01/07/2012 Sunday Politics Scotland


Andrew Neil and Isabel Fraser with the latest political news and debate including the Leader of the House of Lords, Lord Strathclyde, on plans to reform the second chamber.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 01/07/2012. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Good afternoon. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. David Cameron


opens the door to live referendum on of the relationship we the E. We


ask Nigel for arch if the Prime Minister has stolen his party's


most popular political tune. Should the party is apologise for their


own record on regulation? We ask Rachel Reeves to come clean. With


all that and the economic crisis, you would think that the Government


would have a enough on its plate. Not so. We asked the Leader of the


lots whether they can win the fight to save the second chamber.


And on Sunday Politics Scotland, how Scotland is failing its


children in care and what is being done to help them. With the


campaigns launched, where now for the referendum debate? We will be


speaking to the new chief executive of the Independent's campaign,


Good afternoon. The prime minister has suggested the possibility of a


referendum at some time in the future on the relationship with


Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1457 seconds


We are still in very early days. There is just over a week to go


before the House of Commons has to take a decision on a House of


Commons motion. Decisions will take place and discussions will take


place between the parties. They have not told us how many days they


want. A 10 you proceed with that


situation? I think it will be very difficult


to spend weeks and months. We must not second-guess the House of


Commons. Most of them want to get down to discussing the important


issues of what is happening in the second chamber, rather than relying


on a Labour Party tactics to delay discussion again and again.


People will find it very strange that in the middle of these crises


and events in Syria and elsewhere that the Commons floor is dominated,


week after week, by laws reformed. -- by Lords reform.


I think that is why we will see support for a sensible programme of


development by government. We have had referendums on all


sorts of issues recently, why not a referendum on this major


constitutional change? We have had very few national


referendums and at the last general election all three party manifestos


agreed that there should be a democratic reform. They have agreed


over the last decade or so. They said they would try to find a


consensus, not that they would do We are yet to see whether we can


achieve a consensus. Referendums are expensive. �80 million on,


ostensibly, asking the people to agree something that the political


parties have already agreed. I think this is a political tactic.


This was put in their manifesto at the last minute before the last


election. They never mentioned it in the past and they did not have


won in 1999 when they threw out hereditary Peers.


There does need to be some discussion within government about


the most appropriate way of continuing.


Speaking of a referendum, at the same question as that that I put to


Nigel for arch, I'll be closer to a referendum on Europe after the


Prime Minister's article? We are closer than we were but we


are not yet clear on what the basis of that referendum will be. He


understands what the need is for a referendum but we must decide what


it is about first before making that historic decision.


They do you very much for joining us. It is approaching 12:30pm. You


are watching the Sunday Politics. Good afternoon and welcome to


Sunday Politics in Scotland. Coming up on the programme. He stood


behind the First Minister at the launch of the Yes campaign, now


Blair Jenkins steps up to lead the campaign foreign independent


Scotland. Also coming up, Scotland's secret


shame. The scandal of how badly we are failing our children in care.


And tackling the country's second biggest killer. We asking why


coronary heart disease is still taking so many lives.


The campaigns on both sides of the referendum debate are officially up


and running so how will each side go about trying to win your support


between now and polling day? Earlier this week, Blair Jenkins,


the former head of News at BBC Scotland, was named the chief


executive of the Yes Scotland group. He is tipped to join me now.


Congratulations. -- he is here to try me now.


How do you stop this campaign becoming just an SNP campaign?


This is going to be a big umbrella campaign. The yes campaign is for


anyone in Scotland to come together and fight on this one issue which


is a hugely important issue. While the SNP, as one would expect, will


be very active in the campaign and prominent in it, it will be a much


bigger and broader alliance. Where does the fund income from for


this? How much of the funding, looking at the practicalities, will


come from the SNP? If there is a lot of funding from them, or will


there not be an impression that it is about their agenda if they are


bankrolling its? The large for yet Scotland came


partly from the money that came from Edwin Morgan. Some of the


funding from those people have been done using the launch period. --


had been used in the launch period. I want be yet Scotland campaign to


be self financing. You have a limit on the amount that


people who are not on the electoral roll in Scotland can donates. How


much is it and why was that decision-taking?


Most people in Scotland do feel quite strongly that the referendum


campaign should be determined by those who live in Scotland and will


make this decision. We will not accept donations above �500 from


anyone who is not on the alleged oral register in Scotland. That is


important to make sure the people taking the decision instalments are


contributing to the campaign. Could it be a tactical error if the


no campaign it is funded by a large donors in England?


I hope they will be as transparent about their funding as we will be.


Is it appropriate that you asked people to sign a declaration of


independence. This may not be the case. It was reported that you had


conceded it was a mistake to asked 1 million Scots to sign this


declaration of independence? That is absolutely not true.


Can you clarify your position on whether there should be a second


question? My position is that I am leading


the Yes Scotland campaign. We will only be campaigning for


independence. That is the campaign I am leading. Most people in


Scotland at the moment need to keep an open mind of the discussion. I


have an interesting experience over the last few weeks were I have


spoken on political issues and a lot of people have been in search


to say they agree with me and others are not sure. Let us meet


for coffee and talk about it. I have been drinking a lot of coffee


recently. My experience is that people are open to the conversation


and are highly persuadable of the arguments for an independent


Scotland. That is what we need to Will you be putting forward policy


ideas? I think people contributing to the


debate will put forward policy ideas. I am sure the SNP and the


Greens and the s and -- the SSP will be making policy contributions.


The Yes Scotland position is we will be campaigning for a Yes vote


in the referendum in 2014 and it is not to the political parties


thereafter in the general election to set out their policy agenda for


people in Scotland. It is useful to clarify that


earlier. Because that has been quite widely reported. It is


interesting how the media has been interacting with S. I hope this


quote is accurate. You said it you hoped we could have a sensible and


mature debate free from Punch and Judy confrontations and one


Scotland can be proud of. Do you have a concern that that it is not


just winning that matters but how you win because of the residue of


what could be left in scutter society in general if this is not a


decent campaign? -- in Scottish society.


Some journalists in the week did invite me to make adverse comments


about the people in the no campaign on and off The Record. I will not


be criticising individuals in the no campaign. The important thing to


recognise here is that the day after the referendum in 2014, all


the people involved in the no campaign will become citizens of


the new Scotland and will be determined at along with the worst


of us to make Scotland the country it could be. I think everyone wants


a really good, positive, constructive campaign. One of the


things I want to bring to this is a lot of high quality information to


as many people as possible so it is a well informed debate.


Do you think that is what we are seeing now in the social media? Do


you think the arguments that are entirely constructive?


It is not. We are really in the early days of social media. I do


not think the ground rules have been properly sorted out. I do not


think anonymous posting is a good idea as it encourages people to get


into negative territory. If you look at America website, you get


much more vicious, hostile and aggressive things said thing you do


here. What people are using social media for is to engage with people


in the campaign. A lot of people who asked me what they can do to


help, I say to them something concrete. I say to them, if in the


next two years you can convince one other person you know from your


family and friends are your workplace who is currently not


intending to vote for independence, that will make for a clear majority


in favour of an independent Scotland.


Do you accept that there is a newspaper bias as the SNP claimed?


It do you think that will be an issue in getting the message out?


The media message is important in creating the need music of any


campaign. It is a free country. Some newspapers blur the difference


between news and opinion. It is a free press and we will engage with


that press. What will be the role of BBC


Scotland? We needed to be an honest broker


and continue to provide high quality information.


Are you satisfied it is doing that as it exists now?


I have nothing to declare to the contrary.


Joining me now from Edinburgh is Richard Baker one of the five


directors of the Better Together campaign. Thank you for coming in.


Can we look first at the funding issue. Penny give us more clarity


today about who will be playing for your campaign? -- paying for your


campaign? There are no rules governing


donations as yet. Despite that, we will voluntary abide by the


appropriate legislation which is the elections and referendums Act


which means we will not be accepting foreign donations and we


will be publishing on our website all donations over �7,500. When


Blair Jenkins talked about transparency in that, I am happy to


agree with him about that and we will have the same level of


donation transparency. Do you think it will be like the


Yes campaign, a limit on the amount people can give.


We will publish the names of all donors over �7,500. But she will


accept money from anyone anywhere in the UK?


Will not accept foreign donations but we do not regard the rest of


the UK as a foreign land. We are campaigning to keep the UK together.


The SNP have a track record of accepting donations from overseas.


Do you have any concerns that, at as the current speculation has been,


most of the donations will confront a Conservative donors in the south.


Do you have concerns that the perception will be that the


campaign is bankrolled by so many interests, as opposed to the Yes


campaign which is funded by donations from people in Scotland.


This is the start of our campaign. We have had a very successful


launch last week, based on people living in Scottish communities. We


will push had for donations in Scotland. I hope we will see


sizable donations from within Scotland.


If we look at what the Better Together campaign is offering


people, what will that be? If it is no to independence, what is it?


Clearly, it is Scotland's remaining in the United Kingdom. We will put


together a very positive case on why Scotland benefits in being part


of the UK in terms of our position in the world, economy and shared


society. We will put forward that positive case about the important


question of whether Scotland remains in the United Kingdom.


Blair Jenkins has said that he has no campaign based on any other


question. It is about the fundamental question of remaining


part of the UK. If it is yes, economically and


socially, what vision do you offer. The Yes campaign say this is what


Scotland will look like in 30 years. What is your patient of what


Scotland will look like in 30 years' time?


People can see now the benefits we have had from the UK, particularly


in troubled economic times. The Bank of England's bailed out our


banks. I have to say, when we look at the SNP of Blair Jenkins's


campaign for independence, they are entirely unclear on how Scotland


will look in 30 years. Now they say we will keep the Bank of England


and the pounds and we will even still be British. A lot of people


are saying, what is the point? We need far more clarity from the


campaign to break up Britain about We have no clarity from sure


campaign about increased powers, there is no clarity there. Without


that, all what do you offer? There are campaigns about Scotland


remaining in the United Kingdom. The question of extra powers is for


other forms. To clarify this point, I have you saying that there is not


a specific vision you can offer? If you do not have a specific vision,


if what you are offering is Stanion the United Kingdom and muddling


along in a managed decline. What is your positive alternative for


Scotland and when will we know the details for that? I think that


staying a the United Kingdom is a positive alternative from


independents, and people know what the United Kingdom means. We know


the strengths of the UK and we know the challenges. I have to say to


you, and you were not asking Blair Jenkins to define his vision for


independence, there are huge unanswered questions about what


independence will actually mean. The SNP have been changing their


few week in week it. He did not ask Clare Jenkins whether he believes


that an independent Scotland should remain in or out of NATO. To


suggest that we have a lack of clarity of vision that the SNP have


is simply absolute nonsense. We come to a second question, it


should be quite clear that this is a fundamental issue which until


recently all the main parties agree should be a clear a single question


about whether Scotland should be in or out of the United Kingdom. Alex


Salmond is taking his mind on that because he knows he will not get


the answer he wants from the first question that people will now be


asking why he is running chicken from the clear debate that we


should have in this country over the future of Scotland and I want


to engage in that debate. I think that Blair Jenkins was looking to


engage that the bid constructively as well. I want to ask you about


that any moment, but just for the avoidance of doubt, Blair Jenkins's


job is not to articulate specific policy areas as you suggested, he


makes that clear in his interview. He will not promote specific


policies because the policies in the Independent gripping, the


parties that support that, they could have different policies. His


job was to put forward the argument for an independent Scotland, but


not policy specific. There is no point in asking them for policy


specifics. He wants an end to Punch and Judy politics, will that be


possible? Can be put forward a positive case for Scotland being in


the United kind? There is a positive case. We must move beyond


process questions and on to a clear debate about the future of Scotland.


I hope we can move on to that clear debate as quickly as possible. We


will put forward a positive case for Scotland remaining in a the


United Kingdom and will be arguing that England-Wales and the Northern


Ireland and Scotland all benefit by being part of the United Kingdom. I


do think that we will have a substantial debate and that the


media will allow us to have this debate.


The most discriminated against Great in our society, that is how


one charity described children who are taken from their homes


principally because of abuse and neglect and put into care. MSPs are


now investigating why these children who are most acutely in


need of stability permanency and loving relationships are


systematically denied the structures and support which would


enable them to thrive. Holyrood has just launched an inquiry into when


children should be taken into care prompted by shocking findings from


an earlier report into how look after children fare in school.


There are 16,000 looked after children in Scotland. A recent


report by the education committee looking at their educational


achievement levels revealed stark findings.


He suggested that youngsters in residential care and foster homes


if performed about ten times worse in school than the average child in


Scotland. The report also found that looked after children left in


their family homes perform about ten times worse in exams than their


counterparts in residential and foster care.


The last finding particularly surprised MSPs, as their


expectation had been that it looked after children left in the family


home would do better educationally than those who went into other


homes. Politicians concluded that the decision-making process leading


to where a child is placed for care has a crucial impact on a child's


life chances. The Education Committee's latest


inquiry will look at whether the speed of decision-making in cases


is appropriate, whether there is a presumption that children whose


parents have addictions should be removed from the home, and it will


also look at the balance of the Visa sign of children's care and


ask whether the child's rights are being put before the parents. MSPs


will now spend the next six months taking evidence that they hope will


shine a light on where the state system is failing children in care.


With me now he's the convenor of Holyrood's education committee and


the President of the Association for social work and the chief


executive of the charity, who cares Scotland?


First of all, you charity exists to give children in care a voice, what


do you think that we have to hear at this stage that we are not


heeding yet? Nelson Mandela said, the most revolutionary aspect of a


society's soul has hit its bed -- is how it treats its children and


young people. We believe that Scotland has some soul-searching to


do when it comes to her looked after children in care. We have it


comes that we cannot be proud of, and we believe that our society as


well as our politics and civil servants need to question their


awareness of this issue. These are our children when we take them into


care, their society's children. They go into care because there is


not the stability, the loving caring and nurturing environment


that would allow them to prosper and thrive, therefore rethink we


can do better. I have a child and from the age of 16 she has a one-


in-three chance when -- Sea has a one-in-three chance if she left


home to become homeless, would I be happy if she has a one-in- 10


chance of having a mental health issue? And if the education system


could fill the to such a degree? That is not to say that these young


people are so different, they're just as capable as other young


people, we have taken them to summer school and Everest base camp.


They have been massively discriminated against by the


communities. A damning indictment for our society is that these


children feel stigmatised because of their life in care. We asked


what that was from, and they said that from the age of five they were


never invited to another child's birthday party. It is things like


that which exacerbates the situation. There are areas, then,


when you look at statistics like health and education on the


criminal-justice system, children in care are disproportionately


represented there, but apart from what he will discuss in more detail,


the immorality of not looking after them properly, or we are wasting a


lot of potential for society as a whole. They are massively talented


people. The resilience it takes to go through the care system is


phenomenal, if you go into care, what we require as human beings,


and we do not often reflect on this, but it is the relationships that


guide us through life. Parents often act as a social and moral


rudder to guide us to understand what is going on. How to be present


that for children and young people? They can have up numerous numbers


of adults or parents are placements that do not give them the stability


which they need to thrive. He said that one child had 50 placements


before she had turned 18. We should begin this by saying that


this is an incredibly difficult area for social workers to work in,


and nobody was going to social work in this area for an easy life. But


when we look at the structures in place, for example, children who go


into care because they have had to be taken from their homes because


they are being abused or neglected, these are little ones to have done


nothing wrong, but children who need immediate intervention. In a


care home, they can have anything between 16 and 31 carers on one


shift. If we look at something very basic, how difficult is it for


these children to form the sort of permanent, stable and nurturing


relationships that any other child can take for granted? I should


start by saying that I wholeheartedly agree with Duncan's


sentiments. We must be ambitious with children, particularly those


who I believe are discriminated against, we must make sure they are


looked after. It is difficult. As Duncan says, the resilience of


these young people is something that Dele -- something that


surprises me daily. We must just get these young people the tools


they need to achieve their goals. I think that we need to look


sometimes at how the system does work for some young people,


particularly those who give a fair to. They begin in incredibly


challenged circumstances and then come into care services and


sometimes the care services really do transformed their lives for the


better. But we must do better. I think one of the keys to do better


is that we work together. Part of it is about ensuring that our


society does not discriminate, except positively in favour of


these young people. It is about teaching staff, it is about the


public, it is also about employers in particular giving opportunities


to young people for employment when they leave the care system. That is


a huge issue given the recessionary impact on the economy in Scotland.


What is wrong with us that this is not just an automatic response to


these children? What is wrong with us as a collective? First of all,


we must recognise that they are there. The fact is that today beset


with the highest number of children looked after in Scotland for 30


years. 16,100 young people are cared for in Scotland, with the


majority being cared for at home. What we have to do is make sure


they are not hidden from sight, secondly be must include them


positively in all the opportunities that my children will benefit from


in Scotland's society today, and I think that is a bit better


healthcare, more factories were saying that is clear and a long-


term, not short-term funding. It is about training people in the


culture that actually forces them and enables them to recognise that


young look after people are ambitious and achieving young


people. We know that in Denmark, it comes


across education Health, attainment, everything else would children in


care, are pretty much the same as for children who grow up with their


own parents in their own families to adults it, given what has just


been said, hardly at all comfortable with the way that


restructure her responses to these children? That I am not in the


least that comfortable, I think that one of the things that we want


to achieve is to highlight the situation, to give and the


publicity to get Scotland thinking about the problems that these young


people face, and that is the first thing that we want to achieve.


Hopefully through programmes like this and others, we can bring some


attention to the details. Clearly, as you said, there is a small


Scandinavian country that is do much better than BR. If they can do


it, surely we can as well. Although there have been marginal


improvement in the past 10 or 15 years, various experts and


governments have made a marginal on Britain, that is not good enough.


Why is that? Why the think, as you see, it is almost not that people


do not want to change, it is not that people are not aware of it,


why does nothing changed? Why does it changes so slowly? That is part


of the reason we're holding this inquiry, to find it what is


happening in the process that is ending up with children failing to


achieve not just educational, but also with other things in life.


They are a higher proportion of the prison population than average,


they hire problem with drugs and alcohol. We must ensure that we get


to the bottom of this particular problem. We have known about this


for so long, there have been many reports. It is as though people


more of the problems but do not want to engage with them. It is a


difficult and complex issue, it is so sensitive that people do not


want to face up to some of the realities here. We have a decision-


making process that we have been told that the first evidence has


come and that it is too slow and complex. It takes far too long.


Even if they tell was not yet born and we know there is a high risk


factor with the family, it is taking too long to achieve


permanence in a solution for those child. We know how critical those


first two years are for the life chances of that child.


We are almost out of 10. The key issue is that I am not sure we have


given the right message to society. Society does not know the nature of


this problem. They do not understand the roots of the style


that where they come from. How many local authorities have consultant


as to whether a residential did can be placed in the committee? They do


not open their arms, they treat it like nuclear waste. Who are these


young people? What has put them in this place? With relatively small


investment, they will respond positively. Every match will step


we take that they consume in their daily lives, they feel more


marginalised. We must accept that citizens of this country need to


give a stronger mandate for us to help these children. We're out of


time today, but the programme will go back and look at specific areas


here, because the evidence that is emerging to the committee is quite


shocking. We will look at healthcare as children in the


justice system and in care children in the healthcare system. We will


have you back very soon to look at these things.


Coronary heart disease is the second biggest killer in Scotland


after cancer. �150 million a year is spent on tackling cardiac


problems yet Scotland still has the highest rates of heart disease in


Western Europe. Gilly Mathieson has been to Drumchapel where the


Scottish parliament's public audit committee have been engaging with


locals asked them what is going Physios from dar Naval Hospital are


working with the community to help those suffering from heart disease


to remain fit and well. Glasgow is the capital of heart disease in


Western Europe. I was out walking the dog one


Sunday afternoon and I felt breathless. I phoned NHS 24 and


described my symptoms and the next thing they said was that I should


sit down and the end of -- and the ambulance is on his way.


I did not think it would happen to me. I did the smoke. I attended


cardiac classes were over 90 per cent of people who had heart


problems smoked. In Scotland, at 8000 people a year


die of heart disease and �150 million is spent on hospital


treatment. A recent survey highlights the barriers preventing


people from more deprived areas from being diagnosed early and


treated quickly by the NHS. NHS 10 to -- men tend to turn up in


the emergency room. In the more deprived areas particularly, people


have less access to health information.


Jackie is taking part in the keep well programme which works with


locals in Drumchapel to address factors addressing their help. She


suffers from heart disease but finds it difficult to make healthy


choices. If you buy a wholemeal loaf, it is


dearer than a white lie. If healthy food was cheaper, people would levy


a lot longer. Today she is telling MSPs about her


experience. It is part of the inquiry into the experience of


services. We can bang on about things as much


as we want but if we do not provide healthy food in local shops and


affordable a, will not see that a change.


How to encourage people to buy health defeat when fast food is


seen as the cheaper option is challenging officials here.


We need to build on the minimum pricing far alcohol led to station


and build on that. For example, at more information about the


healthiness of fruit. The emphasis is on getting the


message out to have to read -- too hard to reach groups. They will


address that in the report they publish after the summer recess.


Gilly Mathieson there. Public trust in bankers has taken a battering in


the past week and we will have more on that later in the programme but


how much stronger is our trust in politicians and the political


process? Some say it would be stronger if there was more


transparency and scrutiny. I am joined now from our Edinburgh


studio. Do we need more lobbyists?


Yes, lobbyist do ads to be democratic process and provide


briefings for MPs and MSPs and informers on a number of subjects.


It is a legitimate part of the democratic process. However, they


also work behind the scenes to influence legislation and policy


and budget decisions. I think we should be shining a light on that


process. So what are you suggesting


specifically? You have mentioned a transparency register. What would


have to be detail that the public consumption?


It is a very simple process. We want an open register for people


who fulfil certain criteria. We do not want to have the local Scout


group of the Girl Guides having to fill in their in a form and


register. That is fairly insignificant if they are talking


to Parliament or their local representatives about something.


Companies that are lobbying in a significant farm, they will fill in


a form and say who they meet and what they met about ants provide


some financial information. You have also said there must be


independent oversight of this and credible sanctions. What you mean


by that? The credible sanctions I think I


need people to comment on. I do not want to create an expensive layer


of bureaucracy to oversee this. The possibility is that and a existing


organisation, for example the Information Commissioner as they're


suggesting in England, could oversee this so we do not at an


expensive bureaucracy. What was other points?


There should be a degree of sanctions. If there are major


breaches of what was proposed, in theory, a lobbyist could be struck


off at the extreme end. If there were minor breaches it could be a


warning letter. Though sanctions would be able to be seen. They


would be publicly available. You feel that these levels of


transparency are necessary to restore faith in the political


process. You feel that strongly about it?


I think politicians are perhaps not the lowest form of life in public


opinion at the moment. I think you will find that his


journalists. Not even journalists. It is bankers


at the moment. Are standing is not at the lowest at the moment but my


view is that because there has not been any lobbying scandals in


Scotland like there have been in England, we should not be


complacent and think there may not be problems here. I think it is


better that we take proactive steps to put in place systems that would


prevent the reputation of Parliament being damaged, rather


than trying to recover a reputation will damage once it occurs.


Thank you very much indeed for that. Now the lunchtime news with Andrew.


Proposals to change the drink-drive limits will be open for


consultation in the coming weeks by the Scottish government. Ministers


have bowed to lower the limits as a priority. The new responsibilities


are among powers being transferred from Westminster as a Holyrood


under the recently passed 2012 Scotland Act.


A 20 minute ultrasound scan which could detect those at an rest of


abdominal aortic aneurysms have been rolled out across Scotland.


Men over 65 are believed to be most at risk. It is thought the


screening programme -- screening programme could save many lives a


year. Andy Murray made history at


Wimbledon last night as he made it 3-the 4th round at the men's


singles. He raced against the clock to beat Marcos Baghdatis, finishing


at the latest ever time of 11:02pm. This June has been one of the


dullest, wettest and coldest on record. Let us see of the first day


of July brings us better news. Here Sunshine and showers is the picture


today. The sunshine part is pretty hard to come by first then this


afternoon. There are showers particularly an East but through


the day we will see dry and brighter conditions feeding in from


the West as by the ends of the afternoon most places will be dry


with late brain has to end the day. Temperatures 13 to 17 Celsius. That


is the forecast. That is all for now. Our next


bulletin is at 5:45pm. Back to is It has been a turbulent week in the


banking world. This week the Prime Minister is expected to announce an


independent review of regulations. Let us look at the potential fall-


I am joined by a financial journalist.


Ian, let us look at the Miss selling scam. What do you think all


this means about the average bank customer?


I would imagine most bank customers are shocked and disgusted to


discover that the leading banks, including Barclays and RBS and


Lloyd's and other banks, have been engaging in systematically


manipulating interest rates to benefit their own bottom lines. I


think most customers will be really appalled but this has been going on.


It has been going on for about five years, since 2005. The regulators


did nothing to stop it. And in terms of what people might


have lost financially, particularly in the insurance mists selling scam,


do you think people will be looking for compensation?


Berry definitely. The compensation claims could be so great it could


bring down some of the banks. In the USA there are huge glass action


lawsuits against banks that combines to try and rape of the


global rates. I have spoken to two or three lawyers to represent small


businesses who had been cheated by their banks and they are


considering their positions. George, how do you think this could


develop? Could there be expensive court cases and what effect could


that have? The we have really not seen the


worst of it yet. There were two glass actions launched in the


United States and those damages could run into billions. It is very


serious problems ahead. Although there is legislation in the words


at Westminster to improve the strength of banks and safeguard


depositors. That legislation is not likely to be on the books since --


until at least 2019. You could fight a World War in that time. The


politicians are talking a lot but they are not doing anything very


quickly. Do you think there should be an


inquiry? That would again postpone what should be done. Do we not know


what the problem was here? It was an over-complex system,


deliberately manipulating its, with derivatives traders running a


marked? We are suffering from a disease our


inquiries in this country. We are looking at more navel-gazing.


Do we need criminal sanctions in this country?


In America, if you fix prices you go to jail. In this country we just


find the banks. At some point in the future the banks to recoup the


money by putting the prices up. There is a moot point about whether


or not he could take sanctions against those involved in this


rigging? The first thing I would soon before thinking about an


inquiry would be to phone of the Fraud Squad and get the people


investigated to engaged in this activity.


I know you have an opinion that there could be legal proceedings


against people in this country but what is the role of the


shareholders in all of this? Shareholders have failed abysmally.


They sat quietly whilst banks were engaging in these activities. It


was widely known in the markets that this was being manipulated.


They could have tapped Bob Diamond on the shoulder and suggested he


look at it. Overall, the shareholders do not come out of


this selling -- smelling of roses. They have been pretty complacent


and unaware of things that they ought to have been aware of. There


is now this thing called a shareholders' spring where


shareholders have been voting down excessive pay packages in a number


of UK plc is and that is encouraging. There are signs


shareholders are waking up from 20 years of sleepwalking. Both are


what more is to come here? If I was Fred Goodwin of Bob


Diamond, I would be pleading with the Crown Prosecution Service to


prosecutes me because there is a high chance there will be


prosecuted by the US authorities. The US authorities will seek their


extradition. Not necessarily those to put it could be them of the


bankers who are Bayern's to have a active role in manipulating global


rates. I imagine that is one that outcome as I wrote in today's


Sunday Herald. There are lots of different outcomes. I sincerely


hope one outcome is that the Government wakes up to the fat are


banking sector has been wholly as a control, corrupt, dishonest,


deceitful and so on for far too long. What they have done to date


has been utterly, utterly unlikely to change anything. The most recent


report is like a sticking plaster on a gaping wound. It will not


resolve the matter. We need a fundamental change of culture, as


Vince Cable has been discussing. How you achieve that, I do not know.


It would almost be better if the existing banks were allowed to fail


and then we could start again from a clean sheet of paper and rebuild


a some banks which were decent and which saw their purpose as been


looking after the interests of their customers and of society,


rather than the other way around. Vince Cable, the business secretary,


has said this was a cesspit essentially. Is this the last


banking scandal we will hear? Could there be more waiting?


I would not be surprised if there was more. It just gets worse and


worse. It is because of the culture. Rigging prices, conning the


consumer and screen out of much does the system as you can, that


was the atmosphere. People have to go to jail.


The is that likely to happen? the public mood does seem to be


changing. My worry is that because banking is


the largest industry we have in this country, the politicians will


always came into them. Part of the problem lies with the politicians.


Political magazine presented by Andrew Neil and Isabel Fraser.

Download Subtitles