13/04/2014 Sunday Politics Scotland

To Aternoon, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

As MPs head off for their Easter break, campaigning for the European

elections in six weeks' time gets underway.

In a Sunday Politics special, we'll debate the issues at stake on May

22nd with senior party figures from the Conservatives, Labour, Liberal

Democrats and UKIP. Glasgow 2014 has announced that it

will not demolish the Red Road flats live at the opening ceremony.

And our vote for Scotland, not the SNP. Alex Salmond's last conference

speech before the referendum. Here in the studio we have Syed

Kamall, leader of the Conservatives in the European Parliament, Richard

Howitt, chair of the Labour group of MEPs, Sarah Ludford, deputy leader

of the Lib Dems in Europe, and Patrick O'Flynn, UKIP's director of

communications. Welcome to you all. In a moment, all four will give us

their opening pitch for the elections. A little earlier they

drew lots to decide who'll go first. And that privilege goes to Syed.

Before that, though, here's a quick reminder of what all the fuss is

about. The vote to choose members of the

European Parliament takes place on Thursday the 22nd of May. The same

day as local elections are held in England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends 73 England and Northern Ireland. The UK

sends NTP is to Brussels. And the vote is a form of proportional

representation. In total, there are 751 MEPs from the 28 member states.

What do they do all day? The European Parliament's power has

grown. A vet of the EU commissioners and they can amend, approve or

grown. A vet of the EU commissioners reject nearly all EU legislation and

the EU budget. Some laws MEPs have been responsible for include price

caps on mobile phone chargers, banking regulation and cover food

regulation two -- labelling. Syed Kamall, you have 30 seconds.

Europe cannot go on as it is. Europe needs to change. And our

relationship with Europe needs to change. Only the Conservatives have

a plan to deliver that change and of the British people and in-out

referendum. Labour and the Lib Dems will not and UKIP simply cannot.

Only the Conservatives will offer the three yards, with Conservative

MEPs working alongside a conservative Prime Minister. For,

really is and above all a referendum. Sarah Ludford is next.

Your choice is simple. If you think Britain is better off in Europe,

vote for the Liberal Democrats. The Lib Dems are the only party of Ian,

fighting to keep Britain in Europe and in work. There is nothing

patriotic about UKIP's desire to pull-out. That is playing Russian

roulette with Britain's economy and jobs. The Conservatives are flirting

with exit and Labour lacks the courage to speak up. Thought Liberal

Democrat on May the 22nd to say in Europe for jobs and security. Sarah

Ludford. Next, Richard Howitt from Labour. The European elections are

about who represents you. They are not a referendum on a referendum.

Labour MEPs believe in putting jobs and growth first. A guarantee to

help young people into work, reforming energy markets so that

bills are brought down for good. Labour believes in reform in Europe,

but within. It is David Cameron who is risking your job and Britain's

prosperity because of divisions in his own party. Labour MEPs put

British interests first. Our fourth opening statement from Patrick

O'Flynn. The EU is old hat. It is a declining regional trade bloc in an

era of global trade. It is a 20th-century political project

designed to prevent conflict in Europe that is now reawakening old

hostilities. It is an attempt to force on the European people

European this as their primary collective identity. It has hollowed

out British democracy and now we do not even control our own borders.

That is why you should vote UKIP. That is the opening statements.

Let's get on with the debate. Why should people vote in the

selections? If you vote UKIP, we can deliver an earthquake that will rock

the foundations of British politics and the European political class. We

can send a signal to Europe that Britain has had enough, that Britain

wants to retain its nation state status and regain political power

and the ability to forge trading deals across the world. Britain

leading Europe to freedom twice in the last century through bloodshed.

We feel that a UKIP win in those elections could help Britain set an

example to lead European nation states back to free assembly again.

Syed Kamall, isn't it the case that many Tory voters will vote you clip

to keep you honest, to keep your feet to the fire? Whatever you think

of the European Parliament or the EU, the fact is that the European

Parliament as equal power with the 28 governments of the EU. When David

Cameron delivered the first cut to the EU budget, the first ever cut,

he needed a strong team of Conservative MEPs working alongside

him. But many of your supporters will vote for UKIP for the reasons I

gave. Many will vote Liberal Democrat. Not very many. Many of our

supporters will vote for us because we are the only party trying to

change the EU and offer reform. We have offered renegotiation and a

referendum. And how would you vote in such a referendum? We have no

idea whether he would vote yes or no. Let him answer. I will answer

that question. If the EU continues on this road, towards a United

States of Europe, and if there was no change at the time of the

referendum, then I would probably vote to leave. You have no

confidence in David Cameron? We Javier Culson opportunity to read

negotiate our relationship with Europe and the Conservatives are at

the forefront of that agenda. David Cameron have not given a list of

demands. He said that if things do not change, he will probably vote to

leave, is that right? If at the time of the referendum, things had not

changed, I would vote to leave and we have a golden opportunity to

perform the agenda. Richard, the last time the British people had a

say on this was over 40 years ago. Under a Labour government. Which was

deeply divided on the issue. And that was a say on the common market.

Today's EU is a very different animal from the common market. Why

can we not, under another Labour government, have another vote? First

of all, we want it to be more than a free trading area. We make no

apologies about that. But in the elections because this is half of

Britain's exports and investment. If you care about your job and

business, you cannot hear from the party of government that they

probably want you to leave because the CBI, the engineering employees

in Federation and the chimp of commerce, 80% of them say it is

necessary to stay in. So why not give us a vote? When David Cameron

says he wants to repatriate social powers, he means takeaway maternity

rights and holidays. If the case is so strong, why not give us an in-out

vote? David Miliband has said that there will be a referendum if there

was a proposal to change powers. Why wait? This is based on a series of

reforms. Labour has a set of reforms. David Cameron is silent

about what they would be. That is because he knows that if he put them

forward, they would either be unsatisfactory to his Eurosceptic

backbenchers and he would be out of a job, or they would be unacceptable

to European leaders. Why is your leader missing in action? Ed

Miliband is unable to say even the positive things that you are saying.

He has run away from the argument. He actually said there would not be

a referendum in his time. For a conservative to say they will

have a referendum but not give the reforms, it is a mistake. Nick Clegg

gave Nigel Farage a huge opportunity in that debate. He said that the

Eurosceptic view was to leave Britain like Billy no mates. I can

say that he is the best qualified person to say that. Sarah Ludford,

you have said that lots of people are going to vote Lib Dem but that

is not what the polls are saying. You are 7% in two polls this

morning. Eclectic's decision to champion Europe has been a disaster

for you. You face wet out. We swayed a lot of people our way with Nick

Clegg's debate. Where is the evidence? We are the only party that

is completely united, saying that we are wanting to stay in. It is

essential because formally and jobs are supported by our trade with the

EU. Linked to the EU. We are finding a lot of moderate conservative

voters are actually fed up with the Tories being split and divided all

over the place. Syed Kamall saying that we might vote in rout. -- in or

out. We are consistent. A poll in London showed that 18% would vote

for us. I am delighted about that. London is not the whole country, it

may surprise you. We need to move on to immigration, an important issue.

We are a member of the EU and the rules say that with a few caveats,

our fellow EU citizens are free to come here if they want. Why can we

not just accept that? Britain has a proud record when it comes to

immigration. We have been open to people across the world for

centuries. But we welcome people who come to our country to contribute to

pay taxes and two wards are a society positively. But there are

three real concerns that we have to address. The first one is numbers,

and secondly people who may come here not to work but for benefits,

and thirdly, getting a hang of the numbers. I think it is shameful that

only this week the office for National said that they did not

collect sufficient figures under a Labour government. 350,000 extra

people came in and they did not count the numbers. That is the size

of a city like Cardiff. That is shameful. 350,000 came from all over

the place. Do you accept the free movement of peoples within the EU? I

accept and am open to people who want to come here and contribute. In

the same way... Do you accept the free movement of peoples within the

EU? In our manifesto, we have said it is an issue for reform. We have

to make sure that people are coming here to work and contribute

positively, not simply to come here and take advantage of the system. I

will tell you what else is shameful. What is shameful is David

Cameron making a pledge to the British people on an issue that they

really care about, to bring net immigration down to the tens of

thousands a year, having no means of fulfilling that pledge. And we see

now it is back up to 212,000 a year because we have no volume control

and no quality control from immigration from our neighbours. And

that is a disgrace. How could UKIP address that issue? Because we would

leave the EU. How? Tell me how. You do not have a single member of

Parliament. He will not get a single member of Parliament. How are

you... ? TUC are hoping to get an MEP. What do you say? -- he is here

today hoping to get an MEP. All of -- almost 2 million Brits live and

work in the rest of the EU. Is that worth having? The majority are

wealthy, retired people. Why do not object to bilateral agreements with

countries with similar living standards to us. France, the

Netherlands, that works fine. But these three people want Turkey to

join the EU, 75 Na Li and people running our country, only 10% of

which... Syed Kamall is Michael year to say whether they are in favour of

free movement for work, not for benefits... That is what I'm

saying. You said you were unable to be clear. That leaves 2 million

British people absolutely unsure as to whether they would have a right

to continue to live in other countries. It is a two-way street.

You are putting those people in a state of uncertainty. EU migrants

have been good for the British economy and contribute far more than

they take out in services and benefits. One in seven businesses

were founded in -- by migrants. And they cannot just turn up and claim

benefits. The coalition government has legislated to make sure that

they cannot claim for three months. They will not be able to claim for

more than six months. Richard Howitt, Jack Straw said it was "A

spectacular mistake for Labour to allow EU migrants from Poland and

Hungary to work in the UK from 2004." Why should we trust a party

that makes spectacular mistakes and hasn't apologised for it? We accept

it is a mistake and I apologise. We make a firm commitment for new EU

states we will put down transitional controls. When I listen to the

Conservatives and UKIP trying to re-write history, saying immigration

was out of control, uncontrolled, open door, we hear it over and over

again. It is not true. Anyone who was around at the time... Come on,

Richard. Hold on, you undercounted by 350,000. You were letting 2

million in over the years, an under-counted by 350,000 people you

didn't know came in. You should have tightened the benefit rules. The

Conservative MEP today has, in four years in government in Britain, is

trying it blame the previous Labour Government over the fact they won't

count people in or people out. Yvette Cooper - it is not easy for

people to come to the country and benefits are changing, changing the

habitual residence test and we are going to say that migrants can't

come and claim child benefit if their children are outside the

country. Labour a has shown they have listened to concerns but we say

it is a stronger, better, country because it is diverse and

multicultural snoo.d this is fantasy politics from all the Peters. They

are committed to a system with no volume control and no quality

control. You talk about benefits as if it is only out of work benefits.

In work benefits cost a lot of money for the British taxpayer. Big

businesses bring in minimum wage workers. It is ?5,000 per perschool

place What are you going to do? Have all the pensioners come back to

Britain? How will will you fund the health care? Do you really think

Spain and pour tu ghal their current situation, are going to turn their

backs on British property owners with wealth? -- Portugal. They might

not wanting pensioners to use their health service. Pensioners often

come back to Britain to use the health service. You have shown it

represents wealthy people's interests. A second Conservative

Party. Hang on a minute... Blue collar wages were down. They want it

character for the National Health Service, have cuts that go farther

and comprehensive education. This is a debate on the wider politics

between Conservatives and UKIP and Labour will... You can't both talk

time. UKIP - they haven't thought it through, thousand they will have

trade access in the EU, hasn't thought how they will have trade

deals that the Liberal Democrats support, like with the United

States: Would you have a cap on non-EU immigrants? We are not in

favour of a cap. No cap on either. No. Well it is a target. It is a

moving feast, as it were. Would you have a limit on non-EU limits? We

have limits on quality. We have people who are skilled migrants

coming in. Lip its? . By quality, not by quantity. -- Limits.

How do you do that? We need to move on to foreign affairs.

Should we pool more sovereignty to give the European Union more clout

in foreign and defence matters? I'm Labour's defence and foreign affairs

spokesperson. No we don't need to pull more powers into Europe. As we

undertake this live debate there are guns being fired in Ukraine as we

speak. Europe is facing, for the first time, since the end of the

Second World War, Armies crossing national borders and floatening

peace. Doesn't it -- threatening peace. Doesn't it need to come

together of the We don't need more powers. We need political will. With

Vladimir Putin, in my view, he has -- we have fallen short in the

sanctions. But it is Europe, not Britain. Remember Putin calling

Britain little England a small island with no influence. Labour

doesn't agree with that. But if that's the mindset that allows

someone like Vladimir Putin to send troops across borders threatening

peace, it is worrying. And when we have, in UKIP a party that say they

admire Putin and support his policies, that is no recipe for how

Europe should be wrong. I was waiting for that. Let me ask him. We

don't admire Putin as a leader... Oh. No we don't. What Nigel Farage

said, was he admired him as a political operator. Testifies

Franklin D Roosevelt who said a good foreign policy was speaking softly

but carrying a big stick. The EU shouts its mouthed off while

carrying a matchstick. It is fantasy that you wiebl it stand up to Putin

over the Ukraine. -- that you would be able to stand up. Do you admire

what Putin is doing in the Ukraine? No. What matters in foreign policy

is the outcould. We have a terrible outcome in the Ukraine, like Syria,

and Georgia... What would UKIP do? What u skip would do, would be to

keep our people safe -- UKIP. How? And not commit our Foreign

Office and troops Foreign wars. Patrick O'Flynn. You brought up this

issue of foreign wars. Now Nigel Farage said in previous debates that

Britain should leave the EU because, "We have had enough of endless

foreign wars." Which wars has the EU taken us into? The EU has ban very

important factor in the push towards trying to get military intervention

in Syria, for example. What wars has the etch U taken us into it -- EU.

Fortunately the EU doesn't have its own army yet. It has wanted to sign

up to an expansionist agenda. Did it want Iraq? No, that was Labour. UKIP

opposed Iraq, so did most of the mainline Europeans. Germany was

against Syria and Libya. No EU policy. We had an Anglo French deal

on Syria. A by lateral deal. A European dimension. No, buy lateral.

We have a European Union that wants to expand ever-more into other

people's spheres of influence. If we are going to stand up to what Putin

is do, which obviously Nigel Farage has no intentions of doing, you have

to get your act together on economic sanctions and diplomatic force and

in trade matters, in supporting eastern European countries. Sayeria,

who and whose army? And NATO and working transatlanticically, is

important through NATO. I will come to you in a moment. Nick Clegg said

that the idea of an EU Army was, "A dangerous fantasy that is simply not

true ""Why then, are we already working on etch U-owned and

controlled drones -- EU-owned and the President of the European

Parliament has said that the majority of MEPs want the EU to have

"deployable troops." He is not speaking for me or Liberal

Democrats. The EU does not and will not have an army. Our defence is

mainly shaped through NATO. He is President of the Parliament What we

must do is to get equipment which can operate together. We waste an

awful lot of our spending in Europe because we duplicate equipment. We

don't get the bang for our bucks that we should. It is a useful role

for the EU, to get equipment working together. That doesn't make sense.

You say military equipment, a NATO job. No, the EU, there is a kind of

dimension of the EU members of NATO, in working together on a common

quument o o so they can talk to each other -- on common equipment, so

they can talk to each other. The EU has a role but not an army. So a

European defence agency, that helps our defence industries and those

jobs are extremely important and would be threatened if the

Conservatives and UKIP took us out of Europe but it is 100 years since

the start of the fist world war. Remember that Europe was set up to

try to get a secure peace within Europe T succeeded. Now look on

Ukraine but also on the southern borders to the Arab Spring countries

in North Africa. It is more important than ever that we work to

keep keep peace and stability on our borders. Can I say to Syed and the

Conservative MEPs. You talk about the three Rs, I have a fourth,

retreat. If you take us out of the European Union, it will be the worse

retreat by Britain since Gallipoli. Let him answer If he wants answers

-- the British Parliament is the right place with a British Foreign

Secretary to decide our foreign policy. You say that, but can I

quote David Cameron, this is germain to what you are saying, David

Cameron said "There is no doubt that we are more powerful than

Washington, Beijing and Delhi, because we are a powerful player in

the European Union." Do you agree? He is saying that there are times

when it comes to international foreign affairs when you have to

cooperate with partners. Often they are EU partners but often they are

not. The problem we have... Washington have made it very clear

that it wants Britain to talk through Brussels. No, not at all.

Talk through the French and Italians, come on, wake up? Through

the EU collective. I'm vice chair of the EU delegation. I hear it from

the American counterparts. They want the EU to get itself together and

not least on Ukraine. Why should our sovereignty be at the behest of... ?

I want to hear from Syed calm amplgts the British Parliament is

the right place to decide our foreign poll sinchts sometimes we

work with our European partners, sometimes we work with our

non-European partners. It is our choice to pull sovereign trito work

together. G, we move on to our foirt area. We hear a lot in this country

about MPs expenses. Snted the real scan dalt MEPs gravy train. -- isn't

the real scandal, the MEPs gravy train? You all have your snouts? The

trough? I don't think so. There is transpancy. The way we use our

expenses is online and anyone can ask to examine those. We have

actually voted to reform MEPs' allowances. We regularly vote but

unfortunately the majority in Parliament don't. Have you voted to

cut them? Yes. By how much? About 5%. A 5% We hoped to have economies

I never fly except across the Atlantic. Difficult to do it any

other way. I didn't swim. But we voted for economy flutes. We

voted for European Parliament policy of transparency which other groups

haven't. UKIP don't turn up to vote. They don't earn their salaries.

Dhoent do anything. They should hand their salaries and allowances back.

You can't ause UKIP of being on the gravy train and the other that we

don't claim our attendance allowance because our MEPs are not there. Your

attendance allowance is if you are there, you are saying we don't turn

up You are in the building and claim the allowances. You are not an MEP,

UKIP are so ashamed of what their MEPs have done in Brussels, they

didn't field a sitting MEP for today's debate. I think each party

decides who it wishes to field. I have the honour of being the UKIP

representative. I would say by going in the past few weeks, xeeming to me

saying - we are sick of the others. -- people saying to me. : We are

quite excited. Can I ask Patrick O'Flynn. He says he touched a chord

and his party is strong in the polls today, between 18% and 20%. Haven't

you also struck a chord with hip crasscy. Two of your MEPs were

jailed for expenses and benefits' fraud. Two more asked to pay back

?37,000 for using European funds. Nigel Farage has boosted about

getting ?2 million in expenses and he went on to employ his wife as a

secretarial allowance after telling other members not to People who do

wrong and break the law, go to ja. I have no time. -- go to jail. People

who spend money they are not entitled to should pay it back and

that's right. But what UKIP does and the good UKIP MEPs do, is use the

allowances they are given to pursue the political agenda they put up

when elected which is to get Britain out of this superstate. Instead of

using it for parliamentary work. Very interesting. Richard Howitt. We

were the first British political party to have independent audits of

our MEPs' expenses, from 1990, way before the expenses crisis blew up.

The Maria Miller scandal has of course hit David Cameron and the

Conservative Party hard as it should do. But you are right, even in my

own region you have UKIP candidates and councillors who have been

charged with fraudulently filling out election papers and other shot

lifting. Another independent inquiry found he made racist comments. We

had a European candidate last week in Hertfordshire who got a parking

ticket from the police and called the police fascists. These people

aren't here. I'll let you have a quick reply. We

can bring up parochial cases. Let him answer. Not so long ago a

Liberal Democrat councillor was sent down for firebombing, I don't say

they are a bunch of arsonists, but now I think, Nick Clegg might have

burnt some cactuses, once. I'm glad you pronounced that word carefully.

Syed Kemal, the EU's auditors, they are strongly critical of the EU's

financials saying "Errors permist in all main spending areas", the

financials are poorly managed. It is a shambles And that's something that

all parties agree on. As we agree on expenses, the British parties are at

the forefront of transpancy. Every year when we vote for the discharge

of the budget, the Conservatives also vote for it but we don't get

enough MEPs from other countries to investigate in favour. The Liberal

Democrats have put forward to make each Finance Minister, George

Osborne and his counterpart to sign a declaration to say all EU money is

properly spent in my country. Funnily enough they don't want to do

that but I look forward to you confirming that George Osborne will

sign it. All the time we hear it is about the money we pay in, about

?150 per family per year. What about the money that comes back? ?1. 5

billion that comes to Britain's regions because of being in Europe.

I myself helped to negotiate a fund to help Britain's food banks to

ensure so. Poorest and most destitute people... Isn't it our

money that went there first. Can I tell you the Conservative-led

Government have blocked us from claiming that money. If you want to

have the clearest choice at these European elections, it is between...

Tell us why. It affects our rebate. Tony Blair gave away our rebate. He

is quite right. Lib Dems fought to make sure that we apply for money to

help with flooding. That is what the Tories were blocking. If you want

the clearest example at the European elections, the Conservative Party

and MEPs blocked the cap on bankers bonuses, and then blocked a Labour

victory to get money for free banks. We need to move on to the

future. It is important and people are watching. The EU's Justice

Minister says that we need to build a United States of Europe with the

commission as its government. Is she right? Not at all. But the future,

if we take the next ten years, thinks about climate change and the

fact that we are not going to hit of the two degrees target. Europe has

led and needs to lead towards getting a new sustainable world. It

is the political will to use these powers, so she is wrong. It is about

the threats from abroad. Labour reforms like getting a commissioner

for growth and rebalancing the budget, reforming the common

agricultural policy, all of those things will need to happen to make

Europe more democratic and open. But against the rise of Brazil and

China... We do not need more treaties and powers. We need more

action with more Labour MEPs. Sarah Ludford, you would sign up to that?

No. Unless they do not think that should concentrate on institutional

matters. What we need to do is concentrate on making Europe

progrowth and competitive and create more jobs in a competitive world. We

need more trade deals to open up our exports, we need to streamline the

EU. We need More powers for Brussels or not? I

think the balance is about right. In some areas, we would like to see it

slimmed down a bit. I'm not sure whether the EU should be... I think

the EU should concentrate on their big challenges like climate change

and the economy, a pollution, catching criminals. If we fritter

away at political capital on interfering on national matters, we

do not have the support. Would you still want to join the euro? We want

the Eurozone to be... Which you want to join the euro one day? If it

suits the British economy. Now is not the time. The idea in principle

of a single currency has advantages. We are not ruling it out for ever.

What would our relationship with Europe in the future if UKIP cots is

way and we left? We would be trading partners with Europe. Would we be

Norway? We would be in a stronger position than Norway. Our biggest

exports are services and they would not have to agree to free trade in

services. They still haven't and we are inside the EU. Let me read you

something. There would be a free trade agreement in place the day

after our exit. Germany would demand not less. That was Digby Jones who

said that. He is talking about goods, not services. You have to

accept all the EU rules without having any say. Let me give you

another one. No, no. Is it not looking forward, Mission impossible

for David Cameron to get anything like the repatriations of powers

that would satisfy you? My father was a bus driver. The only reason I

am here today is because he told me you can achieve anything you want if

you work hard. He also told be not to listen to doubters. If people

tell you something cannot be done, it is a sign of their limitations,

not yours. They said that we could not veto a new EU treaty, we did it.

Overall, we are paying more into the European budget. People say we

cannot achieve reform, but we have given the examples of it. Britain

was an open country looking outward into the world. What the

Conservatives now, trapped by their backbenchers, they are looking

inwards, allowing the rise of UKIP. We are going to have to stop now.

Thank you for a spirited debate. Just gone three o'clock. You're

watching Sunday politics. We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland to

leave us now for Sunday Politics Scotland.

Good afternoon and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up on the

programme. In the last hour, Glasgow 2014 has cancelled plans for the

live demolition of the Red Road flats during the opening ceremony of

the Commonwealth Games. A vote for Scotland, not for the

SNP. Alex Salmond reaches out to disaffected Labour voters in his

message to the final party conference before the

a yes vote in September is not a vote for an SNP government in 2016.

It is our vote for a government in Scotland that the people in Scotland

have chosen. Good afternoon. Within the last

hour, it's been confirmed that controversial plans to demolish five

blocks of flats on Glasgow's Red Road, as part of the Commonwealth

Games opening ceremony, have been scrapped. The Chief Executive of

Glasgow 2014 said the decision had been made on the basis of concerns

about safety and security. It comes after a petition to halt the plans

collected over 17,000 signatures. Joining me now from the newsroom is

our Commonwealth Games correspondent, Chris McLaughlin.

In the past hour, we have had this news and a statement from the chief

executive of Glasgow 2014 seeing that the absolute priority was

safety and this event would only happen if it was safe to do so. He

says, it has become clear that opinions have been expressed which

have changed the safety and security context. The demolition of the Red

Road flats will not know picture as part of the opening ceremony.

Glasgow City Council see the support the organising committee's

decision, public safety is paramount. Glasgow Housing

Association has said, public safety is our priority. Demolition will be

rescheduled. Why wasn't there further consultation before this

announcement was made with the local residents, the people of Glasgow?

And why are Glasgow 2014 announcing this on the eve of a milestone to

moral of 100 days to go? News they would not have been looking to

release ahead of that milestone. This has universal support of those

behind the Commonwealth Games, including the Scottish government.

Is there any political reaction? The local Labour MSP has said that she

supports it and is glad the decision has been made. But this is just the

start of the furore surrounding this. Initially, people thought it

was strange, but possibly a stroke of genius. Others thought it was a

terrible idea. But now the question will be why was there no further

consultation before this announcement was made?

Joining me from our Dundee studio is former SSP MSP Carolyn Leckie who

began the public petition against the demoliton.

I am relieved and very pleased. I think it is great, a sensible

decision. I think everybody will be believed and this 17,000 people who

expressed their views the petition -- via the petition will be

relieved. I think because the organisers have changed their mind,

is superbly some kind of consensus has developed behind-the-scenes. --

presumably. I think it should be welcomed. It is an indication that

people powered can be effective and possibly highlights that, in

Scotland, we can look forward to a more pirates participitive

democracy. It seems as though this decision has been made on safety

grounds? I can understand that the games organisers would need to find

a reason for changing your mind without anyone being blamed. Is this

a face-saving exercise? I'm not worried about why they have changed

their mind, I am just glad they have changed their mind, they have

listened and responded. The explosion as part of the ceremony

will not go ahead. I just hope that the community of the Red Road flats,

present and past, are not forgotten about and some of the promises that

were made in the last week about regeneration, again, of an area in

Glasgow are followed through. The initial justification for this was

that the council were highlighting regeneration. They say, it remains

our intention to dedicate a part of the opening ceremony detail of the

social history of Glasgow. Is that something that you think is

important that unlike yes, I think it is. One of the issues that needs

to be discussed, full, -- though, is that regeneration can only work is

if there is regeneration of wealth in Glasgow. There have been various

attempts at regeneration of Glasgow, at that fundamental inequality has

not been addressed. Various housing projects are not going to succeed if

underlying poverty is not dealt with. The council would say that the

regeneration of the east end of Glasgow is part of Glasgow 2014, and

an important step towards that. Ultimately, these flats are going to

come down. Like previous demolitions, there will be a crowd

there to watch. What is the difference between that and

featuring as part of the opening ceremony? It was distasteful and

disrespectful to beam that is entertainment around the world.

Demolitions are conducted quietly because of previous safety issues.

It seems contradictory for them to then make a huge spectacle of the

demolition of the Red Road flats. Also, the issue of the families,

asylum seekers families, five flats are to be demolished, however, the

sixth block will remain standing with asylum seeker families in it.

Housing that the world has been told is unfit for human habitation. That

issue as to be addressed with a border agency.

We heard that tomorrow is a milestone, 100 days until the

opening ceremony. You think that the announcement today and the furore

over the demolition is going to overshadow what should have been an

important moment for the games organisers? I think it would have

overshadowed it if they had not changed their minds. I do not think

that anybody who signed this petition was seeing this as

something we wanted to win, just as something they wanted to stop from

happening. Hopefully, this announcement will mean that they can

do what ever publicity they want to do and it will not be overshadowed

as much as it would have been if they had not changed their minds. I

think it is a positive thing and I am really respectful of everybody

involved in the decision. Thank you for joining us.

Alex Salmond has appealed to disaffected Labour voters to support

a yes vote in September's referendum and then back what he says will be a

rejuvenated party at subsequent elections. It was part of the SNP

leader's pitch to those struggling to back his position on

independence. In his speech to the party faithful in Aberdeen, Mr

Salmond also tried to reach out to women, another group that so far

isn't wholeheartedly supporting his plans. He promoted two female

ministers into his cabinet and talked about delivering childcare

that would be the envy of the world. I'll speak to Alex Salmond shortly,

but first Glenn Campbell reports from Aberdeen.

The S is celebrating its 80th birthday. -- the SNP. And one

leading light turned 50 today. But for John Swinney, the big

celebration of his life will come in September if there is a yes vote. I

think we will win the referendum in September. Why are you so confident?

What we are seeing is a strengthening of the yes position, a

narrowing of the gap. We are still behind in the opinion polls and we

have to close that gap. This party still has much work to do to

persuade a majority of voters to go for independence. If they are to

finish over the winning line in September, the leadership knows that

it must persuade voters who do not normally back the SNP to say yes to

independence. That is what this weekend has been all about for the

SNP, trying to reach out to potential supporters in other

political tribes. For everyone out there with Labour in your heart, the

message is clear. Vote yes and reclaim the Labour Party.

The Nationalists reckon Labour supporters could be attracted to the

independence cause with the thought that it might end Conservative rule.

Those days will be gone for good. By appointing more women to Cabinet the

SNP is seeking to make independence more female friendly. The party

reckons its commitment to removing nuclear weapons from Scotland is

evil when. In less than six months' time if we bought yes we will not be

in the protest business any more. We will be in the removal business.

They aim to get rid of Trident by 2020. That timetable is not set in

stone. Everything will be discussed in the context of the negotiations

that would follow eight Yes vote. But White Paper on independence was

produced by the SNP in Government 80 years after the party was founded.

There have been many false dawns in the history of the SNP. But a

generation after Alex Salmond first to the leadership, the party is

counting down to a fault that could result in Scotland is becoming an

independent country. But what if the electorate sees no? The SNP are in a

strong position. If they get are 40% thought they have demonstrably moved

on the number of people supporting independence. There might be some

discontent around the fringes, but Alex Salmond as a unifying figure in

the party. I think he carries on. The birthday wish of the SNP this

weekend is a victory in September. Even if they do not the party is not

necessarily over for the Nationalists, however much they are

opponents may wish it so. I am now joined by the First

Minister Alex Salmond. Let me ask you about this decision

on the red Road flats. It was only a couple of weeks ago your Government

was supporting the idea. What is your reaction to the decision? It is

a sensible decision that will be widely welcomed. There are two

aspects. One is the safety aspect. Secondly there is a wider aspect.

The games are a unifying force for Glasgow and Scotland. We want all

aspects of the Commonwealth Games to bring Scotland's together. That is

in the minds of the organising committee as well. The decision is

sensible and should be supported. Carolyn Leckie told us that she

thought the issue of security was a face-saving exercise. I heard the

interview and Carolyn Leckie seemed a lot more positive than the BBC

about the decision. I thought she responded very gracefully to the

decision. The decision has been made on sensible grounds. I do not think

that the safety issue is face-saving. It is very important.

There is also the point about unifying. We are 100 days from the

Commonwealth Games. We are about to have the greatest celebration of

sport that Scotland has ever seen. All we are writing about is one

aspect of the opening ceremony. If we had been in London we would have

spent 20 times as much and had no security. This is one of the few

games in recent history that is coming in on time and on budget.

Glasgow is already blessed with some fantastic facilities. Gets behind

the Commonwealth Games like everyone else and let us enjoy the occasion.

I want to ask you about the speech you made yesterday.

You have brought more women into your cabinets. Six months from the

referendum, gnawing women are less likely to support eight Yes vote at

this stage, as this opportunistic? It is not. It is something we have

been pursuing for a large amount of time. It was indicated in the White

Paper. It is an important symbol. You have been in power for seven

years. With great respect and at its ministers in the SNP ministerial

team. The qualities belief and the pensioners believe for the first

time ever is a reserved responsibility. We are preparing for

better things. This is the right time. We are trying to set an

example. We are calling on company boards are right Scotland to have at

least 40% of women represented to shore the difference changes in

society as we mobilise the talent of women. The Government should lead by

example. Do you personally have a problem when it comes to drawing

support from one end? I do not think so. The SNP won a substantial

majority of women voters at the last election. An opinion poll last week

show the SNP were ahead amongst women voters for the Scottish

parliament. Why are so many not convinced about the idea of

independence? I was coming to that. It is not an issue about the SNP.

Some people see that women are risk averse. I do not agree with that. It

is more risk we are. People want to see substantive reasons for making

the change to independence. Therefore they guess campaign, and

the accent we are putting on childcare, will be meaningful to

families. -- therefore the Yes campaign. We have got work to do. We

are prepared to do that work. Let me ask you about childcare. You talked

about childcare being the envy of the world. But no modelling was done

to assess whether 104,000 women could be drawn into the workforce.

Where did that figure come from? The 104,000 figure is if there is a 6%

increase in participation of women in the workforce. The impact of

having a transformation in childcare is to allow far more women to come

into the workforce. But not 140,000. That is the problem. It is not a

problem at all. Female participation in Sweden is 6% higher. It is

reasonable to say that the reason for that is the extraordinary

availability of childcare in Sweden which unfortunately we do not have

in Scotland at the present moment. It is reasonable to argue that if

you can produce that childcare in Scotland woman will be able to

participate in the Scottish workforce.

But it is the figures that are Big Issue. There are only 64,000 women

in Scotland with children under the age of five who are economically

inactive. You cannot use that figure of 104,000. It is not for one year.

This is a rolling figure. When would you reach 104,000? I am trying to

explain that. This is not a figure for one year. This is a cumulative

figure. Men's participation in the workforce is 76%. Woman's

participation is 70%. We should have the same participation of women in

the workforce as we have men. Allow me to finish. That is where the

figures come from. In the last year 65,000 more women have become

employed in Scotland. If we can produce 65,001 year RUC loosely

arguing we cannot get to 100,000 over a five-year period? This

transformation in childcare is important to the future of Scotland.

But the figures seen at a cost of ?1.2 billion would be needed to put

this policy into action. You are seeing that the figures would reason

700 million. How much would the policy cost? That is the additional

cost over the five years, step-by-step. It will cost as an

additional 700 million. The figure of quarter of a billion is being put

in over the next two years. There is not a serious question about that

part of the figures. There is substantial evidence coming into the

Scottish Parliament committees. We are embarking upon improvement of

childcare. The reason it is affordable and independence and not

under devolution is that it releases all of the economic growth and

taxation games when you control your own revenues. That is what makes

childcare affordable and Sweden. That is what will make it affordable

and Scotland. We can unleash that mobilisation of woman's talent and

ability in the workforce as well as fundamentally transforming life

prospects of children. This is one of the arguments for taking control

of our revenues. You said you agree with many of the

Labour party policies. Therefore Labour supporters can support you in

the devolved elections and you can enact the policies that you see

Labour are neglecting such as three descriptions. They do not need

constitutional upheaval for that. To defend some of the social Democratic

gains many people have chosen to vote for the SNP. But there are many

other issues that require independence. To abolish nuclear

weapons. To not participate in illegal wars. To stop the assault on

the pure and disabled in Scotland. These are all things that you need

independence for. That seems to me a compelling argument. If people

thought there was going to be another Conservative Government the

surge in support for independence would be even greater.

You're watching Sunday Politics Scotland. Let's go to the news with

Andrew Kerr. Good afternoon. As you've been

hearing, the demolition of the Red Road flats as part of the Glasgow

2014 Commonwealth Games opening ceremony has been cancelled. The

Chief Executive David Grevemberg said safety and security concerns

had been expressed which led to a change of heart. The live demolition

had been widely criticised as crass and insensitive, with thousands

signing a petition against the plan. The pilots' Union BALPA has cold on

the Civil Aviation Authority not to back down on new safety improvements

to helicopters which fly offshore. It comes after industry body Oil and

Gas UK said the changes risk damaging safety. The new rules were

prompted by a review after four people died when a Super Puma

crashed off Shetland last year. BALPA say they don't want the

industry back-sliding. It just seems at the moment that oil and gas UK

are bringing this if the agenda forward and that will affect their

production. They are stated aim is safety. We think they should fully

support the view on this. Three men have been detained by

police in connection with the death of a man in Largs. William

McLachlan's body was discovered outside his home in Holehouse Road

yesterday morning. A 19-year-old and two 20-year-olds are now in custody.

Football and St Johnstone have booked their place in the Scottish

Cup semifinal with a 2-1 win over Aberdeen at Ibrox. The Dons had the

better of the first half but couldn't hold on, with Stevie May

scoring two goals for St Johnstone in the second half.

That's it. Back to Gary. A unifying feature of the SNP

conference has been the determination of the party to get

rid of nuclear weapons on the Clyde. John Swinney, Nicola Sturgeon and

Alex Salmond in turn reiterated that there would be no deal with

Westminster which allowed Trident to remain in Scotland in return for a

currency Union. Future defence arrangements is the subject of the

second in our series of referendum animations.

Right, gather round and pay attention. Today, we are going to

talk about tactics. That is some assault course. The question is what

kind of defence policy would Scotland have? All of Britain's

nuclear missiles are based on the River Clyde. We are not trying to

attack, they want to know what kind of military force Scotland would

want, and be entitled to. It says in this document, we would get rid of

nuclear reference. The idea is that they are unpopular and use --

unusable. There is nowhere to base them if they are not on the Clyde,

so the top brass in London will be determined to keep them here. The

next thing in the plan of attack would be, what would Scotland be

left with? Not much to protect the oil fields. Here is the SNP. Do they

plan to share something, plan and build something? What if they don't

want to share? And what will happen to the infantry? The idea seems to

be that you can choose if you want to be in the British forces or the

Scottish forces. So I can choose who I fight for? Something like that.

Can I fight for Brazil? We have a lot of coastline to defend, is this

wise? It says here we could join NATO. It has a defence pact, like if

one are attacked, all are attacked. I don't see it happening. What about

all the other jobs in defence, like in ship loading? We sell to the

Westminster governments now, so why not in the future. But why would

they want to buy from a foreign country? Does anyone know what

happens if Scotland votes now. It is as you were. Iraq, Afghanistan and

nuclear weapons, stuff we did not want in the first place. One of the

proudest and most respected fighting forces in the world. And we would

need our own intelligence forces. It's time to have a look at what's

been happening this week and at what's coming up in the week ahead.

I'm joined in the studio now by Murray Ritchie, former political

editor at the Herald, and Lindsay McIntosh, political correspondent

for the Times. Let's talk about the breaking news

about the Red Road flats, their demolition will not feature in the

opening ceremony, was this inevitable? Perhaps not inevitable,

but a sense of relief that this embarrassing row is out of the way.

I can remember in bed last Commonwealth Games in Edinburgh,

they ran out of money. I'm glad this has been resolved. It is a feather

in the cap of Carolyn Leckie. A lot of political reaction coming in.

Politicians saying it is a great thing, but a few weeks ago, they

were agreeing with the decision. There has been a lot of misjudgement

on how this would have gone down with the people of Glasgow. When

that reared up as it has done, politicians went OK and rolled back

from that position. Everyone is saying about health and safety now.

I think the organisers have been guided this week. The council and

the rest of them have lost their bottle, so a big row coming and

backed off. I was in favour of it at first. But somebody said, what would

people in Mumbai or Nairobi make of this? Nairobi has the biggest shanty

towers and Africa. People without homes. They bring out the best

athletes in the world. What would we make of Glasgow blowing up buildings

for fun? I began to think about these things and the more I thought

about it, the more I read of the idea.

Let's talk about the SNP conference. What did you make of the pitch from

Alex Salmond during his speech to Labour voters and women voters?

Fairly naked attempts to get both groups on site. The women issue

first, there are real problems with the childcare policy. I'm not

convinced that the wiki answered them in terms of the amount of women

who can actually get into employment even if they wanted to take that

step, and also in terms of the funding. I'm not sure how will that

will play with women. Secondly, the quarter policy has put in place, in

the Cabinet, the idea is that will be an aspirational policy for

private companies also, I don't know how well that will play with women.

Obviously gender equality in the workforce can only be a positive

thing, but is that the baby want to do it? If women are slow to be

convinced of the idea of independence, it is partly economic

concerns rather than the issues we have been talking about. The economy

is the most contentious issue in the campaign. He is right to try and get

women's votes, nothing wrong with that. But if you look back in the

campaign, the big issues, Europe and the economy, I think the SNP are

ahead on both of these. The economic argument fell apart when we found

that there would be a unified currency. This idea that one or two,

or three or four individuals can decide our currency, or decide not

to have a currency is nonsense. That is not a question for our

government, it is a question for Parliament. I think people have

recognised the yes campaign were right to challenge this refusal and

the whole thing has backfired on Westminster. What about their appeal

to disaffected Labour voters, we know that there are a lot because

many of them voted SNP at the last election? Blair Jenkins from the yes

campaign suggests that polls are seeing an independent Scotland would

be fairer than the position at the moment, but is that enough? It has

to be. The cause these 800,000 or so traditional Labour voters are vital

to both sides of the campaign. It is now down to Labour, really. If they

were watching Alex Salmond at the weekend making this overt appeal

directly to Labour voters, I think the party has to look at that and

think, what do we do now? What they need to do, as the Lib Dems have

cold for them to do, is get the big beasts out. What is your sense of

whether or not this notion of a rejuvenated Labour Party in an

independent Scotland might appeal to Labour voters? I think it is a good

idea. The Labour Party in Scotland never took to Tony Blair, they were

reluctant to embrace new Labour. I think Labour have got a problem in

Scotland. The yes campaign is really bouncing just now. All over the

country, there are meetings in pubs, clubs, town halls, villages, people

discussing the referendum and independence and it is all coming

from the yes campaign. I think I have that one leaflet through my

door from the no camp. The SNP... Before we go down that road, either

have to stop you. Thank you both for joining us.

That is all from us this week. We are off for the next two weeks for

the Easter break. Join us on Sunday the 4th of May at the usual time of

11am. Goodbye.