02/02/2012 Newsnight Scotland

wave of violence. Conspiracy theorists would say that is exactly

Tonight a Newsnight Scotland: But toxic two on tour. The prospect of

Lord Forsyth and Lord Foulkes planning to join forces for a

Unionist roadshow has delighted nationalists. We will hear from one

of the noble Lord's about this outbreak of consensus. And after

several weeks of referendum wrangling, who is in the lead? We

will assess the latest polls. Could this be the Unionist dream

team? It emerged during the Scotland Bill debate that two

former ministers, are considering joining forces to convince Scots of

the benefits of the Union. How many people are to be convinced by a

self confessed toxic two remains to be seen.

Time seems to move a little bit more slowly in the Lords. But that

doesn't necessarily mean that nothing ever changes. The Scotland

Bill, after clause 14, Lord Foulkes. For a moment, it looked like a new

political force was emerging, uniting Lord Foulkes with the

Conservative Lord Michael Forsyth, the former Scottish secretary.

Would the toxic two hit the road? Maybe yes, maybe no. I think he and

I need to be careful. I think we will be appearing in the blogs as

an example of an unholy alliance. I suggested that we should form a

road show, and go around Scotland extolling the virtues of the Union.

The pair Rossouw in June that they both tabled similar amendments on

the Scotland Bill over the impact of tuition fees on students from

the rest of the UK. -- the pair are so in tune. Quite separately,

without any collusion. The reason I am saying this is because this off-

the-cuff comment following our recent discussions about the

roadshow, the toxic two, it has been picked up north of the border

and is already causing some interest. It was all getting a bit

heady. So Lord Forsyth 40 had to put a bit of a brake on. Just to

make sure that people realise that the noble Lord and I only agree on

some things, I might respectfully remind him that it was the Labour

government that introduced tuition fees. Meanwhile, it emerged that

Lord Foulkes is branching out on his own, calling for a double

referendum to determine Scotland's constitutional future. He has

tabled another amendment, posing two separate votes, the first on

independence. If that was defeated, a second of further devolution. It

has all been happening in the Lords today.

I am joined by Lord Foulkes and the SNP's Linda Fabiani, who chairs the

Hollywood Scotland Bill committee. The obvious question is if this

toxic two tour goes ahead, are there then used in Scotland which

would be big enough to host it? are jumping the gun. It was a

suggestion that Michael Forsyth made, as he said, off the cuff. I

think a much more important discussion is whether or not we

have one or two referendums. That is what I have been dealing with. I

have been putting down an amendment because there has been so much

debate about whether there should be one or two questions. You have

just left the entire nation down! Are you saying you are not going to

go around on a bus tour? Nothing has been agreed. I am involved in

the campaign, campaigning for the union. I'm glad to have enter a

debate with Linda Fabiani. I can't think of anyone nicer to have a

debate would. But it's important not to talk about that, an off-the-

cuff remark by Michael Forsyth. I think it's better to talk about the

substance. What I understood when I was invited by your producer to

come on was to talk about whether or not we have one referendum with

two questions or, as I am suggesting, two referendums. It is

far more logical to make a decision first about whether or not Scotland

is going to remain part of the United Kingdom. Only once that

decision is made can you follow it up. If we are in favour of

independence, there was no need for a further referendum. If

independence is rejected, we move on and decide what kind of

devolution we have. That can only be decided once we have made a

decision about independence or not. Right, what is wrong with that idea,

and Linda Fabiani? Isn't that fairly sensible? We have another

Labour and Tory coalition up ahead, I see. Maybe not, he doesn't want

Of it was your SNP government for the last four years that was held

at, proper up by Annabel Goldie. -- propped up. Give Linda a chance to

have a say. What I was going to say is that we have a consultation out

so that everybody in Scotland can respond to that consultation about

how the referendum should be run. I think there should be respectful

that. I think people are engaged with it. If George wants to respond

to that, he should. I don't think it is it appropriate for folks

sitting in an unelected table -- chamber to try to tell Scotland how

we go ahead with a referendum. Don't be so coy, are you telling us

that you don't have any views on his proposal for a second

referendum because you are having a consultation? Well, it will be

considered along with lots of different views. I'm more

interested in the views of people of Scotland. We have

representatives of Civic Scotland Committee gather, to talk about the

potential of a second question. There is a lot to beat -- be

discussed. I think that is absolutely fair. The Westminster

government has a consultation out as well. I'm going to resist asking

you whether you have already made the T-shirts for the tour and ask

you a question you cannot complain is not substantial. Isn't there an

issue about the question about devo-max, whatever you want to call

it, that in the case of independence it is Scottish people

having a vote, self-determination, whatever they decide they go and do.

If they are voting on devolution plus, that affect the rest of the

United Kingdom. In the 1990s, the British government agreed what

devolution would be, everybody agreed and they put it to the

people of Scotland. I don't see how the idea of a second referendum

gets around that, that it is not really up to the people of Scotland

is sake they want this bit or that bit? I think that is a valid point.

Can I say to Linda that I will be submitting views to the Scottish

government and the Westminster government. Meanwhile, the House of

Lords is part of our constitution until we are reformed or abolished.

It is legitimate to debate this. I can understand your question.

Scotland needs to make a decision, first of all, about whether or not

we want to remain part of the United Kingdom. If we do, then we

move on to considering what kind of devolution, what level of

devolution we should have. Sub of gruel all suggesting, as you have,

-- some people are suggesting, as you have, that it is a matter for

the United Kingdom. I think the evidence shows it is a matter for

Scotland, principally. Not everybody in the Labour Party has

signed up to this and we can all discuss it. Other people will want

the status quo. Some people might want Calman or Calman plus. But you

cannot take the two decisions together. You can't make a decision

about the level of devolution until we decide whether or not we want to

be part of the United Kingdom. Linda Fabiani, the point I am

getting at, and it has implications for the SNP as well, you still seem

to harbour reservations about having a second question on the one

referendum paper. But devo-max or whatever you are going to call it

has to be more than an idea. If you say to people, do we want more tax-

raising powers in Scotland, a lot of people would say yes. Do you

want the welfare system in Britain to be broken up and the stabilising

effect it has on the economy, a lot of people might say they are not

sure. You have to specify precisely what you're asking. What you're

asking on independence is absolutely clear. What you are

proposing to ask people on devo-max is unclear. Our policy is very

clear, we believe in independence. So you did not want a second

question any more? We have never said we want a second question. It

has been quite clear. We would like a single question on independence.

But we have to show respect to those in Scotland who have said

they would like that option. I am really glad that Lord Foulkes has

said that about autonomy. That is something that the Scotland Bill

committee took forward in the report to the UK government. We

have not had it in response, saying that we have not had a response on

what we agreed cross-party. If that is what Lord Foulkes says should go

forward, have a look at the committee report. We are still

waiting for the committee's report to be considered by the Scottish

parliament. It has not been considered yet. Can I say, if you

have the vote, the referendum, and two questions on the same ballot

paper, the same day, supposing independence gets 50% and devo-max,

the other option, get 70%, which trumps the other? Which wins?

Nobody has come up with a solution to that conundrum. That is why I am

saying that these should be separate. Baisha beat 35 days apart,

six months the craft, whatever we think is appropriate. Whatever the

amendment, it is to enable that to be discussed. I hope that not just

in the House of Lords, not just on Newsnight Scotland, but throughout

the whole of Scotland, these options will be properly discussed.

We will discuss the rest of the news in a moment. Derek Bateman has

been looking at the political landscape.

It was a week for cutting down to size. Fred Goodwin lost his knight

would -- like wood. There were problems with people who do not cut

their hedges. For Fred Goodwin, it was off with his head. It neatly

diverted attention from others in the banking scandal. To some, the

bankers should be jailed and going suddenly, someone else to think the

bankers should be jailed came out of prison this week. This fight is

far from over and this story has not yet finished. Tommy Sheridan's

campaign for his reputation and independents. The good news for Mr

Salmon is a single question - yes or no? There was uncertainty

whether there would be a campaign for a second question. They might

need to put it to a referendum. Into the mix Ken the first of two

ets. Tax the bankers bonuses and give or Mary employees extra pay.

They are second a right three days later when Ed Balls displayed Alex

Salmond's capacity for food-related photo opportunities. John Swinney

is tonight entertaining members of the David Hume society. The very

thought will have people squirming in their seats. The Lords are

leaping over the constitution with Lord Foulkes demanding a second

question and a second referendum. As Hume at might have said, only

the unelected would think that would please the senses. There was

no escaping the spectre of Mr Fred. Yesterday, the First Minister said

he would have done things did they leave. Is he prepared to apologise

to be people up Scotland for a serious error of judgment? I do not

think Fred Goodwin is the strength of the Labour Party. It was my

predecessor who recommended him for an night would and it was Gordon-

Brown as Prime Minister who appointed him as one of his

economic advisers. And as the political retreat to a close, a

poll confirmed the SNP leader, that shocked scientists who rushed to

put the findings under the microscope. And Eric was - Alex

Salmond's popularity has fallen by 13 %.

I am joined now by Professor John Curtice of Strathclyde University.

We have had quite a few polls on independence over the last few

weeks. Everyone is trying to claim the trend is in their direction.

What is the truth? The truth is there is no discernible trend. We

have had to set of polls. One was in immediate wake of the UK

government's intervention into the referendum last month. 10 days

after that we had a whole swathe of polls. One of them showed a small

increase for independence. If you do look at the average though,

there is no evidence, despite the SNP's expectations that Mr

Cameron's intervention had any impact. Nothing really has changed.

The second set palls of people beginning to examine what the

response is to Mr Salmond's question. A number of people might

be arguing that it is biased in the SNP's favour. It looks as though

when people are asked that question, at the level of support for

independence is about 4% higher. It wasn't the question on the ballot

paper, so perhaps Mr Salmond's? Give him an advantage. Now today we

have seen Lord Ashcroft published a poll in which he has asked three

separate questions, basically three different samples by the same

pollster. One of which is the SNP's proposed question which gets 41 %

support for independence. A second question which keeps the bones of

the SNP question but also says do you agree or disagree that Scotland

should be an independent country? It polled at 39 %. There's a third

question which is the kind of question that some say should be

asked - should Scotland say the same or leave the United Kingdom?

That polled at 33 %. There is evidence that Mr Salmond's question

looks like the one that people are more likely to respond to. A lot of

people are saying, paid for by Lord Ashdown. There was a serious survey

there. Lord Ashcroft. You yes, Surrey. -- yes. The evidence that

is published is there for everyone to see. So they might be a

difference depending on the question, but it is an important.

Macro you made, although we are debating it, many people aren't

paying much attention. As a pollster, I would never ask Mr

Salmond's question as worded on a poll. Given we are going to have a

referendum campaign that will go one for nearly three years, at

their end of that, the detailed wording of the question will not

make anything like the same difference in terms of the way

people will be polled. That said, there is evidence building up that

maybe this is the type of question Mr Salmond would like to have on

the ballot paper. Their SNP, in polling about who you think should

run the Scottish government seems to be doing well, but that does not

seem to have any effect on polling on independence. We should Bobby

surprise. Last year, the growing momentum in support for the SNP

showed there was no change in terms of the question of independence.

Thank you. A quick look at That is all we have time for.

Another cold and frosty start tomorrow morning. Some snow showers

across the East. For the vast majority vote it will be a sunny,

but bitterly cold winter's day. Fine conditions across northern

England. Temperatures were just about creep above freezing. For

most of the day it will be sunny. In the south-west it may feel a

little less cold. Fine for Wales and most of Northern Ireland.

Scotland will be dry and fine and sunny, but cold. There will be some

wet weather coming in on Saturday. As it arrives, it could bring a

little bit of snow. Some uncertainty about where the snow

will fall and how much there will be, but as the wet weather bumps