:00:12. > :00:15.expensive VAT cuts. OK thank you On Newsnight Scotland: In today's
:00:15. > :00:18.Neil Lennon case, the assault charge against this man was found
:00:18. > :00:25.not proven. Celtic say they find the acquittal difficult to
:00:26. > :00:29.comprehend. We ask a leading QC, what he makes of the verdict.
:00:29. > :00:31.And, ANOTHER twist in the tram saga, as we ask the leader of Edinburgh
:00:31. > :00:39.City Council under what circumstances she would consider
:00:39. > :00:42.resigning. Good Evening. Today, the case
:00:42. > :00:45.against a Hearts fan accused of carrying out a sectarian attack on
:00:45. > :00:49.the Celtic manager, Neil Lennon, during a football match was found
:00:49. > :00:52.not proven. Instead, John Wilson was found guilty of breach of the
:00:52. > :00:55.peace by running onto the pitch at Tynecastle last May where thousands
:00:55. > :01:02.of football fans witnessed Wilson shouting and swearing at the Celtic
:01:02. > :01:05.manager. Celtic football club said this evening they find the
:01:05. > :01:11.acquittal of the charge of assault difficult to comprehend. Reevel
:01:11. > :01:15.Alderson has this report. The mid week match at Tynecastle
:01:15. > :01:20.was highly charged, Celtic needed to win to maintain their challenge
:01:20. > :01:25.for the league title. Outside there was evidence of tension between
:01:25. > :01:33.rival fans. Inside, BBC reporters heard sectarian chanting from both
:01:33. > :01:37.sides. This was from the Hearts' fans.
:01:37. > :01:41.Then, with Celtic having scored their second goal, John Wilson was
:01:41. > :01:45.seen clearly leaping the barrier on to the pitch and running towards
:01:45. > :01:49.Neil Lennon. In court, Wilson admitted to lunging at Lennon in
:01:49. > :01:54.front of 16,000 fans. He admitted breach of the peace, but denied
:01:54. > :01:59.using the words Fenian bastard which would have meant the offences
:01:59. > :02:03.were sectarian and aggravation which would have carried a more
:02:03. > :02:07.severe sentence. The jury took the sectarian element out of the breach
:02:07. > :02:11.of the peace charge. But they acquitted Wilson completely on the
:02:11. > :02:21.charge of assault which they had witnessed on video, a verdict which
:02:21. > :02:22.
:02:22. > :02:28.has baffled senior lawyers. With me is the QC Paul McBride.
:02:28. > :02:30.What do you make of the verdict? It's inexplicable. This was a well
:02:30. > :02:33.presented prosecution case, he was seen live on television assaulting
:02:33. > :02:38.Neil Lennon. He admitted in evidence lunging towards him, he
:02:38. > :02:41.wrote Neil Lennon a letter of apology and his own counsel
:02:41. > :02:45.accepted the issue was whether he used inappropriate language.
:02:45. > :02:51.Against that background of all of that the they acquit him of the
:02:51. > :02:54.assault he admitted. The verdict is utterly inexplicable. I haven't met
:02:54. > :02:57.a single lawyer or lay person tonight who could understand this
:02:57. > :03:00.verdict. You must have when you have been in court had verdicts you
:03:00. > :03:05.didn't expect? Yeah, all the time. And that is the function of a jury
:03:05. > :03:09.and that's why we respect what jurors do. I have never heard of a
:03:09. > :03:12.case where an accused person has admitted a crime, the jury is told
:03:12. > :03:17.by his own counsel he accepts that part of the charge but the jury
:03:17. > :03:22.still let him off. It's quite baffling tonight and I think it's
:03:22. > :03:27.cast a long shadow on the Scottish legal system this evening. Do you
:03:27. > :03:30.think it is that significant, presumably because very few people
:03:30. > :03:34.have interactions with the court and this is high profile and people
:03:34. > :03:37.will be surprised by the jury verdict, do you think this actually
:03:37. > :03:41.could do damage to court reputation? It does some damage,
:03:41. > :03:45.it's also more troubling than that. The Lord Advocate has put a huge
:03:45. > :03:49.amount of effort in to tackling sectarian crime. This Government
:03:49. > :03:53.has put a huge amount of of effort into tackling sectarian crime,
:03:53. > :03:58.First Minister doing their very best. Verdicts like this undermine
:03:58. > :04:02.it and that's why all the political parties have to get together and
:04:02. > :04:08.support the SNP in their quest to put this kind of activity to bed.
:04:08. > :04:10.Was the fact that a sectarian element was part of both charges he
:04:10. > :04:14.faced, do you think that muddied the waters and was
:04:14. > :04:17.counterproductive or is that not the case? Absolutely not. It's jury
:04:17. > :04:20.decide whether the sectarian element remains or not. If it
:04:20. > :04:23.doesn't remain, they delete it. What they should have done if
:04:23. > :04:27.they're not satisfied in the sectarian element is return a
:04:27. > :04:31.verdict of guilty of assault under deleagues of those words, it's
:04:31. > :04:34.perfectly simple. Briefly, does this again open up the question
:04:34. > :04:39.about whether or not we should be able to talk to jurors about why
:04:39. > :04:42.they make the choices they make? Yes there is an issue about that.
:04:42. > :04:46.We have juries who don't have to read, write and count and may be
:04:46. > :04:50.full of prejudices, unlike other countries, we may have to revisit
:04:50. > :04:53.this area again. Thank you very much.
:04:53. > :04:59.Edinburgh Councillors meet again on Friday for another chance to decide
:04:59. > :05:01.the future of the city's tram line. A week ago, thanks to the absention
:05:02. > :05:04.of SNP members of the ruling coaltion, councillors voted for a
:05:05. > :05:11.truncated route ending at Haymarket, but today the SNP group had a
:05:11. > :05:18.rethink and will now back its Lib Dem partners. David Allison reports
:05:19. > :05:22.how this conversion on the route to St Andrews Square came about.
:05:22. > :05:25.Absurd, not the words of an overzealous hack, rather the
:05:25. > :05:28.considered view of the Finance Secretary John Swinney. The
:05:28. > :05:32.Government was finally spurred into action after Edinburgh council
:05:32. > :05:36.voted to finish the tram line at Haymarket, rather than bring it
:05:36. > :05:39.along Scotland's most famous street into the city centre. With the
:05:39. > :05:43.project changed from what it been agreed the Scottish Government
:05:43. > :05:47.threatened to stop the flow of money with the cancellation of the
:05:47. > :05:51.last �72 million instalment of a total allocation of �500 million.
:05:51. > :05:55.The move brought a dose of reality into a situation which was already
:05:55. > :06:00.the subject of plenty of jokes on the Edinburgh Fringe, even before
:06:00. > :06:04.the heady events of last Thursday. We believe the Haymarket option can
:06:04. > :06:08.be negotiated with the contractor and we give that the officials to
:06:08. > :06:13.get on with that and get that contract sorted out and before the
:06:13. > :06:16.end of August. It's a devastating decision for the city and I don't
:06:16. > :06:22.think either people willfully misunderstood the information they
:06:22. > :06:26.were given or they genuinely did not understand the repercussions.
:06:26. > :06:36.For a Government which prides itself on getting procurement right
:06:36. > :06:37.
:06:37. > :06:43.such as the M74 and M80, the fiasco was a serious embarrassment. The
:06:43. > :06:47.Finance Secretary was all too aware that the council's ruling Lib Dem
:06:47. > :06:51.SNP coalition lost Thursday's vote because the SNP group abstained.
:06:51. > :06:57.The SNP councillors have maintained a principled and consistent
:06:57. > :07:01.opposition to the tram's project in the city of Edinburgh and what the
:07:01. > :07:04.city, SNP council group decides to do in relation to this project is a
:07:04. > :07:08.matter properly for them. I would say to all counselors in the city
:07:08. > :07:12.is that I tkoeplt think anybody could look at the events of the
:07:12. > :07:15.last few days to see an absurd decision that was taken by
:07:15. > :07:18.Edinburgh City Council last Thursday, an absurd decision.
:07:18. > :07:22.decision which would have meant special effects videos showing
:07:22. > :07:27.trams on Prince' Street would be as close as we would ever get to the
:07:27. > :07:31.real thing. The message from on high appears to have got through to
:07:31. > :07:35.the SNP group leader. Nobody expected anybody in their right
:07:35. > :07:39.mind would vote for a tram line to go from the airport and terminate
:07:39. > :07:42.short of the city centre at Haymarket. That That took everybody
:07:42. > :07:45.by surprise apart from those in the Labour group and Conservative group
:07:45. > :07:49.who voted in that fashion. That's why we can in the allow this to
:07:49. > :07:52.happen again. We can't run the risk these two groups will join forces
:07:52. > :07:56.on Friday and reaffirm their original decision which defies
:07:56. > :08:00.description. No longer will they refuse to take a view either way
:08:00. > :08:03.and they've promised a vote with the Lib Dems to reinstate the St
:08:03. > :08:09.Andrews square option. In the meantime, the trams are going
:08:09. > :08:15.nowhere. Before we came on air I spoke to
:08:15. > :08:19.the leader of the Edinburgh City Council, the Liberal Democrat Jenny
:08:19. > :08:27.Dawe and asked her to clarify the costs of tonight. The costs of
:08:27. > :08:34.going to St Andrews Square are �776 million, we had �545 million
:08:34. > :08:39.originally, so that gives us a gap of �231 million. I know these sound
:08:39. > :08:44.horrendous sums, but against the option of termination where you get
:08:44. > :08:48.nothing and would have had an immediate impact of �161 in our
:08:48. > :08:52.revenue budget and Haymarket which was never going to be a line that
:08:52. > :08:57.is profit-making, in that context that's a price that's been arrived
:08:57. > :09:01.at. It's been negotiated very hard with the consortium. There will
:09:01. > :09:07.still be ongoing work with the consortium to see if there are bits
:09:07. > :09:11.of that that can be negotiated down further, but at the moment that is
:09:11. > :09:15.the price that we have. That's �15 million a year in interest
:09:15. > :09:21.payments? That's right, yes. And we have looked at how we can meet
:09:21. > :09:26.those interest payments and there are means within our current
:09:26. > :09:31.budgets, there's a host of ways that we can meet it that don't mean
:09:31. > :09:36.doing anything particularly new right now, but it does leave us
:09:36. > :09:39.with about a 4.8 million revenue funding gap which we are looking at
:09:39. > :09:45.potential borrowing as the means of covering that, though that doesn't
:09:45. > :09:49.rule out other options. So, if at this stage you are saying these are
:09:49. > :09:52.definitive figures on costings which may actually come down,
:09:52. > :09:58.that's your opinion as you look to what could happen in this project,
:09:58. > :10:02.can we look at some of the actual facts which might change that
:10:02. > :10:07.financial picture. Are Lothian buses obliged to pay the subsidy
:10:07. > :10:11.that you factored in here? That has been discussed with Lothian buses
:10:11. > :10:16.and I know there has been much said about Lothian buses not knowing
:10:16. > :10:20.what's going on and the rest of it. There have been discussions with
:10:20. > :10:29.them about this. It's perfectly possible that figure will be
:10:29. > :10:34.negotiated, but at the moment we do have a - we have factored in a cost
:10:34. > :10:42.that would put upon Lothian buses... That cost is what? The figure as
:10:42. > :10:47.far as I can recall was about �2.5 million. Possibly �2.7 million
:10:47. > :10:51.factored in for that. If we look at what the contingency fund is for
:10:51. > :10:58.the utilities disruption when you open up Prince' Street and
:10:58. > :11:02.particularly when you go into Shandwick Place, what sort of
:11:02. > :11:06.funding do you have in contingency for that? The risks has been moving
:11:06. > :11:13.as there has been more intrusive work done, particularly on that
:11:13. > :11:16.part of the route you mention. There have been more intrusive sort
:11:17. > :11:22.of bore holes and looking at potential, what they're calling
:11:22. > :11:29.conflicts with the route. So we are more certain than we were, but that
:11:29. > :11:33.is - that's an area that is always subject to potential movement in
:11:33. > :11:38.the price, because it's very, very difficult to quantify exactly
:11:38. > :11:42.what's underneath a road until you actually get there. But do you see
:11:42. > :11:45.the problem for people listening to this interview? Earlier on you said
:11:45. > :11:50.these are definitive figures, and this is what we pay in interest.
:11:50. > :11:54.Now you are conceding that actually once you start getting into areas
:11:54. > :11:58.about contingency funds for utility costs, a fund I understand which is
:11:58. > :12:02.already below the normal 10% in these projects, you are already
:12:02. > :12:05.conceding that you could again be into multimillion pound questions,
:12:05. > :12:09.you don't have the answers to at this stage? When you asked what the
:12:09. > :12:12.costs were, those are the costs as at this moment. In this sort of
:12:12. > :12:15.project there are always going to be potentially what people refer to
:12:15. > :12:22.as unknown unknowns, things that we actually don't know are going to
:12:22. > :12:27.happen. But every effort has been made to produce figures for us that
:12:27. > :12:32.have been looked at by external organisations and have been
:12:32. > :12:37.ratified by them, our officers have been working very hard with our
:12:37. > :12:40.solicitors and our finance people to try to make sure that as far as
:12:40. > :12:45.possible we have as definitive figures as we can, but the figures
:12:45. > :12:50.that we have in the report are what we have to go by. There's a whole
:12:50. > :12:54.swathe of background papers to that, most of which I have looked at in
:12:54. > :13:04.some detail and I am satisfied that everything has been done at this
:13:04. > :13:06.stage to minimise the possibility of increased costs. I can't say
:13:06. > :13:16.definitively there will not be a different figure once things have
:13:16. > :13:16.
:13:16. > :13:20.been worked on. It could go down as 50 you actually expect a cost to go
:13:20. > :13:26.down rather than up, or do you have to concede that there are costs
:13:26. > :13:29.coming much you have not factored in? No, I do not think there are
:13:29. > :13:34.multi-million-pound costs. I think at this stage nobody can be certain
:13:34. > :13:38.about these things. And as you will know from the past there had been
:13:38. > :13:42.figures we got were definitive that turned out not to be. At this stage,
:13:42. > :13:46.because of the better relationship we have with the consortium, and
:13:46. > :13:50.with the excellent team of people we have working within the council
:13:50. > :13:55.and outside the council, I am more confident that the figures we have
:13:55. > :13:59.been given are at this moment the best possible figures we can get.
:13:59. > :14:03.Do you accept that people listening to this would not share your
:14:03. > :14:07.confidence? And actually, their scepticism would be backed by the
:14:07. > :14:12.evidence of what has happened. Why should anybody have any confidence
:14:12. > :14:16.in what you were saying this evening? For I have confidence in
:14:16. > :14:21.the officers that had reduced the figures, in the external us past
:14:21. > :14:25.organisations that have ratified them. That is all I can say, I have
:14:25. > :14:30.looked at those figures very closely, I have heard how they had
:14:30. > :14:34.been arrived at, and I have as much confidence as I possibly can in
:14:34. > :14:40.that. Obviously, people have heard different figures quoted over the
:14:40. > :14:44.months and years. And I can understand that they might be
:14:44. > :14:49.dubious as to what certainty there is. I am not saying they are
:14:49. > :14:53.absolutely certain, but I am saying that at this moment in time, I
:14:53. > :14:58.respect the figures I have been given as being the result of many
:14:58. > :15:02.hours, weeks and months of very hard work. And that our team has
:15:02. > :15:10.been negotiating very hard with the consortium to pare down the costs
:15:10. > :15:14.wherever possible. In 2007, of when you became the council leader, it
:15:14. > :15:20.was said this project was signed. Since then, it has gone off the
:15:20. > :15:26.rails. Do you think you are a popular figure in Edinburgh,
:15:27. > :15:31.enjoying the confidence of local people? I have done what I felt has
:15:31. > :15:37.been the right thing to do. I have taken action on this, brought about
:15:37. > :15:43.the mediation towards the end of last year. I had acted in good
:15:43. > :15:49.faith and that is all I can do. it is not all you can do. It is
:15:49. > :15:53.clearly not all you can do. If you feel that local people have lost
:15:53. > :15:57.confidence in what you have done, they had been misled and are
:15:57. > :16:01.exasperated that public money has been wasted too ludicrous degree,
:16:01. > :16:05.then obviously you have an option where you can say, I was in charge
:16:05. > :16:11.of this, whether it is my fault or not the decent thing for me to do
:16:11. > :16:14.would be to step down. Have you considered that? Quite the opposite.
:16:14. > :16:19.Particularly since they Haymarket decision was made last Thursday. I
:16:19. > :16:22.have had an enormous amount of public support that we should
:16:22. > :16:32.pursue a beer and try to get this thing to the St Andrews Square
:16:32. > :16:32.
:16:32. > :16:37.option. I and my group has kept the integrity of our decisions to go to
:16:37. > :16:41.St Andrews Square. And I had done, to the best of my ability, what I
:16:41. > :16:46.can to ensure we have a team of people who had been working hard to
:16:46. > :16:50.now get those prices down as far as possible, to negotiate hard with
:16:50. > :16:55.the consortium, build up a new relationship with the consortium.
:16:55. > :17:01.And given that the choice before us now is termination or Haymarket or
:17:01. > :17:05.St Andrews Square, so I had no doubt and I would say that 95 % of
:17:05. > :17:08.my mailbag and the people that I meet in the street has been that we
:17:08. > :17:14.should go to St Andrews Square. They think that is the right thing
:17:14. > :17:21.we do and they are disappointed it did not happen last Friday. And I
:17:21. > :17:28.very much hope that this Friday, that decision will be reversed and
:17:28. > :17:31.it will be back to taking a tram project is to St Andrews Square.
:17:31. > :17:36.But it is project does not go to the Budget you have outlined and
:17:36. > :17:40.the timescale you have outlined, do you think it is then incumbent on
:17:41. > :17:45.you to reconsider your a position? If that is an entirely different
:17:45. > :17:49.situation you are now describing. I have put my faith in the figures we
:17:49. > :17:54.have been given. I respect the organisations and the individuals
:17:54. > :17:59.who have given us those figures. I believe the consortium has a new
:17:59. > :18:04.relationship with us, it's and I certainly hope that we now have a
:18:04. > :18:08.proper way forward. Obviously, if it all falls to pieces and suddenly
:18:08. > :18:12.everything doubles in price, and nobody wants to go out and do that
:18:12. > :18:17.work, if the relationship with the consortium breaks down, then
:18:17. > :18:22.obviously, I would be considering what my role might have been in
:18:22. > :18:27.that. But at the moment, I think I have done all it is possible.
:18:27. > :18:32.Anything is a possibility in this world, that is not what I expect
:18:32. > :18:39.happen. I expect the consortium to do as they have said, and work in
:18:39. > :18:43.partnership with last to deliver the trams, to give us the
:18:43. > :18:49.integrated, modern public transport system this city needs for
:18:49. > :18:54.environmental and economic reasons. Thank you very much.
:18:54. > :19:00.Just time for a quick look at tomorrow's papers. The Scotsman is
:19:00. > :19:04.leading with the story we lead with tonight, not an assault, jury's
:19:04. > :19:11.decision to clear fan off assault on Lennon. That is all for me. At
:19:11. > :19:20.any good night to you. -- a very any good night to you. -- a very
:19:20. > :19:24.Most of us will have another try day on Thursday, and another fairly
:19:24. > :19:28.cloudy day. Southern Counties of England and Wales should have some
:19:28. > :19:38.September sunshine. And by the afternoon it will feel quite
:19:38. > :19:38.
:19:38. > :19:41.warning that some. Elsewhere, it will be cloudy. This other counties
:19:41. > :19:45.of England should brighten up, there should be some good spells of
:19:45. > :19:49.sunshine and in that sum it will feel quite warm. A bit of a breeze
:19:49. > :19:56.picking up over the South West, but elsewhere it will feel very
:19:56. > :20:00.pleasant. Temperatures easily going up to 21. Pretty grey tea in
:20:00. > :20:05.Northern island, but here, every now then, we may get breaks in the
:20:05. > :20:09.cloud and a think -- hint of sunshine. Some rain over the
:20:09. > :20:16.Western Isles late in the day. The North East or South -- Scotland may
:20:16. > :20:22.see some rain. But overall, cloudy but dry. The rain will spread more
:20:22. > :20:25.widely across parts of the north on Friday. Meanwhile, in the South,
:20:25. > :20:34.most of England and Wales should be even warmer on Friday. Temperatures