28/11/2013 Question Time

Tonight, we are in Falkirk, and welcome to Question Time.

And a welcome to you at home, and to our audience. On the panel last week

we only had three panellists. We are making up for it tonight with six

panellists. Scotland's Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon of the

SNP. From Westminster, the Liberal Democrat Secretary of State for

Scotland, Alistair Carmichael. Labour's shadow Scottish secretary,

Margaret Curran. The ex-leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Annabel

Goldie. One of the leaders of the Scottish Greens, and a member of the

Scottish Parliament, Patrick Harvie. And the singer and independence

campaigner Eddi Reader. So, it is just ten months before

Scotland is asked to decide whether it wants independence. This week the

SNP published its argument for independence. Tonight, we will be

debating that with an audience that is pretty well divided 50-50 on the

issue, evenly split. Let's take our first question from Stephanie Pride.

Can Scotland achieve true independence without an independent

currency? Nicola Sturgeon. Yes, absolutely, we can. France and

Germany share a currency but nobody would argue that they are not

independent countries. I want Scotland to the independent so that

we can be responsible for our own decisions, take decisions in our

best interest. But sometimes those decisions will be to cooperate with

others, in particular our friends in other parts of the UK. A shared

currency would not just be in Scotland's interests, but also in

the best interests of other parts of the UK. Why? Firstly, Scotland is

the second biggest export market for England, and England is Scotland's

biggest export market. Unless we want to incur unnecessary costs for

businesses, it makes sense to stay in the same currency. What do you

make of the argument John Major put today in his speech? He said a

currency union, which you assume is negotiable, would require the UK to

underwrite Scottish debt and that cannot and will not happen if

Scotland leaves the union, there will be no halfway house, no quasi

independence. I would recommend to John Major that he reads the work

done by the fiscal commission, that set out in some exhaustive detail

how this arrangement would work, including the governments

arrangements of the Bank of England, and what would happen if

there was any need, which we hope there would never be, to stabilise

the financial system, and the shared contributions that would be made by

Scotland and other parts of the UK. I do not accept that argument. The

second point about why it is the right arrangement is that Scotland

contributes massively to the UK balance of payments. Our oil and gas

exports are ?30 billion. If that was taken out of the UK balance of

payments, the balance of payments deficit would almost double, which

would be back -- damaging to the sterling currency. My final point is

that it is as much Scotland's pound as it is the rest of the UK, and we

will be expected to take on our share of the liabilities of the UK.

It is only right that we get our share of the assets as well.

Alistair Carmichael, do you believe it can work as simply as that? No, I

don't. Basically, we almost that currency unions are very difficult

to make work. You just need to look at what has happened in the eurozone

to see that. Effectively, what Nicola is offering to the rest of

the UK is the opportunity to import into the rest of the UK the problems

of the eurozone. Currency unions only work if you can align your

economy so they go in the same place, the same direction, at the

same speed, at the same time. If you are going to do that, to take your

point, I do not think you have a properly independent country at that

point. Why would Scotland, on day one, say, we are independent, and on

day two hand over control of interest rates, borrowing levels,

taxation and all the rest of it back to an institution in the rest of the

UK? From the point of the rest of the UK, you would be asking them to

underwrite banks and to have taxpayers in the rest of the United

Kingdom stand behind the Bank of England, the lender of last resort,

in circumstances where they had no control over these banks. It is not

in either party's interests to have it, and it just would not happen.

When you say it would not happen, if Scotland voted for independence you

are saying the Treasury, the Bank of England, the government at

Westminster would refuse to countenance it? George Osborne has

said it is highly unlikely. Different from saying it will not

happen. That can only be said by the government of the remainder of the

United Kingdom when it is constituted in that way. He said it

was logical and desirable. He did not, that is a misrepresentation. It

is not just Ed Balls George Osborne, but Carl Wynn Jones, First Minister

of Wales, says that he would not want it. This is not just a contest

between Westminster and Edinburgh. This is going to involve people in

all parts of the United Kingdom. Nobody should vote for independence

next year thinking that if they do so they will keep the pound. On

Tuesday, we should have heard what the alternative was. I think Patrick

Mabey has an interesting alternative, but you cannot vote yes

on the basis of keeping the pound. Nicola Sturgeon mentioned France and

Germany. That is the euro with Germany very much the lead country.

Is that not what we should be doing, entering the euro? And secondly, is

Alex Salmond in Wales to see if the Welsh Mint will make Scottish

pounds? You are saying the euro would be preferable to going into

sterling. Eddi Reader. Well, I ain't a politician, but, you know... I

don't have any problem with England and I don't think England has a

problem with us. The people of England and the people of Scotland

are sane people. They would not choose to have a fight about

something like this. Once it is simply explained what the actual

deal is, this union we are supposed to have, once it is explained to the

English and the Scottish people properly, by people with no agenda,

by the way, anybody, once it is said what it is, and I did a bit of

investigation. I was neutral this time. This time last year I was

neutral, completely neutral. I was a Labour traditional voter. And then I

started looking at what this was that was floating into our laps,

this referendum idea. What is it? I like the union. What is this

breaking up? I don't think it is that. I actually went and found out

what the deal is. Our deal is not that. Our vote does not affect what

happens in the rest of the United Kingdom. Our vote in Scotland is

generally centre-left, and the bottom part of England tend to vote

centre-right. Therefore, we have to put up with that. And there was a

time when they did go for a kind of socialist, socially useful

compromise with Tony and Gordon, but that had to go so far right that it

was not the Labour Party that I voted for, and it wasn't what

Scotland votes for. Scotland votes for welfare. It votes for people. I

do not want to deflect you, but we are coming to this question. All

right, what I want to say is that if we decide to be independent, I do

not see it as having a fight with anybody. Margaret Curran, do you

agree? No, I do not. The currency is absolutely fundamental to the

interests of Scotland. It is at the heart of what the SNP has proposed

and has not been explained at all. We were promised the answers in the

White Paper and we have not got them. To me, it is a strange

independence that says we will have all about tax powers, keep control

of tax powers, but the monetary powers, which determine interest

rates, mortgages, has huge imprecations for our economic

interests, they will be set by the Bank of England. The Bank of England

is under the legislative competence of the UK, but under Nicola

Sturgeon's model, will withdraw all political influence in that. I think

that is a very strange form of independence. Why would we give away

those economic powers? What is it that you independent Scottish

government would not be able to do if it had sterling as its currency?

We would have influence over interest rates. You say you set them

already? They are set for Scotland at the moment. We will debate this

as the year goes on but this is important. Under the proposals put

forward by the SNP, which their own experts have said it is stupid not

to have a back-up plan to this, under their proposals, they propose

to split tax powers from interest rates. The interest rates would be

determined by the Bank of England. The Bank of England, the legislative

framework of the governance of the Bank of England is determined by the

UK Parliament, from which the SNP want us to withdraw. What you think

they should do, if they for independence, have their own

currency or go into the euro? I think the best way to keep the pound

and economic stability is to vote no in the referendum. People are

saying, two panellists, saying we will lose control of interest

rates. That assumes we have control at the moment. In the waiting room,

we had Mark Carney's announcement which did not get much past the

property market in London. I would like to go for interregional

cooperation, rather than attacking the yes campaign. Can you answer his

point specifically, that interest rates are not fixed by the

government anyway? Interest rates come within the macroeconomic

framework. We have seen what has happened as the government has

struggled to cut the overall deficit in the UK. The government is trying

to do that to try to protect, for example, mortgage rates, to ensure

interest rates are not leaping out of control and people are facing

impossible bills to pay. Going back to the heart of this, Nicola used an

interesting example, I thought, to illustrate a currency operation.

That was the euro. Most people would look at the euro, with all of its

challengers recently, and regard it as an instructive experience. The

first part of the experience is, thank goodness we are not in the

euro. The other very instructive ins -- experience is, and the gentleman

was quite right, Germany actually controls the euro. It does not

matter what the other countries think, Germany is calling the shots

and Germany is determining what the borrowing and taxation levels are in

these other countries which use the euro. Is this a crunch issue for

you, the issue of currency? I think it goes to the heart, David, as to

whether or not we should go for separation and independence, or

whether to keep the pound the best thing to do is stay within the UK. I

think currency, frankly, is about the most important thing we can

think about. It affects us all, at any stage of life. There is no way

of not having sterling which would work for Scotland? Having its own

pound, or the euro? Theoretically, Scotland as an independent currency

could float its own currency. I think currency is a crunch issue,

yes. Why could it not float its own currency? Every expert has said that

is a very risky thing to do. You immediately placed yourself at the

mercy... Hang on, you have had an extensive survey. The markets,

David, would determine the worth of your currency. You would have no

control over that. With the pound, we have an established, tried and

proven currency which has actually stood up well to the very

considerable challenges. The markets decide the value of sterling. Yes,

but they have made a good judgement on sterling. Why would they not on

Scotland? There is no track record. The markets could say, we do not

know what this currency is like, or the economic policies. You are not

proposing it, but if you could not negotiate terms acceptable to you

and Alex Salmond... I am going to go to the audience again. The woman on

the left. I want to go back to Eddi Reader. I am sitting on the fence

and I cannot make up my mind. There is a lot of scaremongering. You are

saying all that about money, euros and pounds and it does not bother

me. I do not care. You said that in February... Was it February? I was

musing on it and I pose the question, what was this debate?

Somebody must have got through to you. Nobody has got through to you

about it. It is things that go right above your head. To get to the

people that matter the most, you need to come down to their level.

What would that be? We all need money. I find it surprising that you

all clap that it is about that. Is it not about democracy? As so often

in this debate, there is a bit of truth on both sides. I have no doubt

that in answer to the original question, yes, we could become

independent and continued to share a currency. I suspect the issue is a

bit of truth on both sides. I have no doubt that in answer to the

original question, yes, we could become independent and continued to

share a currency. I suspect the issues the UK Government currently

wants currency union would be increasingly different -- difficult.

In the longer term, and it might be a matter of years or longer than

that, but I do believe the Scottish Government should hold open the

option of creating an independent currency. Otherwise, UK Government

could impose limits on borrowing, public spending and services and

impose some form of austerity on us. I think we need to get away from

that. We have spent quarter of an hour on that and I want to get

through two or three aspects. I will move on to a question which perhaps

will touch on what you are saying. Chris Mulholland has the question.

How will the Scottish Government accommodate the latest influx of

European migrants in January giving the lack of jobs and housing? How

will you... The SNP says it wants to encourage immigration. How will that

work? I think that this should be prepared to welcome people to come

here from other parts of the world. Especially from the European Union.

If there are jobs and if they are coming here to make a contribution.

I take your point that we still have over 7% of our own people unemployed

so we should be looking at everything we can do to get them

into work. The truth of the matter is, whatever happens, we have an

ageing population in Scotland and that is the future. It will be

especially true if Scotland were to be an independent country. We will

need more people of working age to pay the pensions of people who are

retired. At the moment, the way things are going, Scotland is going

to be in an even more challenged position than the rest of the United

Kingdom in that regard. What do you make of what the Prime Minister

announced in Westminster about all these changes on benefits? You

originally said it would put us on the wrong side of the European Union

and I do not want to buy myself in that territory. I said, if you make

these changes solely in relation to people coming from the new accession

countries, Romania and Bulgaria, these changes that are being

announced today, which are pretty straightforward and sensible

managerial issues, if you come from another EU country, you're not going

to be able to claim jobseeker's allowance for the first three months

of being here. That will put us in the same position as Germany, the

Netherlands and other places. I have absolutely no difficulty with that.

The SNP has said Scotland needs immigration. What Scotland needs is

a people to come here, work here and contribute here. We know that. There

may not be too much difference between Alistair and I on this

issue. The first point, we're a nation of immigrants. We are also a

nation of immigrants. Scots and descendants of Scots are living in

every corner of the globe. The starting principle should be we

should give people coming to live in Scotland the same welcome as we

would expect for Scots going to live in other parts of the world. There

are big issues here that make for important discussions. I represent

the part of Glasgow that has the biggest concentration of migrants

from Central and Eastern Europe in glass go. There are challenges. It

is not challenges associated with where people come from, it is

challenge is challenges associated with the very significant and rapid

rise in an area which was already densely populated. You need to make

sure the investment, services and work done to integrate and make

people welcome, we need to do that. The bigger issue is about the future

need of Scotland for people to come and do skilled jobs here, to have

targeted emigration -- immigration. Having an ageing population does not

make us unique. It is a good thing that our population is ageing. We

need to make sure a working population is going to support that

ageing population. Taking away the right of young people we educate to

stay here after they graduate to work, particularly after they get

degrees, is the wrong thing to do. We could put in place policies that

are sensible for our economy and that, I think, is one of the big

benefits. Want to go back to the question. Chris Mulholland, you

clearly had concerns. Can you explain your concerns? Both these

speakers have said as far as they are concerned, everything is fine. I

have no problem with people coming here with something to offer. It

seems too easy for people to come into Scotland and the UK and is get

preferential treatment over people already living here. I think that is

wrong. I have been in a situation where I have worked every week since

I left school, 23 years. I could not get a mortgage, I went to the local

council office. They more or less said to me, you are the wrong

nationality. To get anywhere on the housing list. I was forced into an

astronomical private letter which I can barely afford and I cannot save

up for a deposit. You are the wrong nationality in what sense? The

people who are immigrants are placed higher up the housing list than

people who are already living here and I think that is wrong. Do you

think that is the doing of the Scottish Parliament or that of

Westminster? I think it is both. Certainly, the issue is one reserved

for Westminster. That is correct. I found myself in agreement with

Nicola and Alistair. There is an issue for Scotland and that is we do

know, without a shadow of doubt, that our population is ageing

proportionately at a greater pace than the rest of the UK. As one of

the other questions indicated, we have two good thought about how we

support those who will have two have pensions paid and other service

needs. I think it is the case that we are a welcoming country. We are a

welcoming set of countries in the United Kingdom. We do need skills

that are not currently available. I am delighted if people can bring

these skills and can work. What Alistair was talking about was where

people were coming and may very well have been expecting to go on benefit

indefinitely, goes that if the system of welfare provision. What

the UK Government has said in relation to Bulgaria and Rumania,

no. You're going to have to qualify for benefits and you are simply not

going to get that after a certain time. That is all about it. The

women in green. Instead of encouraging migrants from whatever

country they come from, I know that they have two and EU rules, let them

come in. Instead of actively encouraging them to come in and

bring skills with them, why don't we concentrate on upscaling and

training and investing in our own young people?

APPLAUSE I think that is a very important

point. I do think, sometimes, the apparent failure to take action

sometimes does cause Al-Qaeda conflict and tension around the

debate on immigration. -- does cause conflict. We do need to tackle it in

order to go forward. On the general question, most people would accept

that immigration in principle is a good thing. It needs to be managed

and it needs to be fair and effective and we should be clear

about the rules that are applied to everyone. The rules should apply

fairly. I would be very concerned at any housing person saying, you

cannot get a house on the basis of your nationality. Do you think it

happens? I assume he is not a liar. I am sure I would have agreement

from my colleagues that that should be addressed. People should get

housing on basis of need and not nationality. It will have

implications on independence and we will need to think that through. I

came up from Gretna Green, travelling and listening to the

Richard Bacon show, they had several politicians and people talking on

their about this very subject. David Cameron, the Labour politician was

saying, they hate this policy he is bringing in from 1st of January. It

is a little too late. If the SNP gets the referendum and they start

pushing, Scotland is going to be wonderful, we are going to be the

land of milk and honey and there will be more people coming. We will

sort out David Cameron 's immigration problem out because they

will not want to stay in England, they will want to come to Scotland.

I am against it. We are the first line of defence and the ones whose

houses are getting taken over. People may laugh. Anyone who does

not know where they are going, they filter out from the border. They do

not pick up point on the map and think, I'm going to Aberdeen or

Falkirk. They say, where do we go? Talking about the first line of

defence is a wee bit of overkill. It's kind of pretends that foreign

equals bad and that immigrant equals threat. There are some real myths.

Immigration contributes more to the economy across the whole of UK than

welfare -- band received welfare payments. Where there are problems

around the supply of social housing, and there are, we should be

investing in building more social housing. Where there are problems

around public services, we should be investing more in public services.

Where there are economic problems which lead to a lack of skills and

employment, that is what we should be investing in. You are not

persuading him. He is shaking his head. We do not have the

infrastructure to have thousands, and hundreds of thousands of people

who may come in. These houses are not going to get made. There are not

the schools in place. There are not hospitals and the Fire Service.

There is capacity to invest in housing in Scotland for domestic

need and migration need. That is something we should be doing

regardless. If you look at the numbers coming in and out, it is

mostly the same country that people are coming in and out of the UK to

and from. Let's get this into a bit of perspective and recognise that

migration is as much an opportunity and we should not talk about it like

that. Who is frightening new about this big influx of people? Who is

frightening new about that? It is not a question of who is

frightening, it is the reality. It is what is going to happen. We are a

very prosperous European countries. All the other countries, the 29 that

are in Europe, a lot of them are not as prosperous as we are. It is just

natural that people will want to better themselves. They want to up

skill themselves. They want to financially provide for their

family. There has to be the infrastructure, the housing. When

that gentleman up there cannot get a house, and he has lived and paid his

taxes, gone to school, cannot get them, there is something morally

wrong. Whoever told him that, has to be fired.

We do not need Mr Cameron's suggestions that rich people should

be able to move. Surely there is a question about membership of

Europe. If we were an independent country, if we did not become a

member of the European Union there would not be the issue of

immigration, because the issue is migrants coming from the rest of

Europe. You would like an independent Scotland to be outside

the European Union? Not necessarily, but there does seem to be a question

about whether we would automatically become members, given the comments

from the Spanish Prime Minister. Do you think it is likely that it will

not be automatic? I think it is like the currency debate, where it is

something that people are putting up barriers at the moment but if we got

a yes vote in the referendum it would not be such an issue. Is it

really possible that Scotland would not be allowed into the EU, in your

view, as an independent country? I think it is not automatic. I would

hope Scotland could join the EU and be welcomed into it, but the

critical issue is the conditions attached to that. In terms of the

rebate, open borders, the euro, other member states, on whom we

would need their unanimous agreement, would put conditions on

that. It is the conditions attached to that which would materially

affect life in Scotland going forward. You think it might be

different from that position now. It could be very different. We might

not get the rebate. We currently have the opt out on open borders and

that might not apply, so it is very significant and there are no

guarantees and the white paper from the SNP gave no guarantees or

answers on this. To listen to Margaret Curran, you have to wonder

how 150 countries have managed to become independent since the end of

the Second World War. They clearly did not want to join the EU. Some of

the members of that you are newly independent countries. If we vote

yes next year, we do not become independent the day after. By

definition, we negotiate the transition of our membership. We are

not asking for any special terms. We are asking for the terms we have

right now to continue. The bottom line is, is anybody seriously

suggesting that Scotland, with everything we bring to the European

table, would not be warmly welcomed as a continuing member? That is

simply not credible. This is an endorsement of Scotland's strengths.

This comes to the crux of it. Nicola says we are not asking for special

terms. We have got special terms. If we walk away from the United

Kingdom, we walk away from these special terms. That is the fact,

that is what we heard from the Spanish Prime Minister, who told us,

yes, you can apply but you will have two apply as a new entrant. We would

not be able to get the same opportunities that we currently

have. We got a pretty clear signal of that from the Spanish Prime

Minister last night. The cars it is not in his interest to make it look

easy for an independent Scotland. I know you want to send a signal to

the Catalans, and he does not really support the idea that the Catalonian

's should decide their fate in a referendum. But the one thing I

thought we all agreed about in this referendum was it is the decision of

the Scottish people, not the Spanish prime minister. Briefly, what would

not be available to Scotland that is available as a member of the United

Kingdom? You have to wonder if Croatia, for example... We are

talking about the United Kingdom. Croatia has been told she cannot

have the same favourable terms as we have, but as joint anyway. So why

would Croatia agree? What are the special terms? The rebate on budget

contributions, the commitment to join the euro. The only risk of

Scottish membership of the euro is the in-out referendum being promised

by David Cameron. Perhaps the rest of the EU might be willing to accept

the swap of an independent Scotland for Spain or Greece? Let's move on

because we have many other questions. You can join in the

debate at home by text or Twitter. Let's take this question from Carol

Fox. The one certainty of independence after March 2016 would

be that Scotland would never again be ruled by a Tory government. Is

that not more than enough reason to vote yes? Margaret Curran, does that

put you on the yes side? Well, there is a curious thing about democracy,

and that is, you can't always guarantee what governments are going

to be in the future. Let me say to you, do not make a decision, the

momentous decision we have next year, just on the basis you think

you can have a guarantee that Tories will never have power and influence

in Scotland. Sometimes when I look at Alex Salmond and see what they

are doing to the poverty programmes in Scotland, I have my doubts about

some of the things that are currently happening. They have a lot

of Tories on their side as well. If Scotland decide to vote Tory, then

they decide to vote Tory. It does not make any difference. The point

is that Scotland has the choice. Scotland has the choice. Not all the

time. Are we a country? Of course we are, and a very proud nation and

very patriotic. Then why ignore the mandate of the Scottish people then?

I am not ignoring the mandate. I do not accept that. You know we vote

centre left all the time. Please let me make the point. Why can't we have

a government that reflects us. Why can't we do that? The last 16 years,

Scotland has voted Labour and Scotland got a Labour government. We

do get to vote in Scottish Parliament. They had to lean so far

to the right that it was unrecognisable. And went toward in

Iraq. I voted for that Labour. Hold on, hold on, hold on! Enough! Eddi,

enough, for the moment, please. You are having a conversation among

yourselves. There are four other people here and 120 audience

members. I think the real reason Margaret Curran does not want

independence is because she realises Labour will never be in power again

in the UK. Not at all. You need the Scottish vote to get into

Westminster. Four governments since 1945, Labour governments, have been

supported by the Scottish vote and would not have been there if it had

not happened. Annabel Goldie, what do you say to the question that the

Tories would be dead meat in Scotland if Scotland votes

independence? That is very in courage in, implying a present state

of life, which I know there to be. I can understand why the lady poses

the question and why Eddi launches into her impassioned diatribe. I

actually think... I actually think there is something much deeper to

this about the whole constitutional debate. Because actually there are

many reasons why people may form a view. We have listened to some of

the views from those who favour independence for Scotland. They can

have that view, they are titled to it and I respect it. I would argue

very strongly that if you do believe, and according to the

opinion polls a lot of people do believe this, if you do believe that

this extraordinary and unusual social and economic and political

union which is the United Kingdom has actually worked well for the

last 300 years, and that does not mean you always get the government

you want at Westminster, for 13 years I did not get the government I

wanted at Westminster, but I still believed in the concept of the

United Kingdom, because I think it has served Scotland well and there

is a lot of evidence to demonstrate how effective the union has been.

What I am saying is that I think there are deeper, broader and bigger

issues which should determine Scottish minds when they make that

decision next year. For my own part, I have never said Scotland could not

be independent. Theoretically, Scotland could be independent. That

is not the question. The question is, which arrangement suits Scotland

better? My apartment is that I think we have the best of both worlds. We

have the benefit of ace drunk Scottish Parliament which looks

after domestic issues, and we have the framework of the bigger

partnership which gives arenas of influence on the international

stage. We have seen that to good effect in recent days, whether the

talks taking place about Iran, and how we stop Iran's nuclear

programme, whether it is all of the help we are managing to give in the

tragic situation confronting the Philippines, we are able to do all

that. We would not have these arenas if we were independent, so there are

bigger, broader issues than whether you like or do not like the Tories

in Scotland. No wonder people become disinterested in politics when we

have seen a display like this this evening, and just in the last few

minutes. People want the facts that they can then make up their own

minds. We want the truth. We want to know what is going to happen. OK, so

you can have power with uncertainty, or you can have no power with

uncertainty. Because nobody can tell us what is going to happen if we

stick with the status quo. We have 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds

getting the vote for the first time. They need to be helped to make up

their mind. Therefore, they need the truth. We cannot have people

bickering. You cannot turn on the TV or open a newspaper and get the

facts. I had to find it on the internet, had to look for it. Do you

believe there is a truth to be got at? I believe... I am not talking to

you. Do you believe there is a truth to be got at, or do you believe it

is a matter of judgement which nobody can ascertain at this stage?

I do not think we have heard any truth from any of the politicians on

this. We have published a White Paper and I hope people will read

it. We have tried to answer as many questions as possible and we will

answer more if we can. People have to look at the arguments and come to

their own decision. On the democracy point, I am no fan of the Tories but

for me this is not an anti-Tory point. It is a pro-democracy point.

Never in my life has Scotland voted Tory and yet for more than half of

my life we had a Tory government. That is not democratic and cannot be

right. With independence, we do not get landed with a government we have

rejected. I do not understand the Labour position on the referendum.

On many social and economic things, Labour supporters, SNP supporters

probably want much the same things. We want a fairer economy, a decent

welfare state, to see the back of nuclear weapons, and we are far more

likely to get these things through independence than through Labour

teaming up with the Tories in a Better Together campaign. Wouldn't

the argument about being represented by Tories for a long period of time

and not getting what you want, wouldn't that be equally applied to

parts of England that are consistently Labour voting and

support Tory governments, and parts of Britain that are consistently

Tory voting and support Labour governments? Why should Scotland be

so special? My grandmother was from Sunderland and that part of England

I am sure does not like Tory government is any more than we do.

You are not saying independence for Sunderland. My grandmother probably

would have argued that, but that is a different story. We are a nation

and we have the opportunity to assert that, to be independent and

take our own decisions. That is what it is about. I believe passionately

in the social, cultural, family union with other parts of the UK,

but I want us to be politically and economically responsible and we only

get that if we are independent. Alistair Carmichael. The lady in

blue said this was bound for politics because we were all

bickering. -- bad. I have two point out it is the one non-politician in

the middle who is bickering. It is my home and it is where I live. I

live here as well. I am a Scot and I am also passionate about being

British. It is possible to have more than one national identity. We have

lived with that for long enough. Part of the danger is how you

consider things in a referendum with how you would consider them at an

election. In an election, if you make a decision and decide to vote

for a government you do not burn like, you can change it at the next

general election. -- then like. If we make the wrong decision next

September, if we vote for an independence we do not like, there

is no going back. I am afraid Nicola just does not seem to get the grasp

of democracy. In my community, I live in Otley, we have never voted

for the Nationalists. -- I live in Orkney. We still have a Nationalist

government. That is how democracy works. Are you saying it is

undemocratic to have a vote on independence? Absolutely not. Who

says we cannot go back? All I am saying is why have we not got the

power to make the decision? If we speak to the English about what kind

of alliances we have, why do we have to have this old, ancient empire

structure. I think they could do with a bit of a rejuvenation of the

electoral system as well. The women in the bedroom from the back. You do

not need to be nationalist to vote yes. Working-class women are not

able to make equal pay claims in Scotland. No one in Scotland ever

voted for that. If you want to change that their new boat for other

parties at the next general election. -- then you vote for other

parties at the next general election. I want to start actually

by agreeing with something that Annabel from the Conservatives and

Margaret from the Labour Party said. It is a deeper, longer-term issue

than who will form the next government. I hope if you are

undecided, or if you are sat at home watching the programme and you are

undecided, I hope you do not make the decision on who the next

government will be. I have made my decision on the basis of a political

landscape I think needs to be fundamentally challenged. The UK

political landscape, whichever party is in power, has been delivering

minor variations on a centre-right scheme for far too long. It is the

opportunity for fundamental change. I think we will get that changes we

decide to take responsibility for ourselves and build our own

political culture in Scotland, our own political landscape which

reflects the values of the Scottish people. It is not easy and it is not

a guarantee. The only way to guarantee failing to achieve that is

not to try. The woman in red. We are talking about democracy and

democracy for Scotland and the future of Scotland. Democracy is

something Scotland is very passionate about. I would like to

ask Alistair Carmichael to explain the democracy of him bolstering a

Tory government, imposing legislation in Scotland like the

bedroom tax. Also the these good job tribunal is, except read. How can he

possibly justify that to be Scottish people? -- also the fees for job

tribunal 's. It is the government of the United Kingdom. The two parties

in the coalition across the whole of the United Kingdom got 57% of the

votes. I think we are perfectly entitled to Govan. Let me take

another point. Margarets, four years, the Labour Party in Scotland

says do not vote SNP or the Tories will get in. -- Margret. There is a

basic premise I would put forward. I think we have a strong Scottish

parliament. Because we have a shared interest with the rest of the United

Kingdom, I do not believe Scotland should pull away from that because

of family and connections. I think the best way to do that if the

alliance that Eddie talks about. We have a democratic structure in

Scotland and a Democratic structure will shared interests. Let me

finish. I think we have to make sure we put forward these arguments. You

can have a strong Scottish parliament but you also, where you

have shared interests, be it the currency or macro economic issues, I

ran some European membership, defence, foreign affairs, I think

that is best governed by having the UK Parliament with representation

across the UK and is accountable to the people it represents. Want to

take the woman there. Can I ask the panel, if we vote for a yes vote

next year and the SNP did not get in, is there anything in the White

Paper, all these promises that have been given to us in this huge

document yesterday, that any of the other parties would accept? Would

they take that on board or would a completely new paper be written up?

All the political parties will put forward the manifesto. The yes or no

choice on independence is simply about that question, should Scotland

govern itself and make its own decisions decided by the Scottish

Parliament and the political balance that the people of Scotland choose

to put into that Parliament? There are things in the White Paper that

the SNP has put forward which sound like political proposals, like

childcare. It is like a manifesto for an election rather than

independence. We have been very open about that. Some things are very

important in terms of fundamentals like the currency and to the EU. We

have said we want to demonstrate and illustrate how you can use the

powers of independence to make Scotland better and grow the

economy. That is why we have put forward proposals. You are

absolutely right, we may not be the government. We have managed to do it

in Westminster. Childcare in the rest of the United Kingdom is far

ahead of where it is in Scotland. You have the power, you have the

money, why don't you just get on with it? We can only do that if we

are independent. We have had a lot of questions about Falkirk. One

question from John McCall, on an issue that has been exercising the

political classes and other people. My MP, Eric Joyce, has brought shame

on for Kirk. Should his constituents and myself be able to vote for his

dismissal? APPLAUSE

In other words, Eric Joyce was fined ?3000 and banned from pubs and even

a 12 month community order for committing an assault on another MP.

Should you be able to get rid of him in this period or should he be able

to sit there? I think lots of stuff goes on we do not get a clear

picture of. There are definite agenda is going on. I think there

has been some sneaky behaviour happening. I do not want to be

trashing all trade unions because people make mistakes or Eric Joyce,

I do not really... I do not live in this part of the country and I do

not know much about him. I know he punched somebody in the face. I am

not clear what is going on between Unite and the Labour Party. Unite

are accused of fixing the choice of candidate. Eric Joyce did bring

shame on for Kirk and the Labour Party and we were right to suspend

him. Should it go to the wider population? The legislation did not

come forward in the House of Commons. It becomes a very complex

process and that will need to be discussed. As Labour come clean

about what goes on in the selection process? -- has Labour come clean?

When concerned became public, the Labour Party took immediate action

to deal with that. We put the constituency into special measures.

You bring in senior officials. What we did do was to ensure that the

members, through that investigation, the members were now floating in the

new selection procedure all predated any of the concerns. Has Labour come

out with a clean face from this, do you think? It has not been the

happiest of experiences. Has it all being cleared up? All parties have

problem with candidates. That has happened in Scotland in the recent

period. You must investigate it. What is important is moving forward.

It is about addressing the needs of the people of Falkirk will stop we

have a good candidate. What has happened to Falkirk is very

unfortunate. I think it is regrettable that, I am a

politician, I am acutely aware that the public perception of politicians

is not high. When something like this happens, it reaffirms public

perception. I think that is profoundly regrettable. There are

broader strands and two things will have helped. I do not think a bad

smell will go away unless whatever the report was that the Labour Party

commissioned is made public. Why should it not be made public? You

have suffered. You have been the victims. Another aspect is

troubling. Let me say I believe in trade unions. That may sound

improbable. Responsible trade unions have an important role to play. I am

deeply concerned at the way Unite has operated. Since Ed Miliband

became leader of the Labour Party, the biggest element of donations has

come from Unite. All of that is made public. There is no dependents to

the extent that Labour is dependent on trade unions. Why can't Labour

disengaged itself from Unite, come clean, hold its hands up and say, we

are trying to put it right. Why is Ed Miliband not doing that? This

whole thing stems back from the time when the Labour Party

disenfranchised Dennis Canervan. He was an excellent MP for this area.

Eric Joyce made it no easier. When the whole thing started, he should

have stepped down immediately. The thing has been started by the fact

we have got, if you like, a clean slate coming up with the new

selection of the new three candidates. I think the whole thing

is, our MP, Mr Joyce, should have stepped down immediately. Falkirk

has had a bad press because of that. I will have two stop there. We have

run out of time. I have two stop or I shall be hung, drawn and

quartered, which I would not like. Next week we will be in east London.

It is on the day of the Chancellor 's prebudget report. Politicians

will include the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, David Davis for the

Conservatives, Mary Beard will be on the panel and Amanda Patel. The week

after that we will be in Swansea. If you want to come to ease London or

Swansea, applied to the address on the screen. -- east London.

The debate goes on on radio five live. From Falkirk, thank you to our

panel and all of you who have taken part in the programme. Good night.

But you're saying the scale of theft is huge.