23/04/2014 Newsnight Scotland

this than us sitting here on TV having a debate. We need to get out

there, the people need to get out there and work on this. Thank you.

Tonight on Newsnight Scotland, we will ask the Justice Secretary Kenny

MacAskill why he has sided to delay the bill which includes the

abolition of the principle of corroboration. It is Saint Georges

Day and the anniversary of Shakespeare's birth. We have been to

Stratford-upon-Avon. We will be discussing the view from England

with Tariq Ali and Tom Holland. Just a couple of months ago in his

well-known fire and brimstone mode, the Justice Secretary castigated his

critics who are trying to block the abolition of corroboration. Today,

and meat and consensual Kenny MacAskill gave in to their demands.

The plans have been put on hold for a year until a review has been

completed. Corroboration is the requirement in Scots law that cases

can only come to trial if there are two sources of evidence against the

accused. It can be circumstantial, come from forensics science, or

even, an accused person's previous convictions. At finding

corroboration is a real problem in rape cases and where there are

accusations of domestic abuse, hence the government's determination to do

away with it, until today, when the plans were put on hold. There is

more to the new law than just chopping corroboration. It would

also have brought about a wide range of changes to police powers to

arrest and detain suspects. Established body to set pay and

conditions for peace in Scotland. Increased the maximum sentence

courts can impose on anyone convicted of carrying a knife or

offensive weapon in public or school or prison. Given the crown more time

to bring cases before a sheriff and jury. It would have extended the way

anyone accused of people trafficking could be charged. All those changes

are now on hold as well. It is the dropping or postponing of changes to

corroboration that will get most attention. It has attracted varying

reactions. Corroboration has simply been

considered a barrier to justice, rather than the other side of the

debate where it should be considered a safeguard and something that has

been a hallmark of the system for many years and should not be

considered in isolation but form part of a wider review. Society

would participate in such a review. MSPs have already passed the bill in

principle but the delay means it will not go to the second stage of

scrutiny until the spring of next year, something that has been

welcomed by the political opponents of the government. If we need to

rebalance the way that juries operate, decide about the powers of

judges, decide how he say is used in court and so forth, let's get it

right along with the decision about corroboration, but not make up our

mind about one element of it and, in my view, this has been driven by

politics from the SNP. It has been at chase after the votes of a very

specific group of people, and those people are victims. It lacks

credibility. The real dilemma, perhaps, is how do you get the

criminal justice system truly to deliver justice, not just deal with

cases on a court list? Short while ago I spoke to the Justice

Secretary, I asked him why he delayed it. A proposal came from the

opposition parties, asking us to delay the timescale for stage two

and stage three. That was a matter that had not been offered before. It

is an unusual procedure, I have been in Parliament since 1999 and never

experienced it, but it was something we were happy to consider. We

discussed it in Cabinet and intimated our acceptance of today.

We welcome it, we are always keen to work with the opposition, to show

willing. It delivers what we want is a government. Corroboration and its

removal remains sacrosanct. There is no change to the timetable but there

is a change thanks to the suggestion from the opposition parties as to

the matter in which we will do it. As to this matter, it will be built

upon Lord Carloway rather than legislation. The suggestion is the

reason for now is because of the referendum, and you're trying to

shut down any issue that could cause you problems. There might be some

validity in that if it had not been them who offered it. They came

forward with this proposal, we considered and reflected on it and

accepted it, so the clearing of the decks has come from them. Not from

myself. Was it a mistake to make MSPs pass legislation before it has

been properly considered? Not at all, we passed it and should support

on stage one, and I welcome the commitment we had in Parliament. We

recognised that there were concerns about how the procedure was playing

out, we were prepared to put in a procedure that has been used in

other bills throughout the length of parliament, but when this proposal

came in from the opposition parties we were delighted to accept it. I do

think this will be clearer. It satisfies the concerns that many in

the opposition had, that is why I have seen support from across the

spectrum. We had a welcoming of it from the faculty of advocates and

The Law Society of Scotland, and equally from Rape Crisis Scotland.

We will get the best possible procedure for Parliament to

scrutinise it at the same time, balanced with delivering to the

victims groups the Access to justice that has been denied. Many people

are still opposed to the plans. Conservatives are keen. Why are you

so keen on this change? We have been hearing from Labour that you are

basically canvassing for victim votes, to appeal to female voters.

We are doing what is right. Thousands of victims, tens of

thousands of victims in Scotland are routinely denied access to justice.

Many are female, because they are subject to sexual offences. Some are

children. Some are the elderly. They do not get justice because of the

routine requirement for corroboration. We believe the case

for the removal of corroboration has been made. That was endorsed at

stage one in the Parliament. What we have done is established a review

group of the great and the good in Scotland of the legal profession,

and are victims groups, who will set out the basis for clear safeguards

to have the best possible procedure is in Scotland, and that way we will

deliver what is necessary. The scales of justice are balanced for

the victim, but also to ensure the rights of the accused. We will need

to leave it there. Thank you for joining us. Cry God for Harry,

England, and St George. The famous battle cry goes and the Patron saint

of south of the border has been celebrated. Including those paying

tribute to the greatness of England was the Prime Minister, but he also

used his contribution to emphasise the benefits of the United Kingdom.

In just five months the people of Scotland will go to the polls. And

they will decide whether they want to remain a part of this global

success story. So let us prove that we can be proud

of our individual nations, and be committed to our union of nations.

Because no matter how great we are alone, we will always be greater

together. Also in the land of St George

tonight was the First Minister Alex Salmond. In a cross-border rail to

Carlisle he spoke to a business audience, hoping to convince them of

the benefits of independence, and saying it wasn't something to be

scared about. Scotland will not be a foreign country after independence,

any more than Ireland or Northern Ireland, England or Wales could be

ever be foreign countries to any sensible person in Scotland.

Scottish independence will not change many aspects of the

day-to-day life in the countries within these Ireland's -- islands.

In fact he said independence would benefit the north of England, as it

would help recalibrate the economy and lesson London's dominance. That

has been described as a dark star, sucking in resource, people and

energy. . The successful Scotland we will certainly see will become a new

growth poll to the north. Shifting the centre of economic gravity of

the islands, it often seems as though power, well, and talent flow

down to the south-east, independent Scotland will cause a rebalancing of

Britain a northern light to resist the influence of Professor Travers's

dark star. It marks the 450th anniversary of William Shakespeare's

birth, so we sent our referendum correspondent Laura Bicker to

Stratford-upon-Avon, the home of the Bard to find out what people there

are making of the campaign. Oh Scotland, Scotland. But here in

the town of Shakespeare's birth the constitutional drama being played

out north of the border is largely passing them by. Instead they are

focussed on celebrating the English Bard's birth but when pushed, those

at this community arts project were aware of the debate. I know that

Scotland's... Just might want to leave the United Kingdom. I fully

understand why they would want their independence, so it has a good,

there is good points and bad points really. Social gist Alex Smith

believes the level of English engagement with the Scottish

referendum depends on which part of the country Tay live and how much of

the campaign they have been listening to. Too often the debate

seems to have descended into whether Scotland will be better off or not

without England, as if it is in England's gift what Scotland gets by

staying in the union, and I think that as a result, the better

together campaign have really missed an opportunity there. Going it alone

is the only way Scotland can choose its own course say those campaigning

for a yes vote. But in a town where the union flag is used to lure

tourists into shops, this is an argument many do not understand. I

think the politicians so far have upset Scotland. People in Scotland.

So it is difficult what to do. Can you see why they might want

independence? You have a geerlt because you don't have to pay for

your tablets you get free prescriptions. The English are

detached from it. We think it won't affect us, whereas it is not true.

Many people here do have an opinion on the independence referendum, but

you have to prod them and then the questions start coming back, what

are the issue, what are the argument, what are people in

Scotland thinking when it comes to the vote on September 18th? And

crucially the one question I have been asked a lot, is how close is

this race between yes and no? Does it matter if people here and across

the rest of the UK get involved in this debate? Better together

certainly think so, they have organised a call centre in London to

call people up in Scotland to ask them to vote no. The yes campaign

say it is one-to-one conversations they are having on the doorstep with

neighbours and friends that will make the difference, not being told

what do by the rest of the UK. I have no spur to prick the sides of

my intent. But only vaulting ambition which falls on the other.

People here will have no part to play when it comes to the vote in

September. Some may watch from the wing, others will want a front row

seat. People in England, do you think that I will wake up, perhaps

get to a point where they go goodness, something is happening

north of the border? When the Commonwealth Games are opened

Glasgow it will be obvious there is something going on in Scotland. I

think the Commonwealth Games will be an important opportunity for those

arguing for the yes cause in Scotland, to make the case that

Scotland is a nation capable of asserting itself on the world stage,

and of course, the month before the referendum that is a powerful

potential opportunity for the nationalist and the yes campaign. It

obviously suits their timetable very well, to have the Commonwealth Games

so close to the referendum. The flag that has marked 300 years of accord

is taken down to mark England's National day. There is now five

months until the finale in Scotland, unty we -- until we know whether

this could be or could not be the shape of things to come. I am joined

by two residents of England who are taking a keen interest in the

referendum. The writer Tariq Ali and the historian Tom Holland. Good

evening, thank you for joining me. First to owe Tariq Ali, you are a

keen supporter of Scottish independence, is this a gut feeling

or based more on hard hearted, hard headed economic arguments? It is not

just economic argument, it is a mistake to look at it purely from

that point of view. There is a strong political argument, that

effectively Scotland is now so close to becoming independent, because

large numbers of people working class people, intellectual, a real

mix, feel that the compact with which nay agreed, and which they

supported wholeheartedly in 1945, the Attlee Government's social

reforms creating social democracy, has now been dumped and they are not

happy with it. Much less happy with the dumping of that social

democratic compact than appears in England. I think that is what has

brought about a revival of this new, modern, forward looking social

democratic nationalism in Scotland. That is what it is all about. Do

you, Tariq Ali, see the problem as being Westminster rating, you were

calling it a Vassell state, are you almost saying this is the way that

Scotland can prosper away from this Vassell state as you put it. Yes,

David Cameron's remark that the United Kingdom is a success story is

of course is a complete joke. It is mired in crises, a number of its

politicians as we read every day are mired in corruptions of various

sorts, it is not an example that appeals to many countries, other

countries in the world, and independent Scotland could actually

do that. I mean, the example here is Norway's separation from Sweden,

which was agreed by the Swedish Parliament, the Norwegians wanted it

and erelations remained close and Norway has developed extremely well,

so... OK, so I want to put that to Tom Holland. What do you make of his

argument there, that Westminster has failed the people of the UK and

Scotland as seeking a way out and Scots are looking at that way out?

There is always an inherent excitement, the prospect of kicking

over the traces, and Tariq Ali can't see a status quo without wanting to

have a go at it. But I think there is also a waking passion in people,

who want to keep Britain the way it is. I have to say that I am

surprised at myself, how passionate I have come to feel about this

issue. I would go so far as to say I have, I have never been as upset

about anything as the prospect of Scotland leaving. Ultimately, that

is not to do with any of the issues that we have been talking about. It

is not do with the issues that are in in newspapers, not about oil or

pensions or Trident. It goes back to something as visceral as the jigsaw

puzzle I made when I was a child and particularly liking the images of

Scotland on it. It goes back to going to Glasgow and Edinburgh and

reading Scottish authors and and feeling this is the most beautiful

area in Great Britain and feeling it is simultaneously an alien part but

it is a part of me. I think that increasingly the English will feel

that, they will wake up to the prospect of what they risk losing,

if Scotland decides they no longer want to stay with England. Tom

Holland, given what Tariq Ali has said, many Scots feel the United

Kingdom is not working for them in this 21st century Scotland, you

sound like you are harking back do your childhood as it were. I think

that I think there is always the desire, everyone has a desire to

make their country better. The temptation is, it is like a midlife

crisis temptation, if only you buy the motorbike, if only you get the

girl, if only you roar off out of your dull life everything will

change. I think that is delosery. I think Tariq Ali says the United

Kingdom is a failure, I am not convinced that is the case. We have

a stable, broadly tolerant, broadly peaceable society, which, compared

to many other countries has been a great success. Let us put

these.sback to Tariq Ali. He is painting the United Kingdom as a

successful, well-organised country, where people are economically

prosperous and happy in that, of course, he is almost talking about

British nationalism, what do you say back to him? Well, I mean I would

disagree with him, obviously. There is a tiny part of southern England

which is doing very well, that is London, and the areas round it. The

rest of the country is not doing well at all. As anyone will tell

you. The figures we are getting from the Midlands, the figures we are

getting from the north of England, are pretty awful, and the figures

for Scotland are not good, which is why the Scots are decided seriously

to go it on their own. But... Honestly, the argument that, you

know, people in England will not be able to visit Scotland or see the

sights or shop or buy their whisky, it is absurd. Tariq Ali, the counter

point is the social list argument, the Labour argument as Gordon Brown

was saying yesterday, that in the United Kingdom there is a pooling

and sharing of resources, that is spread evenly across the United

Kingdom, and of course, would be a possibility of permanent

Conservative Governments in our UK. I don't agree with that necessarily.

I think an independent Scotland could curiously enough have a

positive effect in Britain, and in England as well. It could open up

English politics, shake it out of its lethargy where you have three

mainstream parties, all believing in effectively the same thing and

create a debate as to how England should move forward. Already there

are people talking about London having more powers, so I think an

independent Scotland will aid that a great deal. It will open England up.

Tom, speaking about London, England, do you think Westminster has woken

up to what could happen in Scotland? Are people in Westminster

complacent? I have no idea. I am not part of the Westminster

establishment. What I know is I agree there are things that are

wrong in Britain, but what I think is that we are better working

together, to solve those problem, than Balkanising ourself, because if

the argument is things are going wrong in the north, what do we do?

Bring back Northumbria? If things are going wrong in the Highlands, do

we bring bact Pictland. That will result in fragmentation of Britain.

We have a unity and 300 years of shared history. Together we have

created things, and we have achieved things that have gone forward. And

we can continue to do that. Tom, you speak about 300 years of shared

history but Scotland had 800 years when the pickets and the Scots

joined, so do you not see there is merit in that? Of coursing, if we go

back 1200 years the kingdoms of Scotland and England didn't exist. I

would not imagine that Alex Salmond would want to see Scotland fragment.

Do you want to come back on that Tariq Ali? I don't think that is

going to happen. Effectively an independent Scotland will be both

different from the United Kingdom, but also will be part of this

region. No-one is proposing, no-one, either on the left in Scotland, or

the nationalist centre is proposing any different, and the example I

come back to is the example of Norway and Sweden, both get on very

well. Both travel; etc, etc. OK. Tariq Ali and Tom Holland, we will

have to leave it there. Thank you both for joining me.

Now, before we go let us look at tomorrow's papers. First in The

Scotsman we have Kenny MacAskill in U-turn on radical law change. Of

course an emotional Andy Murray there in Stirling when he was

receiving the freedom of the city. In the Daily Telegraph:

And in the Guardian we have stop your sons joining Syria war. That is

all we have time for tonight. I am back at the same time tomorrow, from

all of us on the Newsnight Scotland team. Do have a very good night. Bye

for now. Rain continues to spread east

overnight, heavy showers fade from south-west England and Northern

Ireland, a chilly start down to the south-west of the UK in the morning,

patchy fog too, Wales, Midlands, southern England slowly clearing and

a day of some sunshine