08/06/2014 Sunday Politics Scotland


Andrew Neil and Gary Robertson with the latest political news and debate, including an interview with Shadow Education Secretary Tristram Hunt.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 08/06/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Morning, folks and welcome to the Sunday Politics.


David Cameron slaps down two of his most senior cabinet ministers


over their public row about Islamist extremism in schools.


Michael Gove makes his apologies, but not to Theresa May - and it is


her special advisor that has to resign.


We will talk to the Shadow Education Secretary live.


Should this man become the next President of the EU Commission?


David Cameron has staked a lot on stopping Luxembourg federalist


Jean-Claude Juncker, but could the arch Europhile yet get the top job?


And we will find out why this political party is celebrating


with a pint down the pub and how their success may have cost UKIP


And coming up on Sunday Politics Scotland...


Former Labour cabinet minister John Reid makes his first speech


for the Better Together campaign. He will be on live, to tell us


why it has taken him so long to enter the debate.


who are always squabbling among themselves, Nick Watt, Polly Toynbee


and Janan Ganesh, who will be tweeting throughout the programme


This morning's political news is dominated


by the very public fall-out of Home Secretary Theresa May and


The high viz blue on blue spat between two senior


Conservatives centred around the Government's approach to tackling


The row burst into the open ahead of the publication tomorrow of


investigations into the so-called Trojan Horse plot in Birmingham,


where it is alleged several state schools have been covertly taken


Mr Gove told The Times last week he was concerned that the Home Office


was unwilling to tackle extremism at its roots.


He said a robust response was needed to drain the swamp.


In response, Mrs May's special advisor tweeted,


"why is the Department for Education wanting to blame other people


Lord knows what more they have overlooked on the subject of the


An angry David Cameron ordered a speedy inquiry.


Last night, Mr Gove apologised to the Prime Minister, while Ms May's


Speaking on the BBC earlier this morning,


this is what Foreign Secretary, William Hague, had to say.


There's been a disciplinary matter within the Government,


which the Prime Minister has dealt with in a very firm, clear way.


There will be discipline in the Government.


The main thing is the issue itself - tackling extremism in schools.


The Government will be very clear, very robust about anything that's


put children at risk - risk to their safety or learning.


Let's look at the positive of this. Theresa May 's people of saying she


has come off worse in theirs. Yelena Kushi is no more guilty than Michael


Gove he was guilty of indiscretion. She is no more guilty. Even during


13 years of new Labour 's psychodrama, I cannot remember an


act of hostility quite as naked as direct as publishing on a website


and intergovernmental letter. It suggests quite a lot of


conservatives do not think they will win next time. Why would there be a


leadership spat going on like this unless they thought there was a


vacancy? Inside the Cabinet, Theresa May is getting quite a bashing. In


the Sunday Times, someone has reported she is the date from hell.


She sidles up to people and is nakedly ambitious. I think that is


interesting. On the whole, nobody will understand the finesse


differences of opinion. It is not serious, it is not serious, it is


tactical. It'll be puzzling for most people and will probably fizzle out.


Has the Prime Minister slapped it down or will it rumble on? On the


politics of it, it will not fizzle out. What you have is Theresa May is


deadly serious about replacing David Cameron, not dislodging him but


replacing him if there is a vacancy. Michael Gove is deadly serious in


ensuring George Osborne succeeds David Cameron. It will be that


ongoing political rivalry. What is really interesting about this is the


Prime Minister is absolutely fed up with both of them. He is fed up with


Michael Gove full-size gearing of message. He had the row with Nick


Clegg and he had a row with Theresa May. He named Charles Barr and


criticised him in a lunch with the times. White brother he is the


Security adviser at the Home Office. -- he is the security advisor. He is


fed up with Theresa May for mounting an unannounced leader bid. What


separates Theresa May from Michael Gove on dealing with extremism? The


view from Michael Gove is that it shows no interest in Islamic


extremism until it manifests in violent form. Theresa May is


criticised for rolling back the programme which the previous Labour


government introduced to do with the previous Labour government


introduced to do with the Home Office has been made by other people


and made when the Home Office was not run by Theresa May but previous


home secretaries, even dating back to the Conservative government in


the 1990s. It is about the laxity of the Government. Michael Gove has


used extraordinary inflammatory language talking about draining the


swamp. I think Theresa May 's view is you can very easily inflamed


those emotions and create many more extremists the process. Michael Gove


would say that his approach is entirely consistent with the speech


the Prime Minister made to the Munich Security conference in 2011


when the Prime Minister talked about how extremists


warp the grape great religion of Islam. The Birmingham school system


is going to be one of the most reported systems in Europe.


Joining me now from Kent is Shadow Education Secretary Tristram Hunt.


Should parents of Birmingham children be worried that some of


their schools are in the grip of an Islamist takeover? I think parents


in Birmingham schools will be very disappointed by the political


infighting going on in the Government. The briefings, the


resignations, the apologies. The real apology that Michael Gove needs


to deliver it to the pupil -- the pupils and parents of Birmingham.


There was a potential threat of radicalisation. He fell to act for


four years. The Labour Party is asking, when did he know the fact


that radicalisation could have been taking place? What has been going on


for the last four years? What we in the Labour Party want to see if much


stronger systems of local oversight and accountability to situations


like this do not arise again. Is there, in your view, if some of the


Birmingham schools, an Islamist takeover? What we have seen in the


leaked Ofsted report so far is fears about cultural isolation and an


overconcentration on Islamic teaching within the curriculum. We


want young people to celebrate their cultural identity, celebrate


themselves as Muslims. We also want them to have an education which


makes them succeed in multicultural 21st-century Birmingham. We want to


be quite tough on moves towards gender segregation, a restricted


curriculum. Birmingham is a multicultural city. We need an


education system which celebrates that. What is wrong with gender


segregation? You went to an all boys school. Where you have gender


segregation, we have had a long tradition in Catholic schooling.


Where you have a state education system, which is about gender


equality between boys and girls, and there is an unofficial policy of


gender segregation, that is unacceptable. We should not be


tarring communities with the same brush in terms of radicalisation. We


do want to see a successful, multicultural education. Two years


ago, Ofsted rated Parkview as outstanding. Now it looks like


tomorrow it is going into special measures. What is it up to? I do


think there is an issue for Ofsted that you can go from outstanding to


inadequate so quickly. That is why we are asking for a new criteria to


be introduced to look at a broad and balanced curriculum. We have healthy


sex and relationship education. There is a real issue this morning


as the BBC has been reporting on the night for the Department of


as the BBC has been reporting on the Education. We are hearing that some


of those involved in the schools were not allowed to open a free


school on security grounds. They were allowed to allow one of the


schools to be taken over as an academy. We have a lack of oversight


and accountability in schools within Birmingham. What the Labour Party


wants is a local director of school standards to make sure we challenge


underperformance and make sure we get in confronting Islamic extremism


when it was in power? I was speaking to Hazel blears and she was very


clear about the prevent programme which they rolled out when in


office. A very atomised and fragmented school system where every


school is looked at from behind a desk in Whitehall and he put that


together and you do have an increased risk of chances of


radicalisation. You have attacked Mr Gove for gross negligence. Was it


the same -- you attacked Mr Gove for gross negligence. We are dealing


with a government which has been in since 2010. The Government needs to


hold the executive to account. We note the Department Michael Gove was


warned by a senior and respected head teacher about fears over


radicalism. What did he know and what did he act upon? We are hearing


more reports of conversations about fears, about radicalisation, taking


over some of the governing bodies of schools. We need to know what


ministers did. Let me continue. You mention the capital to prevent


strategy. Was it gross negligence for Labour to regularly consult a


man who once headed a group dedicated to making Britain an


Islamic state and wrote a book about schools full of Taliban style


decrees. I think the events in Birmingham are enormously


significant. About the nature of multiculturalism, the nature of


education, the role of civic education, the role of faith


schools. I will say to you this morning that Birmingham City


Council, Ofsted, the Labour Party, the Department for Education were


all involved in this conversation. In 2010, ministers were warned about


potential radicalisation of schools and they fell to act. We need to


know why, for years on, they allowed this situation to exacerbate. When


you look at the record of labour and this government 's record, there are


plenty of examples where both of you fail to act. Would it not be better


to drop the party politics and get together to confront this problem


for the sake of the children? There are a number of reports going on in


Birmingham. Some are led by the city council, some by the Department for


Education. Labour MPs this morning have come forward with the Bishop of


Birmingham talking about faith in schools. If you have a minister


failing to do their job, if you have a minister being given warnings in


2010 and failing to act on them for four years, the opposition has a


role to hold the executive to account. This is about the safety


and standards of teaching for pupils in Birmingham schools. It is about a


great education for these young people so they can succeed in a


modern, multicultural Britain. Do you agree with your Shadow Cabinet


colleague, Rachel Reeves, that Labour' as core voters are


abandoning the party? She was building on what Ed said the day


after the elections in Berwick. We have to make sure those communities


who we historically represent regard Labour as having a successful


message for them. I am passionate about making sure we have great


vocational and technical education, the great academic education in our


schools. If we have more work to do to get people to the polling


booths, we must do that. We must with listen to what she says.


David Cameron has staked a lot on stopping the former PM of Luxembourg


- named by one newspaper as 'the most dangerous man in Europe'


because of his federalist views - from becoming the next president


Mr Cameron has reportedly described Jean Claude Juncker as a 'face from


the 80s who cannot solve the problems of the next five years'.


But with the German Chancellor Angela Merkel publicly backing Mr


Juncker, it's not a dead cert that Mr Cameron can stop his appointment.


This is what he had to say at the G7 summit earlier this week:


It is important that we have people running the institutions of Europe


who understand the need for change and reform. I would argue that view


is widely shared amongst other heads of government and heads of state in


the European Union. I am clear what I want to achieve for Britain's


future, to secure Britain's placed in a reformed European Union and I


have a strategy for delivering that, a strategy for dealing with an


issue which I think if we walk away from it would see Britain drift


towards the exits. We've been joined from Berlin


by the German MEP Elmar Brok who is a senior figure in the EPP - that's


the party backing Mr Juncker. He's also Chairman of the Union


of European Federalists. And in our Newcastle newsroom is


the former Conservative MEP Martin Callanan who until last month led


the European Conservatives and Reformists group in Brussels.


Welcome to you both. The United Kingdom, Sweden, Hungary,


they don't want Mr Junker, the new Italian Prime Minister doesn't look


keen either, should he bow out gracefully? First of all, he wants


to have Mr Junker but he wants to have his conditions. Will he become


president of the European Council, a high representative? It is a


discussion to be had in the next three or four weeks until the


European Parliament can elect the president of the European Council


after the proposal of the European Council, which has to be done after


consultation with the Parliament in the light of the European elections


and by a majority vote. If not Mr Junker, then who? There are many


available candidates, I am not going to mention them in front of someone


so esteemed as Elmar Brok. Give us one name that you would prefer? The


prime Minister of Sweden, Christine Lagarde, the minister from


Lithuania, these are people who have a record of old reform. Junker is


the ultimate Europe insider. We need radical inform. We need to respond


to the message the electorate gave us in the elections -- radical


reform. Junker said he had to lie in public, he allowed the security


services to conduct a dirty tricks campaign against his opponent. This


is not who we want leading the European Commission. Elmar Brok,


since the European voters have sent a message to the parliament that


they are not happy with the status quo, why would you want a man who is


synonymous with the status quo? First of all what Martin has said is


wrong. He has not done tricks against his opponents. He was very


clear on that. He is also the man who was always for changes. He made


dramatic changes as head of the Euro group, came out of the economic


crisis which was a result of the financial crisis, made politics


possible, to stop this incredible financial sector influence of our


states. I believe he is a man who works on the programme which Mrs


Merkel and others have decided in Dublin, for the reform of the


European Union, less government. But we need Europe more and he is not a


man from the 80s. He is a man of this century and in this century he


made his own policy. He is the winner of the European elections, he


has a majority will stop Mrs LANguard is not running because she


knows she will not get the majority in the European Parliament. --


Christine Lagarde is not running. It is the Council of minister is that


decides. No, the European Parliament has the final word. The European


Council can make a proposal by majority in the light of the


European elections after consultation with the European


Parliament. The council cannot get a candidate against the will of the


European Parliament. Mr Junker has a majority in the European Parliament.


Theoretically he is right, the Parliament has do vote on the


candidates proposed by the council. I want to challenge the view that


somehow he won the European elections. There is no provision for


Jean Claude Junker to stand in the elections. He is saying that the EEP


party got the most number of seats in the Parliament but none of the


electorate knew they were taking part in this election. How many


people who voted Labour in the United Kingdom realised that their


vote would count towards a German socialist to be a candidate for the


commission of presidency is a nonsensical proposal. The elections


were 28 individual elections with hundreds of parties across Europe.


To try to claim there is a democratic mandate for somebody


nobody has heard from Luxembourg to take over the commission is a


nonsense. People should know him, if I should say that ironically.


Newspapers talking about members of the family of his wife with Nazi


links... What is the answer to Martin Callinan's point? I think it


is clear that British Conservatives have no candidate because they are


not a broad European family, they have not impacted on the selection


of top candidates but it is a form of isolation of the British Tory


Party. The Prime Minister said if Mr Junker is appointed it could lead to


Britain drifting towards the EU exit, is that credible? Is it


melodramatic? It is true that we want to renegotiate the


relationship. We want some serious reform in Europe so the people who


vote in a referendum will be able to vote to stay in if that is what they


want. We need a bold reformer, somebody prepared to engage. That is


not anti the interests of the UK. We need to recognise there is a problem


with public perception of the European Union. Elmar Brok is proud


to be one of the last bastions of federalism that that is not where


most of the public opinion is in Europe. I understand why he wants


his man installed but we need to take into account the message of the


letter -- the electorate. 25% of the publishing of France were prepared


to vote for an openly racist party. We can't just ignore the signal that


the electorate were sending us. If enthusiasm for federalism was at an


all-time low, it would be a slap in the face for the voters of Europe to


have a federalist as the president, would it not? 70, 80% of the members


of the European Parliament, selected by their people, are pro-Europeans.


These are the winners of the European elections. Even in France,


a majority of voters have voted pro-European and that should be


clear, not to make this a populist thing which is not only to do with


Europe. And we want to have a Europe which is strong, the member states


should do their things. We do not want to have a European centralism,


we do not want a European state. This is not at stake. Let's talk


about the question of better governance, let's talk about what


was wrong in the past, we have to become better, to change our


programme in that question. That should be the way we lead to come to


positive results. Thank you for that. Before we go, there is a


British commissioner that needs to be appointed to Brussels, do you


like the sound of that? These are matters for the Prime Minister, I am


sure he has many excellent candidates. Do you like the sound of


it? Like previous British commissioners, Chris Patten, Neil


clinic, I have just lost an election -- Neil Kinnock for the everybody


who is asked would serve, I'm sure. Just days ago UKIP were celebrating


topping the poll in the European They're claiming they'd have had two


more MEPs and the Greens two fewer had another


party not confused the electorate. What's more UKIP say it's


the fault of the body which was set up to oversee


elections - the Electoral Commission This is a party celebrating success


at the European elections. They didn't win a single MEP but


nationally polled 250,000 votes. They are an independence from


Europe, mostly people who were once in UKIP, and that is rather the


point. They may look like capers, drink like capers, sound like capers


-- -- sound like kippers, but they are not. The name and the logo were


displayed on this banner when the party launched its campaign. UKIP


suggest the look, the wording and the inclusion of UK in now confused


voters, and are looking at rewriting such a wrong. The way that seats are


allocated in a European election under a proportional representation


system is using this formula. It was invented by a Belgian mathematician


in 1878 and it is essentially this. When all of the votes have been


tallied up, the one with the most seats gets the first MEPC in a


region. The others are allocated using votes cast divided by the


number of seats gained plus one -- first MEP seat in a region. UKIP


were concerned with South West and London. There they say, when the


last MEP seats were being allocated, if everyone who had voted for an


independence from Europe had meant to vote for UKIP and you tallied


their votes up, and added them to UKIP, UKIP would have been up one in


each region and the greens would have lost them. Whether you can


prove that voters did that by mistake is a very different matter.


UKIP may have to just chalk it up to experience. It has happened before,


back in the European elections of 1994. Then in England under the


first past the post system. This man, Richard Huggett, decided to


stand as a little Democrat and polled a significant number of


votes. The Liberal Democrat candidate at the time is now an MP.


Many people voted and afterwards realised that they had bubbly voted


for -- probably voted for a little Democrat, not a Liberal Democrat as


they had been intending to do -- bubbly voted for a literal Democrat


-- probably voted. Mr Sanders got some consolation. In


1998, laws came into rule on so-called spoiler tactics and the


Electoral Commission was established. The Electoral


Commission are based on the seventh floor of this building and they did


look into this issue prior to voting. They have given us a


statement that reveals the conclusion they came to, part of


which says, we decided that the name of the party, and its description


are sufficiently different to those registered by the UK Independence


Party, UKIP, to mean, in our opinion, that voters were not likely


to be confused if they appeared on the same ballot paper. Pretty


conclusive stuff. Back at the pub, were an independence from Europe


just being crafty, or do UKIP need to wake up and smell the flowers? We


attack them in all areas. An independent study for Anglo


Netherlands because I was involved in the Dutch -- with the Dutch


member of Parliament and the description was UK Independence now,


nobody has a monopoly on the word independence. I have been fighting


for independence since I started in 1994, before I joined UKIP. The


party tell me they will stand again at the general election next year.


The ironies not lost on them or the major parties of UKIP complaining


that a smaller party has been taking votes of them.


Joining me now to discuss this story is Gawain Towler.


He's the UKIP candidate for the South West region, who failed to get


And in our Bristol studios is the victorious Green MEP for


How many of the 23,000 votes that were cast for the Independence party


were meant for you? Impossible to tell. I want to congratulate Molly


for getting elected. They are the breaks. I do not think there is a


purpose in complaining about boats that are cast. Do you think you


would have one otherwise? Yes, I do. You have to look at the


would have one otherwise? Yes, I do. You have to look boats for parties


people have not heard of and those with a long tradition that people


have heard of. I do not think there is any doubt. If you saw the spoiled


ballot papers, the amount of people who had voted at the top and the


bottom, most people are not anoraks, they say, they are the people I


want. They know what they are after. I think it is at least told. It is


said you owe your seat to And Independence Party. It is strange


for a man to say he could represent people in the south-west better than


me. There has been outpouring of delight that a Green MP has finally


been elected. A number of people have been saying they have been


voting all their lives and it is the first time they have elected


anybody. I am glad to represent them in a significant legislature. What


would you say to that? I find it strange. I am perfectly happy for


her to be elected. I feel the electoral commission has questions


to answer. But, congratulations to Molly. Why do you want an extra seat


for the Greens in the European Parliament but your national share


of the vote actually fell. We did come under pressure nationally. If


he is complaining about the role the election commission said we could


stand, the rule we were not happy with was the off, ruling which said


we were not a main party. We got significantly less media time and


that is why our belt actually fell. Not on the Daily Politics or the


that is why our belt actually fell. Sunday Politics, where you were well


represented. Was it a problem for UKIP in other parts of the country?


Only in London. What do you think happened there? Very much the same.


I do not think there is any doubt, the number of people we have had


getting in touch saying, I am really sorry, I made a mess, that they


voted for the wrong party. They are the breaks. Politics is politics.


What I would like to see and what is reasonable, and I hope Molly would


agree, there needs to be a reform - a serious reform of the Electoral


Commission. There is no appeal process. They say it is not


confusing. Lets see if she thinks that. I make it a policy never to


agree with UKIP. What is important to note, if you look at the votes


and the way the votes fell out and the seats fell out in the


south-west, it is difficult for an Electoral Commission to turn boats


into seats. UKIP got 33% of the vote and 33% of the seats.


right to complain about the amount of seats we have ended up with. So


you have complaints about the commission? Not about the commission


but I think we have to move towards a proportional system, especially in


the general election. We should be looking to have 30 or 40 seats in


the national legislator and we need to consider proportional


representation for National Election Council do you accept the ballot


paper may have a -- may have confused some people. Some people


may have been worried about the rights would move of UKIP and the


leadership of Nigel Farage and as a consequence he set up a separate


party. That is what happens in politics, especially when they are


led by demagogues, you see splitting and UKIP need to learn lessons from


that. Indeed we have seen splitting by the Greens in Brighton as well.


Do you have any legal redress to this? None. The legislation as it is


means there is no free dress. But we do feel, and I ask Molly, she says


she disagrees with everything, but it at the next election if this


party are called Google party, will she then complain if they are


excepted? There needs to be some level of appeal for electoral


commission decisions. Without that one wonders what is going on. We


have an organisation with enormous power and influence which was set up


to stop this sort of thing going on as the Liberal Democrats made clear.


It has failed in the Tower Hamlets and to have failed over postal


votes, it has failed over everything it is supposed to do. Let me go back


to the final point, should there be a right of appeal to the rulings of


the Electoral Commission? You need to have an authoritative body to


make decisions in this area and we have a commission. This is an


outbreak of soda loser from UKIP. I am delighted I will be able to


represent the people from the south-west. Should there be a right


of appeal as a matter of principle? I do not think you should have a


right of appeal, no. We will leave it there. You are watching Sunday


Politics, we are saying goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us for


Sunday Politics in Scotland. Good morning and welcome to


Sunday Politics Scotland. The former Home Secretary, Lord


Reid, tells a referendum meeting that the measure of your support


for Scotland is not waving the flag, but voting No in the country's best


interests. Acting smart - the technology


that will revolutionise service John Reid, the former Cabinet


minister and so-called Labour "big beast", has made his first


foray into the referendum debate. Speaking at a Better Together event


yesterday, he accused Nationalists of denying there were any risks


in voting yes to independence. In a moment, we will speak to him


live and ask why he has decided now Tony Blair's troubleshooter. The Man


Of Steel who is at the heart of government. Lord Reid is stepping


into the referendum campaign. He has given his first speech as part of


Better Together, refuting the suggestion that Scots are now are


less patriotic. Let us say clearly that no side in this campaign has a


monopoly on patches to them. I make that absolutely plain. -- on


patriotism. It would be helpful if the First Minister made that equally


plain because he is the First Minister of Scotland, not of the


Scottish nationalist party. Pro-Union campaigners welcome his


involvement. His refutation precedes them. Perhaps it was political skill


which gained him plaudits as Home Secretary and defence secretary.


However, political opponents arguing for a yes vote think he will not be


an asset. John Reid is was a risk when it comes to the SNP in Scottish


politics. He is a big beast, yes. He's not like Gordon Brown. I am


amazed Gordon Brown has proved so positive. John Reid never plays


positive. My worry, if I was in the no campaign, I would wonder if he


would put a bit wrong. So a man who has fought plenty of political


battles now has another one on his hands, the Better Together fight to


save the union. Lord Reid is here now. The papers this morning, you


are being criticised by the SNP and others in the Yes Campaign for your


remarks about D-Day yesterday. They are saying you try to politicise it,


what is your response? My response is it is nonsense. I am glad you


mentioned it because the leader article said that the SNP's response


on this was not only naive but foolish because if history has no


point, then what are we to do with that? The point of history is to


inform the future. As we remember, the great things we have done


together as a country, the Scots, Welsh, Irish and English, the


greatest of those was surely the defeat of fascism, standing alone


against fascism and National Socialism and to remember that as an


emotional aspect of the United Kingdom's history is perfectly


legitimate. We heard you talking about Alex Salmond in the clip. You


think people who want to vote no every bit as Scottish as people who


want to vote. You said Alex Salmond should publicly intervene and state


this. Hang on. Perhaps I have missed something, but I am not sure Alex


Salmond has ever suggested that people love said they would vote no


is any less Scottish. I did not say he had at that hour atmospherics out


there, especially on digital media will stop those who are sending out


tweets on the internet which implies that if you do not vote for


separation, somehow you are less... Alex Salmond is the First Minister


and he is leading this campaign. I want him to recognise the simple


fact that it demeans the debate which is a crucial debate to allow


the implication of innuendo that people who vote no to keep Scotland


in the United Kingdom are somehow less Scottish. I'm saying plainly


that is not true. What he wants him to do, make a public statement? That


with the help. Along the lines of what you have just said? If it is


noncontroversial, that would be helpful. People on the other side of


the beastly things about nationalism all the time and nobody calls on Ed


Miliband David Cameron to make at public statement. They're always


calls to make public statements. You're making an issue about the


simple proposition. We should not doubt the sincerity of any Scottish


person or anyone who is taking part in this referendum as regards their


love of Scotland. I speak as a Scotsman and somebody who has been


born, bred and lived in Scotland. Somebody who has committed my life


to Scotland. You would like a statement from Alex Salmond seeing


which are said? Let me finish. There are many millions of people in this


country who not only feel Scottish but think that the interests of


Scotland are better protected by remaining inside the United


Kingdom. They are every bit as patriotically those who want to vote


yes. All right. The sterling rally you spoke at was organised by Better


Together, would you be happy to sit sheer platform with the


Conservatives on the Better Together Campaign? -- to shape our platform.


Yes, I have done so before, for instance over the fight for


Ravenscraig. We extended its life for years. I marched to London with


people whose views I did not share, including the SNP and Tories of the


time to save the Ravenscraig steelworks. If it was important


enough to do just steelworks, how much more important is it for the


future of our country to rise above petty personal difference and any


political differences and fight for the welfare of Scotland. Gordon


Brown criticised the way the Coalition Government have handled


the currency this week. He said, the wave it currency argument was put by


the government was given Scotland versus Britain which means we


need... Is the only propaganda which comes from the Conservatives is


Britain says no, there is bound to be a reaction in Scotland. I'm not


going to comment on what Gordon said. Can Scotland go it alone, yes


it can, doesn't have the right to do so? Yes. The question in dispute


which people have to decide in September is in what conditions


Scotland would be if it went down that road. In my view, in terms of


the advantages of the union, economic and Vantage, economic


growth, individual ad vantage and growth... In terms of separation,


the risks are issued. I think the government has every right to rule


any part of the United Kingdom. I am giving you my view on the Better


Together Campaign. I am prepared to work with anybody over and above any


personal and political differences. I do not think the public are


astonished by this. I think the government would like to see


politicians put aside personal differences more often. This is such


a crucial issue for the future that I think all of us should get


together. When Gordon Brown says the trouble with David, -- David Cameron


and George Osborne, they put Scotland against Britain, you seem


to be with Cameron and Osborne and disagree with Gordon Brown? I am not


disagreeing with any of them. I am saying that whenever you rise above


party differences and have an issue as crucial as this, you must rise


above party differences, of course others will try to rise -- intervene


and point out differences. On the question of the future of Scotland,


there is a huge degree of agreement among political parties and among


people in Scotland. You said yesterday that you did not think


Better Together had done everything right. What have we done wrong? I


don't think any human being does everything right or any


organisation. You actually have something specific in mind? I did


not have anything specific in mind. I just would not say we have


everything right and we can always improve. Nobody listening to this


thinks that is an outstandingly exceptional and two together, it is


common sense. Do you think the Yes Campaign will win? I do not think


it, but it is all was possible, in politics anything is possible. Over


the next 100 days, there will be three issues which will decide this.


One is economic and material advantages to being part of the UK,


secondly the risk of separation, whether it is pensions, Europe, the


corn -- the economy, and suddenly the emotional argument. There are


many people who have emotional connections because of the history


and culture and what we have done together in Britain. There is an


argument of the head and an argument of the heart. Over the next few


weeks I think they will come together. Let us say that is a small


majority for independence, is that it, completely it. Let us say that


you are right, there is no currency union despite what Alex Salmond


says, there are problems with Scotland's getting into the European


Union in the short-term. One year later and people are saying, we


voted for this was the false perspective, will you be saying, I


told you so? Is there any way back? I will not be saying that but I do


not think there is any way back. Alex Salmond said this morning this


is a once in a generation thing, I agree with him. But it is a


everything. You would agree with that? Yes, it is a further thing.


Certainly in our lifetimes. This is why it is crucial to examine the


risks. That is not negative. I know Alex Salmond keeps saying do not ask


about the currency, the economy because that is negative. It is not


negative. We are brought up to believe look before you leap. A


businessman known jazz to have risk assessment for the future. You would


never set out on a journey without knowing you had the money and the


transport for it. You are making car and transport analogies, what is


going on? You suggest you were brought into a appeal to the male


working-class voters, I do not know if that is true but they look like


they would like to vote yes, so why do you think that is, given that


these are people who tend to vote Labour in elections? I am not sure


you are correct. The latest definitive Paul was done at the


beginning of this week by your competitors television programme, it


said 34% for the yes vote. You go it was 37% so there has been a


reduction. I am asking specifically about male working-class voters, the


other was likely to vote yes, I am dubious as to why you think that is?


I think there is equal concern across all classes, both sexes, all


parts of the country about the risks. The majority of people across


all of those classes and every part of the country who are worried about


that and think we had better stay with the best of both worlds which


we have at the moment. As Scottish Parliament deciding Scottish affairs


and the United Kingdom Parliament. I do not think at this stage you can


make that decision for them. Thank you very much indeed.


Described as world-leading by academics in San Francisco,


a Glasgow-run technology project could revolutionise the way councils


across the country manage services. The Glasgow Future Cities Project


began in 2012. It uses hi-tech kit to help increase safety


on the city's streets and open up council-held data to the public.


But what has it achieved so far and how will it continue


City life only big-screen. This is Glasgow 's smarter future and it is


happening now. Smart city one which integrates technologies and helps


best provide its services. A smart city can take some of our older


thinking and produces a much more efficient and effective way of


delivering services. " fought off competition from 29 other cities to


highlight this technology. The using software to map and Jake the


movements of people throughout the city. I think people feel a lot


safer. The ball can also get around the city better because of the


transport improvements. We can also see the likes of health and


education benefits. Around one half of the ?24 million budget has been


spent on this information centre -- CCTV cameras around the city coming


together. But came and safety are not the only focus. The project is


the first of its kind to open up data set to the public, sharing


anonymous data online. Intended to make the council more transparent


and save money on dealing with Freedom of information requests,


some see changing the old church of information handling is not without


its challenging. The whole project is basically sending shivers down


the spine of most local authorities. It is enabling the reformation of


things which happen under the bonnet with everyone else. They are trying


to engage citizens to be more active to shear for the no boat the city


and other citizens. We have got to the stage where we can provide tools


and technology to capture technology and integrate it with what the


council already holds. The approach has caught the attention of


academics around the world. With the government funded period coming to


an end, Private investment will be necessary for it to continue.


Investment is crucial. We need to continue to raise the money to


operate. Cycling will likes of claim on dealing with emergencies, things


people the care about. Clearly, things like energy and


communications, these are critical services. I think the freeze Future


Cities Project is possibly not too helpful, because it makes people


think of the science-fiction film. But I think we will see the benefit


of this time. Political will and financial backing will be crucial


for the next of this project, with the outcome being watched much for


the rocky roads in Glasgow itself. Richard, letters look at some of the


technology first. How does this work? Let us talk about intelligence


streetlights, of which no that there is a fate breaking out under them,


just tell it what actually happens? Every lighting column in the EEA is


connected to the intimate, essentially. They can communicate


with the operations centre that use. They have sensors into them. On the


likes of bicycle path is, you can see that when someone is moving


along it, the lighting would move up as they approach and in them and


hang them, so you are not wasting energy. The question of unusual


activity, if you are listening to sound or watching pictures, is there


a problem? Is it just people having a good NATO or as something more


serious about to develop? You can feed that information in and you can


do the lights of raising the lighting any questionable activity,


which could be enough to calm a situation down. So, the street lamps


would await the police if this continued? Probably not that we


directly, but it would let the communications centre that something


unusual was going on and should maybe be looked at. Then, an


appropriate response could be made. One of the big issues in Glasgow are


health outcomes and one of the things which stop people walking and


cycling is that they are concerned about their own safety. Things you


can do to make people fear more confident using intelligent


lighting, it helps the people use the city to greater advantage. It


sounds great, but an obvious problem with people having had a view jinx


and they are out singing and then the police suddenly all flooding. I


do not think it would be as dramatic as that. I think you would raise the


level of lighting, which can have a quiet in effect, but also, you would


be able to notice there was something needing looking at. You do


not have to scramble the police to that. You can look at the situation


first. Although Glasgow is the forerunner of this, you have been


involved in something similar? Yes, I have been working with local


authorities in Scotland on a smaller scale we're we have been putting in


technology in the local authorities to provide useful digital services,


particularly with Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Sorry, to me, this is


gobbledygook. If you are a citizen, what difference do you notice? You


are able to use a digital mobile service which can make life in a


local basis more useful. So it is an application on your phone. What does


it do? Say, is on a simple level, in the likes of Aberdeen, we have a


transport application that provides all up to date information about


situations with local transport. Also, you may be able to see that


there is also an updated service, whereby, if some of the information


is wrong, a member of the public could get back in touch and the


information within change. It is accessible and useful. How many


areas as this now available on? We are working with for local


authorities in are working with for local


authorities Scotland and also with local authorities in New York. --


Europe. The money for the Glasgow project comes to an end in Glasgow


comes to an end in August, so what happens after that? That was


essentially for the setup and development of the programmes. A key


reason behind this is that this is one of four demonstrations around


the United Kingdom. This comes out of the study of 29 cities about what


they could deliver. If you take what will happen next, we have the


Commonwealth Games, we can monitor what is happening, look at all the


data from the communications centre. We will be able to see whether the


use of city vehicles is more efficient. We will monitor this for


some years to come. This has been built into the plans of Glasgow City


Council for the future. This is how the imagine the future to be. A lot


of people will be watching, I am slightly uneasy about this. We worry


about security on the Internet about who might be looking in and getting


information about us and know they may be worrying about walking down


the street. We are talking about non-contravention none controversial


public data. Think how useful data is to your life. I am able to knows


whether or not a bus is going to arrive. There is a lot of data


information which is really useful to the general public and the more


that you use people to support their data to add value to it, the more


alive it becomes and the more relevant it becomes. Things like bus


timetables, they are no longer timetables in this sensitive printed


on pages. You will be able to get up-to-date information to find out


what has happened to your bus in the last few minutes? Yes. The London


transport network data is very good in that respect, letting people know


to within a couple of minutes when the underground is going to arrive.


How do you see the development of this in the future? I think we could


get people involved in completely transform how people move to work,


home shopping works and how we could see big transformations in the likes


of health care and health outcomes. You are watching Sunday Politics


Scotland. Let us cross now Good afternoon. Tomorrow marks


the start of the 100-day countdown On the Andrew Marr Show today


First Minister Alex Salmond said referendums on the constitution were


"once in a political generation" and this was the first democratic,


consented opportunity to vote But speaking on this programme,


the former Labour cabinet minister Lord Reid said Scots


must vote against independence. One person has died in a house fire


in Watten on the outskirts of Wick. Fire crews were called to the


property before eight o'clock this morning, but when they


arrived, the blaze had burnt out. A search is underway in Nairn for a


man thought to have been swept away Police were called


to the River Nairn, near the harbour of the Highlands town just before


eleven o'clock. Two men were in the water, with one attempting to


rescue the other, but only one man managed to get out. Search teams


are now checking the coastline A list of companies who have


been fined by the UK government for failing to pay the minimum wage


has been published. In total 25 firms owed workers


more than ?43,000 in arrears. Cargilfield School in


Edinburgh left a worker almost ?4,000 out of pocket.


Ministers say they have quadrupled financial penalties and plan


to change the law Good afternoon. There will be some


showers this afternoon, but also some brighter weather. The showers


could be heavy at times, possibly thundery at times. But I think they


will be mainly a feature on the higher ground.


It will feel very one today, with high temperatures of 22 degrees


Celsius. That is it for now, I will


hand you back to Gordon. Thanks, Andrew. Now, in a moment,


we will be discussing the big events coming up this week, but first,


let us take a look back at The Conservatives unveiled their


plans for further revolution in the event of a


The Conservatives unveiled their plans for further normal vote in the


independence referendum. Women who received injuries after getting


breast implants have been petitioning the Scottish Parliament.


An enquiry has been launched into what went wrong with the Edinburgh


trams project. The United Kingdom has been a next ordinary partner to


others. From the outside at least, it looks as if things have worked


very well. And the garment been criticised for using figures of


legal to criticised for using figures of


legal emphasise the stands against independence. The Scottish National


party called it childish and the company itself has forced the


government to take down the advert because of a breach of copyright.


Joining me now are the former Labour MSP Pauline McNeill and Andrew


Wilson, who is a newspaper columnist and a former SNP MSP.


Joining me now are the former Labour MSP Pauline McNeill and


Are you quaking about what John Reid said. I do not think it plays into


the modern world to relate D-Day to the Olympics. His second point was a


reasonable one, which was that no one has a monopoly on patriotism.


You can vote no and failed Scottish and you can celebrate 200 years of


British heritage and vote yes. 200,000 Irish soldiers who served in


the first wall for I know less British than those who were serving.


They were able to become an independent country. -- in the First


World War. We should look forward. What do you make of this mini row?


Regarding D-Day, John Reid's central point what you can still vote no and


BP tree or two. Labour have been firing on all cylinders this week.


-- and BP tree or ticks. Rover has been very positive. John Reid has


given us his point of view. I do jumping with joy to see John Reid


get involved? I think he has an appeal to voters. There was talk


that he was brought in for male working-class voters, that makes


sense, doesn't it? I'll Labour's big hitters are getting involved. It is


100 days or so. There is nothing new for John Reid having a speech at a


rally. The central message was that no side can claim patriotism for


whichever way you vote. It was an important message. John Reid is


appealing to a certain section of voters. People are voting no offer


all sorts of reasons. Historical reasons and identity questions are


important for the no campaign. Alistair Darling is dealing with the


business case and Gordon Brown was dealing with social justice this


week. Now, the Sunday Herald said there is 100 days to go until the


referendum. Andrew Wilson, your side of the argument needs something


transformational, doesn't it? What could that be? I think people are


now beginning to make their minds up. There is a host of people who


are undecided who are being focused. It is a personal choice. Do we trust


ourselves to do a better job? When you look at the history of


international endeavour, did we approve of Lord Reid and his


government when we went into Iraq for instance? Do you believe the Yes


Campaign can win by what you're talking about, by undecided people


changing their minds? Do you think the Yes Campaign itself has come up


with something different? No, I think the Yes Campaign has to stick


to being positive and ambitious for their country. We have an argument


which says Scotland cannot and another which says Scotland can. It


is about our personal contribution to the future, we will be better


placed to govern ourselves. You are lucky if the vote in London reflects


the vote in Scotland. This is true of social welfare reform,


strengthening the economy, as I said. You would not advise the Yes


Campaign to do anything different? No, I think the focus remains as it


is. Stay positive. Draw comparisons with the reality of life in Britain


as it is just now. It does not feel, from inside Scotland, that


everything is OK. That is too much needing fixed. The question is,


what's to be fixed, do we fix it ourselves let others do so? Do you


think the Better Together Campaign should change? I think Labour have


to take a more forward role and that is what you are now seeing for the


no campaign. That is what happened. We have 100 days to go. You want


more Labour Party, less Better Together? Yes. We have had Gordon


Brown this week and that has been very important for Labour voters who


are undecided. I think there is recognised by Better Together. You


clearly recognise that your side of the argument has a problem with


Labour voters. John Reid did not want to recognise that. It is male


working-class in certain regions... In the same way that the Yes


Campaign has a problem with women voters. They need to address the


issue of women voters. The reasons why women might want to vote yes.


How do you address that problem about male working-class voters? Do


you just get John Reid to go and tell them or what? We need to get


down to the nitty-gritty of the argument and the fact that people


want to have about the difference between voting yes and no. With a


hundred days to go, Jim Sillars said today this campaign will be lost or


won on the doorsteps and in the working-class communities. I agree


with that. It is also about the presentation of the arguments. Do


you agree with that? That it will be won or lost in working-class areas?


One of the modern phenomena of politics is that they do not vote in


the numbers that they should. If they do in this referendum, if they


take this opportunity to vote, it could be transformational. There is


a huge opportunity for a lot of people. But is there a particular


opportunity in working-class areas for the Yes Campaign? That is what I


was trying to see, where the turnout is not what we would want it to be


in normal elections, there is a great opportunity for reform and


change and making the system of how we govern ourselves better. That is


the core message. Either things are done to you or you do them


yourselves. Much better to do it yourself in a time of crisis like


this. Sorry to stop you. We have to leave it there. That's all from us


this week. Goodbye.


Download Subtitles