13/03/2012 Newsnight Scotland


13/03/2012

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 13/03/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

On Newsnight Scotland, a former First Minister enters the debate

:00:15.:00:20.

over the independence referendum. Jack McConnell calls for the vote

:00:20.:00:22.

to be held within 18 months to avoid uncertainty and disagreements

:00:22.:00:27.

hampering economic recovery. And how will planned changes to the

:00:27.:00:30.

UK's welfare system affect families in Scotland? A charity issues a

:00:30.:00:35.

dire warning over increasing poverty levels.

:00:35.:00:41.

Good evening. Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale, that's former

:00:41.:00:43.

Labour First Minister Jack McConnell to you, has published his

:00:43.:00:50.

submission to the consultations on the referendum. In it he calls for

:00:50.:00:53.

the vote to take place in the next 18 months and outlines his views on

:00:53.:01:01.

the wording of the question. To Jack McConnell has been a strong

:01:01.:01:06.

supporter of devolution since his days in Scottish Labour Action in

:01:06.:01:09.

the 1980s so it is little surprise he has chosen to weigh in on this

:01:09.:01:10.

debate. In his submission to the

:01:10.:01:13.

consultations, he said that both the UK and Scottish governments

:01:13.:01:17.

should be willing to compromise in order to get a fair and decisive

:01:17.:01:21.

result. On timing, he says, the referendum should take place within

:01:21.:01:25.

the next 18 months at a date to be agreed by both governments. He

:01:25.:01:29.

believes that, the rules for the campaign and for voting should be

:01:29.:01:34.

set out by the Electoral Commission. He says, he is sympathetic on the

:01:34.:01:39.

case for voting at 16 but, it would be wrong to experiment with a

:01:39.:01:43.

different franchise for this most important of votes. He says there

:01:43.:01:47.

should be only one question on the ballot paper. The voters should be

:01:47.:01:56.

asked to choose between us to take -- two statements: I agree that

:01:56.:01:59.

Scotland should become an independent country or that it

:01:59.:02:01.

should remain part of United Kingdom.

:02:01.:02:10.

Lord McConnell joins me now from Westminster. Why is having a

:02:10.:02:13.

referendum by next year anyway in the national interest? I'm trying

:02:14.:02:20.

to deal with the reality of the situation. Those who were of, those

:02:20.:02:23.

Scots who have been pressurising the Prime Minister to intervene

:02:23.:02:26.

have been calling for an immediate referendum. The Scottish government

:02:27.:02:33.

wants to have won the late 2014, it seems to me that what we need to

:02:33.:02:37.

have here is compromise on both sides and coming together to agree

:02:37.:02:42.

a date that is somewhere in the middle of that. I think... There is

:02:42.:02:46.

no reason for saying it is in the muscle in front -- national

:02:46.:02:50.

interest, you just want to split the difference. A it's in the

:02:50.:02:54.

national interest to get a clear outcome as quickly as possible. A

:02:54.:02:59.

recognised through decision has to reflect the views of those in power

:02:59.:03:03.

and therefore, and suggesting that rather than going in one direction

:03:03.:03:08.

or the other, we try to reach an agreement that will see a speedy

:03:08.:03:11.

conclusion but one that is much too fast for the Scottish government.

:03:11.:03:19.

You say you want a compromise, so that the referendum is put on a

:03:19.:03:25.

legal basis through section 30 mechanism. What if that doesn't

:03:25.:03:28.

happen and the Scottish parliament holds a referendum off its own

:03:29.:03:32.

back? What do think the implications of that could be?

:03:32.:03:36.

I take you back to the core element of my submission, which I think

:03:36.:03:43.

justifies that position? That is, this is a vital decision for the

:03:43.:03:48.

future of Scotland. This is about our constitutional future inside or

:03:48.:03:52.

outside the UK. That decision first of all needs to be clear cut but

:03:52.:03:56.

secondly it needs to be a decision that those who are on the losing

:03:56.:04:00.

side can accept. Therefore, we need to make sure that the decision

:04:00.:04:03.

itself is binding on everybody afterwards and for that reason, it

:04:03.:04:08.

has to has a leave -- have a legal basis. Secondly, it has to be based

:04:08.:04:13.

on a clear-cut choice with rules that are perceived to be fair by

:04:13.:04:16.

all so that when the outcome is finally achieved, and the people of

:04:16.:04:21.

Scotland have their decision... This has been a long time coming

:04:21.:04:24.

but they will have it. They will have their decision on this matter

:04:24.:04:28.

and everybody must be able to accept the result and move forward.

:04:28.:04:31.

Coming back to my question, your concern would be that should this

:04:31.:04:37.

go ahead without first section 30 order, the problem would be that

:04:37.:04:40.

not everyone would think it is illegitimate affair that could lead

:04:40.:04:44.

to more wrangles later on. A there could be legal questions about that

:04:44.:04:48.

before and afterwards. I don't think that is the way to go ahead.

:04:48.:04:52.

But the UK government is willing to make some compromise and devolve

:04:52.:04:56.

the legal authority here, and I think the Scottish government

:04:56.:04:59.

should be able to accept that a legal authority. I think that is a

:04:59.:05:02.

good thing for everyone concerned. What is also important is that both

:05:02.:05:07.

sides seek to work in a consensual basis in all the arrangements

:05:07.:05:10.

around that and don't seek to impose in one direction or the

:05:10.:05:14.

other Ferrand used for party advantage. Why are you so against

:05:14.:05:20.

having another question? What I am in favour of is a clear choice. I

:05:20.:05:24.

despair at the way the debate has been conducted over the last two

:05:24.:05:28.

months. We've seen on the one hand a knee-jerk reaction to the

:05:28.:05:31.

intervention of the Prime Minister but then also a knee-jerk reaction

:05:31.:05:34.

by the other side to the First Minister's proposals. What I have

:05:34.:05:39.

tried to do is rather than oppose the First Minister's suggestion for

:05:39.:05:42.

the wording of the question, has proposed that we in fact use

:05:42.:05:45.

something that is identical to all very similar to the wording he

:05:45.:05:50.

wants, which is Scotland should become an independent country. But

:05:50.:05:54.

them match that with a similar statement that says Scotland should

:05:54.:05:58.

remain in the United Kingdom. That gives people a clear choice between

:05:58.:06:01.

two options. It moves us away from that debate that has been taking

:06:01.:06:05.

place about who gets to be the yes on the ballot paper and he gets to

:06:05.:06:09.

be on the know. There is no place for that in this debate. We'd be

:06:09.:06:13.

clear choice between the two options. When I said an extra

:06:13.:06:17.

question I meant this proposal that there should be a question on more

:06:17.:06:22.

devolution. That something that the opinion polls show most trouble

:06:22.:06:26.

actually want. I got that, Gordon, you are trying to talk about

:06:26.:06:29.

something that wasn't a core part of the submission and I was trying

:06:29.:06:34.

to concentrate on a key proposal that nobody else is suggesting. I'm

:06:34.:06:38.

glad I've had a chance to explain that because I think so bad

:06:38.:06:43.

appraisal... For Alex Salmond, that the core issue. Let me answer. As

:06:43.:06:46.

far as I'm concerned, the question I have suggested, the choice

:06:46.:06:50.

between those statements, hasn't been suggested by anybody else.

:06:50.:06:53.

It's a compromise but Betty -- better than anybody else's

:06:53.:06:56.

suggestion and I hope it will be taken seriously by both sides in

:06:56.:07:00.

the debate. I think that choice them makes very clear that we

:07:00.:07:02.

should and muddy the waters by having a debate about something

:07:02.:07:06.

else as well. All of the parties are quite able to have a debate

:07:06.:07:09.

about the current levels of more powers for the Scottish Parliament

:07:09.:07:15.

over the next few years and from time to time but that choice and...

:07:15.:07:19.

That is not a core choice in this debate. This is a once-in-a-

:07:19.:07:23.

lifetime, once and for all decision about whether or not Scott and his

:07:23.:07:26.

inside or outside the UK. Am happy to have that debate and accept the

:07:26.:07:32.

outcome. -- I'm happy. If surely this is an opportunity for you and

:07:32.:07:38.

people like queued to make different options part of the

:07:38.:07:44.

debate. -- people like you. You are a former First Minister of Scotland

:07:44.:07:49.

and you are the late... That misses the point. You are the latest

:07:49.:07:54.

person telling people that they cannot vote for what they want.

:07:54.:07:59.

That is not the case and you are missing the point. This is not a

:07:59.:08:02.

multi- option choice between a whole variety of different

:08:02.:08:07.

possibilities. It could be full Stock this is about two different

:08:07.:08:12.

sets of government, different forms of government. It is not about the

:08:12.:08:14.

number of powers the public -- Scottish parliament has, it's about

:08:14.:08:18.

whether or not Scotland should be governed as an independent country

:08:18.:08:22.

or whether it should be governed as part of the United Kingdom. Thus a

:08:22.:08:28.

very fundamental constitutional choice. -- that is. I think the SNP

:08:28.:08:32.

should welcome that clear choice. I think those on the other side

:08:32.:08:37.

should start to welcome but clear choice. I think if we get a fair

:08:37.:08:40.

organisation of a referendum, a fair statement and questions on the

:08:40.:08:45.

ballot paper and a mad, everybody can accept, then whatever that

:08:45.:08:49.

outcome is, Scott and can try to move forward. At the moment, we got

:08:50.:08:54.

a serious problem on our hands. Unemployment has gone above the

:08:54.:08:58.

rest of the UK and we have growth below the rest. Until we resolve

:08:58.:09:01.

this issue, we are not going to see the level of investment in Scotland

:09:01.:09:11.
:09:11.:09:19.

we need in order to take 5th So you would compromise a proposal?

:09:19.:09:24.

You're not compromising at fault. Alex Salmond has not said that is

:09:24.:09:32.

his preference. I have not ruled out... You are ruling out. I have

:09:32.:09:36.

asked the other side in this debate to except Alex Salmond's wording in

:09:36.:09:40.

this debate, but I am asking Alex Salmond to consider that there

:09:40.:09:44.

needs to be a different choice of word in for the other questions. I

:09:44.:09:49.

think that is a reasonable proposal. This will give people in Scotland a

:09:49.:09:56.

clear choice between those two systems. Thank you very much.

:09:56.:10:01.

The UK Government's reform of welfare and loss -- is being

:10:01.:10:04.

discussed. The Government says it will be fair and encourage people

:10:04.:10:13.

back to work. Charity says it will make people poorer. Julie Peacock

:10:13.:10:19.

reports. Life is busy for Tracey. She is a

:10:19.:10:23.

single mum who juggles looking after her young son with a part-

:10:23.:10:28.

time job. Children's tax credits and benefits help balance the books,

:10:28.:10:33.

but the proposed well-filled reforms are were in her. I am

:10:33.:10:38.

petrified. We do not know exactly what is going to happen. Although

:10:38.:10:43.

they agree with it the uniformity of that process inside of the new

:10:43.:10:48.

benefits, I do not agreed that even though they say we are going to be

:10:48.:10:53.

better off, my personal belief is that eventually they will start to

:10:53.:10:57.

-- start chipping away and to we're given that the minimum or nothing

:10:57.:11:02.

at all. Do you think it occurred just you to go back to the work

:11:02.:11:09.

this? No. -- encourages you to go back to the workplace. Know. I

:11:09.:11:16.

would need their -- I would have to give up my job altogether and live

:11:16.:11:20.

in that the benefits system again, of which I am loath to do but given

:11:20.:11:24.

the choice between studying for an extra two were �3 a week or being

:11:24.:11:31.

an at home mum it is not a hard decision. How discerned maybe

:11:31.:11:35.

justified. Save the Children's says some families will be worse off

:11:35.:11:41.

under the new scheme. A single parent with a child under five

:11:41.:11:47.

could be �65 a week worse off after welfare reform. The chat -- the

:11:47.:11:50.

Department of work and pensions says the charity has been

:11:51.:11:56.

disingenuous. It says that many single parents will be better off

:11:56.:12:01.

under the new scheme. At today's welfare committee in Holyrood, QC

:12:01.:12:07.

and to realise that version of events. The big picture here is an

:12:07.:12:12.

increase in poverty which wind the clock back to the date when thus

:12:12.:12:19.

far it -- this Parliament began. If nothing else changed, that is the

:12:19.:12:24.

track that we are all on as a result of welfare reform. A our

:12:24.:12:27.

main concern is that the extraordinary impact on levels of

:12:27.:12:31.

child poverty that are being forecast as a result of these

:12:31.:12:37.

welfare reforms. If you look at the trends, we're looking at up to

:12:37.:12:41.

100,000 children more at living in poverty at the end of the decade.

:12:41.:12:46.

Sometimes we get blinded by these numbers, at the reality is that is

:12:46.:12:49.

tens of thousands of children who will be growing up in families

:12:49.:12:53.

without the resources to give them the best start in life. There were

:12:53.:12:58.

concerns that some of the reforms could it Scotland harder. The

:12:58.:13:02.

reforms are being sold as a way of getting more people back to work.

:13:02.:13:07.

Some charities argue that it could in fact to do the opposite, and

:13:07.:13:11.

that Scottish families will be hardest hit. That is because south

:13:11.:13:16.

of the border around 40% of tools qualify for free child care. That

:13:16.:13:24.

is not the case here in Scotland. 40% of two-year-olds. Alex Salmond

:13:24.:13:30.

has pledged to match England's childcare provision. But with

:13:30.:13:34.

welfare reforms due to come into force, it may not be quick enough

:13:34.:13:38.

for some families. Charities say more children could be pushed into

:13:38.:13:42.

poverty and it is a constant fear for parents who are already being

:13:42.:13:47.

squeezed. If we were to go back to having a lower income, I would be

:13:47.:13:52.

back to missing meals almost every day and my child will be going back

:13:52.:13:58.

to missing bills and not having clothes that fit him. -- missing

:13:58.:14:06.

meals. I cannot say no to buying a new clothes so why will fall back

:14:06.:14:11.

into debt. Welfare is a reserved matters so there is a limit to what

:14:11.:14:15.

Holyrood can do. But charities say the Scottish Government needs to

:14:15.:14:20.

act fast to soften the blow. A earlier, I spoke to Douglas

:14:20.:14:24.

Hamilton, -- head of Save the children in Scotland and asked him

:14:24.:14:29.

if this report did indeed cherry- pick figures as the Government can

:14:29.:14:34.

-- Government claims. The situation is going to be bad for many parents,

:14:34.:14:39.

particularly single working mothers. Universal credit as a concept has

:14:39.:14:45.

many redeeming features. It will simplified if system and help work

:14:45.:14:50.

pay for many families, but it has a significant blind-spot when it

:14:50.:14:55.

comes to certain family types, single mothers who work 16 hours a

:14:55.:15:02.

week and couple families will lose out. The Government says that for

:15:02.:15:06.

example to get you a figure of three and a have 1000 a year to

:15:06.:15:13.

work, you have to be a lone parent with three children under school

:15:13.:15:18.

age and use a child care for 40 hours a week and the currently

:15:18.:15:23.

claiming both tax credit and housing benefit. It may be that

:15:24.:15:27.

those people are very common, but the Government clearly is

:15:27.:15:31.

suggesting that they are not. Government is not suggesting that

:15:31.:15:36.

those figures are wrong. Yes there are some families that have three

:15:36.:15:41.

finger at -- have three children who will be �68 a week worse off. A

:15:41.:15:45.

single mother working full-time will shoot -- with two children

:15:45.:15:50.

will be worse off. But you seem to be suggesting that 100,000 people

:15:50.:15:57.

in Scotland alone would be in that situation. Is that the case? We are

:15:57.:16:00.

suggesting that 96,000 councils in Scotland are at risk of losing

:16:00.:16:04.

benefits and entitlements that they currently have, being worse off

:16:04.:16:09.

under the new system than they currently are. It is a very complex

:16:09.:16:12.

situations. People are genuinely worried and do not know how they

:16:12.:16:16.

are to be affected. But the impression that you are giving with

:16:16.:16:22.

the publicity for this report was that there are almost 100,000

:16:22.:16:25.

people in Scotland to could end up being several thousands of pounds

:16:25.:16:29.

worth a year worse off. And now you're saying that is not really

:16:29.:16:34.

the case. There may be some examples in extreme cases and up to

:16:34.:16:37.

100,000 people may be worse off, but perhaps just by a marginal

:16:37.:16:42.

amount. Some will be worse off depending on their fat -- depending

:16:42.:16:49.

on their family types. Households where to parents are working part-

:16:49.:16:54.

time could be nearly �2,000 -- �2,000 a year worse off. We have

:16:54.:16:59.

tried to present a range of family types and a range of impact. That

:16:59.:17:04.

goes against the Government was a call principle for the Universal

:17:04.:17:11.

credit system is. It is not going to be the case that every family

:17:11.:17:19.

will be better off. We are proposing changes to that system so

:17:19.:17:23.

that it does help everybody. You're research suggests that more people

:17:23.:17:28.

will be better off than worse off under the new system. Is your

:17:28.:17:32.

argument that is not the point? That everyone should be at the same

:17:32.:17:36.

level? I think our point is that particularly the poorest households

:17:36.:17:40.

should be better off under the new system and that is clearly not

:17:40.:17:44.

going to be the case. The Government's figures show that

:17:44.:17:48.

there are winners and losers in this. They say that 600,000 single

:17:48.:17:52.

parents will be better off, but there same report says that 500,000

:17:52.:17:58.

single parents will be worse off. 400,000 councils across the UK will

:17:58.:18:02.

be worse off by more than �50 a week. So the Government can say

:18:02.:18:05.

that there are going to be some families that will be better off

:18:05.:18:08.

and we acknowledge that and welcome those improvements, but we are

:18:08.:18:11.

saying we have to have a fair system. We have to make sure that

:18:11.:18:15.

it really helps the poorest households to get the income they

:18:15.:18:22.

needed to provide for their children. Thank you very much.

:18:22.:18:25.

A quick look at tomorrow's front pages.

:18:25.:18:31.

The Herald League's on Rangers. Craig Whyte duped us all for sale

:18:31.:18:37.

of Rangers. The Scotsman says hopes were high street revive fault are

:18:37.:18:42.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS