27/10/2013

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:35. > :00:39.Morning, folks. Welcome to the Sunday Politics. Hope you enjoyed

:00:40. > :00:43.the extra hour in bed and that you've realise it's not quarter to

:00:44. > :00:45.one. It's quarter to 12! It's getting stormy outside. But

:00:46. > :00:48.they're already battening down the hatches at Number ten because

:00:49. > :00:53.coalition splits are back, with bust-ups over free schools and power

:00:54. > :00:57.bills. We'll speak to the Lib Dems and ask Labour who's conning whom

:00:58. > :01:00.over energy. EU leaders have been meeting in

:01:01. > :01:03.Brussels. But how's David Cameron getting on with that plan to change

:01:04. > :01:13.our relationship with Europe. We were there to ask him.

:01:14. > :01:16.Have we got any powers back yet? Foreign companies own everything

:01:17. > :01:19.from our energy companies to our railways. Does it matter who owns

:01:20. > :01:23.our businesses? Union boss Bob Crow and venture capitalist Julie Meyer

:01:24. > :01:25.go head to head. And here on Sunday Politics

:01:26. > :01:29.Scotland. More on the questions surrounding the role unions play in

:01:30. > :01:30.today's workforce - could this week's events at Grangemouth signal

:01:31. > :01:45.a sea change? pace?

:01:46. > :01:48.And with me, three journalists who've bravely agreed to hunker down

:01:49. > :01:50.in the studio while Britain braces itself for massive storm winds,

:01:51. > :01:54.tweeting their political forecasts with all the accuracy of Michael

:01:55. > :02:01.Fish on hurricane watch. Helen Lewis, Janan Ganesh and Nick Watt.

:02:02. > :02:05.Now, sometimes coalition splits are over-egged, or dare we say even

:02:06. > :02:09.occasionally stage-managed. But this week, we've seen what looks like the

:02:10. > :02:11.genuine article. It turns out Nick Clegg has his doubts about the

:02:12. > :02:15.coalition's flagship free schools policy. David Cameron doesn't much

:02:16. > :02:19.like the green levies on our energy bills championed by the Lib Dems.

:02:20. > :02:23.Neither of them seems to have bothered to tell the other that they

:02:24. > :02:26.had their doubts. Who better to discuss these flare-ups than Lib Dem

:02:27. > :02:37.Deputy Leader Simon Hughes? He joins me now. Welcome. Good morning. The

:02:38. > :02:41.Lib Dems spent three years of sticking up for the coalition when

:02:42. > :02:46.times were grim. Explain to me the logic of splitting from them when

:02:47. > :02:50.times look better. We will stick with it for five years. It is

:02:51. > :02:54.working arrangement, but not surprisingly, where there right

:02:55. > :02:58.areas on which we disagree over where to go next, we will stand up.

:02:59. > :03:03.It is going to be hard enough for the Lib Dems to get any credit for

:03:04. > :03:09.the recovery, what ever it is. It will be even harder if you seem to

:03:10. > :03:13.be semidetached and picky. The coalition has led on economic

:03:14. > :03:18.policy, some of which were entirely from our stable. The one you have

:03:19. > :03:24.heard about most often, a Lib Dem initiative, was to take people on

:03:25. > :03:26.blowing comes out of tax. The recovery would not have happened,

:03:27. > :03:31.there would not have been confidence in Britain, had there not been a

:03:32. > :03:36.coalition government with us in it, making sure the same policies

:03:37. > :03:40.produced fair outcomes. We are not going to leave the credit for any

:03:41. > :03:45.growth - and there has been very good news this week. We have played

:03:46. > :03:49.a part in that, and without us, it would not have happened. Does it not

:03:50. > :03:54.underline the trust problem you have? You promised to abolish

:03:55. > :04:00.tuition fees. You oppose nuclear power, now you are cheerleading the

:04:01. > :04:05.first multi-billion pounds investment in nuclear generation.

:04:06. > :04:09.You are dying out on your enthusiasm on green levies, and now they are up

:04:10. > :04:16.for renegotiation. Why should we trust a word you say? In relation to

:04:17. > :04:26.green levies, as you well know, just under 10% is to do with helping

:04:27. > :04:30.energy and helping people. Unless there is continuing investment in

:04:31. > :04:34.renewables, we will not have the British produced energy at cheaper

:04:35. > :04:39.cost to keep those bills down in the future. At cheaper cost? Explain

:04:40. > :04:48.that to me. Off-shore energy is twice the market rate. The costs of

:04:49. > :04:52.renewables will increasingly come down. We have fantastic capacity to

:04:53. > :04:57.produce the energy and deliver lots of jobs in the process. The parts of

:04:58. > :05:01.the energy bill that may be up for renegotiation seems to be the part

:05:02. > :05:07.where we subsidise to help either poor people pay less, or where we do

:05:08. > :05:12.other things. Too insulated the homes? Are you up to putting that to

:05:13. > :05:18.general taxation? Wouldn't that be progressive? I would. It would be

:05:19. > :05:21.progressive. I would like to do for energy bills what the Chancellor has

:05:22. > :05:28.done for road traffic users, drivers, which is too fuelled motor

:05:29. > :05:32.fuel -- to freeze new to fall. That would mean there would be an

:05:33. > :05:38.immediate relief this year, not waiting for the election. So there

:05:39. > :05:42.is a deal to be done there? Yes. We understand we have to take the

:05:43. > :05:45.burden off the consumer, and also deal with the energy companies, who

:05:46. > :05:49.look as if they are not paying all the tax they should be, and the

:05:50. > :05:54.regulator, which doesn't regulate quickly enough to deal with the

:05:55. > :05:58.issues coming down the track. We can toughen the regulator, and I hope

:05:59. > :06:01.that the Chancellor, in the Autumn statement, was signalled that energy

:06:02. > :06:05.companies will not be allowed to get away with not paying the taxes they

:06:06. > :06:12.should. And this deal will allow energy prices to come down? Yes. How

:06:13. > :06:17.could David Laws, one of your ministers, proudly defend the record

:06:18. > :06:22.of unqualified teachers working in free schools, and then stand

:06:23. > :06:28.side-by-side with Mr Clegg, as he says he is against them? David Laws

:06:29. > :06:33.was not proudly defending the fact that it is unqualified teachers. He

:06:34. > :06:38.said that some of the new, unqualified teachers in free schools

:06:39. > :06:43.are doing a superb job. But you want to get rid of them? We want to make

:06:44. > :06:50.sure that everybody coming into a free school ends up being qualified.

:06:51. > :06:54.Ends up? Goes through a process that means they have qualifications. Just

:06:55. > :06:59.as we said very clearly at the last election that the manifesto

:07:00. > :07:03.curriculum in free schools should be the same as other schools. It looks

:07:04. > :07:10.like Mr Clegg is picking a fight just for the sake of it. Mr Clegg

:07:11. > :07:13.was taught by people who didn't have teaching qualifications in one of

:07:14. > :07:19.the greatest schools in the land, if not the world. It didn't seem to do

:07:20. > :07:23.him any harm. What is the problem? If you pay to go to a school, you

:07:24. > :07:30.know what you're getting. But that is what a free school is. No, you

:07:31. > :07:34.don't pay fees. A free school is parents taking the decisions, not

:07:35. > :07:38.you, the politicians. We believe they would expect to guarantee is,

:07:39. > :07:43.firstly that the minimum curriculum taught across the country is taught

:07:44. > :07:46.in the free schools, and secondly, that the teachers there are

:07:47. > :07:52.qualified. Someone who send their kids to private schools took a

:07:53. > :07:58.decision to take -- to send their children there, even if the teachers

:07:59. > :08:02.were unqualified, because they are experts in their field. Someone who

:08:03. > :08:10.send their kids to free schools is because -- is their decision, not

:08:11. > :08:13.yours. Because some of the free schools are new, and have never been

:08:14. > :08:19.there before, parents need a guarantee that there are some basics

:08:20. > :08:24.in place, whatever sort of school. So they need you to hold their hand?

:08:25. > :08:28.It is not about holding hands, it is about having a minimum guarantee.

:08:29. > :08:32.Our party made clear at our conference that this is a priority

:08:33. > :08:37.for us. Nick Clegg reflects the view of the party, and I believe it is an

:08:38. > :08:40.entirely rational thing to do. Nick Clegg complained that the Prime

:08:41. > :08:49.Minister gave him only 30 minutes notice on the Prime Minister Buzz 's

:08:50. > :08:53.U-turn on green levies. That is almost as little time as Nick Clegg

:08:54. > :08:56.gave the Prime Minister on his U-turn on free schools. Aren't you

:08:57. > :09:05.supposed to be partners? Green levies were under discussion in the

:09:06. > :09:09.ministerial group before Wednesday, because we identified this as an

:09:10. > :09:16.issue. We do that in a practical way. Sometimes there is only half an

:09:17. > :09:22.hour's notice. We had even less than half an hour this morning! Simon

:09:23. > :09:26.Hughes, thank you. So the price of energy is the big

:09:27. > :09:31.battle ground in politics at the moment. 72% of people say that high

:09:32. > :09:36.bills will influence the way they vote at the next election. Ed

:09:37. > :09:41.Miliband has promised a price freeze after the next election, but will

:09:42. > :09:46.the coalition turned the tables on Labour, with its proposal to roll

:09:47. > :09:54.back green levies. Caroline Flint joins us from Sheffield. It looks

:09:55. > :10:02.like the coalition will be able to take ?50 of energy bills, by

:10:03. > :10:05.removing green levies. It is quite clear that different parts of the

:10:06. > :10:09.government are running round waking up to the fact that the public feel

:10:10. > :10:13.that this government has not done enough to listen to their concerns.

:10:14. > :10:17.Last week, there was a classic case of the Prime Minister making up

:10:18. > :10:23.policy literally at the dispatch box. Let's see what they say in the

:10:24. > :10:26.autumn statement. The truth is, whatever the debate around green

:10:27. > :10:31.levies, and I have always said we should look at value for money at

:10:32. > :10:48.those green levies. Our argument is about acknowledging there is

:10:49. > :10:50.something wrong with the way the market works, and the way those

:10:51. > :10:53.companies are regulated. Behind our freeze for 20 months is a package of

:10:54. > :10:56.proposals to reform this market. I understand that, but you cannot tell

:10:57. > :10:58.as the details about that. I can. You cannot give us the details about

:10:59. > :11:01.reforming the market. We are going to do three things, and I think I

:11:02. > :11:05.said this last time I was on the programme. First, we are going to

:11:06. > :11:12.separate out the generation side from the supply side within the big

:11:13. > :11:17.six. Secondly, we will have a energy pool, or power exchange, where all

:11:18. > :11:21.energy will have to be traded in that pool. Thirdly, we will

:11:22. > :11:25.establish a tougher regulator, because Ofgem is increasingly being

:11:26. > :11:30.seen as not doing the job right. I notice that you didn't mention any

:11:31. > :11:35.reform of the current green and social taxes on the energy bill. Is

:11:36. > :11:41.it Labour's policy to maintain the existing green levies? In 2011, the

:11:42. > :11:48.government chose to get rid of warm front, which was the publicly funded

:11:49. > :11:51.through tracks a scheme to support new installation. When they got rid

:11:52. > :11:57.of that, it was the first time we had a government since the 70s that

:11:58. > :12:02.didn't have such a policy. What is your policy? We voted against that

:12:03. > :12:08.because we believe it is wrong. We believe that the eco-scheme, a

:12:09. > :12:16.government intervention which is ?47 of the ?112 on our bills each year,

:12:17. > :12:20.is expensive, bureaucratic and isn't going to the fuel poor. I am up for

:12:21. > :12:24.a debate on these issues. I am up for a discussion on what the

:12:25. > :12:27.government should do and what these energy companies should do. We

:12:28. > :12:31.cannot let Cameron all the energy companies off the hook from the way

:12:32. > :12:37.in which they organise their businesses, and expect us to pay

:12:38. > :12:41.ever increasing rises in our bills. There is ?112 of green levies on our

:12:42. > :12:46.bills at the moment. Did you vote against any of them? We didn't, but

:12:47. > :12:53.what I would say ease these were government imposed levies. When they

:12:54. > :13:01.got rid of the government funded programme, Warm Front, they

:13:02. > :13:08.introduced the eco-scheme. The eco-project is one of the ones where

:13:09. > :13:12.the energy companies are saying, it's too bureaucratic, and it is

:13:13. > :13:14.proving more expensive than government estimates, apparently

:13:15. > :13:19.doubled the amount the government thought. These things are all worth

:13:20. > :13:25.looking at, but don't go to the heart of the issue. According to

:13:26. > :13:35.official figures, on current plans, which you support, which you voted

:13:36. > :13:42.for, households will be paying 41% more per unit of electricity by

:13:43. > :13:51.2030. It puts your temporary freeze as just a blip. You support a 41%

:13:52. > :13:55.rise in our bills. I support making sure we secure for the future access

:13:56. > :14:00.to energy that we can grow here in the UK, whether it is through

:14:01. > :14:08.nuclear, wind or solar, or other technologies yet to be developed. We

:14:09. > :14:13.should protect ourselves against energy costs we cannot control. The

:14:14. > :14:17.truth is, it is every fair for you to put that point across, and I

:14:18. > :14:22.accept that, but we need to hear the other side about the cost for bill

:14:23. > :14:25.payers if we didn't invest in new, indigenous sources of energy supply

:14:26. > :14:30.for the future, which, in the long run, will be cheaper and more

:14:31. > :14:34.secure, and create the jobs we need. I think it is important to

:14:35. > :14:38.have a debate about these issues, but they have to be seen in the

:14:39. > :14:45.right context. If we stay stuck in the past, we will pay more and we

:14:46. > :14:50.will not create jobs. How can you criticise the coalition's plans for

:14:51. > :14:55.a new nuclear station, when jeering 13 years of a Labour government, you

:14:56. > :14:58.did not invest in a single nuclear plant? You sold off all our nuclear

:14:59. > :15:12.technology to foreign companies. Energy provision was put out to

:15:13. > :15:22.private hands and there has been no obstacle in British law against

:15:23. > :15:28.ownership outside the UK. Part of this is looking ahead. Because your

:15:29. > :15:32.previous track record is so bad? What we did decide under the

:15:33. > :15:37.previous government, we came to the view, and there were discussions in

:15:38. > :15:44.our party about this, that we did need to support a nuclear future.

:15:45. > :15:47.At the time of that, David Cameron was one of those saying that

:15:48. > :15:52.nuclear power should be a last resort. And as you said, the

:15:53. > :15:58.Liberals did not support it. We stood up for that. We set in train

:15:59. > :16:02.the green light of 10 sites, including Hinkley Point, for

:16:03. > :16:06.nuclear development. I am glad to see that is making progress and we

:16:07. > :16:10.should make more progress over the years ahead. We took a tough

:16:11. > :16:18.decision when other governments had not done. You did not build a new

:16:19. > :16:26.nuclear station. When you get back into power, will you build HS2?

:16:27. > :16:33.That has not had a blank cheque from the Labour Party. I am in

:16:34. > :16:38.favour of good infrastructure. Are you in favour of?, answer the

:16:39. > :16:43.question? I have answered the question. It does not have a blank

:16:44. > :16:48.cheque. If the prices are too high, we will review the decision when we

:16:49. > :16:53.come back to vote on it. We will be looking at it closely. We have to

:16:54. > :16:58.look for value for money and how it benefits the country. Have you

:16:59. > :17:02.stocked up on jumpers this winter? I am perfectly all right with my

:17:03. > :17:10.clothing. What is important, it is ridiculous for the Government to

:17:11. > :17:19.suggest that the answer to the loss of trust in the energy companies is

:17:20. > :17:25.to put on another jumper. The coalition has taken a long time

:17:26. > :17:30.to come up with anything that can trump Ed Miliband's simple freezing

:17:31. > :17:36.energy prices, vote for us. Are they on the brink of doing so? I do

:17:37. > :17:39.not think so. They have had a problem that has dominated the

:17:40. > :17:45.debate, talking about GDP, the figures came out on Friday and said,

:17:46. > :17:50.well, and went back to talking about energy. My problem with what

:17:51. > :17:56.David Cameron proposes is he agrees with the analysis that the Big Six

:17:57. > :18:01.make too many profits. He wants to move the green levies into general

:18:02. > :18:06.taxation, so that he looks like he is protecting the profits of the

:18:07. > :18:11.energy companies. If the coalition can say they will take money off

:18:12. > :18:17.the bills, does that change the game? I do not think the Liberal

:18:18. > :18:23.Democrats are an obstacle to unwinding the green levies. I think

:18:24. > :18:28.Nick Clegg is open to doing a deal, but the real obstacle is the carbon

:18:29. > :18:33.reduction targets that we signed up to during the boom years. They were

:18:34. > :18:37.ambitious I thought at the time. From that we have the taxes and

:18:38. > :18:42.clocking up of the supply-side of the economy. Unless he will revise

:18:43. > :18:46.that, and build from first principles a new strategy, he

:18:47. > :18:53.cannot do more than put a dent into green levies. He might say as I

:18:54. > :18:57.have got to ?50 now and if you voters in in an overall majority, I

:18:58. > :19:02.will look up what we have done in the better times and give you more.

:19:03. > :19:07.I am sure he will do that. It might be ?50 of the Bill, but it will be

:19:08. > :19:12.?50 on your general taxation bill, which would be more progressive.

:19:13. > :19:19.They will find it. We will never see it in general taxation. The

:19:20. > :19:24.problem for the Coalition on what Ed Miliband has done is that it is

:19:25. > :19:29.five weeks since he made that speech and it is all we are talking

:19:30. > :19:32.about. David Cameron spent those five weeks trying to work out

:19:33. > :19:35.whether Ed Miliband is a Marxist or whether he is connected to Middle

:19:36. > :19:41.Britain. That is why Ed Miliband set the agenda. The coalition are

:19:42. > :19:48.squabbling among themselves, looking petulant, on energy, and on

:19:49. > :19:54.schools. Nobody is taking notice of the fact the economy is under way,

:19:55. > :20:00.the recovery is under way. Ed Miliband has made the weather on

:20:01. > :20:06.this. It UK has a relaxed attitude about

:20:07. > :20:14.selling off assets based -- to companies based abroad. But this

:20:15. > :20:16.week we have seen the Swiss owner of one of Scotland's largest

:20:17. > :20:20.industrial sites, Grangemouth, come within a whisker of closing part of

:20:21. > :20:22.it down. So should we care whether British assets have foreign owners?

:20:23. > :20:25.Britain might be a nation of homeowners, but we appear to have

:20:26. > :20:30.lost our taste for owning some of our biggest businesses. These are

:20:31. > :20:38.among the crown jewels sold off in the past three decades to companies

:20:39. > :20:40.based abroad. Roughly half of Britain's essential services have

:20:41. > :20:42.overseas owners. The airport owner, British Airports Authority, is

:20:43. > :20:45.owned by a Spanish company. Britain's largest water company,

:20:46. > :20:48.Thames, is owned by a consortium led by an Australian bank. Four out

:20:49. > :20:51.of six of Britain's biggest energy companies are owned by overseas

:20:52. > :20:54.giants, and one of these, EDF Energy, which is owned by the

:20:55. > :20:56.French state, is building Britain's first nuclear power plant in a

:20:57. > :21:04.generation, backed by Chinese investors. It's a similar story for

:21:05. > :21:09.train operator Arriva, bought by a company owned by the German state.

:21:10. > :21:12.So part of the railways privatised by the British government was

:21:13. > :21:21.effectively re-nationalised by the German government. But does it

:21:22. > :21:24.matter who owns these companies, as long as the lights stay on, the

:21:25. > :21:31.trains run on time, and we can still eat Cadbury's Dairy Milk?

:21:32. > :21:36.We are joined by the general secretary of the RMT, Bob Crow, and

:21:37. > :21:43.by venture capitalist Julie Meyer. They go head to head.

:21:44. > :21:49.Have we seen the consequences of relying for essential services to

:21:50. > :21:55.be foreign-owned? Four of the Big Six energy companies, Grangemouth,

:21:56. > :22:02.owned by a tax exile in Switzerland. It is not good. I do not think

:22:03. > :22:07.there is a cause and effect relationship between foreign

:22:08. > :22:11.ownership and consumer prices. That is not the right comparison. We

:22:12. > :22:15.need to be concerned about businesses represented the future,

:22:16. > :22:19.businesses we are good at innovating for example in financial

:22:20. > :22:26.services and the UK has a history of building businesses, such as

:22:27. > :22:36.Monotypes. If we were not creating businesses here -- Monotise. Like

:22:37. > :22:46.so many businesses creating products and services and creating

:22:47. > :22:52.the shareholders. Should we allow hour essential services to be in

:22:53. > :22:55.foreign ownership? It was demonstrated this week at

:22:56. > :23:00.Grangemouth. If you do not own the industry, you do not own it. The

:23:01. > :23:04.MPs of this country and the politicians in Scotland have no say,

:23:05. > :23:11.they were consultants. Multinationals decide whether to

:23:12. > :23:15.shut a company down. If that had been Unite union, they are the ones

:23:16. > :23:21.who saved the jobs. They capitulated. They will come back,

:23:22. > :23:26.like they have for the past 150 years, and capture again what they

:23:27. > :23:32.lost. If it had closed, they would have lost their jobs for ever. If

:23:33. > :23:37.the union had called the members up without a ballot for strike action,

:23:38. > :23:41.there would have been uproar. This person in Switzerland can decide to

:23:42. > :23:47.shut the entire industry down. The coalition, the Labour Party, as

:23:48. > :23:52.well, when Labour was in government, they played a role of allowing

:23:53. > :24:04.industries to go abroad, and it should be returned to public

:24:05. > :24:12.ownership. Nestor. It has demonstrated that the Net comes

:24:13. > :24:18.from new businesses. We must not be... When Daly motion was stopped

:24:19. > :24:23.by the French government to be sold, it was an arrow to the heart of

:24:24. > :24:27.French entrepreneurs. We must not create that culture in the UK.

:24:28. > :24:31.Every train running in France is built in France. 90% of the trains

:24:32. > :24:42.running in Germany are built in Germany. In Japan, it has to be

:24:43. > :24:46.built in that country, and now an energy company in France is

:24:47. > :24:50.reducing its nuclear capability in its own country and wants to make

:24:51. > :24:54.profits out of the British industry to put back into it state industry.

:24:55. > :24:58.That happened with the railway industry. They want to make money

:24:59. > :25:09.at the expense of their own state companies. We sold off energy

:25:10. > :25:14.production. How did we end up in a position where our nuclear capacity

:25:15. > :25:17.will be built by a company owned by a socialist date, France, and

:25:18. > :25:26.funded by a communist one, China, for vital infrastructure? I am not

:25:27. > :25:30.suggesting that is in the national interest. I am saying we can pick

:25:31. > :25:35.any one example and say it is a shame. The simple matter of the

:25:36. > :25:39.fact is the owners are having to make decisions. Not just

:25:40. > :25:44.Grangemouth, businesses are making decisions about what is the common

:25:45. > :25:50.good. Not just in the shareholders' interest. For employees, customers.

:25:51. > :25:55.What is in the common good when prices go up by 10% and the reason

:25:56. > :25:59.is that 20 years ago they shut every coal pit down in this country,

:26:00. > :26:02.the Germans kept theirs open and subsidised it and now we have the

:26:03. > :26:11.Germans doing away with nuclear power and they have coal. Under the

:26:12. > :26:17.Labour government, in 2008, the climate change Act was passed. Well

:26:18. > :26:21.before that, and you know yourself, they shut down the coal mines to

:26:22. > :26:25.smash the National Union of Mineworkers because they dared to

:26:26. > :26:30.stand up for people in their community. Even if we wanted to

:26:31. > :26:35.reopen the coalmines, it would be pointless. Under the 2008 Act, we

:26:36. > :26:42.are not meant to burn more coal. The can, as if you spent some of

:26:43. > :26:50.the profits, you could have carbon catch up. That does not exist on a

:26:51. > :26:54.massive scale. You are arguing the case, Julie Meyer, for

:26:55. > :26:59.entrepreneurs to come to this country. Even Bob Crow is not

:27:00. > :27:06.against that. We are trying to argue, should essential services be

:27:07. > :27:13.in foreign hands? Not those in Silicon round about doing start-ups.

:27:14. > :27:18.I am trying to draw a broader principle than just energy.

:27:19. > :27:24.Something like broadband services, also important to the functioning

:27:25. > :27:29.of the economy. I believe in the UK's ability to innovate. When we

:27:30. > :27:34.have businesses that play off broadband companies to get the best

:27:35. > :27:40.prices for consumers. These new businesses and business models are

:27:41. > :27:46.the best way. Not to control, but to influence. It will be a disaster.

:27:47. > :27:52.Prices will go up and up as a result. Nissan in Sunderland, a

:27:53. > :27:56.Japanese factory, some of the best cars and productivity. You want

:27:57. > :28:01.that to be nationalised and bring it down to the standard of British

:28:02. > :28:04.Leyland? It is not bring it down to the standard. The car manufacturing

:28:05. > :28:12.base in this country has been wrecked. We make more cars now for

:28:13. > :28:17.20 years -- than in 20 years. Ford's Dagenham produced some of

:28:18. > :28:24.the best cars in the world. Did you buy one? I cannot drive. They moved

:28:25. > :28:30.their plants to other countries, where it was cheaper labour. Would

:28:31. > :28:36.you nationalise Nissan? There should be one car industry that

:28:37. > :28:40.produces cars for people. This week the EU summit was about Angela

:28:41. > :28:49.Merkel's mobile phone being tapped, they call it a handy. We sent Adam

:28:50. > :28:52.to Brussels and told him to ignore the business about phone-tapping

:28:53. > :29:02.and investigate the Prime Minister's policy on Europe instead.

:29:03. > :29:11.I have come to my first EU summit to see how David Cameron is getting on

:29:12. > :29:20.with his strategy to claim power was back from Brussels. Got any powers

:29:21. > :29:25.back yet? Yes! Which ones? Sadly, his fellow leaders were not as

:29:26. > :29:31.forthcoming. Chancellor, are you going to give any powers back to

:29:32. > :29:35.Britain? Has David Cameron asked you for any powers back? The president

:29:36. > :29:44.of the commission just laughed, and listen to the Lithuanian President.

:29:45. > :29:54.How is David Cameron's renegotiation strategy going? What's that? He

:29:55. > :29:58.wants powers back for Britain. No one knows what powers David Cameron

:29:59. > :30:06.actually wants. Even our usual allies, like Sweden, are bit

:30:07. > :30:12.baffled. We actually don't know yet what is going through the UK

:30:13. > :30:18.membership. We will await the finalisation of that first. You

:30:19. > :30:23.should ask him, and then tell us! Here is someone who must know, the

:30:24. > :30:29.Dutch Prime Minister, he is doing what we are doing, carrying out a

:30:30. > :30:34.review of the EU powers, known as competencies in the jargon, before

:30:35. > :30:37.negotiating to get some back. Have you had any negotiations with David

:30:38. > :30:44.Cameron over what powers you can bring back from Brussels? That is

:30:45. > :30:49.not on the agenda of this summit. Have you talked to him about it?

:30:50. > :30:55.This is not on the schedule for this summit.

:30:56. > :31:05.David Cameron's advises tummy it is because he is playing the long game.

:31:06. > :31:11.-- David Cameron's advisers tell me. At this summit, there was a task

:31:12. > :31:18.force discussing how to cut EU red tape. Just how long this game is was

:31:19. > :31:24.explained to me outside the summit, by the leader of the Conservatives

:31:25. > :31:28.in the European Parliament. I think the behind-the-scenes negotiations

:31:29. > :31:31.will start happening when the new commissioner is appointed later next

:31:32. > :31:36.year. I think the detailed negotiations will start to happen

:31:37. > :31:40.bubbly after the UK general election. That is when we will start

:31:41. > :31:49.getting all of the detail of the horse trading, and real, Lake night

:31:50. > :31:53.negotiations. Angela Merkel seems keen to rewrite the EU's main

:31:54. > :31:58.treaties to deal with changes in the Eurozone, and that is the mechanism

:31:59. > :32:02.David Cameron would use to renegotiate our membership. Everyone

:32:03. > :32:06.here says his relationship with the German Chancellor is strong. So

:32:07. > :32:12.after days in this building, here is how it looks. David Cameron has a

:32:13. > :32:16.mountain to climb. It is climbable, but he isn't even in the foothills

:32:17. > :32:21.yet. Has he even started packing his bags for the trip?

:32:22. > :32:29.Joining us now, a man who knows a thing or two about the difficulties

:32:30. > :32:32.Prime Minister 's face in Europe. Former Deputy Prime Minister,

:32:33. > :32:37.Michael Heseltine. We are nine months from David Cameron's defining

:32:38. > :32:43.speech on EU renegotiation. Can you think of one area of progress? I

:32:44. > :32:51.don't know. And you don't know. And that's a good thing. Why is it a

:32:52. > :33:02.good thing? Because the real progress goes on behind closed

:33:03. > :33:04.doors. And only the most naive, because the real progress goes on

:33:05. > :33:33.behind You are much better off making

:33:34. > :33:41.progress the best you can in the privacy. It is a long journey ahead.

:33:42. > :33:53.Do you have a clear sense of the destination? No. I have a clear

:33:54. > :34:03.sense of the destination which is the victor the key will win to stay

:34:04. > :34:10.inside the European community. I of course have total support for that.

:34:11. > :34:13.If he is incapable of getting any tangible sign of the negotiation and

:34:14. > :34:21.is able to do only what Harold Wilson don't in 1975 which is

:34:22. > :34:29.getting a couple of talking changes, he goes on to the referendum without

:34:30. > :34:39.much to answer for, doesn't he? He has everything to argue for. He has

:34:40. > :34:45.Britain's vital role as a major contributor and beneficiary. He has

:34:46. > :34:55.the vital role of the city of London. He could argue for that now.

:34:56. > :35:03.He doesn't want to have a referendum now and I have no doubt he will come

:35:04. > :35:12.back with something to talk about. It may be slightly different to what

:35:13. > :35:19.his critics, the UK isolationists, want. He may have found allies

:35:20. > :35:30.within the community want change as well. He may secure changes the way

:35:31. > :35:34.the community works, which would be a significant argument within the

:35:35. > :35:39.referendum campaign. As an example, I happen to think it is a scandal

:35:40. > :35:44.the European commission do not secure the auditing of some of the

:35:45. > :35:49.accounts. Perhaps that could be on the agenda. He might find a lot of

:35:50. > :36:00.contributing countries, like Germany and Holland, might be very keen. We

:36:01. > :36:06.saw the other day he vetoed the increase in the European budget and

:36:07. > :36:10.he had a lot of allies, so working within Europe or the things the

:36:11. > :36:15.people want is fertile ground in my view.

:36:16. > :36:21.Is John Major right to call for a windfall tax on the energy

:36:22. > :36:28.companies? Here's a very cautious Philip Hollobone does not say things

:36:29. > :36:35.thinking about. -- -- cautious fellow. It is pretty difficult to

:36:36. > :36:42.predict what the consequences would be. I am myself more interested in

:36:43. > :36:47.the other part of his speech which was speaking about the need for the

:36:48. > :36:52.Conservatives to seek a wider horizon and recognise what is

:36:53. > :36:58.happening to the party and the way in which its membership is

:36:59. > :37:06.shrinking. I take it you are not for a windfall tax? I am not in favour

:37:07. > :37:11.of increasing taxes anywhere. Do you shear scepticism on Iain Duncan

:37:12. > :37:21.Smith's ability to succeed with welfare reform? I think he is right

:37:22. > :37:24.and I indeed wrote a pamphlet in the 1980s called no place for hostages

:37:25. > :37:34.arguing for what he is now trying to do. -- ostriches. He is right to try

:37:35. > :37:43.this and public opinion is behind him but it is not easy because on

:37:44. > :37:50.the fringe of these issues, there are genuine hard luck stories and

:37:51. > :37:54.these are the ones that become the focus for attention and it requires

:37:55. > :38:02.a lot of political skill to negotiate through that. Is he right

:38:03. > :38:09.to invoke the beverage principle that you should be expected to make

:38:10. > :38:17.a contribution? -- Beveridge. We will let you get your Sunday lunch.

:38:18. > :38:29.Good afternoon and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up on the

:38:30. > :38:33.programme. Grangemouth over the past week has

:38:34. > :38:37.captivated the country. We will be examining the future role of unions

:38:38. > :38:40.in industrial relations. We'll weigh that up with a panel of people

:38:41. > :38:43.who've discussed and debated the place of unions in Scotland for

:38:44. > :38:46.several decades. And a win in Dunfermline for Scottish Labour -

:38:47. > :38:49.we'll speak to their leader Johann Lamont about how the party plans to

:38:50. > :38:52.capitalise on the victory. Scotland's biggest industrial

:38:53. > :38:55.complex was close to collapse this week, saved at the eleventh hour by

:38:56. > :38:58.the total capitulation of a once powerful, unionised workforce. There

:38:59. > :39:01.were certainly echoes of the 1970s in the Grangemouth dispute, but

:39:02. > :39:06.Unite the union was overwhelmed by the hardline tactics of 21st century

:39:07. > :39:10.mobile capital. Politicians were virtually powerless too in the face

:39:11. > :39:13.of this emerging phenomenon. As Andrew Kerr reports, industrial

:39:14. > :39:28.relations may never be the same again.

:39:29. > :39:31.The spear Grangemouth this week with 800 workers having to tell their

:39:32. > :39:37.families they were probably out of a job. People will probably never

:39:38. > :39:42.forget these events but there's a more positive outcome. A more

:39:43. > :39:48.harmonious relationship has been re-established here at Grangemouth.

:39:49. > :39:54.Really for the workers and now perhaps recriminations against the

:39:55. > :40:03.union. They marched their members up to the top of the hell but had to

:40:04. > :40:07.march back down again. Ineos wanted the other way and were prepared to

:40:08. > :40:15.take the sanction. Those are the methods of multinationals playing a

:40:16. > :40:21.global game. We want to see a long-term future for Grangemouth. We

:40:22. > :40:30.should be talking about them about the levels of long-term investment.

:40:31. > :40:37.Not just intent on a fight. The world has moved on from the 1970s.

:40:38. > :40:42.It certainly has. Look at the deal struck if you can even call it that.

:40:43. > :40:49.They agreed to a three-year pay freeze with no strikes, closure of

:40:50. > :40:56.the final salary pension scheme and no full-time union conveners. The

:40:57. > :41:02.union was over a barrel this week, a far cry from these days. There will

:41:03. > :41:14.be no vandalism, there will be no bevvying! They were dealing with

:41:15. > :41:18.Ineos this time. If they had watched what was happening over the years,

:41:19. > :41:25.this is a business that has had to deal with international bankers and

:41:26. > :41:29.won that round. It clearly was signalling there were problems and

:41:30. > :41:33.we have not been listening hard enough to understand how important

:41:34. > :41:37.it was to accept the changes which are facing most people in Scotland

:41:38. > :41:44.today. Some Labour MPs have been defending the union but whether the

:41:45. > :41:51.tactics were hardline and uncompromising. We can only

:41:52. > :41:57.represent the members we are representing at that time. We had

:41:58. > :42:06.our members faced with three days to make key decisions on really radical

:42:07. > :42:10.changes to terms and conditions. That probably means an emasculated

:42:11. > :42:18.union at Grangemouth but it seems there's still a for them and perhaps

:42:19. > :42:23.one more powerful. Any union has an important part to play and has two

:42:24. > :42:27.learn the lessons of what did not work but I imagine any management

:42:28. > :42:31.would want to make sure of that as well because it is an easy and

:42:32. > :42:37.powerful way to get through to the staff of what needs to happen. I

:42:38. > :42:43.imagine they will want to make union relationships work as well. Jim

:42:44. > :42:51.Ratcliffe has called for the UK to the former Labour relations. The

:42:52. > :42:55.question now is how many other employers have been watching this

:42:56. > :42:58.dispute with interest wondering how far they can now push the unions.

:42:59. > :43:01.Joining me now in the studio to discuss the fall out from last weeks

:43:02. > :43:05.events - former Falkirk West Labour MP and later, Independent MSP,

:43:06. > :43:08.Dennis Canavan and Chris Bartter who was with Unison Scotland for 20

:43:09. > :43:11.years. And in our Edinburgh studio, Alan Cochrane, Scottish Editor of

:43:12. > :43:22.the Daily Telegraph. Good afternoon. As the dust settles,

:43:23. > :43:26.who was to blame? Now was not the time for recriminations. I had the

:43:27. > :43:32.privilege of representing the Falkirk area for over 30 years and

:43:33. > :43:38.many of my former constituents are employed at Grangemouth. They are

:43:39. > :43:47.not militant extremists. Where they misled? I do not like the way they

:43:48. > :43:51.and the trade union movement have been demonised by certain elements

:43:52. > :43:57.in the media and certain politicians. These people by and

:43:58. > :44:05.large are responsible citizens and employees and trade unionists. I

:44:06. > :44:10.think the officials of the trade union in retrospect could say things

:44:11. > :44:14.should have been handled better. That is all well in hindsight but

:44:15. > :44:20.they were up against a ruthless and intransigent employer who was not

:44:21. > :44:24.coming clean with the workforce, and we are where all sorts of

:44:25. > :44:29.allegations coming out. Jim Ratcliffe was saying they are to be

:44:30. > :44:34.honest about the finances. That is what was lacking all along, the lack

:44:35. > :44:40.of honesty and transparency on behalf of the employer, and I think

:44:41. > :44:45.there would have been a better and there weren't, had we had there been

:44:46. > :44:54.transparency. Was the union demonised? I was astonished when you

:44:55. > :45:03.said this was a case when the union was overwhelmed by 20th-century

:45:04. > :45:07.mobile capitalism. They were overwhelmed by a union that walked

:45:08. > :45:10.straight into a trap. The management wanted to change these working

:45:11. > :45:17.practices and instead of arguing about the practices, the union

:45:18. > :45:27.decided to fight a stupid 1970s battle about political power way or

:45:28. > :45:33.the convener, according to the evidence amassed, he was spending a

:45:34. > :45:37.quarter of his time trying to organise or fix a constituency

:45:38. > :45:41.Labour Party selection. That is nothing to do with trade unions as

:45:42. > :45:50.we understand them now. What about wages and conditions? This is what

:45:51. > :45:54.the union chose to fight. This was a unique situation in terms of

:45:55. > :45:58.industrial relations what the company controlled by one powerful

:45:59. > :46:07.man, so negotiation would be very different to what you would normally

:46:08. > :46:22.expect? Probably most trade union negotiations traditionally have not

:46:23. > :46:30.been done like this. They usually negotiate collectively but this was

:46:31. > :46:35.not like that at all. I also have felt that the attitudes to the trade

:46:36. > :46:39.unions over the last week or so has been quite disgraceful from some

:46:40. > :46:46.quarters of the media. They are the victims here. Have they served their

:46:47. > :46:54.members well when you look at the outcome? I think the situation with

:46:55. > :47:02.the union is that you have to remember the union is its members in

:47:03. > :47:10.this sense. They vote for strike action over the attacks on wages and

:47:11. > :47:20.conditions was an 82% of vote on an 86% return. The decision to go back

:47:21. > :47:27.and accept the ultimatum from Jim Ratcliffe was a workforce decision.

:47:28. > :47:31.You are shaking your head? Everyone seems to be forgetting the initial

:47:32. > :47:38.strike was called over speedy deans but I agree, this dispute shows

:47:39. > :47:44.Scotland on both sides in a very bad light. -- Stevie Deans. I have

:47:45. > :47:47.spoken to outsiders involved in these negotiations and they have all

:47:48. > :47:52.been astonished by the level of personal animosity between the shop

:47:53. > :48:01.floor and the management. It was poisonous. It was a stupid union

:48:02. > :48:06.dealing with management levels which were impenetrable. They could not

:48:07. > :48:10.work out what the management structure was and everything had to

:48:11. > :48:22.go back to Jim Ratcliffe, but instead of fighting that battle,

:48:23. > :48:29.they wanted to fight on deans. What does this tell us about union

:48:30. > :48:33.relations going forward? The positive part of this outcome was

:48:34. > :48:44.that thousands of jobs have been saved, although belatedly. The

:48:45. > :48:52.negative part is the management and the order still seem intent on

:48:53. > :48:56.victimising the workforce. -- and Jim Ratcliffe. They are now coming

:48:57. > :49:01.up with suggestions that people that voted against the company proposal

:49:02. > :49:07.should get a worse deal on pensions than people who voted for it. If

:49:08. > :49:13.ever there is a way to continue the acrimony and bad industrial

:49:14. > :49:16.relations, that is the way to do it. Scotland is light years behind some

:49:17. > :49:24.other countries in terms of industrial democracy. Look at

:49:25. > :49:32.Denmark and Sweden and other Scandinavian countries. Look at

:49:33. > :49:37.Germany, even. Workers have more salient in planning and investment

:49:38. > :49:44.decisions of their companies and instead of this silly confrontation,

:49:45. > :49:51.you get more of a cooperation and better productivity. Looking for

:49:52. > :49:59.work, what we need to say is it wasn't just the workforce, it was

:50:00. > :50:03.also politicians and communities in Scotland that had the gun held to

:50:04. > :50:13.his head. Would he not argue it is has money? He is going to borrow

:50:14. > :50:20.money from here... He now has the UK government to give a loan guarantee.

:50:21. > :50:25.If he defaults, it is us that had to pay it back, so he has actually

:50:26. > :50:32.helped that loaded gun across the board to all of us and walked away.

:50:33. > :50:39.I worry considerably that the 25 years future that was spoken of in

:50:40. > :50:53.the press yesterday by the company and politicians will only last as

:50:54. > :50:57.long as the next demand. It will work in Scotland, it will work only

:50:58. > :51:03.if they give up this idea they can run political parties as well. Ed

:51:04. > :51:08.Miliband is trying to distance himself, you cannot have the union

:51:09. > :51:13.at a loss-making plant spending a quarter of its time fiddling a

:51:14. > :51:18.selection conference. That is not the way to get worker representation

:51:19. > :51:24.on board. These allegations have not been proven. We need to look at

:51:25. > :51:29.governmental responsibility and taxpayers money going into these

:51:30. > :51:34.companies. The UK government have put a loan guarantee of ?125

:51:35. > :51:40.million, the Scottish government regional development assistance of

:51:41. > :51:44.?9 million. That is a lot of taxpayers money, and in return I

:51:45. > :51:48.think both governments should use that money is leveraged to ensure

:51:49. > :51:54.that the company treats its workers in a more responsible way. Corporate

:51:55. > :51:59.responsibility is something very lacking in companies like INEOS. If

:52:00. > :52:05.there was more a responsibility to their workforce, I think the trade

:52:06. > :52:11.unions would respond in a more responsible way. Thank you all for

:52:12. > :52:19.coming in to speak to us today. Labour won the Scottish Parliament

:52:20. > :52:22.by-election. A 7% swing from the Nationalists. What does this tell us

:52:23. > :52:32.about the political education in Scotland? If it's just a blip for

:52:33. > :52:37.Alex Salmond? Labour has been the dominant force

:52:38. > :52:41.in Dunfermline since the creation of the Scottish parliament, but that

:52:42. > :52:46.hold was broken in 2011 when Bill Walker secured a victory for the

:52:47. > :52:49.SNP. This week's by-election was

:52:50. > :52:56.triggered by his resignation after he was thrown out by his party and

:52:57. > :53:01.jailed for domestic abuse. It was a campaign fought on local issues, not

:53:02. > :53:07.least proposed school closures. The SNP had the best-known candidate and

:53:08. > :53:12.focused on national policies like the council tax freeze. But mid-term

:53:13. > :53:17.votes tend to be unkind to those in government, and so it was in

:53:18. > :53:28.Dunfermline. The SNP's share of the vote fell by 7%, the Lib Dems were

:53:29. > :53:32.down 8%. Labour's candidate, she claimed her victory reflected the

:53:33. > :53:42.public's frustration with the referendum campaign.

:53:43. > :53:48.I will repay your trust in me after the disgrace of Bill Walker,

:53:49. > :53:54.Dunfermline deserves better and I will ensure that we will be far

:53:55. > :53:59.better than what went before. Dunfermline has sent a message to

:54:00. > :54:03.Alex Salmond, it is time for you to concentrate on the real priorities

:54:04. > :54:09.of Scottish people not your constitutional obsession. That is a

:54:10. > :54:12.sentiment shared by her party's leadership. But what does the

:54:13. > :54:16.success mean for the bigger battles which lie ahead?

:54:17. > :54:22.The leader of Scottish Labour is with me now. Let me ask you about

:54:23. > :54:27.Grangemouth, as we were discussing that. How well did Scottish

:54:28. > :54:31.ministers handle the situation? I was very pleased the Scottish and UK

:54:32. > :54:35.government came together to solve this problem. At the very heart of

:54:36. > :54:41.this was a workforce and community in shock and treated very badly. I

:54:42. > :54:45.was very glad the government came together to secure the jobs for

:54:46. > :54:54.those people and their families and the broader UK economy. If I was in

:54:55. > :54:58.the privilege -- privileged position of government my focus would have

:54:59. > :55:02.been on the implications for those families and the Scottish economy.

:55:03. > :55:05.We would work to do whatever we could to make sure those jobs were

:55:06. > :55:12.secure. As regards the situation which has emerged which started with

:55:13. > :55:15.Stephen Denes and his role in the Falkirk selection. There is a

:55:16. > :55:19.newspaper story today which said e-mails have been handed in to the

:55:20. > :55:23.police suggesting dirty tricks in terms of getting people to withdraw

:55:24. > :55:28.allegations, is it time for Ed Miliband to look into this again? I

:55:29. > :55:32.have not seen the e-mails, but if they are serious allegations they

:55:33. > :55:39.need to be looked at. I'm determined to make sure we look at an open

:55:40. > :55:43.process for selection and select a candidate who will represent labour

:55:44. > :55:50.and stand up for the people of Falkirk. That needs to be the focus

:55:51. > :55:57.in the coming period. Where the process is wrong up until now? The

:55:58. > :56:02.investigation by the party looked at the scale of the challenge. People

:56:03. > :56:06.were expressing concerns about Falkirk, and I'm determined the

:56:07. > :56:11.Labour Party is open and transparent. It is not a plaything

:56:12. > :56:14.of individual groupings. The message for me is that if anyone believes

:56:15. > :56:20.the big battle in the Labour Party is to get selected, they are sending

:56:21. > :56:25.out the wrong message. You cannot presume people's support. I am

:56:26. > :56:29.determined we are very clear, the main thing we do is go out to speak

:56:30. > :56:34.to people, listen to their concerns and stand up for them. Any

:56:35. > :56:42.presumption we take the voters for granted is entirely unacceptable.

:56:43. > :56:49.You one in Dunfermline, but if that was replicated across Scotland you

:56:50. > :56:53.still would not be able to overturn the SNP's majority. In your desire

:56:54. > :56:59.to be First Minister and for your party to lead this country, do you

:57:00. > :57:07.accept it might take two general elections to do that? There is this

:57:08. > :57:11.recognition, even with a 7% swing, that perhaps we would almost be the

:57:12. > :57:17.biggest party. It tells us that scale of the challenge ahead of us.

:57:18. > :57:22.We have made very good progress from a very difficult stage. I said the

:57:23. > :57:27.Labour Party would change, we would win back the support of the people

:57:28. > :57:33.of Scotland. That is a work in progress. I am not complacent about

:57:34. > :57:38.this. We will be credible and competitive, and Alex Salmond may,

:57:39. > :57:42.through arithmetic, establish you doing OK. What he is doing is

:57:43. > :57:49.ignoring the mesh -- the message being given to him. People are

:57:50. > :57:53.concerned Alex Salmond is not representing and doing his job.

:57:54. > :57:59.By-elections rarely changed anything, and the most recent poll

:58:00. > :58:03.showed 57% support for the first in a strand the government in what they

:58:04. > :58:08.are doing. Even at this stage they seem to be doing well in the eyes of

:58:09. > :58:19.the public. It does not feel like that to me. The SNP have failed to

:58:20. > :58:24.win any by-elections since 2012. The people of Scotland are saying to

:58:25. > :58:28.Alex Salmond, do your day job. Tell us what you think about

:58:29. > :58:33.independence, but at the same time, what can you do in terms of creating

:58:34. > :58:39.economic opportunities? What can you be doing about making our education

:58:40. > :58:42.system better? What can you do about the care situation with too many

:58:43. > :58:49.people left isolated in their own home? Can people legitimately say of

:58:50. > :58:53.you and your party, we know what you are against? You are against

:58:54. > :59:00.independence, the bedroom tax, what are you for? We have a long process

:59:01. > :59:06.to go through. It is about rebuilding trust. We do need to talk

:59:07. > :59:14.much more positively about the kind of Scotland we want to see. What are

:59:15. > :59:21.the issues you are for? Education and opportunity. The fact that too

:59:22. > :59:27.many of our young people's life decisions are determined by a young

:59:28. > :59:31.age. What is happening in terms of colleges and carer. These are big

:59:32. > :59:34.issues we could be addressing cross party in Scottish Parliament right

:59:35. > :59:40.now. Unfortunately everything is seen through the frame of

:59:41. > :59:44.independence. As we come towards a 2016 election there will be very

:59:45. > :59:48.specific things we will be talking about. What I am determined is that

:59:49. > :59:53.my view and vision of Scotland have two relate to what people's lives

:59:54. > :59:58.are alike. It will not be a trading of slogans, it will be how we make

:59:59. > :00:02.sure our young people get the best education. How do we stop the

:00:03. > :00:06.attacks on further education, and how do we ensure our health and

:00:07. > :00:12.social care Airbuses mean people are treated with dignity. Given what use

:00:13. > :00:17.said said in the past about universal benefits, people might

:00:18. > :00:21.have been confused by the leaflet you put during the Dunfermline

:00:22. > :00:25.by-election where you said you supported the scrapping of

:00:26. > :00:32.prescription charges. Labour supports the free bus passes. Labour

:00:33. > :00:36.supports the tax freeze. It is a reflection of the cartoon politics

:00:37. > :00:41.we are living with that their SNP misrepresent what Labour has said. I

:00:42. > :00:44.have never said that some people get something for nothing. I have said

:00:45. > :00:49.you have to look both at what you spend money on and what are the

:00:50. > :00:52.consequences of that. It is not acceptable to say free personal care

:00:53. > :00:56.when people are living with the experience of less than 15 minute

:00:57. > :01:01.visits. I want to sustain public services and we need to have a

:01:02. > :01:06.debate about that. I am in the same place in that debate as many others,

:01:07. > :01:19.as John Swinney himself said in private. How do you see the council

:01:20. > :01:26.tax freeze? He is a respected academic. Do you agree with his

:01:27. > :01:32.findings? We will of course look at the report. But your leaflet says

:01:33. > :01:39.labour supports the council tax freeze, he says it is an inefficient

:01:40. > :01:43.use of public funds. Up until 2017 local authorities made commitments

:01:44. > :01:48.to have a council tax freeze. First of all, the council tax freeze is

:01:49. > :01:52.underfunded. John Swinney has attacked local government then

:01:53. > :01:57.condemns local government for making cuts. Secondly we know that the

:01:58. > :02:00.council tax is discredited. I would hope that a cross-party we could

:02:01. > :02:05.have a discussion about how we properly fund local government. Are

:02:06. > :02:09.you talking about a change to the council tax? There is a huge

:02:10. > :02:21.challenge. People do not want to pay their council tax. Is labour working

:02:22. > :02:25.on an alternative? The prize cross-party is to understand that

:02:26. > :02:30.people really care about their local services. We know the funding of

:02:31. > :02:34.them is not sustainable. I want a discussion, not where the parties

:02:35. > :02:39.get dividing lines between each other, but come together and address

:02:40. > :02:43.the challenge of how do you properly build a confidence in the way in

:02:44. > :02:46.which you raise taxes locally in order to ensure our schools are well

:02:47. > :02:53.equipped and our young people are properly educated. Thank you for

:02:54. > :03:00.joining us this afternoon. Still to come, a look at the week

:03:01. > :03:08.ahead. You are watching Sunday Politics Scotland. Here is the news.

:03:09. > :03:14.Good afternoon. Two former senior police officers have clashed over

:03:15. > :03:19.security implications in independent Scotland. Graeme Pearson, former

:03:20. > :03:24.head of the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency there's effective

:03:25. > :03:36.working is easier as part of the UK. Allan Burnett, he says a Scottish

:03:37. > :03:40.intelligence agency could do better. Eight people have been rescued

:03:41. > :03:45.following a fire in the East End of Glasgow. Emergency crews were called

:03:46. > :03:52.to the Dennistoun area just before 1:30am. The residents, including two

:03:53. > :03:56.children, were taken off the fifth floor by firefighters. A further 33

:03:57. > :04:02.people were evacuated from the building, no one was injured.

:04:03. > :04:12.Good afternoon, a rather wet look to the afternoon. Some places seeing

:04:13. > :04:19.good spells, but a fair few showers across western parts. One or two

:04:20. > :04:24.showers making it through eastwards. It will be quite windy across

:04:25. > :04:30.central and southern parts of the wind following across northern areas

:04:31. > :04:34.as the day progresses. Temperatures around 11-12dC at best.

:04:35. > :04:40.That is it for the moment. In the moment we will be discussing

:04:41. > :04:57.the events coming up at Holyrood. Almost half of Edinburgh's licensed

:04:58. > :05:02.saunas are to close after reset city refused to grant them licences.

:05:03. > :05:14.The closure of a chemical firm in Paisley.

:05:15. > :05:17.The Scottish Housing regulator says housing arrears have increased since

:05:18. > :05:21.the bedroom tax was abolished. A former Liberal Democrat MP has

:05:22. > :05:29.taken his seat in the House of Lords. Jeremy Purvis will now set as

:05:30. > :05:33.Lord Purvis of Tweed. The cost of fuel bills raised the

:05:34. > :05:38.temperature in the House of Commons. I want better regulation

:05:39. > :05:44.and deals for consumers. ScottishPower are one of the latest

:05:45. > :05:50.firms to announce price rises. Finally, Jack Straw is to stand down

:05:51. > :05:55.as an MP at the next general election.

:05:56. > :06:02.So, if that was the week that was, let's turn our attention to the Week

:06:03. > :06:05.Ahead. My guests today, Alan Roden,

:06:06. > :06:14.Political Editor for the Daily Mail here in Scotland and the freelance

:06:15. > :06:19.journalist Pennie Taylor. Let's take a look through a couple of the

:06:20. > :06:23.stories in the newspapers. Lots of coverage of Grangemouth with the

:06:24. > :06:32.Sunday Herald saying there are details of the secret deal done by

:06:33. > :06:36.Alex Salmond to save Grangemouth. He had a secret meeting to see if

:06:37. > :06:40.another company could purchase the plant. There seems to be praise for

:06:41. > :06:46.the first Minister's handling of the situation. He is dealing with the

:06:47. > :06:51.day-to-day issues of a crisis like this. He put the constitutional

:06:52. > :06:58.argument on hold for a few days but was helped by the UK government in

:06:59. > :07:05.this. This proves we are Better Together know with both sides coming

:07:06. > :07:08.together to encourage this deal. Neither side was making political

:07:09. > :07:12.points and seemed to be coming together for the national interest.

:07:13. > :07:17.They definitely seems to have taken that decision to leave the

:07:18. > :07:21.referendum to one side. Looking at the coverage in the papers today and

:07:22. > :07:29.through the week, Alex Salmond has come out of it very much the vector,

:07:30. > :07:38.the white hat, if you like. How did the workers come out of it? They are

:07:39. > :07:43.immensely relieved and I find it personally astonishing that people

:07:44. > :07:47.can say it is the media's fault that the union movement has come out of

:07:48. > :07:53.this badly, because I think all the coverage through the week would

:07:54. > :08:05.indicate that the Utah that the union made was one that the workers

:08:06. > :08:13.wanted. -- U-turn. How do Ineos look at the end of this week? The union

:08:14. > :08:18.where worse by far. The mess this up and let the workers almost over the

:08:19. > :08:21.cliff and need to have a look at themselves and learn some lessons

:08:22. > :08:30.because I do not think workers will thank the union for what has

:08:31. > :08:34.happened. I would suggest the events of this week show more than ever

:08:35. > :08:38.that we need a strong union movement in Scotland to represent the

:08:39. > :08:43.interests of workers up against companies like Ineos but the

:08:44. > :08:47.implication is we need intelligent union intervention and not the kind

:08:48. > :08:53.of macho approach we have seen this layout. Dennis Canon felt the union

:08:54. > :09:01.were working with one hand behind their back. -- Dennis Canavan. If

:09:02. > :09:07.there's ever a time when you need a union that is level-headed, this was

:09:08. > :09:11.then but instead they read from the 1970s textbook and went ahead with

:09:12. > :09:19.the barnstorming approach that did not work out and have left the

:09:20. > :09:23.workers in a much worse situation. Let me turn to the Sunday express or

:09:24. > :09:36.have an interesting story saying the first Minister was the result of --

:09:37. > :09:40.recipient of US phone bugging. The suggestion is that America seems to

:09:41. > :09:50.know in advance of the announcement being made a couple of years ago

:09:51. > :09:55.that Al-Megrahi was being released. I think if I was Alex Salmond I

:09:56. > :10:00.would feel proud to be worthy of being bugged by the Americans. If

:10:01. > :10:06.the new, what I don't understand is what difference it made to any

:10:07. > :10:12.outcome, what is the point? Forewarned is forearmed but it seems

:10:13. > :10:17.to be a widespread practice? There's some wishful thinking with the idea

:10:18. > :10:23.that Alex Salmond is in the top 35 world leaders is ridiculous, but it

:10:24. > :10:31.is going to dominate issues in Europe for the week ahead. A

:10:32. > :10:42.brand-new MSP being sworn in on Thursday. What do you make of the

:10:43. > :10:48.Rectory in Baz Luhrmann? -- victory in Dunfermline. It is the second

:10:49. > :10:58.biggest majority Labour has in Hollywood now. They are undoubtedly

:10:59. > :11:01.had the best campaign. The first Minister himself took to the streets

:11:02. > :11:10.on the final day but they still lost heavily. There were special

:11:11. > :11:18.circumstances surrounding this and it is always difficult to read too

:11:19. > :11:22.much into a by-election. They always say you cannot draw a conclusion

:11:23. > :11:28.about the referendum from a by-election result but I imagine

:11:29. > :11:35.Grangemouth, not too far from Dunfermline, will have had in impact

:11:36. > :11:43.on how people voted that day. The interesting impact for me was the

:11:44. > :11:53.growth of UKIP. That causes me some pause for reflection. They got twice

:11:54. > :11:57.as many votes as the Greens got. UKIP are not the political force in

:11:58. > :12:03.Scotland as in England but they will dominate the agenda down south and

:12:04. > :12:09.they could scrape in with an MEP in Scotland. They are on course to save

:12:10. > :12:14.their deposit sometimes. The Liberal Democrat vote went down

:12:15. > :12:20.substantially. It does not look as if there's any resurgence for them

:12:21. > :12:26.any soon? They are going nowhere and Willie Rennie was very popular in

:12:27. > :12:34.that area but it did not translate into votes. That seems to be the

:12:35. > :12:44.picture, that people are still unhappy about being in coalition? I

:12:45. > :12:47.think very much so, across Scotland, it is anecdotal that people who

:12:48. > :12:52.voted Liberal Democrat are feeling pretty much betrayed.

:12:53. > :12:59.What about the Conservatives? They will point to the vote going up by

:13:00. > :13:04.1% with the turnout of 42%, which is not very many votes. Is there any

:13:05. > :13:11.sign they are doing anything other than flat-lining? Ruth Davidson is

:13:12. > :13:18.doing a decent job but they are going nowhere and are continuing.

:13:19. > :13:22.Success for higher will be doubling the seats and going from one to two

:13:23. > :13:29.but anything other than that will be a disaster. Do either of you get any

:13:30. > :13:38.sense about what this can tell us about the referendum? It will be a

:13:39. > :13:42.clash between the Scottish Titans. Although Labour are saying this was

:13:43. > :13:48.partly a rejection of independence, it did not feel like that. The SNP,

:13:49. > :13:55.who have a formidable election machine, they knew not to discuss

:13:56. > :13:59.that. They talked about local schools which is a massive issue in

:14:00. > :14:02.Dunfermline. They could have done a lot better.

:14:03. > :14:09.Thank you to you both. That's all from us - I'll be back at the usual

:14:10. > :14:14.time next week. Just before we go, a reminder of Newsnight Scotland's

:14:15. > :14:16.special debate tomorrow with a look at higher education in the context

:14:17. > :14:19.of the referendum. Goodbye.