20/11/2016 Sunday Politics Scotland

Morning folks - welcome to the Sunday Politics.

Theresa May says she'll deliver on Brexit but does that mean leaving

the EU's Single Market and the Customs Union?

Tory MPs campaign for a commitment from the Prime

The Chancellor pledges just over a billion pounds worth of spending

on Britain's roads but is that it or will there be

Their last leader was just 18 days in the job.

Now the second UKIP leadership election this year

Amid delays and growing frustration among passengers,

I'll be asking the Transport Minister Humza Yousaf if he thinks

Abellio are still fit to run ScotRail.

is it about a bigger conflict in Europe?

And with me - as always - and, no, these three aren't doing

the Mannequin challenge - it's our dynamic, demonstrative,

dazzling political panel - Helen Lewis, Isabel Oakeshott

and Tom Newton Dunn they'll also be tweeting throughout the programme.

First this morning - Theresa May has said

"Brexit means Brexit" - but can the Prime Minister -

who was on the Remain side of argument during the referendum

Well, Leave-supporting Tory MPs are re-launching

the "European Research Group" this morning to keep Mrs May's feet

Are you worried that you cannot trust Theresa May until payment to

deliver full Brexit was Magellan like I totally trust Theresa May,

100% behind her. She has displayed a massive amount of commitment to

making a success of Brexit for the country.

We don't know that yet, because nothing has happened. Why, then,

have you formed a pressure group? We were fed up with the negativity

coming out around Brexit. I feel positive about the opportunities we

face, and we are a group to provide suggestions. Who do you have in mind

when you talk about negativity - the Chancellor? No, from the Lib Dems,

for example, from Labour MPs. This is a pressure group for leaving

membership of the single market and customs union, correct? That is what

we are proposing. It has a purpose other than just to combat

negativity. When it comes to membership of the single market and

the customs union, can you tell us what Government policy is towards

both or either? Rightly, the Government hasn't made the position

clear, and I think that is the right approach, because we don't want to

review our negotiating hand. What we're saying... I'm not asking what

you are saying. Can you tell us what Government policy is towards

membership of these institutions? The Government wants to make sure

British businesses have the right to trade with EU partners, to forge new

trade deals with the rest of the world. We hope to Reza may speak at

Mansion house this week. -- we had Theresa May speak at Mansion house

this week. She has been clear, saying it was not a binary choice.

And she's right. Let's run that tape, because I want to pick up on

what she did say. This is what she had to say about the customs union

at Prime Minister's Question Time. On the whole question of the customs

union, trading relationships that we have with the European Union and

other parts of the world once we have left the European Union, we are

preparing carefully for the formal negotiations. We are preparing

carefully for the formal negotiations. We want to ensure we

have the best possible trading deal with the EU once we have left. Do

you know what she means when she says being in the customs union is

not a binary choice? I think she's right when she says that. At the

moment, and you know this, as long as we are in the customs union, we

cannot set our own tariffs or rules, cannot have a free trade agreement

with the US or China. We need to leave a customs union to do that.

Binary means either you are in or you are out, self which is it? We

still want to trade with the EU, and I think we can have a free trade

agreement with the EU. That is a separate matter, and it has to do

with the single market. What about the customs union? We need to leave

the customs union. We do it and properly. That is how to get the

most out of this opportunity. Summit is a binary choice? The Prime

Minister is right when she says it's not a binary choice. Both can't be

right. We can leave the customs union, get their benefits, and have

a free trade agreement with zero tariffs with the EU. So it is a

binary choice an either be stale really. Yellow like I am saying the

Prime Minister is right when she says it is not a binary choice. -- I

am saying the Prime Minister is right. We need clarity. Youth had

said -- you have said it is a binary choice. We need to leave the

constraints of the customs union. It pushes up prices. The EU is not

securing the right trade deals, and if we want to make the most of it,

we need to get out there and get some deals going. Do you accept that

if we remain in the customs union, we cannot do our own free-trade

deals? Yellow right 100%. That is why we have to leave. -- 100%. Do

you accept that if we leave the customs union but stay with

substantial access, I don't say membership, but substantial access

to the single market, that goods going from this country to the

single market because we're no longer in the union will be subject

to complicated rules of origin regulations, which could cost

business ?13 billion a year? I would like to see a free-trade agreement

between the UK and the EU. Look at the Canadian deal. I give you that,

but if we're not in the customs union, things that we bring in on

our own tariffs once we've left, we can't just export again willy-nilly

to the EU. They will demand to see rules of origin. Norway has to do

that at the moment and it is highly complicated expensive. I think if we

agree a particular arrangement as part of this agreement with the EU,

we can reach an agreement on that which sets a lower standard, which

sets a different level of tariffs, which protects some of our

industries. Let's suppose we have pretty much free trade with the EU

but we are out of the customs union, and let's suppose that the European

Union has a 20% tariff on Japanese whisky and we decide to have a 0%

tariff - what then happens to the whisky that comes into Britain and

goes on to the EU? The EU will not let that in. That will be part of

the negotiation. I think there is a huge benefit for external operators.

Every bottle of Japanese whisky, they will have to work out the rules

of origin. There have been studies that show there is a potential for

50% increase in global product if we leave. We're losing the benefits of

free trade. I understand, I am asking for your particular view.

Thank you for that. Is it not surprising Mr Hannan could

not bring himself to say we would leave the customs union? It is

messy. The reason there is this new group of Tory MPs signing up to a

campaign to make sure we get a genuine Brexit is because there is

this vacuum. It is being filled with all sorts of briefing from the other

side. There is a real risk in the minds of Brexit supporting MPs that

the remaining side are going to try to hijack the process, not only

through the Supreme Court action, which I think most Brexit MPs seem

to accept the appeal will fail, but further down the line, through

amendments to the great repeal bill. This is a pressure group to try to

hold the Prime Minister to account. There is plenty of pressure on the

Prime Minister effectively to stay in the single market and the customs

union, and if you do both of these things, de facto, you have stayed in

the EU. She is in a difficult position because there is no good

faith assumption about what Theresa May wants because she was a

Remainer. There is all this talk about a transitional arrangement,

but she can't sell that as someone who voted to remain. The way Isabel

has characterised it is interesting. There is a betrayal narrative.

Everyone is looking to say that she has betrayed the true Brexit. Since

the Government cannot give a clear indication of what it once in terms

of the customs union, which sets external tariffs, or the single

market, which is the free movement of people, capital, goods and

services, others are filling this vacuum. Right. The reasons they

can't do this are, first, they don't know if they can get it or not. We

saw this with the renegotiation the last Prime Minister. What are they

hoping to get? The world on a stick, to get cake and eat it. You go into

a negotiation saying, let's see what we can get in total. Are they going

to ask the membership of the single market? Yellow I think they will ask

for a free trade agreement involving everything. You can demand what you

want. The question is, do they stand a cat's chance in hell of getting

it? They don't know. Welcome back. We will be back, believe me. It is

150 day since we found out the UK had voted to leave the EU, but as we

have heard, remain and leave campaigners continue to battle about

what type of relationship we should have with the EU after exit.

Leave campaigners say that leaving the EU

also means quitting the

Single Market, the internal European trading bloc that includes free

movement of goods, services, capital and people.

They point to evidence that leading Leave supporting

politicians ruled out staying in the Single Market during

Andrea Leadsom, for example, said it would almost

certainly be the case that the UK would come out of the Single Market.

When asked for a yes or no on whether the UK should stay

"No, we should be outside the Single Market."

And Boris Johnson agreed with his erstwhile ally, saying, "Michael

Gove was absolutely right to say the UK

They've released a video of clips of Leave campaigners speaking before

the referendum apparently saying that the UK should stay in the

Nigel Farage, for example, once said that on leaving

the EU we'll find ourselves part of the European economic area

Owen Paterson, the former Environment Secretary,

once made the startling statement that only a madman would actually

And Matthew Elliott, the Vote Leave chief, said

that the Norwegian option would be initially attractive for some

But do these quotes create an accurate picture of what

To cast some light on where these quotes came from we're

joined by James McGrory, director of Open Britain

Welcome to the Sunday Politics. . Your video has statements from leave

campaigners hinting they want to stay in the single market. How many

were made during the referendum campaign? I don't know. Not one was

made during the referendum campaign. Indeed, only two of the 12

statements were recorded after Royal assent had been given to the

referendum. Only one was made this year before the referendum.

Throughout the campaign am a leave campaigners lauded the Norwegian

model. Norway are in the single market but not in the EU. They went

out of their way not to be pinned down on a specific trading

arrangement they want to see in the future with Europe, when the

Treasury model the different models it was the EEA or a free-trade

agreement. I understand. Does it not undermine your case that none of the

12 statements on your video were made during the campaign itself,

when people were giving really serious thought to such matters? The

Leave campaign weren't giving serious thought to such matters.

They did not set out the future trading model they wanted to see.

But you cannot produce a single video with somebody saying we should

stay in the single market during the campaign. Daniel Hanna had talked

about the Norwegian model as a future option. One comment from

Nigel Farage dates back to 2009, when we didn't even know if we would

have a referendum or not. Does it not stretch credibility to go back

to the time when Gordon Brown was Prime Minister? The overall point

stands. It is not supposed to be an exhaustive list of the options.

Daniel Hannan, described as the intellectual godfather of the Leave

movement is saying that no one is talking about threatening our place

in the signal market. I think it's legitimate to point out the Leave

campaign never came forward with a credible argument. We have

highlighted some of the quotes you picked out from leave campaigners

over time. Do you think you have fully encapsulated their arguments

accurately? I don't think in a 92nd video you can talk about the full

thing. -- a 90-2nd video. Some of them want to seek a free-trade

agreement, some to default on to World Trade Organisation tariffs.

There is a range of opinion in the Leave campaign. Let's listen to the

clip you used on Owen Paterson first.

Only a madman would actually leave the market.

Only a madman would actually leave the market.

It's not the EU which is

a political organisation delivering the prosperity and buying our goods.

It's the market, it's the members of the market and we'll carry on

I mean, are we really suggesting that the

economy in the world is not going to come to come

to a satisfactory trading arrangement with the EU?

Are we going to be like Sudan and North

It is ludicrous this idea that we are going to leap off a

What he said when he said only a madman would leave Europe, was that

we would continue to trade, we would continue to have access. Any country

in the world can have access. What the Leave campaign suggested is our

trade would continue uninterrupted, they are still at it today, David

Davis used the phrase, uninterrupted, from the dispatch box

recently. You misrepresented him by saying only a madman would leave the

Single Market and stopped it there, because he goes onto say that of

course we want Leave in the sense of continuing to have access. I don't

think he was about axis, he is talking

about membership. He doesn't use the word membership at all. He talks

about we are going to carry on trading with them, we will not leap

off, we will carry on trading. Anybody can trade with the EU, it's

the terms on which you trade that is important and leave campaigners and

Patterson is an example of this, saying we can trade as we do now,

the government saying we can trade without bureaucratic impediments and

tariff free. The viewers will make up their mind. Let's listen to the

views of Matthew Elliott, the Chief Executive of Vote Leave.

When it comes to the Norwegian option, the EEA option, I think that

it might be initially attractive for some business people.

So you then cut him off there but this is what he went on to say in

the same clip, let's listen to that. When it comes to the Norwegian

option, the EEA option, I think that it might be initially attractive

for some business people. But then again for voters

who are increasingly concerned about migration in the EU,

they will be very concerned that it allows free movement

of people to continue. Again, you have misrepresented him.

He said the Norwegian model has attractions but there are real

problems if it involves free movement of people, which it does.

But you cut that bit out. I challenge anyone to represent them

accurately because they took such a range of opinions. I don't know what

we are supposed to do. You are misrepresenting them. He is saying

the Norwegian option is attractive to business, I understand why. It

might not be attractive for voters. But then he said if it allowed free

movement of people it could be an issue. You took that out. You are

saying this is a definitive position. I'm suggesting you are

distorting it. This is what you had Mr Farage say.

On D+1 we'll find ourselves part of the European economic area

This is what he then went on to say in that same clip that you didn't

run. There is absolutely

nothing to fear in terms of trade from leaving

the on D+1 we'll find ourselves part

of the European Economic Area and we should use our

membership of the EEA as a holding position from which

we can negotiate as the European Union's biggest export

market in the world, as good a deal, my goodness me,

if Switzerland can have one we So there again, he says not that we

should stay in the Single Market as a member, but that we stay in the EA

as a transition until we negotiate something. -- EEA. This whole clip

is online, how would you get away with this distortion? It is not a

distortion, the whole point is to point out they do not have a

definitive position, he is arguing for membership of the Single Market,

for a transitional period. For the transition. How long does that go

on, what does he want to then achieve? Not very quickly but he

does not say we should stay members of the Single Market and you didn't

let people see what he went on to say, you gave the impression he

wanted to stay in the one it. It would not be a video then, it would

be a seven-week long lecture. They took so many positions, and the idea

now that they were clear with people that we should definitely leave the

Single Market I think is fictitious. You are trying to make out they all

had one position which was to remain members of the one it. You see the

full clips that is not what they are saying. We are trying to point out

there is no mandate to leave the Single Market. The idea the Leave

campaign spoke with unanimity and clarity of purpose and throughout

the whole campaign said we will definitely leave the Single Market

is not true. That is the whole point of the media. We showed in the

montage in the video just before we came on, we said that then Prime

Minister, the then Chancellor, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, being

categorical that if you vote to leave the EU, you vote to leave

membership of the Single Market. What bit of that didn't you

understand? Under duress they occasionally said they wanted to

leave. Some of them wanted to leave the Single Market. All of the other

promises they made, whether ?350 million for the NHS, whether a VAT

cut on fuel, points-based system. You do not have a single quote of

any of these members saying they want to be a member. Daniel Hannan

has said consistently that Norway are a part of the Single Market. You

spend the referendum campaign criticising for Rim misrepresenting

and misrepresenting and lying and many thought they did. Having seen

this many will conclude that you are the biggest liars. I think it is

perfectly reasonable to point out that the Leave campaign did not have

a clear position on our future trading relationship with Europe.

That is all this video does. It doesn't say we definitely have to

stay in the Single Market, it just says they do have a mandate to drag

us out of our biggest trading partner.

Now people have seen the full quotes in context our viewers will make up

their mind. Thank you. Now - voting closes next week

in the the Ukip leadership contest. The second Ukip leadership contest

this year after the party's first female leader - Diane James -

stood down from the role Since then the party's lurched from

farce to fiasco. It's a world gripped by uncertainty,

split into factions. Yes, 2, because they're

having their second Watch as the alpha male,

the Ukip leader at Nigel Watch as the alpha male,

the Ukip leader Nigel Farage, hands power to the new alpha

female Diane James. The European Parliament

in Strasbourg, October. Another leading light and possible

future leader, the MEP Steven Wolfe,

has been laid low after an alleged tussle with a colleague

during a meeting. A few days later he is

out of hospital and I will be withdrawing my

application to become I'm actually withdrawing

myself from Ukip. You're resigning from the party?

I'm resigning with immediate effect. And this week a leaked document

suggested the party improperly spent EU funds on political

campaigning in the UK. Another headache for whoever takes

over the leadership of the pack. One contender is Suzanne Evans,

a former Tory councillor and was briefly suspended for

disloyalty. Also standing, Paul Nuttall,

an MEP from Liverpool who has been by Farage's side

as his deputy for six years. There's another big beast

in the Ukip leadership contest, and I'm told

that today he can be spotted He's John Rees-Evans,

a businessman and adventurer who is offering members the chance

to propose policies via a website We've got really dedicated

passionate supporters who feel like they're not really

being listened to and are not even Typically what happens

is they just basically sit there until six months before

a General Election when they are contacted and asked to go out

and leaflet and canvas. Even at branch level people feel

there is not an adequate flow of communication

up-and-down the party. Are you not going to take part in

any hustings? He left a hustings saying

the contest was an establishment coronation and has

made colourful comments in the past. He's in favour of the death penalty

for crimes like paedophilia. I think there is a clear

will amongst the offences should be dealt with

decisively. But again, on an issue like that,

that is something that Our members are not

going to agree with me on everything and I don't believe that

I would have any authority to have the say and determine

the future What method would you use

for the death penalty? Again, that is something that could

be determined by suggestions made So you'd have like an online

poll about whether you use the electric chair,

or lethal injection? For example, arguments would be made

in favour of This is such a small aspect

of what I'm standing for. Essentially, in mainstream media

they try to by focusing on pretty irrelevant

details. This is one vote that

the membership would have. What I'm actually trying to do

in this party is to revolutionise the democratic

process in the UK, and that's really what your viewers should

be concentrating on. With him at the helm he reckons Ukip

would win at Meanwhile, in New York,

on a visit to Trump Tower, Nigel Farage admired the plumage

of the President-elect, a man he has described as

a silverback gorilla, a friendship that's been condemned by some

in this leadership contest. There are also elections

to the party's National Executive Committee, a body

that's been roundly criticised by And we're joined now by two

of the candidates in the Ukip leadership election -

Suzanne Evans and Paul Nuttall. We are going to kick off by giving

each of them 30 seconds to lay out their case as to why they would be

the less leader starting with Suzanne Evans.

Ukip is at its best when it is scaring the political establishment,

forcing it to address those problems it would rather ignore. But it

really change people's lives for the better and fast, we need to win

seats and elections right across the country. To win at the ballot box we

need to attract more women, more ethnic

minorities, and more of those Labour voters who no longer recognise their

party. I know how to do that. Ukip under my

leadership will be the same page about it, common-sense, radical

party it has always been, just even more successful. Thank you, Suzanne

Evans, Paul Nuttall. I'm standing on a platform of unity and experience.

I believe the party must come together if it is to survive and

prosper. I believe I'm the best candidate to ensure that happens, I

am not part of any faction in the party, and beyond that I have done

every single job within the party, whether that is as head of policy,

whether that is Party Chairman, deputy leader for Nigel for the past

six years. I believe Ukip has great opportunities in Labour

constituencies where we can move in and become the Patriot invoice of

working people, and beyond that we have to ensure the government's feet

are held to the fire on Brexit and we get real Brexit, not a

mealy-mouthed version. How will you get a grip on this? People have to

realise that the cause is bigger than any personality, we have to get

together in a room and sort out not just a spokespeople role but roles

within the organisation, Party Chairman, party secretary, and

whatnot. But as I say, Ukip must unite, we are on 13% in the opinion

polls, the future is bright, there are open goals but Ukip must be on

the pitch to score them. He says he's the only one that can get a

grip on this party. I disagree, I have a huge amount of experience in

the party as well and also a background that I think means I can

help bring people together. I have always said nothing breeds unity

faster than success and under my leadership we will be successful.

There is concern about the future of our National Executive Committee

going forward. Mr Farage called it the lowest grade of people I have

ever met, do you agree? I think he must have been having a bad day, I

think we need to make it more accountable to the membership, more

open, more democratic. What would you do with the National Executive

Committee? I have been calling for the National Executive Committee to

be elected reasonably since 2010 giving the members better

communication lines and make it far more transparent. Would you have a

clear out of the office? I wouldn't, I think the chairman of the party,

Paul Upton, the interim chairman, is doing a good job and the only person

who has come out of the summer with his reputation enhanced. Let me show

you a picture we have all seen of your current leader, Mr Farage, with

President-elect Donald Trump. Paul Nuttall, you criticise Mr Farage's

decision to appear at rallies during the American election and called Mr

Trump appalling. Do you stick by that? I wouldn't have voted for him.

I made it clear. Do you still think he's appalling now that he is

President-elect? Some of the things he said were appalling during the

campaign that he said. But he would be good for Britain, trade,

pro-Brexit and he is an Anglo file and the first thing he did was put

the bust of Winston Churchill back in the Oval Office. You, Suzanne

Evans, called Mr Trump one of the weakest candidates the US has had. I

said the same about Hillary Clinton. They cannot both be the weakest. The

better candidate on either side would have beaten the other, that is

quite clear. Do you stand by that, or are you glad that your leader Mr

Farage has strong ties to him? I am, why wouldn't I be? For Ukip to have

that direct connection, it can be only good for a party. Were you not

out of step and Mr Farage is in step because it looks like your vote is

according to polling I have seemed like Mr Trump and his policies? Let

me finish. If I am the leader of Ukip I will not be involving myself

in foreign elections, I will because in trading here in this country

ensuring we get Ukip people elected to council chambers and get seats in

2020. The other thing your leader has in

common with Mr Trump is that he rather admires Vladimir Putin. Do

you? I don't. If you look at Putin's record, he has invaded Ukraine and

Georgia. I am absolutely not a fan. I think that Vladimir Putin is

pretty much a nasty man, but beyond that, I believe that in the Middle

East, he is generally getting it right in many areas. We need to

bring the conflict... Bombing civilians? We need to bring the

conflict to an end as fast as possible. The British and American

line before Donald Trump is to support rebels, including one is

affiliated to Al-Qaeda, to the Taliban. We need to clear these

people out and ensure that Syria becomes stable. This controversial

breaking point poster from during the referendum campaign. Mr Farage

unveiled it, there he is standing in front of it. You can bend it - do

you still? Yes, I think it was the wrong poster at the wrong time. I

was involved with the vote Leave campaign as well as Ukip's campaign,

and I felt strongly that those concerned about immigration were

already going to vote to leave because it was a fundamental truth

that unless we left the European Union we couldn't control

immigration. I thought it was about approaching those soft wavering

voters who weren't sure. I don't think I said it was racist, but it

was about sovereignty and trade and so forth. That was where we needed

to go. I was concerned it might put off some of those wavering voters.

People may well say, it was part of the winning campaign. It was Ukip

shock and all, which is what you stand for and what makes you

different. I said I would know how that I said I would not have gone

for that person and I thought it was wrong to do it just a week out from

the referendum. However, I believe it released legitimate concerns,

with a deluge of people making their way from the Middle East and Africa

into the European continent. Where is the low hanging fruit for you,

particularly in England? Is it Labour or Conservative voters? I

want to hang onto the Conservative voters we have got but I think the

low hanging fruit is Labour. Jeremy Corbyn won't sing the national

anthem, Emily Thornbury despises the English flag. Diane Abbott thinks

anyone talking about immigration is racist. Not to mention John

McDonnell's feelings about the IRA. Labour has ceased to be a party for

working people and I think Ukip is absolutely going to be that party.

It is clear, I absolutely concur with everything Suzanne has said. I

first voiced this back in 2008 that I believe Ukip has a fantastic

opportunity in working-class communities, and everyone laughed at

me. It is clear now that we resonate with working people, and you have

seen that in the Brexit result. Would you bring back the death

penalty? It wouldn't be Ukip policy. Absolutely not. Would you give more

money to the NHS and how would your fanatic? You like it is important to

fund it adequately, and it hasn't been to date. We promised in our

manifesto that we would give more money. Where does the money come

from? It is about tackling health tourism. I think the NHS is being

taken for a ride at the moment. That may be right, but where does the

money come from? It is about scaling back management in the NHS, because

that has burgeoned beyond control. They are spending far more money on

management. Where would you save money? We need to look at HS two,

foreign aid. Now we have Brexit and we will be saving on the membership

fee. We need to cut back on management, as Suzanne says. It

cannot be right that 51% of people who work for the NHS in England are

not clinically qualified. The NHS needs money now - where would you

get it? From HS two. That is capital spending spread over a long period.

Where will you get the money now? OK, another one. We spent ?25

million every day on foreign aid to countries who sometimes are richer

than ourselves. Through the Barnett formula. You would take money away

from Scotland? Yes, I think they get far too much. PG tips or Earl Grey?

Colegrave. PG tips. Strictly come dancing or X Factor? Neither.

Strictly. I would love to be on it one day. There you go. Thank you

It's just gone 11:35am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.

We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now

Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.

The Transport Minister tells there's a strong arguments

for a unified railway system under public ownership.

The Scottish and Welsh Governments win the right to intervene

in the Supreme Court Appeal over Article 50 - but with growing

pressure on Prime Minister May to abandon the appeal altogether,

And after picking-up mysterious signals emanating from Westminster,

our reporter Huw Williams goes beyond the final frontier.

Worth over ?7 billion the ScotRail franchise is the single biggest

The current recipient of this handsome public purse

All does not seem to be going well. In a moment we will hear from the

transport minister saying he is holding a meeting next week to

create a public sector company to bid to run the railways. On Thursday

morning a train broke down between Haymarket and Waverley, causing

chaos. Here are some views of the passengers. It is a shambles. A

joke. We were on the train for over three hours. We were coming from

Livingston. It took two and have ours. I had better go. I am late for

work. We had to stand there and no one told us what was going on. We

were told there were replacement bus services but they never came.

Well, later the same day under questioning

from Labour's Kezia Dugdale, the First Minister apologised

for Abellio's performance and accepted it's not good enough.

I am sorry for the disruption that was caused this morning and any

disruption that any passenger faces on any day of the week. That is

ScotRail's position and it is mine. I accept things are not good enough

and that is why the improvement plan is in place and we will stick with

that until things are running to a standard the public have a right to

accept two expect. I'll be speaking with the Transport

Minister Humza Yousaf shortly, but first, here's Robert Samson

from the rail passengers lobby group Transport Focus and I asked him

if things are getting worse Yes. Passengers are experiencing

poor journeys, punctuality is going down. They are going from 90% down

to 80%. Passengers are suffering right now. Is this a problem to do

it with Abellio or is it a more generalised problem? We have met

with senior management from Abellio last week and there is a problem

with punctuality but there is not one major issue. That are a number

of issues, such as trains breaking down, infrastructure problems. It is

attention to detail that is required to resolve it and hopefully the

performance improvement plan over the next couple of months will see

that punctuality get back up to 90%. Is the problem that Abellio have not

been paying that detailed attention in way that first were when they

were running it? They have been paying attention to the detail but

there have been a number of other factors as well, such as industrial

disputes. Even the problems such as the fourth road works closure meant

that poor performance for ScotRail because they had to amend their

that poor performance for ScotRail timetables to deal with passengers

getting in from Fife to Edinburgh. What they would say is that a lot of

these things you mentioned where beyond their control. Yes, there are

a number of that terrorists that are beyond the control but there are

numbers of factors that are within their control. -- a number of

factors. Such as Saint Mel 's not failing and points failing not

failing. Both those are in control of Network Rail and within the

ScotRail Alliance. We hope the attention to detail with this

performance improvement plan will give passengers the train service

that they want. Some of the issues they mention their sound to me like

Network Rail issues, rather than Abellio issues. Passengers do not

care if they are Network Rail issues or ScotRail issues and there is an

alliance that is coming together, ScotRail and Network Rail, it is up

to the them together to solve the problem and deliver the railway

system that passengers want. Passengers do not want to hear

excuses. It is the infrastructure owners fault, they do not care. Just

fix the problem. Take me through this. If you are someone who relies

on the trains to commute from Glasgow to Edinburgh or Dundee to

Aberdeen or whatever, what are the sort of common problems that regular

commuters are coming across? Regular problems are trains being delayed

and even the performance measure. Commuters especially notice if

trains are two or three minutes late. They want the trains to be on

time. We have done research and high ratings are punctuality and being

able to get a seat. A lot of times in the morning and evening rush hour

passengers are unable to get a seat. Those are the basics that we want to

passengers are unable to get a seat. deliver. What about the state of the

trains themselves? The trains in the morning and evening are overcrowded

and that is a problem for passengers. When things do or wrong,

they want a good level of information to see how long the

delay is going to be and what alternatives are in place. When it

works, it is good. It is patchy and what we want as consistent delivery

of information so that passengers can make an informed choice. Thank

you very much indeed. Well, the man hopefully with a plan

to get Scottish rail back on the right tracks

is Transport Minister Humza Yousaf. First of all, when the Abellio

contract was awarded your Government described it as world leading. Could

you explain to me in what ways Scotland's railways are better than

any others in the world. World leading in terms of what it offered

workers at the time. No compulsory redundancies, the living wage. Let's

be clear, ScotRail's performance has been not good enough. The understand

that I have told them and two in no uncertain terms that the performance

must improve and if it does not improve, there will be serious

consequences. It is not world class yet. It is a franchise and we will

be working to get it the best railways on these islands. It is not

good enough. ScotRail know it is not good enough. Is it world leading in

any respect? Some of the protections it gives employees are unmatched

across these islands. You will understand that people are

frustrated at not being able to do their commute. There are criteria in

using it as the best in the world is not the staff being made redundant.

I would agree. Passengers have been frustrated. Passengers tell me they

are angry. I was that the really at peak time and I have heard that.

When they go on the morning travels are back in the evening, I am on top

of ScotRail to improve the performance. It is not at your level

that is acceptable. Everyday when passengers go on their commute, I R

two and on top of ScotRail to make sure they are improving. Your

Government promised to deliver a world leading railway, which means

the best in the world and you have just sat there and told me that the

is no way in which it is the best really in the world. That is your

responsibility. Yes, it is my responsibility. Why do you not

resign? The only people calling for that are the party and Labour unions

affiliated with Labour. People want a transport minister... Are you

inviting passengers to call for your resignation? No. I am on top of the

job and listening to what passengers have to say and monitoring

ScotRail's performance. I demand a per two improvement. I will be

clear, there are very serious consequences for ScotRail and

Abellio if they do not improve their performance. Nicola Sturgeon said

the other day that you would keep the option of stripping Abellio of

the ScotRail franchise. That could happen when's there are a few ways

that could happen. One is performance dips between 83.4% for

three consecutive months. That is one way it could happen. What I

would also say it is that alternatives in terms of the public

sector bed is something I am exploring and looking at committing

to bring forward. When could that happen? The contract could be

terminated if performance falls below 83.4% that is when you would

start discussions about stripping the contract. You would have a

period of time whereby we would have to put other measures in place. We

have the operator of last resort if the Scottish Government and

transport Scotland had to dig over the railways tomorrow. We have

contingency in place. -- take over. We have the operator of last resort

to do that. If it came to that point, you would resign. If it came

to the point that you had to strip a world leading railway operator of

its contract and you either transport minister, could hardly

say, I have been a great success and I am going to continue. My job is to

make sure that Abellio make an live up to the standards of that

contract. If they do not and if they underperform, I will hold them to

account. That is my job. Abellio's job is to run the railway and the

franchise. My job is to hold them to account. If they do not perform and

if the fault below that threshold, of course their contract will be

terminated. -- fall below. Either no circumstances in which she would

resign? No, I am not suggesting that. I am not here to discuss

whether I will resign. This is not about me. This is about making sure

Abellio... It is about you. You either transport minister. It is

about making sure Abellio live up to the obligations in the contract. I

am responsible for making sure that happens. I am monitoring that daily

to make sure it happens. If it does not happen, I will and we will as a

Scottish Government take a very serious measures. That could include

stripping them of the contract. Is it your current

intention that Abellio will not be re-awarded the contract to run

ScotRail? Our current position is they have signed a contract until

the end of the franchise. There is a break clause in 2020. We're going to

put together a public sector bed. I am going to be calling the unions

this week and other political parties to join with me any

discussion about how we make and put together a viable public sector bed

that will be viable and competitive and that is what the alternative

that we have put forward will be. That could be ready for 2020. What,

Abellio do not get re-awarded the contract? That is not what I am

saying. We have a legal contract that we had to procure. We would

have liked the feel devilish and of railway powers. That was blocked by

other parties in the Smith position. Labour Party

Labour are calling for nationalising the railways in Scotland. Due

against that? We don't have the powers do so. I would love to have

full Devil lotion and full control over the railways. I would like to

have the full power, full control over railway powers. Why would you

not like to rationalise the railways? No. What's wrong with

saying nationalised the railways? I'm not saying I'm entirely against

the proposal. I will put together a public sector bed. Why is it wrong

to say nationalise the railways? What we have said... You have

explained that. Explain to me why it is wrong to... There is an argument

that integrating the railways to use the jargon, integrating the

operating company and infrastructure... I think it is a

very good argument that the railways can be in public ownership and that

has been something I have been committed to putting forward. What I

have said is that we will put forward a compat at a public sector

bed. Let me finish. I will be calling out to other political

parties this week and the unions to help us put forward a public sector

bed. We do not have the powers to nationalise the mill with. What

commuters want to know or are we on top of Abellio, will the performance

improved and that is I am determined to do. If Abellio do not improve

their performance, if the performance tips, they will be

stripped of their contract. You have been asking the British government

to devolve ownership over the railways. Would you think the best

option would be to integrate the network railway Wescott rain, and

make at one company? Network Rail is make at one company? Network Rail is

-- why I asked for a full devil lotion of Network Rail was because

we do not have control over them as they do real infrastructure projects

which are overshooting by hundreds of thousands of pounds. What you are

saying is that you would like one public sector company to run the

whole infrastructure? You can have a public body to tender for the next

round. That is not the same as nationalisation. They could lose

after that. Currently we do not have the powerless. I would like the full

powers over Network Rail. Currently water allows is for a public sector

bed. We have shell companies. You say you want a public sector company

to bid for it, a public sector operated company to bid for it. Is

anything like that in existence? operated company to bid for it. Is

That is the reason I am calling out to the Unionist... Does it exist?

The shell companies that exist as the operators... Does a real company

exist? No, the reason for that is to bring the unions and, other

political parties, what came to company do they want to see setup?

That takes time in order to put the bid together. We will be working on

that and we have internal work on that, I want to reach out to the

unions and other political parties to see if we can put together a

public sector bed that is viable. Thank you.

to intervene in the legal challenge at the Supreme Court over how

And there's been much talk over whether Scotland can remain

in the single market if it adopts the so-called "Norway model".

It's all getting a bit complicated, so here to make it a bit

easier to understand is Professor Sionaidh Douglas-Scott,

who's Anniversary Chair in Law at Queen Mary's University of London

and also a special adviser to the Scottish Parliament's European

and external affairs committee Brexit inquiry.

She speaks to me now in a personal capacity. First of all, the Supreme

Court, the fact that the Scottish and Welsh governments, they are

allowed to take part, what does that mean in practical terms, what can

they do that they can do last week? It means that they can make some new

arguments, these arguments were not considered in the High Court case

which was won by the claimants, and some of these arguments I believe,

although I have not seen the skeleton argument of the Scottish

Government, might involve this issue of legislative consent. If approval

is needed before the government can trickle and no Article 15 zero of,

the argument will be that the Scottish Government, Scottish

Parliament will also have to give its consent. This is an issue that

has been raised by the Brexit minister, Mike Russell, on several

occasions. If the Scottish Government refuse legislative

consent, it is excepted that that will not stop Brexit happening. It

might create some confusion and difficulties. The general agreement,

the consensus seems to be that it is a convention, notwithstanding the

parts of been written into the Scotland act 2016, but in the

British constitution, the impact of governments ignoring conventions

means that although legally they may be able to continue, that

Westminster could still legislate, constitutionally that action would

be unconstitutional. And that can have considerable consequences. Like

what? For example, I give an example from Canada. Which has a legal

system is similar in some parts to the British legal system, when the

Canadian Prime Minister wanted to be repatriated the Canadian

constitution, he ignored a constitutional requirement requiring

the quiet -- legislation or consent of Qu bec. That triggered some

of Quebec. That triggered some uncomfortable relations and to end

the dens -- independence referendums and Qu bec. For the British

and Quebec. For the British government to ignore the civil

convention, and No vote, would be unconstitutional. We can say that it

does not look good if governments act in a manner that is

does not look good if governments unconstitutional. It has been

suggested by one of the lawyers involved in the court case, that the

Scottish Government and the Welsh government could go to the European

court of justice and asked them for a ruling that the trigger laying of

Article 30 is revoke a ball. -- article 50. If MPs did not like what

was going on they could vote against what was going on and that would

cancel the triggering of article 50. Does that seem plausible to you or

desirable? It is a vexed question, whether the article 50 trigger is

reversible or not. There is no wording on it either way. The only

institution that can decide that question is the European Tour to

justice. If the Institute is raised in the Supreme Court by the Scottish

Government, then the question is whether the Supreme Court thinks

that a decision on that matter is necessary to determine the case. It

might think that and make a reference to the Luxembourg, the

European Court of Justice, and that the delayed matters further. And

there would be effects of that, of deciding that article 50 was after

all reversible. One might be that of two years down the line, the British

governments decide after all that Brexit did not mean Brexit, then

Britain would not be perhaps out on its knees without any deal at all.

So there are also some consequences that could follow. Briefly, there

has been much talk of Scotland perhaps being able to Norway stale

deal, even if the rest of the UK is perhaps being able to Norway stale

out of the single market. Is that plausible? It is perhaps possible

but difficult. The first problem is that for that to happen, they would

have to be some agreements from the UK Government, because it is the UK

Government that negotiates. There would have to be agreement on the

side of the EU. I can see that there are sums technical legal problems

arising about borders, for example what about classifications of goods

if they cross from England into Scotland? And there will be customs

unions issues and there would be issues of free movement. In Scotland

is in the single market, allowing for free movement of persons, but

England and perhaps the rest of the UK is not, then Scottish residents

would have rates of free movement that the rest of the UK would not.

Would that mean a change of UK passports. So there are some

technical problems. All right, we will have to leave it there. Thank

you very much for joining us. Expect to hear more

about the prospects of Scotland hosting the UK's spaceport later

in the week. A Conservative MP is due to ask

the Secretary of State David Mundell about discussions with other

Government departments on the benefits of locating

the facility here. If you were cynical,

you might see it as an opportunity for the Westminster government

to highlight the opportunities they Be that as it may, it is a reminder

that right now there are around 5500 scientists and engineers working

in the space sector in Scotland. And many see a spaceport as the next

logical development. Scotland is in space, not just the

pipes as a tribute to a collie, but in a commercial programme that has

been growing over the past few years. With Glasgow alone, there are

three companies. One company building five or six spacecraft a

month. And another small company has come through and they will be

launching their first spacecraft this year and that is within

launching their first spacecraft Glasgow. They join the 30,000 or so

man-made objects in orbit around Earth. This is the structure, it

would be filled with components and some are much larger, a few times is

all. My research focuses on how those satellites and objects would

actually re-enter our atmosphere and whether they are not whether they

hit the ground. But before they can come down, they have to go up. At

the moment, launching a Scottish built satellite into space means

putting it onto a rocket in the former Soviet Union or French

Guiana, but that could change of Scotland gets its own spaceport.

Ultimately it's about having that end-to-end capability. We are

greater coming up with ideas, we can build the spacecraft, we cannot

launch them. There is a gap in the middle that we as the UK need to

fill in Scotland is quite well-positioned for that by the

nature of the geography of the UK, Scotland has potential locations for

that. One personal menu is Prestwick. A satellite is just a

different type of cargo. Why do we need a spaceport? At the moment we

have no choice to go to Kazakhstan or French Guyana. It is very

uncertain to go there, costs a lot of money and it is limiting the

growth of the sector. And the main growth is coming from satellites in

space. There has been a lot of that in recent years and is being held

back. So why should it be on the Ayrshire coast? Affordability is a

factor because we do not need to have the same level of investment

that some of these places would have to have, but we do have around us is

a cluster of aerospace industries which are supporting us, which means

that as a business plan, going forward, we can be fairly certain

that we can actually make this work. But there are other contenders.

Airfields in Stornoway and Mac Hannah show. They are lengthening

the airstrip. Plans for a rocket range in the Outer Hebrides were

once controversial. Though no there isn't easy as for being home to a

spaceport. Britain is going to need a spaceport in future for commercial

space vehicles and Stornoway is certainly in the running for that.

It has advantages over others. You can launch over the sea without any

land getting in the week and various other advantages as well. And the

hope is that wherever the spaceport ends up, it will become a hub,

attracting more activity and expertise. This spaceport will be an

economic boost to the area that comes to. But that will in turn

attract other people to the local area to use the test facilities and

to just have the access to the engineers and all the other people

who will be working in and around that site. That will create a circle

that will continue to build the sector. And experts hope that once

we have cracked the delivery of satellites into space, it will not

be too long before space tourism becomes a reality. That was Hugh

Williams reporting. This week the Chancellor Phillip

Hammond will deliver his first Autumn Statement, where he updates

the UK Government's Mr Hammond has already

abandoned his predecessor's plan to achieve a budget surplus by 2020

and there's no sign of the emergency budget threatened before

the vote for Brexit, I'm joined now by David Phillips

who's a Senior Research Economist at The I F S expect a deterioration in

the public finances over the next The I F S expect a deterioration in

couple of years. How much is this a direct result of Brexit? We have

crunched the numbers and we think, given tax revenues are coming in the

forecast, about 6 billion deterioration in the public finances

will be the result of things happening before Brexit. A far

larger part is downgrading the growth forecast over the next couple

of years. If we follow suit with an independent forecasters and the

growth forecasts. That'll be a bigger impact on the Government tax

spending. We found about ?25 billion lower revenues and ?5 billion higher

spending as a result of this law economy. That follows on from the

Brexit boat. The problem with this is that there has been all sorts of

talk about a big programme of investing in infrastructure to

create a fiscal stimulus. That becomes less possible as the budget

deteriorates anyway. Indeed. When you have a large stock of debt, the

Government debt is over 80% of GDP and we have a budget deficit, is

harder to find more money to spend an infrastructure or to boost

spending. On the other hand, interest rates are low at the

moment. We might see it's a good time to take advantage of that and

invest in infrastructure and also to provide a longer term based in

productivity. I think what we have seen so far from the drip feed of

information from the Treasury is that we are not looking at a very

large fiscal stimulus. We're not looking at tens of billions of

pounds but is smaller stimulus. We have seen measures on transport on

roads in England and housing... The problem here though is that there is

smoke and mirrors, couldn't there be? The chancellors and out every

year that that is going to big spending envelope structure. George

Osborne was always on about it. -- infrastructure. Governments would

announce capital spending projects. They do not amount to a fiscal

stimulus. I think that is the big question. How much of this is a

boost to underlying spending? Is it new spending measures or is it just

putting labels to be spending already announced? I think there

will be a small boost in the short-term but I think you are right

in saying that this is not the end of a sturdy. What this is is a

potential slowing down of austerity. They are targeting a surplus budget

for 2020. The longer term plan is for a budget surplus. Delayed rather

than abandoned. Very briefly, jam is for a budget surplus. Delayed rather

the new thing we have to talk about. These are people who are just making

it through. Theresa May would like to do something for them, it is sad.

10 million of them and it is very expensive. Is there anything she can

do. I do not agree with the big measures on tax year. We not

expecting that in the statement. What we might see is a small

increase in personal allowance. That would impact on Scotland because

that has not been devolved. We might see something on air passenger duty

and fuel duty. Also the cuts to benefits. The real term free...

Sorry, the tax freeze has been an ounce because of the higher

inflation. David Phillips, thank you very much indeed.

It's time to look back at the events of the past week and see what's

With me now is the Scotland Editor of the Guardian Severin Carrell

and Investigations Editor at the Sunday Herald Paul Hutcheon.

Severin Carrell, the politics of the Autumn Statement, do you think there

is a chance that he is going to come out and say there is a big

deterioration in finances because of Brexit and the hard Brexit, they

were mixers out to be an attempt to counter to by Philip Hammond. They

might do. The politics to them is as much as the Tory's position. They

are going to be concerned about whether Philip Hammond is able to

deal with the smaller topics that ordinary voters are concerned about.

The quality of roads, the very detailed and mundane aspects of

daily life. The macro politics around whether Brexit is going to be

disastrous to the economy is something that put cold parties and

disastrous to the economy is that cult leadership will feed on.

What Philip Hammond knows is that his party 's trusted more than any

other in Westminster with the economy. There was a poll today

saying that 40% of voters trust the Tories with the economy. That'll

make you feel much more confident. The old BR will be a serious issue

with him. The Brexiteer is all when to rally around him rather than pick

with him. The Brexiteer is all when a fight with them. The investigative

powers Bill was passed by the House of Lords this week. The snapper

charge at some call it. You are worried about this. What are your

worried about? Following the Edward Snowden revelations, the Government

want to get powers that the security services have had. We have gone

further than people expected. What Internet service providers now have

to do it legally is hold onto people's browser history for 12

months, which can then be accessed by Lauren Forstmann agencies and

MI5. Don't be do that already? -- law enforcement agencies. You have

this collection of data but also this police power now that is God

equipment interference and they can access your phone. -- police

equipment interference. That story in the Herald last week, I wonder

what he got that information, if they got the judge to improve and

the sees the computers and go through it and get your Internet

company to tell them where you have been browsing. There is a separate

element for journalists. They have to get additional information. The

journalist is not informed. It is all heard in private and the

journalist would never know about it. I am guessing the Guardian are

not mass of fans about this either? We are not fans of it either. We are

unhappy it has gone through without any opposition. There has been very

little debate about this. Like a lot of other things in daily particle

life and the life of the Government, everything has been obscured by the

EU referendum. I just wonder if this is... I happen to know that young

EU referendum. I just wonder if this people are very interested in this

particular issue and it is an issue with the media and the young people

do seem to have very serious concerns. That is true but ordinary

voters may be comfortable with this. We are already one of the most

surveyed societies in the world. We have a higher level of CCTV

surveillance in our ordinary life. It may be that the British

electorate as a whole are relatively sanguine about it. People like

myself and Paul and others whose job it is to challenge and investigate

and probe feel deeply unhappy about it. We are making efforts to try and

get past it. Brexit, Paul, shown that was very clear in expelling

some of the legal things. Does this amount any more than tossing a load

of spanners in the general direction and hoping they get caught up in it.

I had a chat with a couple of civil servants this week you were speaking

privately and anonymously they do not think that the Scottish

intervention is going to amount to much at all. I think it is more

intervention is going to amount to about the symbolism and gesture of

it. Being seen to do something. In the final analysis built in the

Scottish Parliament a say, will it be blocking Brexit? Of course it

want. It is based and not legally be blocking Brexit? Of course it

binding. I just wonder whether the legal rout of just triggering

Article 50, having to decide on what Brexit will be when the British

Government has finished its negotiations. Simply MPs will want

to say we will decide that. There are some in a different actors MS

that this could go on Sony different directions. The Supreme Court

decision is expected early next year. Having European judges...

Surely MPs are saying... This could go on and on. There is no doubt

about it at all. The layers of complexity are so great that I think

some people are strapping themselves in for some years of legal conflict.

We will have to leave it there. Thank you to the both of you.

I'll be back at the same time next week.

is announcing the first Autumn Statement since the EU referendum.

The BBC will explain what that means for you,

with live coverage and expert analysis.