10/09/2014 Daily Politics


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 10/09/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning folks, and welcome to the Daily Politics.


Just eight days to go until the people of Scotland decide whether or


The fate of the 300-year-old union hangs in the balance,


with polls suggesting the Yes and No campaigns are neck-and-neck.


The Prime Minister makes an impassioned plea for Scots to


He's cancelled his normal question time appearance,


along with the other main party leaders, to head north to Scotland.


Alex Salmond says the No campaign is falling apart at the seams.


But with fresh warnings from the Governor of the Bank


of England, and as investors continue to take fright, can the Yes


With Messrs Cameron and Miliband off to Scotland, it'll be Hague


We'll have all the action and expert analysis live at midday.


And the journalist Alice Thomson says it's time to end the culture


of politicians wining and dining with big donors.


The Queen costs each taxpayer 56 pence a year. In return, we don't


have to worry, she is wining and dining people, for a stack of cash


to keep the show on the road. That should be the example for all our


All that in the next 90 minutes, and with us for the whole of the


programme today, the new Secretary of State for Wales, Stephen Crabb,


and the Shadow Housing Minister, Emma Reynolds. Welcome to you both.


Now, it's Wednesday, and usually that means we'd be gearing up for


our weekly bout of verbal pugilism between the Prime Minister and the


Leader of the Opposition. But wait - what's that? They're not going to be


there? Why? The referendum? Yes, that's right. Messrs Cameron and


Miliband have agreed to suspend hostilities in order to campaign in


Scotland. They've even taken Nick Clegg with them - probably to carry


their bags. Actually, I jest. The leaders aren't travelling together,


and they certainly won't be sharing any stages.Yes, the Prime Minister


and they certainly won't be sharing any stages. Yes, the Prime Minister


is doing a Q in Edinburgh this morning with voters, Nick Clegg will


be visiting an energy company in Selkirk at lunchtime, and Ed


Miliband will be making a speech this afternoon in Glasgow. A short


while ago, I spoke to our political correspondent, Norman Smith, just


before he went in to hear the Prime Minister speak.


It is a huge gamble by the three main unionist parties but it


reflects the fact that the polls have tightened, they know they have


to step up the intensity of their campaign and they have to try and


seize the initiative, which is why they have taken the decision to set


aside Prime Minister's Questions and make the case for the union, we will


see the tone of the campaign changing. There has been criticism


too much has been focussed on the economy, sterling and now there is


to be a conscious effort to make a more emotional case to the people of


Scotland, to site family, to reframe the argument, but it is a huge, huge


gamble. The gamble is this, that they come up here and are seen as


the Westminster elite, coming up to Scotland, to lecture the Scots at


the very last gasp of this referendum campaign, that is the


narrative we have been hearing from Alex Salmond, who insists it is a


last minute panic measure and it might backfire, because if you look


at their ratings, north of the border, let us be candid, David


Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg are not highly regarded here. They


advertise the fact they are the Westminster party, and that


reinforces Alex Salmond's case, that Scotland would be better governing


itself. O so it is a big risk and a big move by the three main party


leaders. Norman Smith there let us pick up on


that point. Aren't you playing into Alex Salmond's hands? He has said he


will pay for the bus fares for all of them to travel up. Not at all. We


knew the last days of the campaign would feel very intense indeed. We


knew that the polls were tightening. You didn't think they would be this


tight, did you? That is is right for the party leaders to make a stand,


to go to Scotland and say this matters. Tell people of Scotland how


much we want them to stick with the family, stick with the family of


nations. You look cynical at this point, why wasn't it done before? It


is only because the polls have shown one or two of them that they are


tied the or the yes campaign is slightly ahead, that there is what


looks like a desperate attempt to make appeal to Scottish voters?


David Cameron has been going back and forward to Scotland since he


became Prime Minister, speaking from his head and heart about why he


wants Scotland to stick with the family of nations that is the United


Kingdom. He isn't popular in Scotland, so could it make it worse?


. I don't believe it will make it worse, I think it is a really


important step that the party leaders take, today, it is not


uncommon for the Prime Minister to miss PMQs for extraordinary


occasion, this is an extraordinary momentous moment nor the United


Kingdom. What difference is Ed Miliband going to make, bear in mind


they have had to ask Gordon Brown, a previous Labour Prime Minister to


step in to save the union? It is right that the three party leaders


are up in Scotland. We expected all along the polls would narrow. One


poll suggested that 20% of people have not made up their minds, so it


is right that politicians across the political spectrum are there and


Gordon Brown, a towering figure in British politics and Scottish


politics has been involved in the campaign for quite some time, and


again, it is unsurprising that he has started to come Pape more


intensely in the last couple of weeks. Looking now, xue excuse me,


Stephen crab, do you think there should have been another question on


the ballot paper, that promised more powers to Scotland, in the event of


a no vote? No, the decision that the people Scott land are taking is a


complicated one, a difficult one. Having a choice between independence


or remaining part of the UK... Was that the wrong decision? Would we be


in this situation if there had been another choice on the ballot paper?


It is difficult presented with that. There is a strong appetite within


Scotland for more decision making to be taken within the boundaries of


Scotland, the parties at Westminster are united in saying we are going to


meet that appetite. But it is right for the people Scott land to make


this decision whether they want to stick with the United Kingdom, stick


with the family of nations or to go it alone as independents. Let us


One of the things Mr Cameron et al will be talking about


while they're north of the border will be more devolution as


Yesterday, the leaders of the Scottish


Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats stood on a joint platform


to offer the Scots further powers if they vote No next Thursday.


They hope this will be enough to dissuade people from voting


The Yes Campaign says it's just a last minute panicky bribe.


Stewart Hosie is deputy leader of the SNP group in Westminster, and


Given all the uncertainties that are associated with independence, would


it not be better to keep the certainty of the union, and all the


extra devolutionary powers that are being promised to you? No, because


the certainty with independence is that the Scottish people will have


all of the power in their hands. The Scottish Government elected


democratically, it will take all the decisions. When we talk about


uncertainty, we have had this week Gordon Brown, our backbench Labour


MP making a promise he can't keep, expecting the Scottish people to


believe a Tory Government will implement a Labour plan. The weakest


of the three plans on offer from the three unionist parties. I think the


First Minister is correct. It this is a last ditch panic move. It is


desperation at the heart of the no camp. Nobody is buying it. If you


accept more Home Rule, Scotland's position in the EU, that is firm,


its position in NATO, that is firm, monetary union with the rest of the


United Kingdom, that is guaranteed. Independence, you can't guarantee


any of these things, that is uncertain. I know I have made the


case as to why a currency union is in the best interest of Scotland and


the rest of the UK. You can't guarantee it. . I am certain that


the arguments we have laid out, in terms of the currency are correct.


There is not a serious commentator thinks we will be outside of the EU.


I think the language that was used is Scotland be treated as a special


and unique case. It could take time. It is not seamless, you party used


to say it was automatic, the you wouldn't even have to apply again,


you would remain a member of the EU. We although that is not the case


now, it is uncertain. Andrew, I think it is the case that because


there is no provision to pebbling a state or part of a state -- expel


where there will be negotiation, they will be from the inside. You


know, there are no more uncertainties with independence as


there are risks as staying part of the union, this is a union with ?1.5


trillion worth of debt. When the main parties travel to Scotland to


tell the Scottish people what they can't do, they can't be seen to be


photographed together. No-one is taking this seriously. The most


serious point if there isn't uncertainty ant independence, why


are investors pulling their cash out of Scotland, sinsing is on exit


clauses in commercial property deals and the value of sterling is


falling? That sounds like uncertainty. . In terms of sterling


we saw a 1% dip two days ago, that has happened 16 times in the last


year against the euro. Can I just point out against the dollar,


sterling only a month ago was 1.72, it is now 1.61. That is a big fall.


There are many reasons why currency prices change. I think to put all of


that at the door of Scottish independence is wrong. To be honest,


the smart commentators are suggesting as much of this is to do


with the lack of preparedness of the UK government than independence


itself. In terms of the stock price, if you look at Scotland's lives


company, apart from cairn which has share problems unrelated to


independence, their rise since the no campaign was at peak last


September, it was 4.7%, that is against a 3.7% average for the FTSE


100. It is wrong to suggest share prices are falling, because of


independence. Except it was largely on Scottish prices that the big


share prices fell. Why are investors pulling their money out of Scotland?


Why are they moving their bank accounts south? The FTSE is down 1%


already, that is across the entire inDerek this is not to do with


Scottish independence. Why are people pulling their money out of


Scotland? I have heard this scare story from our opponents many time.


You know and I know over the past two years as the debate has


happened, yes I have we have taken the lead, investment in Scotland,


massive investment, not least the 14 billion of investment in the North


Sea last year. It is wrong to say people are pulling out of Scotland


at and it is wrong four our political Pope innocents to be


spooking the market in this way. You say, just before I bring in our


studio guests. A Scottish investment fund, we have moved hundreds of


millions south of border, on the record. Another firm in Edinburgh.


We have moved our bank account south. Resident commercial property


investors now insisting on exit clauses should Scotland vote yes.


That is uncertainty. It is on uncertainty if it is talked up.


There are lots of reason to put an exit clause in deal if you think it


might not go through. Doing it before? We are certain and I am sure


the smart investors know this very well, that I will be huge


opportunities in an ind Scotland, a country with a fundamentally robust


economy, with huge plans to grow the economy, to create more wealth. I


think investors will be flocking to Scotland to take advantage of the


opportunities after the 19th September. I want you to listen to


what our studio guests are saying. I will come back for a brief reaction


from you. Why did Labour, which is basically calling the shots in this,


in the no campaign, why did it wait to offer this new Home Rule package


after all the postal votes had been cast? Well, Ed Miliband's been


talking about further devolution for some time. You didn't spell it out


until the postal votes had been cashed. The only conclusion is you


are panicking The three party leaders have decided there should be


further devolution of tax powers in addition to all the other powers the


Scottish Parliament has. You are not going to take them way, are you.


There has been a significant devolution of powers already in the


time that we were in Government, and I think it is right now, in the


closing weeks of campaign, that there is further clarity on the


timetable. Let us have some clarity. Give us collarly. What extra tax


powers will the Scottish Parliament get? We have talked about further


devolution of income tax, obviously the details of that will need to


be... You can't give clarity on what the details would be or a broad


strategic description of what the income tax powers would be? There


would be significantly more powers. What does that mean And that the tax


now paid into the Treasury would go into Scottish coffers and there


would be more control over that for the Scottish Parliament. How much


income tax would be devolved? Detail would need to be worked out. Surely


the people of Scotland are being asked to vote on their future, there


is two alternative, one is clear, it is independence and they can take


out a view on that. The alternative is not the status quo. We have been


clear about that. You are saying further devolution, Gordon Brown


calls it Home Rule. Don't the people of Scotland have a right to know


what that would mean in terms of income tax, VAT, would the taxation


on oil be devolved to Scotland? We have talked about the devolution of


housing benefit. The devolution of income tax. I think it is very clear


that there will be further devolution of power and I think that


is right. I understand that but you promised clarity and I am not


getting it. Will that taxation of oil be


devolved? That is one of the things that will need to be worked out. I


know that, I would like you to tell me will it all wanted or don't you


know? The powers being put forward will fundamentally change the fiscal


equation for Scotland. It will be a situation where most of its money


gets handed down from Westminster and all they can decide to do is how


they spend it to actually taking responsibility for raising when most


of them may themselves. Whether that's from energy resources, or


from income tax, corporation tax. So a home ruled Scotland would have its


own powers over the taxation of oil would go to the Edinburgh


parliament? We are not saying that exactly. You said taxation over


energy policy. I said there were a lot of resources available from


which governments can raise money, and what Scotland will get is a huge


swathe of new powers, giving it responsible to the raising most of


its money and then deciding how to spend it. That changes fundamentally


the devolution equation for Scotland. Or are you hitting the


panic button because you are about to lose the referendum? You say most


taxation powers would be in Scotland. All the figures I have


seen, whether you take the rather reluctant devolution of the Labour


Party or the more enthusiastic devolution of your party is that


actually about 40% of revenues raised in Scotland would go to the


Scottish parliament. That's not most. Most income tax raised will be


the responsibility. Income tax will become the responsibility of the


Scottish Government. Do you agree that most income tax should be


raised in Scotland? I think the decisions about text have wider


implications for the rest of the union, and in that sense it is


absolutely right. The direction of travel has been set, but the further


detail needs to be considered with care and attention. But not by next


Thursday, correct? Scots will have to vote blind on this matter. We


have said income tax to a certain extent will be devolved and there


will be further tax raising powers for the Scottish parliament. The


direction of travel is clear. It is just the actual destination is not


clear. Stewart Hosie, I will come back to you for the final word. A


huge open goal in front of you? Reign just be serious for a second,


the Scottish Government just a 600 page white paper, detail, questions,


answers, everything, massive amount of detail. We can't even get a clear


answer from Unionist parties about the proportion of income tax that


will be devolved or if any other taxes will be devolved. It is simply


not good enough, it is the bag of a -- back of a fag packet calculation.


I can't wait till next Thursday. Neither can I, probably for


different reasons. It's just that I'm working, you will be spectating.


Stewart Hosie, thanks for joining us.


We've heard plenty over the last few months and weeks about what Scottish


independence would mean for Scotland - but what about the rest of the UK?


What would a Yes vote next Thursday mean for people in England,


Alex Salmond has said an independent Scotland would remove Trident


nuclear sub Marines from their current base on the Clyde by 2020,


leaving the rest of the UK with an expensive relocation bill. UK


defence spending without Scotland would be reduced by 10%. Without


Scotland, UK's role in the world could also change will stop if it is


seen as less influential, United Kingdom would not be up to retain


her permanent suit -- seat on the UN Security Council. Whether Scotland


will be allowed to keep the pound would have an impact on the money


markets. There will also be tough negotiation about how much of the


national debt Scotland agrees to take on. Without Scotland, the rest


of the UK's GDP would be about 8% smaller than now and the Westminster


Treasury would take a hit from the loss of North Sea revenues fostered


but some economists argue GDP per may actually increase in England,


Wales and Northern Ireland and Scotland's average expenditure per


person is ?1300 higher than the UK average. Politically, there is talk


of a constitutional crisis. There could be cause for the Prime


Minister and other party leaders to resign. An early general election


could be triggered before Christmas. If the May 2015 election does go


ahead, then any MPs elected in Scotland would only serve until the


proposed Independence Day in March 2016. So if Labour is elected by a


small majority, or there is a hung parliament, we could face another


general election in 2016, once the 59 Scottish MPs are taken out of the


equation. Let's look at some of the implications, if there is a yes vote


next week, or even if there is not. A lot more home rule on offer for


Scotland. Gordon Brown calls at home rule. Why shouldn't Wales have it?


There isn't the appetite in Wales for independence, we know that.


Devolution has worked in Wales, in the sense that it has killed off in


the Tennents as a movement within Wales but what I believe is that the


appetite for decision making within national borders, Wales, Northern


Ireland and Scotland, that appetite should be met. So there should be


more devolution of power to Wales? There will be in future if that's


what the public opinion once. But are you in favour of it? I am


open-minded about how devolution progresses in Wales. The important


thing is that we need stability and a constitutional setup that helps


foster unity rather than division. You once said devolution was as big


a threat to this country as uncontrolled immigration, why do you


want more of it? I was one of a great number of people in Wales who


felt that devolution was a very risky path to go down, 12 years ago.


It could cause huge and permanent damage to our country? In that time,


devolution has worked in Wales, it has fostered unity and I think it's


right. Every time the people of Wales when they asked you want more


or less devolution, they say more please, but we don't want


independence. Would a future Conservative government, if you win


the election next year, will you give Wales more devolved powers?


It's happening anyway. We have a bill going through Parliament which,


for the first time, gives taxation powers to Wales. They are banking


that, that's going through now. Will there be more, as a result of all


the power unspecified in some areas that you are planning to give to


Scotland, will there be more for Wales as well? If the appetite is


therefore more powers, and Carl Wyn Jones has said he does not


necessarily believe that Wales should have exactly the kind of


devolution settlement Scotland, so it is not a case of whether Wales


should have the same... I didn't ask that, I simply asked if there would


be more? I said yes, Wales is getting more. Would that be true


under Labour too? It is important to talk about devolution in England. We


will come to that in a second, but let me sign off on the Wales


question, would a future Labour government devolved more power to


the Welsh Parliament or a semi? I think the Welsh assembly has already


got a number of powers. We know that, but would it get more? I am


not entirely confident that there is appetite for significantly more


devolution of powers in Wales full stop let's come on to England, 85%


of the United Kingdom by population. If Scotland is to get a


lot more power, including almost complete control over its divest it


affairs and substantial taxation powers, does that not mean that you


have to answer the West Lothian question, that Scottish MPs cannot


vote on English only matters? I think what is an important question


is actually more so what does it mean in terms of the centralised


nature of our country? We are more centralised than many other European


countries. Why don't you devolve and have an English only Parliament


Sundays in the Commons when Scottish and Welsh MPs can't vote on English


matters? What it actually points to is that we need to devolved powers,


responsibilities and perhaps resource, which we have talked about


in recent months, to local authorities in England that come


together and work together. That is, for me, a more significant move, in


terms of devolution. Why would it be right for a Scottish MP, who under


the Gordon Brown scheme that you signed up to, would have no say


whatsoever over domestic Scottish matters, or over income tax, why


should that Scottish MP have any say over England's domestic matters?


Because there will still be domestic affairs we continue together and I


believe in the integration of the UK Parliament. If this Scottish MP has


no say over Scottish education or how it is to be funded, why should


he or she have a vote over English education, which doesn't affect its


constituency? We already have that situation, and I do think it is


important that the body politic that sits in Westminster, that represents


every corner of our family of nations, have the same rights. Is it


conceivable that you can agree to all this extra devolution for


Scotland without coming up for something with England as well, that


allows English MPs... Alex Salmond says constantly the Scots should


decide their own future. When will the English be allowed to decide


their own domestic affairs without Scottish or Welsh MPs voting on the


same issues? I don't think it is conceivable to devolve this new


suite of powers to Scotland and leave the constitutional settlement


affecting Northern Ireland, Wales and England in tact. You think there


has to be a UK... Absolutely, there needs to be a UK wide response. Yes,


we have given a commitment to give more powers to the people of


Scotland, because that is what they want, but we need to look at the


other nations as equal nations. We talk the language of being a family


of nations, in the United Kingdom. For the first time, we need to look


at the Constitution as if we are generally a family. The primers to


has told the audience in Edinburgh that he would be heartbroken if --


the Prime Minister. Arguing, I love my country more than I love my


party. There we go. As we have been discussing, the latest ploy is to


reach out to voters in Scotland to tell them that they really do want


them to stay. We have heard from David Blunkett saying it is time for


people in the UK to phone a Scottish friend.


David Cameron and Ed Miliband urged homes and offices


across the country to fly the saltire, and it was even raised


It happens every day on Saint Andrew stay, but never mind.


But in what the superstitious might regard as something


of a bad omen for the unionists, the flag fell down, and it took several


But, wherever you stand on Scottish independence, there's one thing that


we know is universally popular, from Land's End to John O'Groats.


No, not the Great British Bake-Off, I speak of course of the


We'll remind you how to enter in a minute, but let's see if you


MUSIC: "Don't Stop Till You Get Enough" by Michael Jackson.


I've always maintained I was innocent


MUSIC: "Message in a Bottle" by The Police.


I inherited a dairy industry in whch costs had risen, and producers


MUSIC: "I Don't Like Mondays" by The Boomtown Rats.


To be in with a chance of winning a Daily Politics mug, send your


answer to our special quiz email address, that's [email protected]


And you can see the full terms and conditions for Guess The Year


on our website, that's bbc.co.uk/dailypolitics.


What are the full terms and conditions? Have you got half an


hour. No. It's coming up to midday here,


just take a look at Big Ben, yes, Prime Minister's Questions is


on its way, minus the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition,


of course. Other than that, it's going to be


great! LAUGHTER And that's not all,


James Landale is here. So we have got the B team, all eyes


are north of the border, does any buddy rarely care what Mr Hague or


Miss Harman have to say? Only if they make a mistake. I would expect


them to stick to safety first, talk about Scotland, they don't want to


portray an image of disunity today. They will agree. Just to let you


know, you quoted some of the premise's words, can you also tell


you something else -- tell you something Ozzie said, he said this


was a decision that would last for centuries. It was not, I quote, if


you are fed up with the Tories, you can give them a kick. That is what


the primers to said, -- Prime Minister said the premise to said


effing Tories. Feeling more to the heart than the head. He saying to


Scots, this is not an occasion if you are fed up with the effing


Tories give them a kick, this is a decision that would last for


centuries. Let's go straight to the house. I hope the language is


better. To listen and talk to voters about


the huge choice they face, and their message to the Scottish people is


simple, from the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, we want


you to stay in the United Kingdom. I join the Prime Minister in the


tribute he paid on Monday to Jim Dobbin who died at the weekend. He


was a proud Scot and a hard-working and principled particletarian who


was respected op both sides of this House. He will be very sadly missed


and I know that the thoughts of the whole House are with his family and


his friends. Mr Speaker, this morning I had meeting with


ministerial colleagues and others and in addition to my duties in this


House I will have further such meetings later today.


Can I join the the leader of the House in paying tribute to Jim


Dobbin, he was a kind and decent man and he he will be sorely missed. Our


thoughts and prayers are with his wife Pat and the family. The bedroom


tax is discriminal nay Troy. It is damaging amend not even working. On


Friday, this House was very very clear, will the Government now


listen, will it scrap this wretched pod sip -- policy because if they


won't, we will. Well, Mr Speaker, this is a basic


issue of fairness here, because if you live in private rented


accommodation and receive housing benefit the rules apply throughout


the whole of the last Labour Government and we had a situation


which neighbouring households could be treated unequally. She asked


about the Private Members Bill, the proposal in that bill could cost the


country up to ?1 billion and because we have introduced a cap on overall


spending, making the changes would mean finding savings elsewhere. I


haven't heard suggestion from the party opposite for that. Assuming a


no vote in the Scottish referendum, who in the Government will respect


England for the new devolution settlement? Who speaks for England,


because we need a voice and a new deal? Well, there are many of us who


having represented Yorkshire for 25 year, I can claim to speak for


England, from time to time. -- years.


Your shire men are keen for a far bigger area than they represent


themselves. Of course, all of these debates are to be had once the


referendum is concluded. Can I thank the Right Honourable member for the


word he said about our good friend and colleague Jim Dobbin, and add my


tribute to him on his sudden and tragic death at the weekend. He was,


as has been said a accident man who stuck to his principles and at a


time when it is fashionable to say politicians are in it for themselves


he was the opposite of that. Our deepest sympathies are with Pat and


their children and we will miss him greatly. -- a accident man. Historic


is is a much overused word in politics, does he agree in eight


days people the people of Scotland will make a truly historic decision?


This is their vote, but I want the message from this side of the House


to be heard loud and clear, we want Scotland to stay. I do agree with


the Right Honourable lady and that is a clear message from her side of


the House and from our different political perspectives, from the


side of the House as well. I hope therefore the message the people of


Scotland will hear from this House, where Scottish Parliamentarians have


made an imminence -- immense contribution for generations we want


to stay together and cannot imagine life on these isles without him


them. She is a London MP and speaks for millions in what she has said.


As, as I fleshed, I am a Yorkshire MP who served as Secretary of State


for Wales and we are all proud to be British, combining those identities.


There is no doubt we would all be diminished if Scotland was separated


from the people of the rest of UK. The roots of our party are deep in


Scotland, and we deliver devolution and the Scottish Parliament, but we


need to go further. Will he confirm that there will be further


devolution and a Scotland Bill setting is out new powers, published


in January? Well, as the Right Honourable lady knows that the three


main party leaders have come together to agree a programme for


change, the member for Cowdenbeath has set out a process for how it


could be delivered, to a tight timetable, all three main parties


have endorsed that timetable and it mean, immediate action, the day


after the referendum, to start the legislative process, it means a


command paper, including proposals at the end of October, with a full


draft Scotland Bill published by the end of January. And the introduction


of a bill, after the general election, regardless of who forms


the Government. So that is a clear timetable, and it shows that Scots


can have change, without irreversible separation and without


risks to jobs and their future. For the clarity of that answer, as we


set about devolving further powers to Scotland does he agree that time


has also come to devolve further power to Wales and crucially to the


great cities and regions of England too? The decision next week, of


course, as we know is a matter for the people of Scotland, the


implications will be felt by all the people of the United Kingdom, we are


already steadily devolving increased power to the, to parts of England as


well as have been doing so in Wales, under this Government, Wales has


received more primary law making power, we are moving to devolving


tax and borrowing powers for the first time, we want to see


devolution in Northern Ireland succeed, in England the Lokalism act


devolves power of business rates to Local Authorities an city deals have


given local areas more of a say. The great strength of the United Kingdom


is that it is not a rigid union, it's a living, flexible union, and


that is one of its greatest strengths of all. For us, on this


side of the House, a fundamental principle of our politics is


solidarity, we want the UK to stick together in the cause of social


justice. Does he agree with me it is wrong to set the different countries


of the UK against each other, whether it is on workers' rights or


corporation tax? Well, the Right Honourable lady makes a powerful


point about solidarity in the UK. For 300 years we have sat in this


House, with Scottish Parliamentarians and their


predecessors and they have sat together, from the 18th century to


implement a range of together, from the 18th century to


causes, from the abolition of the slave trade to our pursuit of human


rights and development across the world. We have often led the way at


times of world crisis, and been an inspiration to democratic peoples


elsewhere. The next 300 years could be as turbulent and dangerous at the


last 300 year, so to tear apart a union so proven, so precious, and so


valuable, would be a tragic mistake for all our people. People in


Scotland can now be certain that with a no vote there would be


change, and more powers for Scotland. Does he agree with me that


posed against that certainty, is the uncertainty that a yes vote would


bring on so many issues like job, pensions, mortgages and the


currency? The uncertainty would bring, as impossible to list in the


answer to one question, but a letter signed last week by more than 120


job creators from across the whole range of Scottish business concluded


that the business case for independence had not been made. They


said uncertainty surround vital issues including currency,


regulation, tax, pension, EU membership and support from for our


exports round the world. They said uncertainty is bad for business. The


Governor of the Bank of England said yesterday that sovereignty and the


currency union are incompatible and he is right. Many of us have pointed


that out for many years in relation to another currency. And be certain


of this. Be certain of this. This is not an opinion poll where you can


change your mind the next day. It is not an election where you can


reverse the result four or five years later. It is a permanent


decision that will affect generations, and therefore, the


votes cast next Thursday will probably be the most important vote


that can be cast in any country, at any time, and the voters must


therefore weigh that vote heavily. While jobs, pension, taxes are


important, next week's decisions, as he rightly says is about much, much


more than that. For sure, there must be change. We must have that and we


will, but not by tearing this country apart. We must stay as


family, not become foreigners to each other. She puts it very well.


We all want the best for Scotland as we want the best for our own


constituents, from all parts of the UK in many. The people of England,


Wales and Northern Ireland believe Scotland is better off in the UK and


the UK is better off with Scotland in it. So this referendum is the


most important choice the people of Scotland will ever make. A choice


between the opportunity and security of staying in the UK, or of leaving


for ever, without the pound, without the UK's influence in the world,


with Scotland as part of the UK, we have the best possible situation and


a great future together in the United Kingdom. Mr Speaker, since


2012, my right honourable friend and I have been supporting the policy of


the Government, not to offer so-called Devo Max as a consolation


prize in the event of a no vote, in the Scottish referendum. If this is


no longer the policy of the Government, when and why did it


change, and what opportunity has there been for this House to express


its view? It has been the policy of the Government for some time, to be


open to further devolution and I gave examples of what we have done


in Wales for instance, during the lifetime of this Government. The


statements by the party leaders, made on this in the last few day,


are statement by party leaders, in a campaign, not a statement of


Government policy but a statement of commitment from the three main


political party, akin to statements by party leaders in a general


election campaign, of what they intend to do afterwards, it is on


that basis they have made those statements.


In 2012, the Chancellor set himself a target to double exports to 1


trillion by 2020. I wonder whether he could won firm his Government is


on course to miss this tart get by a massive -- this target by a massive


300 billion. Nobody can claim to know what the figure will be in 2020


since we are only in 2014 at the moment. A great deal of work, a


great deal of work has to be done, but we have greatly intensified the


promotion of British e ports, that is why and in my time as Foreign


Secretary opened nearly 20 new embassies and Consulates, including


many that the party opposite closed when they were in power, that is why


we have revamped UK TI. We have huge increases in exports to countries


like China and India and Brazil, and everybody, of all parties and


business, must join in making a success of that by 2020. Mr Speaker,


my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister


and the Leader of the Opposition are rightly campaigning today, for the


future of our union. On a dally day sips, with Gatwick in my


constituency, I see the strong family and business links between my


local airport and Scottish airports. Does my right honourable friend the


leader of the house agree with me, that our great kingdom is better


together, as a united Britain? I say that as somebody with proud Scottish


ancestry. Yes, I absolutely agree with my honourable friend and what


he can see at Gatwick Airport and what we all experience round other


parts of eping England and Wales is a very good example of his point. In


fact two thirds of Scottish exports are exported to the rest of the


United Kingdom. Twice as much as to the rest of the world put together.


Why would anyone choose to place an international border, where those


exports are going? And do so unnecessarily. So he makes a very


powerful point. Mr Speaker, the leader of the house


is right. Next Thursday, the Scots go to the polls to make what is


undoubtedly the most historic momentous decision we have had the


privilege to consider. Will the Leader of the House join me


in congratulating the Scottish people for the way they have gone


around conducting this incredible debate? Well, I'm happy... He is


right, it was a gentle understatement that we want


different things from this process. LAUGHTER


But of course we applaud the people of Scotland for taking such an


immense interest in this on all sides. And of course it's very


important that there is a high turnout in any such referendum, so I


absolutely congratulate the people of Scotland, but I don't


congratulate those such as his own party who have failed to be straight


with the people of Scotland. Who have never explained what money


Scotland will use, and what its value will be, who have never


explained how long it would take to rejoin the European Union and on


what terms, who have never explained how they would fund schools and


hospitals, when there would be a ?6 billion black hole in their


finances, who haven't explained that their threat not to pay debts would


be disastrous for Scotland's long-term future. They are


passionate about Scotland, and they are passionate about separation but


they are not passionate about telling the truth to the people of


Scotland. Embracing three centuries, the garrison town of


Colchester has welcomed thousands of Scottish soldiers, many with their


families. We wish that to continue. Does the Leader of the House agree


with the Defence Select Committee that if Scotland ceased to be part


of the UK, and we have the best Armed Forces in Europe, this would


pose serious security and defence risks for a separate Scotland,


without the capacity to defend itself? My honourable friend makes


an extremely important point. He sees the participation and the work


and the sacrifices of members of the armed Forces from Scotland when they


are deployed in cultures to. I see the garrison in my own constituency.


He makes an important point about the security of all of us --


deployed in Colchester. It is important for Scotland's security.


Her Majesty's Naval base, Clyde, is the largest employment site on the


whole of Scotland and is going to get vigour with the deployment of


all of our submarines. These things are put at risk. Last Thursday, I


attended a public meeting in my constituency, where the doctors were


consulting their patients about how they were going to deal with a


budgetary cut of 22 to 24% by the year 2018. This cut of 22 to 24% has


officially been notified to them by NHS England. Will the Leader of the


House confirmed that if the Conservatives are in power after the


general election, these are the cuts that my constituents can expect? I


can confirm that this government has raised the NHS budget in line with


inflation, which his party was not committed to do at the last general


election. I know the Secretary of State for health will want to


discuss with him the details of the local situation, but I hope he did


explain to them that, overall, since the last election, the number of


nurses is up 3700, the number of doctors is up 6500, the number of


people who say they are treated with dignity and respect is up 10%, and


we've now been ranked as the top health system in the world,


according to the Commonwealth fund, moving from seventh in the world


four years ago. Would my right honourable friend


applaud the initiative of Prince Harry, in creating the Invicta 's


games, and welcome all the participants to this country on our


behalf? Absolutely -- Invictus Games. This is an important


continuation of the immensely proud sporting history we have in this


country. We are established again as one of the great sporting nations of


the world, and we are also a country that thinks deeply about the welfare


of service veterans and his Royal Highness, Prince Harry, has been one


of the great champions of this and we wish him and everyone involved in


the game is very much well. In 2012, the primers to said he wanted to see


economic growth that meant rising living standards for all. Can the


Leader of the House tell us why Britain has seen one of the largest


falls in real wages of any EU country, beaten only by Cyprus,


Portugal and Greece? He might remember that there was a debt


fuelled recession that came about under the previous government. And,


of course, that has to be paid for. But after four years now of the


disciplined policy of my right honourable friend, the Chancellor of


the Exchequer, we now have the fastest growth of the G-7 economies.


We have employment nearing a record high. We have nearly 2 million new


apprenticeships who have started in this time. This is a remarkable


economic turnaround from a catastrophic situation we were left.


Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Leader of the House agree with me


that Scottish independence is not about getting one over Westminster,


is not about embarrassing the Prime Minister or the leader of the


opposition, it's not about defeating the old enemy, but it is about


Scotland turning its back on 300 years of successful union and


rejecting so much that this country has made to make us all so proud of


being part of Great Britain? My honourable friend is right, it is


not about any individual or party or election, it is a far longer term


decision than that. And, I must say, in my experience all over the world,


other nations regard the UK with admiration and sometimes even envy.


If Scotland voted yes, all over the world, people who share our values


and count on our contribution to peace, stability and human rights,


would be disappointed, while those who don't share those priorities and


beliefs would be quietly satisfied, and that is another thing we all


have to bear in mind. At the end of last month, my constituent


disappeared in Qatar. He had been arrested by the Secret Service there


because he was investigating the human rights abuses of workers who


were working to build the infrastructure for the 2022 World


Cup. I thank the Foreign Office for their help in securing his release,


but what action will he take to speak to the Ambassador of Qatar


about the disgrace of arresting him in the first place and the treatment


of those preparing those facilities? The honourable member 's right to


say the Foreign Office has pursued it and achieved some success in


doing so, as we will in any parallel cases in the future. I know that the


embassy and the Foreign Office will want to follow up these matters.


That is for my successor, the Foreign Secretary, to determine, so


I will draw his attention to the question asked by the honourable


member and ask him to write to him about it. With mounting evidence of


an innovative, very vibrant and growing real economy, especially in


manufacturing and engineering, does the first Secretary of State agree


with me that Scotland should remain with us, first to share in the


fruits of that success, and second to give us a bigger footprint in the


global trade? Yes, I do. This is another very good point, and the


economic turnaround that has now been brought about by the UK means


that employment in Scotland is now at a record high. There have been


seven consecutive quarters of economic growth in Scotland. And


there are a quarter of a million more private-sector jobs in Scotland


than there were four years ago. That is a reminder of the potential, if


we continue to work together, and that is the message that I again


repeat to the people of Scotland today. I welcomed suggestions that


the premise to will attend the crucial climate summit at the end of


this month. Will he confirm the primers to will go and will he tell


us what bold new initiative is the prime list will be taking with him,


because that's what my constituents in Brighton say they want. They want


to protect what they want, they want urgent action on climate change.


Order, can I just say, for future reference, it is disorderly to


display images in that way, and I say with all courtesy to the


honourable lady, whose principal and commitment I respect, that if


everybody did that on every cause, it would make a mockery of this


place. I asked the honourable lady to take a view much wider than her


own immediate preoccupation. Leader of the House. Thank you, Mr Speaker.


The answer is the Prime Minister will attend the UN General Assembly


later it is September. We haven't yet issued or finally decided his


precise schedule, but of course we are looking at attending the meeting


the honourable lady refers to, and Britain will continue to play a


leading role in the world in bringing about legally abiding


agreement on climate change. The next 15 months is a very important


period on this, leading up to the meeting in Paris at the end of next


year. We are one of the most active countries in the world on climate


change diplomacy, and the prime list and other ministers in New York will


be fully conveying that, whoever attends the meeting. Will my


honourable friend explained to the house why it is that with the


possibility that there could be a yes vote, finance is leaving


Scotland, many businesses are thinking of leaving Scotland? Surely


if economic arguments were so good for the Yes campaign, the reverse


would be happening? My honourable friend makes a very powerful point,


the anxieties of big businesses are very clear to see. And while we can


understand people doubting the word of politicians about economic


events, it's very important to listen to what businesses say they


will do with their jobs, with their headquarters, with their


investments, because a country that has separated itself from the


fastest-growing economy of the G-7, that put itself outside the European


Union without thinking about implications of doing that, and that


ended up with no central bank and unsure which currency was going to


use would of course find it difficult to attract new business to


its shores. The transatlantic trade and investment partnership believes


the health service vulnerable to some of the worst possible outcomes


of this government's privatisation programme. Private investors will be


able to hold the government and devolved ministrations through the


investor state settlement tribunal, in that respect how can the Leader


of the House guarantee that the health service, including the health


services in the devolved administrations, will be except? My


right honourable friend has been dealing with these matters and has


held a briefing about such matters, so I have no doubt we can furnish


her with more details on these issues. But it is very important to


maintain a commitment to free trade that has been a characteristic of


the United Kingdom over many centuries, and which has invariably


brought greater prosperity to the people of the UK, as well as to


people all over the rest of the world. The transatlantic trade and


investment partnership is another major opportunity to boost free


trade across the world. Mr Speaker, a vote next week in favour of an


independent Scotland would have major damaging implications for


Wales. Does my right honourable friend agree with me that my fellow


Welsh citizens, who care about the future of our Welsh nation, should


be hoping and praying for rejection of the break-up of the United


Kingdom? Yes. Absolutely. I think they are. I regularly consult with


at least one Welsh citizens, and on the evidence of that, they are very


much hoping and praying that the UK will not be broken up, and my


honourable friend I know speaks very well for his constituents in mid


Wales. All of us in the United Kingdom would be diminished by the


break-up of the United Kingdom. We are something greater than the sum


of our parts, and that is well understood across the UK, and the


impact upon Wales would be a mistake of all.


Six in ten people couldn't get a GP's appointment within two days of


them needing one. Can the Secretary of State explain to the house why


his party won't support Labour's patrol Sams to guarantee an


appointment withinle hours. Professionals in the health system


have said going back to that target would be a counter productive thing


to do. And the honourable member knows that the number of people


treated by GPs has increased by many millions over the last four years,


that is a trend that is continuing, of course, we are always trying to


seek further improvement but reintroducing the old failed target


is not the way forward. When I travel abroad, and I am asked


where I come from, I am proud to say, I am British. Does my right


honourable friend agree with me that you can be proud to be British but


still have your own identity of being English, Scottish, Welsh or


from Northern Ireland and we should remain together and continue as


Great Britons. I don't think anybody could have put it better. My right


honourable friend has his own identity in different ways, he has


expressed that beautifully including his identity with the United Kingdom


and that is how so many of us think in Britain and let us hope it is


possible to continue to do so. Mr Speaker, can I support the visit


of the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and the leader of the


opposition, speaking directly to people of Scotland, my right


honourable friends and myself, and honourable member, speaking on


behalf of the vast majority of the people in Northern Ireland, they


want the United Kingdom to stay together, and it is my hope, that


some of those who are crowing today, may be disappointed after the


referendum. That is certainly my hope as well, and I am very pleased


the right honourable gentleman has been able to make this point. It


means in this short Question Time, we have heard from members from


England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with very clear message to the


people of Scotland, that we want them to stay. Mr Speaker, my parents


will soon celebrate their 60th wedding anniversary. My mother was


born in Aberdeen, and my father in Cambridge. Is my right honourable


friend reassured there is no need for any senior politicians to come


to their anniversary event, because my parents know in their heads, and


in their hearts, that in their union, as in the other union, they


are happier together and better together.




Well I extend the congratulations of Her Majesty's Government to his


parents. And indeed, of the whole of the House of Commons, and I think


all the political parties in it. Even of the Scottish National Party


on this occasion, they are an example to us all, particularly


after 60 year, and I hope that example will be one that will


continue to be heeded and respected all over the UK.


Mr Speaker, contrary to the previous question, from temperature member


from Perth, this campaign has been fraught by fear and intimidation.


But is somewhat ironic, Mr Speaker, that the majority of the Scottish


separatists, have turned out for today's debate, yet just last fried


when we were discussing the important factor of welfare reform,


less than half of them turned out to a debate that justified, that


justifies their priorities to come here, to whinge rather than debate.


I don't think I needed a to the honourable member's description of


the Scottish National Party. Mr Scottish pro unionist friends have


reminded me that the Middle East peace envoy reportedly said he


welcomes the publication of the Chilcott report. Will he tell the


House when we can expect the report to be published? I can tell him this


work continues, that Lord Chilcott said he intends to publish the


report as soon as possible. There is no, I don't have any fixed date I


can give to my honourable friend. I will only observer had that inquiry


been set up when I and others first called for it and voted for it, in


2006, it would have reported long ago. It was set up late, it is


therefore reporting late an we look forward to it. Is it acceptable for


young people to be fed take away pizza at lunchtime, because the


government has failed to prepare schools properly for the


introduction of a free nutritious meal? Well, I think to put that into


perspective, I think the latest figures are that 98.5% of schools


are now providing a hot meal as they were intended to do, to infants,


that is going up all the time. There are Government funds of course to


help those schools who need new facilities to do so. It think it


would be right to welcome the entirety of that picture, rather


than trying to find fault with one small aspect of it.


STUDIO: It was like Hamlet without the Prince there. It was a bit of a


love in as well. Almost as if I am sure this is not the care, almost as


if the two frontbenches has choreographed their love for the


union and their hatred of Scottish independence as they cooed at each


other across the despatch box. Even the backbenchers got in on the act


with a lot of anti-independence questions coming from MPs, except


from the one Scottish Nationalist who asked a question, we didn't


learn anything new, some will have heard the sound of stable doors


closing as the horse has already bolted. Let us see what you thought


of it There was less of a love in among the viewers. This came from


Joan. It is undemocratic to offer more powers after many people have


posted their votes. Although it doesn't breach the Edinburgh


agreement it does breach the spirit of it. I don't want to be governed


by a bunch of Charlatans. This from Alistair. "We in non-Metropolitan


England need a concrete plan for real equal devolution, not LEP,


grand council or glorified unity authorities but devolution for all.


This from Bill. "Leaders have long their reason. Vote no and we will


give you more independence. No should mean no. Yes should mean yes.


Let us get rid of the Scottish Parliament. If we are better


together it is better to have one Parliament." This from Linda. "Let


them go. Move air and sea bases to Northumberland, be careful what


rights Scots are offered or we will all be up in arms." There we go.


Perhaps the most significant intervention came from John red wood


hen he asked the question who speaks for England? The English voice has


not really by heard in this campaign. It is clear we will hear


from England if the vote is yes. If it is no, then in other ways I think


we will be hearing from England as well.


Any way, the real action was not in the Commons today, it was north of


the border, with the Prime Minister being there, the leader of the


opposition and the Deputy Prime Minister too. While we were on air


David Cameron has been speaking in Edinburgh, to an audience there. Let


us have a look at what he has to say.


Sometimes because it is an election, a ballot, I think people can feel it


is like a general election, that you make a decision and five years later


you can make another one, if you are fed up with the Tory, give them a


kick and maybe we will think again this is tote definitely represent to


a general election this is a decision about not the next five


years, it is a decision about the next century. That was the Prime


Minister speaking in Scotland. James, this must have been put


together at the last minute. It was only yesterday we found out they


were going to Scotland. Yes it is. When we spoke to the Prime


Minister's spokesman we said when he is going up, we were told in the


last week. A decision was clearly taken, I think the moment of change


happened on Monday afternoon, after the Prime Minister's statement on


NATO. He and Ed Miliband met behind the speaker's chair in the Prime


Minister's offices there. They said we have to go up, they hatched this


plan to abandon PMQs and go up. Is it last minute? Yes, we saw the


Prime Minister not speaking from note, he swiftly moved off those,


talking passionately using words we don't normally here from a Prime


Minister, but clearly. Not publicly. Trying to inject a bit, this is not


just to use his words a chance to have a go at the effing Tories but a


wider decision. He was close to tears towards the end I have seen in


some reports. We will no doubt see that later. The Prime Minister said


in this speech, if Scotland did vote yes he would have to handle the


negotiations, up until 2015 when we see the result of the election.


Which suggests that he, that sort of reinforces his claim he will not


resign, if he loses Scotland. But my sources tell me there is a lot of


Tory MPs will want him to resign. There will be some Conservatives who


will call for him to go if a yes vote wins. The question to look for


is, are those conservative MPs the same ones who called for him to go


before or are there news one? If you are a Conservative MP you might be


furious, passionate and angry if that is what happen, the loss of the


union, you will be thinking what are the best chances for me in 2015? Do


they think a divisive leadership contest, is that the best way to do


it, or do they try and say, look, this, the Prime Minister has taken


the hit, he will be forever known as the Prime Minister who presighed


over the loss of the union and hope he goes, you know, at the time of


the election. So, he is making very clear, and privately his people made


clear he is not going to, because they believe there will be enough


people who will say, no, now is not the to lose a Prime Minister,


because will not, you will get saying do we want have that


uncertainty? Probably not. It is having an effect on your party, the


Conservative Party's, standing and reputation, the before this, what


you might call the crisis in the friend came up, you were almost


getting nip and tuck with Labour, you are seven points behind. There


is no appetite among my Conservative colleagues for any change in


leadership. It is above party politics. It is not a destroy of


strength. David Cameron is our Prime Minister now, he will be ourpm after


the friend because there will be huge decisions that have to be


taken. The leader of the Conservative and unionist party will


have lost the union. Some Tory backbenchers are describing him as


the Lord north of the 21st century. The Prime Minister who lost the


American colonies. We have provided the opportunity for the people of


Scotland to have this discussion, they are taking the decision, it


isn't about David Cameron, Ed Miliband or any Westminster


politician, it is about what the people of Scotland choose, we want


them to make the right decision, which is to stick with the UK. If,


is it not something of a crisis for Ed Miliband as well, because the


Labour Party has dominated the better together campaign, they have


called the shots, we saw that again with Gordon Brown this week, and if


it is a yes vote, it will be because Mr Miliband could not convince


enough of his own supporters to vote for the union. He couldn't get them


out. So therefore, he will go down as being a man who lost the union.


We don't know what is going to happen. I am saying if it is a yes


vote. This is a distraction, the most serious implication of a yes


vote next week is separation of Scotland from a 300-year-old union


and a real risk it diminishes our voice in the world, in terms of the


UN, we heard from from your report, these are the serious implications


of separation. We know that but the men, you know, when China went


Communist there was a huge debate who lost China, in America. There


are, who lost Iran was a great debate after 1979 and the people in


power at the time, have to take some of the responsibility. Now, Mr


Cameron is the Prime Minister, so he is the man who would be leader at


the time if this was to happen. But we know from the polls that 95% of


Scottish Conservatives intend to vote for the union, we also know


from the latest polls that maybe 30-35% of Labour voters are going to


vote for independence. Now that is pure surely a major problem for Ed


Miliband. We don't know yet how the voters are going to vote. We won't


know until polling day. We have seen the trends. Why prematurely engage


in a blame game. We don't know what is going to happen. What is


important is we make the arguments, that Scotland should stay within the


family of nation, for all the positive reasons but we outline the


risks and to be frank I think this is a bit of a distraction, having a


potential blame game scenario, it trikes me as... The better together


campaign was about 20 points ahead and it is closed. Who is to blame


for that? There has been a significant percentage of people in


Scotland who are undecided. Now, according to a poll yesterday there


are still 20% of people, that is a massive number of people, one in


five people in Scotland still undecided. There is still all to


play for, you know, the polls were always going to narrow. The better


together campaign has been ahead for the last weeks and month, it was


always going to be closer to the time of the referendum, I really


think you know discussion about David Cameron's future and Ed


Miliband's future is a distraction. When the focus should be on the real


issue at hand which is what will happen to Scotland, and the rest of


us, if they vote for separation. I understand we are a week away from a


referendum in which the polls are nip and tuck. It is only right that


the rest of the United Kingdom should start to think more than it


has, about the consequences of a yes vote, so let me ask another question


along these line, if it is a yes vote should the general election in


May be postpones. I don't see a clear reason why. Why


should Scotland get to vote if it has already voted to depart the


United Kingdom? I think we continue as business so far, work that is set


back in primary legislation, you need to come act of Parliament and


reworked the legislation to do that. The simplest thing is you


press ahead and at the point in 2016 if Scotland does vote yes for


independence, that is the point the Scottish MPs, we lose them from


Westminster. You could be in a position of Labour forming the next


government, only because of the 40 or so MPs cut from Scotland. MPs


will be temporary, will be leaving with Independence Day on 2016. That


would make you a government of the walking wounded right from the


start. Under the eyes of the English, illegitimate. Firstly, I


think there is no question that we could go beyond a parliament of five


years. I think, if I'm right in saying, that would not be


constitutional, and it certainly would set a kind of dangerous


precedent for elections in the future. And secondly, we just simply


don't know what's going to happen next week. Obviously, I hope that we


win the general election next year with a significant majority. This is


kind of uncharted territory, in terms of the what ifs and the


wherefores. Until we know what happens on Thursday next week, I'm


not sure this is where the date is at. Westminster, that YouGov poll


has concentrated minds in Westminster and they are now


thinking about the consequences of this. For example, if Mr Miliband


wins the next general election in 2015, I would suggest he could not


appoint a Scottish minister in any department because every government


department will be involved in setting up the rest of the UK's


divorce terms, so you can't put the other side on your side. That will


have to be decided by legislation. It is very clear the negotiating


teams on both sides will have to be specifically set out, and that...


You say Westminster is waking up, and yet the most astonishing thing


is that Westminster and Whitehall have not made contingency plans.


Whenever I am told this, I say, surely not, but all these officials


say they are not doing it, even the Cabinet Secretary said before


Parliamentary committee this week we have not done it because we have


been told by our political masters not to do it. And yet, if a Yes vote


is successful, there are hundreds of questions about how you and stitch


Scotland from the rest of the United Kingdom. What happens to all the


civil servants who work for the UK in Scotland, what happens to the


civil servants who work in England or Wales or Northern Ireland for


Scotland? Do they lose their jobs, do they have to move anywhere? On


top of all the other issues we have talked about, currency and defence,


they're all of those issues too, and yet there is no contingency plan for


that matters the most extraordinary thing about this. If there is a Yes


vote, they will be very busy from the early hours of 19 September


onwards. Until 2016. Now, as the general election looms,


all the parties are desperately trying to raise enough cash to


finance their campaigns. At the 2010 general election,


parties spent more than ?31 million on the campaigns, and this was down


from the 2005 general election, But how do party officials persuade


people to part with their cash, and is it always done


for the right reasons? Here's the journalist Alice Thomson


with her soapbox on why we need state funding


for our political parties. We all enjoy a nice lunch,


but it seems politicians, especially our leaders, are being forced to


eat more than the rest of us. Leading figures across all parties


are expected to wine and dine influential businessmen


and celebrities, in order to try to It's time we looked at alternatives


- not least because of our In smart restaurants


and boardrooms across London, We have Labour cosying up to


the unions. Since Ed Miliband became leader,


they've provided ?8 out of every The Tories host balls


and auctions to win a drink with the Chancellor or a tennis match


with the Prime Minister. In the first three months of this


year, they raised ?6.6 million. As next year's general election


looms, all the parties need to raise enough cash to pay for


their general election campaigns. It's not enough to have


a manifesto and candidates, So instead of focusing ideas,


they are wasting time and energy on entertaining rich potential


donors desperate for influence The solution is state funding


of political parties. Spending limits should be cut


and donations capped. Parties would then be forced to


concentrate After all, there are more people


signing up to the Caravan Club But they refuse to do this,


worried that voters will recoil at having to pay more


for the antics of this venal lot. They should find


the courage to make their case. The Queen costs each


taxpayer 56 pence a year. In return,


we don't have to worry, she is and dining people for a stack


of cash, to keep the show on road. That should be the example


for all our politicians. Alice Thomson joins us now from that


rather swanky restaurant. Are you saying that politics rarely is that


correct, that is the only way to clean it out, to have state funding?


It's not that it's corrupt, it is just that they waste an awful amount


of time wining and dining, and have the Prime Minister spending that


amount of time is a waste. It is the same with the unions, they are far


too influential. It is not exactly corrupt but I think the worst it


probably gets is that there are so many peers in the House of Lords who


have given money to one of the parties. I just don't like that, I


would prefer to give the money myself actually. I would not mind


spending 40p a year. Dare I say it come you may be alone or in a very


small minority, because generally people just don't want to give money


in that way to the funding of political parties. It is not in


fashion. It is not in fashion because of the ways MPs have


behaved, but that is not to say it is wrong. I actually think it would


rarely help politics and it would clean it up, and then you would get


better people in the House of Lords, and also you would get the


politicians concentrating on the right issues. I don't want them to


spend a lot of time with very rich people and unions, I would like them


to spend a lot of time with more normal people, campaigning and being


in their constituency. But even if there was some state funding, even


if people did give donations or there was more money coming from


individual electors, wouldn't that still go on? Wouldn't there be


wining and dining anyway? You're not going to end that whole industry in


itself with state funding. I think they would be lobbying, but it would


be more lobbying campaigns, and it would not be individual very rich


people and the unions having much more sway than they would be able to


have if the money was not involved. And you would get better people in


the House of Lords. Stephen Crabb, are you convinced by that argument?


I'm not. Alice herself said we do not have a corrupt system in the UK,


actually the UK has one of the best systems are financing the business


of politics. In Germany for example, you have a large amount of state


funding and that does not tackle all the problems there either. The


public would say what about MPs expenses, cash the question is, what


about MPs being secretly filmed by your colleagues. That does say there


is a level of corruption that might not be there with state funding. And


all of that has led to improvements in the system, greater


transparency, greater accountability, so the system is


getting better. We need to go further, we need to have a cap on


donations, screen out some of the wrong influence there is a system


but we are getting better. It is an easy thing to knock your own


political system but it is an awful lot better than so many others out


there. As a party, we feel it should fall around ?50,000, the cap, we


think that is an acceptable limit in somebody wanting to donate their own


money they have turned to a political party. Do you ever think


there will be state funding introduced? Wane ever ever? Let's


talk about the next few elections. Certainly not in the foreseeable


future. I think there is still a lack of trust in politicians,


unfortunately. The MPs expenses scandal looms large. I am very


synthetic to what Alice says. In terms of House of Lords, there is a


much simpler solution, have an elected House of Lords to get around


this phenomenon new speak about. I would certainly -- that you speak


about. I would like to see a cap on donations, I think 50 grand is far


too high. I do access the argument that politicians are spending quite


a bit of time raising this kind of money. But, unfortunately, I think


you have outlined, Jo, the public appetite, and I'm sure we will get a


lot of responsiveness on Twitter, it is not really there for state


funding. A lot of responsiveness on Twitter, it is not really there for


state funding. It doesn't sound like more pay, but what I'm saying is


what we will give you is more money for your party for you to do that so


you can concentrate on all the potent issues. We are not saying we


want more pay, let's be clear about that. The authority have told us. I


think they are wrong, because in the public sector for example... But you


haven't got a say in it, do you? This morning has brought


an announcement of an important new line up; no, it's not


the starting XI for this Saturday's Arsenal squad, it is, of course, the


role allocations for Jean Claude Lord Hill is the British


representative So let's take


a look at what he ended up with, It is not quite a key job at the


moment. There are other more important jobs. The economic one was


one that Britain might have got, the internal market as well.


The top economics position goes to Pierre Moscovici,


a French Socialist, who will now be responsible for EU economic policy.


This will pose questions about the EU's approach to deficit


This particularly now that the French manners in there, perhaps


Brussels won't be as strong on deficit reduction as it was before.


Here's what Juncker had to say earlier this morning.


We are at the beginning of a new commission. We have an exceptional


opportunity, but also an obligation to make a fresh start and get down


to work to address the very difficult geopolitical situation, to


strengthen the economic recovery, and to build a united Europe that


delivers jobs and growth to its citizens. I think I have the right


team to do so. That was Jean-Claude Juncker, joining me now from


Brussels a la Europe correspondent, Chris Morris. How did Jonathan Hill


actually get that job? We didn't think he would get any of the top


jobs, certainly not in financial services. The joke was he would be


in charge of multilingualism, but David Cameron has pushed hard to get


a senior economic job, and I think if you had offered Downing Street


the job of Commissioner in charge of financial stability and financial


services six weeks ago is they would bitten your hand. It involves


supervision of banks and other matters which really affect the City


of London, so I think what it is as quite a big olive branch, if you


like, from Jean-Claude Juncker, because don't forget it was only a


couple of months ago that Cameron said he was absolutely the wrong man


for the job. And I don't think the Juncker team have forgotten that


level of criticism. But they have put it to one side to get on with


business. We are almost running out of time.


There's just time to put you out of your misery, and give you


All that rotting rubbish and the strikes should have been enough. It


was also the year of the referendum on Scottish devolution, that was the


one they lost, they won the 197, the Jeremy Thorpe trial, Stephen, you


get to press the buzzer. And the winner


The one o'clock news is starting over on BBC One now.


I'm off to Scotland for a special This Week live from Edinburgh,


then I'll stay in Auld Reekie for a Daily Politics special on Friday.


But don't worry, I'll be back here at noon tomorrow with all the


Download Subtitles