0:00:04 > 0:00:09
0:00:09 > 0:00:17we come to agreements we stick to them. On Newsnight Scotland, is the
0:00:17 > 0:00:22SNP ready to change the policy on membership to Scotland? Has the
0:00:22 > 0:00:26purpose of Nato changed in all recognition anyway. Scottish
0:00:26 > 0:00:29scientists create a machine which could create almost anything,
0:00:29 > 0:00:35including cures for diseases you don't even know you are going to
0:00:35 > 0:00:41get. Good evening. The evening saw reports that the SNP is on the
0:00:41 > 0:00:46verge of reversing policy so that an independent Scotland should be
0:00:46 > 0:00:50part of Nato. It is clear that any change in approach to Nato would
0:00:50 > 0:00:55not include an acceptance that missiles should be based on
0:00:55 > 0:00:59independent Scottish soil. David Alison wonders if this is just the
0:00:59 > 0:01:05latest SNP policy to undertake subtle changes ahead of the
0:01:05 > 0:01:11referendum. Don't be fooled, there is a lot going on under the surface.
0:01:11 > 0:01:14The SNP is something of a constantly moving target,
0:01:14 > 0:01:20apparently moving policies to soften its image and not frighten
0:01:20 > 0:01:30the horses. Sadly not the voters. For example, the SNP would now keep
0:01:30 > 0:01:30
0:01:30 > 0:01:37the Queen as head of state and the way once strident views, like that
0:01:37 > 0:01:43of Republican Rose, are now gone. I know it, you know it, the press
0:01:43 > 0:01:49know it. Republican know it, most of them think we are already a
0:01:49 > 0:01:53Republican Party. The end there is the pound. Where once the euro was
0:01:54 > 0:01:58Scotland's destiny, there has been a major rethink and now a newly
0:01:58 > 0:02:06independent Scotland would carry on using sterling, with interest rate
0:02:06 > 0:02:10set by the Bank of Scotland. Now there is a change in policy to do
0:02:10 > 0:02:17with membership in Nato, policy has always been against membership
0:02:17 > 0:02:22because of the policy from Nato on nuclear weapons. The most famous
0:02:22 > 0:02:26attack on the organisation from the SNP came from Alex Salmond in a
0:02:26 > 0:02:31party political broadcast in 1999, when he criticised Nato
0:02:31 > 0:02:34intervention in Kosovo. It was formed as an alliance against
0:02:35 > 0:02:39potential aggression from the Soviet Union. It achieved its
0:02:39 > 0:02:46purpose without firing a single shot, but now for the first time it
0:02:46 > 0:02:51is acting in an offensive way outside United Nations. It is an
0:02:51 > 0:02:59action of dubious legality and definitely one of folly. That
0:02:59 > 0:03:03action backfired and the party has looked to soften its stance. I have
0:03:03 > 0:03:06tea-party strengthens our co- operation with other countries of
0:03:06 > 0:03:15conventional defence by reiterating our determination to move nuclear
0:03:15 > 0:03:19weapons. Alec Salmond was supportive of action in Libya.
0:03:19 > 0:03:22Backing up the protection of civilians must be the case, those
0:03:22 > 0:03:27who have taken the atrocities against civilians must be held to
0:03:27 > 0:03:35account. From the bottom to the head of state. Any foreign policy
0:03:35 > 0:03:40change at Nato would have to be ratified in June. By coincidence,
0:03:40 > 0:03:451600 troops from the UK, Denmark, France, Canada, the USA and the
0:03:46 > 0:03:52Netherlands are taking part in a Nato exercise in Galloway and dumb
0:03:52 > 0:03:58phrase. It included troops from France. Back in 1966, General de
0:03:58 > 0:04:02Gaulle, visiting Moscow, withdrew from the command structure citing
0:04:02 > 0:04:06US dominance and all non- French Nato troops were asked to leave
0:04:06 > 0:04:09France. But France has remained a member of the alliance,
0:04:09 > 0:04:13demonstrating that flexibility is possible and an independent
0:04:13 > 0:04:21Scotland which asks for the removal of nuclear weapons on the Clyde
0:04:21 > 0:04:28could still be a part of the Nato family. In 1999, former Communists
0:04:28 > 0:04:36states, hungry, the Czech Republic, and Poland, now Slovenia, Lithuania,
0:04:36 > 0:04:41Slovakia, Romania and others have joined since 2004. After an anti-
0:04:41 > 0:04:45nuclear anti-Nato stance in 2004, the wilder side was changing fast.
0:04:45 > 0:04:49Now the party is having to play catch-up, and the shadow Scottish
0:04:49 > 0:04:54secretary insists that on all big issues the SNP is making the policy
0:04:54 > 0:05:01up as it goes along. There is no doubt that the strategy of trying
0:05:01 > 0:05:09to nuclear eyes difficult issues is designed to try and make life
0:05:09 > 0:05:19difficult for political banners to tie them down. -- nuclear rise. It
0:05:19 > 0:05:21
0:05:21 > 0:05:26all raises issues of what may be pitched between now and the
0:05:26 > 0:05:31independence vote. A I am now are joined by Mike guests, thank you
0:05:31 > 0:05:35for joining me. What is the point of Nato now? The point is to
0:05:35 > 0:05:40maintain peace in Europe and it has done that be on the end of the Cold
0:05:40 > 0:05:45War. The notion which the SNP suggest it was wrong, saying that
0:05:45 > 0:05:49Nato no longer had a purpose. It is false. There are frets that Nato
0:05:49 > 0:05:54can respond to. One is the very uncertain situation about what
0:05:54 > 0:06:00Russia is today. This is not a cold war, Russia will not come across
0:06:00 > 0:06:06the border. But it is unstable, is it a democracy or not? They are
0:06:06 > 0:06:12great territorial questions about Russia. Nato has a point. In what
0:06:12 > 0:06:17ways would Scotland be safe in Nato than without? Sky since primary
0:06:17 > 0:06:23concern is off the east coast, Nato provides you with a system to
0:06:24 > 0:06:29patrol that. The SNP's current policy, based on the Nato defence
0:06:29 > 0:06:33means that there are no Scottish naval ships which could reach those
0:06:33 > 0:06:39will fields in less than a day. It would take such a long time to get
0:06:39 > 0:06:44around. So Nato, if you stay in Nato, you provide some kind of
0:06:44 > 0:06:51integrated system. Presumably far wider interests are effective if
0:06:51 > 0:06:57the oil fields are attacked in any way. If that is a state attack, yes.
0:06:57 > 0:07:01But what if it is sabotage? The kind of thing which is not a state
0:07:02 > 0:07:09to state war. Nato should provide an ongoing system to show what
0:07:09 > 0:07:13crafts are at sea. The is there any other sort of alliance, if Scotland
0:07:13 > 0:07:20does not stay in Nato, they could stay in to replicate that level of
0:07:20 > 0:07:23Safe Guard? Why would the Nato countries make an exception to a
0:07:23 > 0:07:28small country like Scotland which is not being co-operative. You
0:07:28 > 0:07:32cannot dictate those terms. Countries like Denmark and Norway,
0:07:32 > 0:07:36the closest comparison to Scotland, have based it on a strong Nato
0:07:36 > 0:07:40relationship. They are not going to jeopardise their Nato relationship
0:07:40 > 0:07:45by giving Scotland a preferred position in that. In Norway in
0:07:45 > 0:07:50particular, it is so wedded to Nato because of the problems with Russia,
0:07:50 > 0:07:57they are not going to give a non- Nato Scotland any special treatment.
0:07:57 > 0:08:02Can you say that, yes, we want to be in Nato, but we don't want to
0:08:02 > 0:08:10have nuclear power, the nuclear subs. We don't want anything to do
0:08:11 > 0:08:16with nuclear power on Scottish soil. It is how you define the term "non-
0:08:16 > 0:08:23nuclear." they are only three countries, France, the United
0:08:23 > 0:08:26Kingdom and the US which openly have a nuclear-weapons. If you are
0:08:26 > 0:08:32not planning to maintain these weapons then you are talking about
0:08:32 > 0:08:38most of the Nato countries. But, talking about whether a country can
0:08:38 > 0:08:43have a nuclear weapon on a ship, if that is how you define it, then you
0:08:43 > 0:08:49would have trouble. It is that lot Denmark says? Have they not been
0:08:49 > 0:08:54able to secure that? So Scotland would have to negotiate. That is
0:08:54 > 0:08:57possible. The non-nuclear thing is not a deal breaker. What if America
0:08:57 > 0:09:03says we need some nuclear capability which must based in
0:09:03 > 0:09:09Scotland for some strategic reasons. We need some credibility on
0:09:09 > 0:09:14Scottish soil. Is that they no? I'd don't know if they would say that,
0:09:14 > 0:09:23but it may be that they talk about the war ships which visit Scotland.
0:09:23 > 0:09:30The United States might say "if you don't let us in we will use run-a-
0:09:30 > 0:09:37ball bases." it is very hard to see how the United States, or why the
0:09:37 > 0:09:43United States, would ask to base weapons in Scotland permanently.
0:09:43 > 0:09:47Scotland can negotiate an arrangement with the US. You broke
0:09:47 > 0:09:52the story yesterday, this has been something which we know was
0:09:52 > 0:10:00discussed at a certain level within the SNP for a long time, but a move
0:10:00 > 0:10:04up in gear now. Why? The referendum is on the horizon. If we accept it
0:10:04 > 0:10:12is 2014 as the timetable, that is only two years away and there is a
0:10:12 > 0:10:16lot of behind the scenes policy work going on on difficult issues.
0:10:16 > 0:10:20They believe be a perspective needs to be more fleshed out, so they
0:10:20 > 0:10:24know what they are talking about when the referendum campaign comes
0:10:24 > 0:10:28around. They will go into the campaign with issues like this
0:10:28 > 0:10:33dealt with and thought through, with research and analysis done
0:10:33 > 0:10:39upon them so they can anticipate attacks from their opponents. The
0:10:39 > 0:10:43campaign, the cross-party on none SNP body for the independence
0:10:43 > 0:10:47referendum, I understand will be launched shortly after the local
0:10:47 > 0:10:55elections. That coincides with is gearing up going on within the
0:10:55 > 0:11:01party. How divisive do you think it is within the party now? His is
0:11:01 > 0:11:05interesting. There is a sizable, vocal, not that focal at the moment,
0:11:05 > 0:11:15but a vocal minority within the SNP for whom the idea of Nato
0:11:15 > 0:11:15
0:11:15 > 0:11:25membership is an affable. It has been the policy for 30 years. We
0:11:25 > 0:11:33had, in 2009, Jamie Hepburn saying that Nato was a cause of
0:11:33 > 0:11:39instability. Then we had two government ministers suggesting
0:11:39 > 0:11:43they agreed. But academic research suggests a small majority would
0:11:43 > 0:11:47support a change, I spoke to a local branch chairman last week who
0:11:47 > 0:11:51said the party is in listening mode and if the leadership presents as
0:11:51 > 0:11:55something you need to do in order to win the independence referendum
0:11:55 > 0:12:00it will compromise things a lot. Follow in your report yesterday we
0:12:01 > 0:12:06reported that nuclear groups suggested that if the SNP are not
0:12:06 > 0:12:13unequivocal on this, they will lose votes on the left. Where do you
0:12:13 > 0:12:17think the average quoted it is on this? I'm not sure that they
0:12:17 > 0:12:21technicalities of these international issues enter into the
0:12:21 > 0:12:26everyday conversations. The economy was the major issue in the debate
0:12:26 > 0:12:30foremost, that is what gets people excited. Part of this politically
0:12:30 > 0:12:34is about continuity, about the SNP saying that independence is not
0:12:34 > 0:12:38that different from what you have now. When you wake up on
0:12:38 > 0:12:41independence day we will still be defended in this major airlines if
0:12:41 > 0:12:50we go in this direction. You will still have the Queen as a head of
0:12:50 > 0:12:55state. We are trying to win the one battle, they will think, they will
0:12:55 > 0:13:00put almost anything else to one side. The cabbie at his nuclear
0:13:00 > 0:13:07weapons. There is no willingness in the SNP, at a high-level or grass
0:13:07 > 0:13:17roots, to make any change on that. The membership need to be persuaded
0:13:17 > 0:13:21
0:13:21 > 0:13:25-- you can be in Nato without nuclear arms. The idea of an
0:13:25 > 0:13:32independent nuclear deterrent is part of the policy to which all of
0:13:32 > 0:13:37the three UK parties are signed up to. We know from the SNP spring
0:13:37 > 0:13:43conference that the wording was that Trident should be removed as
0:13:43 > 0:13:47soon as possible. This is a really important question and the SNP
0:13:47 > 0:13:51cannot dictate these terms. If you break up the United Kingdom, which
0:13:52 > 0:13:57is what independence would be, you would throw the rest of the United
0:13:57 > 0:14:02Kingdom, basically England, into a debate about the defence position.
0:14:02 > 0:14:07England might say we will no longer be a nuclear power. Britain only
0:14:07 > 0:14:10really keeps an hour to get the un Security Council veto. That would
0:14:10 > 0:14:15be called into question if the United Kingdom breaks up. The idea
0:14:15 > 0:14:25of England having it makes no sense. England could say fine, we keep
0:14:25 > 0:14:28
0:14:28 > 0:14:33Looking down the line, would cut the outcome be if there was an
0:14:33 > 0:14:38independent Scotland negotiated on a basis that there would not be
0:14:38 > 0:14:41Trident and the Government is not an SNP government? It is
0:14:41 > 0:14:45fascinating, I should clarify what I said about the Lib Dems and
0:14:45 > 0:14:51nuclear weapons, the Lib Dems are not comfortable with nuclear
0:14:51 > 0:14:55weapons, but it was part of the coalition deal. The SNP would see a
0:14:55 > 0:15:02two-stage process, the day when Scotland votes Yes in their world
0:15:02 > 0:15:05and eventually, independent state, and in this period, there would be
0:15:05 > 0:15:09negotiations not just with the UK government with London, but also
0:15:09 > 0:15:13with various international bodies that Scotland would aspire to be
0:15:13 > 0:15:22part of, the European Union, perhaps, potentially with NATO
0:15:22 > 0:15:25allies. If Scotland on Independence Day wakes up still in NATO and with
0:15:25 > 0:15:29an SNP government committed to withdraw and there is a change in
0:15:30 > 0:15:36government, then the question would be about it being timetabled. How
0:15:36 > 0:15:38quickly could the nuclear issue be dealt with? There are the
0:15:39 > 0:15:44practicalities of nuclear disarmament because a lot of the
0:15:44 > 0:15:48anti-nuclear campaigners are saying part of the objection because you
0:15:48 > 0:15:55are morally subscribing to nuclear- weapons, but technically speaking,
0:15:55 > 0:16:00how quickly can you do it? We have so little time, but looking at 2020
0:16:00 > 0:16:03when Trident runs out? If England wishes to keep them, they need to
0:16:03 > 0:16:12build a new, purpose-built facility costing a huge amount of money when
0:16:12 > 0:16:17there is no money. It could take a long time. Faslane is a beautifully
0:16:17 > 0:16:25equipped sub base. How much to be a bargaining chip would it be in this
0:16:25 > 0:16:29discussion? For the SNP? To say that we will keep the submarine's
0:16:29 > 0:16:34year, does it give them any leverage? It would be a big problem
0:16:34 > 0:16:40for them, I would think. It gives England leverage in the decision to
0:16:40 > 0:16:47take them. We need to leave it there. I bet we will come back to
0:16:47 > 0:16:53that. Thank you. Researchers at Glasgow University have developed a
0:16:53 > 0:16:59revolutionary new process to print trucks. They have 3D technology
0:16:59 > 0:17:03that could have a purse of pharmacy dispensing drugs at home. --
0:17:03 > 0:17:10personal pharmacy. One day they may be able to diagnose illnesses
0:17:10 > 0:17:14before they actually happened. It is just a matter of a few years
0:17:14 > 0:17:20ago the BRI d'Or being able to print something in 3D rather than
0:17:20 > 0:17:27too deep seemed like science fiction. -- the idea of being able
0:17:27 > 0:17:37to print something. Now, look at this. 3D printers like this used
0:17:37 > 0:17:49
0:17:49 > 0:17:54layers of plastic to build objects The big idea at Glasgow was why use
0:17:54 > 0:17:59just plastic? One of the big dreams in science fiction and technology
0:17:59 > 0:18:03is the idea of a universal matter compiler and we have this with 3D
0:18:03 > 0:18:09printing when we can print almost anything but how can you put
0:18:09 > 0:18:13chemistry into the device? At we take what is in this test tube and
0:18:13 > 0:18:16print it and Prince the test-tube at the same time? To print the
0:18:16 > 0:18:20coloured ink which is the chemical that will react and the glass at
0:18:21 > 0:18:26the same time, so you can do reactions in a new way. What is
0:18:26 > 0:18:32happening here? In this Printer, we have been able to print the reactor
0:18:32 > 0:18:37and also print in the reaction, rather like if you have a mink jet
0:18:37 > 0:18:42printer and the colour is coming out, all the collar is the chemical
0:18:42 > 0:18:48and you can do a reaction in the object that we print. -- the colour.
0:18:48 > 0:18:52We changed the shape of the test tube and the chemistry very quickly,
0:18:52 > 0:18:55so this means conceptually, we can print money more molecules, but
0:18:55 > 0:19:05when we print the molecule we do new reactions and make new things,
0:19:05 > 0:19:09new drugs, may become a new pigments and detergents. They're
0:19:09 > 0:19:14calling it reaction where, not just bespoke designs for chemical
0:19:14 > 0:19:19reactions taking place, but they have chemicals to drive the process.
0:19:20 > 0:19:24We make the device had done a very simple material, so this is just
0:19:24 > 0:19:29made of bathroom sealant, the kind of stuff you put around just sink
0:19:29 > 0:19:36and the shower to make sure that it is watertight. We can printed as a
0:19:36 > 0:19:42gel, throwing nozzle, like this. -- print it. And it has it robbery to
0:19:42 > 0:19:47have consistency that can have a reaction inside. -- it Robert type
0:19:47 > 0:19:53constituency. We also have catalysts year for this matrix so
0:19:53 > 0:19:58that we can have carbon that will make it conduct so that we can make
0:19:58 > 0:20:03conduct of appliances and things that you can pass a charge through.
0:20:03 > 0:20:09And slightly more sophisticated versions like this that contain
0:20:09 > 0:20:16mazes of chemical components in sequence. They have done it using a
0:20:16 > 0:20:22modified 3D Printer and open Soffe software. This device has to so
0:20:22 > 0:20:28Rangers that contains pink for printing material. -- it has two
0:20:28 > 0:20:32layers of ink. It compiles its layers to build up the architecture
0:20:32 > 0:20:38that we have designed on the computer and so on the left-hand
0:20:38 > 0:20:45side, we have blanks structural link and on the right hand side, a
0:20:45 > 0:20:49conducting think that can produce structural materials. -- conducting
0:20:49 > 0:20:58Inc. And we put the material into the structure of the device that it
0:20:58 > 0:21:02is printing. Where could it lead? The team envisages a revolution in
0:21:02 > 0:21:07pharmaceuticals, bespoke drugs designed to treat illnesses on a
0:21:07 > 0:21:12person by a person based us all dispensed from a press of Pharmacy
0:21:12 > 0:21:17in your own home. It is early days, but we would like to print a
0:21:17 > 0:21:22reactor with chambers in a defined sequence with specific catalysts in
0:21:22 > 0:21:27those chambers so that you can buy a common in starting material like
0:21:27 > 0:21:31you can buy ink for Europe computer today and put it into the reactor
0:21:31 > 0:21:35and turn it upside down and put it in the microwave for five minutes
0:21:35 > 0:21:38and added come the product you were trying to print, whatever that
0:21:38 > 0:21:43might be, say a prescription drug. What are the implications for the
0:21:43 > 0:21:48pharmaceutical industry? This is a mind-blowing concept in that if we
0:21:48 > 0:21:52can bring together some Engineering and molecular biology and chemistry
0:21:52 > 0:21:56in one format, then we could be able to imagine a scenario where
0:21:56 > 0:22:04you could treat you diseases before you know that you're going to get
0:22:04 > 0:22:07them. -- you're diseases. What are the implications of that?! We could
0:22:07 > 0:22:12take your cells and predict what diseases you will get and create
0:22:12 > 0:22:16the drug to treat them before you even get the disease. The idea of
0:22:17 > 0:22:21turning digits into things has, very long way in a very short time
0:22:21 > 0:22:25at the Glasgow team have already taken out further by creating
0:22:25 > 0:22:28several molecules including some anti-cancer drugs. Ultimately the