:00:41. > :00:45.good afternoon, welcome to the Daily Politics. President
:00:46. > :00:52.good afternoon, welcome to the Daily United States will extend attacks on
:00:53. > :00:57.the -- into Syria, should written joining with the militants? Some of
:00:58. > :01:00.Scotland's biggest financial institutions say they will relocate
:01:01. > :01:06.part of their business to England if there is a yes vote. Is the momentum
:01:07. > :01:11.swinging back to the no campaign? 1400 children abused in Rotherham by
:01:12. > :01:14.gangs of men of Pakistani heritage will stop was political correctness
:01:15. > :01:21.to blame for a lack of action by police and the local council?
:01:22. > :01:28.And why can politics make us so dam angry?
:01:29. > :01:34.All that in the next hour. With us for the whole of the programme
:01:35. > :01:37.today, someone who David Cameron once told his party they should
:01:38. > :01:42.learn to love, Polly Toynbee, welcome to the programme.
:01:43. > :01:46.The chairman of John Lewis, Charlie Mayfield, has warned of the
:01:47. > :01:49.likelihood of higher prices in its Scottish stores in an independent
:01:50. > :01:53.Scotland. Those claims have been dismissed by the pro-independence
:01:54. > :01:57.campaign but it is the latest in a number of warnings to the business
:01:58. > :02:01.community about the impact of a yes vote. At the beginning of the week,
:02:02. > :02:06.the yes campaign was in buoyant spirits with polls suggesting a
:02:07. > :02:11.narrow lead for independence. The last 24-hour 's have slightly
:02:12. > :02:13.dampened the mood. Three of Scotland's biggest financial
:02:14. > :02:18.institutions have confirmed they would move parts of their business
:02:19. > :02:22.south of the border if Scotland votes yes. The Royal Bank of
:02:23. > :02:25.Scotland would move its head office and registered office to London.
:02:26. > :02:29.Lloyds would move its legal home to its head office which is already in
:02:30. > :02:33.London. Standard life said it would create companies in England to
:02:34. > :02:36.protect its customers. Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney told
:02:37. > :02:41.MPs on the Treasury committee that in the event of a yes vote, Scotland
:02:42. > :02:46.would need to amass billions of pounds of currency in reserves. And
:02:47. > :02:51.a new poll shows a 6 Point lead for the no campaign. SNP leader Alex
:02:52. > :02:56.Salmond has hit back, saying the leader of these offers -- the move
:02:57. > :03:01.of these offices would have no impact on jobs or services. He was
:03:02. > :03:08.sounding confident of a yes vote in XP's poll. -- next week's poll.
:03:09. > :03:13.Scotland is on the cusp of making history, the eyes of the world are
:03:14. > :03:17.upon Scotland and what Scotland is saying is an articulate, peaceful,
:03:18. > :03:22.energise debate. Scotland will vote yes next Thursday. And they will
:03:23. > :03:26.vote yes because last-minute cobbled up promises from the no campaign,
:03:27. > :03:31.which unravel at the slightest scrutiny, will not throw anyone in
:03:32. > :03:36.this country and neither will be latent bullying and intimidation of
:03:37. > :03:40.the Westminster government. Joining me from Glasgow is the
:03:41. > :03:44.Liberal Democrat MP and former leader of the Liberal Democrats,
:03:45. > :03:49.Charles Kennedy. Welcome to the Daily Politics. He is sounding ever
:03:50. > :03:52.so confident. Yes and good luck to him. I am one of those who always
:03:53. > :03:56.thought this would be a very tight on the night finish and so will
:03:57. > :04:03.prove. As we go into the last week, we are hearing noises from outside
:04:04. > :04:07.the political circus, warning us as to what may or may not be the
:04:08. > :04:12.locations. Scots will have to weigh those up for themselves, take them
:04:13. > :04:15.seriously. I also think, this is why have been campaigning in Glasgow
:04:16. > :04:20.this morning, we have got to be positive, both about what the union
:04:21. > :04:23.has brought for Scotland over the centuries, and what Scotland has
:04:24. > :04:28.brought to the union and how much more we can still achieve together.
:04:29. > :04:34.Do you think it has been too negative, all about the risks and
:04:35. > :04:40.warnings that Alistair Darling and the Better Together campaign have
:04:41. > :04:43.run a downbeat campaign? I don't think they have run a downbeat,
:04:44. > :04:47.negative campaign. I think we have asked all of the pertinent westerns
:04:48. > :04:51.that need to be asked, we have asked them repeatedly and have not had
:04:52. > :04:57.many concise answers, that is putting it diplomatically. I think
:04:58. > :05:02.at the same time -- the pertinent questions. There is a case for
:05:03. > :05:07.taking things forward after the referendum. Not just those of us in
:05:08. > :05:11.the no camp. An awful lot of Scots and civic Scotland, many of whom
:05:12. > :05:16.will vote yes, but they should have an input as well into how we get
:05:17. > :05:21.Scotland onto a better footing within a UK that is on a better
:05:22. > :05:27.footing. That seems to be moving in a more federal correction. You say
:05:28. > :05:29.there should be a more positive note sounded. The Better Together
:05:30. > :05:33.campaign and your colleagues have said there is great uncertainty and
:05:34. > :05:37.that is underlined by the reaction from some businesses and financial
:05:38. > :05:42.institutions. Is what you are offering now, postal votes have been
:05:43. > :05:47.cast before the offer, is it any more certain, there are three
:05:48. > :05:52.different versions of what extended powers Scotland would have in the
:05:53. > :05:55.event of a no vote. Actually the truth is there is more uncertainty
:05:56. > :06:00.with what you are offering. I would not have started from where we are
:06:01. > :06:04.right now left to myself. I argued it was better to have an agreed
:06:05. > :06:09.package. But even if we have a finally agreed package amongst the
:06:10. > :06:13.three principal UK parties, that would not be the end. We couldn't
:06:14. > :06:18.absolutely say, there is the deal, seal it, because you would still
:06:19. > :06:21.have to go out after the referendum and consult many people who had
:06:22. > :06:26.voted yes, to get their input as well. Because all the experience in
:06:27. > :06:31.Scotland and indeed elsewhere in the UK shows that to get good lasting
:06:32. > :06:37.constitutional change, you have got to go beyond the boundaries of one
:06:38. > :06:42.bit of the argument. You have got to try to embrace positively as many
:06:43. > :06:45.people from other parts, too. Let's talk about certainty. Scottish
:06:46. > :06:49.voters want to know how it will affect them directly and be Better
:06:50. > :06:53.Together campaign has said it can give guarantees. What guarantee can
:06:54. > :06:58.you give in terms of powers over levels of taxation for Scotland if
:06:59. > :07:01.they vote to stay together? The level of guarantee is simply this.
:07:02. > :07:04.You have the Conservative Party, Labour Party and Liberal Democrats
:07:05. > :07:08.and whatever the arithmetic of the next House of Commons, all are
:07:09. > :07:15.agreed that there is going to have to be a greater share of tax raised
:07:16. > :07:19.within Scotland. How much? As I said, you can't begin the detailed
:07:20. > :07:23.discussions on that until after the referendum. Not just because of the
:07:24. > :07:28.three parties, but because of the wider interests in the trade union
:07:29. > :07:33.movement, in business, in civic Scotland as a whole that are going
:07:34. > :07:37.to have to be involved. You have also got to look at how this impacts
:07:38. > :07:42.on the rest of the United Kingdom, too. In Wales, Northern Ireland, the
:07:43. > :07:47.regions and across England as a whole. There is a great deal more
:07:48. > :07:52.work to be done. We have a settled base camp and that is next Thursday,
:07:53. > :07:56.a week to day. That is Scotland staying in the UK. Let's have the
:07:57. > :08:02.answer is, yes we are, we are going to vote no. But then we are going to
:08:03. > :08:05.take it forward. There are three different offers and there are
:08:06. > :08:09.Scottish voters I have spoken to who are just not sure what will actually
:08:10. > :08:14.come out of it, what will they get in terms of labour, depending on
:08:15. > :08:17.what happens in 2015, their offer is lower in terms of power is lower in
:08:18. > :08:20.terms of powers going to Scotland in the event of a no vote, and that
:08:21. > :08:26.doesn't fill many Scottish voters with great reassurance. All I can
:08:27. > :08:30.say is that in the real world, all three of us, the Conservative Party,
:08:31. > :08:34.Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, we will have to compromise and we have
:08:35. > :08:39.act knowledge that by signing what we have signed, at a UK level and a
:08:40. > :08:44.Scottish level -- we have acknowledged that. We are going to
:08:45. > :08:50.have to go wider than just ourselves to win wider acceptance. The no
:08:51. > :08:54.vote, having this referendum behind us, will in fact bolster that. Alex
:08:55. > :08:58.Salmond, from his point of view, talks about having a mandate to
:08:59. > :09:02.negotiate independence. The application being, he negotiates and
:09:03. > :09:07.then he comes back. There is no coming back, there is no going back.
:09:08. > :09:11.Whatever is negotiated, that is it. In our case we have a mandate, to
:09:12. > :09:17.agree amongst ourselves as the political parties, but that mandate
:09:18. > :09:22.must extend beyond us if it is to win the commonweal, if it is to win
:09:23. > :09:33.wider acceptance. That is the business we are on. Stay with us, I
:09:34. > :09:36.think we have Dennis Canon from the yes campaign. I don't know how much
:09:37. > :09:42.of Charles Kennedy you were able to hear. I didn't hear any of it,
:09:43. > :09:45.unfortunately. Let's start from the beginning, then. Statements from
:09:46. > :09:51.businesses like RBS, Lloyds and standard life. Do you agree that
:09:52. > :09:55.what they have said only serves to underline the uncertainty that would
:09:56. > :10:03.result in a yes vote? I think it has got to be clear, first of all, that
:10:04. > :10:07.RBS have indicated that there will be no transfer of jobs or operations
:10:08. > :10:14.out of Scotland. If there is a degree of uncertainty, I think it is
:10:15. > :10:18.Charles's coalition government and his colleague, Danny Alexander and
:10:19. > :10:24.his boss, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who are responsible. All
:10:25. > :10:26.of the Unionist parties have ganged up against the democratically
:10:27. > :10:33.elected Scottish Government and said, in effect, no way will we have
:10:34. > :10:38.a currency union. And that is what is causing the uncertainty, because
:10:39. > :10:42.there is a great leap throughout Scotland that these politicians in
:10:43. > :10:50.Westminster are just bluffing, and that when we get a yes vote, the
:10:51. > :10:53.reality will kick in and good Liberal Democrat MPs like Charles
:10:54. > :10:59.will save for the good of Scotland and the good of the MP, let's go
:11:00. > :11:02.with this currency union. Let's put that to Charles Kennedy. Will you
:11:03. > :11:08.and your colleagues at Westminster immediately say, let's talk currency
:11:09. > :11:14.union? I am sorry. Because of a lot of internal BBC chatter, I come to,
:11:15. > :11:21.missed what it was you were talking with Dennis about so can you bring
:11:22. > :11:28.up to speed? -- I, too, missed what it was. The line is that you have
:11:29. > :11:31.ganged up on the currency issue and it is your full that there is this
:11:32. > :11:34.uncertainty that has led to businesses saying they may have to
:11:35. > :11:39.move part of their business, and that when there is a yes vote on the
:11:40. > :11:46.19th, you will all fall into line and start talking currency union.
:11:47. > :11:50.Dennis is one of my favourite stars in politics and always has been, I
:11:51. > :11:54.will not hear a word against him but what I will say is I think he has
:11:55. > :11:58.had some distinct ideas of his own about his preferred option for a
:11:59. > :12:03.Scottish currency. After this referendum, if it was yes, we
:12:04. > :12:08.achieved independence. The fact of the matter is, let's deal with the
:12:09. > :12:11.world as we know it. Not what the politicians are saying, but what
:12:12. > :12:15.business and commerce are pointing out. That is the most reliable guide
:12:16. > :12:19.on which we can base future progress. That is the world is at
:12:20. > :12:25.least highly uncertain. I find it interesting that the yes campaign,
:12:26. > :12:29.led by Alex Salmond, are saying the best option for Scotland and
:12:30. > :12:33.currency is the option we have got. Agreed, agreed. So let's keep it.
:12:34. > :12:39.Let's not upturned the applecart by voting for independence. Alex
:12:40. > :12:46.Salmond is the head of the Scottish Government. He is leading the
:12:47. > :12:51.campaign. It was his idea to have the referendum. Assuming we get a
:12:52. > :12:57.yes result in that referendum, he will have a mandate to lead the
:12:58. > :13:02.negotiations. He has made it perfectly clear that his preferred
:13:03. > :13:07.option is to have sterling within a currency union. Nobody can stop
:13:08. > :13:13.Scotland using sterling because it is an international tradable
:13:14. > :13:17.currency. The point is the desirability or otherwise of a
:13:18. > :13:21.currency union. They have a situation whereby Charles's party
:13:22. > :13:26.leader and the Tory Party leader, and low and behold the Labour Party
:13:27. > :13:31.leader are all saying we are not going to have this. It is complete
:13:32. > :13:34.nonsense. Cutting off their nose to spite their face. It is in
:13:35. > :13:40.everybody's interest to have a currency union. Even if you say that
:13:41. > :13:46.the businesses that have voiced some doubt about what they would do with
:13:47. > :13:50.some jobs and services, you say jobs would be lost but symbolically it is
:13:51. > :13:59.not exactly a vote of the buttons in the idea of an independent Scotland.
:14:00. > :14:02.-- vote of confidence. All of this has cast doubt on the economic case
:14:03. > :14:06.put by Alex Salmond that there is going to be jam and honey tomorrow.
:14:07. > :14:11.These are just some business people. The truth of the matter is that the
:14:12. > :14:14.business community in Scotland is divided. There are those who are
:14:15. > :14:17.very much in favour of a yes vote, those who are against, and some
:14:18. > :14:21.people say it won't make much difference. That Scotland will
:14:22. > :14:28.flourish within or without the union. Frankly there is a host of
:14:29. > :14:32.business spokespeople in Scotland, we have an organisation called
:14:33. > :14:36.business for Scotland, who are in favour of Scottish independence
:14:37. > :14:42.because they believe that what is holding Scotland back at present is
:14:43. > :14:45.this kind of dependency culture, and the financial straitjacket in which
:14:46. > :14:49.we are, whereas with independence, it would release a new
:14:50. > :14:53.entrepreneurial spirit within Scotland, we would see more business
:14:54. > :14:54.start-ups, we would see business flourishing and that would create
:14:55. > :15:04.more jobs in Scotland. Let me go to the opinion polls.
:15:05. > :15:07.Charles Kennedy, did the "no" campaign panic? Now we've had
:15:08. > :15:13.another opinion poll which has changed slightly in terms of who is
:15:14. > :15:20.ahead. Was there a panic? Have they offered too much to a potentially,
:15:21. > :15:24.if they vote "no", in terms of powers without knowing, and basing
:15:25. > :15:26.too much on one opinion poll? I don't think too much has been
:15:27. > :15:32.offered in terms of powers but you're talking to a federalist here.
:15:33. > :15:36.But did they panic? I don't think so. The way I would draw the analogy
:15:37. > :15:41.is this - if you are driving a car and you suddenly have to take
:15:42. > :15:44.unexpected action to avoid a collision you weren't anticipating
:15:45. > :15:49.and you do so calmly, professionally and no collision happens, you didn't
:15:50. > :15:56.panic but you changed the mode of your direction at very short notice.
:15:57. > :15:59.Now, when opinion polls started showing, it would be an insult to
:16:00. > :16:02.the intelligence of people in Scotland that it didn't have an
:16:03. > :16:07.effect on everybody campaigning in Scotland. We were neck and neck or
:16:08. > :16:12.possibly behind the stop if we had said we were sailing on regardless
:16:13. > :16:15.and not taking any avoidance of what might be an unfortunate mishap in
:16:16. > :16:21.front of us if we didn't do something, we would be accused of
:16:22. > :16:25.complacency and contempt. Let me ask Dennis Canavan, do you think the
:16:26. > :16:29."yes" campaign has peaked too soon? We still have some days to campaign
:16:30. > :16:33.and now everything, including the kitchen sink, is being thrown at
:16:34. > :16:37.this campaign from the Better Together side. I don't think we've
:16:38. > :16:45.peaked too soon. There is still a week to go. We are neck and neck.
:16:46. > :16:49.When you look at the opinion polls not all that long ago, the other
:16:50. > :16:54.side were 20 points ahead, so we have got the moment on our side, we
:16:55. > :16:57.are closing the gap, we are going to work harder than ever to get every
:16:58. > :17:01.undecided vote in Scotland and we are confident that we will win a
:17:02. > :17:06.famous and historic victory a week today. Dennis Canavan and Charles
:17:07. > :17:12.Kennedy, thank you very much. Polly Toynbee, your analysis - who's going
:17:13. > :17:17.to win? We really don't know. As Dennis Canavan said, the momentum
:17:18. > :17:21.has been behind "yes". As you suggested, they might have peaked
:17:22. > :17:25.too soon. A lot of the heavyweight industries, the finance industry,
:17:26. > :17:29.didn't want to come out and have to declare their hand at all. They
:17:30. > :17:32.thought it would be dangerous, that they could lose business if they
:17:33. > :17:36.found themselves on the wrong side of the result. What happened is
:17:37. > :17:41.because of that one opinion poll that showed "yes" winning, it's
:17:42. > :17:44.brought them all out saying really quite fierce things. What Mark
:17:45. > :17:50.Carney said, what the banks have said about moving south - I think
:17:51. > :17:54.it's quite alarming and I imagine there are some waverers who will be
:17:55. > :18:00.swung. Thank you very much. Let's move on. A steady, relentless effort
:18:01. > :18:04.is what President Obama says is needed to root out the extremists of
:18:05. > :18:08.the so-called Islamic State who are operating in Iraq and Syria. In a
:18:09. > :18:11.speech last night, the American president outlined his new
:18:12. > :18:16.strategy, which includes extending the US led campaign of air into
:18:17. > :18:20.Syria. He said the US will lead a broad Coalition to defeat the
:18:21. > :18:22.terrorists, which could include British warplanes involved in air
:18:23. > :18:24.strikes. We will degrade and ultimately
:18:25. > :18:31.destroy ISIS through a sustained We will degrade and ultimately
:18:32. > :18:35.counterterrorism strategy. First, we will conduct a systematic campaign
:18:36. > :18:39.of air strikes against these terrorists. Working with the Iraqi
:18:40. > :18:43.government, we will expand our efforts beyond protecting our own
:18:44. > :18:49.people and him and Terry emissions, so that we're hitting ISIS targets
:18:50. > :18:52.as Iraqi forces go on offence. I've made it clear that we will hunt down
:18:53. > :18:56.terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will
:18:57. > :19:02.not hesitate to take action against ISIS in Syria as well as Iraq. A
:19:03. > :19:06.short while ago, I spoke to our correspondent Quentin Sommerville in
:19:07. > :19:10.Baghdad. I asked how the government there would respond to the speech by
:19:11. > :19:14.President Obama. This will be greatly welcomed and the Iraqi
:19:15. > :19:20.leadership, this new Iraqi unity government, at least on paper,
:19:21. > :19:22.welcomed Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday and he would have
:19:23. > :19:26.been given a full briefing. They have been making a very clear for
:19:27. > :19:31.quite some time that Iraq alone cannot handle the threat from the
:19:32. > :19:36.Islamic State but also the overspill of the conflict in Syria. They said
:19:37. > :19:43.the international community needs to provide them assistance. Iraq had to
:19:44. > :19:48.do its part and for many years now, the government here in Iraq has
:19:49. > :19:52.exploited sectarian and ethnic divisions and created a huge gap and
:19:53. > :19:57.in that gap the Islamic State spared in and exploited the divisions. A
:19:58. > :20:02.lot of repair has to be done to bring back this country and then
:20:03. > :20:05.Iraq can think about, with a larrikin help, tackling the threat
:20:06. > :20:11.of the Islamic State. -- American help. You said the unity government
:20:12. > :20:16.on paper. How much trust is there among Sunnis in Iraq that it will
:20:17. > :20:21.deliver that inclusive government? The proof of the pudding, really.
:20:22. > :20:27.They've got very little credit in the bank. When you look at this
:20:28. > :20:29.government, many of the faces seem familiar but when you actually
:20:30. > :20:33.travel on the ground in Iraq, say you go to northern Iraq in some of
:20:34. > :20:39.the areas where is the state are operating, we've been there, near
:20:40. > :20:49.Mosul, and speak to Christians, years Edie is, -- years Edies. You
:20:50. > :20:52.find they are fleeing for their lives and have very little trust in
:20:53. > :21:00.the Iraqi government to protect them, never mind defend them against
:21:01. > :21:05.IS. There is a long shopping list before people can actually feel safe
:21:06. > :21:07.in this country again. There is a big question - who is going to go in
:21:08. > :21:12.and liberate Mosul? Would be an Iraqi army made up of the Shia
:21:13. > :21:19.majority, going into liberate a Sunni people from the Islamic State?
:21:20. > :21:26.That doesn't have a lot of credibility and doesn't address the
:21:27. > :21:30.fears of the Iraqi people. Joining me now is the Conservative MP John
:21:31. > :21:34.Barron, who sits on the foreign affairs select committee, and Bayan
:21:35. > :21:39.Sami Rahman, the Kurdish regional government's high representative to
:21:40. > :21:43.the UK. John Barron, you support air strikes against IS in Iraq but not
:21:44. > :21:47.in Syria. What would be the point of that? The point is that the
:21:48. > :21:52.immediate objective is to drive IS out of Iraq. When I say I support
:21:53. > :21:56.them, I think there is room for regional players, friends and
:21:57. > :22:00.allies, to play a much more prominent role. So do you support
:22:01. > :22:04.British air strikes with the Americans in Iraq? I would first
:22:05. > :22:08.want to see and check cost as much as we could of our regional our
:22:09. > :22:17.regional our eyes. We've just seen the American allies. -- check we've
:22:18. > :22:22.asked as much as we could have our regional allies. In answer to your
:22:23. > :22:26.question about Syria, I think it takes it on to another level
:22:27. > :22:30.altogether. Of course we can agree with the broad strategy of President
:22:31. > :22:35.Obama, we've got to take on IS, but strikes in Syria risk Russian built
:22:36. > :22:41.or Russian supplied air defence systems. There are legal issues to
:22:42. > :22:43.address. But also, air strikes alone aren't going to defeat this
:22:44. > :22:48.well-organised guerrilla army and we don't know who will replace ISIS in
:22:49. > :22:54.Syria. Many extremists lurk in the shadows. Bayan Sami Rahman, is there
:22:55. > :22:59.any point in joining air strikes against IS in Iraq or parts of Iraq,
:23:00. > :23:03.without trying to defeat them in Syria? No, in my view you need to
:23:04. > :23:10.strike at ISIS at their nerve centre. They are very powerful in
:23:11. > :23:14.Syria. They have access to oil, access to wealth, and are able to
:23:15. > :23:19.cross the board are freely. So if we're only going to contain them in
:23:20. > :23:23.Iraq, that's containment. They will then stay in Syria, expand into
:23:24. > :23:28.Lebanon and Jordan. We need to strike at ISIS in the heart of where
:23:29. > :23:32.they are. What do you say to that? We got to balance what is desirable
:23:33. > :23:37.with what is achievable and given our errors in the past, whether it's
:23:38. > :23:41.going to war in Iraq on a false premise or the disastrous mission in
:23:42. > :23:45.Afghanistan or Libya, you got to approach this with caution. Our
:23:46. > :23:49.immediate objective is a responsibility to the Iraqi people,
:23:50. > :23:55.given our misguided intervention in 2003. We should focus on driving
:23:56. > :23:59.ISIS out of northern Iraq. Local forces, regional forces - including
:24:00. > :24:03.the 250,000 strong Iraqi army - should conduct that campaign. The
:24:04. > :24:08.air strikes in Syria take it on to another level of risk and danger
:24:09. > :24:13.which we should be very rare -- wary about. There was a lot of cautious
:24:14. > :24:17.feeling among the public here and quite a lot of MPs for the reasons
:24:18. > :24:21.John Barron has outlined. Do use of the pies with that to a certain
:24:22. > :24:24.extent, why there is some reluctance before going headlong into another
:24:25. > :24:29.conflict? Of course I do understand that. I've been a representative of
:24:30. > :24:35.the Kurdistan Regional Government since 2005, so I've seen all of the
:24:36. > :24:39.debate internally about Tony Blair being a liar, George Bush being a
:24:40. > :24:44.warmonger, but the fact is - and what I believe politicians in the
:24:45. > :24:48.West generally, including the UK, failed to do - is they've failed to
:24:49. > :24:52.explain to the public that nonintervention also has a cross.
:24:53. > :24:56.Nonintervention in Syria early on has let ISIS to grow and has led to
:24:57. > :25:00.a spill-over of the conflict in Iraq. We in Iraq are paying the
:25:01. > :25:04.price for nine to mention in Syria when the time was right. Does the
:25:05. > :25:10.Labour Party have a responsibility in that? It decided, and Ed
:25:11. > :25:13.Miliband, not to back any potential action against Bashar Al-Assad, and
:25:14. > :25:17.it has led to what we are facing now? I don't think the Labour Party
:25:18. > :25:21.or the other MPs in the Commons who voted against it, considerable
:25:22. > :25:26.numbers of Conservatives and Lib Dems to, have any sense of regret. I
:25:27. > :25:31.think there is a very keen awareness, born of painful
:25:32. > :25:35.experience in Iraq, but you need really good military advice, as John
:25:36. > :25:39.was suggesting, that says attacking them by air will make a difference
:25:40. > :25:43.and there really is no evidence of that. What happens if you do big
:25:44. > :25:50.bombing raids is that you had a lot of civilians, and you change the
:25:51. > :25:55.politics in the area. Western intervention is very, very
:25:56. > :26:00.dangerous. Unless you know you can absolutely do what it is you're
:26:01. > :26:04.going to achieve... There is evidence IS has been pushed back. We
:26:05. > :26:12.had evidence from the Kurds but also other groups in Iraq. We know that
:26:13. > :26:15.the bombings have pushed them back and, arguably, these dreadful
:26:16. > :26:21.beheadings that we have seen are as a result of panic, if you like, on
:26:22. > :26:24.the side of IS. Yes, there's no doubt about it - the air strikes
:26:25. > :26:28.have had the effect of checking IS and driving them back a bit,
:26:29. > :26:31.perhaps. That is to be welcome. What many of us in the House of Commons
:26:32. > :26:36.are saying is that we've got to restrict our activities to Iraq and
:26:37. > :26:40.accept the fact that you cannot defeat a well-organised guerrilla
:26:41. > :26:44.army such as ISIS by air strikes alone. This is not a disparate group
:26:45. > :26:47.of terrorists living in caves. This is well organised and well funded
:26:48. > :26:51.and we've got to realise the limitations of our power. ISIS is
:26:52. > :26:56.strong in northern Iraq not because we didn't intervene in Syria.
:26:57. > :27:00.Really? If we had intervened in Syria, we would have been siding,
:27:01. > :27:05.unintentionally, with many of the terrorists we're now taking on in
:27:06. > :27:08.northern Iraq. What led to ISIS making such ground was the sectarian
:27:09. > :27:15.politics of the premieres premise of Iraq. -- previous. Doesn't that make
:27:16. > :27:20.it now nigh on impossible for a British Government? We've had a
:27:21. > :27:23.Labour MP saying we may need site with Bashar al-Assad to defeat IS,
:27:24. > :27:28.not that that is the Labour Party's position. But if you go in and bomb
:27:29. > :27:34.IS, there are other Sunni militants who could come to the fall. It's a
:27:35. > :27:36.minefield. It is, and the world is accommodated place. I'm sorry but
:27:37. > :27:42.the British public have to accept that the world isn't a clean place
:27:43. > :27:50.and the good guys in the white hats defeat the Cowboys and the white --
:27:51. > :27:55.blackouts. There is a Shia-Sunni conflict. The Western world does
:27:56. > :27:59.have a role to play. You cannot run the world based on values alone. You
:28:00. > :28:05.need to lead militarily to stop when I talk about intervention in Syria
:28:06. > :28:11.I'm talking about the early days, not when the whole thing came out of
:28:12. > :28:16.control. We're not talking just about air strikes, we're talking
:28:17. > :28:21.right now in Iraq. We have Iraqi and Kurdish Peshmerga fighting on the
:28:22. > :28:24.ground, supported by air strikes. We push them to the border
:28:25. > :28:28.ground, supported by air strikes. We they will come back. They need to be
:28:29. > :28:32.demoralised in Syria as well. What about arming the Peshmerga? Should
:28:33. > :28:39.we have done that much earlier? We saw reports from the border saying,
:28:40. > :28:43."we need arms now. We cannot halt IS unless we have a lot more
:28:44. > :28:47.ammunition". What we can agree is that there are no easy answers.
:28:48. > :28:51.Arming the Peshmerga, fine, but what you are doing is taking a step
:28:52. > :28:55.closer to the old regional fault lines and Iraq breaking up into its
:28:56. > :28:57.three constituent parts. You got to recognise that there are downsides
:28:58. > :29:04.to each of these policies but what we've got to learn from past
:29:05. > :29:10.interventions is that we have intervened and, actually, I would
:29:11. > :29:13.argue - whether it is Iraq all the mission in Afghanistan, or even
:29:14. > :29:16.Libya, where the Libyan parliament is now taking refuge in a Greek
:29:17. > :29:21.ferry - we have not made things better. We have got to be more
:29:22. > :29:25.balanced and nuanced and are approaching when it comes to ISIS,
:29:26. > :29:28.yes, play an active role in driving them out of northern Iraq but it has
:29:29. > :29:33.to be local forces on the ground doing that. Be very wary of going
:29:34. > :29:37.into Syria, if only because it would represent a complete U-turn on our
:29:38. > :29:40.policy last year. John Barron and Bayan Sami Rahman, thank you very
:29:41. > :29:45.much. Louise Casey, the former victims
:29:46. > :29:47.commissioner, has been appointed to conduct an independent inspection
:29:48. > :29:51.into children's services at Rotherham Council. She'll also look
:29:52. > :29:55.at what wider lessons can be learned about child protection, following
:29:56. > :30:00.the revelation that 1400 children were abused in the borough between
:30:01. > :30:05.1997 and 2013, mainly by gangs of men of Pakistani heritage. Police
:30:06. > :30:08.and council officials appeared in front of select committees over the
:30:09. > :30:09.last couple of days, accused of failing to act to stop the abuse
:30:10. > :30:17.despite numerous warnings. This is not something I would have
:30:18. > :30:21.turned a blind eye to, nor something I would have wilfully ignored. With
:30:22. > :30:25.respect to the evidence you have been given, those who know me
:30:26. > :30:29.personally know I would not turn a blind eye cover up incidents of
:30:30. > :30:34.child grooming. I take no pleasure from this. I have had a 32 year
:30:35. > :30:40.police career, and yet on this issue, I have singularly failed the
:30:41. > :30:46.victims of these criminals. And it hurts, bearing
:30:47. > :30:55.Bearing in mind you were the deputy head of children's services from
:30:56. > :30:59.children's -- from 2006, you have known about this all along, you are
:31:00. > :31:05.one of the threads in respect of what has been happening. Why are you
:31:06. > :31:09.still in post? I am not stepping aside for the simple reason I remain
:31:10. > :31:13.accountable to the children, people and families of Rotherham. I take
:31:14. > :31:20.personal responsible to for every incident of child abuse and I worked
:31:21. > :31:26.tirelessly with my staff. I take my responsible at his very seriously
:31:27. > :31:29.and I do not intend to resign... Some very significant, tragic
:31:30. > :31:36.failings within the Council. The reason we are here is because of the
:31:37. > :31:40.victims. Those people, before the select committee. With me are former
:31:41. > :31:46.MP and Cryer, who raise concerns about the grooming of teenage girls
:31:47. > :31:58.by Asian men in her constituency in Keighley as early as 2002, and Susan
:31:59. > :32:03.Evans, deputy chairman of UKIP. Ann Cryer, you raise this issue ten
:32:04. > :32:07.years ago, what was the response? It was 12 years ago, actually. The
:32:08. > :32:12.lease and social services's response was minimal -- police and social
:32:13. > :32:17.services. I got on board Justin Rowlatt, who now works for the BBC,
:32:18. > :32:21.and he made a short film about the mothers who had come to see me,
:32:22. > :32:25.reporting the abuse of their very young daughters. 12 or 13-year-olds.
:32:26. > :32:31.That film that just didn't make it the trick, it got West Yorkshire
:32:32. > :32:35.Police and Bradford social services on board and after a further two
:32:36. > :32:41.years, it did take a while, I think five of the men were sent down. I do
:32:42. > :32:45.remember you trying to raise these issues at the time. What do you
:32:46. > :32:49.think actually motivated the inaction, if you like, I social
:32:50. > :32:57.services and council and police, at the time? It is what has been said
:32:58. > :33:01.about Rotherham. People who are not racist are generally afraid of being
:33:02. > :33:05.called racist, that is the truth of the matter. I hated it because I
:33:06. > :33:10.knew that the Pakistani community in Keighley at the time would probably
:33:11. > :33:13.because me a racist. I have no evidence of that but I dare say that
:33:14. > :33:23.is what happened. And of course it is terrible. If you genuinely
:33:24. > :33:26.believe in a fair deal for everyone in your constituency, and you do
:33:27. > :33:32.your best for them, it is awful to think you're going to be as a
:33:33. > :33:38.racist, simply because you raised the issue of girls being abused in
:33:39. > :33:42.this way. It is shocking and that is what has been raised, the idea that
:33:43. > :33:46.people could be labelled for merely bringing up, and what has proven to
:33:47. > :33:50.be true in many cases, the fact that they were men of mainly Pakistani
:33:51. > :33:54.heritage involved in this abuse. Absolutely. Ann Cryer has been
:33:55. > :33:58.exceptionally brave all along and whole lot of these issues, she has
:33:59. > :34:02.been unafraid and had a lot of trouble as a result and I think she
:34:03. > :34:06.is magnificent. One of the problems is that the number of rotten
:34:07. > :34:09.boroughs that there are, where politicians collude with so-called
:34:10. > :34:13.leaders of ethnic communities, who are not really leaders at all, they
:34:14. > :34:17.are not leaders of large parts of it, but they can deliver votes, or
:34:18. > :34:21.they think they can deliver votes. That is partly because we don't have
:34:22. > :34:26.a proportional representative system which breaks up some of these solid
:34:27. > :34:34.locks, in this case Labour, in some places Tory -- solid blocks. Does it
:34:35. > :34:38.come down to political correct this? Actually stopping people being able
:34:39. > :34:43.to do their jobs? Was that the reason in Rotherham that people
:34:44. > :34:47.didn't want to dig any deeper? We have heard from Denis McShane, the
:34:48. > :34:50.former MP, saying I was a left leading Guardian reader, it wasn't
:34:51. > :34:54.the sort of thing we looked into, that political correctness was to
:34:55. > :34:58.blame? I think partly but it was very much these deals with so-called
:34:59. > :35:02.leaders. The leaders wouldn't allow any slur on anything that was going
:35:03. > :35:07.on in their community and Labour backed off. I'll say think there is
:35:08. > :35:10.a lot of political incorrectness. How these goals were treated was
:35:11. > :35:18.extraordinarily sexist and classist. -- these girls. These are rubbish
:35:19. > :35:21.girls, in care, wild and reckless, there was no idea that these are
:35:22. > :35:25.children in our care and perfection. That seems to be the most important
:35:26. > :35:29.thing, the way these girls were utterly despised, both by their
:35:30. > :35:34.abusers but also by the authorities. I am delighted that Holly has
:35:35. > :35:40.brought up this issue of sexism and class, because I think that is
:35:41. > :35:44.right. -- Polly. We try to label it as being entirely to blame at our
:35:45. > :35:48.peril, there were other issues as well and Polly has accurately picked
:35:49. > :35:51.up on one of them. There are issues about the night-time economy. I
:35:52. > :35:57.personally feel there are issues around what Michael the anaesthetise
:35:58. > :35:59.agents of economy -- the -- around what I call. People see such cases
:36:00. > :36:12.time and again that what I call. People see such cases
:36:13. > :36:19.red flag flying. An MEP has made this quite clear, they need to stand
:36:20. > :36:22.up and make them accountable. These so-called community leaders are not
:36:23. > :36:31.democratically elected, they are put there... Nobody should accept... We
:36:32. > :36:34.have just heard from the council director of children's services
:36:35. > :36:39.saying she is not going to resign, yet she was there throughout this
:36:40. > :36:47.period and the Ford ever -- throughout this whole period and for
:36:48. > :36:56.whatever reason it was not recognised. It is also political
:36:57. > :37:02.protectionism of your own people and own voters. As the left fostered
:37:03. > :37:06.that? I don't know about the left, they are an old-fashioned corrupt
:37:07. > :37:12.our working council, you can find the same in Tory councils that have
:37:13. > :37:16.been Tory for ever as well. You have a solid block of old-fashioned power
:37:17. > :37:20.that refuses to look at what is happening. But the left has
:37:21. > :37:25.relentlessly pursued the ethnic vote and I think that is the cause of the
:37:26. > :37:28.problem. I think you will find David Cameron is pursuing the ethnic vote
:37:29. > :37:34.as well. You are probably the only ones who aren't. Do you think there
:37:35. > :37:39.was that sort of atmosphere at the time, in your area and rather, too,
:37:40. > :37:42.and it was the fear of being labelled a racist? There may be an
:37:43. > :37:48.omen of a rotten borough but did that prevent issues coming to the
:37:49. > :37:52.four? When I was elected first, the leader of the council said, I will
:37:53. > :37:57.consult the Camino to. What he meant by that, and it nearly always was
:37:58. > :38:02.that, he will pick up the phone and phone perhaps five men -- consult
:38:03. > :38:06.the community. The women would have no say whatsoever. He would bring
:38:07. > :38:10.those five men ask them their views, and then he had consulted the
:38:11. > :38:15.community, in his view. It was wrong. We have moved on a bid from
:38:16. > :38:22.then. We have about eight or nine women councillors of Asian Heritage,
:38:23. > :38:28.which is terrific. After the next election we may have an Asian woman
:38:29. > :38:38.MP, which would be great, in Bradford. We are moving on but this
:38:39. > :38:40.particular community in Bradford and Keighley are extremely
:38:41. > :38:46.paternalistic. We have to grasp that nettle and argue and make sure it is
:38:47. > :38:49.understood that it is not the way of politics in Bradford and Keighley,
:38:50. > :38:56.and things must change, and I think they are changing. Let me bring up
:38:57. > :38:58.another example. In November 2012 Rotherham council removed three
:38:59. > :39:04.children from foster parents because they were members of UKIP. I mention
:39:05. > :39:08.the director of children's services who told the BBC at the time, her
:39:09. > :39:12.decision was influenced by UKIP aberratio
:39:13. > :39:27.-- influenced by UKIP's policy. If these were children of ethnic
:39:28. > :39:33.minorities... I think they it is a bit different. I don't see why. They
:39:34. > :39:37.are either good foster parents or they are not. What matters is
:39:38. > :39:42.whether or not you are a good parent. I all accounts these foster
:39:43. > :39:46.parents work and I gather they are being foster parents again, although
:39:47. > :39:52.I think in a different borough. I don't know the case but if it were a
:39:53. > :39:55.case of foster parents who had any instinctive sense against particular
:39:56. > :40:00.foreigners, I would think it not a good idea to put foreign children
:40:01. > :40:03.with them. UKIP doesn't have anything against Eastern Europeans,
:40:04. > :40:09.this is the problem, it has been so misrepresented. Except you go into
:40:10. > :40:15.areas where there is strong Eastern European... We are against mass
:40:16. > :40:22.immigration. , we're not against anyone from eastern Europe and we
:40:23. > :40:31.have been misrepresented on that. In East Anglia you are really targeting
:40:32. > :40:35.people who are not Eastern European? We talked about when they were
:40:36. > :40:39.joining the European Union, how they would be an open door, it could have
:40:40. > :40:43.been any other two countries. You sound so reasonable but you are so
:40:44. > :40:49.unlike the leaflets that you and your party are putting up. Thank you
:40:50. > :40:53.very much. Pay attention, you lot, because I am
:40:54. > :40:57.not repeating myself. Politics has got angry and it is your fault.
:40:58. > :41:02.Sorry about the tone but you see my point. As our guest of the day knows
:41:03. > :41:05.well, some people can take an aggressive dislike to people who
:41:06. > :41:10.inhabit the political landscape or write about it. It is us, the
:41:11. > :41:14.public, or have politicians got to wound up and has the advent of
:41:15. > :41:20.social media meant we can vent spleen whenever we like?
:41:21. > :41:24.The world of politics is not just populated by politicians but a press
:41:25. > :41:29.that provides opinion formers and commentators. They are often
:41:30. > :41:36.strident and dogmatic in their views, as are their counterparts,
:41:37. > :41:40.but how often have you seen or had this reaction? That person is so
:41:41. > :41:44.annoying, they are wrong about pretty much everything, I actually
:41:45. > :41:52.think I hate them! I might even tell them that. And now with Twitter and
:41:53. > :41:54.Facebook and links to the comments section of newspapers and
:41:55. > :41:59.politicians who willingly use social media, we can, and we do tell people
:42:00. > :42:04.in no uncertain terms what we think of them. By and large you are
:42:05. > :42:11.talking about people who are older, they are male, they are right wing,
:42:12. > :42:16.they have a sense that everything is somehow getting away from them, that
:42:17. > :42:22.people who have no right our user pin power and so on. Essentially
:42:23. > :42:23.they are people who feel their potency slipping away and look for
:42:24. > :42:37.somebody to blame -- they are You cover both sections, from the
:42:38. > :42:43.left, who really dislike cute was that no matter what you say, if you
:42:44. > :42:49.said free beer for the world of workers, they would say, I hate you!
:42:50. > :42:55.Hold on, chaps, because it is mainly chaps. It is not just us but our
:42:56. > :43:04.politics can get sharp at times. How about this, you are the weakest
:43:05. > :43:07.link, goodbye? Mr Speaker... The house has noticed the Prime
:43:08. > :43:18.Minister's remarkable transformation in the last few weeks from Stalin to
:43:19. > :43:25.Mr Bean. You are a miserable pipsqueak of a man! When it gets
:43:26. > :43:30.rowdy, the speaker is clear he thinks we do like it and want it
:43:31. > :43:34.calmer and more reasonable. Order. That is what the public has a right
:43:35. > :43:39.to expect of this house. We pretend we don't like bust ups, we think it
:43:40. > :43:46.is bad, badly behaved, then we all watch it and we send each other
:43:47. > :43:52.tweets about it. The vile sickos who populate Twitter, there is no green
:43:53. > :43:58.ink defining them any more. It is the same typeface, whether you are
:43:59. > :44:04.David Cameron or you are some revolting piece of work conducting
:44:05. > :44:08.some vile vendetta. It is a fascinating subject and I would love
:44:09. > :44:18.to tell you more, but frankly, you can all bog off. Charming! Joining
:44:19. > :44:21.the psychologist Lucy Beresford. Polly, does it bother you, the
:44:22. > :44:25.response that you get in response to your columns?
:44:26. > :44:33.It does from time to time and it does, to some extent, altar what I
:44:34. > :44:36.write. I'm very, very much more careful to not write anything
:44:37. > :44:40.remotely personal, not to give away anything, that could allow them to
:44:41. > :44:44.get that screwdriver in. When I read the comments after my column, are
:44:45. > :44:48.lot of them are the same ones week after week. They are very often
:44:49. > :44:53.absolutely vile. We have a moderator who takes out anything really
:44:54. > :44:58.obscene or a threat to your life. I have had ones that have been threats
:44:59. > :45:04.to my life. "Hope you get cancer," that kind of thing. Very nice. It is
:45:05. > :45:08.upsetting and disturbing. The level of vitriol is kind of
:45:09. > :45:12.incomprehensible. I don't, on the whole, right vitriolic or personal
:45:13. > :45:19.stuff about people. I have, about three times in my life, written
:45:20. > :45:25.really savage things about Peter Mandelson, Boris Johnson and another
:45:26. > :45:30.person. Otherwise, I am genuinely not trying to stir things up. What
:45:31. > :45:33.does that say about the state of human nature, if people are writing
:45:34. > :45:38.that sort of savagery to be blight Polly Toynbee on a fairly regular
:45:39. > :45:41.basis? There are two things. One is about the nature of politics, which
:45:42. > :45:46.is generally quite impassioned, and the other is the nature of social
:45:47. > :45:51.media at the moment, which almost excites and impulsivity. If I wanted
:45:52. > :45:57.to send a letter in green ink, by the time I got my 17th page, I might
:45:58. > :46:00.have got it off my chest. But now it takes me no time at all to tweet.
:46:01. > :46:08.I've pressed the button before I've censored myself, doing the normal
:46:09. > :46:11.human thing. But politics is about passion and it's also about our
:46:12. > :46:15.sense of self. We hold beliefs about things and it's those beliefs that
:46:16. > :46:18.make us feel connected and grounded to the world and if someone
:46:19. > :46:23.challenges those beliefs, we're going to defend ourselves. Do you
:46:24. > :46:29.think it is the immediacy of the response, the initial anger before
:46:30. > :46:32.it had time to diminish, which means politics is actually ideological D
:46:33. > :46:43.split that it was in the 1980s and 1990s. -- ideological. I think this
:46:44. > :46:46.government was doing things well to the right of anything Margaret
:46:47. > :46:51.Thatcher ever dared do so I think there is, underneath it, a very
:46:52. > :46:58.strong right-wing ideological string anything to do with the state...
:46:59. > :47:02.They do it to some extent to people on the left but I think people on
:47:03. > :47:07.the left are less interested in spending their time on the Daily
:47:08. > :47:11.Mail site than those to the right plunging into the Guardian. If you
:47:12. > :47:17.weren't allowed to be anonymous and people knew that their families,
:47:18. > :47:21.their brothers and sisters, their work colleagues, could see what they
:47:22. > :47:26.are saying, it would calm the whole thing down. I would like an end to
:47:27. > :47:31.anonymity. Do you think that is the problem, people feel masked by
:47:32. > :47:35.social media, e-mails, Twitter, so they can say things they don't
:47:36. > :47:38.really believe the person will ever read? They certainly have the
:47:39. > :47:42.wherewithal to be anonymous and some people have to be anonymous and some
:47:43. > :47:46.people have Twitter encourage a certain licentiousness but, at the
:47:47. > :47:51.same time, there are a lot of people who want to stand out and proud and
:47:52. > :47:54.say, "I am going to be a really nasty person". We have to leave it
:47:55. > :47:59.there before it gets nasty. Thank you very much.
:48:00. > :48:02.We know that the continuing saga over who should be the next Commons
:48:03. > :48:07.clerk has been keeping you awake at night. Not familiar with the story?
:48:08. > :48:11.Well, and Astrium called Carol Mills is the preferred candidate of the
:48:12. > :48:14.Commons Speaker John Bercow for the role of clerk of the House of
:48:15. > :48:19.Commons. The Clarke Access Chief Executive of the Commons but they
:48:20. > :48:22.are also the person who advises MPs on procedure. But a growing number
:48:23. > :48:28.of MPs are unhappy with the choice. They're concerned that Ms Mills
:48:29. > :48:32.lacks the necessary Parliamentary knowledge to carry out the role.
:48:33. > :48:36.Last night, Conservative MP Andrew Lansley, who sat on the panel that
:48:37. > :48:40.interviewed her for the job, admit they might have chosen the wrong
:48:41. > :48:44.person. It is no criticism of Carol Mills, who interviewed well, to say
:48:45. > :48:46.that her knowledge of the constitutional procedural issues, as
:48:47. > :48:51.required for clerk of the House, would not suffice. I took that view
:48:52. > :48:55.but it is not supported by the majority of the selection panel. It
:48:56. > :48:59.is particularly regrettable that the speakers sought expressly to water
:49:00. > :49:02.down the 2011 requirement in the job description that the clerk should
:49:03. > :49:09.have "detailed knowledge of the procedures and practices of the
:49:10. > :49:13.House". He sought to replace the words "detailed knowledge" with
:49:14. > :49:19."awareness". I have to say the selection panel was not asked to
:49:20. > :49:23.subject candidates to the same test as in 2011. The process for
:49:24. > :49:29.appointment there was, in my view, it ill founded. Jesse Norman, the MP
:49:30. > :49:34.who called for last by's debate over the choice of Commons clerk, joins
:49:35. > :49:37.us from Westminster. This isn't about respective traditions of
:49:38. > :49:40.Parliament, is it? It another way of putting the boot into John Bercow
:49:41. > :49:44.because you don't like him. Nothing could be further from the truth.
:49:45. > :49:49.There was a flawed procedure to choose the new clerk and there were
:49:50. > :49:53.questions, as Andrew Lansley mentioned, and are widely
:49:54. > :49:56.acknowledged, about whether she has any genuine qualifications for the
:49:57. > :50:02.procedural and constitutional aspects of the job. We know that
:50:03. > :50:07.she's had two enquiries launched into her conduct by the Australian
:50:08. > :50:11.Parliament where she works and this was about clearing all that up and
:50:12. > :50:15.putting the selection process and, indeed, the governance of the House,
:50:16. > :50:19.on a proper constitutional basis. Stick a white we take your point
:50:20. > :50:22.about the enquiries going on but she is a secretary for the department of
:50:23. > :50:27.Parliamentary services and the biggest item coming up the clerk's
:50:28. > :50:29.agenda is multi-million pound refurbishment of the Palace of
:50:30. > :50:34.Westminster, which won't need an intimate knowledge of Parliamentary
:50:35. > :50:37.protocol, will it? It's true that the business side
:50:38. > :50:40.will be important and that's why the wiser heads in the Palace of
:50:41. > :50:44.Westminster are going to set up a specific delivery authority to
:50:45. > :50:49.commission this enormous piece of change and renewed infrastructure.
:50:50. > :50:53.But if you think about what's really at stake, the question is, can
:50:54. > :50:57.Parliament reinvent itself for the 21st century through this renewal
:50:58. > :51:03.and restoration process? That requires a detailed understanding of
:51:04. > :51:06.how Parliament works in Britain and this specific institutions and stop
:51:07. > :51:12.it is the clerk's understanding and expertise that will really be in
:51:13. > :51:16.play. We've done quite a few interviews on this in the last
:51:17. > :51:20.couple of weeks since has returned. Is this really what MPs should be
:51:21. > :51:25.spending their time on? There's a way of looking at it which says that
:51:26. > :51:28.this is just petty nonsense and we should pay our attention to
:51:29. > :51:33.international affairs and I don't disagree with much of that. The
:51:34. > :51:36.question, however, is what the rules are under which Parliament itself
:51:37. > :51:40.operates and Parliament is our supreme legislative body so, add
:51:41. > :51:44.chilli, the question of who the clerk is is a profound matter for
:51:45. > :51:50.the constitution and proper governance. -- actually. Other
:51:51. > :51:53.governments across the Commonwealth rely on our clerk for advice on how
:51:54. > :51:58.to run their Parliament so it turns out to run their Parliament so it
:51:59. > :52:02.turns out how to get right. But isn't there some truth in what David
:52:03. > :52:05.Blunkett says, which is that MPs wouldn't put up with how the House
:52:06. > :52:09.of Commons were run if it were a business and that, to some extent,
:52:10. > :52:12.echoes the electorate, you are switching of Parliamentary protocol
:52:13. > :52:19.because it's compensated and outdated? That isn't a reason to not
:52:20. > :52:24.care about Parliamentary protocol. It may be that in the Twitter age,
:52:25. > :52:27.people just generally don't have the time to invest in these issues,
:52:28. > :52:31.although frankly they know more about them now than they probably
:52:32. > :52:34.have ever done in our history. David Blunkett was right in our history.
:52:35. > :52:41.David Blunkett was writing part. 20 years ago, the House of Commons with
:52:42. > :52:48.an ability to mess. It's now much better. -- and administrators at
:52:49. > :52:51.mess. It can still continue to improve and that's part of the
:52:52. > :52:55.argument that we'll be engaging with with this new select committee. All
:52:56. > :53:03.right, Jesse Norman. No doubt we will do revisit this. Amongst
:53:04. > :53:05.political journalists of a certain vintage, this Scottish referendum
:53:06. > :53:12.campaign has conjured up a feeling of deja vu. Stop "yes" and Mobot for
:53:13. > :53:15.their French language counterpart and you could have a campaign in the
:53:16. > :53:25.Canadian province of Quebec in the 1990s. -- swap "yes" and "no". In
:53:26. > :53:30.Quebec they love voting on whether to leave Canada. They lasted it in
:53:31. > :53:33.1995 and there are some spooky parallels with what happened then
:53:34. > :53:37.and the final few days of the campaign in Scotland. Just ask
:53:38. > :53:41.somebody who was there. Watching this whole campaign has given me a
:53:42. > :53:45.strong sense of deja vu, having followed the Quebec referendum 20
:53:46. > :53:49.years ago. A hugely exciting, nail-biting campaign, but also
:53:50. > :53:55.bringing together these very big, emotional feelings.
:53:56. > :54:00.bringing together these very big, national identity, belonging.
:54:01. > :54:05.Exhibit A, the polls. In the early days, the Canadian "no" campaign was
:54:06. > :54:09.a head-butt them in the last minute the "yes" campaign took the lead.
:54:10. > :54:13.The same seems to have happened in Scotland this week. Better
:54:14. > :54:20.Together's response is out of the Quebec rule book. The Prime Minister
:54:21. > :54:25.of Canada said that Quebec would be recognised as a distinct nation with
:54:26. > :54:29.a constitutional veto. People said it was too late and if he really
:54:30. > :54:33.meant it they would have done it earlier. They said they wouldn't be
:54:34. > :54:39.fooled again, exactly as you are hearing now on the nationalist side.
:54:40. > :54:42.Then there was a move to say that we have been too negative on the "no"
:54:43. > :54:51.side and to pettifogging about the detail. We've got to be more open.
:54:52. > :54:56.Just like jamming street's decision to fly the salt are, although there
:54:57. > :55:06.are few tricks Number Ten might not borrow from Canada. David Cameron
:55:07. > :55:12.could have said that if a wrong-headed to King's Cross, he
:55:13. > :55:16.would pay for them to go to Edinburgh to campaign. But that is
:55:17. > :55:21.what happened in Canada. If you got a free ticket to go to Edinburgh to
:55:22. > :55:27.campaign for Scotland to stay in the UK, would you take it? Yes I would.
:55:28. > :55:33.Would you be tempted with a free ticket to go on campaign? I used to
:55:34. > :55:37.live there and I think it's a nice place but I think they cost us too
:55:38. > :55:43.much money and if they want to go, they can go. Is it one way or
:55:44. > :55:48.return? There is a big difference from Quebec. We know the result. The
:55:49. > :55:55.answer was "no" but only just. We're joined by a representative of
:55:56. > :55:58.the Canadian broadcaster CBC. I love the idea that the government paid
:55:59. > :56:04.for people to go to Quebec to beg them to stay. That obvious he
:56:05. > :56:08.worked. It depends who you speak with. The fact is that about 100,000
:56:09. > :56:13.Canadians ended up in Montreal. I was there as a student journalist
:56:14. > :56:17.and was quite a scene, certainly not won the separatists were
:56:18. > :56:22.appreciative of but one that the Federalists credited with that very
:56:23. > :56:28.small surge ahead for the "no" side. What lessons do you think thereafter
:56:29. > :56:32.Scotland in this campaign? It's amazing the similarities, despite
:56:33. > :56:38.the fact that the campaign is so starkly shorter on the Canadian
:56:39. > :56:43.side. It's gone on for ever hear! Despite that, the arc of it has been
:56:44. > :56:47.similar. The surge of the "no" side all along and then suddenly the
:56:48. > :56:52.dramatic surge of the "yes" side. In Canada, there was the love bombing
:56:53. > :56:57.that happened and here, that seems to be happening. It does sound very
:56:58. > :57:01.familiar. The separatists were not very happy about it in Canada. I was
:57:02. > :57:07.told it isn't the kind of approach they like to see in Scotland. What
:57:08. > :57:11.do you say to that? What about a month long campaign? Would that have
:57:12. > :57:17.been better for the "no" side or the "yes" side? What's really
:57:18. > :57:25.interesting about the Quebec question is that they then one such
:57:26. > :57:27.strong concessions as a result of nearly winning that it was all a
:57:28. > :57:34.problem. There really does appear now to be very little push for
:57:35. > :57:39.another referendum any longer. The young in Quebec seem to be 70% in
:57:40. > :57:44.favour of not breaking away, so it sounds as if it's done the trick and
:57:45. > :57:47.maybe what the "no" side is offering now would do the trick in Scotland
:57:48. > :57:58.as well and resolve the question by giving enough. Do you agree with
:57:59. > :58:01.that, and does it end the debate? In Canada the separatist movement still
:58:02. > :58:06.exists and is watching this mode very closely, just as Catalonia is,
:58:07. > :58:09.and Venice, because it could be instructive. Some associations in
:58:10. > :58:12.Montreal have planned meetings will shortly after the vote to talk about
:58:13. > :58:21.what affect this vote might have on the future, the next possible
:58:22. > :58:26.referendum. The party that led and hopes to go for another vote still
:58:27. > :58:31.has a broad base of popularity. Was it a dirty campaign? In Canada?
:58:32. > :58:39.Depends who you talk to! We'll end it there. Thank you for joining us
:58:40. > :58:43.today. That's it. Thanks to all of our guests but particularly to you,
:58:44. > :58:47.Polly Toynbee, for bearing with us for the whole hour. The news is
:58:48. > :58:52.starting on BBC one now. Andrew will be in Edinburgh tonight and
:58:53. > :58:58.tomorrow, I will be here in London and Andrew still in Edinburgh for
:58:59. > :59:09.politics Musgrove. -- for the Daily Politics.
:59:10. > :59:19.Now. This. Looks. Like. A job. For me.