:00:40. > :00:42.Hello and welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:43. > :00:46.The Scottish independence referendum is just two days away!
:00:47. > :00:48.The three main party leaders at Westminster have signed
:00:49. > :00:52.a pledge promising new powers for Scotland, whichever way Scots vote.
:00:53. > :00:57.The SNP says it's an insult and asked why it's taken so long.
:00:58. > :01:00.There are growing calls for more powers for the rest of the UK.
:01:01. > :01:07.We'll debate whether England needs its own parliament.
:01:08. > :01:10.It's often thought that artists are more likely to be on the left.
:01:11. > :01:18.We'll bring together two best-selling authors to debate
:01:19. > :01:35.He looks like someone has put his finger up their bottom! And do we
:01:36. > :01:39.need to lighten up when it comes to a bit of political argy-bargy?
:01:40. > :01:42.All that in the next hour and with us for the whole
:01:43. > :01:44.of the programme today is the novelist Jeanette Winterson.
:01:45. > :01:46.She's perhaps best known as the author of
:01:47. > :01:50.This summer she hit the headlines after skinning a rabbit and posting
:01:51. > :01:54.And on this programme we like to think we specialise
:01:55. > :01:57.in minor controversies that blow up out of all proportion,
:01:58. > :02:03.so she should feel right at home. Welcome.
:02:04. > :02:09.He said he wouldn't resign despite mounting calls for him to go, but
:02:10. > :02:12.in the last hour South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner has
:02:13. > :02:14.stepped down from the role after weeks of pressure over
:02:15. > :02:18.Shaun Wright has come under increasing fire
:02:19. > :02:25.since the publication of a report into child sexual exploitation
:02:26. > :02:27.in Rotherham as he was the councillor with responsibility
:02:28. > :02:30.for children's services in the borough from 2005 to 2010.
:02:31. > :02:34."My role as South Yorkshire police and crime commissioner has clearly
:02:35. > :02:37.become prominent in terms of public opinion and media coverage following
:02:38. > :02:41.This is detracting from the important issue, which should
:02:42. > :02:45.be everybody's focus - the 1,400 victims outlined in the report - and
:02:46. > :02:48.in providing support to victims and bringing to justice the criminals
:02:49. > :02:59.responsible for the atrocious crimes committed against them."
:03:00. > :03:09.We are joined now by our correspondent Adam Fleming. Why has
:03:10. > :03:15.he gone? He said he was starting to worry that he was detracting from
:03:16. > :03:20.the plight of the survivors. I think he probably realised the writing was
:03:21. > :03:27.on the wall last week at a meeting of the police and the panel in that
:03:28. > :03:32.region. That is a committee which scrutinises the work of each crime
:03:33. > :03:36.commission in each area. There was abuse from the public gallery and it
:03:37. > :03:41.got quite heated so he probably saw the scale of the anger that was
:03:42. > :03:47.directed at him. The pressure had been piling on him for weeks and
:03:48. > :03:51.weeks and weeks. The Labour Party said he should stand down. He
:03:52. > :03:55.resigned the whip but not from the job. The Home Secretary and even the
:03:56. > :04:00.Prime Minister were saying, do you really want to carry on this job
:04:01. > :04:04.considering what has happened? Where does that leave the role of Police
:04:05. > :04:12.and Crime Commissioners? They could not actually make him go? That is
:04:13. > :04:17.the point, people were asking, how can you get rid of a Police and
:04:18. > :04:20.Crime Commissioner? The rules are very strict. They can only be
:04:21. > :04:25.chucked out of office if they are convicted of an offence which means
:04:26. > :04:28.they go to prison. That has now sparked a big discussion about what
:04:29. > :04:32.should happen to these roles in the future. Labour have said they will
:04:33. > :04:39.be keen to look at having some sort of recall mess them -- mechanism.
:04:40. > :04:43.Theresa May has said she's prepared to have a debate. Nick Clegg has
:04:44. > :04:48.said, it is this job even a good idea? Is it an experiment which has
:04:49. > :04:51.not worked? In the short-term in South Yorkshire there will be a
:04:52. > :04:55.by-election for summer due to take over from Mr Right. We saw easily
:04:56. > :05:03.there was a by-election in the Midlands and the turnout was 10%.
:05:04. > :05:09.Thank you. Jeanette, was he right to go? Yes, he should have gone right
:05:10. > :05:13.from the beginning. If you are is the row hours contract worker you
:05:14. > :05:17.can be out of the door straightaway. The higher up the food chain you go,
:05:18. > :05:21.the harder it is to get rid of you. We have politicians who are
:05:22. > :05:26.insulated from public opinion. But he has gone in the end. The he had
:05:27. > :05:30.to. He is a prize that everyone is furious with him. Why have got a
:05:31. > :05:36.situation where you cannot get rid of someone like him unless it is a
:05:37. > :05:40.criminal offence. G4S are saying, give us contracts for ten years and
:05:41. > :05:44.if you change your minds, still payoffs. We are getting to a
:05:45. > :05:49.situation where we cannot throw out people in power when they have done
:05:50. > :05:52.wrong. We have to wait for them to resign. It is stupid. We will see if
:05:53. > :05:55.it changes, the legislation. The question for today is -
:05:56. > :05:59.which is the odd one out amongst At the end of the show Jeanette
:06:00. > :06:14.will give us the correct answer. With less than two days to go
:06:15. > :06:17.until the polls open in the Scottish independence referendum,
:06:18. > :06:19.David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg have this morning added
:06:20. > :06:33.some meat on to the bones of They have signed a pledge on the
:06:34. > :06:38.front of a Scottish newspaper. The pledge on the front page of
:06:39. > :06:41.today's daily record newspaper promises a timetable for the
:06:42. > :06:45.transfer of further powers to Scotland, in the case of the no
:06:46. > :06:51.vote. The politicians guarantee that the final say on NHS funding will
:06:52. > :06:57.lie with the government in Scotland, something which has become a major
:06:58. > :07:03.part of the Yes campaign in recent weeks. They promise to keep the
:07:04. > :07:08.mechanism which allows the higher funding in Scotland than in England,
:07:09. > :07:11.known as the Barnett formula. The position for Scotland is becoming
:07:12. > :07:16.clearer but what about England? Labour have been calling for more
:07:17. > :07:21.devolution for English regions. This does not solve the West Lothian
:07:22. > :07:24.question, the fact that MPs from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
:07:25. > :07:29.are allowed to vote on England only matters. Some people think an
:07:30. > :07:31.English parliament is the solution but the Prime Minister appeared to
:07:32. > :07:35.rule this out last night saying we are not remotely at that stage.
:07:36. > :07:37.I'm joined now by Conservative MP Peter Bone and Labour's Lucy Powell
:07:38. > :07:47.Lucy, first of all, do we need an English parliament? What we need is
:07:48. > :07:53.more devolution to the English regions. I think that city now --
:07:54. > :07:58.that train now is unstoppable. Labour have been calling for more
:07:59. > :08:04.powers to the city regions. I think we now need much more serious and
:08:05. > :08:07.real and significant devolution to the city regions which are chomping
:08:08. > :08:11.at the bit. Here we are in Manchester, I am here in Manchester
:08:12. > :08:19.and we are ready for that to come. We have been working towards that
:08:20. > :08:29.for a time and we want to be unleashed. Dare I say, is it a
:08:30. > :08:33.little too little, too late? What you are talking about is localism.
:08:34. > :08:37.There is a broad consensus between the parties about offering more
:08:38. > :08:41.devolution to other cities in England, but if further devolution
:08:42. > :08:44.is agreed for Scotland, that will have huge constitutional
:08:45. > :08:49.consequences for the UK which will mean more than just a few powers for
:08:50. > :08:58.local government. We are not talking about a few more powers for local
:08:59. > :08:59.government. This would be a significant and transformational
:09:00. > :09:04.devolution. When you say transformational, what are you
:09:05. > :09:11.intending to offer some of the great cities of England? More power and
:09:12. > :09:16.control. Labour has promised to devolve ?30 billion of expenditure.
:09:17. > :09:20.That would be the first step. We are looking at things like how cities
:09:21. > :09:25.can raise their own business rates, how they can spend that, how they
:09:26. > :09:29.can spend money around economic development skills, transport,
:09:30. > :09:34.things that add a moment they do not have the powers to do. Alongside
:09:35. > :09:39.that we would be looking for more accountability and democracy. I am a
:09:40. > :09:42.strong supporter of directly elected mayors. But the people in those
:09:43. > :09:48.regions have not been very strongly in support. The appetite has not
:09:49. > :09:52.been there. It has not been demonstrated in the past. I will
:09:53. > :09:59.come back to you in a moment. Is that going to be enough, Peter
:10:00. > :10:02.Bone? No. This government is devolving power to local
:10:03. > :10:07.authorities. Labour were in power for 13 years and nothing happened.
:10:08. > :10:12.They tried to offer directly elected mayors and people did not want them.
:10:13. > :10:16.What people are saying now is that if Scotland is going to have more
:10:17. > :10:22.powers England has to have its own parliament, English votes for
:10:23. > :10:27.English laws. All we have to do is exclude non-English MPs from voting
:10:28. > :10:31.on English matters. That was a pledge at the last general election.
:10:32. > :10:35.We are only carrying on what we said before. I think the Scottish
:10:36. > :10:40.independence debate has highlighted a need for this sensible move. Is it
:10:41. > :10:43.the independence debate which have highlighted it or is it that more
:10:44. > :10:49.powers have been offered in the closing stages of this campaign by
:10:50. > :10:54.your Prime Minister to try and get a No vote? It has highlighted it. It
:10:55. > :10:58.was there. It has always been rumbling on. Now people are saying
:10:59. > :11:03.in Westminster, this has to be done. People are crying out for the fact
:11:04. > :11:08.we do not want Scottish MPs telling the English how to govern England.
:11:09. > :11:14.Although it has existed for a long time up until now. That was the West
:11:15. > :11:19.Lothian question. What about the West Lothian question, Lucy Powell?
:11:20. > :11:23.Does it have to be solved if we are talking about more devolution. What
:11:24. > :11:28.would be wrong with an English parliament stopping Scottish MPs
:11:29. > :11:32.voting on English only matters? We have to continue to address this
:11:33. > :11:37.question of the West Lothian question. How? If I had the answer
:11:38. > :11:41.to that, we would have done it a long time ago. I think let's get
:11:42. > :11:46.back to what is the actual question here that people are asking. I think
:11:47. > :11:50.it is interesting what Peter Bone said. He said people in Westminster
:11:51. > :11:57.are crying out for an English Parliament. My constituents are not.
:11:58. > :12:01.Had you asked them? They are crying out for two things. The first is
:12:02. > :12:04.that Westminster is increasingly remote from their lives. It is
:12:05. > :12:09.remitted in terms of the decisions it takes and in their lives. The
:12:10. > :12:13.second thing my constituents want is they want a better deal for
:12:14. > :12:18.Manchester. They want Manchester to be able to fill its potential. I
:12:19. > :12:22.don't think that an English Parliament answers either of those
:12:23. > :12:28.questions. What an English Parliament does is create another
:12:29. > :12:32.tier, another layer of centralised Westminster -based power. That is
:12:33. > :12:35.not what my constituents are crying out for. I am not opposed to an
:12:36. > :12:40.English parliament but I do not think it answers the question on the
:12:41. > :12:44.table. I will come back to your question about what constituents in
:12:45. > :12:50.some of the northern cities are crying out for. Would it be fairer
:12:51. > :12:55.that only English MPs vote on English only issues that affect them
:12:56. > :13:01.in health and education. Would it be fairer to have that? There are other
:13:02. > :13:05.issues we have to consider as well. Is it right that we continue if we
:13:06. > :13:08.are going to have more powers going to Scotland, that Scottish MPs
:13:09. > :13:12.continue to vote on health and education and then on finance if
:13:13. > :13:18.more tax-raising powers are given to Scotland? We have definitely got to
:13:19. > :13:22.work these things through. You have also got to consider the unintended
:13:23. > :13:26.consequences if you go down that road which is what it means for the
:13:27. > :13:31.Westminster UK Parliament and the divine doing of that as well. This
:13:32. > :13:35.is not going to be something that we can resolve in a debate like this.
:13:36. > :13:44.This is a process that we need to consider. I think we're absolutely
:13:45. > :13:49.ready to go with centralisation. Let me put these points to Peter Bone.
:13:50. > :13:52.Isn't Lucy Powell right that this government has presided over
:13:53. > :13:56.policies and an administration that is geared totally to London and the
:13:57. > :14:00.south-east, that that is the problem and Lucy Powell is right to say,
:14:01. > :14:05.what they want is more decentralisation? Not another
:14:06. > :14:08.Parliament but not every policy focusing on where the votes for
:14:09. > :14:16.Conservatives are in the South? Wrong on every count. More and more
:14:17. > :14:24.power has been devolved. That is the point. Our localism agenda is doing
:14:25. > :14:30.that. No, it hasn't. It has. You have given with one hand and taken
:14:31. > :14:34.away with the other. Can you stop laughing at her. This sneery
:14:35. > :14:39.contempt is really unattractive. You are smiling away as if to say these
:14:40. > :14:45.girls do not know what they are talking about. Let him answer. When
:14:46. > :14:49.you say, what examples can you give on localism which have made a
:14:50. > :14:57.difference? We are having mayors, for example. Planning is going back
:14:58. > :15:05.to local authorities. Know it is not. It is going in completely the
:15:06. > :15:10.opposite direction. That is my view. Are they substantial enough powers?
:15:11. > :15:13.If there was more decentralisation, would you need an English
:15:14. > :15:18.Parliament? That is the point, you can never get to that point. You
:15:19. > :15:22.have to have decisions about education and health which have to
:15:23. > :15:26.be decided on a national level. The idea that there will be more
:15:27. > :15:31.bureaucracy is nonsense. You're going to use the same building and
:15:32. > :15:36.the same MPs, it will not cost a penny more. Where would the
:15:37. > :15:41.constitutional home be? It would still be in Westminster. When it
:15:42. > :15:45.came to UK matters, all MPs in Parliament would vote. All we are
:15:46. > :15:46.saying is for purely English matters, English MPs should only
:15:47. > :15:56.vote on those. Do you think David Cameron is
:15:57. > :16:03.offering too much to Scotland? We don't know, it is all happening too
:16:04. > :16:08.quickly. You don't know because? We know they have signed a pledge.
:16:09. > :16:16.Party leaders have signed pledges before. The Tory offer is for them
:16:17. > :16:21.to have total control over income tax raising powers, is it too much?
:16:22. > :16:25.If we go down the route of evolution and as Lucy says it will be a
:16:26. > :16:30.difficult discussion. If you're going to go down that route, you
:16:31. > :16:36.have got to have English votes for English laws. Lucy Powell, the truth
:16:37. > :16:40.is, whichever way you look at it, you could say Labour does not want
:16:41. > :16:44.an English parliament because it would make it harder for Labour to
:16:45. > :16:48.govern in Westminster. Imagine in 2015 if Ed Miliband wins with a
:16:49. > :16:54.small majority it would be reliant on those MPs in Scotland and Wales
:16:55. > :16:59.and then they would be able to vote on the budget which would be only
:17:00. > :17:09.for England, that would be absurd? You go down the road of creating two
:17:10. > :17:15.grades of MPs at your level. Then you have more important MPs and less
:17:16. > :17:28.important MPs. There are some tricky issues. It is not a political point.
:17:29. > :17:32.Tony Blair's election victories, he won the majorities of MPs in England
:17:33. > :17:39.as well. But the likelihood is, Ed Miliband with the reliant on
:17:40. > :17:44.Scotland and Wales MPs. These considerations are not based on
:17:45. > :17:50.politics, they are based on what are the questions we are trying to
:17:51. > :17:54.resolve. It is an internal discussion to think about the West
:17:55. > :17:59.Lothian question. Frankly, most of my constituents, I would have
:18:00. > :18:06.surprised if hardly any of them had heard of the issue and were bothered
:18:07. > :18:10.about it. Peter Bone is shaking his head. If you had a crystal ball,
:18:11. > :18:15.what would you do? Would you have a more federal UK, an English
:18:16. > :18:24.Parliament and parliaments of the remainder of the UK if Scotland goes
:18:25. > :18:28.independent? Or, would you have evolution to other cities or keep it
:18:29. > :18:32.as it is? He find the answers when you take the question seriously. The
:18:33. > :18:43.Scottish referendum has shown how strong the feeling is for default
:18:44. > :18:47.powers. -- devolved powers. We don't have too have everything sitting in
:18:48. > :18:51.Westminster the way we do now. There is a new generation growing up now
:18:52. > :18:58.where everything is devolved on media. They don't need a group of
:18:59. > :19:03.people in one place. We could think about this in a more radical way, if
:19:04. > :19:11.we wanted to. Lucy is right, most people don't care about it. They
:19:12. > :19:13.want to know, how am I and my city, are we going to have more say in the
:19:14. > :19:20.government. Thank you to my guests. So as we've been saying
:19:21. > :19:22.the main party leaders in Westminster have all been talking
:19:23. > :19:25.about the powers Scotland will get Well there'll be a lot
:19:26. > :19:31.of pressure for Parliament to be Normally at times
:19:32. > :19:33.of great national importance MPs can be recalled to Westminster
:19:34. > :19:36.at 48 hours notice, but there's talk Our political correspondent,
:19:37. > :19:50.Carole Walker can tell us more. What are the options? If there is a
:19:51. > :19:56.yes vote, MPs across all parties will feel that such as the
:19:57. > :20:00.cataclysmic scale of the change we are confronting, it would be
:20:01. > :20:04.unthinkable for parliament not to be recalled. The fracture there would
:20:05. > :20:08.be on the economy, the pound, international relations, Andy Fenn
:20:09. > :20:18.'s and the future constitution of the country would be on such a
:20:19. > :20:24.scale, MPs would undoubtedly be recalled. -- defence. Downing Street
:20:25. > :20:28.are not contemplating a yes vote, not making contingency plans, so
:20:29. > :20:35.there are non-contingency plans at the moment but Holloman to be
:20:36. > :20:40.recalled. But in the past few weeks when there has been speculation
:20:41. > :20:47.about the recall of MPs to discuss Iraq and the possibility of Britain
:20:48. > :20:50.being involved in some form of military action, the whips are
:20:51. > :20:56.sending out e-mails to find out where MPs would be just in case
:20:57. > :21:00.parliament needed to be recalled. Quite a few MPs I have spoken to
:21:01. > :21:04.think Parliament should be recalled, even if Scottish voters voted to
:21:05. > :21:10.remain part of the United Kingdom. They feel it is already clear there
:21:11. > :21:15.will be significant changes underway and we saw the pledge from the three
:21:16. > :21:19.UK leaders today and that is something MPs should be recalled to
:21:20. > :21:24.discuss. It is complicated by the fact the Labour Party Conference is
:21:25. > :21:30.due to start at the weekend and many Labour MPs are expect to be there. I
:21:31. > :21:34.think that the moment, it is looking probably less likely but on Friday
:21:35. > :21:40.morning, I think there may be renewed calls for MPs to return to
:21:41. > :21:44.discuss the future of the country. It is uncharted territory.
:21:45. > :21:47.When it comes to the arts, whether it's writing, painting,
:21:48. > :21:49.or even comedy, it's often assumed that the majority of artists are
:21:50. > :21:53.And the few who clearly aren't - like the modern artists Gilbert
:21:54. > :21:56.and George or the author PJ O'Rourke - seem to be something
:21:57. > :22:13.If you paint a picture of the politics of art, the assumption is
:22:14. > :22:18.art is the preserve of the left. It is an assumption and I'm not sure
:22:19. > :22:24.how true it is. Art is greater than any ideology. Our response to it is
:22:25. > :22:31.personal and therefore infinite. Any attempt by politicians or parties of
:22:32. > :22:37.either side, to corral artists to their cause has historically been a
:22:38. > :22:41.catastrophe. The art establishment is dominated by left-wing thinking
:22:42. > :22:46.and left-wing expectations and there are people in the world who hold
:22:47. > :22:49.more libertarian views and field their own careers could be
:22:50. > :22:53.negatively affected if they were to come out. However, artists lobby all
:22:54. > :23:02.governments and it is often about funding. Even a leading campaigner
:23:03. > :23:07.admits money may be a personal driver of politics. If you judge a
:23:08. > :23:12.system by how well it supports the less it -- less fortunate you could
:23:13. > :23:16.be an artist through ideology or self-interest. You are more likely
:23:17. > :23:20.to have been poor, you have almost certainly signed on and you are more
:23:21. > :23:25.likely to give your support to the party who has supported you more. It
:23:26. > :23:32.is interesting that some people have come out of the system and continue
:23:33. > :23:37.to be left-wing. JK Rowling was a single parent and on benefits when
:23:38. > :23:46.she wrote her first book but she still supports benefits and rights.
:23:47. > :23:50.The trick the right think the left have conjured it those who potter
:23:51. > :23:55.about in a school of thought who think it is not about class but
:23:56. > :24:03.intersect -- intellectual class. Ballet receives subsidies but the
:24:04. > :24:10.audience are well off enough to buy tickets at full price. Then there is
:24:11. > :24:17.the more exclusively intellectual snobby art. There are things people
:24:18. > :24:21.don't like and not being popular and not being able to pay its own way is
:24:22. > :24:26.not assign it is great, maybe it is a sign it is rubbish and the general
:24:27. > :24:32.public will want to pay to go and see it because it is not very good.
:24:33. > :24:34.But there are left-wingers who think arts subsidy became funding and
:24:35. > :24:42.entertaining or the rich and glamorous. Left wing entertainers
:24:43. > :24:45.think it stops it being edgy. But it boils down as to whether you think
:24:46. > :24:50.art is essential to our social well-being. We're not just here to
:24:51. > :24:54.work our backsides off for 50 years and then died. There are other
:24:55. > :24:59.things to do in between and there are other things to do than shop.
:25:00. > :25:02.What else are we going to do? We have to make sure there are cheap
:25:03. > :25:05.and interesting things to do for youngsters to do if they have not
:25:06. > :25:10.got enough money to buy the things they are told they need to be happy.
:25:11. > :25:14.If I to choose between saving a life of paying for someone to create an
:25:15. > :25:21.optional piece of art which the public may or may not use choose to
:25:22. > :25:22.go to, I will pay to save a life. It is that argument that has coloured
:25:23. > :25:28.the politics of art for so long. Well to discuss this I'm joined
:25:29. > :25:32.by the House of Cards author and Conservative peer,
:25:33. > :25:42.Michael Dobbs, and of course Is there a left-wing bias or stream
:25:43. > :25:48.of thinking in the arts in your mind? I think it is a bit more
:25:49. > :25:52.complicated than that. Art is often has to make a point and the point
:25:53. > :25:58.you have got to make is about the establishment and the existing way
:25:59. > :26:04.of things. Dramatists, journalists as well as artists, tend to be - not
:26:05. > :26:08.so much left or right but antiestablishment. It is the easiest
:26:09. > :26:12.way to go. We have always accused the BBC of being left wing, but
:26:13. > :26:18.Harold Wilson used to accuse it of being right wing. Even Winston
:26:19. > :26:23.Churchill used to accuse the BBC are being left wing. But I think it was
:26:24. > :26:28.more antiestablishment than having a clear political agenda. Is there a
:26:29. > :26:34.feeling that a lot of comedy you hear is actually anti the right
:26:35. > :26:40.rather than antiestablishment? Does the left, in a way dominate the
:26:41. > :26:46.intellectual side of the arts? It has changed, everything changes.
:26:47. > :26:53.Vince Margaret Hatcher came to power we have had a more ideological
:26:54. > :26:57.ride. Margaret Thatcher. It is not just talking about left and right,
:26:58. > :27:02.it is talking about a way that Tory party has remade itself as a party
:27:03. > :27:05.and it has caused a lot of people in the arts to question those values.
:27:06. > :27:11.To look at social justice and inclusion. The arts are for
:27:12. > :27:16.everybody, not just for the elites, the educated and people who have
:27:17. > :27:22.time, money and leisure. Everybody is created in some way. To shut that
:27:23. > :27:28.are for the majority of people is wrong. That is why you get the sense
:27:29. > :27:36.amongst artists that we have to be on the left because we have to be on
:27:37. > :27:43.the side of inclusion. Margaret thatcher has been out of office for
:27:44. > :27:49.years and this debate was going on before her. She altered the way
:27:50. > :27:52.Britain is. What about on the left, surely the left can be criticised
:27:53. > :27:58.for some of the ideas put forward. Why don't people on the right come
:27:59. > :28:04.out and do that in the arts? On the left you want more government. You
:28:05. > :28:10.say we can achieve things for you. I almost call it a deceit almost that
:28:11. > :28:14.the government says it can do everything for you, left-wing
:28:15. > :28:19.government can do everything for you. The right wing says, actually
:28:20. > :28:29.the government cannot do all of this. Government says, we will let
:28:30. > :28:36.G4S do it. You cannot privatise all of life. There are anarchists,
:28:37. > :28:46.loners and misfits in the art world. When you have a big government, most
:28:47. > :28:51.of us work in very solitary ways. It is not because you suddenly see
:28:52. > :28:57.yourself as belonging to the left but you see yourself as a challenge
:28:58. > :29:00.to the status quo. What about the contradiction you could have
:29:01. > :29:04.left-wing ideas for example, being portrayed in theatre in Opera
:29:05. > :29:08.maybe, but the people who watch it are the people with money and the
:29:09. > :29:15.only ones who can afford the tickets. That is more true about
:29:16. > :29:21.opera than theatre. That is why we have more subsidised theatre. It is
:29:22. > :29:24.great people can go for ?10 and see things at the National which then
:29:25. > :29:29.gets transferred is and makes a tonne of money. But I would agree
:29:30. > :29:36.with you, I can afford a ticket. When I was younger I used to pay ?3
:29:37. > :29:40.and stand at the back of the gods. Let's talk about the money issue, it
:29:41. > :29:45.has an influence on the arts in terms of subsidy and who can afford
:29:46. > :29:51.to go and see some of the big West End shows and Opera? Art is wider
:29:52. > :29:55.than Opera. At the end of the day, government should not a supporting
:29:56. > :30:00.the arts to the extent it is the only way for it to survive. I am in
:30:01. > :30:04.favour of temporal tickets. You think everything at the National
:30:05. > :30:12.should be privately funded rush to mark not at all, it is not the point
:30:13. > :30:18.I made. Art should not exist if it is only capable of existing because
:30:19. > :30:22.of taxpayers money. It is OK to subsidise farming? This is a
:30:23. > :30:28.subsidised country, it is all about subsidy. That is where the
:30:29. > :30:37.difference is. The right wing of the argument is we should be doing with
:30:38. > :30:39.less subsidy. Not only did Margaret Thatcher pay for everything by
:30:40. > :30:45.selling it all off, it is all subsidy. Art and drama is not
:30:46. > :30:52.documentary. Are you saying this government is not subsidising.
:30:53. > :30:57.Listen to what I am saying. Are you saying this government is not
:30:58. > :30:58.subsidising? Are you saying this government does not subsidise rich
:30:59. > :31:09.farmers? Let's come back to the reason for
:31:10. > :31:13.the subsidy on the arts. Without a lot of subsidy, the Arts Council
:31:14. > :31:21.would say their subsidies have been cut. -- their grants have been cut.
:31:22. > :31:26.If you go back 200 years ago, the art we are looking at now is not the
:31:27. > :31:31.art of 200 years ago. It does not all take place in these glorious
:31:32. > :31:36.rich stucco fronted buildings. That is a small part of art. What
:31:37. > :31:41.Jeanette does, what I do, what other people do is art and we do not do
:31:42. > :31:58.that in these great big buildings. It is easy for writers and it has
:31:59. > :32:01.never been easier because you can self publish now. What we do is
:32:02. > :32:04.cheap. When you put on a show you are talking about money and that
:32:05. > :32:06.money has to come from somewhere. What you cannot have in theatre is
:32:07. > :32:09.innovation without cash behind it. We need cash. Looking at artists on
:32:10. > :32:15.the right, who'd you admire most? Is there someone that you do look at
:32:16. > :32:20.who is broadly from the right? I really like Tracey Emin's work and
:32:21. > :32:24.she has destabilised the way we think about art. She is a great
:32:25. > :32:29.thing in the art world but I cannot bear her political views. You have
:32:30. > :32:33.to make those distinctions. Right, we have to leave it there.
:32:34. > :32:36.Now - the eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that Andrew's been
:32:37. > :32:40.So far he hasn't sent so much as a postcard or the tin
:32:41. > :32:45.Instead he's been on the campaign trail with both sides ahead of
:32:46. > :33:06.First up, here he is out and about with the Yes campaign in Hamilton.
:33:07. > :33:11.Hamilton, a working-class town to the south-east of Glasgow. This used
:33:12. > :33:17.to be a place where they did not bother to count Labour votes, they
:33:18. > :33:20.just weighed them. In 1967, it was the scene of one of the most
:33:21. > :33:26.dramatic political upsets in political history. Willie Ewing came
:33:27. > :33:30.from nowhere to win a by-election for the Scottish Nationalists.
:33:31. > :33:35.Labour subsequently reclaimed the territory. This is the kind of place
:33:36. > :33:40.where the Nationalists have been doing well and Yes vote will be
:33:41. > :33:44.looking for a repeat of the spirit of 1967 because they need to do well
:33:45. > :33:48.in places like this if they are to win on Thursday.
:33:49. > :33:51.Towns like this, especially in the West of Scotland, have become the
:33:52. > :33:57.battle ground for the campaign. There are a lot of older voters,
:33:58. > :34:01.voters who used to vote Labour and are on modest incomes. There is a
:34:02. > :34:05.fair degree of social deprivation. The Yes campaign knows it needs to
:34:06. > :34:11.win a chunk of these categories if it is to win on Thursday. When I
:34:12. > :34:15.spoke Alex Salmond last weekend, he said the Yes campaign was making
:34:16. > :34:23.progress in every Democratic group except the over 60s. They were more
:34:24. > :34:27.wary of independence. He said he would concentrate on them. That is
:34:28. > :34:31.why Nicola Sturgeon is in an area like this because there are a lot of
:34:32. > :34:35.old people here. They were probably traditional Labour voters but the
:34:36. > :34:40.Yes people think their votes are now up for grabs. They used to just
:34:41. > :34:46.weighed the votes here, didn't they? They did. It is SNP we have been
:34:47. > :34:51.voting for in recent years. Labour are not better than the Tories when
:34:52. > :34:56.it comes to their politics. They are going to do away with bus passes and
:34:57. > :35:00.things which will affect pensioners. I am a unionist. I was in the
:35:01. > :35:05.forces, I swore allegiance to the Queen. I will not be swearing
:35:06. > :35:12.allegiance to help residential, whoever he is. This is not safe and
:35:13. > :35:19.pensions are not safe and it is getting through to people. Is it
:35:20. > :35:27.clear cut or will it be down to the wire? Down to the wire. The people
:35:28. > :35:32.you speak to are worried about the National Security in Scotland. The
:35:33. > :35:39.size of our army, different things. Pensions. That is a worry? That is
:35:40. > :35:43.why we came today. The Yes campaign knows it has to reassure older
:35:44. > :35:48.people about their pensions if it is to get their votes. Increasingly,
:35:49. > :35:51.the message I think is resonating with the older generation is when
:35:52. > :35:56.they know their pensions are safe, they want a very Yes to give the
:35:57. > :35:59.Next Generation better prospects in the future. I think that is why we
:36:00. > :36:08.will see more older people vote yes on Thursday. People think Labour
:36:09. > :36:14.voters will be more for the No camp and Nationalists are more for Yes.
:36:15. > :36:19.That is not how it is working. A lot of Nationalists will vote No, a lot
:36:20. > :36:24.of Labour voters will vote Yes. It seems one of the biggest deciding
:36:25. > :36:28.factors is levels of deprivation. The less of a stake you have on
:36:29. > :36:33.society, the more you are struggling, the more likely you are
:36:34. > :36:37.now to vote Yes. That is why another reason why Nicola Sturgeon is in
:36:38. > :36:41.Hamilton. And on tomorrow's show you can see
:36:42. > :36:43.Andrew out and about Joining us from Glasgow is
:36:44. > :36:47.Richard Walker, the editor of the Sunday Herald which has come out in
:36:48. > :36:51.favour of independence, and with me in the studio is the Daily Mail's
:36:52. > :36:56.Deputy Editor Tony Gallagher. Welcome to both of you.
:36:57. > :37:01.First of all, how much weight do newspaper editorials carry with
:37:02. > :37:07.their readers? I think the days of newspapers being able to sway large
:37:08. > :37:13.numbers of readers have gone, it is ever they existed. Nevertheless, I
:37:14. > :37:17.think newspapers are still important. When we made our
:37:18. > :37:20.declaration of favour of Yes, we got a huge groundswell of support which
:37:21. > :37:27.was very heartening and welcoming for us. I think clearly we put
:37:28. > :37:32.forward our arguments in favour of Yes and we hope some readers will
:37:33. > :37:35.take those on board. We are not telling readers we think Yes was the
:37:36. > :37:40.right answer and you should all follow what we say, our readers are
:37:41. > :37:45.way smart enough to decide that for themselves. Do you agree with that
:37:46. > :37:51.that they hold less power and sway these days? I think in the era of
:37:52. > :38:01.social media that is undoubtedly the case. Readers by newspapers in large
:38:02. > :38:05.part to reinforce their own views. They are very influential with
:38:06. > :38:08.political class. I think politicians of all stripes will look at
:38:09. > :38:12.newspaper editorials almost before they look at anything else to see if
:38:13. > :38:17.they are mentioned in dispatches. The idea they would sway large
:38:18. > :38:23.numbers of people is a myth. But you have come out in favour of the
:38:24. > :38:28.union. To some extent, are you preaching to the converted? We feel
:38:29. > :38:32.passionately that the union is a good thing and it should remain in
:38:33. > :38:37.place. It is the most beneficial union we think has existed through
:38:38. > :38:41.the modern age. We had a shared sense of national identity what
:38:42. > :38:45.Scots have achieved is truly remarkable and they have punched
:38:46. > :38:49.above their weight. The idea that we would be turning Scots friends,
:38:50. > :38:53.neighbours and relatives into foreigners is an anathema to us
:38:54. > :39:00.which is why we are fully behind the No vote and the union remaining in
:39:01. > :39:04.place. Richard, is it lonely being the only paper to come out in
:39:05. > :39:10.support of Alex Salmond? No, it is not lonely at all. We have a huge
:39:11. > :39:15.number of readers. It is strange in a media landscape there is only one
:39:16. > :39:19.newspaper in support of Yes. I think that's something about our democracy
:39:20. > :39:25.and one of the we wanted to state where we stood was there is a huge,
:39:26. > :39:29.at least 50% of the population support independence and there is no
:39:30. > :39:35.newspaper reflecting that view. I think that is not healthy. What you
:39:36. > :39:41.make of the fact that your sister paper, the Herald, has come out in
:39:42. > :39:47.favour of the No campaign. Newspapers will not criticise a
:39:48. > :39:52.newspaper for stating of you. Our proprietor holds us to say what we
:39:53. > :39:57.think is the best outcome. That is a healthy situation for newspapers to
:39:58. > :40:00.be in. The Herald and the Sunday Herald are different newspapers,
:40:01. > :40:05.they have different editors. We each came to our own conclusions and they
:40:06. > :40:09.are different conclusions. I think that is much healthier than having a
:40:10. > :40:16.proprietor which is telling us to do one thing or have to do the same
:40:17. > :40:20.thing. I think that would be an untenable situation for me as an
:40:21. > :40:26.editor. The Daily Mail has been accused of printing one view on the
:40:27. > :40:30.front cover of the English edition and a contrary front page in the
:40:31. > :40:37.Scottish edition. Do you think that works? They do have different
:40:38. > :40:42.readers. Culturally the idea that we should be presenting a uniform paper
:40:43. > :40:46.would be a mistake, just as the BBC provides a different service north
:40:47. > :40:50.of the border to its viewers. I think the Daily Mail quite rightly
:40:51. > :40:53.should be providing a different menu for readers who have different
:40:54. > :40:59.cultural and political interests. You do not think it is treating
:41:00. > :41:03.readers like fools for doing that? Not at all. The idea that we should
:41:04. > :41:08.be providing one newspaper the whole of Great Britain would be a mistake.
:41:09. > :41:12.Scottish people have many different interests, cultural, sporting and
:41:13. > :41:15.political interests. The idea they should be force-fed huge amounts of
:41:16. > :41:19.Westminster politics when Holyrood is important to them would be a
:41:20. > :41:24.mistake. As much as anything, it would be the road to commercial
:41:25. > :41:29.ruin. People want newspapers which are relevant to them. That has been
:41:30. > :41:35.a lot of speculation about what the Scottish Sun will do. Will they join
:41:36. > :41:38.the yes camp, does it matter? I think it would be great if the
:41:39. > :41:43.Scottish Sun came out in favour of it. It would be clearly two
:41:44. > :41:53.newspapers supporting Yes rather than just one is fairer, it even is
:41:54. > :41:56.the right. Do you think the spectacle of London based papers
:41:57. > :42:04.coming out in favour of Better Together could harm the campaign? I
:42:05. > :42:07.do not. I think what is harming the campaign is the spectacle of
:42:08. > :42:10.politicians panicking and charging north of the border having woken up
:42:11. > :42:15.to the idea that they might be losing in the last couple of weeks.
:42:16. > :42:20.I think it has been rather un-edifying. It has smacked of
:42:21. > :42:24.complacency. When they open their mouths, the tendency to resort to
:42:25. > :42:27.bullying and hectoring the Scots has been a catastrophe. The idea that
:42:28. > :42:36.Scotland would not be capable of ruling on its own as an insult and
:42:37. > :42:38.extremely patronising. But equally, the idea that we should be shouting
:42:39. > :42:41.at Scots the entire time without highlighting benefits of the unit --
:42:42. > :42:49.union would be a mistake. Newspapers, Jeanette, could you be
:42:50. > :42:56.persuaded? I could be persuaded. I am a Guardian reader, what do you
:42:57. > :43:00.expect? Surprise, surprise! I read the Daily Telegraph sometimes and
:43:01. > :43:04.also the Daily Mail as well. We do not need on a law, we need a
:43:05. > :43:09.dialogue, that is what newspapers can offer. You need people who can
:43:10. > :43:13.put across a point of view to allow you to change our mind. I think we
:43:14. > :43:16.need to be more optimistic. If a newspaper has a strong belief, a
:43:17. > :43:21.strong opinion, then why not put it across. I want someone to argue with
:43:22. > :43:25.me. As long as it is not the karate chop syntax of fake headlines to
:43:26. > :43:32.sell the paper, let's have a proper debate. The idea we should not have
:43:33. > :43:36.proper opinions is a mistake. The idea that newspaper editorials can
:43:37. > :43:41.change your mind is overstated and as much a newspaper myth as reality.
:43:42. > :43:44.Gentlemen, thank you very much. Enjoy the last few days.
:43:45. > :43:54.The women that I knew who raised me calm and thoughtful?
:43:55. > :43:59.The women that I knew who raised me and millions of people like me, who
:44:00. > :44:05.ran our factories and our businesses, put out the fires when
:44:06. > :44:15.the bombs trot, they would not have recognised their definition of
:44:16. > :44:18.womanliness as being incorporated in an iconic model of Margaret
:44:19. > :44:28.Thatcher, two rebuke to the first Prime Minister deputed by female
:44:29. > :44:35.gender, OK, but a woman, not on my terms. The big thing is UKIP and
:44:36. > :44:40.Nigel Farage. Come over here, the Romanians and Bulgarians are putting
:44:41. > :44:45.everything at risk. I think he looks like someone has put their finger at
:44:46. > :44:51.his bottom. Are you allowed to say that? It is too late! He can
:44:52. > :44:56.embarrass and self, he can disgrace his party but what is intolerable is
:44:57. > :45:09.he has cynically raised the hopes of hundreds and thousands... Miserable
:45:10. > :45:14.pipsqueak of a man! Order, order, before we go any further, I must ask
:45:15. > :45:20.the honourable gentleman to withdraw the term he used. I think I heard
:45:21. > :45:32.the term pipsqueak. The honourable gentleman must withdraw that term.
:45:33. > :45:44.You say the public switch off at political slanging matches? If you
:45:45. > :45:50.look at PMQs, it is the only bit of the debate people tune into. It is
:45:51. > :46:00.the only way to test parliamentarian's metal. Everything
:46:01. > :46:04.is so manufactured. The one time we get to see what politicians are like
:46:05. > :46:10.is when they go to and Neil at each other. To avoid that it would leave
:46:11. > :46:17.us with these endless drones of dieticians who are boring and dull.
:46:18. > :46:25.-- politicians. We see them in their most natural state when they are
:46:26. > :46:27.aggressive. Isn't that true? People want characters, personalities,
:46:28. > :46:34.mavericks and people to speak their mind. The way Harry outlined it, it
:46:35. > :46:39.is stage-managed, why do we have more of the argy-bargy? It is a
:46:40. > :46:44.little bit stage-managed. I think you are right about the spin and
:46:45. > :46:47.stage management. And stage management. And we think it is just
:46:48. > :46:52.a performance and we cannot get behind to the truth. I am just not
:46:53. > :46:56.sure we really need to have the slanging matches and are getting
:46:57. > :47:03.down and dirty when we're watching people have a debate. I have got an
:47:04. > :47:06.issue because I do think there is a gender problem, because a lot of
:47:07. > :47:14.women are not attracted by that and not very good at it. You are good at
:47:15. > :47:23.it. Harriet Harman is not a shrinking violet. She is going at it
:47:24. > :47:28.like the rest of them. The transport minister, the defence minister, they
:47:29. > :47:34.are powerful women. I resent the fact people will say, shouting isn't
:47:35. > :47:43.for women. We have this model as if it is almost, what we are seeing is
:47:44. > :47:48.this is how politics is being done which is a male preserve and if we
:47:49. > :47:51.put a woman in their she has got to behave like one of the boys. We say
:47:52. > :47:56.she has got balls. We use these terms. If the model of a politician
:47:57. > :48:04.is a male combative model, maybe women want to do things differently.
:48:05. > :48:07.I think they do. Isn't there a line between passionate debate and
:48:08. > :48:14.personal slanging matches? Sometimes the debate does get reduced to a
:48:15. > :48:16.slanging match which does not show the intellectual power of
:48:17. > :48:26.politicians. There are lines we cannot cross, it has to be around
:48:27. > :48:30.the issue at hand. A good parliamentarian is the one who has
:48:31. > :48:35.the skills to remain on the right side of the rules. I think people
:48:36. > :48:38.should care I get angry, it does matter. I would like to see
:48:39. > :48:46.politicians going out more with their constituents and having to
:48:47. > :48:52.but... A bit like the Scottish campaign, out on the streets. Jim
:48:53. > :48:57.Murphy, a Labour hard man saying they threw eggs at me and called me
:48:58. > :49:00.names. Alastair Darling when he was confronted by the TV debate
:49:01. > :49:13.audience, he said it was an Axa double. Nigel Farage said he did not
:49:14. > :49:18.like it out in the field. Nigel Farage deserves what he gets. If
:49:19. > :49:22.they are to be strong and tough, do they have to withstand that thing?
:49:23. > :49:28.It comes with the territory. You have to expect some people will not
:49:29. > :49:32.like you and freedom of speech is not just for politicians it is for
:49:33. > :49:36.people to vent their anger to politicians. There is a line and
:49:37. > :49:40.when it becomes physical intimidation, it is an issue. The
:49:41. > :49:45.idea politicians are not the most popular people in the world is
:49:46. > :49:52.absurd. They should wake up and realise this anger is out there. We
:49:53. > :49:56.are saying get on the streets and you will feel the anger coming back
:49:57. > :49:59.at you. It is the level of debate in Westminster which distracts from the
:50:00. > :50:07.important questions the public are trying to grasp. Serious things.
:50:08. > :50:16.Party political point scoring? Yes. I agree, we are about to enter into
:50:17. > :50:20.a general election campaign full of tedium. The reason we are going to
:50:21. > :50:27.be able to test politicians are when things go wrong and get nasty. When
:50:28. > :50:31.they make mistakes. The point I was trying to make is, we should be
:50:32. > :50:34.celebrating these mistakes and celebrate the rawness of politics
:50:35. > :50:40.because that is when we see the truth. Does it turn voters off, do
:50:41. > :50:46.you feel people just think, it is not for me? I think this shouting
:50:47. > :50:50.turns people off, but if we got politicians out onto the streets and
:50:51. > :50:56.have them participating in a democracy rather than sit down
:50:57. > :50:59.democracy, this is what we were talking about at the beginning.
:51:00. > :51:06.Politicians are often insulated from the views of the public. Let's see
:51:07. > :51:10.what happens in Scotland before we can decide whether the negativity of
:51:11. > :51:17.raw politics turns people off. It has been a passionate campaign. This
:51:18. > :51:18.is such an important issue and the Scots are on it, unlike the wimpy
:51:19. > :51:22.English. Let's leave it there. And now back to the Scottish
:51:23. > :51:24.independence referendum. According to reports this morning
:51:25. > :51:27.the unionists have been outgunned by independence supporters
:51:28. > :51:30.in the final days of the campaign when it comes to billboards,
:51:31. > :51:32.leaflets and knocking on doors. But just how important has
:51:33. > :51:34.advertising been over Well if you're watching in Scotland
:51:35. > :51:42.you can hardly have missed them, but for the rest of our viewers here's a
:51:43. > :52:08.taste of what you've been missing. I am going to be born on the 18th of
:52:09. > :52:13.September 2014. The very same day as the referendum on independence for
:52:14. > :52:21.Scotland. Have you made a decision yet? I was like, it is too early to
:52:22. > :52:25.be discussing politics. Independence, it is what we want in
:52:26. > :52:31.our lives so why should our country be independent. We don't want to be
:52:32. > :52:42.a separate nation, we want to be a better nation. You know what? I have
:52:43. > :52:50.made up my mind. I am going to do what is best for Scotland. So, that
:52:51. > :52:56.will be known from me. When the 18th of September arrives and I arrived,
:52:57. > :53:02.please vote yes for Scotland, for yourself and for your children's
:53:03. > :53:12.future. Right, I have heard that one before. Watching that was Chris
:53:13. > :53:16.Fairhurst from an advertising agency and Gordon Young who is an editor.
:53:17. > :53:25.Gordon, what makes a good elliptical advert? Something that can sum up
:53:26. > :53:34.the proposition neatly and put it forward in a clean and single-minded
:53:35. > :53:38.way. Do people agonise, we have seen advertising agencies going over
:53:39. > :53:45.slogans and headlines? People do agonise. People in the public would
:53:46. > :53:51.be amazed how long people spend coming up with 32nd television
:53:52. > :53:55.adverts. What effect do you think adverts and the leaflets have had on
:53:56. > :54:04.this independence referendum campaign? I think the adverts,
:54:05. > :54:09.posters and TV commercials, my suspicion is not very much at all. I
:54:10. > :54:20.inked the marketing that probably hasn't had a lot -- has had a lot
:54:21. > :54:23.more effect, the more 121 advertising. Partly because of the
:54:24. > :54:27.nature of the campaign but also because of the advertising that has
:54:28. > :54:35.been done is not very good. Do you agree? People pay a lot for
:54:36. > :54:39.advertising. In America, they think it works to a great extent. But do
:54:40. > :54:45.you agree it has not had a great impact? Relative to what political
:54:46. > :54:50.advertising looks like, the Yes campaign has look good. The Better
:54:51. > :54:58.Together campaign has look poor. Why is that? It has been a bit
:54:59. > :55:03.disjointed. Is it Better Together, let's stick together, is it no
:55:04. > :55:08.thanks? They have come out with all sorts of different colours and
:55:09. > :55:14.oppositions. The Yes campaign has been more consistent and
:55:15. > :55:17.professional. Is it easier because it has been clearer than having
:55:18. > :55:24.three other parties joining with slightly different messages? I am
:55:25. > :55:30.certain it is part of it. I think also, the Yes campaign has been more
:55:31. > :55:38.coherent because the advertising tends to be an emotional medium and
:55:39. > :55:41.I think the Yes campaign's idea has been an emotional idea. Where as the
:55:42. > :55:48.No campaign have attempted to communicate through rational fact.
:55:49. > :55:54.What they have learned is it does not do the job of persuading people,
:55:55. > :55:56.you need to do both. How would you choose who would represent your yes
:55:57. > :56:03.or No campaign? Who would you have going back, who would trusted and
:56:04. > :56:08.credible? The big opportunity for the Yes campaign is it is a positive
:56:09. > :56:14.proposition from the start. They have had the commercial where they
:56:15. > :56:17.featured a baby who was born on referendum day and trying to work
:56:18. > :56:22.out what would happen over the lifetime of that child. Selling hope
:56:23. > :56:28.which is tied up with a new baby. The No campaign have been negative
:56:29. > :56:33.with the proposition of the woman. They had a woman who said she is too
:56:34. > :56:38.busy for politics because she is too busy serving her family serial. It
:56:39. > :56:43.is not so much the individuals, it is what they are saying that is
:56:44. > :56:48.important. Do you agree with the mother in the campaign because it
:56:49. > :56:54.has been criticised. I do agree with that. Not going to appeal to the
:56:55. > :57:00.family and women voters? Particularly these days, people are
:57:01. > :57:08.very sophisticated in terms of how they understand advertising. I would
:57:09. > :57:12.lay this criticism to both camps. Simply putting the person in the ad
:57:13. > :57:17.you want to talk to and said this is a person of your age, sex or
:57:18. > :57:24.whatever, and said this message is for you. People see through that and
:57:25. > :57:31.want more these days. Do you think it is worth spending those sums of
:57:32. > :57:36.money on these campaigns? It is high risk, but when you get it right. In
:57:37. > :57:40.the case are Better Together, probably best to do nothing at all.
:57:41. > :57:47.Their strategy has not converted a lot of no voters to yes. So when you
:57:48. > :57:51.get it wrong it can go badly wrong. What do you think is most important,
:57:52. > :57:58.leaflets through the door, as opposed to TV adverts? Leaflets
:57:59. > :58:02.through the door, it has been the physical passion that has fired up
:58:03. > :58:09.the Scots. Both campaigns have been a bit wishy-washy. If you are not in
:58:10. > :58:15.the United Kingdom, these adverts look exactly alike and they just
:58:16. > :58:18.took the captions off them and you could not tell the difference. But
:58:19. > :58:22.on the ground, people can feel the heat. Thank you both very much.
:58:23. > :58:25.There's just time before we go to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:26. > :58:48.Which is the odd one out. I hope it is Nick Clegg. If not, let it beat
:58:49. > :58:51.John Major, which is it? It is Nick Clegg.