12/10/2016 Scotland 2016

The people have spoken but should Parliament have a role

in scrutinising the Government's plans for Brexit?

Good evening and welcome to Scotland 2016.

Brexit was supposed to put Parliament back in charge

so why won't the Government let it debate when

The SNP conference starts tomorrow but is Nicola Sturgeon

And I'll be speaking to a Syrian Nun who's been living in Aleppo

The Prime Minister keeps on insisting that she won't give

Parliament a running commentary on Brexit.

The UK Government says that would undermine its negotiating position.

But it's not clear at this stage that it even has

Today at Prime Minister's Questions, Jeremy Corbyn branded

Theresa May's Brexit strategy "shambolic" and a Labour-led debate

that followed did little to dispel that assertion.

Then the vote to leave the EU, we have been told by Theresa May that

Brexit means Brexit. But the Prime Minister has offered little in terms

of what this might actually be. The whole idea of leaving the EU was to

take control away from Brussels and give it back to Parliament. But

there are many who feel cheated and left out. At Prime Minister's

Questions Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn accused the government of

leading a shambolic Brexit process. This is a government to drop no

plans for Brexit, no has no strategy for negotiating it and offers no

clarity -- clarity, transparency or scrutiny of the strategy.

Which was swiftly dismissed by the Prime Minister.

I'm optimistic about the prospects of this country once we leave. I'm

optimistic about the trade deals that other countries are actively

coming to us to say they want to do with the United Kingdom. And I'm

optimistic about what we will be able to ensure about making our

economy grow. The government doesn't want to show

its hand. We know the devolved administrations want an negotiating

role but have been knocked back. However, this afternoon MPs debated

a Labour motion on the government's plans for Brexit. This response to

Alex Salmond's question illustrated her little discussion has taken

place. Agriculture is not devolved so

unless the government changes that position it will be automatic that

agriculture and fisheries powers will go to Scottish Government.

This is an area where we have not addressed or talk to the devolved

administration yet but we will do so.

Earlier in the day, on a similar point the Secretary of State for

Scotland had this to say. It is self-evident that because the

devolution settlement in the United Kingdom are predicated on the basis

that United Kingdom was a member of the European Union then those

devolution settlements will need to be changed by the United Kingdom

leaving the EU and those matters will be subject to debate and

discussion. Not only our opposition parties

angry at being locked out of negotiations, they say they don't

even know what we're negotiating on. Earlier, I spoke to our Westminster

Correspondent, Nick Eardley. Parliament really started to flex

its muscle to date but there is the question of who has the mandate. The

people have spoken but ministers have a role as well.

The mandate question is crucial. The obvious mandate of the UK Government

is the Vote Leave on the 23rd of June. The next question is what does

that vote mean? During the Tory party conference last week, we saw

an indication that the UK Government wanted to see the process through

the way it sees fit but a number of MPs today have made clear that they

do not think that is good enough, they want Parliament to be consulted

on different parts of this process, they don't think that the line vote

should give the UK Government a blank cheque to do what it wants

and, on top of that, they fear that the Prime Minister is being

influenced more by what they see as the hard Brexiteers in her Cabinet

and on the backbenchers and that is without even bringing in the

Scottish day mentioned. The majority of voters here backed remain so

another layer of complexity. The problem the Prime Minister faces

of that any vote in parliament, you have a parliament fool of MPs who

voted for remain and could cause all sorts of problems.

Theresa May has a wafer thin majority in the Commons so getting

anything controversial than can be quite difficult. The Labour Party

has said it will respect the result of the EU Referendum Bill across the

UK but there are nuances here. The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn doesn't

think immigration should come down which was a key part of what the UK

Government are looking for. Strong access to the single market is

essential to some. You can see their hard different ways of taking what

the Brexit vote means. The UK Government doesn't want to give its

hand away. Scottish Secretary David Mundell

says there are opportunities for Scotland in Brexit. Is this a

reference to possible new powers? If you think back to the referendum

campaign, the Leave site Scotland made that point. A number of powers

would come back to Hollywood being one of the key arguments. David

Mundell was asked what would happen post-Brexit and he said it was

possible more powers would come Scotland's way. A lot of current

devolution laws are based on the UK being in the EU. There will be a

debate on what will happen to those powers. What did UK Government and

many people who voted to remain want to see is that there are

opportunities to take, there will be some bumps on the road but there

will be some positives as well. I'm joined now from Edinburgh

by the Conservative's Dean Lockhart and from Aberdeen by Labour's Lewis

Macdonald. Why shouldn't Parliament have at

least a debate over the broad outlines of the government's

negotiating position? I think what the Prime Minister has

made clear is the timing of triggering article 50 and the

overall objective in terms of what we're trying to achieve, which is to

gain the maximum possible access to the single market, which I think

everyone shares from a business and economic perspective. I think from

the other side to see that there should be a running commentary of

negotiating position isn't recognising the reality of what

happens during the negotiation. So I think that we have the broad outline

of what we're trying to achieve and what I think that people want to see

is real leadership from the politicians who are acting in the

best interests of the nation. When I MPs going to get a vote?

Before or after Brexit? They will be ongoing whenever there

will be different stages of the process. There will be announcements

between the UK and EU in relation to different aspects of Brexit and that

will be a that Parliament can give scrutiny. I go back to the point on

leadership. We have seen real leadership from the Prime Minister

and from Ruth Davidson, who are acting in the best interests of the

nation. But we don't know what the

Conservatives' because seating position as yet. Do you want to be a

member of the single market? It is not being a member of the

single market, it is about different access levels. People talk about the

Swiss or the Norwegian approach. We are the second largest economy in

Europe and the fastest growing one. The EU depends more on jobs in terms

of exports to the a kid and vice versa so I think we can be in a very

strong negotiating position where we can reach up this book agreement

that is in the best interests of the UK and Scotland.

Labour put forward 170 questions of the government today. If it answered

those questions it would completely reveal its hand before negotiations

started. That is ridiculous, isn't it? If it

and to some of those questions then the public would have some idea of

what they are after. I think Theresa May was found out today. No win the

debate comes up in Parliament we see that many are unhappy at that lack

of transparency. You are in favour of the single

market but Jeremy Corbyn is not quite clear.

Jeremy Corbyn is very clear. Labour wrote to the government today at

Westminster to say, let's have a clear route into the single market.

That would be a big help to people to understand.

So Jeremy Corbyn wants to remain in the single market as a full member?

When I see Theresa May got found out today, I think it is not that she

wants to keep secret whether she wants Britain to remain in the

single market, it is that she cannot get agreement around her Cabinet

table. That has become clear today. The cabinet do not have an agreed

position on this. I think there is a consensus that we

should continue to have access to the single market and that is a

common consensus across the board. What does that mean?

It means we negotiate from a strong position. We are in a strong

position economically to negotiate strong terms and a bespoke agreement

for the UK. I find it ironic we're getting the term shambles from

Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party. Obviously they have great experience

of shambles. This is an approach where anybody involved in

international trading negotiations will tell you you can set of the

road map but you cannot let out the details of what you are trying to

achieve. It is simple business economic sense.

Why don't we know whether the government wants to be part of the

single market? I will answer your question. Yes, we

want maximum possible access to the single market. That is what the

Prime Minister said today. That means membership.

You're mistaking it as a binary proposition where you have

membership or not. You can have levels of access to the single

market meaning you don't need to be a member of the EU.

Lots of countries have access to the single market but it doesn't always

mean that you will have access to the single market in services. It

may be in goods, lots of countries have that, but services is a

different matter. That is the point I'm trying to make

to Lewis, it is up for negotiation. We can look at models agreed with

Norway or Switzerland but their economies are far smaller than the

UK. We will have a very strong negotiating position to set down

with their European counterparts and work out an agreement.

But does the British government want that agreement to include membership

of the single market and protection of employment rights and

environmental protection that we have at the moment or do they want

to walk away from them as Chamakh those are the fundamental questions.

I understand Theresa May doesn't need to answer all those questions

Pujara today but she needs to lead Britain know what she wants to

achieve in these negotiations. The Japanese government have already

said clearly that if you do not see what you want then Japan cannot make

investment. If that is true for Japan, it will be true for other

countries. Now, tomorrow sees

the start of the SNP's conference and now, to chew over

what might be coming up, I'm joined by journalist and former speech

writer for the party Andy Collier. If you were writing Nicola

Sturgeon's speech tomorrow, how often would you insert the phrase

independence referendum? She has to have it in there because

it is the one thing that this conference is going to be talking

about all the time, in the bars and around the place. It is the one big

subject of this conference so she has to talk about it.

Though she get a firm commitment and the timetable?

I don't think we will get either of those things. She needs to bring

some clarity. You have these two sides of the argument. A lot of new

members are people enthusiastic to have the referendum as soon as

possible but perhaps more experienced heads, people like Alex

Neil and Kenny McAskill who are saying let's hold off and see how

this goes, let's leave it for a bit. It will be interesting to see how

those two different sides play out of this conference and how that big

speech on Saturday afternoon will see Nicola Sturgeon approach it. I

think she will try to get both sides hope, probably something to rally

them and keep their enthusiasm up, but don't be surprised if she gave a

date. Isn't the problem that she has

raised the stakes so high. She set out five conditions including

safeguarding the free movement of labour and having not just access to

the single market but also a role in shaping its rules. If we are headed

for a hard Brexit she could be coming out of this with nothing.

We just know what is going to happen. To be fair to Nicola

Sturgeon, she grasped this one from straight after the referendum when

she got a bed be hard for skull and's interests. She went to

Brussels. Who did she meet and what agreements

did she get? She might not have got many

agreements but she certainly got the sympathy and was listened to. She is

in the same position as the rest of us in that she does not know what

the UK Government is planning. We are all in the dark on this one and

that is another reason not to have an early referendum because if you

did that when we already have huge uncertainty over Brexit that would

create more uncertainty. Was one of the purposes of seeking

to speak to European leaders not to try and secure some guarantee that

of Scotland voted for independence then we could stay in Europe?

I think it is impossible for Europe at this stage to give this guarantee

or any guarantee like that because we don't know what the position is

going to be. I do for Scotland for the UK or come to that for Europe.

We don't know how this will fit together and we are absolutely in

the dark so she cannot take guarantee is back at this stage. She

will say that she is talking and she is talking, she is being positive,

but she has made clear that has a problem and we have lots of hurdles

to jump through before we get to any conclusion.

The polls being one of them but many people in the party would accept

that -- suggest that the closer we did get to our deal, the polls may

call to Nicola Sturgeon's fever but it is a gamble because she would

need to trigger the tenth of a referendum soon.

It is a total gamble. We just don't know. There was a lot of expectation

of the referendum that the vote in favour of independence, the polls

would start to shift heavily. But we have not seen that. If anything that

was a blip upwards after the vote but since then it has stayed in the

same space that was when we had a vote.

Briefly, do you think she will be able to contain expectations of the

party faithful? She will because she is strong and

unchallenged. People like her, she is hugely popular but I don't think

it will be easier just so has the problem the long term to deal with.

Now, Sister Annie Demerjian, is a Catholic nun born in Syria

and based in Aleppo who provides emergency aid and support

She's left that desperate city to come to Scotland as part

of an event organised by Aid To The Church In Need,

a Catholic charity helping those suffering persecution.

Earlier tonight, she came in to the studio.

Can you describe the situation to me in Allah Pope before you left? -- in

Allah Pope. -- Aleppo. Last week it was a very difficult time for is. In

one week, we had more than 13 shells and bombs and rockets on different

places in Aleppo, especially residential places. Many were killed

and injured and just, you know, on the Facebook they put pieces of the

body here and there and one family lost her one daughter and her son,

two members of the family. The third was injured. So, many people died.

It was very sad for Aleppo. Everyday we have someone to bury and to say

goodbye and that is very sad the people. How on earth do the people

cope with that? That's the ultimate test of the human spirit. Yes. I

think the only strength they get is from God. We feel God's power in our

heart so we can cope with the everyday difficulties and suffering

and experiences. I'm wondering, as a none, this must challenge of faith

to some extent. You must ask questions, what kind of God could be

responsible for this? Many people ask this question, why? For others,

it's a very challenging and difficult to see the cry of our

people every day. You need to be present, you need to be strong so we

can trust from this strength to them and they will feel that it you are

with them. It's not easy. We trust in the Lord and we believe in him.

We know our God is not a god of War, or not a God of violence. A God of

mercy and God of love. It's our mission, how we transfer this

message to the people we meet. Our God is God of love, of mercy...

Aside from spiritual help, humanitarian aid, is that getting

through? Loew yes. Many organisations, many churches are

doing a great job in Aleppo. They are trying to help many people. Are

the medical facilities? Some hospitals are still working and they

get some help, even if it's not... Even if it's not complete, or there

is something lacking they will transfer them to another city. Yes,

they do all kind of medical help for that person. What do you see, when

you look at the pictures behind as of the destruction of Aleppo, a once

beautiful city, a US envoy to Syria said that the city could be

destroyed by Christmas. We hope and we pray, no. We hope not. It's not

easy to see your home, your city destroyed like that. When the war

will stop, our people are strong enough to build our city again and I

can see, because really the power they have, the young people, I'm

sure when the war stopped, all of them were built it beautiful again.

Is it possible for people to escape from the city or are they, in a

sense, stuck there? Sometimes. There is a road, longer than before,

before the crisis. We can pass from this road and walk, go to Damascus

and other cities. Sometimes when there is fighting, the road will be

closed. Everything will be stopped entering the city. But it's OK. It's

available to go and come, even if it's double hours to travel. What

makes you want to stay in Aleppo? The people. We can't stay with them

when they are just in peace and happy. When there is pain and

suffering, we believe them. We are with them with everything, with

happiness and with difficulties. This is our mission. We offer our

life to God. So God now is suffering with the suffering of our people and

this is our mission there. Thank you. We really appreciate you coming

in to join us. With me now to discuss

some of today's news, I'm joined by Cat Boyd

who's an activist for RISE, Scotland's Left Alliance,

and by the political editor of Glasgow's Evening Times,

Stewart Paterson. Stewart, can we do much more to help

the people of Aleppo? We could on a daily basis. The children of Aleppo

are being orphaned, maimed, killed. We could be getting as many of those

children out of there and keeping them safe until there is peace and

then they can go back and build the country. There is enough people

dropping bombs on that country just now. We need to help people, get

them safe, the people trapped there, help them to survive through this

awful onslaught. It is difficult for others who are not politicians,

watching these appalling images on our television screens. Absolutely.

Every time I turn on the television, I wonder what horrific thing I'm

going to see across the world, particularly in Aleppo. It's great

to see women like a sister Annie on the TV with that message of hope,

not giving up on the people of Aleppo and making sure there is some

kind of future that is going to be there. Ultimately, I would hope that

none of the right wing politicians that have come out of the woodwork

in the last few days asking for Western intervention have no

traction. Stuart is absolutely right, Western intervention is not

going to have those people have a future. Let's talk about Brexit. Do

you think that Parliament needs to have a role not just discussing

Brexit but having some say in the negotiation process? It has two. The

role of Parliament is to scrutinise the government and to add to the

policies of the government. For Theresa May and the Conservatives to

try and do this behind closed doors in secret is not sustainable. Nobody

knows, other than that people voted to leave the EU, nobody knows what

they voted for. Was it an immigration, trade, the fact that it

is an overblown bureaucracy? They don't really know that. Parliament

as a representative of the people has to have a say in devising that

strategy. One thing was clear, people wanted to leave the European

Union, surely that entails leaving the single market and freedom of

movement. If democracy on the 23rd of June was good enough for them,

democracy should be good enough now. That negotiation should be handled

as transparent as possible. Some people say it was a revolt against

an unaccountable elite. The people in charge having discussions behind

closed doors, are we going to allow that? Back in 2014, wouldn't you be

arguing about the same opponents saying people weren't sure what they

were voting for, let's unpick this. You would have been saying, the

result was clear. I would want every single citizen in Scotland to be

able to see what was being negotiated. For me, independence was

about democracy, sovereignty and taking control of our own lives and

futures. I would want everybody to part of that conversation, yes, or

no. That is my position. We don't know what people voted for with

Brexit but they didn't vote for a reduction in the minimum wage, we've

had reports out saying that the minimum wage is going to rise at a

much lower rate because of Brexit. You certainly didn't vote for that.

These negotiations need to be as transparent as possible and

Parliament should have a say. Talking about the SNP conference,

will delegates be going with a spring in their step? I'm not sure.

De-arrest in the has thrown the SNP off-course a little bit. -- DDE you

-- the EU referendum. It has thrown a spanner in the works. Nicola

Sturgeon has to wait until she knows what the UK position is before they

can use that as a mechanism for a second referendum. Do you think that

is right? Wait first. I like to be impatient about these things. I

would like a second referendum. The UK is an absolute disaster. We have

seen this today with the debate, the pound is crashing, the economy is in

disarray. When these economic shocks happen, time and time again it is

working class people that paid the price. There needs to be a challenge

to the UK state, that could come through independence and that is why

we would like a referendum. Do you think Nicola Sturgeon will set a

date? Absolutely not. A nice clear answer.

I'm back again tomorrow night, usual time.