:00:53. > :01:03.George Galloway conjured up a Sten -- an astonishing by-election
:01:03. > :01:04.
:01:04. > :01:06.victory. Has he knocked the stuffing out of Labour?
:01:07. > :01:11.The Health and Social dead -- Care Bill gets through Parliament at
:01:11. > :01:12.last. But what does it mean for Andrew Lansley? And here:
:01:12. > :01:15.Sccusations that the Scottish Government's referendum
:01:15. > :01:18.consultation is rigged as the Westminster one shows support for
:01:18. > :01:28.an early vote. The gas leak that keeps leaking in
:01:28. > :01:28.
:01:28. > :31:27.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1799 seconds
:31:27. > :31:37.the North Sea. Are the risks of Deal care if the private sector
:31:37. > :31:37.
:31:37. > :34:10.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1799 seconds
:34:10. > :34:15.We are seeing productivity increase in the NHS where it did not
:34:15. > :34:21.increase under Labour. So NHS hospitals will be in a strong a
:34:21. > :34:26.place to provide the services patients need. If you are re-
:34:26. > :34:32.elected in 2015, can you give a guarantee that there will be no
:34:32. > :34:39.further reorganisation? legislation is very clear...
:34:39. > :34:44.can't? Can you give a pledge that there will be no a major
:34:44. > :34:49.reorganisation from 2015? For my point of view and I am sure it will
:34:49. > :34:54.be the same for David, the legislation was to deal with all of
:34:54. > :34:58.the issues required and the reforms, in order to sustain the NHS in the
:34:59. > :35:05.21st century, so to that extent, absolutely, it should give
:35:05. > :35:13.sustainability for a long period of time. And you won't enforce some of
:35:13. > :35:16.the changes asked by the Lib Dems and the Lords? No. You talked about
:35:16. > :35:21.amendments but in the Lords, we made amendments through a process
:35:21. > :35:27.of constructive debate and agreement. There were 32 votes in
:35:27. > :35:35.the Lords and we actually only lost two, one of which we accepted, and
:35:35. > :35:43.another where Lord Patel of Bradford put forward another
:35:43. > :35:50.suggestion which we are unhappy with. It has a great degree of
:35:50. > :35:55.sustainability. Do you have any regrets? Yes. A year ago, we had to
:35:56. > :36:00.stop the legislation to have a full engagement with NHS staff. Although
:36:00. > :36:03.we consulted on the white paper more than 18 months ago, many of
:36:03. > :36:08.the organisations that responded did not get to grips with what was
:36:08. > :36:13.in the legislation, said to have had that kind of engagement with
:36:13. > :36:16.the NHS Future Forum would have been better earlier. Given your
:36:16. > :36:20.unpopularity among swathes of health professionals, would it not
:36:20. > :36:25.be better to let somebody else come in and implement these reforms?
:36:25. > :36:30.Your damaged goods in the eyes of health professionals? That is very
:36:30. > :36:35.kind of you to say so! Others say different things. That comes from
:36:35. > :36:41.the trade unions. What they are all now is that for eight-and-a-half
:36:41. > :36:45.years as my party spokesman, I have been an advocate and supporter of
:36:45. > :36:53.the NHS. We have increased resources for the NHS in real terms
:36:53. > :36:59.each year. Has it destroyed your political career? No, it hasn't.
:36:59. > :37:03.you still have one? I have a passion for ensuring the NHS is in
:37:03. > :37:10.a stronger place in the future to give greater service and benefits
:37:10. > :37:17.to patients. All right. We have run out of time. Delivering quality for
:37:17. > :37:21.patients in the future will absolutely be my aim. Thank you. We
:37:21. > :37:26.will talk to you in the future if you are still Secretary of State
:37:26. > :37:29.for Health. You are watching Sunday Politics. Still coming up...
:37:29. > :37:32.Good afternoon and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up
:37:32. > :37:35.on the programme, a new war of words on the independence
:37:35. > :37:40.referendum. It could take six months to resolve
:37:40. > :37:44.the gas leak at the Total platform near Elgin. Is the price of deep
:37:44. > :37:48.sea drilling too great? Should the drink-drive limit be
:37:48. > :37:57.lowered in Scotland? We hear from a campaigner who says a lower limit
:37:57. > :38:01.would save lives. I feel like an episode of Casualty. When I stood
:38:02. > :38:05.up, I thought they should shout, cut, and then I realised it was
:38:06. > :38:09.real. I was lying down. But first, Westminster and Holyrood
:38:09. > :38:12.are at loggerheads once more over the independence referendum. This
:38:12. > :38:15.time it's over whose consultation process is more valid. The UK
:38:15. > :38:17.Government says its consultation shows that there is a clear
:38:17. > :38:19.majority in favour of an early ballot. Meanwhile, opposition
:38:20. > :38:21.parties are challenging the validity of the Scottish
:38:21. > :38:23.Government's referendum consultation after it emerged
:38:23. > :38:33.people could respond anonymously and multiple times. Our reporter
:38:33. > :38:34.
:38:34. > :38:39.Laura Bicker has more. So, there were two consultations on
:38:39. > :38:44.both side of the border. 3,000 people replied to Westminster. They
:38:44. > :38:49.included individuals and business representatives. 70% of people said
:38:49. > :38:53.they would like a referendum earlier than in the autumn of 2014.
:38:53. > :38:56.22% supported the Scottish government timescale. The UK
:38:56. > :39:00.Government said none of the replies were anonymous and they did not
:39:00. > :39:06.accept multiple replies in the same name. But it has emerged north of
:39:06. > :39:11.the border, that was allowed. The Scottish government's consultation
:39:11. > :39:16.does accept anonymous contributions and multiple submissions. We have
:39:16. > :39:20.got a First Minister voting about how many responses -- boasting
:39:20. > :39:24.about how many responses he has received but people are sitting at
:39:24. > :39:34.home sending in the same answers. We need confidence in this
:39:34. > :39:35.
:39:35. > :39:43.consultation because we are talking about the future of our country.
:39:43. > :39:47.need to be able to rely on having no leaks. They have to publish
:39:47. > :39:51.every submission they receive. We can then get some idea as to how
:39:51. > :39:55.many responses were anonymous and therefore how much suspicion we
:39:55. > :40:02.might have. The Scottish government said they had more than 10,000
:40:02. > :40:10.replies. The consultation will run until 11th May.
:40:10. > :40:14.Joining me now art Stewart Hosie and Anas Sarwar. Stewart Hosie,
:40:14. > :40:18.let's start with the SNP government consultation of. What kind of
:40:18. > :40:21.confidence can the public have had a consultation process that allows
:40:21. > :40:27.a anonymous responses and modelled for responses from the same
:40:27. > :40:33.address? They can have a great deal of confidence because it will be
:40:33. > :40:38.independently verified. Let's get to the fact. The Scottish
:40:38. > :40:44.government's consultation uses exactly the same rules used in 2004
:40:44. > :40:47.by Labour on the smoking ban consultation. And the same that we
:40:47. > :40:52.used in 2006 in the tourism bill consultation in the name of
:40:52. > :40:58.Patricia Ferguson. And even the Calman Commission and utterly
:40:58. > :41:04.accepted but published anonymous entries. The information into the
:41:04. > :41:09.Scottish government's consultation was far larger than the UK one. It
:41:09. > :41:13.will be independently verified and published, I am sure, as was said.
:41:13. > :41:18.Do you accept people can make multiple anonymous comments and
:41:18. > :41:26.submissions to this consultation? Are you saying there is some way in
:41:26. > :41:34.which this can be just rolled out later on in the process? -- called
:41:34. > :41:39.out. Well, during the process, it is made clear when there is a
:41:39. > :41:43.number of the duplicates. The rules being used are exactly the same as
:41:44. > :41:50.being used in every single other consultation. Given the importance
:41:50. > :41:54.of this referendum and given that, for example, even pro-independence
:41:54. > :41:59.supporters might question the credibility of this consultation,
:41:59. > :42:09.why did you not put in roles like Westminster did, saying, no
:42:09. > :42:13.multiple submissions and no multiple ones? Because there was
:42:13. > :42:17.used are exactly the same as used in a Labour bill and the Calman
:42:17. > :42:21.Commission. I understand you are saying there is a degree of
:42:21. > :42:24.hypocrisy, but as somebody now who is commenting on the Scottish
:42:24. > :42:33.government and its proposals, do you think the public, the wider
:42:33. > :42:38.public, can have confidence in this? I think they can. We
:42:38. > :42:42.understand from the rumours that half the consultation responses to
:42:42. > :42:50.the UK Government's very small consultation came through a website
:42:50. > :42:57.poor tour run by the Labour body. I think if there is any question over
:42:57. > :43:01.the efficacy, it should be over the UK one. It was so self-selecting
:43:01. > :43:06.that half the submissions came from members of one political party.
:43:06. > :43:11.What are you saying when this consultation closes in May? Who
:43:11. > :43:19.will verify what was a legitimate vote and what was not? These are
:43:19. > :43:24.not votes, these are submissions. Yes, I understand. Who will verify
:43:24. > :43:31.they are from one single person and who they are from? It will probably
:43:31. > :43:39.be verified and the findings will be published as normal in house.
:43:39. > :43:44.if that is the case, there will be no problem. Surely it is the same
:43:44. > :43:48.process as consultations in the past? Firstly, it is not, because
:43:48. > :43:55.you don't even have to submit any form of identity to put in an
:43:55. > :43:59.anonymous response. And you can put in an -- multiple responses. They
:43:59. > :44:03.also go on about how many responses they have received and putting that
:44:03. > :44:09.to the figure to the UK response, where Bobby did have to put in an
:44:09. > :44:18.email address and proof of identity. On the Labour party's own website,
:44:18. > :44:27.you have to put in your name. It is not anonymous. But you could put in
:44:27. > :44:31.multiple response is? -- Malta poor responses? You can see who has put
:44:31. > :44:37.in a response would their name and email address. And then the
:44:37. > :44:40.validity of the process itself, it is clear having a consultation
:44:40. > :44:45.process where you can put in multiple responses and anonymous
:44:45. > :44:51.without any email address or name is not only open to abuse, it is
:44:51. > :44:55.designed for abuse. That is a very significant accusation here,
:44:55. > :45:00.Stewart Hosie, that you have to sign this for abuse. You are
:45:00. > :45:07.actually saying that the SNP are trying to rig this? Is that how you
:45:07. > :45:11.read it? The responses through the Labour Party website are being
:45:11. > :45:15.monitored but that is worrying if Labour are able to monitor
:45:15. > :45:21.responses through the website to a public consultation. That is
:45:21. > :45:28.extremely concerning. If what I said was that individual email
:45:28. > :45:37.addresses and names that will go in our inner responses. I am making
:45:37. > :45:42.that accusation... This is more about Alex Salmond's legacy for
:45:42. > :45:52.Scotland. What we need is a robust process that the people of Scotland
:45:52. > :45:53.
:45:53. > :45:57.We have had exactly the same at roles in any other consultation. We
:45:57. > :46:01.did not just take the enormous admissions. I find it disgusting
:46:01. > :46:06.that the good people of Scotland entering this consultation honestly
:46:06. > :46:14.and openly are being talked down and having entries minimised
:46:14. > :46:19.crassly by the Labour Party. What about the idea that we have got a
:46:19. > :46:25.predetermined intention to break this referendum? Clearly, that is
:46:25. > :46:29.absolutely false. This is a public consultation. People can submit any
:46:29. > :46:35.response they want and quite rightly. It will be considered by
:46:35. > :46:38.the Scottish government as part of the process of the referendum in
:46:38. > :46:43.2014 and the idea it has been at rate is an appalling accusation by
:46:43. > :46:51.the Labour Party. What will be processed be to ensure that we have
:46:51. > :47:01.not got multiple responses by SNP members? He said it would be buried
:47:01. > :47:04.
:47:04. > :47:09.for -- unverified. By whom? -- and verified. We have to move on to the
:47:09. > :47:16.consultation that is talking about an early timescale as opposed to be
:47:16. > :47:20.preferred 2014 timescale. What do you think? They clearly fear the
:47:20. > :47:28.verdict of the Scottish people. What do you think would be
:47:28. > :47:33.appropriate? It should be as quick and clear as possible. What about
:47:33. > :47:37.the legal process. I think we should be open to having a
:47:38. > :47:45.referendum earlier rather than later because it is undermining
:47:45. > :47:51.confidence. You support 2013? soon as possible. What is your
:47:51. > :47:55.response to be 70 % in favour of an earlier time scale? We might well
:47:55. > :48:00.have people keen to see Scotland Independent and they want the
:48:01. > :48:04.referendum sooner rather than later but I think 2014 makes sense. The
:48:04. > :48:08.consultation will tell us what people think about that. It is a
:48:08. > :48:13.big decision and it is important we get it right and consider issues
:48:13. > :48:20.properly be. We should not rush this port narrow party advantage.
:48:20. > :48:23.This is what the public say they want. You are not convinced?
:48:24. > :48:29.winners are half of the people wanting this are Labour Party
:48:30. > :48:37.members. It is not really a public vote, is it? Thank you for coming
:48:37. > :48:42.in today. As gas leaks from the Elgin Platform, Total is
:48:43. > :48:48.considering pumping marred to plug it. It has got rigs available to
:48:48. > :48:52.draw off the gas and allow be well to be sealed. It is an expensive
:48:53. > :48:57.option and could take six months. Total have asked companies involved
:48:57. > :49:03.in the Deep Water Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico to help.
:49:03. > :49:13.Professor Martin Preston is a pollution expert from the
:49:13. > :49:13.
:49:13. > :49:18.University of Liverpool. How dangerous do you think this
:49:18. > :49:24.situation remains, even though the flair has gone out? Now declare has
:49:24. > :49:29.gone out, that has taken out one significant risk. But we have got a
:49:29. > :49:35.big gas leak at risk because it is coming out on the platform and it
:49:35. > :49:40.will be difficult to seal it off. It will take a long time to fix.
:49:40. > :49:48.Can people be put back on that timetable in the foreseeable
:49:48. > :49:53.future? The decision will not be easy. You are putting people into
:49:53. > :49:58.dangerous situations and it will be a hazardous environment with Gas
:49:58. > :50:03.meeting. You need to get to a stage where the area of greatest risk has
:50:03. > :50:08.been sorted out. A small event like a static discharge from a piece of
:50:08. > :50:14.clothing or a dropped to all causing a spark, that could cause a
:50:14. > :50:18.calamity and that is what everybody wants to avoid. A great deal of
:50:18. > :50:21.thought will have to go into putting people back on the platform
:50:21. > :50:28.and I am sure Total will be exploring the options without
:50:28. > :50:35.having to put people at risk. what happens has to be digging out
:50:35. > :50:44.double Wells, that could take six months. Possibly, yes. If they have
:50:44. > :50:53.to do that, this particular area is not in deep water but be well
:50:53. > :51:02.itself is buried deep. -- buried deep. The League has come from an
:51:02. > :51:09.unexpected pocket of gas. -- extremely deep. It is leaking gas
:51:09. > :51:12.coming from a subsidiary. Technically, it is going to be a
:51:13. > :51:19.difficult fix and when that you are drilling you have got to be sure
:51:19. > :51:24.where to drill before you get started. We understand it is deep-
:51:24. > :51:31.water drilling. Is that more dangerous? Is what happening in
:51:31. > :51:36.Elgin telling us about technology and safety? As easy reserves are
:51:36. > :51:42.getting used up, obviously people are looking more and more at remote
:51:42. > :51:48.options. These are inherently more dangerous. Deep water and remote
:51:48. > :51:54.locations and hostile environments or increase risk. I think
:51:54. > :51:59.everybody's concern is that the technology allowing drilling is not
:51:59. > :52:04.being matched by the technology for dealing with accidents when they
:52:04. > :52:08.happen. We saw that in the Gulf of Mexico at. The technology for
:52:08. > :52:12.drilling was obviously dead but people seemed to be making it up as
:52:12. > :52:19.they went along when they tried to fix the problem and that is the
:52:19. > :52:29.main concern. Technology is not keeping up. Our commercial
:52:29. > :52:34.considerations driving all this? -- is it that. That would appear to be
:52:34. > :52:37.the case. You get money by taking gas and oil out of the ground and
:52:37. > :52:42.you do what you can to make reasonable preparations to deal
:52:42. > :52:47.with problems when they happened. But when something major and
:52:47. > :52:52.unexpected happens like in the Gulf of Mexico and like what has
:52:52. > :52:55.happened here with a secondary gas supply, these are things which can
:52:55. > :53:02.catch people out and you might not have the technology and expertise
:53:02. > :53:07.and even the basic procedures to get going quickly. Thank you very
:53:07. > :53:15.much indeed. The Scottish Environment Secretary is in
:53:15. > :53:19.Inverness. If we just pick up that final point, do you have concerns
:53:19. > :53:25.about this problem between what technology can deliver and the
:53:25. > :53:31.safety procedures that we have got in place? If that were the case I
:53:31. > :53:36.would certainly be concerned. The problem we have discussed today, we
:53:36. > :53:40.will have to have a full inquiry to discover what happened. The problem
:53:40. > :53:44.last summer as well. It is important to find out what has
:53:44. > :53:48.caused the problem and make sure appropriate action is taken. We
:53:48. > :53:53.have got a safety procedure in place at the moment and this time
:53:53. > :53:58.last week, the platform was evacuated and that is why we have
:53:58. > :54:05.not had risk to life since then. We are looking at the potential
:54:05. > :54:10.environmental risk. What sort of independent advice do you get on
:54:10. > :54:17.the sort of solutions that Total have come up with? They are looking
:54:17. > :54:24.at putting in a massive amount of mud. Do you have advised that said
:54:24. > :54:29.that it might not be best for the Environment? We have got a
:54:29. > :54:33.procedure in place at the moment. We have got people attached to the
:54:34. > :54:38.UK Government for climate change and energy and they are giving
:54:38. > :54:45.advice at the moment to baize in Aberdeen. If they thought they had
:54:45. > :54:53.a threat to the environment, a response team would be called and
:54:53. > :54:58.that would be a side from Total. We have got a mechanism. What would
:54:58. > :55:02.you think was an appropriate regime? Do you think you have to
:55:02. > :55:08.take the company's were freed on their assessment or should we have
:55:08. > :55:15.a rigorous assessment of what is happening independently? We have
:55:15. > :55:20.got lessons to learn from this episode. Particularly at the end of
:55:20. > :55:25.last summer. Transparency is very important. We have perhaps got off
:55:25. > :55:29.to a slow start in terms of putting information in the public domain.
:55:29. > :55:35.That was the view of the company last summer as well. They have got
:55:35. > :55:39.to have a contingency plan in place. They have to focus on the job in
:55:39. > :55:44.hand, to make people safe and prevent more damage to the
:55:44. > :55:47.environment. That is the focus for the next couple of days. They have
:55:47. > :55:54.to rely on information coming from the company offshore because we
:55:54. > :55:59.cannot get it ourselves. It has to be as transparent as possible.
:56:00. > :56:05.think it is all right, in fact that is not a fair way of putting it,
:56:05. > :56:10.but you have to accept what the company tells you? I am saying
:56:10. > :56:13.perhaps we do have to look at this independently. I want to discuss
:56:13. > :56:18.this and make sure we have got transparency from the first few
:56:18. > :56:24.seconds onwards. Because he would be uncomfortable with how this has
:56:24. > :56:31.developed? We have always got lessons to learn and transparency
:56:31. > :56:34.is very important. The obvious question is that if we have a post
:56:35. > :56:41.independent Scotland, what confidence can the public had that
:56:41. > :56:44.a UK government with economic strategy is looking at drilling
:56:44. > :56:47.revenues in the teacher? What confidence can they have that he
:56:48. > :56:56.would prioritise safety in the environment before that economic
:56:56. > :57:02.interest? -- future? We will look at the environment and grow the
:57:02. > :57:07.economy at the same time. We are looking at Natural Resources and
:57:07. > :57:11.oil and gas has got a long way to go. We have not looked at all of
:57:11. > :57:17.that so far. We do want to see development but of course we have
:57:17. > :57:21.to have a robust safety system in place to protect life, given the
:57:21. > :57:25.hundreds of thousands of people working in the North Sea and
:57:25. > :57:30.protect the environment. We want the best and safest regime anywhere
:57:30. > :57:37.in the world. What is your understanding of when this problem
:57:38. > :57:43.might be contained and switched off, as it were? Now the flame has
:57:43. > :57:47.extinguished, one of the bigger risk factors has been removed. We
:57:47. > :57:53.have got decisions which will be taken by the company. First,
:57:53. > :57:59.personnel will have to be put on the platform with a view to
:57:59. > :58:09.blocking the leakage. Then the relief well which could take up to
:58:09. > :58:12.
:58:13. > :58:16.six months. It has got to be done MSPs have endorsed the Scotland
:58:16. > :58:21.Bill, giving Holyrood the power to set the drinking and driving
:58:21. > :58:24.regulations. Northern Ireland are already reducing it and the
:58:24. > :58:31.Scottish government are keen to go the same way but it was rejected by
:58:31. > :58:35.Westminster last year. How low should it go? It happen very
:58:35. > :58:40.quickly. One minute I am standing on the pavement and then I am lying
:58:40. > :58:45.on the ground and I heard my daughter screaming. Her five-year
:58:45. > :58:50.old son was knocked down and killed along with two others by a driver
:58:50. > :58:56.high on drink and drugs eight years ago. It was like an episode of
:58:56. > :59:04.Casualty. I thought, who is going to shout cut? I realised it was
:59:04. > :59:11.real. My son was dying. Figures indicate that in 2009, more than
:59:11. > :59:17.900 casualties on the roads, 7% reported were down to drink drivers.
:59:17. > :59:25.14 % of deaths that year were fatalities. -- these types of this
:59:25. > :59:31.fallacies. -- fatalities. A review commissioned by the UK Government
:59:31. > :59:34.last year recommended reducing the test to 50 milligrams but this was
:59:34. > :59:39.rejected by ministers say no more money should be spent on
:59:39. > :59:44.enforcement. But the Scottish government wants to lower the limit.
:59:44. > :59:48.This bill could give them the opportunity to do just that.
:59:48. > :59:52.want to bring it down to 50. That sends out a clear message that
:59:52. > :59:56.drinking and driving is not acceptable and it will reduce the
:59:56. > :00:02.number of people seriously injured every year because of the problems.
:00:02. > :00:05.What does it mean in practice? It is difficult to say. With a 50
:00:06. > :00:09.milligram limit you might be able to drink a small glass of wine and
:00:09. > :00:13.a male could drink a larger glass but it depends on the individual
:00:13. > :00:23.and some campaigners say it should be 20 milligrams, almost a total
:00:23. > :00:23.
:00:24. > :00:28.One problem is that people don't know where they stand. It is
:00:28. > :00:35.impossible to know, without being tested, how much alcohol is in your
:00:35. > :00:38.blood. It depends on your sex, your weight and the rate of metabolism.
:00:38. > :00:42.Police agree it is better not to drink and drive atoll but this
:00:42. > :00:47.would be difficult to enforce. They support the 50 milligram limit but
:00:47. > :00:52.also want more powers to stop and test motorists. There are other
:00:52. > :00:56.measures we would support. There are measures in other countries and
:00:57. > :01:00.it is a piece of armoury that puts the fear into people being caught,
:01:00. > :01:07.and at the end of the day, that is what will deter people. There
:01:07. > :01:13.appears to be growing support for a 50 milligram limit in Scotland. The
:01:13. > :01:18.SNP party, the Lib Dems and Labour are in favour. But there is also
:01:18. > :01:21.concern that different laws across the UK could be confusing. If you
:01:21. > :01:25.have different limits across borders, people will have mixed
:01:25. > :01:31.messages about how much they can drink. There is already confusion
:01:31. > :01:36.about how much you can drink and this will only add to it.
:01:36. > :01:42.Michelle believes it could make a difference. I hope it would work
:01:42. > :01:52.and get further towards people being safer on the roads. And
:01:52. > :01:59.hopefully not drink-driving. little earlier, I spoke to Alex
:01:59. > :02:05.Johnstone. I asked why the Tories would not support a lower limit.
:02:05. > :02:09.could put in a lower limit and get prosecutions and have it enforced.
:02:10. > :02:16.But I believe people who are already two, three, four times
:02:16. > :02:19.above the limit are not being caught. The difference between the
:02:19. > :02:26.current limit and the proposed new limit is not where we will make the
:02:26. > :02:30.most to gain. Why cannot do both? We could do, but additional
:02:30. > :02:33.resources would be necessary for that. Would you support random
:02:33. > :02:37.breath testing? That issue is something we have not yet discussed
:02:37. > :02:41.at great length, but it is something we have to be aware of in
:02:41. > :02:48.the future and it is something which would be developed as a civil
:02:48. > :02:53.liberties argument by some political people. Would you be in
:02:53. > :02:57.favour or not? It is fair to say that random breath-testing is
:02:57. > :03:03.something which could only be exploited if it was acceptable to
:03:03. > :03:08.the broader community. Let's just clarify what your position is. You
:03:08. > :03:14.would prefer another approach to this but were the Scottish
:03:14. > :03:19.Government to come forward with an idea to get it to 50 comedy would
:03:19. > :03:24.support it? We would take the argument very seriously. What about
:03:24. > :03:27.reducing it to 20? And think the priority when you set a limit is to
:03:27. > :03:33.make sure you have a limit that can be properly policed and convictions
:03:33. > :03:36.can be obtained. If we set very low limits, we set the priority in a
:03:36. > :03:42.different area. For example, you might find the most productive use
:03:42. > :03:52.of the play's's time enforcing that limit would be to spend time in a
:03:52. > :03:54.
:03:55. > :04:02.supermarket car-park on a Sunday morning. -- the police's time. The
:04:02. > :04:07.significant reduction in drink- driving could mean we take our eye
:04:07. > :04:12.of the ball. And you wouldn't see some difficulty in differences
:04:12. > :04:15.between the borders? It is not impossible that under the new
:04:15. > :04:24.devolved powers, we might see a different limit in Scotland, though
:04:24. > :04:29.I agree it could be tricky. Just on to the comments by Peter Cruddas,
:04:29. > :04:33.extremely embarrassing for the Tory government, when he makes it clear
:04:33. > :04:39.many are not in favour of the union and would be delighted if Scotland
:04:39. > :04:43.were independent? I think the SNP's hysteria is driving his home and we
:04:43. > :04:47.need to see Alex Salmond spend less of his time in London arguing with
:04:47. > :04:51.London politicians. What other possible message could you take
:04:51. > :04:55.from what he said? I think he was making comments that were of his
:04:55. > :05:01.own mind and they don't reflect the arguments taking place in Scotland
:05:01. > :05:05.today. But you have to concede it is very embarrassing for you?
:05:05. > :05:09.we have to see in future is the SNP bringing their arguments to
:05:09. > :05:14.Scotland and arguing against the majority of Scottish people who
:05:14. > :05:19.favour the continuation of the Union. So, on drink-driving, the
:05:19. > :05:24.Scottish Conservatives say may be. What about Labour. Their
:05:24. > :05:31.spokesperson joins me now. Thank you for coming in. Labour had been
:05:31. > :05:35.reluctant to reduce the limit of 50. Where did you stand on that? There
:05:35. > :05:41.is an opportunity here for us to take this forward in Scotland and
:05:41. > :05:44.there is no need for this to be seen, in some way, as undermining
:05:44. > :05:49.the relationship across the United Kingdom or the enforcement of
:05:49. > :05:54.different limits on different sides of the border. Remember, it is
:05:54. > :05:58.nearly seven years since Labour put through the legislation on smoking
:05:58. > :06:06.in public places which did for legislation in place from the rest
:06:06. > :06:11.of the United Kingdom, but not for long. It then went to the rest of
:06:11. > :06:17.the UK, and I think if we took the lead in this area, the rest of the
:06:18. > :06:27.country would follow. But was that not Labour's position in a Holyrood
:06:28. > :06:30.
:06:30. > :06:34.and that is why you opposed it? position is... You have changed
:06:35. > :06:38.opposition and you're being very positive about 50? Positive about
:06:38. > :06:43.50 but also our position has not changed in that an opposition has
:06:43. > :06:47.always been that we want to see progress towards 50 in Scotland and
:06:47. > :06:53.across the UK. So it is not about being out of step or chain in
:06:53. > :06:58.position. It is about saying, here is another opportunity for Scotland
:06:58. > :07:04.to take the lead. But given that people metabolise alcohol at
:07:04. > :07:08.different rates, why not by the bullet and take it down to 20?
:07:09. > :07:13.think this would be hard for road safety in Scotland. The limit has
:07:14. > :07:18.to be enforceable, realistic and remove the risk that people get
:07:18. > :07:26.charged with drink-driving when, in fact, the amount of dual they have
:07:26. > :07:35.consumed is a mute -- minute. -- the amount of alcohol. I think 50,
:07:35. > :07:39.as we have seen from the example, 50 means people know they should
:07:39. > :07:42.not drink before they drive but it also means people will not
:07:42. > :07:47.intentionally find themselves breaking the law when they have
:07:47. > :07:53.drunk alcohol on the previous day in a moderate quantity. In a word,
:07:53. > :07:59.if this comes before Holyrood, at 50, due well supported? Correct.
:07:59. > :08:04.Thank you. Now, what do Ian Rankin and JK Rowling have in common
:08:04. > :08:08.besides being best selling Scottish all this. Well, it seems they have
:08:08. > :08:14.access to a new source of creativity and enlightenment. We
:08:14. > :08:20.have been arrested Reading. This has long had the reputation of
:08:20. > :08:25.the Left Bank of the capital. The play's where writers rub shoulders
:08:25. > :08:29.together. Ian Rankin used to write here. JK Rowling used to stay down
:08:29. > :08:39.the road. It could be something in the water. According to this man,
:08:39. > :08:47.there is. A connection has been discovered between the water being
:08:47. > :08:57.P.H. 10 and this ancient Scottish spring. Looking at a map, I noticed
:08:57. > :08:58.
:08:58. > :09:04.this tiny village have the spring of passes, the legendary Springbok.
:09:04. > :09:11.If you follow the spring into the city, it goes all the way in and to
:09:11. > :09:18.a specific part of the city's water supply. To put the theory to the
:09:18. > :09:23.test, we went to Edinburgh's University. Sam Kelly teaches the
:09:23. > :09:29.Masters in creative writing. She set her students a test. One group
:09:29. > :09:33.would have a drink of PH10 tap water and the others, a well-known
:09:33. > :09:39.French water. It is pretty extraordinary. These groups are
:09:39. > :09:45.pretty mixed. On the one side there has been a massive leap in
:09:45. > :09:49.technical sophistication and also the ideas seem to be better, more
:09:49. > :09:54.complex, just better! Better writing. Overall, it is
:09:54. > :10:01.inexplicable. Would it surprise you to know that that came purely from
:10:01. > :10:05.drinking PH10 tap water? Yes! It would. We can now make it
:10:05. > :10:10.compulsory in all classes. And if you can tell the difference in the
:10:10. > :10:15.work of these novice riders, what about the professionals who have
:10:15. > :10:19.been Downing PH10 for decades? makes perfect sense to me. I have
:10:19. > :10:24.suspected it was some years and I am delighted the research has been
:10:24. > :10:29.done to prove this. There is a certain taste in this water, the
:10:29. > :10:37.P.H. 10 water, and it is difficult to describe. It is slightly papery,
:10:37. > :10:41.a slight taste of paper. And perhaps sometimes you get a whiff
:10:41. > :10:45.of something else as well. Rather different from the taste of water
:10:45. > :10:50.in the West of Scotland, which is very much more towards the whisky
:10:50. > :11:00.end of the spectrum. So there you are. If you want to be a best
:11:00. > :11:01.
:11:01. > :11:03.seller here, your best get stuck into this.
:11:03. > :11:05.And now here's the lunchtime news, with Graham Stewart.
:11:05. > :11:08.Good afternoon. The Scottish Government's consultation on the
:11:08. > :11:10.independence referendum has been called into question after it
:11:10. > :11:14.emerged that the public could submit multiple responses and keep
:11:14. > :11:17.them anonymous. The SNP has had more than 10,000 replies to the
:11:17. > :11:27.process, which ends in May. But opposition parties say it may now
:11:27. > :11:29.
:11:29. > :11:34.not be valid. It is clear that having a consultation process where
:11:34. > :11:42.you can put in Malta poor responses without any name or email address
:11:42. > :11:49.is not only open to abuse, it is designed for abuse. -- put in
:11:49. > :11:53.multi-sport response is. These have been considered by the Scottish
:11:53. > :11:57.Government as a process to the referendum in 2014 and the idea
:11:57. > :11:59.this has been rigged in any way it is an appalling accusation by the
:11:59. > :12:02.Labour Party. Meanwhile, the UK Government says
:12:02. > :12:04.the vast majority of responses to its consultation on how a
:12:04. > :12:07.referendum could work favour holding the ballot sooner rather
:12:07. > :12:10.than later. The Scottish Secretary, Michael Moore, is urging SNP
:12:10. > :12:14.ministers to speed up their proposed timetable of staging the
:12:14. > :12:17.ballot in the autumn of 2014. Every young person aged 16 to 19 in
:12:17. > :12:20.Scotland is guaranteed an offer of a place in education or training
:12:20. > :12:24.from today. The Scottish Government say they want young people
:12:24. > :12:34.struggling to find work to get the message that help is available. �30
:12:34. > :12:35.
:12:35. > :12:40.million has been invested in the Most places will have a dry
:12:40. > :12:44.afternoon but it turns increasingly cloudy, and by the middle of the
:12:44. > :12:52.area -- of the afternoon, it is just dumb freeze getting some
:12:52. > :12:57.brightness. The cloud will produce bits and pieces of rain. Tonbridge
:12:57. > :13:01.us this afternoon ranging from a cool six degrees in the Shetlands
:13:01. > :13:06.to 13 in the best of the sunshine in the East, with winds main
:13:06. > :13:15.delight. That is it for now. Now back to
:13:16. > :13:25.In a moment, we will be discussing big events in politics. First, the
:13:26. > :13:26.
:13:26. > :13:31.Week in 60 seconds. A typical week for French and oil
:13:31. > :13:34.company Total as Gas continued to leak from its Elgin platform in the
:13:34. > :13:38.North Sea. Alex Salmond said the seriousness of the incident must
:13:38. > :13:44.not be underestimated. We will continue to resist and everywhere
:13:44. > :13:49.we can and they are also resisting in total -- on total transparency.
:13:49. > :13:54.A second inquiry into the death of Alex you found that fire commanders
:13:54. > :14:01.did not act quickly enough to savour.
:14:01. > :14:06.The council election ballot is open. Elections are on 3rd May.
:14:06. > :14:13.Two men have been accused of sending parcel bombs to the Celtic
:14:13. > :14:18.manager Neil Lennon. They were also accused of sending them to a Labour
:14:18. > :14:23.NS -- MSP. Experts at a number as soon tell
:14:23. > :14:31.the world that next week is the 36 our window for the panders to mate
:14:31. > :14:40.successfully. So, this coming week, Al Government
:14:40. > :14:45.takes a recess and council elections begin. -- our government.
:14:45. > :14:50.My guests now on Lorraine Davidson and a professor from Glasgow
:14:50. > :14:56.University. What did you make of the referendum interaction? Did you
:14:56. > :15:02.think the votes were rigged? The consultation? That is a big word
:15:02. > :15:08.and I think one of the issues is, is this in keeping with previous
:15:08. > :15:12.consultations? But beyond that is the case that these are constructed
:15:12. > :15:16.leaks by UK and Scottish Governments. We are in the process
:15:16. > :15:23.of the debate about Wendy referendum should be held and what
:15:23. > :15:26.the consultation might say. -- when the referendum. It is playing
:15:26. > :15:30.politics with the consultation process, which is drawing on people
:15:30. > :15:34.who are not politicians to respond to it, so it is best to wait and
:15:34. > :15:37.see what the consultation throws up. What do you think it would say
:15:38. > :15:47.about public confidence in the prisons, whoever holds the
:15:48. > :15:51.
:15:51. > :15:57.The consultations are held in different ways. Where does this
:15:57. > :16:02.leave us, do you think? It does not help if people think Alex Salmond
:16:02. > :16:08.can send in 3000 responses from his party and nobody will realise. That
:16:08. > :16:13.cannot happen because it would be independently verified. We need to
:16:13. > :16:19.look at that before the vote itself when the opposition is saying, is
:16:19. > :16:26.the question fetch? Also, I have never met shy and retiring
:16:26. > :16:32.nationalists. -- is the question reasonable? I am sure people would
:16:32. > :16:36.be happy to response to the consultation. In my experience, the
:16:36. > :16:41.Unionists are perhaps scared, that business people do not want to put
:16:41. > :16:44.their name to things and put their head above the parapet. If the
:16:44. > :16:50.Government said they would not take on board any anonymous admissions,
:16:50. > :16:56.I think it would help politically as well. They are not anonymous
:16:56. > :17:01.admissions. Would that tidy up things a bit? We have to look at
:17:01. > :17:05.what the Government has done before. We can look at what Peter Cruddas
:17:05. > :17:10.has said. What do we think the impact will be in terms of
:17:10. > :17:14.discussions, if they win the referendum? If we have discussions
:17:14. > :17:23.with the other team saying that we do not really want it anyway, what
:17:23. > :17:30.have we got? That is quite a big question. I think the issue is is
:17:31. > :17:36.Peter Cruddas right? To some extent, he is right. There are some people
:17:36. > :17:42.in Westminster that would really like to be shot of Scotland. That
:17:42. > :17:46.opinion certainly exists. But as to if it will impact on the process,
:17:46. > :17:53.we will find out because if we get to that stage, we will have an
:17:53. > :17:57.awful lot of noise in the London based media about how be
:17:57. > :18:03.discussions should be going and we will probably have a split in the
:18:03. > :18:07.coalition if it is still here at that time. This is one of the ways
:18:07. > :18:14.in which the landscape is shifting ahead of the vote, like the
:18:14. > :18:19.discussion about consultations. we'd look at it a little bit, it is
:18:19. > :18:23.embarrassing for the Tories, isn't it? It undermines David Cameron
:18:23. > :18:29.spending time in Scotland and saying that he really cares about
:18:29. > :18:34.Scotland. But Peter Cruddas is a man that if we are honest, nobody
:18:34. > :18:40.knew who he was. What we know about him now is that he is a bit of an
:18:40. > :18:44.idiot. He is articulating a strand of opinion which does exist in the
:18:44. > :18:51.Tory party in England but it is not an opinion reflected in any way by
:18:51. > :18:55.David Cameron and mainstream Tories. It is embarrassing and he will
:18:55. > :19:03.think it was the last thing he needed. But it is a two day wander
:19:03. > :19:09.and nothing else. We are almost out of time. Which councils will you be
:19:09. > :19:15.watching in the council elections with the greatest interest? Last
:19:15. > :19:18.Tape. Can beat Labour Party hang on? And Edinburgh, where it the SNP
:19:18. > :19:28.holds up it will still be damaged by the drop in the Liberal