:00:00. > :00:00.Yesterday, she was not going anywhere.
:00:00. > :00:07.Tonight, Natalie McGarry has stepped down from the SNP.
:00:08. > :00:27.Hello and welcome. In a dramatic move, Glasgow MP
:00:28. > :00:29.Natalie McGarry has stepped down from the SNP parliamentary group,
:00:30. > :00:46.She is enetitled to the presumption of innocence. She has done the right
:00:47. > :00:51.thing in the interest of party and I accept that position but she is now
:00:52. > :00:53.entitled to state her innocence and clear her name.
:00:54. > :01:01.The question exercising Westminster tonight, as the Scotland Bill
:01:02. > :01:05.And 20 Labour MPs defy calls from their leadership to abstain
:01:06. > :01:16.To lose one MP may be regarded as a misfortune but, to paraphrase
:01:17. > :01:19.Oscar Wilde, to lose two is starting to look like carelessness.
:01:20. > :01:21.Just six months ago, the SNP was celebrating its best-ever success
:01:22. > :01:24.at the Westminster elections, but tonight, a second MP has resigned
:01:25. > :01:27.the SNP whip, as allegations of financial irregularities against her
:01:28. > :01:35.Natalie McGarry denies any wrongdoing
:01:36. > :01:45.Here is our Political Editor, Brian Taylor.
:01:46. > :01:54.Natalie McGarry takes the Westminster seat of Glasgow East
:01:55. > :02:01.from Labour in May. Natalie McGarry, Scottish National
:02:02. > :02:07.Party, 24 thousand... There cheering her on the First Minister. Natalie
:02:08. > :02:09.will be here at lunchtime. Central to the controversy is the campaign
:02:10. > :02:15.group women for dense. They decided to keep going after the referendum,
:02:16. > :02:21.but found gaps in their Championship with more apparently raised than had
:02:22. > :02:25.been spent. -- cash. It is said Natalie McGarry had control of
:02:26. > :02:30.crowdfunding, her lawyer maintains her innocence. Natalie McGarry is
:02:31. > :02:35.aware of the fact that a report has been made, to Police Scotland, about
:02:36. > :02:41.women for dense which raises questions of financial discrepancy,
:02:42. > :02:45.as of yesterday, on Natalie's request we contacted Police Scotland
:02:46. > :02:48.and advised them she would speak to them if they wished to. Natalie
:02:49. > :02:57.maintains she has not done anything wrong.
:02:58. > :03:00.It is not the first party problem for Nicola Sturgeon, another MP
:03:01. > :03:06.Michelle Thompson's property deals are under police investigation. She
:03:07. > :03:08.stresses her innocence, but has surrendered the party whip at
:03:09. > :03:13.Westminsterment at lunchtime Nicola Sturgeon said she wanted time to
:03:14. > :03:17.consider all the details. -- Westminster I am not going to be
:03:18. > :03:20.rushed into a decision I will consider this properly and fairly.
:03:21. > :03:29.If action needs to be taken it will be taken. It will balance the
:03:30. > :03:33.highest of standards I expect from a presum son of innocence. Tonight,
:03:34. > :03:37.after a day of pressure, Natalie McGarry withdrew from the SNP whip
:03:38. > :03:41.at Westminster, which means automatic suspension from the party.
:03:42. > :03:45.She said the controversy was distracting from her job. Opposition
:03:46. > :03:48.leaders said it left Nicola Sturgeon looking weak I think this is the
:03:49. > :03:54.right thing for Natalie McGarry to do, to resign from the SNP whip, it
:03:55. > :03:59.is a shame that Nicola Sturgeon is the leader of the SNP, didn't do it
:04:00. > :04:07.earlier today. Tonight, the First Minister was delivering a lecture in
:04:08. > :04:11.Glasgow. In a statement the SNP repeated Natalie
:04:12. > :04:17.Well, how much of a problem is this for the SNP?
:04:18. > :04:20.Here to mull that over is the Daily Record's Political Editor,
:04:21. > :04:25.Good evening, David. It is a powerful imam there, in Brian
:04:26. > :04:30.Taylor's film of Nicola Sturgeon cheering on Natalie McGarry, just
:04:31. > :04:35.six months ago in Glasgow. What do you make of the First Minister's
:04:36. > :04:40.response to this, today? I think it is quite clear that there is a
:04:41. > :04:44.strong personal friendship between Nicola Sturgeon and Natalie McGarry,
:04:45. > :04:49.that has existed for some time. Natalie McGarry's a long-standing
:04:50. > :04:52.member of the SNP and has a lot of family links with the party, so that
:04:53. > :04:57.is not surprising that Nicola Sturgeon would want to give her a
:04:58. > :05:00.fair hearing. The bigger political problem, for Nicola Sturgeon is
:05:01. > :05:05.probably where these allegations have came from. These are not
:05:06. > :05:11.allegations made by opponents of the SNP, in fact, seven of the people in
:05:12. > :05:14.the Women For Dense board who took this to the police are SNP
:05:15. > :05:18.candidates for the Holyrood election, so the problem is not just
:05:19. > :05:24.the allegations, not just the political problems they present, not
:05:25. > :05:28.just the embarrassment that 56 is now down 54, the fact it is figures
:05:29. > :05:32.within the SNP that have raised concerns. Labour are saying tonight
:05:33. > :05:37.that there are questions to be asked about who knew what and when, in the
:05:38. > :05:43.SNP, about these allegations. It is not going to go away quickly all of
:05:44. > :05:47.this, is it? It is not going to go away quickly, Police Scotland have
:05:48. > :05:51.said this is likely to be a lengthy investigation, we should say not
:05:52. > :05:56.only does Natalie McGarry deny any allegations of wrongdoing but in
:05:57. > :06:02.fact the police have not established that any criminality occurred. I
:06:03. > :06:07.think while the opposition have been seizing on issue of who knew what
:06:08. > :06:09.when, there is frustration from people in the Scottish Government
:06:10. > :06:16.round Nicola Sturgeon, that really they haven't had the fabs presented
:06:17. > :06:21.with, to them very clearly. They have had no documentation at all
:06:22. > :06:25.from Women For Independence. Whenever opposition politicians are
:06:26. > :06:29.accusing Nicola of not acting quick enough, she probably has reasonable
:06:30. > :06:35.ground phosphorus tracing there if she hasn't been presented with full
:06:36. > :06:39.detail of what is alleged. After Michelle Thompson this puts the
:06:40. > :06:43.SNP's candidates under the spotlight again? It is not just Michelle
:06:44. > :06:50.Thompson, in the current Scottish Parliament we have the case of Bill
:06:51. > :06:55.Walker who was the MSP that concerns had been flagged up previously and
:06:56. > :07:00.he was convicted in court, and had to stand down, so I think t although
:07:01. > :07:04.Michelle Thompson and Natalie McGarry are different situation,
:07:05. > :07:15.because neither have been convicted of anything or it is not clear that
:07:16. > :07:19.there is any allegations to answer, but another episode where an SNP
:07:20. > :07:21.politician appears to have been dragged into scandal isn't a good
:07:22. > :07:25.Within the last hour, the House of Lords has given its approval
:07:26. > :07:28.to the Scotland Bill, but as it went through its Second Reading,
:07:29. > :07:30.some peers raised serious concerns about approving substantial
:07:31. > :07:32.new powers for the Scottish Parliament before they have been
:07:33. > :07:35.able to scrutinise the financial deal that will underpin them.
:07:36. > :07:36.The so-called "fiscal framework" is currently being negotiated
:07:37. > :07:39.behind closed doors by the UK and Scottish governments.
:07:40. > :07:51.Alexandra MacKenzie has been listening to this evening's debate.
:07:52. > :07:56.As the lights dimmed round Westminster, the debate on
:07:57. > :08:02.Scotland's future continued. Despite concerns about a lack of detail on
:08:03. > :08:07.the fiscal framework. That would explain who funds what, and why. We
:08:08. > :08:13.are going to be legislating in this chamber, on a wing and a prayer, but
:08:14. > :08:17.I am very worried that we will end up taking decisions that we cannot
:08:18. > :08:21.back out of, that will have a negative effect, not just in
:08:22. > :08:25.Scotland, but in all of the United Kingdom. The details were not
:08:26. > :08:29.available for this second reading of the Scotland bill, because they are
:08:30. > :08:33.being negotiated by the Scottish and UK Governments.
:08:34. > :08:38.The Bill delivers the Smith Commission agreement, Lord Smith,
:08:39. > :08:43.alongside others, long to see it passed. This bill must be enacted.
:08:44. > :08:46.The political breach of trust and betrayal of commitment to Scottish
:08:47. > :08:53.voters were it not to be passed is unacceptable. However the Economic
:08:54. > :08:55.Affairs Committee is right to identify the fiscal framework,
:08:56. > :08:59.consequential in the bill as being of huge importance. That is correct
:09:00. > :09:03.to do that. The SNP has no representation in the Lords. They
:09:04. > :09:07.denied suggestions they would welcome delays We have been clear we
:09:08. > :09:13.would like to see the fiscal framework, we would like to see
:09:14. > :09:16.that. We are clear we will not sign up to a fiscal framework that will
:09:17. > :09:19.be detrimental to the people of Scotland. We need to look carefully
:09:20. > :09:24.and put it in front of the Scottish Parliament. They need to make the
:09:25. > :09:26.decision. I hope nobody is suggesting we should sign up to
:09:27. > :09:30.something that will be bad for the people of Scotland. Back in the
:09:31. > :09:34.chamber another peer was on his feet and said this should be an exciting
:09:35. > :09:39.time. This bill is not an end in itself. It is a means to try and
:09:40. > :09:43.improve on the Governments of Scotland, the accountability of
:09:44. > :09:47.Scottish Government, to take more decisions and build the kind of
:09:48. > :09:51.Scotland we want to see and the bill has our support. For the people of
:09:52. > :09:57.Scotland the debates and discussions continue. And all await further
:09:58. > :10:01.Just before we came on air, I spoke to the former Conservative
:10:02. > :10:13.You have just come from the House of Lords where the bill has passed its
:10:14. > :10:18.second reading. There were concerns raised. Justifiably so? Yes, the
:10:19. > :10:22.Scottish Parliament are insisting they can only consider the bill with
:10:23. > :10:26.the fiscal framework, and this bill has gone through the House of
:10:27. > :10:30.Commons and they have not had the fiscal framework which sounds
:10:31. > :10:34.complicated. It is what decides how much money Scotland will get and
:10:35. > :10:39.what the long-term funding of public services in Scotland will be, and
:10:40. > :10:42.that is really very very important, in our Economic Affairs Committee
:10:43. > :10:45.report showed there are hundreds of millions of pounds if not in the
:10:46. > :10:48.longer term billions at stake here, it is difficult to consider the bill
:10:49. > :10:54.properly without having the fiscal framework. Indeed you have
:10:55. > :10:57.previously likened passing the Scotland bill to buying a car
:10:58. > :11:01.without seeing the engine, do you think there is a danger Scotland
:11:02. > :11:06.could be very much worse off if this isn't properly scrutinised? There is
:11:07. > :11:10.indeed. If, if Scotland is funded under the Barnett Formula and gets
:11:11. > :11:15.20% more than the rest of the UK, and you take some of that money and
:11:16. > :11:20.replace it with money that is raised in taxes in Scotland. If the tax
:11:21. > :11:27.base is the same in Scotland as in England and not 20% higher, there
:11:28. > :11:30.will be a gap. How you move forward in the years ahead, with determining
:11:31. > :11:33.the block grant is crucially important, and I think it may have
:11:34. > :11:39.just dawned on the Scottish Government that is the case. I think
:11:40. > :11:42.that is why the negotiations, which were supposed to be completed by
:11:43. > :11:46.October are continuing to drag on. Do you agree with the Scottish
:11:47. > :11:49.Government here, they shouldn't approve the Scotland bill until a
:11:50. > :11:53.fair fiscal agreement has been thrashed out? Yes, of course I do.
:11:54. > :11:58.It is their job, I am not elected but it is certainly my job to do
:11:59. > :12:01.what is in the best interests of Scotland, but also in the best
:12:02. > :12:06.interests of the United Kingdom as a whole. You had two reports in the
:12:07. > :12:10.House of Lords, which have both come to the same conclusion, different
:12:11. > :12:12.Select Committee, the constitution committee and the Economic Affairs
:12:13. > :12:16.Committee saying it is outrageous to look at this without having the
:12:17. > :12:22.fiscal framework. I think the Scottish Parliament are saying the
:12:23. > :12:25.same thing. Not just them, you have eminent people like the principal of
:12:26. > :12:29.Glasgow University for making the same point. There is a real danger
:12:30. > :12:33.here. If we don't have a settlement which is agreed on all sides and
:12:34. > :12:35.where the rules are clear, we will have continuing conflict, which I
:12:36. > :12:38.think will be very damaging to the United Kingdom, which the majority
:12:39. > :12:45.of people in Scotland have voted to retain. We will be speaking our
:12:46. > :12:49.guest in a moment. What is the next stage for you, will you try and
:12:50. > :12:54.delay this at the committee stage if you are not happy with the detail
:12:55. > :12:57.that has been published? We can't, I mean the Government made a
:12:58. > :13:01.concession tonight, which is the parts of the bill which are
:13:02. > :13:05.dependent on the fiscal framework, dealing with welfare expenditure and
:13:06. > :13:09.tax will be moved, so they are taken last, and they say that they, they
:13:10. > :13:14.think they can get agreement with the Scottish Government. So frankly,
:13:15. > :13:19.the Scottish Government and the British Government have got to stop
:13:20. > :13:24.meeting once a month and start meeting rather more rapidly and get
:13:25. > :13:27.on with it. And enable us to do our job in the House of Lords. We are
:13:28. > :13:32.not seeking to challenge the policy, but what we are there to do is to
:13:33. > :13:35.scrutinise and warn people about the possible long-term consequences and
:13:36. > :13:40.you will have seen the Economic Affairs Committee, which is an all
:13:41. > :13:43.party committee of very distinguished people, has said they
:13:44. > :13:46.believe we get this wrong, it will result in the destruction of the
:13:47. > :13:49.United Kingdom, which may well will what some people in the Scottish
:13:50. > :13:53.Government want but it is not what people voted for. We have to leave
:13:54. > :13:57.it there. Thanks for coming in this evening.
:13:58. > :13:59.Joining me now in the studio is the leading economist,
:14:00. > :14:02.who is Principal of Glasgow University.
:14:03. > :14:09.Good evening to you. You have serious concerns about the so-called
:14:10. > :14:13.fiscal framework, what are they? The main concern is that the formula
:14:14. > :14:18.that you would use as part of a fiscal framework to adjust the block
:14:19. > :14:21.grant, has to be done, has to be designed in such a way as not to
:14:22. > :14:27.disadvantage Scotland. The point I made in that intervention last week
:14:28. > :14:31.was the fact if it is not done by indexing it to tax receipts and the
:14:32. > :14:35.rest of the UK per capita, over time the block grant could be reduced in
:14:36. > :14:39.such a way the spending power of the Scottish Government could be
:14:40. > :14:43.damaged. That is in my view not the intent of the Smith Commission
:14:44. > :14:59.agreement, which was to reach a no detriment clause to agree a no
:15:00. > :15:03.detriment clause. Difficult is it to find a system which will mean
:15:04. > :15:09.neither side will be worse off in the years to come? It is difficult.
:15:10. > :15:17.The methods I proposed and others have done, is over claim that
:15:18. > :15:24.Scotland would not be disadvantaged relative to the rest of the United
:15:25. > :15:27.Kingdom. There is no perfect mechanism. Inevitably, you have a
:15:28. > :15:32.situation we are a situation where if you change one tanks in some part
:15:33. > :15:39.of the United Kingdom it will have some spill-over into the other
:15:40. > :15:47.products. That was a main point I was making in my intervention. Is
:15:48. > :15:50.there a serious prospect that Scotland could be seriously
:15:51. > :15:56.short-changed if an agreement has not worked on it? I think the
:15:57. > :16:06.methodology suggests this could be the right one. I do not think that
:16:07. > :16:10.demographics will be so important. The other point I made subsequent to
:16:11. > :16:15.that intervention was you need to find some sort of mechanism in the
:16:16. > :16:23.long run to ensure that there is some independent scrutiny over what
:16:24. > :16:28.is happening over this formula. Should you have an independent
:16:29. > :16:33.arbiter? The difficulty here with both the Barnett formula and this
:16:34. > :16:40.adjustment is that the Treasury is both a participant and also the
:16:41. > :16:45.arbiter, a referee, in this match. You may be want a more independent
:16:46. > :16:50.assessment of the formula. Could you see that as a major sticking point
:16:51. > :16:56.from the viewpoint of the Scottish Government? We are both senior has
:16:57. > :17:02.to be an agreement which is made to last? Yes, absolutely. You do not
:17:03. > :17:08.want, after three or four years, some dispute arising. There is
:17:09. > :17:18.always likely to be some aspects of dispute, which we had under the
:17:19. > :17:24.Barnett formula. There were certain expenditures which were not taken
:17:25. > :17:31.through it, a sort of formula by purse. We need the robust formula,
:17:32. > :17:33.but we also need to decide which mechanisms will go through
:17:34. > :17:40.arbitration to be decided in the future. Is there a worry that this
:17:41. > :17:46.has been cobbled together too quickly? I think it was always going
:17:47. > :17:53.to be difficult. I think Lord Smith said at the beginning, the lack of a
:17:54. > :17:58.fiscal framework was the worrying aspect. You cannot just say the bill
:17:59. > :18:06.is a good thing in itself. But if it passes the fiscal framework, it
:18:07. > :18:11.should be a good one for Scotland. A lot of opponents have accused
:18:12. > :18:16.Scotland. Clean politics, seeing the do not really want these powers.
:18:17. > :18:21.They are seeing the meat you can delay the bill of the fiscal
:18:22. > :18:27.framework is not in place. At the rate to be seeing the ball not
:18:28. > :18:30.approve the Scotland Bill event is not sorted out? I think it is
:18:31. > :18:38.absolutely right that you have have the fiscal framework worked out.
:18:39. > :18:40.Thank you very much for coming in this evening.
:18:41. > :18:42.MPs have overwhelmingly rejected a call from the SNP
:18:43. > :18:44.for the Trident nuclear missile system to be scrapped.
:18:45. > :18:48.A debate was called by the SNP, who say Trident is a waste of money,
:18:49. > :18:50.but there was never any prospect of the motion succeeding.
:18:51. > :18:52.So, was it simply a piece of political mischief-making?
:18:53. > :18:55.It certainly shone a light on Labour's disarray over Trident,
:18:56. > :19:26.as 20 MPs defied Jeremy Corbyn's request to abstain from the vote.
:19:27. > :19:32.logic is to declare a nuclear attack, but not everyone agrees.
:19:33. > :19:37.People begin to in lives and 10-15 years and next year a decision will
:19:38. > :19:42.be made as to whether the system should be renewed. For the Scottish
:19:43. > :19:47.National party, this is the defining issue. Since the party began, it has
:19:48. > :21:30.been strongly against nuclear weapons.
:21:31. > :21:35.been strongly against nuclear Russia or action it has been taking
:21:36. > :21:45.in the you you clean. It also will obviously did not predict the rise
:21:46. > :21:50.of Isil. There is still concerned from the unions about jobs. There
:21:51. > :22:00.are thousands of jobs across the Clyde Rosyth depended on Trident.
:22:01. > :22:05.The risk to national security are constantly changing. Who were
:22:06. > :22:08.enemies are in 20 years' time and how we protect against them is
:22:09. > :22:10.almost impossible to predict. Joining me now to discuss that and
:22:11. > :22:14.some of the day's other stories are two men who have gone from political
:22:15. > :22:16.communications to public relations. Kevin Pringle was the Head
:22:17. > :22:19.of Communications for the SNP and Andy MacIver likewise
:22:20. > :22:40.for the Scottish Conservatives. Welcome to you both. I want to go
:22:41. > :22:50.back to our top story about in a moment, but only Trident issue, was
:22:51. > :22:55.the Scottish National party simply mischiefmaking? No, if you look at
:22:56. > :23:02.the global cost Trident of over its lifetime, it is ?167 billion. It is
:23:03. > :23:10.a huge cost, given that it is militarily Stickley useless. If you
:23:11. > :23:16.applied it to the productive economy, you could create tens of
:23:17. > :23:23.thousands of jobs. You need to expose the military uselessness of
:23:24. > :23:31.Trident. It was important to test with the Labour opposition where.
:23:32. > :23:35.Some are voting with the Scottish National party and some are voting
:23:36. > :23:41.with the Conservatives. It is a weapon system which is of no
:23:42. > :23:50.military value and also about the huge and indefensible commitment of
:23:51. > :23:57.?167 billion. That is over 45 years. That is over its lifetime. But the
:23:58. > :24:03.cost is going up significantly. If the idea was simply to highlight
:24:04. > :24:08.Labour's split, that definitely worked. Yes, but that is not the
:24:09. > :24:13.worst thing for Labour in the past ten days. There will be more on for
:24:14. > :24:19.sleep with the statement from the Prime Minister. There is no reason
:24:20. > :24:26.not to have a debate over this. It is perfectly legitimate to Trident
:24:27. > :24:32.oppose and there are many who supported and many who oppose it.
:24:33. > :24:39.What we have to remember is that Trident is not an offensive weapon.
:24:40. > :24:44.It is a deterrent. It is the not to be used. If you look at the Cold
:24:45. > :24:49.War, if you look at why there was no conflict, it was because of nuclear
:24:50. > :24:55.weapons. It is not designed to be used, like a burglar alarm. But
:24:56. > :24:59.there is no reason why the Scottish National party not oppose it. I
:25:00. > :25:07.think it was fit enough to hold the point to highlight Trident. The
:25:08. > :25:12.Labour Party did not really want it needed to be highlighted, but it
:25:13. > :25:19.was. As we have said at the top of the programme, Natalie McGarry has
:25:20. > :25:23.resigned the Scottish National party whip pending a police investigation
:25:24. > :25:30.into financial regular irregularities. Has she done the
:25:31. > :25:35.right thing? I think she has. Nobody knows the rates and wrongs of this.
:25:36. > :25:40.As we speak, it has not been established if there has even been
:25:41. > :25:48.criminality. We do not know. In these circumstances, Natalie McGarry
:25:49. > :25:55.is absolutely entitled to be regarded as innocent. To take some
:25:56. > :25:59.of the political heat out of the issue and the part partisanship out
:26:00. > :26:04.of it, she has done everything by resigning from the Scottish National
:26:05. > :26:08.party whip in the meantime. It is the source of the allegations which
:26:09. > :26:13.must be the biggest concern to the party? I think it is important what
:26:14. > :26:20.has happened. We simply do not know what has happened. We do not know if
:26:21. > :26:25.there has been any criminality. They are assessing the situation. They
:26:26. > :26:30.may have been there may not have been. Pending that, there is not
:26:31. > :26:37.really any way anyone should act as the judge and jury. This is a matter
:26:38. > :26:43.for the police in the first instance to establish what happened. We
:26:44. > :26:47.should suspend judgment and CV of this investigation goes. Letters
:26:48. > :26:54.establish the facts. But I certainly think Natalie McGarry that the right
:26:55. > :27:01.thing. Should the First Minister have acted earlier? It has only been
:27:02. > :27:10.in the making for a day and a half, so I would not criticise her too
:27:11. > :27:15.much for that. But of course, we had this situation with Michelle Thomson
:27:16. > :27:21.and know the situation with Natalie McGarry, so it is obvious that
:27:22. > :27:25.political opponents will jump on it. But I think that the Scottish
:27:26. > :27:30.National party have quite cleverly taken the midget sting out of the
:27:31. > :27:38.story by making it a police matter and taking Natalie McGarry out of
:27:39. > :27:46.the firing line. We do not know what happened. Once that becomes
:27:47. > :27:50.revealed, it will become a story once again. When you are director of
:27:51. > :27:56.communications, did you worry about the sudden success, getting 56 MPs
:27:57. > :28:03.that something like this may come along. Officer, the battle was to
:28:04. > :28:07.win as many seats as successful as possible and we were very successful
:28:08. > :28:11.in that. It is important that we establish what happened. It is
:28:12. > :28:20.premature to talk about fitting procedures. In the situation with
:28:21. > :28:26.Michelle Thomson, the initial investigation was a referral to the
:28:27. > :28:30.solicitors tribunal about his solicitor which had been struck off.
:28:31. > :28:38.I do not know if this has been extended. Obviously, political
:28:39. > :28:43.parties keep the procedures under constant review, but until such time
:28:44. > :28:48.as it has been established that any wrongdoing has taken place, which is
:28:49. > :28:52.not happen, it is not appropriate for the opposition to make political
:28:53. > :28:59.capital out of it. The public are not the, and of the rear, you would
:29:00. > :29:03.not have the situation over the period of the Michelle Thomson
:29:04. > :29:09.situation that the Scottish National party are still sitting at over
:29:10. > :29:15.half, 50% in the opinion polls. That is because the people are more
:29:16. > :29:20.interested in that. It has not dented the popularity of the party,
:29:21. > :29:30.but this could be the beginning of the Cameron? I do not think so. I do
:29:31. > :29:36.not think it will be a vital before things turn around in Scottish
:29:37. > :29:39.politics. If this was a labour or a conservative oriel Liberal
:29:40. > :29:42.Democrat, the Scottish National party would be jumping on this and
:29:43. > :29:47.doing the same thing. This is politics.
:29:48. > :29:48.That is it for tonight. Thanks for watching.
:29:49. > :29:52.David will be here at the same time tomorrow night.