:00:14. > :00:19.Tonight on Newsnight Scotland, that was the week but was, wasn't it?
:00:19. > :00:23.Questioned agreed, cash agreed. We to be the next step in the
:00:23. > :00:27.referendum debate? As Beckham joins parish, what about poor old
:00:27. > :00:33.Scottish football? We speak to this man's predecessor on how we can
:00:33. > :00:37.improve the game here. Good evening. It is being another one of those
:00:37. > :00:41.weeks when you don't know what the will be historic or not. The Yes
:00:42. > :00:47.and No campaigns have accepted the question and the funding levels. In
:00:47. > :00:57.recent weeks, who doubted they would? We have had another round of
:00:57. > :01:03.
:01:03. > :01:13.promises that positive campaigning A lot of fuss about the very few
:01:13. > :01:16.words. Some commentators are suggesting that the SNP government
:01:16. > :01:26.day the questioned something to step out. As the answer is yes or
:01:26. > :01:35.
:01:35. > :01:39.no, it may be... It is quite clear The campaign spending limits are
:01:39. > :01:42.only likely to become controversial in future if and when one side or
:01:42. > :01:48.in future if and when one side or the other wants to disregard the
:01:48. > :01:52.the other wants to disregard the spirit of fairness. We accept that
:01:52. > :01:57.the nationalists are going to spend more than we can. But there is a
:01:57. > :02:01.question of principle. You cannot pick and choose. But at least there
:02:01. > :02:06.is a consistency here about the level of debate. Everyone says that
:02:06. > :02:11.they were but see a serious debate in thawed by hard facts and
:02:11. > :02:20.information. We have been asked how we would conduct the debate in
:02:20. > :02:27.Scotland. We will conduct the debate in a positive manner. If the
:02:27. > :02:32.no campaign can match their commitment... People want
:02:32. > :02:35.information so that people can make a judgment on what an independent
:02:35. > :02:40.Scotland would that light. Isn't it the case that all we know is that
:02:40. > :02:50.it will be a land where you are not allowed to disagree with Alex
:02:50. > :02:52.
:02:52. > :02:57.We will know next month how long vista Bay has to run. What happens
:02:57. > :03:01.the day after the boat, in spite of the wishes of the Electoral
:03:01. > :03:11.Commission, may not be known until it happens.
:03:11. > :03:12.
:03:13. > :03:17.I am joined by arguing Crawford and People they're not just talking
:03:17. > :03:21.about information, but either struck about the findings of the
:03:21. > :03:27.commission. People were saying that they did not want to know about the
:03:27. > :03:30.process. They wanted to note how to assess the cases for and against
:03:30. > :03:34.independence. They wanted an independent source of information.
:03:34. > :03:42.Are people being unrealistic to expect that? No, I think that
:03:42. > :03:50.people do want information, and we have had a lot of hyperbole, and a
:03:50. > :03:56.lot of it is difficult. The UK, we already know what the UK is, but I
:03:56. > :04:01.think what people are looking for, perhaps it is a criticism of the
:04:01. > :04:04.media. Perhaps people think we are not d'etat. That has to be the
:04:05. > :04:12.media's role. We have to be explaining what is happening. The
:04:12. > :04:21.fact is that it is not going to come, for example, the SNP will
:04:21. > :04:25.publish a White Paper. Some people would say it is utterly tosh.
:04:25. > :04:32.not as if someone - but something is going to be published and that
:04:32. > :04:37.is the information. You are pre- empting exactly what you think, got
:04:37. > :04:47.the UK argument would be. I am sure that the SNP would not be happy of
:04:47. > :04:54.your appraisal. But I think that it will be the major's role in best.
:04:54. > :04:59.It is difficult to say he could be a -- end independent assessor. He
:04:59. > :05:03.is going to decide they are independent? Will be the Scottish
:05:03. > :05:07.government or the UK government? Let's just get on with a debate. I
:05:07. > :05:12.think the public does once the information. I was not suggesting
:05:13. > :05:21.the White Paper would be allowed a tosh. Parties would say it it would
:05:21. > :05:25.be a load of tosh. This idea of independence. I am not sure if it
:05:25. > :05:35.will work as an been -- independent source of information went
:05:35. > :05:36.
:05:36. > :05:39.something like that. Indeed, and this is a political argument and
:05:39. > :05:48.political scientists talk about deliberative democracy when you get
:05:48. > :05:51.the best outcome after teasing out the best arguments. That is the
:05:51. > :05:55.rational due in which everyone's arguments are treated equally. I do
:05:55. > :06:00.not think we are going to get that, but ultimately, this is going to be
:06:00. > :06:03.a political argument, and statistics from academic
:06:03. > :06:11.researchers suggest that it is difficult to get anything but is
:06:11. > :06:16.completely unbiased. I am just curious. Obviously, you are prone
:06:16. > :06:22.independents, and clearly it is not doing terribly well in the polls at
:06:22. > :06:28.the moment. Blair Jenkins was here last night, and I'm sure he
:06:28. > :06:32.fervently believes it will improve, but standing back, at what point
:06:32. > :06:36.would you be worried if there is not some sort of player move
:06:36. > :06:40.towards the direction of independence? I am sure that some
:06:40. > :06:45.of the policy is interesting, but one of the things you could say is
:06:45. > :06:49.the back -- disappointment for the yes campaign but also an
:06:49. > :06:59.opportunity, one of the things that the Electoral Commission said in
:06:59. > :07:09.regards of independence is that... On the other hand, you could say
:07:09. > :07:11.
:07:11. > :07:19.that is no pot -- opportunity. I am a... People on your side of the
:07:19. > :07:24.argument, six months ago, the same amount of people agreed. A I don't
:07:24. > :07:29.have a baby in mind. But there are other things in the social
:07:29. > :07:32.attitudes survey they got some publicity last week. If you say to
:07:32. > :07:41.people, do you want the Scottish Parliament to have all of the
:07:41. > :07:46.powers, that comes out as the most popular option, but... It is about
:07:46. > :07:53.the phrasing of a question on the ballot paper. You must be expecting
:07:53. > :08:02.some shift on that. OK. On the other side of the argument, there
:08:02. > :08:09.is a danger of complacency. In the last week, we have had Kevin
:08:09. > :08:12.McKenna and another well-known commentator say they do not have a
:08:12. > :08:19.nationalist bone in their body and they will vote yes. It might not
:08:19. > :08:24.directly involved the opinion polls, but if the media and the chattering
:08:24. > :08:28.classes take that view, it filters down. That must be a worry for the
:08:28. > :08:33.No campaign. A I think the no campaign a very well aware of the
:08:33. > :08:37.dangers of complacency. Anyone who was into Scotland two years ago and
:08:37. > :08:40.saw how the Scottish National Party used this hugely impressive PR
:08:40. > :08:45.machine that they have, it is very smooth and professional, they came
:08:45. > :08:50.from behind in the opinion polls in the Scottish election, and they
:08:50. > :08:55.caught Scottish Labour on the hop, because they were the favourites
:08:55. > :08:59.going into it. We have seen that happen once. I think the yes
:08:59. > :09:05.campaign but think -- I think the no campaign will not be complacent.
:09:05. > :09:09.Some of the chattering classes are going in an unexpected direction.
:09:09. > :09:12.It may not have an effect in the opinion polls, but it may have a
:09:12. > :09:16.bad effect on your side of the argument. Depends on what you think
:09:16. > :09:26.it is a good argument or a bad bargain and. Regardless of what
:09:26. > :09:26.
:09:26. > :09:30.members of the chattering classes might be in their flag to, the UK
:09:30. > :09:33.argument think they have a strong argument. I think he would get the
:09:33. > :09:43.chattering classes on both sides. We will have to leave that there,
:09:43. > :09:46.
:09:46. > :09:50.I'm afraid. Plenty both very much As the most glamourous football in
:09:50. > :09:55.the world jetted into the most glamourous city in the world, some
:09:55. > :09:59.of the most -- less glamourous people in the world were in Glasgow.
:09:59. > :10:03.It is a stark illustration of the gap in the modern football game.
:10:03. > :10:08.Can Scotland, which helped give to the sport to the world and whose
:10:08. > :10:12.deeply -- whose culture remains deeply embedded in it, helped to
:10:12. > :10:21.rescue it? And if not, what would it mean for some of our famous
:10:21. > :10:27.Id was the day when two of the biggest and wealthiest Brands in
:10:27. > :10:30.football joined forces. David Beckham signed for Paris St-Germain.
:10:30. > :10:40.He says it is not about money and will be giving his earnings to
:10:40. > :10:41.
:10:41. > :10:44.charity. If only Scottish football had cash to give away. This was the
:10:44. > :10:49.scene last night - miserable weather matched by some pretty
:10:49. > :10:59.miserable attendances. But it is not that we have fallen out of love
:10:59. > :11:01.
:11:01. > :11:05.with the beautiful game itself. For about 200,000 people stayed up to
:11:05. > :11:10.watch the Games on TV. So how can Scottish football reconnect the
:11:10. > :11:13.game with the fans and revive its fortunes? What Scottish football
:11:13. > :11:19.has to do, because it has no other choice unless a bunch of sugar
:11:19. > :11:24.daddies come into the game, which is not going to happen, is that
:11:24. > :11:31.clubs will have to operate within their means. That means reduced
:11:31. > :11:36.cost, reduced Major's four players -- wages for players, and this will
:11:36. > :11:44.continue each year for years to come. We may well end up with part-
:11:44. > :11:49.time football. Enter the hall the grail of a league reconstruction,
:11:49. > :11:56.being discussed again today. Make the league more competitive and the
:11:56. > :11:58.fans, and their money, will return, say supporters. According to four
:11:58. > :12:04.First Minister Henry McLeish, who produced a review of football's
:12:04. > :12:08.future, it is part of the solution but not the whole is addition.
:12:08. > :12:13.game in its current form is not sustainable. I think we can inject
:12:13. > :12:16.competition, inject more excitement for the fans and spectators. If we
:12:16. > :12:20.can improve the product on the pitch, all of that will help to
:12:20. > :12:24.rebuild the club game but this is an enormous challenge. It will not
:12:24. > :12:27.be easy. The lack of finance is a huge problem but I believe
:12:27. > :12:32.sincerely that if we are seen by outside investors helping ourselves
:12:32. > :12:38.to improve the game, we will attract more finance. This is
:12:38. > :12:43.Aberdeen. So, is it essentially back to the old days? Again
:12:43. > :12:46.grounded in the community, financed by gate money? The Scottish League,
:12:46. > :12:53.however configured, will never compete with the TV billions
:12:53. > :12:57.sloshing about south of the border. But what about the Scottish clubs
:12:57. > :13:04.who think of themselves as bigger than most clubs in the cash rich
:13:04. > :13:08.English Premiership? Rangers, even on the way back up from the lowest,
:13:09. > :13:14.and Celtic, see themselves as among the top brands in Europe. But how
:13:14. > :13:19.do they maintain their status? Do they just accept that they remain
:13:19. > :13:21.big fish in a small pond? It does not matter if they reach an
:13:21. > :13:26.agreement with the Premier League or the championship or the
:13:26. > :13:33.conference. These leagues are all members of a football family of he
:13:33. > :13:43.way that and the Firth. The people in those organisations. It. -- UEFA
:13:43. > :13:45.
:13:45. > :13:50.But it is not just Celtic and Rangers who may benefit from a
:13:50. > :13:57.change in the rules to allow cross- border competition, like an
:13:57. > :14:02.Atlantic League. Should they all other city clubs have a fan base
:14:02. > :14:08.which can compete with the very beast the likes of Wigan and
:14:08. > :14:11.Southampton. For them to do so requires a change of rule. Although
:14:11. > :14:16.there are some straws in the wind, it looks as though Scots clubs will
:14:16. > :14:19.be playing each other for some time yet.
:14:19. > :14:24.I am joined by it Roger Mitchell, who was the first chief-executive
:14:24. > :14:27.of the Scottish Premier League. You have been talking recently about
:14:27. > :14:31.how you think this complicated restructuring thing is all very
:14:31. > :14:34.well but does not really address the idea that the big clubs in
:14:34. > :14:41.Scotland need to play in a different environment. What do you
:14:41. > :14:47.mean? No matter how much you can improve the revenues by 10 or 20%,
:14:47. > :14:50.the fact that the huge financial magnet down south cannot be
:14:50. > :14:57.approached will continue to suck all the talent that we ever managed
:14:57. > :15:00.to develop immediately. You are seeing players go into the
:15:00. > :15:04.Premiership and the other leaves much earlier than they ever did.
:15:04. > :15:08.When I was leading the league, we spent a lot of time on some of the
:15:08. > :15:11.things you talk about earlier - the Atlantic League and other ideas
:15:11. > :15:19.like bringing the Scottish and English game into the same
:15:19. > :15:22.marketplace. That is what the ultimate answer has to be. Do you
:15:22. > :15:27.mean that some of the clubs in Scotland could play, for example,
:15:27. > :15:35.in the English Premier League? think we need to get away from
:15:35. > :15:38.thinking that Celtic and Rangers are the Premiership. The other ones
:15:38. > :15:42.that can aspire are being restrained from competing because
:15:42. > :15:49.they are restricted to the revenues from a very small market of 5
:15:49. > :15:55.million people. There so, are you suggesting a British league? To us
:15:55. > :15:58.try and amalgamate the whole thing. So not as the top clubs but the
:15:58. > :16:08.whole structure of the leagues in England and the leagues in
:16:08. > :16:08.
:16:08. > :16:12.Scotland? Become UK leagues. So for park might be playing... It becomes
:16:12. > :16:19.a regionalised because people might suggest for far against Walsall -
:16:19. > :16:25.who cares? Aberdeen against Southampton, absolutely. People
:16:26. > :16:29.tend to think it means Celtic and Rangers getting out. The fact is
:16:30. > :16:34.that this map was set in train when they changed the Champions' League
:16:34. > :16:38.and it was always going to end this way. If anybody is just waking up
:16:38. > :16:44.now and wondering what has happened to our game, they are wrong because
:16:44. > :16:48.it was clear to my organisation back then. The last day of the
:16:48. > :16:55.transfer window. I don't think it has happened by one of the deals
:16:55. > :17:00.that Celtic were going to make was that Norwich were trying to buy one
:17:00. > :17:07.of bed best buys. With no disrespect to Delia Smith, Norwich
:17:07. > :17:12.and Celtic are not... I agree with you. But they have an expectation
:17:12. > :17:16.they can come in and pinch Celtic's players. It is not a Celtic and
:17:16. > :17:20.Norwich. Aberdeen is one of the richest towns and cities in the UK
:17:20. > :17:25.and it has got the oil industry and could aspire to be one of the top
:17:25. > :17:29.clubs, the way it was in the 1980s. But it cannot do it because its
:17:29. > :17:32.trade is restrained by having to rely solely on a market of 5
:17:32. > :17:39.million when its competitors have a market of 60 million. That would
:17:39. > :17:42.mean changes and the barrier has always been Uefa. There has been
:17:42. > :17:46.talk recently of a Russian Federation League involving the
:17:46. > :17:55.Ukraine. There has even been talk of Yugoslavia reforming, at least
:17:55. > :18:00.in a footballing sense. Do you think UEFA is suffering? The whole
:18:00. > :18:03.power structure is based on national geography so they will not
:18:04. > :18:09.do it willingly. If they were to approve the Russian and Ukraine
:18:09. > :18:14.thing, that would surprise you? that there is also the president of
:18:14. > :18:18.Wales and England. I think it needs to be pushed much harder and I have
:18:18. > :18:23.always had an issue with Scottish football, that it seems to accept
:18:23. > :18:26.its lot. This idea of England is poppycock, let's get back to our
:18:27. > :18:30.little game on Saturday and enjoy it. But you need to push for this
:18:30. > :18:35.and it may not happen this year or next year but it is the only way
:18:35. > :18:39.out. One of the things you said surprised to about the league
:18:39. > :18:44.reconstruction was that Celtic were showing magnanimity in distributing
:18:44. > :18:47.TV revenue. Do you think that as a signal that Celtic are accepting
:18:47. > :18:51.their lot and think their interests are the interests of Scottish
:18:51. > :18:57.football? I think this reconstruction is about securing
:18:57. > :19:01.the Rangers TV rights in one organisation that can then
:19:01. > :19:09.negotiate from strength, rather than have the competition of two
:19:10. > :19:17.organisations dealing with ESPN or Sky. So you think they are pressing
:19:17. > :19:21.for what you want? They should be. They have not. When I was there, we
:19:21. > :19:26.tried but in the last 10 years, I have seen no efforts. I just do not
:19:26. > :19:32.understand why. It seems to be an acceptance of an eventual a
:19:32. > :19:36.relevance. What, realistically, do you think they should be doing?
:19:36. > :19:42.They should be pushing and making a nuisance of themselves, saying that
:19:42. > :19:46.it is a restraint of trade. Just make yourself a fly in the ointment,
:19:46. > :19:51.a pain in the neck, because they may decide to take notice. If we