15/06/2014 Sunday Politics Scotland


With Andrew Neil and Gordon Brewer. James Rubin, Mark Malloch-Brown and Bayan Rahman debate the Iraq crisis and Jackie Baillie and Blair Jenkins discuss Scottish independence.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 15/06/2014. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Politics. The advance of the Islamist army on Baghdad has been


slowed. But the country now faces a defect or partition. Watching


Britain, the USA and Europe be doing, if anything?


It has been a big week in the Scottish referendum. Even the Pope


had a say. But has the tone of the debate will come to downright nasty?


Can I swap Ed Miliband four attempts Aaron? We will be asking if any of


the parties are making last-minute substitutions before the election.


Coming up in Sunday Politics Scotland:


The former SNP leader Gordon Wilson says it's time to challenge


Westminster about its policies in the event of a No vote.


He'll join us live to explain what he means.


The Sunni Islamist army known as ISIS is now in control


of huge swathes of northern and western Iraq, including


Until the weekend they looked like advancing relentlessly


on Baghdad but that offensive has now been slowed or even halted


The Iraqi army and its Shia milita allies vow that


Baghdad will not be taken and that a counter-attack will soon begin.


Iraq's Shia Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has to do something to


reverse the humiliation of recent days, which saw


his US-trained and equipped Iraqi army, which outnumbered


the Islamists 15 to 1 melt away or surrender when confronted by ISIS.


The conflict has already created a humanitarian crisis, with hundreds


The Kurds have used the conflict to consolidate their hold on their


autonomous area in the north, parts of the west and the north are in the


grip of ISIS control and the Shias are hunkering down in the east.


All of which makes a three-way partition a real possibility with


The US is moving another of its massive aircraft carrier


battlefleets to the Gulf, though the White House shows no


While Iran says it's ready to help its Shia allies


and there are unconfoirmed reports that its revolutionary guard has


Well, I'm joined now by Newsnight's diplomatic editor Mark Urban.


Let's start with some basics. Who are ISIS and why are they


controlling big chunks of Iraq? ISIS is an extremist militant jihad


organisation and they have a pure Islamic concept based on 14th


century history and jurisprudence. What they want to do is correct --


create this caliphate that do not recognise colonial boundaries so it


involves Syria and Iraq, and they could go down to Lebanon and


Palestine, that is all fair game as far as they are concerned. And they


have this strict interpretation of Islam. The more interesting question


is why have semi-Sunni Muslims, along with them, these are precisely


the sort of people who in 2006, 2007, tribal leaders in the west of


the country rose up against. It was called the Awakening and the


Americans in power did and bankrolled it. These people turned


against them and admired them in large numbers, so why do they have


so many Sunni Muslims on their side? We hear about people going


back to Mosul. I think the answer is a perception


back to Mosul. I think the answer that the current government is


ruling in sectarian interests, Shia Muslim interest, and the Sunni


Muslims want self-determination and this is their best bet.


Muslims want self-determination and this is their Let me put up this map


to find out where we are going. We can see Mosul in the north, they


took that, and then they started, South, reports that the crit was


involved -- to grit -- to grit. What is the situation on the ground now?


We are in what you might call a consolidation or strategic pause as


American called it in 2003. ISIS are trying to consolidate their power in


Mosul, and now they have this major city and they are trying to show


they can run the city and get the power going, etc. Their southernmost


forces, that is a gorilla army, guys in pick-up trucks. They cannot deal


with serious opposition. They would like to get the tanks and other


things into action but that could take weeks for them to be able to do


it. The government side is that they have counter-attacked, but it will


take a little while before these newly raised militia and other task


forces, call them what you will, can effectively counter-attacked. But


that is what will happen in the next week or two. We will see


increasingly large and serious government counter-attacked trying


to retake those places, and I fear a really difficult, bloody Syrian


style street by street battle for some of these urban centres. I would


like to have a look at this map, because the Kurds, as I mentioned,


they are consolidating their position in the autonomous region in


the north. The Islamist are taking over huge chunks of the Sunni Muslim


West. And of course the Shia Muslim are still dominant in control of


Baghdad and in parts of the south and east. Back to me looks like the


beginnings of the partition of Iraq. -- back to me. Well, it is, but we


have to caveat it in a few ways. Firstly, there are millions of


people in Iraq, so-called sushi, combined families, who do not fit


easily into the pattern. Do we see millions of people becoming refugees


under this scheme? There would be a lot of human tragedies if people


really did try to enforce this type partition. Secondly, there are Sunni


Muslim communities in the south of Baghdad, those places, once again, a


lot of misery and fighting will occur if people try to enforce a de


facto partition. There are still an awakening of forces. They are on the


side of the government. We heard about one group in Samarra of Sunni


Muslims fighting on the same side. It's a complex picture. They factor,


it does look like a partition, and if it goes further in that direction


it will. And partition will always be messy because people end up on


the wrong side of the lies. Finally, the big thing on that map,


Iran, a huge place, a huge border with Shia Muslim Iraq. Iran now


becomes a key factor. It is becoming a proxy war for Iran. Yes, when I


was in Baghdad a few months ago, I did actually see Iranians


revolutionary guards in uniform. They were protecting a senior


Iranians official, so some numbers have been never some time and they


are also said to protect the political leaders and -- in his


compound. They are there. We think more of them are trying to organise


the defence of Baghdad to galvanise the Iraqi army, and they will not


allow the Iraqi government to fall. Mark, thank you for marking archive


this morning. -- marking our card. Tony Blair took Britain


into the Iraq conflict in 2003. He's now, among other things, envoy


to the Middle East representing That's the UN, the EU,


the US and Russia. This morning he entered


the debate about what should be My point is simple. If you left


Saddam in place in 2003, when 2011 happened and you have the Arab


revolutions going through Tunisia, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain and Egypt and


Syria, you would still have had a major problem in Iraq. You can see


what happens when you leave the dictator in place, as has happened


with Bashar al-Assad. The problem doesn't go away. What I'm trying to


say is, we can rerun the debates about 2003, and there are perfectly


legitimate points on either side, but where we are in 2014, we have do


understand that this is a regional problem, but a problem that will


affect us. And I'm joined by the former Foreign


Office minister Mark Malloch-Brown, Here in London are James Rubin,


he was chief spokesman for the State Department under


Bill Clinton, and Bayan Rahman, she represents the Kurdistan


Regional government in the UK. Intervened in Iraq, it's a shambles,


we don't intervene in Syria, it's a shambles. What lessons should we


draw? That is a well framed question, because that is the


problem. Tony Blair is half right. Iraq, like Syria, would probably


have been a problem even without an intervention. But one wishes someone


would tell him to stay quiet during moments like this, because it does


drive a great surge of people in the other direction. The fact is, what


has been missing in western politics towards the Middle East throughout


both episodes, Syria and Iraq, is a drive to build an inclusive,


democratic centre which is secular and nonsectarian. That has been


missing amongst the threats of invasion Manon invasion, we have


just constantly neglected the diplomatic nation-building


dimensional this. I want to come onto what is happening on the


ground. I want to begin with what the Western response by me, and by


that we mean the United States, because of it doesn't do anything,


nobody will do anything. All of the signals I see coming out of the


White is that Barack Obama has no appetite for intervention -- out of


the White House. I don't think he does have an appetite. He would be


very unlikely to do anything very large. He might feel pressured to


act because of the fact that this particular group, this Al-Qaeda


inspired group, fits into the strategy he has pursued in Yemen and


Afghanistan and Pakistan, to use drone strikes against individual


terrorists. So it is possible that the threat of ISIS in the region and


the West in general might inspire him to act, but the idea he will do


enough, militarily, to transform Iraq from its current state of civil


War into something along the lines that Mark was talking about,


nation-building diplomacy, a big operation, I don't see President


Obama sees his historic mission as having got the United States as out


of it. Leave it to the Pacific, perhaps. What would the Kurds like


the West to do? First of all, in Kurdistan we face a huge


humanitarian crisis. We already have had bought a quarter of a million


Syrian refugees and we were struggling to cope with that. And


now we have at least double that number of refugees coming from


Mosul. First and foremost, we are calling on the international


community to help us with that. So we need humanitarian aid? Let's


assume we do that in some way, maybe not enough, but what else if


anything? I think it is an incumbent on the west and other powers to


assist Iraq to get rid of ISIS. I think the Sunni Arab community, some


of whom have joined ISIS and may be supported the uprising, have


justified complaints against the federal government. But we need the


terrorists out of Iraq. That is first and foremost. And what the


West can do is not necessarily intervene with boots on the ground,


but provide technical assistance, provide intelligence and help the


Iraqi army and air force to be more targeted. Can you defend yourselves?


In Kurdistan, we can in terms of the disciplined troops. In this


situation, I hope they won't be abandoning their post, that is for


sure. It is a national cause fires. But we are not armed in the way that


the Iraqi army is -- cause for us. We are not armed in the way that


ISIS seems to be now they have seized some of the American kit. We


are not asking for weapons, but we ask for assistance for all of Iraq


to deal with the situation. Mark, this is not just an Iraqi problem.


This is a regional conflict, and from the Levant on the shores of the


Mediterranean, all the way through to the Gulf, the region is gripped


with what is essentially a Sunni and Shia Muslim sectarian war. Yes, with


the caveats that Mark bourbon made earlier, it's not quite that


straightforward, but the basic divide is exactly that -- Mark


Urban. People have been looking for this to begin in Lebanon or Jordan


and have been taken by surprise although with hindsight I'm not sure


why, that it has begun in Iraq instead. At its most extreme, it


risks redrawing the 20th century boundaries of the region in a way


which would be highly unstable because it would pit a Shia Muslim


bloc against the Sunni Muslim bloc and would undo all of the sort of


social and economic advance of the last century, so the stakes are


suddenly very, very high indeed. Are we seeing the redrawing? The lines


were drawn secretly, not far from here, about a mile away, and may


have survived through thick and thin. They now look pretty fragile.


The map is being redrawn. I think it is true that there is a key factor


Woodrow Wilson probably gave a bit Woodrow Wilson probably gave a bit


of a hand to the promotion of the idea of self-determination, and in a


way, there is a self determination going on, particularly in the


Kurdish region, and perhaps they may end up the big winners in all of


this, because they have proceeded with a relatively moderate,


reconcilable government. The key thing that the Kurdish region has


done. They used to fight the two groups, and now they fight together.


What the Sunni Muslims have not done is figure out how to let politics


let the side things instead of guns. We need to look clearly and in Syria


and Iraq, if there is a Sunni extremist with ISIS that carves out


a place for itself, it will be the great irony of the modern era.


President Bush said he wanted to go into Iraq to fight terrorism. There


was no terrorist. There are now. If in Iraq and Syria together thereat a


thousand strong Al-Qaeda capability that threatens the region, the


West, the world, we are all going to have to do something about it.


The danger is that power will spread. This could grow in power.


You would not want it on your southern border. Absolutely, we


would not. The point we are all making indirectly is that things


have changed in Iraq and will never be the same again. Whether Iraq


completely disintegrates into three countries, or whether it stays


together as one country, but a countries, or whether it stays


together as one country, but loose federation, either way, Iraq has


changed. It will not go back to what it was. I hope it will change for


the better. I think we're at the make or break point for Iraq. Either


the political readers -- the political leaders of a right wake up


and smell the coffee and put aside their differences or there will be


problems. This provides that opportunity, in a very nasty way. If


we take it? Yes, and if not, I think this is the end of a rack as we know


it. If anything resembling a caliphate emerges, that is very


destabilising for the region itself. More so I would suggest than even


the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. At some stage, you have


to assume that they will be coming for us. That is correct. This is


extremely dangerous. The only way forward is for these political


groups to talk to each other and find a compromise that allows the


rates of cinemas and minorities in Iraq to be protected within or the


rates of cinemas and minorities in Iraq to be protected with an


autonomous federal-state. Any support for the government must be


premised on that. There is no military solution for this which is


in during -- there is no military solution for this. There must be


serious political negotiation, not with ISIS, but with Sunni Muslim


moderates, to form a more representative government. This is


the last chance for Iraq. I think we are all saying that that is going to


need to be some major western leadership to make some big


decisions here for the future of the region. I am concerned that after


Afghanistan and Iraq, my country is quite world-weary, quite


world-weary. It does not seem to be giving leadership. Certainly we are


not seeing that in Europe. I am deeply concerned that we are not


going to take the leadership role that needs to be taken. These are


big issues. When Britain and France carved up the Middle East, they were


world powers, operating as global powers, and without that global


leadership by somebody, this is just going to get worse and worse. I


think we will leave it there, thank you very much.


The danger is that power will spread. This could grow in power.


It is just under 100 days until the referendum on Scottish independence.


So, for once, it'll be a long hot-summer


But the campaign isn't just getting heated.


In places it's also down-right nasty. When


Scotland's best-selling author announced she was giving


the unionist cause a million pounds this week, she received


Independence supporters online, so-called cybernats,


called JK Rowling a traitor and much worse, using a variety of


For its part, the Better Together campaign has been accused


Even Gordon Brown seems to think so, and this week he criticised


Conservative ministers for relying on "threats


With the Edinburgh Festival approaching, reports suggest even


comedians are now reluctant to engage in the subject because


I'm joined by Blair Jenkins from Yes Scotland and Jackie Baillie


They're both in our Glasgow studio, and they're going head to head.


Blair Jenkins, let me come to you first. Why have you and the Better


Together campaign and Alex Salmond not done more to slap down the cyber


nationalists who are poisoning the debate? Good morning. I think both


sides tried to stop the tiny number of people on both sides who are


incapable of controlling themselves. We should not get this


out of proportion. We are having a fantastic, decent and democratic


debate. The people who probably total no more than 100 on both sides


who post offensive material or not to be allowed to deflect from that


fact. Of course there are nasty people on the Better Together side


as well, but are you saying there are as many of those as the cyber


nationalists? I have not done the Kent. Lots of people are certainly


posting nasty in defensive things to people in the yes campaigners well.


I imagine that people do what I do, and block them. You stop them from


sending anything further. There is a democratic and in gauging progress


going on throughout Scotland. It is characterised by good humour and


good debate. We should not get out of proportion and the activities of


the number of people. I want to get to Jackie Baillie. The debate is


actually pretty good-humoured and you should be doing more about the


nasties on your side as well? I think we have reached a new low this


week. Despite many people engaging in the politics of the decision and


the debate about that, whether we want to retain the best of both


worlds are separate from the United Kingdom, what we have seen is the


most abusive and vitriolic attack, particularly on women, JK Rowling


and a Labour supporter who dared to support the no campaign. When you


look at the number of people on social media, there are more from


the yes campaign than the no site. We should all be condemning attacks,


from whatever quarter they come. This seemed to be connected to the


office of the First Minister. What is the evidence for that? There was


an e-mail from one of the... I understand about that, but it did


not use vile words. It did not, but it repeated the same mistake as on


the website. We should be clear that we need to condemn these attacks,


but it is not just the water works, it is taking action. There was an


IpsosMORI poll this week which was varying testing. It showed the


population as a whole, farmer people think that Yes Scotland is running


an effective campaign as against Better Together. It is a undecided


voters think this by a majority of four 21. Some people are worried


about of the campaign. JK Rowling, Scotland's most successful author of


all time. She gives ?1 million to the Better Together campaign. She


then faces some of the most incredible abuse. I know what it is


like because I have had some myself. Traitor, Quisling. I cannot use some


of the words, it is Sunday morning. Why does Scottish Nationalists


culture have such a revolting fringe? JK Rowling is entitled to


our views and it is unacceptable if people say offensive things about


her or anyone else who voices and opinion in this debate. Who are


obese people? When you look at the accounts of some of the people who


were posting these things about JK Rowling, they were using the same


sort of language about film stars and football stars. This was just


part of their language on Twitter. How often has Alex Salmond condemned


the cyber nationalists? Very often. Everyone in the campaign hands. By


common consent, Yes Scotland is running a thoroughly positive


campaign, much more positive than Better Together. Jackie Baillie, it


hardly helps matters when Alistair Darling, who runs your campaign,


compares Alex Salmond to Kim Jong Il and North Korea. That hardly


elevates the debate? I think we need to elevate the debate. There are


less than a hundred days to go. It is a massive decision. We need to


elevate the debate beyond attacks. I think there is much more that Yes


Scotland and the SNP can do. You have made that point. Why are you


running a campaign based on fear? The codename of your campaign is


even project fear. It is threats. You cannot have the pound, there


will be no shipbuilding. You will be flooded by immigrants. Why are you


so negative? I am not negative at all and neither is the campaign. The


campaign has asked questions and I think it is legitimate to ask


questions of the people proposing such a fundamental change. People


care about the economy, their jobs, their families. What would happen to


them if they leave the rest of the United Kingdom. I think it is


legitimate to ask questions. I refuse to be asked of


scaremongering. People deserve answers. The yes campaign is equally


guilty of some of the most outrageous scaremongering. Maybe you


are both scaremongering. Blair Jenkins, the First Minister said of


the cyber nationalists, that they are just Daft folk, as if they were


mischievous little children. It is worse than that. When you look at


what they say, they are twisted, perhaps even evil minds. I would not


disagree with his comments, but they are directed at just a small number


of people. The story of this campaign is not the story of what


people are saying on Twitter. Around Scotland, lots of people are getting


engaged in debate to have been tuned out of the political process. Today,


we have 47% support for the yes campaign. The movement in the


campaign is towards yes. People know we have a better campaign, a vision


for Scotland. The latest poll of polls does not show that. Both


sides, you always take the opinion polls that show you in the best


light. All politicians do that. Jackie Baillie, your campaign is not


just negative, it is patronising. You make dubious claims that Scots


would be ?1400 better off by staying in the union, and then you say that


the kids use the money to scoff 280 hotdogs at the Edinburgh Festival.


The fate of the nation is in your hands and that is the best you can


do? I think you will find that the campaign is something that we are


taking the message to people. Then why are you talking about hotdogs? I


do not. The campaign did. We are taking a positive message to people


across Scotland about the benefits of the United Kingdom. We believe we


are stronger and more secure and more stable, being part of that


family of nations that is the United Kingdom. At the same time, we have


the strange and power over things like education and transport. I


understand that. I am not doing the issues today, I am talking about the


tone of the campaign. I have one very important question. Who would


you supporting last night in the England-Italy match? I was not


watching the game. I would be delighted to see England do well in


this tournament. I have Argentina in the office sweepstake. I have to


keep some attention on them, but I would be delighted to seeing Clint


do well. That is because you think it will help your campaign. It will


annoy the Scots. Jackie Baillie? I was supporting England. I was also


supporting Portugal. Now most of you probably missed last


night's football match between England and Italy because


you wanted to get an early night and England lost


despite a plucky effort, I'm told. But even Westminster is


in the grip of World Cup fever and with speculation


about the fitness of each political party's team we sent Adam out to


tackle some of the big players. Well, this is


the closest I'll get to Rio. This year everybody seems to have


gone a bit mad Belize, football stickers. Let's see who I will get.


Oh, the suspense -- a bit mad for these. George Osborne? That is


because we leapt on the bandwagon and made Alan political stickers.


They're hotter than a Brazilian barbecue.


Sunday politics political stickers. We have one of you, Norman. Would


you like it? Do you want to start collecting, Bob? Would you like a


packet? collecting, Bob? Would you like a


Thank you. No album, I'm afraid. collecting, Bob? Would you like a


Thank you. No album, I've got Michael Gove, next to to Reza, and


two of the Prime Minister. -- next to Theresa. I am sure Michael has


Theresa in her stick around, and vice versa.


These Tory ones are proving very popular


since she fell out with him out how to handle extremism in schools.


And there's been open speculation about him taking on him in


Then there are rumours of a reshuffle of the whole Tory album.


Do you think there will be any swapping in the Tory leadership


soon? Who knows? David Cameron has also got to replace the EU


commissioner, Cathy Ashton, who is standing down.


Does he go with the favourite the former health secretary


Or the grassroots choice, Martin Callanan, the Tories old


Or does he rehabilitate Andrew Mitchell after Plebgate?


Do you fancy being European Commissioner? I would rather be


spending the money on the world's poor and spending it well. Glad to


hear it. Happy collecting. Right, there must be some Labour


stickers out there. You don't want to swap Ed Balls any


of the others? Can't I keep them all? This is almost the perfect


team. There have been grumblings


about the fitness of the Shadow And Ed Miliband's got a kicking


in Liverpool after posing I'm told grown men are meeting up


in pubs for sticker swaps - With Danny Finkelstein -


Tory peer and Times columnist, He would be the card I would not


want to trade. Do people want to trade him in? I don't think anybody


wants to trade him in at the moment. He is the best person to lead the


Labour party and will lead us into the next election. There's been a


lot about Michael Gove, and he's very combative. That's been a huge


strength as an education Secretary, despite the fact it's brought in


trouble. I would think the prime minister would tell him not to get


himself into peripheral battles at the moment but stick to what has


been successful. I haven't got Nick Clegg, but I got me. Controversy


amongst collectors of Lib Dems. I need to give away me in return for


Nick Clegg. That would be far better. There you are.


Some local parties are holding meetings about his leadership,


but at one in Cambridge this week they voted to stick with him.


You have got a Euro Commissioner. Why don't I swap, I will swap Ed


Miliband for Tim Farren. Can I do that? What is the significance of


that? Very significant. Happy collecting.


These beauties are popping up everywhere, but sadly they won't


Adam is still doing the samba around Westminster as I speak.


I'm joined by three journalists who've been


furiously swapping stickers throughout the show, they certainly


weren't allowed to stay up to watch the football, it's Nick Watt,


We will talk about Labour after the break, and I want to concentrate on


the Tories, but the moment, Nick, senior Tories are saying privately


that they might win next May. They are beginning to dream the dream. So


why are they doing all this jockeying? I think the jockeying for


the leadership is about a year old. What stoped it up was when Theresa


gave a speech to the conference, and people said she was doing it just in


case, when things were not looking too good. She is not on manoeuvres.


I think it was a policy row that drove the differences with Michael


Gove. But Michael Gove is on manoeuvres, and he is trying to


protect George Osborne from, he believes, a serious threat from


Boris Johnson and possibly Theresa. It is quite self-indulgent when you


are a couple of points behind, the economy is going your way, to be


involved in this sort of stuff. Extraordinary. It shows the toxic


disease that gnaws at the entrails of the Tory party, and Cameron is


their great asset. He is more popular than the party, he bridges


the gap is, and he has an extraordinary dissemble and some


pretending to be this moderate while never the lens -- nevertheless


leading the most far right wing government we have had since the


war, and that has been a brilliant piece of political


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


programme: Former SNP leader Gordon Wilson recommends taking the


referendum attack to Westminster's door. He'll be joining us live to


explain what he means. The Crown Office welcomes a fall in


prosecutions for football-related sectarianism, but the law is still


explain what he means. The Crown Office welcomes a fall in


prosecutions for football-related sectarianism, but the law is still


proving controversial. We have lots more that we can do to bring tension


and defence at football games. This legislation was pushing in the wrong


direction. I would like to CBS FA -- S F a taker for greater role.


If you went back in time to 1982 and told the SNP leader


Gordon Wilson that 32 years on there would be an SNP majority government


in a Scottish Parliament holding a referendum on independence, he would


probably say, in his usual characteristic way,


During Wilson's time at the top, the party was divided


But foundations were laid for later success


and the former leader is fully participating in today's debate.


We'll speak to him live in a moment, but first here's Andrew Kerr.


A career defining moment for Gordon Wilson's leadership. I am now


convinced that the party will not recover its unity until all


organised groups are banned. The 79 Group walk-out. Of which Alex


Salmond was a member. The SNP group was struggling. Professor Murray


Pettit was there that day. He was very courteous, very clear-cut, and


always working to conciliate, to bring with them, but without


actually compromising to much extent. Not a very flexible


character, but flexible enough to strike a delicate balance between


consensus and leadership. The professor says that Gordon Wilson


now and then is an original thinker, which leads to different views from


the current leadership. He suggests keeping an open mind in the EU,


Alex Salmond is used to having what he says goes. When someone with the


stature of Gordon Wilson comes up with contrary views, that will not


go down terribly well with the leadership. They will smile and try


to brush it off, but deep down he can be a thorn in the flesh. That


could be a description that Gordon Wilson now relishes after his own


turbulence time as leader. Listening to that is Gordon Wilson.


Let us move onto your thoughts on the way that the campaign is going


the moment. I am curious as to what you have made of the way that the


Scottish Government has handled things this week. It has been very


difficult for them. I think it turns on the technicality, basically,


first of all, as to whether or not the Ministerial Code was breached.


If that was breached then the resignation should the excepted.


Also, of course... His resignation has not been tendered. No, because


it has not been offered, and it has not yet established that it was a


breach of Ministerial Code. Do you think that he should go? Only if he


has breached the code, which is illegal requirement. And if the


story becomes greater than that of the SNP Government. It is well-known


that PR men in government have to leave if their profile... But you


say that it is established that he has broken the code, but if he is


not tendering his resignation and Alex Salmond is not sacking him, who


has expected to establish if the court has been broken and not? Black


--. Normally it is the permanent secretary. I can apply my experience


over the years, that if you secretary. I can apply my experience


over the years, that have got a big story and it is going on and on and


on then you have got to deal with it. Equally it may lapse because


there are other things happening. So you think that he should stay unless


it becomes too big a new story. If he has breached the code then he has


to go. As he has not breached the code but there is a PR problem then


he may need to go. If neither of these apply then Campbell Gunn


should stay. I'm interested on the comments on the debate from Hillary


Clinton, the Pope, President Obama. It sounded at first that Scotland


was becoming a pariah amongst these nations. But I think the Pope


particularly was studiously neutral. It is a very interesting thing,


isn't it, that presidents go to our land and to London and they never


come to Scotland. I was taken by President Obama's remark. He said


that from the outside things seem to work. The problem is that from the


inside the union is not working, the Scots are suffering and it is hardly


surprising that they will treat this shifty attitude from President


Obama, who has no doubt been prepped by Cameron, with the respect it


requires. So you think you should not have been involved? He is


perfectly entitled to be involved, that is up to him. But the Americans


have to look to the future. They have got Britain like Joe Yule, or a


puppet on a string, written does everything that they want. Why


should they want separation? You described him as shifty? He was


under pressure to say something, he had been asked to, and body else


knew that, which is not the sort of predicament that a President of the


United States wants to be in. He is just doing the young boy a favour.


In the document you produced this week, which is one of your


occasional missives on what you think the yes camp should be doing.


You say that they have to begin the initiative. But some of the poll


suggests that they have been doing just that. Yes, I am elated by


that, but do not forget that we still have to get past the 50% mark,


and not only that I would like to see the momentum build up so that we


go well past the 50% mark. Believe you me, if it is a narrow majority


then London will want a rerun and will try to manipulate that into


doing so. Do not accept that the London politicians are natural


Democrats when it comes to Scotland. Scotland they regard as their


possession, their colony, and they will not let it go unless they are


forced to. But what you think the Yes campaign needs to do that it is


not doing now? Two things. When people go to the ballot box in


September, they will do so with many different reasons. But I think that


at the point of the decision, some people will have to decide on the


question of identity, where they see their future. In Britain, are in an


independent Scotland. On the yes side, it has two project a vision of


a better Scotland... But Alex Salmond would say that he does


little else. Mac I do not know. I think that my job is to persuade


Alex Salmond to up his game of it. The vision thing is very important.


I am sorry to pretend to be Alex Salmond, but if I were him... Loom


at your doing a very good example. I think that I would say to you, for


heaven 's sake, I was out the other day making a speech about how


exports in Scotland could go up under an independent Scotland. It is


coming from a number of sources, not just orchestrated through the SNP


Government. What we need is greater input from other leaders in Scotland


who favour a yes but have ideas as to what should be done, but the


other side of the coin, we have to point out that Britain is not


necessarily a good thing. How can you be a member of a country with an


850 strong parasitic house of lords, non-elected, deciding the laws...


But the SNP never stop banging on about this stuff. Not by my


standards. I think I may be slightly more tough than the SNP when it


comes to hammering London. And they should also look at the economic


issues, because that is the thing that will determine the votes of


lots of people. Jim Sillars rates on the same website that you call


offer. He said that Alex Salmond was a liability. I think he was wrong.


Sadly I was in the Middle East when that happened. I'm asking if you


agree with him. No, I do not think so. If you took him out of the


equation they would be a huge gap. But the opposition are saying that


if you vote yes then you are voting for the SNP and the SNP Government,


whereas, this is Scotland's referendum and Alex Salmond is a


servant of the people in this respect. So he has the most


substantial role to play as First Minister, but going back to my seem,


we are required to orchestrated much more broadly. You would prefer if an


independent Scotland had its own currency. Does it concern you that


there is no plan B on currency from the Scottish Government, that there


is just this and systems over and over again that the Unionist parties


are lying when they say that they will not contemplate a currency


union? Do you think that the Scottish Government should, in


fact, not just have a plan B but be putting some mechanisms in place in


the eventuality that there is a Yes vote? I expect that there is quite a


bit of thinking going on inside the fiscal commission for Scotland on


these issues. Let me put it to you in my capacity as a former


politician. If the SNP had come up with plan B, plan C, Landy, etc, it


would have subjected them to immediate hostile criticism. The


fact of the matter, and it is a question, I believe that it is a


bluff on the part of Westminster, but if not then Scotland will adopt


the same currency as sterling and use it. And even then, you see, even


if there were a fiscal is on the Red Hat to be a period of five or ten


years where we were within the pound sterling area and then we could have


our own currency, we could float it, but only after consultation and only


after it is observe the play -- after she is beneficial to Scottish


business. The financial markets will react to the reality of the


situation that the trading position will be stronger. So, I don't


think... The problem for London is because if you take away the


Scottish exports the balance of trade immediately diminishes and the


financial markets will have two look at that. There has to be


Corporation. One thing you said was people should not take so if Labour


promises from the Unionist parties for more devolution. Why not? A lot


of the Yes campaign on devolution seems to assume the other side of


the debate are lying. The track record is that from 1945 onwards


there have been promises from London being broken again and again and


again. The only react to the pressures of votes from within


Scotland, if there is pressure they give powers but remember Enoch


Powell said that power devolved is power retained. A few months ago


they passed an order taking away energy powers from the Scottish


government. Without much consultation... They can do what


they like and if Scotland votes no, Scotland will be defenceless, in a


skilful way they will start fitting Scottish institutions and secondly


people don't really know that the next round of public expenditure


cuts, 25 billion, is down the road and the day after the next


Westminster general election it will come into effect. That is something


which should exercise our minds because a lot of the things the


Scottish Parliament under Labour and SNP which people like will be under


pressure. Tuition fees may have to go, NHS may be like being this one.


You can spin those out of thin air but the point is... Cuts are a


reality. That is a different issue from devolution. People say why


should we believe them? I have an advantage on you because I spent


some years on the Isle of Man and they are an autonomous government,


they toe the line on many things, hardly pay income taxed, they have


managed well. They have 75,000 people. Scotland will still be taxed


by Westminster. It is a matter of experience throughout the world you


get these situations. The Scots would be foolish to ignore it. Thank


you for joining us. As national teams are playing


in Brazil for the World Cup, here , two years on from the introduction


of controversial legislation aimed at criminalising religious hatred


in Scottish football, calls This week,


figures released by the Crown Office showed there were fewer sectarian


incidents recorded at the season Thanks, it says,


in part to the offensive behaviour at football act, which gave


prosecutors additional powers to crack down on sectarian songs


and abuse at matches and online. At the same time figure released to


this programme show more than 70% of charges under the act were


concentrated in just three areas. This, the shame game of 2011 is seen


by many as the catalyst for Scotland's newest football


legislation. , crowbar has to be a winner in Glasgow tonight and the


winner takes it all. The reputation of Scottish football was the loser


on the night, it was agreed offensive behaviour had to be


tackled but the solution was controversial. How we police


football games is no different now than it has been four years or 20


years ago. We have lots more we can do to bring tension and the


legislation is pushing it in the wrong direction. The act aims to


criminalise religious hatred in football. Some still feel the closer


scrutiny and intensified policing implies and a comfortable distrust


of fans. Immediately before this bill, we had a situation where


policing in Scotland was mature, effective and was different than it


had been in the 1970s and 80s. Police by consent is light touch.


Where we have got to now is policing by confrontation and control and it


is a horrible place. There is agreement that fans are not the


problem. The act is dealing with the misbehaving minority. Figures show


over the last 12 months, the number prosecuted for offensive behaviour


has gone down by 24%. The majority had affiliations with Celtic or


Rangers. Figures released show since the act was introduced, 469 people


have been charged with offences under the act. 338, 72%, which


charged in the greater Glasgow, Ayrshire and Lanarkshire areas.


There were four prosecutions in Dumfries Galloway. Most offences


related to singing or speech in or around football grounds. The chief


legal officer believes the reduction in offences compared to last year is


thanks to the act. I am confident that it is needed. And I'm confident


it has been used appropriately. I am confident that in time, as we see


from the figures, there has been an improvement in behaviour at football


matches. But it is only the second year. I am aware of the fact there


are old firm matches. We want to see the effect. The lord advocate says


the majority of fans can enjoy matches without being affected by


the legislation. There is concern elsewhere that the culture


surrounding the game has all ready been altered. It makes people more


frightened to be able to speak their minds. And is in its people's sense


you have a free society where you can discuss things all say things.


Another major change is it is now encouraging football fans to play


the offence card so you will find more and more Celtic and Rangers and


other fans phoning the police on one another. Despite challenges from


fans and clubs, a review of the legislation will not happen before


August next year. After another football season and, of course,


major fixtures at the ballot box. The rank-and-file police officers


think it is vague and not using the legislation and we don't have the


old firm matches which has been a focal point. You give the act no


credit? Lets look at the experts, the churches, well-meaning fans, the


campaign groups, the rank and file police officers, concerns about the


act. We all think rather than playing politics, let's recognise


there is an issue and we need to take action. It requires not my


legislation but the right legal framework and funding and


appropriate education. We have seen funding cut. Sandra, what do you


make that it is unrelated? It is related in the falling numbers. The


act is working. The 24% drop is proof. He makes assumptions, talking


about the fans and groups who are not supportive but many people are


very supportive of the legislation and it is proof it is working. When


you talk about coming forward in 2015, we must remember that was a


Justice committee put forward an amendment to the bill to ask for


2015. It has been accepted -- accepted by the Scottish government


that there will be a report. I believe... Next year, you will sit


down and look at it and will say this is fantastic, let's keep it


going or you will do what you did with the tax and shove it to one


side. People asked to put forward a report and the Scottish government


says, we will take it on board, you need to look at the facts and


figures, 24% drop in offences, it is working. It isn't unreasonable to


say let's give this a chance and look at it next year. What is the


difference? You can have the argument next year but it isn't


unreasonable to give it a chance. There needs to be a funding


commitment. Do we have a commitment of funding will stay in place?


You want rid of this law, I suggest Sandra has a point when she says


let's review it in 2015 as the government said they would do. How


can you disagree? Your macro all opposition parties united in the


parliament to say the legislation was the wrong thing and sent the


wrong message. The campaign groups as well who expressed concern about


the legislation. The right approach is to repeal the act. Opposition


parties on the Justice committee agreed this. It is untrue to say


that everyone apart from the government are for or against. There


were opposition parties, members who work for it. There has to be an


exception is that in terms of the faith and trust of the fans, the


majority of well-meaning fans, do not have faith and trust in the


deflation. The police officers have expressed concern. The Sheriff


expressed concern with the legislation. Let's get away from the


legal stuff, what do you make of the point that we want racial abuse and


sexual abuse and it is not acceptable but in a way laws like


this encourage people to take offence. You hear a song and you are


a fan and you say, I am shocked to the core, I bet find the police and


that isn't necessarily what you want to be in courage. What he was saying


is the assumption was it was tip for tat. If you say something offensive,


it is offensive and the law is here to stop that. It isn't spelt out


what it is. Not all of the football fans... There are a number of


groups. If someone says it is offensive and the language is


offensive, you need to look at it seriously. Should Scotland be


putting up with that? The groups who are saying others are offensive are


in the category you mentioned. There are different points from different


groups. This is the confusion. The law has added confusion. We have


breach of the peace legislation or ready. This is working. It isn't


working! To be continued. Thank you both very much.


You're watching Sunday Politics Scotland.


Let's cross now for the news with Andrew Kerr.


A new technique for detecting bowel cancer is to be


About 20,000 patients in Tayside, Fife, Grampian


and Glasgow health board areas will be offered "scope screening",


The 15-minute procedure can detect polyps that could


The Queen's baton will continue the Scottish leg of its journey today


Up to four-thousand people will carry it across the country


in the run up to the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow.


Today it travels around West Lothian taking in


Linlithgow Palace where a series of events are planned.


The Wimbledon champions Andy Murray and Marion Bartoli are


among the big names taking part in the national "Rally for Bally"


The Ukrainian-born former British number one, who grew up in Scotland,


died of liver cancer last month, at the age of 30.


Murray will be at the fundraising rally


in Birmingham while an event will be held at Perth tennis club where


That's the news let's now take a look at the weather forecast,


A lot of fine, brakes, dry weather around. We start off with a fair bit


of cloud around. That will thin and break in the afternoon, allowing


good spells of sunshine to get going. Always a bit more in the way


of cloud hanging on at East Coast. Rarely do get the best of the


sunshine, towards Glasgow in the south-west, 21 or even 22 Celsius,


and just the odd light shower. That is the forecast.


Now back to Gordon. Both sides in the independence


debate marked 100 days to go to the referendum. As former Prime Minister


Gordon Brown cold for David Cameron to debate with Alex Salmond on TV


and head of the vote. There has been a rise in greenhouse gas emissions


in 2012. It is the third year in a row that the government target has


been mist. Former US Secretary of State Hillary


Clinton said she hoped Scotland did not become independent. We will see


what the people of Scotland decide, but I would say that it would be a


loss for both sides, but I do not have a vote.


The First Minister said the full powers of independence with this


economy. Campaigners in the yes and no camps have welcomed comments from


the Pope. Pope Francis told a Catalonian newspaper that states


breaking away should be considered on a case-by-case basis.


Let us take a look at what is coming up in the week ahead.


I'm joined by George Kerevan, and Kirsty Scott. Let us talk about the


polls. We have now had three polls in three days, which seemed to show


that there is a bit of an uptake in the support for the yes side.


Anybody in the yes camp reading the newspapers this morning would have


been smelling over their cornflakes. Within a couple of points over 50%


going either way. I noticed one commentator saying that it could go


either way. The issue is gender. Clearly there is a majority of men


in Scotland, well beyond margins of error, who are going to vote yes.


The gap or the yes campaigners with women. And it is whether the whole


argument over JK Rowling is going to influence voters. What you make of


these polls? I would like to see the polls that might next week after


this week. They do show a narrowing. I believe that the latest one, they


did it after JK Rowling's announcement. You think that she


will have very much influence on women? I do not think that JK


Rowling dead, but it is an issue for women and a large part of that is


that it is a very male, very competent campaign -- combative


campaign. That is pitting woman. Not so much JK Rowling, but... Do you


think that the whole row with Campbell Gunn is making matters


worse? The virtual that was heaped on this woman, it makes me


uncomfortable. He is a good man, I do not think that it excuses what he


did, I do not think it was part of any orchestrated campaign, but I


think it sends a message that that kind of underhand tactic to


undermine people is oche. I think that there was a lot of misogynistic


comments online. I would be very interested to see in the polls what


women are seeing next week. Do you think he should stay or go? If this


role than next week then I would imagine he would fall on his sword.


This is not about whether he stays or goes, it is about how women


perceive that. I feel sorry for Campbell Gunn, all he did was to


pick up points in the media where issues were being pushed the wrong


way. It is quite clear in the relaunch, yet another one child


better together, Clare Lally was being presented as not just an


ordinary mother but a member of that campaign. She is an ordinary mother.


Campbell Gunn was saying that he was correcting a mistake. He was trying


to undermine our viewpoint that was different. One suspects that even if


Campbell Gunn had not intervened in this, Clare Lally would have got


dogs abuse from some sections of the cybernats anyway. The Rhino


questions about it for me, if people are abusive to women we should root


them out. We need to do something about it, and I blame editors for


now pitting at the end of columns on the Internet, without pitting the


name and the address, as they used to do, they put anonymous comments.


I think we have to edit that. Ruth Davidson saying that if there is


independence then you might be in favour of a currency union. Question


was put her and it was very much qualified. She said, I want us to


stay in the union, and she also said that she thought that an independent


currency would be the best thing for an independent country, but I think


it has been overplayed. But I can understand why people are jumping on


it and seeing, this all goes to show. We still do not know what is


green to happen in terms of currency, less than 100 days now. I


think that Ruth Davidson is a breath of fresh air for the Tory party. She


has taken the Tory party under demolition further than the Labour


Party -- devolution. You organised and air show. Yes, last year, the


air show was taking off again this year. What you think should happen


to the airport? It is a great airport, we should keep it open. It


would be great for freight and Scotland gets control of airline


taxes, if we can reduce our taxes the way that the Irish have,


Northern Ireland have volt control -- devolved control. This should


keep it open as long as they changed their local!


That is all from us this week. I will be back at the scene came next


week. From all of us, goodbye.


Andrew Neil and Gordon Brewer with the latest political news, interviews and debate. James Rubin, Mark Malloch-Brown and Bayan Rahman discuss the crisis in Iraq. Jackie Baillie from Better Together and Blair Jenkins from Yes Scotland debate the nature of the Scottish independence campaign.

Download Subtitles