is that they are dealing with a company which behaves in a

very, without being pejorative, aggressive way. It is very tough to

deal with and it is certain about its capacity to pull the plug.

Normally, the First Minister is in a position to help reconciliation.

This time, he is dealing with one immovable object and a trade union

fighting for its life. We had coverage of Alex Salmond's speech at

the SNP conference. How do you rate what he said and how he has tried to

galvanise support? I thought it was a very safe and solid speech. His

colleagues are delighted and think it is one of the best he has given.

I am not certain it will resonate much outside of the conference hall.

It is not a speech which will win the referendum. The Sunday Times had

no mention of the speech. There was a splash about Ineos and the speech

got mentioned on page two. I think he is saving his energy and

ammunition until the White Paper comes out. I think there is an

element of holding out and looking for a more comprehensive approach. I

think there should be a much stronger industrial policy,

particularly about the North Sea and renewable energy. It is something

not catered for by the government in the South. Do you think that level

of detail will be an the White Paper? I think so, yes. He knows

about those links to Europe and we have to realise that with a degree

of Confed will power, sovereign power but with an agreement of

elements we have in common with the South, that's give of sovereignty

which allows us to make cooperative choices with European allies is

something that much be -- must be pushed. Do you think that is what

the White Paper will be about? The question of energy cooperation is

essential to Alex Salmond's strategy. Some of the other elements

were allowed to -- all you did to. There is a harmony in that way of

approaching things. He does want to be able to see Scotland as a player

on a much larger stage than just simply within the UK. Does that

resonate with the public? I think so. Alistair Darling slams the HS2

scheme. In other words, better together but further apart.

That's all from the us this week. I'll be back at the same time next

week. Until then, goodbye.