14/09/2014 Sunday Politics London

Welcome to the Sunday Politics, coming to you live from Edinburgh.

Terrorists who use the name Islamic State have carried out

their threat to murder the British aid worker, David Haines.

They released a video late last night, showing a masked man

beheading Mr Haines, who was taken captive in Syria 18 months ago.

The jihadist group have already beheaded two American journalists.

Now it's threatening the life of a second British hostage.

David Cameron described the murder as an act of pure evil.

As we speak he's chairing a meeting of the Cabinet's COBRA

President Obama said the US stood shoulder to shoulder

Alex Salmond says Scotland "stands on the cusp of history" as

he predicts a historic and substantial victory in

As the latest polls show the two sides neck and neck,

I'll ask Yes campaigner and socialist Tommy Sheridan about his

And after last week's last-minute interventions from Gordon Brown

David Cameron, Ed Miliband and big business, I'll ask

pro-unionist George Galloway whether it's enough to win over waverers.

In London, Boris Johnson moves a step closer back to Parliament. Is

it a lame-duck administration? Late last night, as most folk were

preparing for bed, news broke that Islamic State extremists had carried

out their threat to murder the The group released a video, similar

to the ones in which two American journalists were decapitated,

showing a masked man apparently beheading Mr Haines who was taken

captive in Syria last year. The terrorist,

who has a southern British accent, also threatened the life

of a second hostage from the UK Mr Haines is

the third Westerner to be killed His family have paid tribute to

his humanitarian work; they say he David Cameron described the murder

as an act of pure evil, and said his heart went out to Mr Haines

family, who had shown extraordinary Mr Cameron went on to say,

"We will do everything in our power to hunt down these murderers

and ensure they face justice, Mr Haines was born in England

and brought up in Scotland. Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond

condemned the killing on the Marr Well, it's an act of unspeakable

barbarism that we have seen. Obviously our condolences go to the

family members of David Haynes who have borne this with such fortitude

in recent months -- David Alex Salmond was also asked

whether he supported military action Haines there is no reason to believe

whatsoever that China or Russia or any country will see their will to

deal with this barbarism. There is a will for effective, international,

legal action but it must come in that fashion, and I would urge that

to be a consideration to develop a collective response to what is a

threat to humanity. Our security correspondent

Gordon Corera joins me now Gordon, as we speak, the Cobra

emergency meeting is meeting yet again. It meets a lot these days. I

would suggest that the options facing this committee and Mr Cameron

are pretty limited. That's right. I think they are extremely limited.

They have been all along in these hostage situations. We know, for

instance, that British government policy is not to pay ransom is to

kidnappers. Other Europeans states are thought to have done so to get

hostages released, and also not to make substantive policy concessions

to the groups, so while there might be contact, there won't be a lot of

options left. We know the US in the past has looked at rescue missions

and in July on operation to free the hostages, landing at the oil

facility in Syria but finding no one there. If you look at the options,

they are not great. That is the difficult situation which Cobra will

have been discussing the last hour. Does this make it more likely,

because it might have the direction the government was going in any way,

that we join with the Americans in perhaps the regional allies in air

strikes against Islamic State, not just in Iraq, but also in Syria We

heard from President Obama outlining his strategy against Islamic State

last week when he talked about building a coalition, about

authorising air strikes. And training troops. We are still

waiting to hear what exact role the UK will play in that. We know it

will play a role because it has been arming the fishmonger forces but the

question is, will it actually conduct military strikes in Iraq --

arming the passion are there. We have not got a clear answer from

government and that is something where they are ours to discuss what

was around the table. It's possible we might learn some more today as a

result of the Cobra meeting, but I think the government will be wanting

to not be seen to suddenly rushed to a completely different policy as a

result of one incident, however terrible it is. Whether it hardens

their reserve -- resolved to play more active role in the coalition,

that's possible, but we have to wait see to get the detail. -- wait and

see. What the whole country would like to see would be British and

American special forces going in and getting these guys. I think that

would unite the nation. But that is very difficult, isn't it? It is As

you saw with a rescue mission a few months ago, the problem is getting

actionable intelligence on the ground at a particular moment. The

theory is that the group of kidnappers are moving the hostages

may be even every or few days, so you need intelligence and quickly

and then you need to be able to get the team onto the ground into that

time frame. That is clearly a possibility and something they will

be looking at, but it certainly challenging, particularly when you

have a group like this operating within its own state, effectively,

and knowing that other people are looking very hard for it and doing

everything they can to hide. Gordon, thank you very much.

Clegg dropped everything and headed to Scotland when a poll last Sunday

gave the YES vote its first ever lead in this prolonged referendum

If their reaction looked like panic, that's because it was.

Until last weekend, though the polls had been narrowing,

the consensus was still that NO would carry the day.

The new consensus is that it's too close to call.

If we look back at the beginning of the year, public opinion in Scotland

was fairly settled. The no campaign had a commanding lead across the

opinion polls, excluding the undecided voters. At one point, at

the end of last year, an average of 63% backed the no campaign and only

37% supported a yes vote. As we move into 2014 and up to this week, you

can see a clear trend emerging as the lead for the no campaign gets

narrower and narrower and the average of the most recent polls has

the contest hanging in the balance. There was a poll a week ago that put

the Yes campaign in the lead for the first time, 51% against 49%, but

that lead was not reflected in the other polls last week. For polls

were published last night, one by Salvation, for the macro-2 campaign

-- Better Together campaign, and there was another that gave a one

percentage point different. ICM have the yes campaign back in the lead at

54% and the no campaign at 46%, but their sample size was 705 Scottish

adults, smaller than usual. Another suggests that the contest remains on

a knife edge with 49.4% against 50.6%. When fed into the poll of

polls the figures average out with yes at 49% and polls -- no at 5 %.

But some people think 18% are undecided, and it is how they vote

gets -- when they get to the polling booths that could make all the

difference. campaigner and Respect Party MP

George Galloway. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Big

business, big oil, big banks, the Tories, the Orange order, all

against Scottish independence. You sure you are on right side? Yes

because the interests of working people are in staying together. This

is a troubled moment in a marriage, a very long marriage, in which some

good things and bad things have been achieved together. And there is no

doubt that the crockery is being thrown around the house of the

minute. But I believe that the underlying interests of working

people are on working on the relationship rather than divorce. I

have been divorced. It's a very messy, acrimonious, bitter affair

and it's particularly bad for the children will stop that's why I am

here. You talk about working people, and particularly Scottish working

people, they seem to have concluded that the social democracy they want

to create cannot now be done in a UK context. Why should they not have a

shot of going it alone? Because the opposite will happen. Separation

will cause a race to the bottom in taxation. Alex Salmond has already

announced he will cut the taxes on companies, corporation tax, down to

3% hello whatever it is in the rest of these islands. And business will

only be attracted to come here, country of 5 million people on if

there is low regulation, low public expenditure, low levels of taxation

for them will stop you cannot have Scandinavian social democracy on

Texan levels of taxation. The British government, as will be, the

rest of the UK, they will race Alex Salmond to the bottom. If he cuts it

by three, they will cut it by four. And so on. So whether some people

cannot see it clearly yet or not, the interests of the working people

on both sides of the border would be gravely damaged by separation. Let's

take the interest of the working people. As you know, as well as

anyone, the coalition is in fermenting both a series of cuts and

reforms in welfare, and labour, Westminster Labour, has only limited

plans to reverse any of that. Surely if you want to preserve the welfare

state as it is, independence is the way to do it. For the reasons I just

explain, I don't believe that. But Ed Miliband will be along in a

minute. He will be along in May The polls indicate... They say he is

only four or 5%, that is the average. Like the referendum, the

next general election could be nip and tuck. I don't, myself, think

that the time of David Cameron as Prime Minister is for much longer. I

think there will be a Labour government in the spring and the

Labour government in London and a stronger Scottish Parliament, super

Devo Max, that is now on the table. That is the best arrangement of

people in the country. But the people of Scotland surely cannot

base a decision on independence on your feeling that Labour might win

the next general election. It is my feeling. When the Tories were beaten

on the bedroom tax last week in the house, it was written all over the

faces of the government side not only that they were headed for

defeat, but probably a massive fishy -- Fisher. I think the race to the

bottom that I have proper size will mean that the welfare state will be

a distant memory quite soon. The cuts and the run on the Scottish

economy here in Edinburgh, the financial services industry, that

will be gravely damage. The Ministry of Defence jobs in Scotland

decimated, probably ended, more or less. It will be a time of cuts and

austerity, maybe super austerity in an independent Scotland. You

mentioned defence. What about nuclear weapons? The Tories and

Labour will keep them. You are against them. Surely the only way to

be rid of them in Scotland is by independence. But you are not rid of

them by telling them down the river. The danger would be the same --

telling them down the river. The danger would be the same. Nuclear

radiation does not respect Alex Salmond's national boundaries. They

would be committed to immediately joining NATO, which is bristling

with nuclear weapons and is what -- involved in wars across the

Atlantic. So anyone looking for a peace option will have to elect a

government in Britain as a whole that will get rid of nuclear weapons

and get out of military entanglements. We are in one again

now. I have been up the whole night, till 5am, dealing with some of the

consequences and implications of the grave international matter that you

opened the show with. David Haines and the fate of the hostage still in

their hands. There are many other hostages as well. And there are many

people dying who are neither British nor American. I have, somehow, been

drawn into this matter. And it showed me, again, that the world is

interdependent. It is absolutely riven with division and hatred, and

this is the worst possible time to be opting out of the world to set up

a small mini-state on the promises of Alex Salmond of social democracy

funded by Texan taxes. Let's, for the sake of the next question,

assume that everything you have told us is true. Why is your side

squandering a 20 point lead? I will have a great deal to say

about that, whatever the result This is very much a Scottish Labour

project, is that not a condemnation of Scottish Labour? It is

potentially on its deathbed. The country breaking up, the principal

responsibility will be on them. And the pitiful, absolutely pitiful job

that has been made of defending a 300-year-old relationship in this

island by the Scottish Labour leadership is really terrible for me

to behold, even though I'm no longer one of them. I don't know how they

are going to get out of this deathbed. Do you agree that if this

referendum is lost by your side it will be because traditional

working-class Labour voters, particularly in the west of

Scotland, have abundant Labour and decided to vote for independence?

Without a doubt, the number of Labour voters intending to vote yes

is disturbingly high. Even just months ago during the European

Parliament elections, swathes of people who didn't vote SNP will be

voting yes on Thursday. That is a grave squandering of a great legacy

of Scottish Labour history, which history will decree as

unforgivable. If Labour is to get out of its deathbed in Scotland it

will have to become Labour again. Real Labour again. I am ready to

help them with that. My goodness, they need help with it. I wonder if

it isn't just a failure of Labour in Scotland. People all over Britain

are increasingly fed up with the Westminster system, but it is only

the Scots who currently have the chance to break free from it, so why

shouldn't they? That is exactly right. They see a parliament of

expenses cheats led by Lord snooty and the Bullingdon club elite,

carrying through austerity for many but not for themselves and they are

repulsed by it. They need change, but you can go backwards and call it

change but it will be worse than the situation you have now. A lot of

Scottish people don't buy that. It is a big gamble. If I were poised to

put my family's life savings on the roulette table in Las Vegas, my wife

would not be scaremongering if she pointed out the potential

consequences if I'd lost. She would not be negative by telling me that

is my children's money I am risking. If I jumped off this roof it would

change my point of view, but it would be worse than the point of

view I have now. There is another issue here because the Scots are

being asked to gamble on the Westminster parties, which they are

already suspicious of, of delivering home rule. Alistair Darling could

not even tell me if Ed Balls had signed off on more income tax powers

for Scotland, so that is a gamble for the Scots. I feel the British

state has had such a shake out of all this that they would be beyond

idiots, they would be insane now to risk all of this flaring up again

because whatever happens, if we win on Thursday, it is going to be

narrowly. It will be a severe fissure in Scotland. A great deal of

unpleasantness that we are already aware of. That could turn but we're

still. It would be dicing with death, playing with fire, to let

Scottish people down after Thursday if we narrowly win. If you narrowly

win, and if there are moves to this home rule Mr Brown has been talking

about, England hasn't spoken yet on this. Whilst England would probably

not want to stop -- stop Scotland getting this, they would say, what

about us? It could delay the whole procedure. It is necessary, you are

right. England should have home rule, and I screamed at Scottish

Labour MPs going into the vote to introduce tuition fees in England. I

told them this was a constitutional monstrosity, as well as a crime

against young people in England It was risking everything. We are led

by idiots. Our leaders are not James Bonds, they are Austin powers. We

need to change the leadership, not rip up a 300-year-old marriage.

Thank you. It's been one of the longest and

hardest fought political campaigns in history, with Alex Salmond firing

the starting gun on the referendum Adam's been stitching together

the key moments of the campaign It is the other thing drawing people

to the Scottish parliament, the new great tapestry of Scotland. It is

the story of battles won and lost, Scottish moments, British moments,

famous Scots, and not so famous Scots. There is even a panel

dedicated to the rise of the SNP. Alex Salmond's majority in the

elections in 2011 made the referendum inevitable. It became

reality when he and David Cameron did a deal in Edinburgh one year

later. The Scottish Government set out its plans for independence in

this book, just a wish list to some, a sacred text to others. This White

Paper is the most detailed improvements that any people have

ever been offered in the world as a basis for becoming an independent

country. The no campaign, called Better Together, united the Tories,

Labour and the Lib Dems under the leadership of Alistair Darling. Then

the Scottish people were bombarded with two years of photo

opportunities and a lot of campaigning. For the no campaign,

Jim Murphy went on tour but took a break when he was egged and his

events were often hijacked by yes campaigners who were accused of

being intimidating. In turn, they accused the no campaign of using

scare tactics. Things heated up when the TV dinner -- during the TV

debate. Fever pitch was reached one week ago when one poll suggested the

yes campaign was in the lead for the first time. The three main

Westminster leaders ditched PMQs to head north. I think people can feel

it is like a general election, that you make a decision and five years

later you can make another decision if you are fed up with the Tories,

give them a kick... This is totally different. And Labour shelved not

quite 100 MPs onto the train, Alex Salmond took a helicopter instead.

This is about the formation of the NHS. A big theme of the yes campaign

is that changes to the NHS in Linden -- in England would lead to

privatisation in Scotland. Alex Salmond's plan to share the pound

was trashed by big names. There were other big question is, what would

happen to military hardware like Trident based on the Clyde? Would an

independent Scotland be able to join the EU? And how much oil was left

underneath the North Sea? This panel is about famous Scots, we

have Annie Lennox, Stephen Hendry, Sean Connery. I cannot see Gordon

Brown. These are big changes we are proposing to strengthen the Scottish

parliament, but at the same time to stay as part of the UK. A regular on

the campaign, he was front and centre when things got close,

unveiling a timetable for more devolution. People wondered whether

Ed Miliband was able to reach the parts of Scotland Labour leader

should reach, and at Westminster some Tories pondered whether David

Cameron could stay as prime minister if there was a yes vote. This

tapestry is nonpartisan so it is a good place to get away from it all

but it is crystallising voters' views. Look at what we have

contributed to Great Britain, and I am British and I hope to be staying

British. This is what people from Scotland have done, taken to the

rest of the world in many cases and I think I am going to vote yes. I am

so inspired by it. It has certainly inspired me to have a go at

stitching. How long do you think it would take to do the whole thing? I

would say to put aside maybe 30 hours of stitching. Maybe by the

time I am done, we will know more about how the fabric of the nation

might be changing. And I've been joined

by yes campaigner and convenor of Scotland's Solidarity socialist

party, Tommy Sheridan. An economy dependent on oil, the

Queen as head of state, membership of the world 's premier nuclear

alliance of capitalist nations is that the socialist Scotland you are

fighting for? No, that is the SNP's prospectus and they are entitled to

put forward their vision, but it is not mine or that of the majority of

Scotland. We will find out in two years. On Thursday we are not voting

for a political party, we are voting for our freedom as a country. That

is why people are going to vote yes on Thursday. A lot of people are

voting for what you call freedom because they think it will be more

Scotland. You have already got free prescriptions, no tuition fees, free

care for the elderly. You might not in future have that if public

spending is overdependent on the price of oil, over which you have no

control. We don't have to worry about one single resource, we

already have 20% of the fishing stock in Europe. We already have 25%

of the wind, wave and solar power generation. We, as an independent

country, have huge resources, natural resources but also people

resources. We have five first-class universities, food and beverages

industry which is the envy of the world. We have the ability to

produce the resources on the revenues that won't just maintain

the health service and education but it will develop health and

education. I don't want to stand still, I want to redistribute

wealth. But all of the projections of public spending for an

independent Scotland show that to keep spending at the current level

you need a strong price of oil and you are dependent on this commodity

which goes up and down and sideways. That is a gamble. I have got to

laugh because I have been told the most pessimistic is that in 40 years

the oil is running out, panic stations! If you were told by the

BBC you could only guarantee employment for the next 40 years you

would be over the moon. I am talking about in the next five. You need 50%

of your revenues to come from oil to continue spending and that is not a

guarantee. Of course it is, the minimum survival of the oil is 0

years. Please get your viewers to go onto the Internet and look at the

website called oilandgas.com. The West Coast has 100 years of oil to

be extracted. It hasn't been done because in 1981 Michael Heseltine

said we cannot extract the oil because we have Trident going up and

down there. Let's get rid of Trident and extract the oil. You are a trot

right, why have you failed to learn his famous dictum, socialism in one

country is impossible. Revolutions and change are not just single

event. What will happen here on Thursday is a democratic revolution.

The people are fed up of being patronised and lied to by this mob

in Westminster who have used and abused us for far too long. The

smaller people now have a voice What about socialism in one

country? Mr Trotsky warned you against that. The no campaign

represents the past. The yes campaign represents the future. That

is the truth of the matter. What we are going to do in an independent

Scotland is tackle inequality and a scourge of low pay. If we vote no on

Thursday, there will be more low pay on Friday, more poverty and food

banks on Friday. I'm not going to be lectured by these big banks, you

vote less -- yes and we will leave the country! The food banks will be

the ones closing. If you got your way, for the type of Scotland you

would like to see, state control of business, nationalisation of the

Manx, the roads to Carlisle will be clogged with people

Yes, hoping to come into Scotland, because in their hearts, the

Scottish people know that England want to see the people having the

bottle. The working class people in Liverpool, Newcastle, outside of

London, they are saying good on the jocks that are taking on big

business. When we are independent and investing in social housing the

people of England will say, we can do that as well, and they will

rediscover the radical tradition. In wanting to build socialism in one

country, it really means you are fighting for the few, rather than

the many. You are bailing out of the socialist Battle for Britain. You

think it will be easier to make it work. Think globally, act locally

and we will build socialism in Scotland but I wanted across the

world. I won my brothers and sisters in England and Wales to be

encouraged by what we do so they can reject the Westminster consensus as

well -- I want. We had the three Stooges coming up to London, three

millionaires united on one thing, austerity. Doesn't matter whether Ed

Miliband wins the next election he said he would stick to the story

spending cuts. Why vote for Ed Miliband? You wouldn't trust him to

run a bath, not a country. Let's see if this is realistic, this great

socialist vision. At the last Scottish election, the Socialist

party got 8000 votes. The Conservatives got 30 times more

votes. Where is the appetite in Scotland for your Marxist ideology

question we might not win it. But do you know what, see in two years

time. See when we have the Scottish general election. You won't -- you

are saying you might win and you went to the Holyrood election and

got 8000 Pope -- votes. The SNP won a democratic election and then won

the 2011 election and you know why they won? Because they picked up the

clothes that the Labour Party has thrown away. They picked up the

close of social democracy and protecting the health service was --

service. There are people in the SNP who believe in public ownership and

people in the SNP who believe in the NHS should be written into a

constitution as never for sale people in the the SNP that think the

Royal mail should return to public ownership. That is there in black

and white. Do you agree with George Galloway that this is potentially a

crisis for Scottish Labour? Scottish Labour is finished. They are

absolutely finished. George is right in that. Scottish Labour is

finished. The irony of ironies is, Labour in Scotland has more chance

of recovery in an independent Scotland that they have in a no

vote. Labour in Scotland in an independent country will have to

rediscover the traditions of Keir Hardie, the ideas of Jimmy Maxon,

because right now, they are to the right of the SNP as a political

party. I understand the socialist vision, but it is where the appetite

is. And you look at the independence people in Scotland. One of your

colleagues, Brian Souter, a man who fought against the appeal -- repeal

of homosexual rights in Scotland. Another of your allies would seem to

be Rupert Murdoch, the man who engineered your downfall. You say he

engineered your downfall, but I m still here and his newspaper has

closed. Whether it Rupert Murdoch, Brian Souter, or any other

millionaire supporting independence, I couldn't care less. This boat on

Thursday is not about millionaires, it is about the millions. -- this

vote. We will not be abused any young -- longer. Would you rather

not have their support? I couldn't care about the support. You know who

is supporting the union. It is the unions of the big businesses, the

BNP, UKIP, they are the ones who support it. You are giving me a

stray that has wandered into the campaign and are you seriously going

to argue with me that the establishment isn't united to try

and save the union? That is what they are trying to be. The BBC, you

have been a disgrace in your coverage of the campaign. Not you

personally. You don't have editorial control. The BBC coverage,

generally, has been a disgrace and the people. Oil and gas, go and look

at that, why is that not feature. Why is the idea of 100 years of oil

not featured in the campaign. Because the BBC does not want to see

it. Are you getting in your excuses if you lose? You better be kidding.

Is this the face of somebody looking to lose. We are going to win, 6 /40.

Absolutely. There is a momentum that you guys are not seeing on the

working-class housing estates. Working class people are fed up

being taken for granted fed up with the lives of people dragging us into

tax cuts, bedroom tax for the poor. They will have power on Thursday,

and they will use it and vote for freedom. Are you happy with the way

the BBC has treated you today? So far, yes. I have still not been

offered a Coffey, but that might happen. That is an obvious example

of our bias. Tommy, we will speak to you later with George Galloway.

Coming up here in 20 minutes, the week ahead, but first, the Sunday

politics where you are. Andrew, thanks very much

and welcome from us. I've been watching those exchanges

here with Sadiq Khan for Labour and Stephen Hammond

for the Conservatives, who'll be And we'll get back onto that

Scottish question in just a moment. But just to say that a little later,

we'll be considering what it means for London that it's mayor has been

selected for a west London seat and now looks set for

a return to parliament a full year Or is the appearance worse than

the reality? It seems such a hugely

significant political moment. But as the columnist Simon Jenkins

wrote in the Standard this week would independence have much

of an economic impact, directly Well, of course it would, but we are

Better Together. As the country we pooled resources and culture. We

pool the people who work in London. London has 300,000 Scottish people,

and that would be a huge loss to London if part of the UK was to

break. The bombs in the relationships we have in Scotland

are huge. Around London this week, most of the town halls have been

flying the flag as a gesture of solidarity -- the bombs in our

relationship. Global resilient city that will just absorb any short term

shock and do OK in the long run The one thing that we will agree on is

what he has just said. We will be better together and it will be

better if Scotland votes no. Why? I am asking about London, so why? A

global city. In terms of the sheer impact on London, not a great deal,

but the international consequences, some of the break-up for how we

would have to look Parliament and some of the arrangements in

welfare, but particularly for the Scots, and this is where Alex

Salmond has been disingenuous, the currency would change. The pound in

your pocket would not be the same and the Scots, a lot of Scottish

people and that would have consequences will stop that would

have short-term consequences because international markets would look at

disruption. Would less of the taxation raised here go north? Let

me give you an example of a difference it would make. He said he

would recall -- reduce corporation tax then. We are keen to have

high-speed trains going to Scotland because companies in London say they

want to have faster links with Scotland, but if it is part of

Scotland being part of the UK. It's all very well for Alex Salmond to

talk about 3% reduction in corporation tax, but would have to

have another Bank of Scotland that would have reserves, and the only

way to build the reserves is to increase taxes on Scottish business

or people. So, Boris Johnson's been selected to

contest the seat of Uxbridge and South Ruislip for the Conservatives

at the election next Spring. It's a safe seat,

and the presumption is he'll win But for a year after that he'll stay

on as mayor too, until the next Andrew Cryan has this report, which

contains some flash photography I'm very pleased to say that the

Oxbridge Conservative Association have done me the honour of picking

me to fight the election in 236 days. Boris Johnson says there's no

harm in running the MP and doing the job errors the same time. He didn't

always think that, as back in 2 08 he resigned immediately from his

seat in Henley. And he said that the made about Londoners to lead them

out of recession. Keeping that promise cannot be combined in

another capacity. So the question is, was he right when he said it

back in 2012, or is he right when he says now it's not a problem at all

question the Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the Home

Secretary, they have massive jobs and are a constituent MP. I was the

government Chief Whip. Nothing in the same category, but it takes up

time. Indeed, it won't be the first time the Mayor of London has also

been an MP at the same time. It is exactly what Ken Livingstone did for

his first year in office. It was only a year till the general

election. Under the rules then, if there was a by-election, Labour

selected candidate, not the local party, so I sat it out and my local

party selected a really good local councillor, not some ghastly new

Labour clone. I left my casework office and I popped in for about

four crucial votes where they counted. What is the experience of

the only other man to be Mayor of London? Sunday politics wanted to

know what people who have been an MP thought, so we asked every member of

Parliament in London whether they thought his ability to do his

current job could now become demise. The results that came back

almost entirely split on party lines, with 14 MPs saying it was a

problem, and ten saying it wasn t. The yes camp were all labour, along

with two Liberal Democrats. The no camp were all Conservative apart

from two Labour Party members. The views of MPs are one thing. The

people who will actually decided Boris Johnson gets to do both jobs

are the voters of Oxbridge and South Ruislip. Can you be Mayor of London

and the name the same time question mark -- Oxbridge. Possibly. It might

conflict though. It's a lot of responsibility. I have liked what he

has done with the bikes on the new train system. He has put in a lot of

thought. I think he would look after us here as well as London. I think

you should be Prime Minister and Mayor of London at the same time. So

perhaps rather than worrying about whether Boris Johnson could be the

Mayor of London and an MP as well, could we be asking if he could do

three jobs? He is an ambitious man, and if he gets back into Parliament

it would be surprising if he did not want to be the leader of the

Conservative Party, which begs the question of how soon a vacancy

occurs, and whether it occurs immediately after the next general

election. If that happened, and he stood and he became Conservative

Party leader he would be opposition leader, presumably, and Mayor of

London at the same time. On Friday, the Mayor of London refused to rule

out doing three jobs at once. You're not going to be a minister or on a

select committee? You're not going to stand for leader of the

opposition and do the two jobs as well question you are asking a lot

of hypothetical questions there Step one, act one, scene one, of a

long process. What I have to do now is have a lot of talks with people

they -- here, so people get to know the association. But I know it quite

well already because I spent six years of representing the area

anyway. There is a lot of digging in to be done. The Mayor of London

compare the scenes on Friday to the beginning of the play. Whether it

turns out to be a tragedy, comedy, or a great history, remains to be

seen. We invited both the Mayor

and his Chief of Staff to join us on Stephen Hammond, first off, why is

he coming back now before he has finished his mayoral term? There is

unlikely to be in a general election for five years. But overwhelmingly,

they recognise he has been a great Mayor in London. Crime down 17% we

got the money to make sure corporate council taxes down. It's not

surprising Londoners think he has been a great Mayor. Then for the

last year, rather than worrying about re-election, Londoners will

get a better deal. He will be concentrating on delivering all of

those things for his last year as mayor, rather than whether he will

challenge. Why is he coming back though? He has a job to do and he

was elected until 2016. Why does he want another job? He always said he

would do the two terms. Because of the five-year rule on he is thinking

there would not be another chance until 2020. Clearly, the most

important thing is that he can do the two jobs and there is precedent

in the Ken Livingstone film. When we were government ministers, we both

did two jobs, and we have represented constituents extremely

well. And I have no doubt that Boris will be able to do that.

what do you think about that? Congratulations to him, he is one

step closer to leaving the Conservative Party. In 2012 when

Boris Johnson successfully stored his mayoral election, nobody knew

when the next general election would be. He wants to be the next leader

of the Conservative Party, Ken Livingstone didn't. The big

difference now is that until he becomes leader, all the things you

do our leading towards that. You can be a minister and an MP, but the

differences that he wants to be the leader of the Conservative Party.

Not going back to Parliament... He said quite early on he would only do

two terms. We have a housing crisis, a transport crisis... Do we think

that it will impinge on the job he does as mayor? He has been selected

as a candidate, there are 73 seats in London, 33 London boroughs, and

this next couple of weeks when we see the Conservative Party

conference, he won't be arguing for London, he will be arguing for Boris

Johnson to be the next leader of the Conservative Party. I want him

batting for London. Coming back early does indicate he doesn't have

faith in David Cameron winning the next general election. Far from it,

I think you could take the view that like me, Boris hopes David Cameron

wins an overall majority and might be considered by the Prime Minister.

But let's talk about 73 seats in London, I mean every week I hear

about Labour ministers and ex-Labour ministers who wanted to be the Mayor

of London. Perhaps some of them I mean do you want to be Mayor of

London? Should you tell your constituents? Far from me being

disingenuous, there is a moment for Sadiq to come clean? Do you want to

be the mayor? Where are you on that? I want to be the next MP for

tooting. I think London is best served by a Labour government. Would

you rule out standing as Labour s mayoral candidate next time? It is

very flattering Stephen pushing my candidacy... Are you willing it out?

I want a Labour government. London are best served by a Labour

government, by having hard-working MPs, and a Labour mayor in City

Hall, whether he or she has currently declared... You will not

do it? Stephen can deflect but the real issue is that we have two years

left to run... This is much better for Labour isn't it? You should be

thankful he will not stand for a third term. Over the next two years,

he will not be thinking about re-standing as the mayor, who will

be thinking about delivering for Londoners. Affordable housing,

council tax kept low, Londoners will benefit. It is not surprising to

think overwhelmingly here is a great mayor. At this stage you are saying

of course I don't want to be Mayor of London, but you will consider and

think about it after the next election? No, I have already said

no. Going back to Stephen's point, David Cameron has got Theresa May,

George Osborne, Boris Johnson, but London being let down by this mayor

who is distracted. People like Stephen, rather than arguing for

housing and infrastructure, he is arguing about who will be the next

leader of the Tories. We will get on to issues about pay NI next item. It

is now three years since Ed Miliband said he wanted to target his

attention on the squeezed middle, the term characterising people who

may be on modest incomes in steady jobs, but who will still struggle to

get by. This section of London's population is the focus of a new

report out tomorrow which argues that the capital urgently needs to

be made more affordable. Lucy is university educated and has

an annual income of ?24,000, but as a single parent, raising her

12-year-old daughter in London can be challenging. My oven was

condemned a few months ago and I haven't been able to get one yet

because it is quite a big expenditure and there is hardly

anything left for me to be able to save. I have one of those pan tops,

and when I tell people I haven't got another may think it is ridiculous

but it is true. I am hoping things will improve but it is really tight.

According to a new report, Lucy s story is far from unique. It is

claimed there are over 1 million people in the capital for whom life

in London may soon simply become unviable. To cope with this the

report says policymakers need to focus on raising incomes and

reducing costs. They propose a radical shake-up of working credit

so that they can be shared between the different earners of

multi-generational households. Training loans, that would allow

people on middle incomes to move up the ladder. Low interest loans for

commuter season tickets, but follow see any action that could help

cannot come fast enough. At the moment I have ?3 something in my

account, and ?20 savings. You are living pay cheque to pay cheque

what do you do? It is difficult Charles Leadbeater is the author of

the report and he is here now. Not just squeezed, but use a trapped,

and indeed hidden from view. What do you mean? They are trapped between

Labour market which is very competitive at that end which sets

their pay and a housing market which is dysfunctional and is on providing

them with decent places to live at decent rate. They are trapped and

hidden because they don't complain, they don't riot, they basically go

home and they go on the Internet. You portray a lifestyle which is

having very little disposable income. They are not out drinking,

eating, going on holidays, quite a bleak picture. ?6 to go swimming,

eating out would be a luxury, holiday would be a luxury. They are

working very hard and they are essential to London and they have

very little at the end of the week. And you claim that is because the

salaries are going up at a much lower pace than the cost of living.

Exactly, they are trapped. The labour market is keeping their wages

very depressed and it is very costly for them to live. Also childcare is

an extreme expense. What about transport, how do you try to help

one constituency like this by what... Capping fares? The taxpayer

will have to pay? London's public transport has got better but it is

still expensive compared to other cities, and for these people if you

move further out to get the affordable housing, you just pay

more to come in. You would have to find a way for them to afford it

more. Providing low-cost loans for season tickets, that idea. Then

there are social improvement districts, where people focus

energies on low taxation and so on, describe what that would be. It

would be like the city of Friedberg in Germany where you bring together

low-cost housing, low-cost utilities and energy, very affordable

transport, where the cost of living for people earning 25,000 makes life

affordable, but you would have to bring that together and not just do

it in parts. Then London would be affordable for people on modest

incomes. The problem is, Sadiq Khan, the economic situation for the

country as a whole dictate it is very difficult for these measures.

It is a sober and depressing report with lots of personal stories but it

is fizzing with ideas. A third of Londoners are now living in

poverty, two thirds of those are working so we have got to radically

increase the national minimum wage. We have got to reduce the cost of

housing, we need more housing being built. The lowest housing in London

since the 1920s. We need at least 80,000 houses being built, secure

long-term rental properties. That is a good list. Let's ask Stephen

Hammond to deal with that. You have focused a lot of energy on tackling

the benefits bill, trying to get people back to work, but what about

people providing important services in London? I took some things out of

this report, and it is full of ideas, but it does make the point

that Londoners have felt squeezed since 2008. This didn't start in

2010, it has been a long-term trend. Charles also says in his report

let's reduce costs and raise incomes. He identifies the trapped

middle as the 25,000-43,000 earners and one thing you don't want to do

is increase income tax as Harriet Harman wants to do. The other things

you can do are to work with councils to release more public land, huge

amounts of public land. Transport for London has identified 93 sites.

He is also right about the lazy assets, making them work for people.

We are running out of time. Does this mean a bigger burden on public

expenditure? No, if you look at Friedberg, the public sector has

invested in land and in the long run money has flowed back to the

Exchequer but you need public leadership to take the risk out of

that. Thank you for coming in. Now for the rest of the news in 60

seconds. The capital's banking industry

entered centrestage north of the border this week when it emerged The

Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds have drawn up contingency plans to

move registered headquarters to London if Scotland vote yes in the

referendum. Train services going to the capital where the most crowded

in England and Wales, according to new figures. At peak time almost 40%

of London's services were overcapacity. Plans for a

controversial ?4.2 billion super sewer under London have been given

the go-ahead by the Government. Work on the controversial 15 mile Thames

Tideway tunnel is expected to start in 2016, leading to a cleaner river

for London but higher water bills. And Scottish referendum fever

reached the streets with town halls across the capital flying the

Saltire flag to show support for the union.

This huge piece of infrastructure needed, Sadiq Khan, they have

finally grasped the nettle, the Government, and they are going ahead

with it. Yes, but it is important they pay the cost of this and

Londoners should not be penalised. They have got to work with the

councils. ?80 each year for god knows how long on the bills? Yes,

but they are doing the infrastructure that London needs.

The last time a sewer was built in London was 150 years ago, otherwise

we would have a dirty River Thames. Andrew, back to you.

Can the No campaign still pull it off?

And even if they do is the whole of the UK now on the brink

I'm joined now by John McTernan former adviser to Gordon Brown

and Tony Blair, Alex Bell, former Head of Policy for the SNP

and Lindsay McIntosh, the Times Scottish Political Editor

And I'm delighted that Tommy and George have stayed too.

No fighting has broken out either. Where

No fighting has broken out either. have three full days to go

No fighting has broken out either. polling day. What is the state of

play? I think the poll of polls is accurate. 49 and 51%. What is vital

is to bring the undecided voters in, and they properly have about

500,000. I think there are a lot of undecided people. I think they know

which way they are leaning, but they haven't jumped. The hope of the no

campaign is that they will go for the status quo on Thursday. How do

you assess the state of the campaign now? The crucial thing is the big

swing. The swing has come towards yes, so will the momentum carry it

over the line? I will think it does, because it is an antiestablishment

swell, and its people responding to standard Western as the politicians

and saying that they want a new way -- Westminster politicians. I think

that yes will sneak it. A referendum can be more important than a general

election, and the Yes campaign have had the momentum. This was the week

the momentum stopped. We started the week looking as though yes were

going into the lead and then it stopped and most of the recent polls

show a distinct lead for the no campaign. A distinct lead? It is one

or two points. It is six in one poll, two in another, aiding

another. The poll of polls is a good way of measuring, and is it

statistically Nick -- nip and tuck? It is the week the momentum stopped.

About a fifth of the electorate That will be a quarter of the

turnout have voted already, by postal vote, and they are running

very strongly towards no, so there is a whole bank of votes there. The

postal votes are skewed to the over 60s, and that is the demographic

that the Yes campaign have had the biggest trouble with. Absolutely,

the Yes campaign faced a challenge amongst the 16 and 18-year-olds and

always based challenge with the older voters. Trust me, I was the

decision the day the civil servants made it possible for the 16 to

18-year-olds to vote, and we said there was a victory for the no

campaign in that alone. The young tend to be conservative by nature. I

think again that to say that the momentum has stopped when you had a

20 point lead, this is a referendum whether people will speak and they

will be heard. Except for the one poll which needs a huge health

warning because of the size of the sample, the momentum is

unquestionably all the way through August is going in the direction of

yes. It hasn't quite continue to get to the 55/45 four yes that Alex

Salmond thinks will be the result. I would agree with John. This was the

momentum stalled. We saw the three leaders coming up, and that kept

Alex Salmond off the front pages on the television and we had a raft of

economic warnings which, although they were dismissed as

scaremongering, they will have had a lot of traction with voters. What

does the no campaign have to do in the final three days? It has to

focus on the undecided, relentlessly. It has to do stick to

the question of risk and keep pushing back on Alex Salmond to say

it doesn't matter if the banks leave, it will all be all right on

the night. The huge question amongst the undecided voters is about the

economy. It is about jobs and currency, about business. That risk

is what will crystallise in the ballot box on Thursday and that has

to be the focus. What does the Yes campaign have to do? It has to drive

home that the swing to the Yes campaign is motivated by people who

want a different politics. They have decided amongst themselves that they

want to change Scotland. The unfortunate thing is, even though

the no campaign has had the chance to put up after proposals, they have

failed. The Scottish people want their powers were a purpose and they

say that only the Yes campaign can deliver that. There will be two days

of relentless campaigning from today, Monday and Tuesday, then the

media, the newspapers, including your own, will come out with the

final poll, the ones that will be the closest to the day that the

Scots actually go and vote. I think we will see more polling this week,

but what is interesting is the extent to which the pollsters are

picking up what is going on in the street. We know we have a huge

number of voters who have never voted before and are not engage with

politics, so what will they do? The third candidate in the election if

I can would in this way, are the polls. They might have a lot of

questions to answer on Friday morning. We were talking earlier

with George and Tommy about the Labour Party's consequences in all

of this. Gordon Brown, of course, has had a bit of a second coming as

a result of this referendum. I just want to play a clip of Gordon Brown

during the campaign and get a reaction. And I say this to Alex

Salmond himself. Up until today I am outside front line politics. If he

continues to peddle this deception, that the Scottish Parliament under

his leadership, and he cannot do anything to improve the health

service until he has a separate state, then I will want to join Joe

Hanlon want in and securing the return of a Labour government as

quickly as possible -- Johann Lamont. That was seen by some people

as Gordon Brown implying he might stand for the Scottish Parliament.

Whether it is yes or no, is Gordon Brown the saviour of Scottish

Labour? I did a double black the other night -- double act with him

the other night, and I must say he was a big beast all over again. He

crossed the stage Meli dealt with the audience brilliantly. He has a

certain presence, Gordon Brown, but he would really have to reinvent

himself quite considerably. He is capable of doing, but the man who

was the biographer of Jimmy Maxton, who pulled together the original red

paper on Scotland, he would have to be that Gordon Brown rather than the

Gordon Brown of some more melancholy events later. Tommy, you have both

been critical of the state of the Scottish Labour Party. Rather than

looking to Gordon Brown, which might be an interim solution, doesn't

Scottish Labour have to find a new generation of people to reignite it?

What George and I are agreed on and you have to remember this question

of independence see us disagreeing passionately, and in most other

things we find ourselves in agreement, one thing is clear,

Scottish Labour is finished. They have lost the heart and soul of

Scotland. The fact that we are discussing with four days to go an

independence referendum that is neck and neck, Labour have failed

miserably, absolutely miserably because they have given up

everything they stood for. The SNP has picked it up. They have just

taken on the bank -- mantle of a left of centre party and are picking

up support. Gordon and the rest in my opinion, they represent the past.

The yes vote on the Yes campaign represents the future. What do you

say to that? There is nothing socialist about an SNP that wants to

cut business tax by 3% in the pan. There is nothing socialist about an

SNP destroying further education so they can give middle-class people

free education. The Labour Party is alive and kicking. You can see if it

is Gordon Brown, or Jim Murphy with the 100 days tour. But I hesitate to

use this word, but they are kind of privatised from the Scottish Labour

Party. They have rode their own fallow. Jim Murphy was on the stump

because official Scottish Labour did not want him leading their campaign.

Gordon Brown was, I think, kept off the stage until it became so

critical that he had to be brought back. I agree with John, the SNP

talks left but acts right. That is before they get state powers. That

is what is exciting about the referendum, it's not about the SNP,

it's about the people deciding. What we have heard so far in the

referendum campaign is that there is a desperate yearning in the

electorate for real politics, purposeful politics and for the

people to be represented. It is probably to the eternal shame of

labour that they gave up that role and other people are now taking it

upon themselves. How would you assess the state of the Labour

Party? The problem is that it was demolished by the SNP in 2011 and

what they should have done since then and in other circumstances is

take a real look within themselves and brought forward new talent and

policies and watch out what they stood for. They've been unable to do

that because they are locked in a constitutional row. It is the plan

of the Nationalists to fight the first Scottish general election as

an independent nation as a nationalist party with its own

programme. You don't all go your own way. Why don't you do that? You have

more on your main reason to be, so why not go, left, right and centre

question you are presuming you don't go the one-way. I do not see the

function of the SNP after the yes vote. I think it is clear that there

is an SNP under Nicola Sturgeon an SNP which attracts votes from the

left and that is the one for me Whether that is called the SNP or

something else, I don't know. I think the assumption that we are

going into a mirror of old politics in a new world is just fundamentally

flawed. That is interesting. Let's just bring in the English

dimensional. In many ways, England has not spoken in this referendum

campaign. Whether it is yes or no, it will, and to give you a flavour

of what some in England might be thinking was saying, here is a clip

from John Redwood. We are fed up with this lopsided devolution, this

unfair devolution. Scotland gets first-class Devolution, Wales gets

second-class devolution and England gets nothing. If Wales wants the

same as us, they should have it and then there would be commonality so

we could discuss and decide in our own countries, in our own assemblies

in Parliament, all those things that are devolved. George, it was clear

that if Scotland voted yes for independence it has huge

implications for England than the UK, but it's also clear particularly

after Gordon Brown's intervention, even if it is no, it has huge

applications. You are, I suggest, agreeing with John Redwood that

there should be an English boys It would be a step too far for me to

agree with him -- English voice I appreciate I might have gone out on

a limb. He is the voice of Mars the Balkan from Mars. My own

constituents in Bradford are asking, what about us? All these things

being done, all the extra mile is being travel to Scotland, what about

us? Labour would be well advised to adjust quickly on this so that the

John Redwood types do not steal the show. England has yes to use -- yet

to speak. It's interesting when you hear a Labour backbencher in

Scotland talk about a command paper. He is not in government. Gordon

Brown is going round Scotland promising things and he has

absolutely no chance of delivering them. The MPs in England will say,

hey, what are you talking about We have never been discussed with that?

We have not agreed with that. The only way people in Scotland will get

the powers they deserve is by voting yes. Crystal ball time, Tommy, you

think it is 60/40. I will stick with it, because we have an unprecedented

election. 97% of Scotland is registered to vote. The working

class will vote in numbers never voted before. George? 55/45 for our

side. And if there is a rogue poll, the tek Levesley polled --

technically flawed poll, which should not be published because it

is so flawed, then we would be stretching towards what I am

predicting already. I think in the last few days we will reach that.

Come on. If the no campaign can get the silent majority out, they will

edge it. You think they will win, but how much? They cannot give up in

a second, a moment or a mile. It is that close. It will be won by the

passionate view. I will go for a narrow yes victory. I'm the George,

53 or 54% in favour of Joe -- no. -- I am with George. I will leave you

to argue about that later. Thank you for being with us on the special

Sunday politics from Edinburgh. That's all from us today

in Scotland. Don't forget the Daily Politics will

have continuing coverage of the referendum campaign all this

week on BBC2 at midday. On Thursday night Huw Edwards will

be in Glasgow and I will be in London to bring you live coverage

of the results on BBC1 from 10. 0 pm on a historic night for Scotland

and the rest of the United Kingdom. And I'll be back next Sunday

when we're live from the Labour Unless, of course, the referendum

result is so tumultuous even the Remember if it's Sunday,

it's the Sunday Politics.