01/06/2016 Scotland 2016

The Scottish parliament votes to ban fracking.

Turning the heat up on the Scottish Government.

MSPs vote to support an outright ban on fracking.

Donald Trump will fly into Scotland the day the result is known.

And, eclipsed by the other blonde bombshell.

Is that why women's voices aren't being heard in the Euro debate.

Labour, Lib Dem and Green MSPs united to push through an amendment

at Holyrood today backing an outright ban on fracking.

The SNP could have headed off the vote but that would have meant

siding with the Conservatives against a ban.

Scottish Ministers say they'll wait for scientific advice before

The parliamentary vote does crank the pressure up

From high above Falkirk and view of central Scotland, from the Forth in

the east to nearly Glasgow in the west. What we can't see are the

underground and undersea coal reserves, hundreds of millions of

tonnes, or the exploitable shale gas trapped. That's what this makes this

potential fracking country to the concern of many living here. If the

industry gets the green light, the central belt of Scotland becomes the

factory floor for the unconventional gas industry. It's not a few hundred

wells. The entire central belt, 20,000 kilometres square is up for

sale as exploration and development licences. This means we become a gas

field in the central belt. . It's not ska Shale and fracking, it's oil

and gas. People need to understand this. After a public inquiry into

plans to extract methane gas, the Government announced a moratorium on

fracking at the start of 2015, pending further scientific research.

That remained the SNP's position going into May's election. Today,

opposition parties tried to force their hand by calling for an

outright ban on fracking. The voices of communities across Scotland need

to be heard loud and clear, the potential risks to our environment

from fracking are too much for too little reward. It's banned in

France, in New York and other places. How much research do we need

to show that it's dangerous? Scottish Labour is not sceptical, we

are clear in our policy. No ifs, no buts, no fracking. The SNP abstained

which means a ban is now parliament's position but not yet

the Government's. This Government is deeply sceptical about fracking. We

have ensured that no fracking can take place by putting in place a

moratorium. We are also undertaking thorough research and plan to

consult the people of Scotland fully on the issue so that any decision is

based on both the evidence and public opinion. After the moratorium

was announced, the company who owns the plant and want to be at the

forefront of shale gas extraction here, relocated staff to England. A

spokesman said today's vote changed very little.

And that: The Government will now await the

report of an expert panel due sometime next year before making a

final decision. But their stated position is that there will be no

fracking in Scotland unless it can be proven beyond doubt that there is

no risk to health, communities or the environment. They don't believe

here that will be possible. Human error occurs, equipment fails. Pipe

work corrodes, maintenance can be declined in pursuit of profit

margin. It's all in the hands of the industry. It makes the communities

vulnerable, it's so close to many people. The risks cannot be taken.

Joining me now to discuss this from our Edinburgh studio

is Scottish Conservative's environment spokesman Maurice Golden

and Scottish Labour's spokeswoman on the environment,

Welcome to both of you. Claudia Beachish, is fracking now a

non-starter? Well, absolutely. It's really been the concern of many

communities across the central belt of Scotland, the coal belt, for a

considerable amount of time and now it would be very worrying if the SNP

didn't make a decision to actually listen to the will of the Scottish

parliament, as the vote showed today that there should be a total ban. Is

that the only thing that they should be listening to? They've said

they'll take account of the vote, they're not ruling it out at the

moment. Isn't it right that that they wait for the science and make a

decision based on the facts? Well, the reason that Scottish Labour took

for this amendment and the Greens had an amendment and it was

supported by the Lib Dems today, is because there is very robust

evidence already and particularly in relation to climate science and that

science is irrefutable that methane has an even higher proportion of

heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide which is what people have

been worrying about in the past. We have to be really clear today that

the will of the Scottish parliament is that we do not have fracking and

coalbed methane. There are a range of other possibilities for people in

these communities with local jobs and that at the same time we protect

our future and our present communities from climate change. OK.

Maurice Golden, the science is irrefutable? Well, the independent

expert scientific panel convened by the Scottish Government in 2014

concluded that the technology exists for the safe extraction. So,

fracking, according to the Scottish Government's own report, is safe.

But the Scottish Government itself says they're deeply sceptical about

fracking, there is another scientific evidence-gathering

exercise going on. And they want to consult the public. Isn't that the

right thing to do? Well, I think it's worrying that the Scottish

Government won't listen to their own Scottish experts, geology experts,

imminent health professionals with regard to this. I think it's very

disappointing. We need to get the SNP to make a decision and stop with

maybe, maybe no and this approach. Wasn't this vote today really more

about politics, about just trying to force the SNP to stand alongside the

Conservatives, Claudia? No, Scottish Labour, I brought the amendment

today because of supporting communities but also because of the

science that is absolutely clear about climate change and also the

concerns from across the world from research which actually show that

the environment is threatened by it and it's not just in relation to

whether it could be safe to frack, which is debatable and I would

dispute what Maurice is saying about that, it's also the effect on our

communities if this went ahead in terms of transport, in terms of

possible health risks and a range of other issues. The SNP really does

need to come down off the fence and support the ban which the Scottish

parliament today has voted for. Maurice Golden, do you think that

the economic case for fracking has really been considered by MSPs

today? Not at all. I mean, the independent experts have said that

fracking is safe but also Ernst and Young have said for the UK and

investment level of up to ?33 billion could be levied as well as a

creation of 64,000 jobs across the UK, I want those jobs here in

Scotland. I want that investment here in Scotland. Claudia Beamish,

that's a lot of money and jobs. It certainly is. But people have said

that we need fracking as a transition fuel and this is simply

not the case. It's absolutely clear that renewables are already taking

off in Scotland. We have robust policies to support them, certainly

not support by the Tories down south who haven't been helpful with this.

But it's absolutely clear that there are jobs, the office of national

statistics has shown that even in 2014, two years ago, that there were

over 21,000 jobs in renewables, these will bring local jobs, and

possibility of manufacturing and we simply do not need fracking as an

interim fuel with the risks to climate and the risks to the

environment and to our communities when there are very good jobs that

can be developed, highly skilled jobs through transferable skills and

the Scottish Government really does need to make this decision and stop

dithering on the fence. Briefly, do you think that means fracking won't

happen in Scotland now after this vote? I don't know. It's really up

to the SNP to decide on that. You know, one thing's for sure, fracking

offers many benefits and how the Labour Party can look those

unemployed oil and gas workers in the eye and deny them the

opportunity for a new job is quite beyond me.

We must leave it there. Thank you very much for coming in.

Now, on the 24th of June we'll know the result of the EU referendum.

But that could be upstaged by a certain US presidential

candidate who's chosen that day to jet into Scotland.

Donald Trump is coming for the opening of his refurbished

There had been calls to ban him from entering Britain

because of controversial comments he's made on the campaign trial.

But he's getting a good press in the unlikeliest of places.

North Korean state media has just hailed Mr Trump

Here with me is Peter Jackson, Professor of Global Security

Good evening to you. What do you make of those comments in the North

Korean state media? Well, I suppose it's not surprising that North

Korea, Government there or the state media is quite positive about Donald

Trump because Donald Trump has said openly he is willing to talk to the

North Korean dictator about North Korea's nuclear programme and has

even said he would be willing in some circumstances to consider

withdrawing American troops, American military support from the

Korean peninsula, this would be manna for the North Korean

Government. It's not surprising they're enthusiastic about Donald

Trump's prospects to be President. If Donald Trump was to do that, to

meet the North Korean leader, to withdraw US troops from South Korea,

what do you think the effect would be of a foreign policy shift like

that? Well, I mean, it would certainly improve prospects for a

more aggressive North Korean policy to unify the Korean peninsula. But

even more worrying in some ways is the question of what it would say

about American Presidents in the Asia-Pacific region more generally

and especially the United States policy of standing up for the states

in territorial disputes with China in the South China Sea and east

China Sea, like Japan and the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia

and Vietnam. The United States has made very clear its intention at the

moment to bolster its military presence and strategic presence in

that region. If that was to be with withdrawn it could destabilise the

whole Asia-Pacific region and call into question American - the

American pivot to the Pacific. Hillary Clinton is meant to give a

speech tomorrow, we are expecting her to talk about the threat Donald

Trump poses to national security. It does seem like that the battle lines

are being drawn on foreign policy. Well, if that's the case I suppose

this is good news for Hillary Clinton and her campaign, because

she has credibility as American Secretary of State between 2009 and

2013. She is also on the right in foreign policy terms on the

Democratic Party, she is one of the big hawks, from the Democratic Party

and she has real credentials. Whereas, Donald Trump's foreign

policy pronouncements up to now have been inconsistent, contradictory,

erratic, all that we often associate with his campaign so far. We know

that he favours a Brexit in the euro referendum. What about this visit to

Scotland he has announced, do you think the time something a

coincidence? I suppose he wouldn't be able to

come before the Californian primaries, maybe it was planned all

along, but there would be a spotlight on Great Britain on the

23rd and 24th of June. I suppose that his thinking and his campaign

is thinking, it would do him no harm to be in the spotlight. Professor

Peter Jackson, thank you for coming in. You are welcome.

Donald Trump may be with us the day after the European referendum

but we still have three full weeks of campaigning until then.

Is that debate being dominated by men?

A new study suggests it is - with a tiny proportion of the voices

on some of the main TV bulletins being female.

The figures are even worse for national newspapers.

And do the campaigns think they have arguments that

Here's our political correspondent Nick Eardley.

Recognise him? What about him? David Cameron and Boris Johnson are

effective leaders of the Remain and Lead campaigns, battling for your

boat on June the 23rd. You might recognise these two as

well, George Osborne is pro-EU, Iain Duncan Smith wants to leave.

A recent study suggested the lack of gender balance in the campaign has

stuck. Analysis of major news bulletins and

newspapers found the top ten contributors were men.

Women accounted for only 16% of TV coverage, and under a tent in the

national press. Women are virtually absent from the media coverage of

the campaign -- a 10th. Looking at national coverage of the debate,

they are, if you like, almost invisible from that debate. Remain

supporting SNP MP John Cherry thinks it can affect the turnout. It would

be good to have decisive results and if women are not engaged in the

debate, there's a risk that women will not turn out to vote because

they would not see the benefit of voting, that is regrettable for

everyone concerned -- Joanna Cherry. This top-heavy male domination

reflects the European Union. All of the big EU institutions, every

single one is headed by man. Looking at pay within EU institutions, women

very badly. The independence referendum showed some attempts to

appeal to women can backfire. Have you made a decision yet? I was like,

it is too early to be discussing politics. Eat your serial! Are there

issues in the debate that relate particularly to women? Looking back

at the history, gender equality is one of the founding principles and

the EU has been at the forefront for the fight or gender equality. We've

done far better on rights than anything the EU has ever legislated

for. My concern is, looking at the make-up of the EU, there are a lot

of countries with very backward attitudes to women still, and they

are making our legislation. Scotland's three largest parties are

all led by the malls, they have all contributed to the EU debate.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon was at Westminster to make her statement

last week. A lot has changed since winning the

vote a century ago. For some, there is still a long way

to go. So why aren't women's voices

being heard in this campaign? Just before we came on air I spoke

to Lorna Kettles from The number of women featured in the

media is pitifully low. But, how much of that do you think is the

media's fault? Well, I think unless you are invited to the table, you

cannot be part of anything. It is the media's fault in so much of the

way that they portray women and gender stereotypical roles that

women undertake and the underrepresentation of women in

political and public life. I think that is really one of the indicators

as to why women are not represented in this very important debate. And

it is a very important debate. So much of what is being discussed will

have an impact on women, they should be at the front but it seems to me

that unless you are the Prime Minister or Boris Johnson, nobody is

interested. It is more about scandal. We have an issue in

Scotland as well where there is a fairly united front. There is no

real debate between party leaders. Our three strong women party leaders

perhaps thought they would not have much to add, because they are all

singing from the same hymn sheet, if you like. If the debate is dominated

by men, certainly at Westminster, if the leaders of the different groups

are men, we have Nigel Farage, George Osborne, the Prime

Minister... Isn't it inevitable that the coverage is going to be a bit

skewed? Of course, but that is not right and, as I say, that is what it

comes back to, underrepresentation of women. We make up 52% of the

population but it is not reflected at the levels it needs to be. Yes,

you were right, where there are a lot of men, men will dominate. We

have to break that down and challenge it, make sure there are

more women at the table having their voices heard. Women are key

undecided voters we are told in the campaign, is this something about

the debate itself, or even the EU institutions themselves that is

off-putting to women? Absolutely, I think there are a number of factors

you can the reasons as to why women are still undecided. Perhaps they

perhaps a lot of it is to do with women not liking to jump into things

with two feet, they like to think about what they will do but I think

as well, the EU is a fairly separate institution from Scotland women's

Convention organisation, we speak to women throughout the country. Some

of them feel Hollywood is far removed from them, so if that is far

removed, Westminster is further and the EU is even further, they don't

see it as impacting on their everyday lives, they have a real

groundswell of women but we don't have it in this and it will impact

on their lives. -- Holyrood. Do we need women to be bolder in putting

themselves forward? Absolutely, we have plenty of capable women, it is

not an issue of capability. We held an event on Saturday around the EU

referendum, we had four women speakers, very different political

opinions but it was a great, healthy and engaging debate.

Ask us, it is not that we don't want to be involved, but when you have

grey men in grey suits dominating conversation, it is hard to get in.

Thank you for coming into night. Thank you.

With me now to talk about that and the day's other news are former

SNP special advisor Ewan Crawford and Editor of the online site

Liberal Democrat Voice, Caron Lindsay.

Good to see you both this evening. We heard Lorna Kettles saying there

were plenty for women to talk about about the EU referendum, why aren't

we hearing from them? Every political campaign in the

independence referendum as well, if you looked at the TV coverage, you

would get similar sorts of ratios... Is it that bad? 86 to 14 is pretty

bad? It felt like that sometimes, women's voices were not being heard.

I am actually glad it is being noticed and people think it is a bad

thing. And something needs to be done. But I think, actually, women

are getting how important this is and it does affect their daily

lives. I've been out in the streets handing out leaflets and women are

coming up to me and saying, yes, we will stay in. It is things like

maternity leave and employment rights, they do not want to hand

them over to the likes of Michael Gove and Boris Johnson. Without

trying to deflect the blame here, and from the media, is it all our

fault? You've worked behind-the-scenes for a political

party, often we will ask political parties for people to come on and

they will give us a man? I'm not sure that is entirely true, having

worked for Nicola Sturgeon, my experience was clearly different...

My point is, the media aren't always in control... Of who your guests

will be? Yes, identity to the media 's fault in this instance, I went to

blame them for a lot of things but ultimately, at the moment the

referendum campaign seems to be a huge spat within the Conservative

Party. They are tearing themselves apart. Looking at Westminster

Conservatives they are not tremendously gender balanced. It is

not just if you not a woman you are not involved, if you are not called

Cameron, Johnson or Osborne, you are not involved. What is interesting,

Theresa May, a prominent Conservative politician, she says

she is in the in campaign and has not been involved presumably for

reasons that may or may not involve the leadership subsequent to the

referendum but because the campaign is focused on these conservatives,

that may be why we have not seen diversity. If the main core of the

debate was in Scotland, obviously with the female leaders, perhaps

things would be different. But the leaders of the parties, of the

campaigns, they actually are men. How much can you manipulate that? I

think there are many women who could be asked to talk. In the

independence referendum, I made a list of 40 or 50 women who could be

approached who were not being heard from both sides of the argument. I

thought it was important that women's voices got into the debate

and I hoped it would be very different if we heard more women and

did not just here the right wing of the Conservative Party ripping

itself to pieces. Let's move on to the vote on fracking in the

parliament earlier today. Is this the end of fracking in Scotland now?

Wing I don't think anything will change as a result of the vote. I do

not cry labour from this. I've been in a similar position, you want to

make noise. This was about political positioning and trying to say to the

SNP, are you going to vote for the Tories? Then the SNP decline, and

they say it's a political manoeuvre, fair enough, that is politics.

Nobody should seriously mix it up with a serious attempt to change

policy today, that is not what it was about. From Labour and the

Conservatives, it was an attempt at a left or right debate, is fracking

a politicised issue like that? Should it be? It is interesting how

Parliamentary dynamics are working, you have a progressive

environmentalist side, the Liberal Democrats and Greens together, the

Tories do what the Tories do, that SNP... It is extraordinary that the

government of the date decided to sit on their hands, they had the

chance to say, OK, we will think about the future of the planet but

they chose not to -- today. They have a process under way at the

moment of getting scientific advice and will have public consultation,

why would they stop in the middle of that? They had to make up their

minds where they stand. Last year, Jim Ratcliffe said privately the SNP

were saying that they were going to allow fracking by 2018. They've also

been playing up to the green lobby as well by saying they had a

moratorium. They have to make a decision at some point. Labour say

that it would be outrageous if the SNP was to ignore this boat, is that

true? -- float. That is why they held the debate, that is fine --

vote. Nobody thinks that the government should change their

policy, the Cabinet is not sitting on their hands, they are following

government policy, doing exactly what they said they would do. I

don't think anyone is suggesting they should change government policy

just because Labour says what the SNP says is an outrage, they always

do that. Before we go, the Donald Trump story, he is going to come to

Scotland the day we all know the EU referendum result is coming out, is

that a coincidence? He could not come much before then, this has been

arranged a while, but it is an interesting day to come. I had

visions of him turning up at the door of ten Downing St, being let in

by David Cameron who tries to push off Tory MPs coming for his head out

the back door. He is not going to be the story. Nor should we let him be.

But I hope that while he is here he can meet some ordinary Scots, and

realised that we are quite an inclusive, welcoming society. And

learned something from it. How warm a reception will he get from the

first Minster? I don't think hugely warm, I am waiting for someone to

put a planning application in for a wind farm to see what reaction he

would have to this off the coast of Ayrshire. But identity would be

embraced by Nicola Sturgeon or David Cameron, I think he has been even

ruder about him then Nicola Sturgeon. Do you think that they

might? I would not think so, I think that at the moment he is the only

Republican and there are two Democrats in the race, I think they

will come together, let's face it he has annoyed a lot of people, mainly

women as well. I cannot seem any women voting for him in November, we

are a long way from that election. Thank you to both of you for coming

in. I'm back again tomorrow

night, usual time. So do please join me then,

bye bye. With so many claims being

made on both sides, the EU referendum might

appear confusing.