10/07/2014

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:00. > :00:40.David Cameron announces emergency legislation to allow

:00:41. > :00:45.the security services to access our phone, email and internet records.

:00:46. > :00:48.We'll hear why from a Home Office minister.

:00:49. > :00:51.And a Labour MP who says it's a back-room stitch-up.

:00:52. > :00:53.Around one million public sector workers go out

:00:54. > :00:59.The Conservatives say they'll make it tougher to call a strike

:01:00. > :01:11.We have even seen who you have a cigarette.

:01:12. > :01:21.We've got the latest on Mr Juncker's campaign to lead the next European

:01:22. > :01:23.Commission as the Luxembourger gets a grilling from UKIP.

:01:24. > :01:26.And after another World Cup washout, we'll debate whether the UK's four

:01:27. > :01:37.national football teams should play together as one combined team.

:01:38. > :01:40.All that in the next hour, and with us for the duration director of

:01:41. > :01:45.You may remember him from the stand-off last year at

:01:46. > :01:50.the Grangemouth petrochemicals plant in Scotland when the company's

:01:51. > :01:52.management closed the plant and locked out workers in a dispute

:01:53. > :02:03.We'll talk about today's public sector strikes in a moment.

:02:04. > :02:06.First, though, let's start with the breaking news this morning that

:02:07. > :02:08.the Government is rushing through emergency legislation which will

:02:09. > :02:12.ensure that the police and security services can access people's phone,

:02:13. > :02:18.The law will replace previous data rules, which were struck down by the

:02:19. > :02:29.European Court of Justice earlier this year because they were ruled to

:02:30. > :02:37.This is how the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister explained

:02:38. > :02:43.the reasons behind the new law in a press conference this morning.

:02:44. > :02:47.We face real and credible threats to our security from serious organised

:02:48. > :02:50.crime, from the activity of paedophiles, from the collapse

:02:51. > :02:55.of Syria, the growth of Isis in Iraq and Al-Shabab in East Africa.

:02:56. > :02:58.I am simply not prepared to be a Prime Minister who has to address

:02:59. > :03:01.people after a terrorist incident and explain I

:03:02. > :03:07.As a Liberal Democrat I believe successive governments have

:03:08. > :03:12.neglected civil liberties as they claim to pursue greater security but

:03:13. > :03:17.I will not stand idly by when there is a real risk we will suddenly be

:03:18. > :03:21.deprived of the legitimate means by which we keep people safe.

:03:22. > :03:24.Liberty and security must go hand-in-hand.

:03:25. > :03:33.We can't enjoy our freedom if we are unable to keep ourselves safe.

:03:34. > :03:36.Let's talk now to Nick Robinson, who's in Central Lobby just outside

:03:37. > :03:54.David Davis, prominent Tory MP, has just asked, why is this having to be

:03:55. > :03:58.rushed? Do we have an answer? The judgement from the European Court

:03:59. > :04:04.came the Magna month ago. The answer appears to be ministers looked to

:04:05. > :04:11.doing it in other ways, whether it was possible to change regulations,

:04:12. > :04:17.attack on a new clause to an existing piece of legislation and it

:04:18. > :04:21.took them a while to come to the view that it's needed primary

:04:22. > :04:25.legislation, watching a Bill through the House of Commons that the Lords

:04:26. > :04:30.in the space of a week. There have been other MPs who have criticised

:04:31. > :04:37.the rush. The cover of the Prime Minister has easy has the Deputy

:04:38. > :04:42.Prime Minister and the Labour Party. Is it technical or can you explain

:04:43. > :04:47.to us how what they are doing now, this legislation they are rushing

:04:48. > :04:52.through, will make it compliant with European law to do what they had

:04:53. > :04:58.already been doing and it was ruled they should not have been doing? I

:04:59. > :05:06.can. I knew you could. The surprising thing was that there was

:05:07. > :05:12.no British law on this. The security services and the police, the

:05:13. > :05:17.National Crime Agency, were able to find out who you spoke to on your

:05:18. > :05:20.phone and who you email and when as a result of a European directive. It

:05:21. > :05:24.was the European directive that has been struck down in the European

:05:25. > :05:29.Court of Justice. Other countries are going to have to make their own

:05:30. > :05:34.arrangements to deal with that. It may be that the EU comes up with a

:05:35. > :05:38.new directive which is compliant. This is the first time there will be

:05:39. > :05:44.a specific piece on British law to deal with this particular problem.

:05:45. > :05:49.If what we were doing did not comply according to the court, is there not

:05:50. > :05:55.a possibility that what we are about to do could end up in front of the

:05:56. > :05:59.European court? You are stretching my legal knowledge but there has to

:06:00. > :06:02.be a possibility and a possibility that this sort of thing goes before

:06:03. > :06:08.the European Court of Human Rights because the groans on which that

:06:09. > :06:14.court are judged against our the words sufficient protection. That is

:06:15. > :06:17.what is interesting about the behind-the-scenes deal that has been

:06:18. > :06:22.done between Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives on

:06:23. > :06:25.this issue. Labour and the Liberal Democrats have been pushing for

:06:26. > :06:31.greater safeguards. Some people say it is a dramatic step forward,

:06:32. > :06:39.others that it is cosmetic, but there will be an annual review and a

:06:40. > :06:41.major review including a controversial Bill known as the

:06:42. > :06:48.regulatory investigatory Powers act which allows your local council to

:06:49. > :06:52.spy on you if it wants to. There is going to be an oversight board to

:06:53. > :06:57.check issues of civil liberties when these laws are introduced so in

:06:58. > :07:06.theory what you are getting is no law that does all things and new

:07:07. > :07:11.safeguards. -- new law. Critics say how can we be sure this is true when

:07:12. > :07:16.there is only a week to look at this and this is not long enough? I hope

:07:17. > :07:20.they do not have our emails. I've been joined by the

:07:21. > :07:33.Liberal Democrat Home Office Welcome back. Why is this being

:07:34. > :07:37.rushed? Because there has been a court judgement and there is some

:07:38. > :07:41.legal uncertainty and we have to make sure that those who are part of

:07:42. > :07:45.the process, including internet service providers, have that. Have

:07:46. > :07:52.you taken a long while to be convinced? I have been involved in

:07:53. > :07:57.the discussion for some time. If the delay because the Lib Dems took

:07:58. > :08:01.convincing? We have to make sure that it is legally sound and we are

:08:02. > :08:06.convinced. We have been negotiating successfully. You may be right or

:08:07. > :08:11.wrong but you are one of the reasons for the delay and the rush. It is

:08:12. > :08:15.proper that those who are involved in these matters make sure that the

:08:16. > :08:21.law is sound and that is what we have done. That is correct. If you

:08:22. > :08:30.like, along with everybody else who has been involved. I thought you

:08:31. > :08:36.were against this. This is not the Communications Data Bill, this is

:08:37. > :08:41.the reinstatement of existing powers which have been questioned as a

:08:42. > :08:46.result of a European judgement. This is area and reduction of what is

:08:47. > :08:52.already there plus new safeguards. You tell us that but Nick Clegg also

:08:53. > :08:55.said, we will be the first government to increase transparency.

:08:56. > :09:01.There has been no transparency. This has been done behind closed doors.

:09:02. > :09:07.Discussions about the nuances have been behind closed doors. No public

:09:08. > :09:13.debate. The Bill has been published. It is being rushed through next

:09:14. > :09:20.week. You have not allowed time for public debate. It has been going on

:09:21. > :09:26.for several years. Ever since the revelations in the guardian. We are

:09:27. > :09:31.glad that we have the opportunity for a wider debate and that is why

:09:32. > :09:37.we have insisted on a clause to make sure that we have a debate and no

:09:38. > :09:41.government can run away from this. You have had all of your

:09:42. > :09:46.conversations behind closed doors that we have not known they have

:09:47. > :09:50.been going on. This is a big issue, something the government has been

:09:51. > :09:53.doing has been ruled illegal and you are now going to push this through

:09:54. > :09:58.in the dying days of Parliament as it goes into the summer. We are

:09:59. > :10:03.reinstating the position that existed before the European Court of

:10:04. > :10:09.it into uncertainty. It is European legislation. We are ensuring that

:10:10. > :10:14.the security services have the necessary information to deal with

:10:15. > :10:19.exploitation. We have set a date by which this has to be consigned to

:10:20. > :10:21.the dustbin and that will force the next government to have these

:10:22. > :10:29.matters properly considered and there will be a debate between now

:10:30. > :10:35.and December 2016. What is the biggest safeguard that this will not

:10:36. > :10:43.be abused? Annual transparency reports, a board, a reduction in the

:10:44. > :10:49.number of bodies, councils, who can get access. The Washington Post

:10:50. > :10:55.published a report that the NSA and America had managed to collect what

:10:56. > :11:01.they almost cold was collateral information in the process of

:11:02. > :11:05.listening to the bad guys, they pick up a tonne of information from

:11:06. > :11:10.people who are not bad guys and they have all of these emails and voice

:11:11. > :11:13.mail is and mobile phone records sitting on their computers, they

:11:14. > :11:22.know about people 's affairs, private lives, why do we know that

:11:23. > :11:28.is not that? It would be a waste of people's time to be looking at

:11:29. > :11:34.people who are not threats. Where is the safeguard? The safeguard those

:11:35. > :11:41.we have a proper debate starting. We have not, you are rushing it

:11:42. > :11:45.through. We have, in 2016. Between now and 2016 we can have the debate

:11:46. > :11:48.and those questions can be addressed, but we have to get the

:11:49. > :11:54.balance right between looking after the country and making sure we have

:11:55. > :12:03.civil liberty safeguards. Have you gone native? I am busy championing

:12:04. > :12:09.the safeguards. I am keen to make sure that those guys who are trading

:12:10. > :12:18.in child sexual images are dealt with. Everybody does. That is key to

:12:19. > :12:24.making sure we have the information. What is your view? There is a

:12:25. > :12:28.consensus that says if there is data out there that is being used to do

:12:29. > :12:32.harm to society we have to be monitoring it and managing it and

:12:33. > :12:37.there would be a backlash if the government failed to do that. Your

:12:38. > :12:41.point about the collateral is the issue, we must avoid the collateral

:12:42. > :12:48.of innocent people's data being used or abused and for me the big concern

:12:49. > :12:52.is making sure we think about it properly. Rushed legislation gives

:12:53. > :12:55.me concern because we have seen legislation rushed and we have to

:12:56. > :13:01.spend a lot of time unravelling problems. That is why we have a

:13:02. > :13:12.sunset clause and a board to deal with that very important point. Good

:13:13. > :13:18.to see you. Let's talk

:13:19. > :13:20.about today's other big news, the mass public sector strike that's

:13:21. > :13:25.taking place across the country. Across the country, public sector

:13:26. > :13:27.unions, including Unison, Unite and the NUT, are going on strike to

:13:28. > :13:31.protest over pay, pensions and cuts. More than

:13:32. > :13:33.a million public sector workers are expected to be taking part

:13:34. > :13:35.including teachers, council staff, The biggest issue

:13:36. > :13:42.in the dispute is pay. Public sector salaries were

:13:43. > :13:46.frozen in 2010 and since 2012 pay Unison general secretary

:13:47. > :13:52.Dave Prentis claims public sector workers are now ?4,000 a year worse

:13:53. > :13:57.off than they were in 2010. The Conservatives have condemned

:13:58. > :13:59.the strikes, claiming the majority Cabinet Office Minister Frances

:14:00. > :14:07.Maude said the party is looking to change the law by introducing a

:14:08. > :14:12.minimum turn-out for ballots, and a limit on the length of time between

:14:13. > :14:17.the ballot and actually going on the strike, to make unions to get

:14:18. > :14:22.a fresh mandate for any new action. With us now is the General Secretary

:14:23. > :14:35.of the TUC, Frances O'Grady. We had hoped to be joined by a

:14:36. > :14:45.Conservative MP but we are waiting for him. Maybe he cannot get in!

:14:46. > :14:50.What is this strike going to achieve? It is for one day. It is a

:14:51. > :14:56.political strike to draw attention, isn't it? This is local government

:14:57. > :15:01.workers, school meals workers, half a million or in less than the

:15:02. > :15:05.minimum wage saying that they have had four years of real pay cuts,

:15:06. > :15:10.prices keep rising, they cannot afford to carry on in the government

:15:11. > :15:18.has announced there will be four more years or real pay cuts. There

:15:19. > :15:21.is upset and anger amongst ordinary public sector workers that

:15:22. > :15:28.politicians do not seem to understand how tough it is. As you

:15:29. > :15:32.describe it, you said you would not be surprised that there is anger but

:15:33. > :15:35.if that is the case why did so few members vote?

:15:36. > :15:39.if that is the case why did so few We had a high turnout from

:15:40. > :15:44.firefighters stop what they are a small union. They always turn out.

:15:45. > :15:50.If it is hurting so much, how come or did not vote to come out on

:15:51. > :15:53.strike? One problem is that we have this 20th-century method of

:15:54. > :15:57.balloting, postal ballots. If that had been imposed on the general

:15:58. > :16:01.election, we would see turnout go down significantly. In fact, postal

:16:02. > :16:07.ballots tends to raise those balloted. We need to improve

:16:08. > :16:11.participation but first, we should talk about not just the symptoms but

:16:12. > :16:17.the causes of the reason why people are out on strike. We cannot dismiss

:16:18. > :16:21.dedicated firefighters worried about lining up ladders into burning

:16:22. > :16:25.buildings, losing half of their pension. -- climbing up ladders. As

:16:26. > :16:29.I understand, their biggest beef is pensions. There is a whole mixture

:16:30. > :16:34.of different reasons why people are marching today, if they are marching

:16:35. > :16:40.at all. Pay, pensions and real concerns about the future of our

:16:41. > :16:45.public services. We talked on Sunday, on the Sunday politics. We

:16:46. > :16:48.did. On general, public sector workers are still better paid on

:16:49. > :16:55.average than private sector, I do not want to go over that again, you

:16:56. > :16:58.had different reasons. We think there has been a pay freeze in the

:16:59. > :17:02.public sector but actually when you look at earnings, there has not been

:17:03. > :17:08.a pay freeze. Median earnings in the public sector rose by 2.6% this

:17:09. > :17:15.year. Are you making the point about pay progression? The freeze does not

:17:16. > :17:19.cover lots of things, does it. The key issue, workers across both the

:17:20. > :17:26.public and private sector, their earnings are coming in below

:17:27. > :17:33.inflation. The median earning, ?24,000, 2%, 2.6% up on the previous

:17:34. > :17:38.year. It is not a princely sum, it's just about keeps pace with inflation

:17:39. > :17:42.now, but it is not quite the Draconian pay freeze that you would

:17:43. > :17:46.have us believe. You will have seen from the TUC report that workers on

:17:47. > :17:52.average across the public services have lost over ?2000 a year. It is

:17:53. > :17:55.more than ?40 a week. When you are on a modest income, I can tell

:17:56. > :18:01.you... I was talking to workers today, cleaners getting up at 4am,

:18:02. > :18:06.doing one job, coming to the depot to do a second job, going on to do a

:18:07. > :18:11.third, and still not managing the living wage. It has got to change,

:18:12. > :18:15.the government has got to listen. Hold that thought, before I go to

:18:16. > :18:20.Dominic, Tom Crotty, you have had your run-in with the unions, what is

:18:21. > :18:23.your attitude? It is worth saying, we had a run-in with a union on a

:18:24. > :18:34.specific site. Generally we have very good relations on 4950 sites

:18:35. > :18:37.around the world. -- 49 out of 50 sites. But the private sector has

:18:38. > :18:40.made a lot more change to terms and conditions, particularly pensions,

:18:41. > :18:44.than has been achieved in the public sector, that disparity is

:18:45. > :18:49.significant. I think that the bigger issue is probably the one around the

:18:50. > :18:57.very low turnout, as you have highlighted in some of the ballots.

:18:58. > :19:03.Dominic, I am glad you made it, good of you to come off the picket line

:19:04. > :19:06.and join us on the daily politics! If you freeze pay for a long time as

:19:07. > :19:10.this government has, and we are talking about people who by and

:19:11. > :19:14.large are not paid huge salaries at all. It's not surprising they will

:19:15. > :19:21.take to the streets in a peaceful way. It is perfectly legitimate to

:19:22. > :19:26.protest, and legitimate to have a debate about economic policy but the

:19:27. > :19:30.fact of the matter, the restraint on public sector spending which we have

:19:31. > :19:36.had to introduce is part of a much wider economic policy of this

:19:37. > :19:39.elected government. What is quite wrong is for the unions, on

:19:40. > :19:44.incredibly low turnout, some with as little as 8% of support from their

:19:45. > :19:48.own membership, like Unison, to be able to inflict so much damage,

:19:49. > :19:54.hundreds of millions of pounds, on the economy in one day, according to

:19:55. > :19:56.the Treasury and the FSP, not to mention widespread disruption to

:19:57. > :20:03.families with kids in schools and commuters. With such low support

:20:04. > :20:08.from their own members. Why is it right for them to wield such a

:20:09. > :20:11.powerful strike weapon without some safeguards for the hard-working

:20:12. > :20:17.majority? What you think the safeguard should be when it comes to

:20:18. > :20:21.ballot, what is the minimum turnout? I think it should be a very simple

:20:22. > :20:25.rule which says that if a union is unable to persuade majority of his

:20:26. > :20:31.own members to strike, it should not be able to inflict that on the wider

:20:32. > :20:35.public. It should not be about turnout, that was proposed by Boris

:20:36. > :20:40.Johnson. Clarifying, it is not the majority of those who vote, it

:20:41. > :20:43.should be a majority of the total membership eligible to vote? A

:20:44. > :20:50.majority of the balloted membership. I'm delighted to debate

:20:51. > :20:54.this with Dominik, because Dominik wrote a pamphlet suggesting that

:20:55. > :20:59.British workers were among the worst idlers in the world. The worst

:21:00. > :21:03.idlers! Dominik would need to apply that testing himself, he got a good

:21:04. > :21:07.turnout and a good vote at the general election but he did not meet

:21:08. > :21:12.the 50% threshold that he has just advocated in the ten minute rule

:21:13. > :21:17.Bill. 1-run all for union members, one role for members of Parliament.

:21:18. > :21:21.The cry of double standards from unions is chaff, you are not

:21:22. > :21:25.comparing like-for-like, looking at a general election or a by-election,

:21:26. > :21:31.everyone affected by that wrote gets to vote. -- one raw for union

:21:32. > :21:36.members, one rule for members of Parliament. Sometimes very small

:21:37. > :21:42.menorah to support from membership. -- one rule. Actually, what she

:21:43. > :21:48.would want is referendum for strikes, but nobody is suggesting

:21:49. > :21:52.that and it we are talking about a safeguard to protect the majority

:21:53. > :21:56.from the militant menorah T. -- sometimes a very small menorah team

:21:57. > :22:06.support from membership. -- minority. -- minority. Dominik has

:22:07. > :22:14.judged the question -- dodged the question... Perhaps he did not dodge

:22:15. > :22:18.it, perhaps you are just unconvinced. We ballot all he is

:22:19. > :22:26.saying that if it is a threshold, then we have got to do better than

:22:27. > :22:31.politicians. His argument is... By going on strike on public services,

:22:32. > :22:35.you affect everybody. A lot of people feel that the Conservative

:22:36. > :22:39.Party, which was elected with... Is in power on the basis of 23% of

:22:40. > :22:43.everybody who was entitled to vote in the general election, a lot of

:22:44. > :22:50.people feel that the Conservative Party have inflicted a lot of

:22:51. > :22:56.damage. Not everyone gets to vote -- not everyone who is affected gets to

:22:57. > :22:58.vote when you decide to strike. Nile Ferguson said that Europeans are

:22:59. > :23:03.among the worst idlers in the world, but I did make the point in Britain

:23:04. > :23:07.that we have got an increasingly small proportion of people peddling

:23:08. > :23:12.harder and harder to sustain the economy. -- peddling. But also

:23:13. > :23:16.public services. That is socially unfair and unsustainable economic

:23:17. > :23:24.rape. We have the highest employment rate since 1973, 73% of the eligible

:23:25. > :23:27.labour force is employment. Not just the eligible labour force but look

:23:28. > :23:29.at those staying in higher education, compared to life

:23:30. > :23:34.expectancy we are retiring earlier and earlier and also look at average

:23:35. > :23:40.working hours, which have declined substantially since the war. Not

:23:41. > :23:47.among the people I know! Tom Crotty, you have said that you would like to

:23:48. > :23:50.see somebody like Dominik -- you have said that you would like to see

:23:51. > :23:54.something like what is being suggested by Dominic. It would be

:23:55. > :23:59.perfectly reasonable to expect that more than 50% of the balloted union

:24:00. > :24:04.members vote in favour of a strike. That is what he said... In your

:24:05. > :24:08.case, the real issue here was not the strike of the workers, it was

:24:09. > :24:11.the strike of the employer, it was the employer who locked the workers

:24:12. > :24:17.out and threatened to close the plant down, where do ordinary people

:24:18. > :24:22.get a vote there? Is that true? It is not true. We should be talking

:24:23. > :24:30.about how we get the economy growing again, what we can do for

:24:31. > :24:33.manufacturing. I agree with the second part of that dialogue but

:24:34. > :24:38.that is not the question I was asked, I was asked about the issue

:24:39. > :24:42.at Grangemouth, and at Grangemouth this issue would not have been an

:24:43. > :24:47.issue, we had more than 50% of the elected members voted, but it is a

:24:48. > :24:50.point of principle that you should have that, and the issue that

:24:51. > :24:54.compares this to a general election does not work for me, in a general

:24:55. > :25:03.election we are not being asked for a yes/no decision. This is a very

:25:04. > :25:06.clear yes/no decision. We have a system where we assume that a

:25:07. > :25:12.non-voted in favour of a strike, I think that you should assume that a

:25:13. > :25:16.non-voted against the strike. Dominik, we will let you go. Before

:25:17. > :25:25.you go, do you think you get a better deal on public sector pay out

:25:26. > :25:28.of labour? I certainly think that Labour support for the living wage

:25:29. > :25:34.would see that every public sector worker would get a better deal. The

:25:35. > :25:37.important thing here is about talking, unions are all about

:25:38. > :25:42.negotiation, strikes in this country are rare, what we do is negotiate

:25:43. > :25:44.and I would hope that we would have a government in power that would

:25:45. > :25:51.talk. You may not, Labour have said they support these measures. Labour,

:25:52. > :25:54.I hope, would get around the negotiating table and try to resolve

:25:55. > :25:59.problems when we face them, that is the difference, that is what we have

:26:00. > :26:08.got to do. That is the future. Banks. -- thank you.

:26:09. > :26:10.After several years of no or anaemic growth in the British economy,

:26:11. > :26:13.this year our economic fortunes have been looking up with growth now

:26:14. > :26:17.But despite this boost, the feel-good factor hasn't

:26:18. > :26:29.Here's a green-fingered Giles to explain.

:26:30. > :26:35.Do not adjust your set, this is still the daily politics, not

:26:36. > :26:39.gardeners world, but just as garden plants depend on growth to survive

:26:40. > :26:43.and flourish, so does the economy. Recent statistics show that these

:26:44. > :26:49.long for green shoots of recovery are slowly emerging. Are they

:26:50. > :26:54.flowering everywhere? You see, the point about the UK economy and the

:26:55. > :27:01.plant, is that once they experience growth, across-the-board, it is not

:27:02. > :27:07.uniform, everything in the economy is built up around London and the

:27:08. > :27:10.south-east, that is growing nicely. Other areas, pockets of the

:27:11. > :27:15.Midlands, parts of the urban centres in the North are doing OK, but

:27:16. > :27:19.Wales, the south-west, and up into the North, it is not so great and

:27:20. > :27:23.that is part of the problem. What appears to be happening, we do not

:27:24. > :27:28.write now have the numbers to show this but we will eventually, this is

:27:29. > :27:31.primarily a southeastern pick-up, at least initially, London and the

:27:32. > :27:36.south-east are doing very well, places further north, the north-east

:27:37. > :27:39.not doing quite so well. However, it is likely that over time we are

:27:40. > :27:43.going to see a ripple out effect from the south-east region to region

:27:44. > :27:50.further north, but it is going to take time before people up there get

:27:51. > :27:52.the benefit of the feel-good factor. Government can do some things to

:27:53. > :27:56.feed the recovery and they will tell you that their plan is to do just

:27:57. > :28:00.that but there is many other drivers to this that the government finds

:28:01. > :28:04.harder to control. Bank lending to small business, inward investment,

:28:05. > :28:09.exports and foreign investment are other key drivers. Of course it is

:28:10. > :28:12.only where you get growth that you find job creation. If you only have

:28:13. > :28:18.recovery in one part of the economy, one part of the country, then you

:28:19. > :28:22.have two problems: If everything is happening in the south, then that

:28:23. > :28:25.will overheat. Number two, the people in the Midlands and the North

:28:26. > :28:28.will be wondering, what is the big gap between the political rhetoric

:28:29. > :28:35.and what is happening on the ground, they will not give the government

:28:36. > :28:38.any credit. If the overall spread of growth outside of London and the

:28:39. > :28:41.south-east in the urban centres of the North is slow, then the

:28:42. > :28:45.political dilemma is not only do too many people miss out for the time

:28:46. > :28:50.being on the benefits of growth and job creation but any electoral

:28:51. > :28:56.benefit for government about their nurturing a recovery may end up in

:28:57. > :28:58.the bin. If you are up in Newcastle and reading newspapers and seeing

:28:59. > :29:04.stories telling you that house prices are rising, ten, 20%, you are

:29:05. > :29:09.not seeing that up there. People are saying, "my wealth is not going up

:29:10. > :29:13.that anything like the same pace, I do not feel the benefit" and frankly

:29:14. > :29:18.I think they will not over the next 12 months. The time horizon is too

:29:19. > :29:24.short. This at the moment is a recovery based on consumer spending

:29:25. > :29:28.and the housing market. There is no prizes for guessing where that is

:29:29. > :29:32.greatest. No wonder there is a drive for exports and foreign investment.

:29:33. > :29:36.Whether what is being done is enough to bring the UK into bloom

:29:37. > :29:38.everywhere is uncertain. What we do know is that nobody wants the

:29:39. > :29:41.economy heading back to the compost heap.

:29:42. > :29:50.He's good with the gardening metaphors! In geographic terms, is

:29:51. > :29:54.this recovery unbalanced? Yes, but geography is simplistic, it is a

:29:55. > :29:58.strong recovery in London and the south-east, driven by the strong

:29:59. > :30:03.service sector, by housing valuations growing. We are seen

:30:04. > :30:07.parts of the North, where there is still good growth, for the same

:30:08. > :30:12.reasons. There are very large tracts of what I call the industrial

:30:13. > :30:16.heartland of the UK, which depend historically on manufacturing, we

:30:17. > :30:17.are not seeing growth there. That is my concern, we are not doing

:30:18. > :30:21.are not seeing growth there. That is my concern, enough yet to really

:30:22. > :30:27.fire up UK manufacturing industry. What should be done? A whole host of

:30:28. > :30:32.things, it is a broken record for me but energy

:30:33. > :30:48.-- it is a broken record for me but energy policy is a big thing.

:30:49. > :30:56.solution to many of these issues. We are building large ships to bring in

:30:57. > :31:00.the US gas our operations. That is what we are doing. It is because it

:31:01. > :31:04.is the only way to be competitive with the rest of the world. We

:31:05. > :31:08.should not need to be spending that money moving that gas when we are

:31:09. > :31:12.potentially sitting on that and that value could be going to the UK

:31:13. > :31:17.Exchequer. There are issues like that that would make a huge

:31:18. > :31:19.difference. You're one of the biggest industrial complexes in

:31:20. > :31:27.Scotland. If the recovery under way there? It will be because of what we

:31:28. > :31:30.are doing. Because we are going to address that issue of energy

:31:31. > :31:35.competitiveness. We have had to solve that problem ourselves by

:31:36. > :31:37.bringing gas in from America. Does the prospect of Scottish

:31:38. > :31:44.independence have a bearing on your business? No. We are pretty neutral.

:31:45. > :31:49.We operate in big economies and small. We operate in Germany with 70

:31:50. > :31:54.million people and in Norway with 4 million people. It is not an issue

:31:55. > :32:00.about whether an independent Scotland is viable. We were dumb at

:32:01. > :32:05.work with what we are given. You take now stands? Absolutely not. It

:32:06. > :32:14.is up to the people of Scotland. He smokes, he drinks,

:32:15. > :32:16.just what else Jean Claude Juncker Well, they met in Brussels last

:32:17. > :32:20.night when Mr Juncker was quizzed by Mr Farage's Europe of Freedom

:32:21. > :32:23.and Direct Democracy group. That's

:32:24. > :32:24.the European parliamentary group of You are a smoker and I read you

:32:25. > :32:38.drink endless cups of black coffee. I do not believe in the

:32:39. > :32:46.United States of Europe. Given you're planning to introduce

:32:47. > :32:51.the European Union education in our schools, will you be offering David

:32:52. > :32:54.Cameron a course in EU negotiation It would depend

:32:55. > :33:11.on the price he would offer me. Let's talk now to our Europe Editor,

:33:12. > :33:27.Gavin Hewitt, Is Mr Juncker doing the rounds and

:33:28. > :33:33.is it a formality because he is a shoe in to be the commission

:33:34. > :33:40.president? He is a shoe in. He is doing the rounds and with UKIP's

:33:41. > :33:43.group it was knock-about stuff. He tried to express some humour and

:33:44. > :33:48.when he was talking to the conservative group the day before,

:33:49. > :33:53.very much sending out this message, he wants a fair deal for Britain, he

:33:54. > :33:58.would not block Britain trying to repatriate some powers. On the big

:33:59. > :34:06.marker he put down was he was not in for undertaking the treaties and

:34:07. > :34:10.changing those. He made it clear that would not happen. This is

:34:11. > :34:18.Jean-Claude Juncker putting himself out there and trying to convince the

:34:19. > :34:23.UK he is not a bogeyman. When will we get to his portfolio of his

:34:24. > :34:29.fellow commissioners and where are on where the British are going to

:34:30. > :34:34.fit into this? We may get the names or most of the names as early as

:34:35. > :34:41.next week. I understand at least six countries have put forward their

:34:42. > :34:44.names. He has already indicated one portfolio, the crucial economic and

:34:45. > :34:50.monetary affairs, is going to go to a social Democrat. Trying to balance

:34:51. > :34:57.the political groupings. The expectation is that that would go to

:34:58. > :35:01.a candidate from France. Other countries are being encouraged to

:35:02. > :35:05.put forward those names and Jean-Claude Juncker said he is

:35:06. > :35:11.looking to see more women's names, he wants to increase the number of

:35:12. > :35:16.female commissioners. The big fight for Britain is, will it get one of

:35:17. > :35:21.the key economic portfolios? Trade, energy or the internal market.

:35:22. > :35:23.Jean-Claude Juncker is saying whoever comes from Britain needs to

:35:24. > :35:30.be serious, credible and a big hitter. That is the message they are

:35:31. > :35:38.putting out. Any ideas on who would fulfil these criteria? You have

:35:39. > :35:43.heard all the names. We have heard about Michael Howard, Andrew Lang 's

:35:44. > :35:50.Lay, William Hague, I am not sure he would be keen on it, even Nick

:35:51. > :35:54.Clegg. Lots of names out there. The expectation is that sometime next

:35:55. > :35:59.week when the European heads of government come here to Brussels,

:36:00. > :36:03.that he needs to have names, 28 names at least from all the

:36:04. > :36:09.countries, he may not get them I then but he would like them by then.

:36:10. > :36:15.He has also suggested that maybe some countries should put forward

:36:16. > :36:21.more than one name. The timetable, he would like to present those

:36:22. > :36:26.commissioners by October, but before then whoever is selected has to go

:36:27. > :36:30.before Parliamentary committees for a hearing in September, so there is

:36:31. > :36:33.a way to go. At the moment this is the key battle for Britain to secure

:36:34. > :36:37.one of those top economic post. Now,

:36:38. > :36:39.there's a big birthday coming up. It is the birthday of Magna Carta

:36:40. > :36:55.and using the opportunity to ask if it's

:36:56. > :37:05.time to ditch our unwritten using the opportunity to ask if it's

:37:06. > :37:06.constitution in favour of an American-style

:37:07. > :37:07.codified, written constitution. The closest we have got to written

:37:08. > :37:13.constitution, the Magna Carta. Oops, there is no 'the',

:37:14. > :37:15.it is just Magna Carta, It set out basic things

:37:16. > :37:19.like the idea of a law of the land and was signed 790 years

:37:20. > :37:27.ago in Runnymede by King John. Oops, it was not sign,

:37:28. > :37:33.it was sealed. Other concepts are enshrined

:37:34. > :37:36.in other bits of paper stowed away in Westminster like the Bill of

:37:37. > :37:39.Rights and the habeas corpus act. For some it is not what is written

:37:40. > :37:43.down that matters, it is what we do, conventions like the state opening

:37:44. > :37:45.of Parliament which remind us how But as long

:37:46. > :37:49.as this stuff is not codified into one document there will be a slight

:37:50. > :37:52.debate about whether it should be. The question is,

:37:53. > :38:08.will he be the first king who has I am joined by the chair of a

:38:09. > :38:13.political reform select committee which has published a consultation

:38:14. > :38:21.document and by a professor of government. What is the case for a

:38:22. > :38:25.written constitution? We have set out the case for and against because

:38:26. > :38:29.we want a debate. We are going to have six months of debate and

:38:30. > :38:36.hopefully every school child and student and professor and MP and

:38:37. > :38:39.journalists can participate. If you are asking my personal opinion why I

:38:40. > :38:43.would support a written constitution, it is important we

:38:44. > :38:47.know the rules. John Smith said you only know the British constitution

:38:48. > :38:51.if you have a degree in judicial archaeology. Why can you not have

:38:52. > :39:02.something you put in your back pocket and even quoted -- what it? I

:39:03. > :39:07.wish I had jumped on the bandwagon but if you are going to produce a

:39:08. > :39:16.document this thick, it is four years of hard work. How many trees

:39:17. > :39:18.have died in the process? We have provided a model written

:39:19. > :39:23.constitution and a couple of options to codify what we have now and to

:39:24. > :39:29.put into law the Cabinet manual. It is a debate rather than, I think

:39:30. > :39:33.this has to happen. It is great for people out there. Is it not true

:39:34. > :39:39.that we have in recent years moved away down anyway, devolution for

:39:40. > :39:45.Scotland, it provides a written constitution for a devolved

:39:46. > :39:48.Scotland, we have a Supreme Court, which is more written to the law

:39:49. > :39:54.than before, but whereas we used to say our Constitution was written,

:39:55. > :40:06.big parts of it are written? It is not that it is on written, it is

:40:07. > :40:12.uncle divide. -- uncodified. My problem with what is presented as

:40:13. > :40:14.the lack of clarity. Simply drawing together the existing rules and

:40:15. > :40:20.actually entrenching them, which is what the committee means by a

:40:21. > :40:24.written constitution. It does not actually address what it claims to

:40:25. > :40:29.address. Do you have a fundamental principle objection to a written

:40:30. > :40:32.concert douching? Principled and practical because I do not see how

:40:33. > :40:38.we get from here to there at the committees do not provide that. My

:40:39. > :40:45.objection is who ultimately resolves issues? Should it be representatives

:40:46. > :40:48.or the judges? You can make a principled argument for it being the

:40:49. > :40:58.judgement but political issue should be resolved by representatives. That

:40:59. > :41:03.does not include the second chamber. Part of the problem is that the

:41:04. > :41:07.representatives and government are conflated in our system. We do not

:41:08. > :41:11.have a separation of powers within our system or that Parliament can

:41:12. > :41:18.hold government to account and what we are trying to do is get that

:41:19. > :41:22.argument into the open to being. People are fed up with our politics

:41:23. > :41:29.and have lost faith and something like this will allow them to enter

:41:30. > :41:32.the debate and transcend that. It will not get the issues people are

:41:33. > :41:36.concerned about because the argument is not that our system is not

:41:37. > :41:44.broken, there are problems we need to address, but this does not do it.

:41:45. > :41:48.All this does is codify the existing system. The metaphor I like to use

:41:49. > :41:56.is a boxing ring. It is not about the boxers. What this does is set

:41:57. > :41:59.the boundaries, the framework, what is the relationship between local

:42:00. > :42:04.government and national government? What is the relationship between

:42:05. > :42:08.devolved countries and the centre? Does it set the framework for

:42:09. > :42:14.changing the constitution? Yes, there are proposals about how you

:42:15. > :42:19.can do that. To allow yourself and everybody watching the show to write

:42:20. > :42:27.in between now and January the 1st, it is on the website, and make

:42:28. > :42:35.changes. Viewers will love this. Make changes, this is a model. Does

:42:36. > :42:38.this get your juices going? In the context of things that need to be

:42:39. > :42:45.addressed, this is not on the agenda. You could always say that.

:42:46. > :42:47.It is never a good time. Would you like local government to know

:42:48. > :42:55.exactly where maggots bands and have the ability to be independent? Do

:42:56. > :43:03.you think England should have a devolved settlement? Is that in

:43:04. > :43:11.there? Yes. You can amend that and make that relevant. This is the

:43:12. > :43:15.point. More excited? Not yet. The issue for me, I am sure it is the

:43:16. > :43:20.problem you have with people out there generally, the attitude says,

:43:21. > :43:26.we have managed for 800 years, what is the urgent aid for change? Do you

:43:27. > :43:34.think things are fine at the moment with the party coming from nowhere

:43:35. > :43:43.to get 25% of the vote with an collection where a majority could be

:43:44. > :43:46.formed on 28%? Our union partners saying we are thinking about leaving

:43:47. > :43:56.the union. You have mentioned that. Let me ask you, if Scotland votes to

:43:57. > :44:02.stay in the union, the three main Westminster parties, and the UKIP,

:44:03. > :44:07.have promised further devolution. I would suggest that if there is a lot

:44:08. > :44:12.more devolution to Edinburgh other will be demands for more to Cardiff

:44:13. > :44:15.and the English will want the West Lothian question answered. Would

:44:16. > :44:18.there be a possibility of a constitutional convention for the

:44:19. > :44:23.whole of the UK for this to become relevant? There is an argument for

:44:24. > :44:30.convention but not for the purposes indicated. We need to make sense of

:44:31. > :44:34.where we are. The point you have made militates against this document

:44:35. > :44:38.because it will not be static. There will be the sort of changes you have

:44:39. > :44:47.mentioned. It is a framework that is amendable. Scots will not believe us

:44:48. > :44:52.unless there is something written very carefully. Most of the Scots

:44:53. > :45:00.would come back to the union and be part of the family if they knew...

:45:01. > :45:04.They have said unless you sort yourself out we will leave. One of

:45:05. > :45:11.the ways is to be clear. You are not clear. You need a precise act of

:45:12. > :45:18.Parliament because that makes clear what the relationship is rather than

:45:19. > :45:23.a broad document. I think we can agree we have started the argument.

:45:24. > :45:28.We have started the journey. Thank you.

:45:29. > :45:30.More now on the Government's announcement of emergency

:45:31. > :45:32.legislation designed to ensure the police and security services

:45:33. > :45:34.can continue to access people's phone and internet records.

:45:35. > :45:37.Just over an hour ago the Home Secretary Theresa May told

:45:38. > :45:43.the House of Commons why the new legislation is needed.

:45:44. > :45:47.We face two significant and urgent problems relating to both

:45:48. > :45:52.communications data and interception. First, the recent

:45:53. > :45:58.judgement by the European Court of Justice, that called into question

:45:59. > :46:00.the legal basis upon which we require communication service

:46:01. > :46:06.providers in the UK to retain communications data. And second, the

:46:07. > :46:09.increasingly pressing need to put beyond doubt the application of our

:46:10. > :46:14.laws on interception so that communication service providers have

:46:15. > :46:17.to comply with their legal obligations irrespective of where

:46:18. > :46:21.they are based. So I can tell the house that today the government is

:46:22. > :46:25.announcing the introduction of fast track legislation, through the data

:46:26. > :46:27.retention and investigatory Powers Bill, to deal with these two

:46:28. > :46:31.problems. We have been joined by the Labour

:46:32. > :46:33.backbencher Tom Watson, who this morning has condemned

:46:34. > :46:36.the plans as a "stitch up" which prevent MPs from considering

:46:37. > :46:55.the legislation properly. You have a principled objection to

:46:56. > :47:00.this. It is very difficult for me whether to say whether I do or do

:47:01. > :47:03.not, I have only received the bill in the last 30 minutes, there is

:47:04. > :47:09.virtually no way that I can come to an informed view on it and that is

:47:10. > :47:14.the real problem. It is the stitch up that is making you suspicious.

:47:15. > :47:18.This is hasty legislation, and we know that invariably goes wrong.

:47:19. > :47:22.This is on an issue of great concern to many people out there in the

:47:23. > :47:25.country. There have been secret talks between the three party

:47:26. > :47:29.frontbenchers, to reach an accommodation on legislation that

:47:30. > :47:33.most MPs are still not aware about, let alone have the ability to read

:47:34. > :47:37.it. That has recipe for disaster written all over it! There will be

:47:38. > :47:42.people out there in the country who are yet further in gate from the

:47:43. > :47:48.political process, further eroded, because the some reason they were

:47:49. > :47:53.not given time to discuss this. Is a crucial backbencher in this process,

:47:54. > :47:56.how do you see it unfolding over the next... Parliament goes out for the

:47:57. > :48:05.summer recess in a few weeks. Theresa May will get this three

:48:06. > :48:09.major parties have been talked to. It is very frustrating because we

:48:10. > :48:12.will go next week, we will try to improve the bill, look at the

:48:13. > :48:16.clauses as best we can and maybe move amendments but it will be

:48:17. > :48:19.whipped through. There will be no proper scrutiny, the select

:48:20. > :48:24.committees will not have time to look at it. Will it go to a standing

:48:25. > :48:28.committee? We do not yet know... ! As it stands it looks like it will

:48:29. > :48:35.be railroaded through both houses in a day or two! It will be done on the

:48:36. > :48:41.floor of the house. If all three parties are being whipped, that will

:48:42. > :48:46.make amendments more difficult. I do not know what Nick Clegg did... Here

:48:47. > :48:50.is the Deputy Prime Minister, who stood up to say "I do not believe in

:48:51. > :48:56.the surveillance state", one of his key manifesto promises, like tuition

:48:57. > :49:00.fees, and yet he is standing up a three party deal in just lay lay

:49:01. > :49:04.next week. It is a real shame. What you say to the people who are

:49:05. > :49:12.watching events unfolding in Iraq. -- is standing a three party deal in

:49:13. > :49:15.legislation next week. Many British citizens involved in Iraq and Syria,

:49:16. > :49:19.our concern is that they come back and they are serious terror threats

:49:20. > :49:23.and people may think, give the security services what they need, we

:49:24. > :49:29.need is to be protected. I am a patriot, I believe we need a secure

:49:30. > :49:31.state, I have authorised covert surveillance by military

:49:32. > :49:34.intelligence as a former defence secretary, I am not running away

:49:35. > :49:37.from that concern. What we have got to do is draw the line between

:49:38. > :49:42.liberty and security and the only way you can do that is by having a

:49:43. > :49:46.public discourse where civic institutions can take part in this

:49:47. > :49:51.democratic process. There is no way they can do that in three days. How

:49:52. > :49:55.come Ed Miliband has gone along with this? I have absolutely no idea and

:49:56. > :49:58.I'm afraid I'm very disappointed... I can understand him reaching a

:49:59. > :50:02.conclusion that you support the content of the bill which I have not

:50:03. > :50:09.yet seen but which he has, but to allow this to go through with such

:50:10. > :50:12.unnecessary haste... That is not just anti-democratic, I think it is

:50:13. > :50:15.a political mistake that the Labour Party. You have any idea how many

:50:16. > :50:22.like-minded people like yourself on both sides. -- do you have any idea

:50:23. > :50:25.how many like-minded people you have? When I left the chamber it

:50:26. > :50:31.seemed to be just me and David Davies! But there is hundreds of MPs

:50:32. > :50:34.who will not even know we had an emergency statement today because

:50:35. > :50:42.they are in their constituencies! Over the weekend, this may build,

:50:43. > :50:48.but at the moment, it is two! It can only grow! Thank you for joining us.

:50:49. > :51:06.So, the stage is set for a thrilling World Cup final

:51:07. > :51:09.on Sunday, I'm told it's Germany and Argentina battling it

:51:10. > :51:16.out in Rio. Of course, England's world cup dreams died what seems

:51:17. > :51:52.like months ago, and just in case you needed reminding, take a look.

:51:53. > :51:57.How could England and for that matter the national teams of

:51:58. > :52:02.Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland ever hope for success in a major

:52:03. > :52:06.tournament? One MP thinks he has the answer, you're starting a campaign

:52:07. > :52:10.to get the four national football associations to field a combined UK

:52:11. > :52:16.team. Laurence Robertson joins us now.

:52:17. > :52:19.Laurence Robertson joins me now, as does the SNP's Pete Wishart.

:52:20. > :52:28.This smacks of desperation! The Scots, the Welsh and the Northern

:52:29. > :52:33.Ireland to help us out. Perhaps I do not have the answer, I am not

:52:34. > :52:36.prepared to accept... I'm not prepared to accept the inevitability

:52:37. > :52:40.that we cannot compete at world level at football any more. We have

:52:41. > :52:44.had the players over the years, we have divided ourselves into four, I

:52:45. > :52:50.am not aware of any other country in the world that does that. America

:52:51. > :52:53.does not put forward 50 teams! We are causing problems for ourselves

:52:54. > :52:57.and we are denying opportunities to people in Scotland, Wales and

:52:58. > :53:01.Northern Ireland to appear in World Cup finals. It is the only

:53:02. > :53:04.opportunity a Scottish football player is ever going to get as

:53:05. > :53:12.qualifying for a major tournament. Scotland have done pretty well just

:53:13. > :53:17.now... Where were they in Brazil? When did we, if I am allowed to use

:53:18. > :53:24.the week, when did we last qualify? 1990, for the World Cup. But we have

:53:25. > :53:28.got some fantastic games and we have seen some fantastic games. This is

:53:29. > :53:33.part of national life, this is ingrained into the culture, it is

:53:34. > :53:39.something, when Scotland... We were internationally recognised, part and

:53:40. > :53:42.parcel of what we are about. I am sick and tired of Westminster trying

:53:43. > :53:47.to subvert the national football team. What is happening is we have

:53:48. > :53:51.all of the International football authorities sitting in Geneva, they

:53:52. > :53:55.are looking for any excuse to combine these teams together. We

:53:56. > :53:58.must do all that we can to defend the national side, I do not detect

:53:59. > :54:02.any sense that this is what is desired in England. Scottish fans

:54:03. > :54:10.are Scottish fans, England fans are England fans. -- Scottish fans are

:54:11. > :54:13.Scotland fans. I was in a bar in Edinburgh watching England against

:54:14. > :54:18.Italy, a number of fellow Scotsmen were cheering for Italy and I

:54:19. > :54:21.reminded them, and my friend Stephen Hepburn MP reminded me, when

:54:22. > :54:27.Scotland play, we cheer for Scotland. They were very well

:54:28. > :54:30.mannered. When Andy Murray won Wimbledon, fantastic achievement for

:54:31. > :54:37.Scotland, but for the United Kingdom as well. Let me ask you this, would

:54:38. > :54:41.it really make any difference? Is there any Scottish... Is there any

:54:42. > :54:47.Scottish player who would actually get into a British... I think there

:54:48. > :54:52.is and over the years, he may have even... Over the years, certainly,

:54:53. > :54:58.but what about now? Looking at the long-term. In the 1970s, Pete

:54:59. > :55:03.referred to, there would have been a majority of the Scottish players in

:55:04. > :55:06.the UK team. Name me one, now that would make it. I do not know if

:55:07. > :55:12.there is one England player who was good enough to be there, to be

:55:13. > :55:14.honest! Why bother having a team! The British Lions, the whole of

:55:15. > :55:21.Ireland plays with the British Lions. The British Lions to warrant

:55:22. > :55:25.it, there is a great opportunity for people to participate, but there is

:55:26. > :55:59.no desire, nobody wants a joint UK football team!

:56:00. > :56:00.through... Belgium, Holland. Belgium, the Netherlands, Costa

:56:01. > :56:08.Rica, Uruguay, they are not massive. We are one jurisdiction

:56:09. > :56:11.with four teams, that is crazy. The point you have been making, it is

:56:12. > :56:17.something of a historical anomaly, that we are allowed to put in four

:56:18. > :56:20.teams. My understanding is that it is basically because this was the

:56:21. > :56:25.home of football, better organised, separate football associations when

:56:26. > :56:32.these competitions began. At some stage, like our seat in the UN, they

:56:33. > :56:36.may rumble us! They are watching motions like this, the footballing

:56:37. > :56:41.authorities, they do not like the idea that we have four national

:56:42. > :56:48.side. What has happened here, he has encouraged them! I hope my level of

:56:49. > :56:53.influence is that strong! It would threaten the integrity of the

:56:54. > :56:58.national football side and... They come forward with these motions and

:56:59. > :56:59.these ideas. The Tartan Army, every Scottish football fan would be

:57:00. > :57:11.appalled. Team GB in the Olympics two years

:57:12. > :57:14.ago. That is different! Goodness... I want to see success for the

:57:15. > :57:17.football team. Should you not have checked out if there were any

:57:18. > :57:21.Scottish Welsh or Northern Irish players good enough to play in a

:57:22. > :57:28.British team before you came up with this idea. I think there are. You

:57:29. > :57:34.cannot give me a name. Gareth Bale, of course. Where is he from? He is

:57:35. > :57:39.Welsh. Ryan Giggs would have been good enough to get in the present

:57:40. > :57:44.squad. So we have got to Welshman. Wales are probably doing better than

:57:45. > :57:50.Scotland. Gareth Bale is the only one that would come to my mind at

:57:51. > :57:55.the moment. If that is how the people of Scotland vote, that yes on

:57:56. > :58:00.your lapel, then it is a nonstarter! That is the only way to preserve the

:58:01. > :58:01.integrity of the national side. Don't turn it into a referendum!

:58:02. > :58:08.LAUGHTER If we vote no, then what we are

:58:09. > :58:11.hearing from Conservative Westminster MPs is that if we vote

:58:12. > :58:18.no, the National football side is in danger! I'm told it is every couple

:58:19. > :58:22.of years, in between the World Cup, it is the European tournament of

:58:23. > :58:27.nations, will Scotland qualify for that? Very good question, yes we

:58:28. > :58:34.will! But the first site we are up against, Germany! Wales have got a

:58:35. > :58:38.better chance of qualifying! -- but the first side we are up against is

:58:39. > :58:43.Germany. Thanks to Tom Crotty

:58:44. > :58:46.and all my guests. I'm back on BBC One tonight at 11.35

:58:47. > :58:52.with a special edition of This Week and I shall be in Edinburgh with

:58:53. > :58:57.guests including Michael Portillo, Diane Abbott, Charles Kennedy

:58:58. > :59:02.and Susan Boyle, all in front