15/06/2016 Scotland 2016

Scottish Vote Leave accuse the First Minister

of "Project McFear" after she warns a Brexit vote could risk

You are not a Fishermans friend! The war of words intensifies. And a

precious, but often neglected resource. How best to manage

Scotland's sees? With just over a week until the EU referendum it is

starting to kick off. It was a tale of two chancellors as George Osborne

stood side-by-side with Alistair Darling to warn of a black hole in

public finances if the UK vote to leave. The First Minister was

accused of waging project fear, Nick Eardley is here to help us make

sense of the claim and counterclaim. The SNP campaign has tried, so far,

to focus on a positive research. Did that change today? It did a bit. We

have heard the message time and again so far but today the message

from the First Minister was not as positive is in recent weeks, it was

a warning of the risks, the potential negatives, here is what

she had to say a little earlier. We must be aware of the political

consequences. What happens the day after a vote to leave? I don't want

to see the right wing of the Conservative Party have even more

ability to cut spending, damage the rights of workers, and pursue

policies which are wrong for Scotland.

That message has led some to say the SNP are now embracing the tactics

they were so critical of during the independence referendum. Jim Sills,

their former deputy leader, in favour of leaving the EU, said the

First Minister was now using the tactics she deplored in 2014.

Accusing her of waging her own project fear, a direct quote from

the term the SNP used time and again a couple of years ago to criticise

the campaign tactics of the No camp. Michael Gove said he would not

support the plans for an emergency budget if there was a vote to leave.

Could the Chancellor find himself out of a job in the event of a

Brexit? This is the UK wide version of what

is being called the project fear, I think George Osborne wanted to get

the subject back onto the economy, saying Brexit would lead to raised

taxes and cut public spending. That provoked a furious reaction from

many Conservative act ventures. Over 60 signed a letter saying they would

not support the Chancellor doing so. Tonight, Michael Gove, on a Question

Time special, becoming the most senior Conservatives so far to say

he would not act the measures. Here is more of what he had to say.

A vote to leave would put us in an economically stronger position,

taking back money from the European Union to invest in our priorities.

More than that we can begin negotiating new trade deals with

other countries like India, China, Japan, creating hundreds of

thousands of jobs in this country. He went on to say that he would

continue to back David Cameron as Prime Minister if there is a Leave

vote but dodged the question of whether the Chancellor could

continue in his post in the event of a Leave vote next week. The fact you

have over 60 Conservative MPs saying his position would be untenable if

he tries to bring in a Brexit budget means the question will linger, a

reminder of how deep divisions within the Conservative Party are.

Most of Scotland's main parties will appear together in a rally in

Edinburgh tomorrow. How significant is that?

It is significant seen the SNP, Conservatives, Labour, Liberal

Democrat, all together for a remain vote, in many ways a hangover from

the independence vote, Scotland's political parties can be quite

reluctant to make items together, so it will be interesting to see that.

The Leave site will also try to appeal to Scott, the chair of their

campaign will be in Glasgow. -- appealing to Scots.

Thank you very much. Immigration came up time and again

on Question Time with polls suggesting it is the key factor

south of the border, where voters are apparently keen on leaving the

EU than voters in Scotland. We visited one part of the Midlands

that retains a Scottish influence, to find out more.

If you look and listen carefully, the Scottish influence is clear. But

with the day approaching, how does the experience of Corby with the EU

referendum compare? In the local theatre they are exploring it on

stage. It is a very diverse town, with lots

of people who have come from other places to help the town grow, it may

be that it has a particular kind of insight into the EU debate that you

may not get in other places, but certainly they are very energised

about it here in Corby. Decades ago Corby's steel industry was a magnet

for Scots looking for work, it is all but gone but the legacy lives on

in places like the Grampian club, with regulars drink and debate

topics like EU membership. We should not have been in it in the

first place. The rest of Europe thinks we are a cash cow.

Personally I am in. We have made our bed, we have to rely on it.

Speak to people about the EU referendum and very quickly the

conversation turns to immigration. Andrew is came here from

Stirlingshire in the 1960s, and says it is an important interview.

They are coming in their thousands and when we go to the town centre

that we hear more eastern European voices than English voices. It is

widespread. Eileen is a member of the same

Church of Scotland congregation, but takes a very different view.

You have got to remember that if it was not for economic migrants, there

would be no Corby, because it was built and economic migrants. People

have got short memories. Back in the town centre the priority

for this trip is as Miss. Scotland is an important market. The owner is

mindful of the possible Scottish dimension to the EU result.

If the second referendum comes, if Britain decides to leave the EU,

then I personally think that businesses in Corby that deal with

Scotland will definitely sit up and listen.

For a couple of hours this afternoon Leave supporters were leafleting, a

rare splash of colour for a campaign that, to the visiting eye, does not

seem to visible. As it gets closer do you run up

activity? Yes, we want as many members,

supporters as we can, to get into the operation.

The people of Corby already voted to leave in an unofficial vote less

chair, the Remain campaign criticised it as nothing more than

an attempt to grab headlines. They say there is still all to play for.

We need to have as many conversations as return on the

doorsteps and really persuade undecided to come out vote. It will

not be long until the Corby voice, with a distinctive Scottish twine,

is heard for real. The Scottish Government says

its committed to reducing the number Cornton Vale is to close and today

the government announced an extra ?4 million to be spent on community

sentencing for all offenders. But how much impact will that have

unless sheriffs and judges use community options

for women more often? A BBC Scotland investigation has

found that a woman's chances of serving a jail sentence very much

depend on where she lives. There were around 3000 e-mail

admissions to Scottish prisons last year. Almost two thirds of those

were for and, women waiting to be tried or sentenced -- female

admissions. Even was one. I moved, got myself a job, it was a

responsible job, I was ranking money, and a judge still reminded

me. Put my life right back to square one. She ended up in a cycle of the

offending and imprisonment. Sometimes spending months on remand

before being released again. Every year, for everyone who sent to

prison on a sentence on remand, there's a huge number, the vast

majority of end up of a custodial sentence, and yet their lives have

been disrupted, sometimes losing custody of their children, their

tenancies, at huge cost to the public purse. But the chance of

being given a custodial sentence varies widely depending on what part

of the country are from. In Edinburgh, more than 1000 woman

appeared in court for sentencing, just 80 of them, 7.4%, were jailed.

Paired Stirling, where Sheriff still a few offenders, but at 21%, women

were almost three times more likely to be imprisoned. In Glasgow, the

rate was just over 50%. Now serving Sheriff was allowed to speak to the

BBC because of judicial independence. But several spoke of

the record about the lack of alternative options available to

them. Every judge is his own person. Or her own person. We all have

different ways of doing things, different views. They are all

independent. They have local knowledge, they know the person,

they have full information, they do with it to the best of their

ability. In his view most sheriffs see it as a failure to send an

offender to prison. The most difficult decision that a

sheriff normally has to make this the one which is on balance between

prison or not imprisoned. Where there is an alternative, and if it

means receiving public criticism, that is part of the job.

I accept there are times when sheriffs feel as if there are no

alternatives. But I don't accept that is always the case. I believe

there are times when sheriffs could make other decisions where they

think someone should actually go to to meet their needs. But it is for

sheriffs to make the decisions. What I need to do is make sure that we

are trying to make the system work collectively together best we can to

achieve the best outcomes. We are here to address the root

cause of offending... Outcomes like the one achieved at this project in

Glasgow. Group therapy classes force women to confront their offending

behaviour, and the issues behind it. Lindsay is a serial shoplifter. I

have been in and out of prison for 33 years. I was given sentence after

sentence. I heard about this project in the prison cell. It is the first

time I have ever been of -- off drugs, ever looked at why I

offended. Reformers are already convinced by these non-custodial

sentences. This may persuade others. The cost is in excess of ?33,000 per

year. More than it costs sending somebody to Eton. Where is the

priority? We are spending ten times as much as imprisonment per person

as we spend on community justice. The justice minister said there has

already been a gradual shift to prison money into local projects.

Critics say they will never become credible alternatives to prison if

they're not enough of them. -- there are.

And joining me in the studio is the law lecturer

We see a postcode lottery in the film in sentencing for women. How

can it be a Glasgow woman is twice as likely to be sent to jail as one

in Edinburgh? There are a lot of factors at play. Sentencing is a

human activity. The judge is a human being with their own hang-ups,

preoccupations, judgments and punishments that they impose. Some

people will not want to control that entirely. Your films showed a range

of availability in terms of community sentences, leaving judges

feeling they have no alternative but to send people to prison. In

Scottish law that is the test. They are instructed by law to consider

every other alternative before sending someone to jail. We heard

some sheriffs said away from the record there was a lack of

alternatives available. How much do you think that is the problem or

simply some sheriffs are more keen than others in sending women to

jail? It is that human factor, difficult to control. There are some

innovations which can hopefully challenge and try and make it more

predictable. The government has created a sentencing council to try

and create more regularity in sentencing and guidelines for court.

Judges will think about factors, treating the same case in the same

way. There is always going to be a limit to how much we control these

things because of the human element. The government also pledged next ?4

million for community sentencing for men and women. Will that make a big

impact? Some impact. They need to make impact in terms of community

sentencing. The wider policy framework is the Scottish garment

would like to take us from the rates of incarceration. Nobody notices but

the number in prison has increased by 20% since devolution. Every given

day 8000 people are imprisoned in Scotland and the number of women has

increased in Scotland by about 100% since devolution. It is one of the

unspoken aspects of policy in Scotland. The government should be

credited for trying to make investment and make policy

interventions which will try and make a difference in terms of bad.

They are closing quantum bail. There are going to be fewer places for

women. If there are not enough community alternatives is there a

danger that the Dharma line we see overcrowding and other problems? We

will see what is happening in terms of community sentences and it could

not have credibility. If this is going to be credible and the public

are to be persuaded it is a better use of money and resources, that it

is better for people and communities not to send so many women and men to

prison, the community sentences have to work and they have to be invested

in. A professor at Strathclyde University said in your package it

cost over ?30,000 per year to send somebody to prison. It is a vast

amount of money. Where is it smart to put money in terms of outcomes

and to get a good result for communities? That is something many

people might look at sceptically. They might think prison works but it

does not. It is for the Scottish government to persuade Parliament

and the wider community that this is a viable way of dealing with these

social problems. At the moment there is a presumption on short sentences

of under three months. Is that likely to be pushed further? The

Scottish garment has been consulting on extending presumption against one

year. That might be controversial. It is bound to be. It will drive the

tabloids bananas. Ruth Davidson and her liberal Conservative party will

go mad and they are likely to want to resist that strongly. The

argument the Scottish government has in its favour is prison does not

work, short sentences do not work. It does not stop offending and

address underlying problems which are social in the prison system,

mental health, drug abuse, alcoholism, like literacy and lack

of bringing people into the community. I think community

sentences are be any way to address it directly. Prison never can. We

must leave it there, Andrew. Thank you.

And you can see that programme, Women Prisoners: Throw Away the Key?

Presented by Helena Kennedy QC, on BBC iplayer.

Scotland has been praised for world leading aspirations to manage the

seas sustained play. Making it work in practice means reconciling the

different demands of the fishing industry, and conservationists and

the priorities of renewable energy and ecotourism. Here is our

correspondent. It can be beautiful. It can be

brutal. It can be bountiful. But what do you think of when you think

about the sea? Holiday. When I see the sea. Full of fish. Big, blue,

smooth surface. Very nice. It is a nice smell. Fishing and stuff. And

beaches. What happens at sea can also be profoundly political. If you

doubt that, look at the Scott fishing boats sailing today up the

Thames backing the campaign to leave the EU. But hide the European

Referendum, much deeper questions about how we view the sea. -- but

behind. There are maybe three main and sometimes competing priorities.

You can look at the sea as a nature reserve, to protect and preserve.

You can see it as a resource to harvest and exploit. You might think

of it as a playpark to enjoy. A conference today in Dundee is

discussing how we sustainably develop Scottish seas. How we

balance the different interests. We had to realise how important the

marine environment is full Scotland. It is fundamentally important.

Because it gives us a lot of oxygen. 40% of the oxygen we breathe is

produced by the sea. It detects -- dictate climate. We get a lot of

lovely fish out of the sea. If you are using that, it will have an

impact. We cannot manage the environment, only human activity in

the environment. Highland Council has spent four years putting

together a marine plan for the north coast of Caithness and Sutherland,

designed as a model before statutory plans rolled out for 11 regions

across Scotland. We sat in with a blank piece of paper. That is how

much we knew about the area for marine planning. Four years later we

have a plan combining a host of information about tourism, leisure

and recreation, or oil and gas, culture, all the different things in

a Marine environment. Some people taking part in the conference incest

conservation, based on the scientific evidence, must come first

in the way we use the sea is to be truly sustainable. -- if the way we

use. We need a healthy environment to continue to benefit from the

Scottish seas. We cannot risk jeopardising that by putting

development in the wrong places. In the hollow Scotland we have massive

areas of Scottish seas. It is a big resource. There is room for all of

those. It is about finding out the most suitable areas and locating the

activities in those places. Conservationists in the industry

have not always agreed on how to manage the marine environment. Maybe

they have more in common than is sometimes realise. A good example of

collaboration which we can bring from Shetland, for example, if they

are thinking of going this way, is the protected area that was recently

agreed in fair Isle. This initiative came from the community over there.

The fishing industry came on board and together the community and the

fishing industry came together for a mutually acceptable marine protected

area, with all sides satisfied. Does the industry get enough credit. Like

that? Not at all. We agreed would wildly with issues and a lot of

fishermen will say they are the real consternation -- conservationists.

-- we agreed remarkably. If the sea really is as important as

some claim, Scotland needs to get the marine banning policy right. --

planning policy. Here with me now to discuss some

of the days top stories are Jennifer McKiernan,

Political reporter with the Aberdeen Evening Express

and David Clegg, Political Editor Welcome both of you. Eight days

until the Referendum. They have upped the anti-on both sides, David.

I think we can clearly see the Remain camp are split by the polls

they have seen. Remember that period in the Scottish independence

Referendum where one put Yes ahead and everything went crazy. They were

concerned about what was happening, and politicians were making all

kinds of claims. I think we are in the same position at this point.

There has been a series of polls showing the Remain side, the Vote

Leave side could be winning. That is maybe not expected and they are not

sure if the tactics are working, and how they should change them. Voters

might have had a sense of deja vu with a Tory Chancellor standing with

his Labour predecessor, talking about a financial black hole. We

have seen a lot of economic claims and counterclaims. I am not sure if

much of this is getting through to the voters. I think that we can see

a shift in the campaigns on both sides. It is interesting Michael

Gove is talking about workers' rights, that they have been trying

to talk about protection for the NHS. Shifting away from the more

conservative values you might have expected, at the start of the

campaign. Tory backbench MPs are furious at the George Osborne

so-called punishment budget. It looks like there might be a clue

shaping up. He is talking about this emergency Brexit budget but he does

not have the Tory numbers to get that through. It is unlikely he

would hold onto the position of Chancellor in the event of a vote to

leave the European Union. You wonder how these claims can be made

credible. There is quite an important problem which is occurring

in that Remain strategy. To use the Scottish example, they talk about

the pound, who has it and that was a very obvious and physical concept

which you could ram home to people. It is more hypothetical. The

European Union is a more distant concept. They are finding it more

difficult to make it seem credible that these very significant problems

could occur so dramatically if people vote to leave. Moving on, Sir

Philip Green finally apologised for the collapse of BHS today in a fiery

Parliamentary hearing where he clashed with several MPs. It did not

need to be like this. I want to apologise to all the BHS people

involved in this and I hope by the end of the morning, they will hear

everything and we can find some sensible solutions to some of the

issues. Would you mind not looking at me like that all the time? It is

really disturbing. Sorry question might you just want to stare at me.

It is uncomfortable. Did the board consider the reputation and risk of

selling to Joe Powell? Did we go out of our way to find somebody that in

this case, this Chappell, to find somebody that ended up where we

ended up watching Mark --? I think three hours in or however long it

is, three and a half hours, you can accept that was not the case, OK?

What did you make of Sir Philip's performance? I love it when people

get rattled like that. It shows you are getting through. When people are

not necessarily telling the truth they can sometimes get more and more

angry and politicians manage to get under the skin of the witness. Are

they becoming more effective at getting under the skin? From what I

can see, yes! It was quite an amazing performance. He started by

apologising but he did not really say what he was apologising for. He

said he was not responsible for anything that happened and then he

seemed to do an impression of Robert De Niro in taxi driver with one of

the MPs questioning him. Staggering performance. And another one not

known for being shy and retiring, Donald Trump. He said he would like

people on Terror watch lists to be prevented from buying firearms in

the wake of the Orlando shootings. He said he will speak to the

National Rifle Association to discuss the issue. Until now he has

been a strong supporter of firearm rights. He has been endorsed by the

NRA. Is this significant Western it is a small but significant step. --?

It is a small but significant step. People are standing up again and

again calling for more gun controls and it is wonderful to see him stand

up and call for some controls, but it does not go anywhere near far

enough. I think is going down the wrong line. If you insist they are

only for terrorists, I think that he has got a lot further to go. One of

his critics has said on Twitter that he has caved when defending the

second amendment. Might this impact on his chances? I hope his chances

are not great as it is. I think the whole situation is farcical. In an

ABC interview in December he did not seem to know that people on the

terror watch list are not restricted and he is now suggesting they could

be. We are having a discussion about whether it is a significant move

suggesting that Abel suspected of terror should not be allowed to buy

assault weapons. It tells us everything we need to know about how

broken the debate has become. Any sign that the US moved on guns is

changing? Not that I can see. There is a sign that some Republicans

could be moving their position. Especially if Donald Trump is the

candidate. That could happen. I'm back again tomorrow

night, usual time. We're in Leicester tonight -

a city united in pride