23/09/2014 Scotland 2014

All of Scotland will emerge the winner from the referendum.

Tonight we talk to him about what happens next

The Scottish Parliament got back to business today.

And the first order of business is for all the parties to try and agree

what extra powers they want to see delivered to that parliament.

The man who has to try and get them to agree was watching

Tonight we talk to the departing First Minister about the role he

And why he thinks he will live to see a fully independent Scotland.

We are now basically arguing about timescale and method

At his party conference in Manchester,

Labour leader Ed Miliband says David Cameron is learning the wrong

While in New York, he's overheard gossiping about the

The Scottish public might have voted no thanks to independence,

but the appetite for political change has never been clearer.

Today, the Scottish Parliament came together for the first time since

the referendum result and Alex Salmond's resignation announcement

With the clock ticking on a timetable for more devolution,

His first Parliamentary session as the outgoing First Minister, rather

than the future head of an independent Scotland. After country

divided, the politicians came together again. To mark the

significance of the day the presiding officer, and usually, took

time for reflection. It cannot and must not be business as usual.

People have come off their settees, out of their homes, into the streets

and public meetings and then into polling stations. They are not going

back. APPLAUSE

And so over to the politicians. They found common ground on the fact

that 16 and 17-year-olds should vote in future. But soon, there was a

hint of business as usual as old party political divisions began to

show. For this Parliament, we, all of us, have a responsibility to hold

Westminster's feet to the fire to ensure the pledges are metaphors and

that's not just the job the Scottish Government, but one for all parties

in the Parliament. Indeed, we might well argue there's a special

obligation on the Unionist party, it's essential they deliver. We

don't need anybody to hold our feet to the fire in making this

Parliament work. We don't need anybody to hold our feet to the fire

to get powers for this Parliament that will make it stronger still

inside the United Kingdom. I give my commitment that we will bring powers

over taxation. This Government has spent seven years telling the

country all of the things it can't do and now it has just 18 months to

tell us the things that cannot. And one of those things that it can do

is help deliver more powers for the Scottish parliament. This referendum

is never about no change for the change is coming. It's about whether

that change should happen within or without the UK. Referendum over and

of course, the parties aren't going to miraculously come together. But

this man has been tasked with bringing them together. Getting

agreement on the new powers that were promised to Scotland. There is

broad consensus in a way that there needs to be more power given to

Holyrood. My job is to get consensus around some of the detail of that.

My message to the political parties today is that Scotland is expecting

us to arrive at consensus, so I would ask them to enter into that in

the of goodwill. Not only that, but it's got to provide recommendations

by the end of November. The Smith commission, very clearly, very

clearly is not going to have a time to undertake the depth of public

engagement but I believe Scotland deserves to have and those newly

politicised people around Scotland deserve to be able to take part in.

We have to find people to avoid it being another party political stitch

up. We propose the parliament raises the majority of the money that it

spends for the those missing powers would give us control of the purse

strings and therefore control of our destiny on the domestic agenda. If

we want to do is have been different from Westminster, we could for them

if we want tax cuts for those on low and middle incomes, we can choose to

do that. Can they choose to agree on more powers? Every party involved

wants change. Every party wants a different version of change. Adding

all the other contributions, no wonder he is looking serious.

Meanwhile in New York, David Cameron, appears to have

broken royal protocol by talking about the Queen's reaction

when he rang to tell her the result of the Scottish referendum.

He was overheard telling the city's former mayor, Michael Bloomberg,

that Her Majesty purred down the line when he called her to tell her

Buckingham Palace said it does not comment

on private conversations between the Prime Minister and the Monarch.

Earlier this evening, I caught up with the First Minister in Holyrood.

As well as asking him for reaction to that Cameron faux

pas, I began by asking him how he was feeling after what must

I'm feeling very positive. There has been some emotional moments. I

turned up at my constituency meeting, my regularly meeting on

Sunday, and there were 500 people there, so it caused a bit of a

problem. Could not get them all in the whole place so I had to do a

speech outside and that was emotional. People turning out in

such numbers, get a bit emotional but, look, I'm positive about the

future of Scotland. Didn't win the referendum, but we achieved a great

deal. I think momentum, it's clear we may have the essential irony in

politics that the No side have been on the defensive and the Yes side

are riding a wave of public enthusiasm, a substantial irony but

it seems to be what's happening. Coming back to Holyrood for the

first time since the referendum, realising how few sessions you got

left. It must be sad? I love the First Minister's Questions. I love

being First Minister, but there's a range of things in job, for example,

it would be helpful in saving Ferguson shipyard, it's

fundamentally more satisfying than any First Minister's Questions I had

taken part in, so I think what I will miss about the job is there are

issues where you can have a direct influence. There are many you can't,

incidentally, and that has to be said as well but there are some

things which come up and you can say, I've made a difference here for

the bat is really satisfying. I had a phone call from two shop stewards

yesterday at Fergusons, who said the guys were sending me something for

them I don't know what it is but I got an impression it might be

illiquid. John Wilson resigned today which means you gone for a majority

of mine after the election down to one, tricky situation to bequeath

your successor. I think the successor, whoever they are, will be

well capable of dealing with that situation. Obviously, you don't like

for anyone to lose support but we have not been in an uncomfortable

position in terms of the votes in the Scottish Parliament. I would

have thought much more significant is, we have more than doubled the

party membership since last week. I think it changes every hour but last

time I checked, 53,000 or something like that from 26,000, a most

extraordinary thing for them I thought we would gain members

because of the level of activity, but if you are told me we would have

more new members today than we had members last week, I would have been

very surprised. I notice other people on the yes side are

experiencing a similar surge. People, having tasted the prospect

of being able to determine a Scotland's future, people don't want

to let that go and by far the most signal that the aftermath of this

referendum campaign, is the more people who express the wish by

joining the SNP the better, but if they do it by continuing to campaign

and articulate the hopes the referendum campaign did, it's good

as well. People are not going to go quietly into the shadows. People are

now politically active and they want to see this country change totally.

What a roller will he SNP have in changing this country? Will you be

full participants to get new powers for the Scottish Parliament? Yes, I

have already agreed that. We spoke to Lord Smith. Will you personally

be involved in that? I am meeting him on Friday. Robert Smith is an

excellent choice because of his credibility from the Commonwealth

Games. He did a brilliant job over the last few years so he's got a lot

of credibility and that's a good choice but, of course, what we have

to understand, not just the Westminster parties, although they

need to understand more than anyone but the Holyrood politicians as

well, we are not the only people in this process. There are tens of

thousands of politically engaged people with a stake in this future.

They can be involved in the process? They have to be. The Unionist

parties have got themselves into a position in that they have

indistinct proposals which have to be consulted upon. But we will have

to have a wide canvas and they have got a timescale for delivery which

cannot be rescinded upon. Into that mix you're going to put the SNP and

some of the enthusiastic supporters have garnered over the last few

months asking for even more powers than you know Westminster will agree

to. I don't think even more. I'd been anyone will look at what is

being offered and ascribe it as a powerhouse package. Even a devilish

risk groups are saying it's way short -- and Ben Thompson Middle

point he found himself in a position as a revolutionist the Yes Vote was

close at what he wanted, that what was being put forward by the

Unionist campaign. Their practice has been weak as well as indistinct.

However, they have not been sold as that. I mean, even more so, what

Gordon Brown was saying, he was saying this was as near federalism

as you can have. He said it was home rule prospectus, and I think people

therefore very entitled to have something really powerful as part of

their contribution to the process. Hingis parties can't have both ways,

complaining we are not participating and then start complaining if they

do when we are putting forward which will actually fulfil the tests of

the parliament people want. People want a powerhouse parliament which

can make a real difference to jobs and social justice and enhance

Scotland's status. Looking back at the campaign, did you believe you

are going to win? Yes. What went wrong? You can look at it two ways,

either you did not get the majority or you could say that a couple of

years ago David Cameron was sitting comfortably with the thought that

the no side would win 2-to-1. Or even better as some advisers

thought. We came a long way, we just did not get past the summit. In

terms of the campaign dynamic, it will be more useful farce if the

opinion polls showed as leader -- in the lead earlier. It puts Downing

Street into over drive. First, into a fear mongering campaign, most of

us had heard it before, quite disgraceful fear mongering campaign,

but I do not think that is what helped. What helped them was the

presentation of the vow. This extraordinary, last-minute offer

that was presented as something substantial. I think that gave a

number of people a reason for voting no. Was that one thing you did not

see coming? You knew they would throw the kitchen sink at you in

terms of economics, but you were not expecting the vow? It was difficult

to see that there would be a rehashing of something that was

discounted in the spring and presented as something new and

different. That was done. I'm not complaining about it, I will never

complain about campaigns. My view on campaigns, I have said in the

parliament today, there are two things that I think require a good

look, one, the leak of the Royal Bank decision 45 minutes before, I

am not a lawyer, but that seems to be contrary to the law, and all the

information I have one that will be made available to the foreign keys.

-- authorities. I don't think it will result in a clean bill of

health for the people responsible. And the aftermath. The situation

where a gang of thugs had a period ranged attack or peaceful --

prearranged attack on a peaceful demonstration. You don't think there

was a no vote because Scotland wasn't ready for independence? I

think it showed a substantial appetite for independence, and even

greater appetite for real powers, meaningful powers. I think the

pendulum has swung, if did not swing as far as I wanted, but we carried

the torch along way and maybe it is time to pass it on to a new

generation will carry it further. Will use independent Scotland in

your lifetime? Yes, I think we are beyond the tipping point. We are now

arguing about is timescale and method as opposed to destination.

Where the full array of the Westminster establishment and all

their client groups and a variety of institutions went against the

national movement, I think we should call it that now, and we still get

45% of the vote and 1.6 million Scots and a large chunk of other

people who said, well, we think we can get more change, I think we

passed the tipping point. In the next 50 years? In the next ten?

I'm in the incredible position to say with some that is busy -- with

some legitimacy, that is a question you can address to my successor.

David Cameron has been heard saying the definition of relief is when you

phone the Queen and Teller, your kingdom is still united. -- tell

her. That would be a different phone call if it was you on the end of the

phone. Can I just say that David Cameron, he has been Prime Minister

for four years, and he has not learned some basic civility of not

gossiping about what Her Majesty thinks or does not think. That is

pathetic. He should hang his head in shame. Her Majesty the Queen has a

great deal more experience than David Cameron. Secondly, in Dover

heard conversation, most Scots will be quite interested in that he said

he was having stomach ulcers as he was frightened of the polls. I think

that might be encouraging to a lot of Scots to think of discomfiting

the Prime Minister in that fashion. Maybe we should give him is more

discomfort. What is next for Alex Salmond? How will you continue

giving the Tories discomfort? It was noted that a number of people

had spoken to me in the past tense, I am not going out of politics. I am

available to be a member of the Scottish Parliament for

Aberdeenshire East, as long as my constituents would need to be. You

may stand in the 2016 election Graham Buck Oh, yes. I said that.

I have never been opinion that only, I love being a constituency

MP. I have always done that. I know some figures who don't, I won't say

they are bad job, but to them that was a chore. It has never been like

that for me. I have always found it fascinating. I get a real

satisfaction from those sorts of issues. I have no difficulty, I

think all politics is local, so I am available to my constituents if they

so wish and it is a matter for them. You don't have to be First

Minister, love the way do being First Minister, but you don't have

to be to make a difference in politics. I will be available to my

successor, when I wanted and needed, not otherwise, of course, because

you have to be careful. I have a feeling whether this accessories,

they want be the sort of person that will be at risk of being

overshadowed. Track whoever my successor is. -- whoever my

successor is. Scottish politics has also been

centre stage in Manchester at Where Ed Miliband accused the

Prime Minister of learning the wrong lessons from the result

of the Scottish referendum. In his speech to

the party's conference, the Labour leader said David

Cameron, by offering English votes for English laws in the Commons,

was seeking to divide, not unite the UK, as our Westminster Correspondent

Tim Reid reports from Manchester. It is no surprise that as it has

done all this week, Scots and featured very heavily in Ed

Miliband's speech. -- Scotland. He can -- he kept returning to the

theme. His theme also today was one of togetherness, not just the

nations of the UK, but of society, saying many voters were

disillusioned with politics and that is why so many people voted for

independence in that referendum. On that, he suggested that Mr

Cameron's reaction, by suggesting English votes for Bush laws, was one

which was dividing the union and which was the wrong routes to go

down. If David Cameron cares so much about

the union, why is he seeking to divide us? He is learning the wrong

lessons. He is learning the wrong lessons from Scotland. What he

doesn't understand is that the lessons are of course about the

constitution, but they are not about playing political tactics about

England. He also said there should be a constitutional convention to

describe the way forward for devolution across the whole of the

UK, not a stitch up from Mr Cameron. No sign they will sign up to that

moment the back idea of them. Other things you touched on was the

mansion tax. That would pay for a 2.5 billion pound fund for more

doctors and nurses for the NHS. But health is devolved, so the money

from that, we reckon, would go to the Scottish Government to decide

however it wants to spend it. It was a speech lofty on ambition, lots of

rhetoric, I think, some people may say will it be enough to persuade

voters in Scotland who deserted the Labour Party in the referendum? They

will decide in eight months time. In the studio this evening is

the co-convener of the Scottish Green Party,

Patrick Harvie. Former Scottish Conservative leader and now peer

Annabel Goldie. And in our Edinburgh studio Scottish Labour's Welfare

Spokesperson, Jackie Baillie. Smith, who is chairing the

commission on devolved powers, says it will take courage to find the

agreement. As I am in the chair, we could call this arrow version of the

Smith Commission. What can Labour compromise on to try and find

agreement? What we have already seen is that three of the political

parties has set out their proposals in some detail. There is a lot of

common ground. The job is to get them to be the same rather than

similar. What can you compromise on? There is a good starting point of

Ayr in that we are talking about more devolution of taxation, in

particular local income tax. We're talking in addition about the

devolution of some aspects of welfare. Housing benefit, attendance

allowance, all of that. I think there are broad areas where I think

people will achieve a compromise. There is no doubt it is a tough

timetable, but I think Laura Smith is the man to do the job. -- Lord

Smith. In the 18th of September, I was struck by the fact that the

people of Scotland exercise their will, their voices and views

mattered, their votes mattered and they overwhelmingly voted no. By a

significant margin. I think the First Minister seeks to avoid that,

but it is the case that it is the settled will of the Scottish people

that they want to remain in the United Kingdom, but they want more

powers. That is what we have to try and find agreement on. Annabel, the

Tory party's proposals go further than Labour, especially when it

comes to income tax powers. Where can compromise be found? It is

normally found as a consequence of intelligent and informed discussion

and I do not think it would be appropriate to pre-empt the process.

Lord Smith will engage with different parties, I'm sure he will

do that in an inclusive fashion which will provide a forum. For me,

the best compromises often comes from people being able to discuss

thoroughly what they see as the merits or advantages, disadvantages

of proposals. I think it would be inappropriate to try and anticipate

what the discussions will be. Patrick Harvie, you said today you

were worried about the tight timetable promised by the prounion

parties and it does not allow time for voters to get involved. But

presumably you want people to stick to the timetable? That is what they

promised and they will have to stick to it if they want any credibility,

but there is an appetite out there for engagement in politics like

nothing we have seen for many years. There is an appetite for radical

change. That is amongst both sides. But Westminster political landscape

is one that is traditionally very resistant to radical change. I think

it would be a tricky position, my concern is that we do not see this

as an alternative funding formula for devolution, one that satisfies

the interests of the three UK parties, but effectively places any

future Scottish Government in situation of having to manage

Westminster's cuts on its behalf. That would be damaging -- that would

be damaging. Jackie, it will be preferable for the prounion parties

to have come up with an agreed package before September 18, so

people knew what they were voting for. If everyone thinks it is so

easy now to find common area is, why couldn't you have done it before the

referendum? We were operating to different timescales and processes.

There was a bit of healthy competition, which I don't think is

bad in terms of the offer to the people of Scotland. But we need to

come together, clearly, and I think that is the expectation of people

who voted no and people who voted yes. 100% of them voted for more

change and that is now up to us to deliver. While the three party set

out there are proposals, I am encouraged by the fact that I want

people to contribute, I want people to contribute to the process so that

we have a proper dialogue and we can move forward, but we do so in the

frame that the majority of people in Scotland voted no, they do want more

powers, but they wants to remain part of the United Kingdom. I think

Lord Smith will be aware of that fact.

Why couldn't it have been done before September 18?

I think Jackie makes a very good point. Of the three parties have

come by different routes and different timescales and by

different processes to their final deliberations. Why couldn't you

spent the summer sorting out? We were already in the thick of the

referendum campaign when the single issue to be determined was do we

remain within the United Kingdom or not? Patrick says people out there

have an appetite for radical change. What the referendum results confirms

is that people have an appetite for remaining within the United Kingdom.

There are important characteristics that flow from that. I heard people

say, we like being part of something where if we live in Glasgow we can

go visit a relative down the south of England and get the same state

pension... Anywhere else in Europe. Let's rerun the arguments. That pick

up on a lighter note, what did you make of the Prime Minister

discussing what he said to the Queen? I'm not particularly

interested in what animal noises Mrs Windsor chooses to make in any

circumstance, but to let us recognise that one of the things

that we have to try and do is capture this reconnection between

people and politics. Let's not see this as simply establishment people,

whether Westminster or Holyrood, large parties or small, simply

carving the process up and carving up the future of Scotland. This has

to be about answering a public appetite for public participation .

I'll be back at the same time tomorrow night.

This is only the beginning, says President Obama, as America and five

Arab states take on ISIS. We're going to do what is necessary to

take the fight to this terrorist group. For the security of the

country and the region and for the entire world. The air strikes target

Jihadists in Syria