:00:44. > :00:56.Good morning and welcome. Government issues its plan for air strikes in
:00:57. > :01:01.Syria. We will hear from Liam Fox and the Respect party leader George
:01:02. > :01:04.Galloway. Jeremy Corbyn is struggling to get his way over Syria
:01:05. > :01:12.as he tries to persuade his Shadow Cabinet. We will hear from the
:01:13. > :01:13.Shadow Justice Secretary. And the former Conservative Party chairman
:01:14. > :01:18.Grant Shapps resigns from the government or allegations he failed
:01:19. > :01:20.to act over bullying claims inside the Tory party. Is that the end of
:01:21. > :01:22.the story? And coming up on
:01:23. > :01:24.Sunday Politics Scotland: As heads of state gather
:01:25. > :01:27.for climate change talks in Paris, the UK Government cuts funding
:01:28. > :01:29.for new technology which could So, yesterday,
:01:30. > :01:41.former Conservative Party chairman Grant Shapps resigned from
:01:42. > :01:45.the Government over allegations he failed to act on claims of bullying
:01:46. > :01:49.in the youth wing of the party. It's a complicated story,
:01:50. > :01:52.as Giles Dilnot explains. Grant Shapps, former co-chair
:01:53. > :01:58.of the Conservative Party and now a former minister, must wish
:01:59. > :02:04.as his senior aide Paul Abbot Clarke once tipped for the top
:02:05. > :02:23.by Tatler magazine unsuccessfully As a result of his behaviour
:02:24. > :02:27.during that campaign, about which complaints were made, he
:02:28. > :02:30.was taken off the candidates list. A girlfriend at the time declaring
:02:31. > :02:37.he was "unfit to be an MP". In early 2014,
:02:38. > :02:39.Mr Clarke approached the Conservatives and Grant Shapps
:02:40. > :02:41.in particular with an idea. It was simple, bus loads of young
:02:42. > :02:48.Tory activists to marginal seats during the 2015 general election
:02:49. > :02:51.campaign to doorstep constituents. In the face of of unshifting polls,
:02:52. > :02:57.the idea appealed to Conservative Central Headquarters but they
:02:58. > :03:01.wanted to have some control over it. Grant Shapps decided not only to
:03:02. > :03:04.back the idea, but help pay for it, and put Clarke in charge
:03:05. > :03:09.of the operation. never met are you going to be a part
:03:10. > :03:19.of this? -- are you going to be? Roadtrip 2015,
:03:20. > :03:21.as the plan was called, had another motive for Clarke, to see him back
:03:22. > :03:24.on the Conservative candidate list and perhaps he would have and this
:03:25. > :03:27.story ended if not for the apparent suicide in mid-September
:03:28. > :03:29.of a young activist called Elliot Johnson, who left a note, naming
:03:30. > :03:32.Mark Clarke as someone who'd been bullying him and a secret recording
:03:33. > :03:35.of Clarke challenging him in a pub. In the wake of Elliot Johnson's
:03:36. > :03:38.death, lurid allegations emerged about Clarke, alleging sexual
:03:39. > :03:39.misconduct, drugs, intimidation, blackmail and bullying connected to
:03:40. > :03:51.Roadtrip, all denied by Mark Clarke. But August e-mail exchanges
:03:52. > :03:53.between Mr Clarke and Mr Shapps' aide Paul Abbot show Mr Abbott was
:03:54. > :03:55.aware of complaints Nothing was done and since Mr Shapps
:03:56. > :04:03.gave Clarke an official Party role he has now resigned saying
:04:04. > :04:05."the buck stops with me". The Prime Minister says a full
:04:06. > :04:10.internal investigation is under way. Elliot Johnson's father wants an
:04:11. > :04:15.independent external investigation. The most serious allegations
:04:16. > :04:17.about Clarke were made after Grant Shapps had been moved to
:04:18. > :04:23.a junior ministerial position and Lord Feldman, David Cameron's
:04:24. > :04:26.chief fundraiser and close friend, He says the party cannot find
:04:27. > :04:32.nor was aware of any written If, by falling on his sword,
:04:33. > :04:38.Mr Shapps hoped to stop the scandal spreading,
:04:39. > :04:57.he may actually only have become The Sunday Politics panel is here.
:04:58. > :05:03.Nick, here is the case for Shapps. He has been made a scapegoat. This
:05:04. > :05:08.is not the end of the story. I think it is not the end of the story.
:05:09. > :05:12.Grant Shapps did sign up Mark Clark to do this. I think it is getting
:05:13. > :05:22.awfully close to the door of Andrew Feldman. They went -- he went to
:05:23. > :05:28.college with the Prime Minister and organised some balls. They go back a
:05:29. > :05:30.long way. The road trip was run out of Conservative campaign
:05:31. > :05:32.headquarters in the run-up to the general election. Most significantly
:05:33. > :05:36.for Andrew Feldman, he signed the for Andrew Feldman, he signed the
:05:37. > :05:42.checks to allow the road trip to take place. We're not talking small
:05:43. > :05:45.cheques, we are talking many hundreds of thousands of pounds.
:05:46. > :05:58.Grant Shapps was in charge of it on a day-to-day basis but Andrew
:05:59. > :06:02.Feldman and his sister helped the running of the road trip. What it
:06:03. > :06:07.does is put the attention onto some of the attention onto summary the
:06:08. > :06:13.attention would be, what did Andrew Feldman do? What did he know and
:06:14. > :06:17.when and what did he do? What we have to remember is Baroness Warsi,
:06:18. > :06:22.who was co-chairman, kicked this guy out of the party. Feldman was
:06:23. > :06:27.Chairman Ben and Shapps brought him out of the party. Feldman was
:06:28. > :06:30.back. Feldman was co-chairman and Feldman is still the chairman now.
:06:31. > :06:35.In terms of the party, what some people were saying to me yesterday,
:06:36. > :06:44.actually, it cannot be seen that Cameron is protecting Lord Fellman
:06:45. > :06:49.-- Feldman because he is his friend. He has got questions to answer. I
:06:50. > :06:54.also think that if people who are in the party feel these questions are
:06:55. > :06:59.not being answered, and it is not an open process, loads more leaks will
:07:00. > :07:06.come out and it will get messier and messier and messier. It is a rum do,
:07:07. > :07:12.what was going on inside the Tory Party in its youth wing. Multiple
:07:13. > :07:15.allegations of bullying and sexual harassment. Culminating in this
:07:16. > :07:22.young man taking his life on a railway line. It is an appalling
:07:23. > :07:25.thing. There is a history of unusual behaviour amongst Conservative
:07:26. > :07:28.students going back to the 1980s when Norman Tebbit closed down the
:07:29. > :07:37.Confederation of Conservative students. It is the most extreme
:07:38. > :07:43.incident I have ever encountered. This is about personal behaviour.
:07:44. > :07:46.The parents of Elliott Johnson raised an important question of
:07:47. > :07:51.chronology. Grant Shapps stop being co-chairman in May. Some of the
:07:52. > :08:00.allegations against Mark Clark, some of the complaints surfaced as
:08:01. > :08:04.recently as August. There is a deeper structural problem, which is
:08:05. > :08:10.the Conservative Party does not have activists. They have to find them
:08:11. > :08:14.where they can get them. Or, when summary has a reputation as bad as
:08:15. > :08:19.Mark Clark, they end up going along with them because options are so
:08:20. > :08:21.limited. It will not be the end of the story.
:08:22. > :08:24.David Cameron is expected to ask MPs to approve UK air strikes
:08:25. > :08:28.The Government thinks it now has enough support to risk a vote
:08:29. > :08:31.in the Commons, even though the Labour Party is still unclear.
:08:32. > :08:34.And the PM will almost certainly need Labour votes to get his way.
:08:35. > :08:37.Mr Corbyn is still trying to rally his Shadow Cabinet and Labour MPs
:08:38. > :08:40.He told Andrew Marr they should recognise his direct mandate
:08:41. > :08:44.And so what I've done is what I said I would always do,
:08:45. > :08:47.I would try to democratise the way the party does things.
:08:48. > :08:49.Yes, I have sent an e-mail to party members, and actually,
:08:50. > :08:53.70,000 have already replied with their views.
:08:54. > :08:56.I don't know what all the views are, obviously, I haven't read them all,
:08:57. > :09:04.Surely we must recognise that in a democracy, the Labour Party has
:09:05. > :09:07.a very large membership, nearly 400,000 members, they have a right
:09:08. > :09:11.to express their point of view and MPs have to listen to it and have to
:09:12. > :09:13.try and understand what's going on in the minds
:09:14. > :09:24.I've been joined by Charlie Falconer, Jeremy Corbyn's
:09:25. > :09:37.Are you minded to support government on the subject of Syrian air
:09:38. > :09:38.strikes? I am. Then need to be assurances, given to the House of
:09:39. > :09:42.Commons but I am minded to support assurances, given to the House of
:09:43. > :09:48.air strikes. The reason I am, I think Isil poses a threat to the
:09:49. > :09:53.region and also Europe, including the United Kingdom. I believe air
:09:54. > :09:58.strikes over Iraq and Syria are having an effect on reducing that
:09:59. > :10:02.risk. I think it is wrong that we are participating in Syria when what
:10:03. > :10:06.is going on is we are trying to defend the United Kingdom. I believe
:10:07. > :10:12.the only long-term solution is there needs to be a solution to the Syrian
:10:13. > :10:22.civil war and the bombing of cracker will not significantly contribute to
:10:23. > :10:26.that. -- Raqqa. I believe we do not have a choice. The likelihood is
:10:27. > :10:32.that the Shadow Cabinet will agree a collective position in this matter.
:10:33. > :10:37.There are honourably held collective views. The Shadow Cabinet on
:10:38. > :10:44.Thursday, they were appropriately discussing. Everybody was conscious
:10:45. > :10:47.of the fact we have to reach a conclusion in national interests.
:10:48. > :10:50.With an issue like this where there is agreement on the factual
:10:51. > :11:00.material, international law, the final judgment, there is such a
:11:01. > :11:04.difficult decision to be made, it is not surprising that our
:11:05. > :11:08.disagreements in the Shadow Cabinet. It is unlikely that tomorrow you
:11:09. > :11:16.will be able to agree a collective line. I think that is right. It is
:11:17. > :11:21.unlikely we'll be able to agree a yes or no answer to the question the
:11:22. > :11:27.Government is about to post. If it does not and there is a free vote
:11:28. > :11:35.for this among Labour MPs, it does make it certain that Mr Cameron will
:11:36. > :11:42.win by a convincing majority. I do not know the position. I think
:11:43. > :11:45.everyone is weighing up the merits of the argument. The right thing to
:11:46. > :11:48.do is for mothers of the Parliamentary Labour Party members
:11:49. > :11:52.of the Shadow Cabinet to consider all the arguments and reach a
:11:53. > :11:57.conclusion as to what they think is in the national interest. It is
:11:58. > :12:01.clear that enough Labour MPs will abstain or side with the Government
:12:02. > :12:07.to give Mr Cameron a majority, even if that are some Tory defectors. If
:12:08. > :12:11.the position where it was whipped against by the Labour Party, that
:12:12. > :12:13.with very significantly reduce the chances if it were a free vote. I do
:12:14. > :12:18.with very significantly reduce the not know what the final figures
:12:19. > :12:22.would be. Your figures sound right. Should there be a free vote? What is
:12:23. > :12:27.the alternative given the position you are into a free vote? My own
:12:28. > :12:33.view is I do not think this very important issue should be allowed to
:12:34. > :12:37.be a situation that forces resignations on people. I think the
:12:38. > :12:41.right course is, if the Shadow Cabinet cannot come to a collective
:12:42. > :12:46.view, and I accept that maybe unlikely, probably the best course
:12:47. > :12:51.is a free vote. That is ultimately for the leadership to decide. For an
:12:52. > :12:55.opposition which aspires to government when you're not a
:12:56. > :12:59.debating society. You are the opposition, the alternative
:13:00. > :13:03.government. What would voters think if you cannot agree a collective
:13:04. > :13:15.position on something as important as war? What the Government be
:13:16. > :13:17.seeing is a legitimate debate. The public is like the Parliamentary
:13:18. > :13:21.Labour Party and like the saddo Cabinet, of different views. You
:13:22. > :13:27.need to come to a collective view. We need to know your view on this.
:13:28. > :13:32.The differences with this is I do not think it will be possible. I do
:13:33. > :13:35.not think that is surprising. That reflects the debate that is going on
:13:36. > :13:41.in the country. The debate going on in the country is going on within
:13:42. > :13:46.the Labour Party. If Mr Corbyn was to attempt, and he said this morning
:13:47. > :13:50.it is his decision to whip or not. If there were a decision to whip
:13:51. > :13:57.Labour members to vote against bombing, would that be a resignation
:13:58. > :14:01.matter for you? I do not want to comment on that. I very much hope
:14:02. > :14:05.any sort of resignations will be avoided. I think the position will
:14:06. > :14:07.be we will have a further discussion on Monday and a collective you will
:14:08. > :14:12.be we will have a further discussion be reached as to how we go forward
:14:13. > :14:16.in relation to the progress. One Labour MP told us that Mr Corbyn's
:14:17. > :14:22.and of this vote seems to him like a deliberate search for a fight and he
:14:23. > :14:26.is very disappointed. I do not agree. The key thing about what is
:14:27. > :14:31.happening now is not who sent a letter when. The key thing which the
:14:32. > :14:35.public want us to debate is the question itself. Should we support
:14:36. > :14:40.air strikes or not? I think the important thing about this week will
:14:41. > :14:46.not be who said what to whom but will be where you stood on the
:14:47. > :14:50.issue. It is one of those issues where the judgment about what was
:14:51. > :14:56.right and what was wrong will not come on the basis of the politics of
:14:57. > :15:02.these few days. It will come on what happens going forward. What was the
:15:03. > :15:07.right decision? Let me ask you this. We do not have much time. Because
:15:08. > :15:12.you are a lawyer and an expert on the Labour Party, if Labour MPs
:15:13. > :15:17.sought to unseat Mr Corbyn, and there is some wild talk around on
:15:18. > :15:22.that, witty automatically be on the ballot paper of a new leadership
:15:23. > :15:27.election? I have not addressed that. It is not a moment to talk about any
:15:28. > :15:32.sort of leadership challenge. Jeremy Corbyn is leader. He was elected two
:15:33. > :15:36.months ago with a huge mandate. That is the position within the Labour
:15:37. > :15:40.Party and that is where we have to address it. It can hardly be a
:15:41. > :15:45.stable position to have a Labour leader, in such a key issue has
:15:46. > :15:49.bombing in Syria, at odds with a huge chunk of his Shadow Cabinet
:15:50. > :15:56.rest room at that position is unsustainable over the period. It
:15:57. > :15:58.was absolutely clear when Jeremy was elected, there were significant
:15:59. > :16:02.disagreements between Jeremy and others on policy. What is happening
:16:03. > :16:09.is the Labour Party is holding together. So far.
:16:10. > :16:14.So, once again a British government is gearing up extend military action
:16:15. > :16:19.It's a well-trod road and the outcome has not always been
:16:20. > :16:22.predictable, or pleasant, which is why so many are hesitant.
:16:23. > :16:24.Ellie Price has been looking at the Prime Minister's case
:16:25. > :16:26.for action, and what role the UK military might play.
:16:27. > :16:33.That bomb in Paris, that could have been London.
:16:34. > :16:35.If they had their way, it would be London.
:16:36. > :16:37.I can't stand here and say we're safe
:16:38. > :16:45.I can't stand here either and say we will remove the threat
:16:46. > :16:47.that taking action will degrade and reduce that threat over time?
:16:48. > :16:49.Absolutely, and I've examined my conscience
:16:50. > :16:56.David Cameron says he no longer wants to outsource this sort
:16:57. > :17:01.Britain is currently involved in air strikes against so-called Islamic
:17:02. > :17:06.State, but only in Iraq, shown here in the bottom half of this shot.
:17:07. > :17:11.The border, for British forces at least, is crucial.
:17:12. > :17:16.IS, Isis, Daesh - whatever you want to call it - control or is free to
:17:17. > :17:21.operate in swathes of territory in Iraq and Syria.
:17:22. > :17:24.Its so-called caliphate stretches from Aleppo in Syria to
:17:25. > :17:30.The lines on the map are relatively fluid, it recently lost control
:17:31. > :17:37.That was down to Kurdish forces with the help of US-led air strikes.
:17:38. > :17:40.Currently Australia, Canada and France are also flying
:17:41. > :17:45.bombing missions over both countries, targeting IS.
:17:46. > :17:49.According to the latest figures released on Friday,
:17:50. > :17:51.the US and its allies operating under the banner of Operation
:17:52. > :17:56.Inherent Resolve have conducted more than 8,500 air strikes against
:17:57. > :18:01.Islamic State targets since the start of the campaign last year.
:18:02. > :18:07.That's 5,580 air strikes in Iraq and 2,925 in Syria.
:18:08. > :18:10.More than 16,000 targets have been damaged or destroyed,
:18:11. > :18:16.including more than 4,500 buildings, nearly 5,000 fighting positions, and
:18:17. > :18:23.The vast majority have come from US aircraft, but the RAF has run 376
:18:24. > :18:30.They've been launched from this base in Cyprus, where
:18:31. > :18:36.The base has also been used to carry out refuelling and
:18:37. > :18:42.The perception out there is the question as to whether or not
:18:43. > :18:45.the UK should be involved in the campaign in Syria or not.
:18:46. > :18:49.The reality is we are involved in that campaign but in an inconsistent
:18:50. > :19:04.Other countries, our allies, the Americans and French
:19:05. > :19:07.in particular, just don't quite understand where we are up to.
:19:08. > :19:09.The PM insists the RAF can provide specific skills
:19:10. > :19:12.that coalition partners are keen to make the most of.
:19:13. > :19:13.The ability to launch highly accurate Brimstone missiles.
:19:14. > :19:16.We are very good at not killing people collaterally,
:19:17. > :19:19.the UK, so in that sense I think us moving into Syria is good.
:19:20. > :19:23.The sad thing is that no matter how good you are, there will be innocent
:19:24. > :19:28.people killed but they are dying anyway because of Isil, and it's
:19:29. > :19:31.coming to the stage where you have to move forward and do things, even
:19:32. > :19:34.though that sort of thing happens, that cannot be
:19:35. > :19:38.Of course Russia is also involved in air strikes in Syria,
:19:39. > :19:41.but its support of President Assad's regime puts it at odds with
:19:42. > :19:48.The scale of these tensions demonstrated when Turkey,
:19:49. > :19:54.which vehemently opposes Assad, shot down a Russian plane last week.
:19:55. > :19:57.Most experts agree that air strikes alone will not destroy the common
:19:58. > :20:02.enemy of IS, that ground forces will be needed, but agreeing on exactly
:20:03. > :20:07.who those forces would be, could prove the biggest obstacle to peace.
:20:08. > :20:30.We are joined now by George Galloway. What should be done to
:20:31. > :20:35.thwart Islamic State, if not British bombing, what should be done to hit
:20:36. > :20:38.it in its heartland? Most of these terrorist attacks were carried out
:20:39. > :20:46.by people living in the countries in which they operated, Tunisia,
:20:47. > :20:50.France, Belgium and so on so you will not physically stop people
:20:51. > :20:58.bombing Raqqa turning up on the streets of Paris. But the planning
:20:59. > :21:05.involved Islamic State. There's not much logistics involved in taking
:21:06. > :21:09.arms into a nightclub and killing innocent people. There are many
:21:10. > :21:14.weapons in Europe, nobody is suggesting these weapons came from
:21:15. > :21:18.Syria. I don't want to dodge your question, I must strongly in favour
:21:19. > :21:23.of destroying Isis and Al-Qaeda as anybody else, more than the David
:21:24. > :21:27.Cameron government or they wouldn't be tolerating a situation where
:21:28. > :21:34.Turkey and Saudi Arabia have been supporting these people for years
:21:35. > :21:40.and until now are supporting them. We are steeped in blog so far but it
:21:41. > :21:46.is bloodier to go on, I promise you. What would you do? I would support
:21:47. > :22:01.the people fighting Isis and Al-Qaeda on the ground. The wide PG
:22:02. > :22:09.militia -- YPG militia. Give them weapons, every kind of support we
:22:10. > :22:17.can. It is a far better way than us joining in. Do you support Russian
:22:18. > :22:25.attacks on the anti-Assad forces in Syria? Yes, if they are coordinated
:22:26. > :22:32.with the Syrian government's army. So do you support British attacks on
:22:33. > :22:37.Islamic State forces in Iraq at their request of the Iraq
:22:38. > :22:41.government? I do, and if they were coordinated with the Government that
:22:42. > :22:45.make sense militarily, and if we coordinated our involvement with
:22:46. > :23:22.Russia and the Is this the camera not realise that
:23:23. > :23:29.if eating Islamic State is more important than getting rid of Mr
:23:30. > :23:34.Assad. I do not believe that. Is utterly farcical claim in the House
:23:35. > :23:43.this week that there were 70,000 moderate rebels armed and rebel to
:23:44. > :23:50.take over the land. There is not 7000. If there are 700 I would be
:23:51. > :23:53.surprised. What will happen, we will bomb territory that will then be
:23:54. > :23:59.taken by other so-called moderate fanatic 's. The ones that as I said
:24:00. > :24:06.to you before, only caught off half your head. Should we regard the
:24:07. > :24:10.Russians and Assad regime as our allies in the fight against Islamic
:24:11. > :24:16.State? Definitely. And we had the chance after the Security Council
:24:17. > :24:25.decided, we had that chance. But that was incinerated by Allied Mr
:24:26. > :24:27.Erdogan and the Russian air force -- Turkish air force bombing these
:24:28. > :24:30.people out of the sky and provoking a crisis between East and West,
:24:31. > :24:34.between Nato and Russia which was completely unnecessary and
:24:35. > :24:41.completely contrary to any legitimate war aims. Did not still
:24:42. > :24:44.be put together despite that? I wish that it would, I suspect it will
:24:45. > :24:49.not. Russia is taking measures against Turkey. If we had time to
:24:50. > :24:52.discuss that I would elaborate this point. Turkey is the source of this
:24:53. > :24:55.problem. The Turkish border has been open to these people, they are
:24:56. > :25:02.selling their stolen oil, billions of dollars worth. Islamic State
:25:03. > :25:11.selling its oil to Turkey? Yes, it is being sold in Turkey, I believe
:25:12. > :25:15.relatives of Mr Erdogan, it is then sold on to neighbouring countries.
:25:16. > :25:20.You cannot be serious about fighting Isil while you're Nato ally is
:25:21. > :25:23.openly collaborating with them. That is why I suspect Cameron. You
:25:24. > :25:28.followed very closely what is going on in the Labour Party at the
:25:29. > :25:33.moment. Does Jeremy Corbyn have an alternative to a free vote when this
:25:34. > :25:36.comes up to a vote in the Commons? Yellow magnifier were him I would
:25:37. > :25:44.hope the vote, because his enemies, and they are in perpetual rebellion
:25:45. > :25:49.to overthrow Jeremy Corbyn. Five Jeremy Corbyn this is the Touraine
:25:50. > :25:52.on which I would fight because our record on intervention in the Middle
:25:53. > :25:59.East is so bad, the likelihood of it not going well is so high. I would
:26:00. > :26:05.dearly is rebels to facilitate David Cameron's war. Without not rip apart
:26:06. > :26:10.the Labour Party? Or would that be the intention? It kind of looks to
:26:11. > :26:15.me like it is ripping itself apart. This is 1931 revisited, Mrs Ramsay
:26:16. > :26:20.MacDonald in reverse, the leader remaining loyal to the party and the
:26:21. > :26:24.MPs effectively joining in national government in times of War and peace
:26:25. > :26:30.at least. If I were Jeremy Corbyn I would hope this boat and let the
:26:31. > :26:35.Labour members pass verdict on those that trip into the lobby with Liam
:26:36. > :26:40.Fox and David Cameron because I'm pretty sure this will not end well.
:26:41. > :26:45.Even at the expense of ripping apart your Shadow Cabinet? You would be
:26:46. > :26:50.ripping a Shadow Cabinet weather seems to be a majority against the
:26:51. > :26:57.position of Jeremy Corbyn. Some of them might surprise you with their
:26:58. > :27:01.Fidelity, but they are supporting the elected leader as the rope
:27:02. > :27:06.supporting hanging man. The hanging man is asphyxiated in the end. What
:27:07. > :27:12.are the chances of Jeremy Corbyn following your advice? Probably not,
:27:13. > :27:16.listening to John Dunlop and Ken Livingstone, they are going to go
:27:17. > :27:23.for a free vote. That will merely postpone the push. It will give Mr
:27:24. > :27:27.Cameron in the majority and will only postpone the push against
:27:28. > :27:31.Jeremy Corbyn. George Galloway, thank you for being with us. At this
:27:32. > :27:36.Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
:27:37. > :27:41.As heads of state gather for climate change talks in Paris,
:27:42. > :27:44.the UK Government cuts funding for new technology which could
:27:45. > :27:52.And the Defence Secretary is hoping for a Commons vote on UK military
:27:53. > :27:55.You cannot develop the first project easily without government backing.
:27:56. > :27:59.And the Defence Secretary is hoping for a Commons vote on UK military
:28:00. > :28:02.action in Syria this week - will he get support from Labour MPs?
:28:03. > :28:07.As global CO2 emissions continue to rise, heads of state from around
:28:08. > :28:12.the world are arriving in Paris for UN climate change talks, where
:28:13. > :28:17.That comes at the end of a week in which the UK Government scrapped
:28:18. > :28:20.a ?1 billion competition to develop the country's first plant to store
:28:21. > :28:22.emissions instead of releasing them into the air,
:28:23. > :28:29.UK ministers said the programme was a victim of ongoing spending cuts
:28:30. > :28:34.needed to balance the books, but supporters of the technology say
:28:35. > :28:49.For generations, power stations are provided it reliable and relatively
:28:50. > :28:53.cheap way to keep the lights on. But now it seems that they are becoming
:28:54. > :28:58.a term as dirty as the pollution they released into the atmosphere.
:28:59. > :29:05.Storing that pollution, known as carbon capture, has been hailed as a
:29:06. > :29:08.solution to the problem. The process involves piping the carbon dioxide
:29:09. > :29:13.produced by places like coal power stations offshore where it can be
:29:14. > :29:21.stored in the space left by a former oil or gas field. The North Sea's
:29:22. > :29:27.massive CO2 storage potential means Scotland could be at the forefront
:29:28. > :29:33.of this technology. In 2013 project at Peterhead power station by Shell
:29:34. > :29:36.and SSE was named as one of two preferred bidder is anyone billion
:29:37. > :29:42.pound UK Government contest to develop carbon capture. It shows
:29:43. > :29:46.that the UK's leading in the low Carbon challenge to tackle climate
:29:47. > :29:48.change and get clean energy. But this week the UK Government
:29:49. > :29:52.announced it was scrapping that support as part of its spending
:29:53. > :29:57.review, and some argue that is bad news for the chances of getting
:29:58. > :30:01.carbon capture up and running. You cannot develop the first project
:30:02. > :30:05.easily without government backing because any first project is usually
:30:06. > :30:07.much more expensive than follow-on project because you are over
:30:08. > :30:14.designing and overengineering, and that is why that government help of
:30:15. > :30:17.the billion pounds is needed. To not venture down this path when it is
:30:18. > :30:20.clearly shown that carbon capture and storage is by far the best
:30:21. > :30:25.financial benefit to the whole economy, to not venture down that
:30:26. > :30:32.path is negligent, naive and also deceitful in the way it has been
:30:33. > :30:35.done. We have been here before. Ministers delayed stand accused of
:30:36. > :30:42.bungling and incompetence over the cancellation of a project to fight
:30:43. > :30:46.global warming. In 2007 BP abandon plans for a carbon capture plan at
:30:47. > :30:50.Peterhead, blaming Westminster delays. A similar plan for Longannet
:30:51. > :30:56.in Fife went the same way four years later when ministers failed to reach
:30:57. > :31:00.a deal with power companies. And in September, an energy firm abandoned
:31:01. > :31:04.its stake in a project to store carbon dioxide mixed its plant in
:31:05. > :31:09.North Yorkshire. That came after a government decision to cut renewable
:31:10. > :31:12.energy subsidies. And while carbon capture has the ability to
:31:13. > :31:16.dramatically reduce emissions, environmental campaigners are
:31:17. > :31:21.cautious about something which continues the burning of fossil
:31:22. > :31:26.fuels. Carbon capture and storage may have a role to play, but we do
:31:27. > :31:29.not know. We do not know how commercially or technically
:31:30. > :31:35.efficient it will be. Do not know how long-term trust can be developed
:31:36. > :31:38.in the reservoirs into which CO2 would be injected, how long it would
:31:39. > :31:43.stay there. That we are happy to see the research happen. Now that the UK
:31:44. > :31:47.has pulled the plug on that, we need to be very clear that Scotland's
:31:48. > :31:50.future potential, our ability to get back on track and start meeting
:31:51. > :31:56.those climate change targets is based on building a low carbon
:31:57. > :32:01.infrastructure and rolling out -- ruling out the burning of fossil
:32:02. > :32:04.fuels. What chance is there of carbon capture coming to this
:32:05. > :32:08.country? Following the announcement this week, one of the partners in
:32:09. > :32:11.the Peterhead Project, Shell, said that without its funding its
:32:12. > :32:16.proposals were not viable for no. And that presents another project,
:32:17. > :32:21.because if coal power stations begin closing because they cannot cut CO2
:32:22. > :32:29.emissions, we need to find another way to keep the lights on. UK
:32:30. > :32:33.ministers want to see a move away from coal towards gas-fired power
:32:34. > :32:38.stations, although they still see a potential role for carbon capture.
:32:39. > :32:41.As for the now-defunct Willian Penn support fund, that has been put down
:32:42. > :32:47.to a need to balance the government's looks. -- the ?1
:32:48. > :32:52.billion aboard fund. Ministers will attend climate talks in Paris next
:32:53. > :32:54.week. As they discuss how to tackle the problem, the world's CO2
:32:55. > :32:56.emissions continue to rise. We asked the Secretary of State for
:32:57. > :33:01.Energy and Climate change, Amber Rudd, and the Minister of State,
:33:02. > :33:03.Andrea Leadsom, for an interview, The Department of Energy and
:33:04. > :33:09.Climate Change told us the decision to cut funding for CCS was a fiscal
:33:10. > :33:16.one, announced by the Chancellor. We also asked the Conservative Party
:33:17. > :33:32.for an interview on this issue But I'm pleased to say we are joined
:33:33. > :33:38.from Stornoway by the SNP MP Angus MacNeil, who's Chair
:33:39. > :33:40.of Westminster's Energy and And in the studio, the Scottish
:33:41. > :33:45.Greens' Patrick Harvie and the former Labour MP and Shadow Energy
:33:46. > :34:00.Minister Tom Greatrex, who's now Angus, can I start with some factual
:34:01. > :34:05.questions to you. It is unfortunate but do not have anyone from the
:34:06. > :34:08.Government here, but this was not announced by George Osborne, it was
:34:09. > :34:14.not even in the Redbook documents, it was in an announcement to the
:34:15. > :34:18.stock exchange which came after the Chancellor sat down after his Autumn
:34:19. > :34:21.Statement. Have you received the new committee any explanation as to why
:34:22. > :34:28.this decision has been made? None whatsoever. It looks again like the
:34:29. > :34:33.government is fairly chaotic, one hand does not know what the other is
:34:34. > :34:37.up to. Only a few days before Amber Rudd had a speech there was no
:34:38. > :34:39.mention of this. It was not in the Autumn Statement, I went to the
:34:40. > :34:42.House of Commons library that evening with one of the researchers
:34:43. > :34:48.trawled through the documents and could not find anything. I should
:34:49. > :34:50.point out for viewers who are perhaps not familiar with the
:34:51. > :34:55.language of government documents, for the Department of energy to tell
:34:56. > :34:59.us in an e-mail that this was a fiscal decision made by the
:35:00. > :35:04.Chancellor, I don't know if you agree, but it seems to me that is as
:35:05. > :35:07.close as you will ever get to a government department saying, we did
:35:08. > :35:13.not necessarily agree with it and it had nothing to do with us! Correct,
:35:14. > :35:17.and would not be the first time, I do not think the new much in the
:35:18. > :35:20.Department, the story was first leaked to the Daily Telegraph of the
:35:21. > :35:25.intention is to cut support for onshore wind. If Scotland was
:35:26. > :35:32.independent it would never vote to be governed by this lot. What next?
:35:33. > :35:38.Who can have any trust in them? They are as slippery as seaweed. Before
:35:39. > :35:43.we get on to the substance of the issue, arguably this is a very
:35:44. > :35:50.unconservative thing to do. One of the things you want to do surely is
:35:51. > :35:55.respect contracts. I am not here on behalf of the Conservative Party.
:35:56. > :35:58.But is that an aspect of this? People will not necessarily have
:35:59. > :36:01.much sympathy with big oil companies, but the fact is they have
:36:02. > :36:05.sunk money into this and at the last moment have been told, that does not
:36:06. > :36:10.matter, this will not happen. Firstly, this is not new, the
:36:11. > :36:16.Treasury antipathy towards carbon capture and storage goes back, when
:36:17. > :36:21.the company pulled out of Longannet, and again that ?1 billion was moved
:36:22. > :36:28.away from the Department of Energy and Climate Change. Technically it
:36:29. > :36:31.has not sat there. One of the things they have said this week is that
:36:32. > :36:36.they want to start a competition for these new generation modular new
:36:37. > :36:40.clear power stations. Irrespective of whether you think that is a good
:36:41. > :36:43.idea, if you are energy company, you might be thinking, I will not invest
:36:44. > :36:49.money in this because they could do what they have just done with carbon
:36:50. > :36:52.capture. Absolutely. Just a few weeks short of the announcement of
:36:53. > :36:57.which of the two final project would win the competition, to then cut it
:36:58. > :37:01.away like that, quite apart from the merits of carbon capture technology,
:37:02. > :37:05.it sends a very bad signal to potential investors and is on top of
:37:06. > :37:08.a range of similar moves in other areas, and you can have debates
:37:09. > :37:12.about the merits of individual technologies, but the overall
:37:13. > :37:18.message it sends an terms of energy investment is very poor, and for the
:37:19. > :37:21.UK, our position which was very good in terms of energy investment, is
:37:22. > :37:24.deteriorating over time because the risk factor of sudden political
:37:25. > :37:28.change is so high, and in the Conservative Party manifesto they
:37:29. > :37:34.referred to ?1 billion for carbon capture and storage, and less than
:37:35. > :37:40.six months later it has gone. Patrick Harvie, are you not very
:37:41. > :37:45.keen on this? On carbon capture in principle? We are very keen, we are
:37:46. > :37:48.happy to see the research happen. Have never been convinced anybody,
:37:49. > :37:51.including government, should take that as it promised that the
:37:52. > :37:56.technology will be deployable on any set timescale. And both governments,
:37:57. > :37:59.Scottish and UK, have made the assumption they can design energy
:38:00. > :38:04.policy with that expectation that CCF will be available. You will have
:38:05. > :38:10.been in favour of the condition going ahead, of companies trying to
:38:11. > :38:13.develop this, but you do not want governments of any description to be
:38:14. > :38:19.forecasting by me change emission cuts on the basis of technology
:38:20. > :38:22.which has not been proven? To be building in plans of new fossil fuel
:38:23. > :38:27.power generation on the assumption they can then bolt on CCS at some
:38:28. > :38:30.future point. We have never known that would be a guaranteed
:38:31. > :38:32.possibility, it is certainly something we should be researching,
:38:33. > :38:38.something we should like to develop and find out what potential it has.
:38:39. > :38:42.But now that the Government has pulled the plug, it may happen in
:38:43. > :38:46.the long-term, it will not be short-term availability, so we need
:38:47. > :38:54.to rule out fossil fuel generation capacity. The other thing is that
:38:55. > :38:58.George Osborne wants to close coal-fired power station but once
:38:59. > :39:03.another generation of quick to build these power gas generating power
:39:04. > :39:11.stations. And in the short term that can reduce emissions. Over a
:39:12. > :39:14.long-term trajectory... You might disagree with that decision to go
:39:15. > :39:18.ahead, but given that that decision has been made, would it not make
:39:19. > :39:23.more sense, would it not be even more important to try to get CCS to
:39:24. > :39:35.mitigate the emissions from this new generation of power stations?
:39:36. > :39:44.The build new capacity you would need CCS. I would challenge the
:39:45. > :39:48.Scottish Government to rule out any additional fossil fuel power
:39:49. > :39:53.generating capacity and I would welcome it if they would give that
:39:54. > :39:56.clarity. And yes, I know the SMP would like to try to convince the
:39:57. > :40:01.government to change its mind on this. If you are going to have a new
:40:02. > :40:04.generation of gas-fired power stations you might as well try to
:40:05. > :40:09.mitigate the emissions but do you think you can win over the committee
:40:10. > :40:15.to Europe edition? I have a feeling that yes, the committee will be open
:40:16. > :40:19.to move towards that position. It is hard to speak for the committee
:40:20. > :40:24.itself. The chairman of the committee on climate change has said
:40:25. > :40:29.at the fifth cabinet budget launch on Thursday morning that to achieve
:40:30. > :40:34.the 2030 targets will be difficult and it is an issue with this ending
:40:35. > :40:39.of this project so abruptly. Tom's point was very good, the government
:40:40. > :40:43.are leaving huge uncertainty on onshore wind, the left uncertainty
:40:44. > :40:48.on solar, now there is uncertainty on carbon capture and storage. The
:40:49. > :40:53.problem is for investors. Some are calling to the Republic of Ireland
:40:54. > :40:59.to invest because of the feel of what is happening in the UK. This is
:41:00. > :41:03.the second time Peterhead has lost carbon capture and storage. Alistair
:41:04. > :41:09.Darling pulled the plug on an earlier project one decade ago. You
:41:10. > :41:13.are no longer an MP just getting at an opinion, you are cheered of this
:41:14. > :41:17.committee. What will you ask your committee to do about this if
:41:18. > :41:23.anything? At the moment the committee is having an investigation
:41:24. > :41:26.into investor confidence. We did not think it would be involved with the
:41:27. > :41:31.investigation at the outset, carbon capture, but we think it will be. We
:41:32. > :41:35.will be hearing from Shell during this and will have them what this
:41:36. > :41:38.means for their confidence and investing in energy issues and
:41:39. > :41:43.energy projects on the word of the UK Government. It is not for me to
:41:44. > :41:50.guess what they are going to say but I think it is obvious they will not
:41:51. > :41:55.be happy. Tom, is Patrick Hardy's point well made that what
:41:56. > :42:00.governments tend to do is assume these technologies will work then
:42:01. > :42:06.build that into their emission forecast? Carbon capture has not got
:42:07. > :42:17.any rear so far. It has in other places. In Canada and shortly in the
:42:18. > :42:22.US. The lazy operating dash there is operating a carbon capture plant in
:42:23. > :42:28.Saskatchewan. And it is another one similar to the project outside the
:42:29. > :42:32.competition in Grangemouth. Even our clients for carbon capture in China
:42:33. > :42:37.so the technology does exist. If it is the and being utilised why do we
:42:38. > :42:43.need a competition to see if the competition is feasible? The
:42:44. > :42:46.complexity comes with, you can capture the carbon, stored the
:42:47. > :42:54.carbon, we are in a strong position in terms of depleted offshore being
:42:55. > :42:57.able to store it. The transport can be complex depending on where you
:42:58. > :43:04.are in different sites. What is it that has too been open? Let's
:43:05. > :43:07.imagine Peterhead got this. It is a gas-fired power station taking gas
:43:08. > :43:15.from the North Sea and presumably can pump CO2 into empty wells. What
:43:16. > :43:19.is it that is not proven in the technology that is up and running
:43:20. > :43:23.that would have to be proven now? The one in Canada, it has been less
:43:24. > :43:30.than one year that it has been in operation and the one in the S -- US
:43:31. > :43:33.has been less than a year. They are parallel to the UK competition but
:43:34. > :43:38.there are different requirements that have to be satisfied. There
:43:39. > :43:42.will be value coming out of the competition as it is running in
:43:43. > :43:45.terms of the detailed feed studies that are running and there are
:43:46. > :43:51.potential projects in the UK outside of the UK competition. We would all
:43:52. > :43:56.agree the technology is not developed to the point with it as
:43:57. > :44:01.commercially available. What I find but, I would like to see the public
:44:02. > :44:06.sector and community sector take more ownership of this energy
:44:07. > :44:11.system. There needs to be consistency and clarity. We are
:44:12. > :44:16.running out of time. The panellists talks starting this week, Copenhagen
:44:17. > :44:24.was pretty much a wash-out in the middle of the financial crisis. It
:44:25. > :44:28.was overhyped. Do you have any greater hopes for Paris? I know we
:44:29. > :44:32.still have time to make a radical deal which leaves the bulk of our
:44:33. > :44:37.fossil fuels in the ground where they have two stay. Whether I am
:44:38. > :44:43.hopeful on not, I struggle. You struggle with hope? Angus, the same
:44:44. > :44:50.question to you? I think we're Paris is going at the moment, their
:44:51. > :44:55.intended contributions, it is not far enough but we get it hopeful is
:44:56. > :45:00.that the Americans and Chinese are together. My only problem is the
:45:01. > :45:06.American Senate and the Republicans. Again, very briefly, Tom? Since 2000
:45:07. > :45:11.and 966 countries at the climate change act or equivalent and I think
:45:12. > :45:14.it also aligns with people's domestic issues in China and Africa
:45:15. > :45:21.and places like think there is more scope for an agreement than the was
:45:22. > :45:22.in Copenhagen. It is a problem. To be discussed further. Thank you very
:45:23. > :45:26.much indeed. Now, the Defence Secretary Michael
:45:27. > :45:28.Fallon confirmed this morning that he's briefed some Labour MPs in
:45:29. > :45:31.an attempt to win their support for Mr Fallon told the Andrew Marr
:45:32. > :45:37.programme that the government would like to hold a vote on
:45:38. > :45:40.the issue this week but that it did Meanwhile the Labour leader Jeremy
:45:41. > :45:44.Corbyn has defended his decision to publically declare his opposition to
:45:45. > :45:49.action before the Shadow Cabinet He has not yet decided whether
:45:50. > :45:53.to allow his MPs a free vote. I'm joined from London by the
:45:54. > :45:58.Labour MP Stephen Kinnock, who's also Parliamentary Private
:45:59. > :46:19.Secretary to the Shadow Business Stephen as was discussed this
:46:20. > :46:24.morning, he has gone to see individual MPs, has he come to you?
:46:25. > :46:28.He has not come knocking on my door, I have been an Studios, maybe
:46:29. > :46:34.Michael has been trying to get through to me. Which way would you
:46:35. > :46:39.be inclined to vote? I am not convinced by the case of the PM. I
:46:40. > :46:45.agree we need to eradicate the modernist death cult that is Isis
:46:46. > :46:50.but we have to do that with a ground offensive. We will not be able to do
:46:51. > :46:54.that if we are discarded -- distracted by a real bombardments. I
:46:55. > :46:59.viewed the PM has put the cart before the horse. Let's get the
:47:00. > :47:03.politics right. We must get a regional force in place, taking Isis
:47:04. > :47:09.out, then I will be more than happy to support that initiative but as
:47:10. > :47:15.things stand I am not convinced by the case of the PM. I am planning to
:47:16. > :47:20.vote against unless the PM comes forward in the next hours with some
:47:21. > :47:28.much cleaner proposal in terms of getting a ground force together
:47:29. > :47:33.which will be taking Isis out. -- much clearer. You have been making
:47:34. > :47:37.out the problems with the strategy of the PM but we do not consider an
:47:38. > :47:42.argument that the damage to the international coalition emerging
:47:43. > :47:47.against Isis, it should they be a vote in the House of Commons against
:47:48. > :47:51.action, should trump some of the reservations you have. They are not
:47:52. > :47:55.necessarily incompatible with what David Cameron is planning to do, he
:47:56. > :48:01.would say he probably agrees with you in all this? I think we have a
:48:02. > :48:05.once in a generation opportunity now to bring the Russians and Iranians
:48:06. > :48:09.to the table. We are making real progress on Vienna full op adding
:48:10. > :48:16.more on this from the Earth to that distracts from the most promising
:48:17. > :48:22.pieces of this jigsaw puzzle which is that we could start to build a
:48:23. > :48:28.corporate coalition which takes the platform to take Isis out. I
:48:29. > :48:32.understand absolutely we need to make a gesture towards our brothers
:48:33. > :48:36.and sisters in France and to show solidarity, I do not actually think
:48:37. > :48:42.putting the cart before the horse is the best way to do that. This is not
:48:43. > :48:48.just an issue about Syria but it has become an issue about the Labour
:48:49. > :48:53.Party. What would you like to see Jeremy Corbyn do? Should he have a
:48:54. > :49:02.wet vote for your possession or should she allowed a free vote? --
:49:03. > :49:08.whipped. He should have come out within 24 hours of the PM statement
:49:09. > :49:15.to say he was not persuaded and to ask for a free vote. It is a matter
:49:16. > :49:19.of individual conscience, and extremely complex issue. A lot of my
:49:20. > :49:23.colleagues in the Parliamentary Labour Party are examining their
:49:24. > :49:29.consciences. It is not party political in the nature of Trident.
:49:30. > :49:32.I think we absolutely have to be whipped on Trident and I am in
:49:33. > :49:36.favour of maintaining a nuclear deterrent but on this issue which is
:49:37. > :49:43.on the immediate and complex decision on what to do in Syria, I
:49:44. > :49:48.think it is right it is an individual vote. I know we were
:49:49. > :49:52.whipped on Iraq and Libya but we have two say we have learned from
:49:53. > :50:05.Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan and therefore there is a case for an
:50:06. > :50:09.non-whipped vote on this occasion. This is not just about what Labour
:50:10. > :50:13.MPs do next week but about a credible party of government. If you
:50:14. > :50:18.wearing power now with Jeremy Corbyn as leader and the Conservative
:50:19. > :50:22.backbencher put forward a Private members motion for military action
:50:23. > :50:26.the House of Commons might well vote in favour of military action and the
:50:27. > :50:30.PM would be against it. That is what the public would see, these people
:50:31. > :50:36.all over the place. I have said part of this is a matter of conscience, I
:50:37. > :50:42.am also a realist about party management and the fact of the
:50:43. > :50:48.matter is it is very tough for Jeremy Corbyn. As an MP he is
:50:49. > :50:57.somebody who voted against the wet 550 times himself. His ability to
:50:58. > :51:01.whip the party, let's be realistic, call a spade a spade, it is very
:51:02. > :51:06.difficult for him to get the cohesion cause of his track record
:51:07. > :51:11.as an MP and that is a factor. I am realistic about that. I also think
:51:12. > :51:16.that is one of the reasons the PM is bringing this so quickly, Jeremy
:51:17. > :51:19.Corbyn has not had an opportunity to prepare a cohesive and coherent
:51:20. > :51:24.platform. We have got to get over this up and Corey eight cohesive
:51:25. > :51:29.Parliamentary Labour Party, it is deeply cohesion for credibility.
:51:30. > :51:34.Able to not vote for divided parties. We are where we are now and
:51:35. > :51:40.because of Jeremy Corbyn's track record as a serial disregard of the
:51:41. > :51:45.whip he is finding it particularly difficult. Get over this. We need to
:51:46. > :51:49.see some coherence coming in in the New Year and what is critical as
:51:50. > :51:56.well are our results, in the elections next year. It amounts to
:51:57. > :52:01.say we would like to be a credible alternative party of government but
:52:02. > :52:05.just not now? I am being realistic about where we are in the
:52:06. > :52:08.Parliamentary Labour Party and the fact of the matter is that the track
:52:09. > :52:14.record of Jeremy Corbyn does make this difficult. We have two bill
:52:15. > :52:18.that coherence. We have got to build it going into the Scottish, Welsh
:52:19. > :52:24.and London elections next year particularly. We are a party of
:52:25. > :52:29.government. The only way we can put our policies and values into
:52:30. > :52:34.practice is by being in government. We are not a protest movement. Let's
:52:35. > :52:40.see how it looks in Scotland, Wales and London and then we can start to
:52:41. > :52:44.look like that party. According to your party you have got to stop
:52:45. > :52:47.looking like a protest movement before the election, you have four
:52:48. > :52:59.or five months at most. Because the prime minister has
:53:00. > :53:04.brought this rapidly, and because of the big issues I have just outlined
:53:05. > :53:08.over Jeremy Corbyn's track record, but also because this is a matter of
:53:09. > :53:12.individual conscience. And look at the Tory party they are divided as
:53:13. > :53:17.well. Less divided on us numerically, but their whips have
:53:18. > :53:22.two get people who are uncomfortable with this boat to have their arms
:53:23. > :53:23.twisted. That is not the case with the Labour Party at the present
:53:24. > :53:26.time. Thank you for joining us. Time now to review the events
:53:27. > :53:29.of the week and look to what's Joining me is political editor
:53:30. > :53:37.of the Scottish Daily Mail, Alan Roden, and the historical
:53:38. > :53:52.novelist Sara Sheridan. On Syria, Alan, what do you make of
:53:53. > :53:57.what Stephen Kenedy has just said -- Stephen Kinnock has just said. And
:53:58. > :54:00.is on the saying, we're not serious as a party but I hope we will get
:54:01. > :54:06.serious soon. Or am I misinterpreting? You are right, they
:54:07. > :54:10.are a protest movement at the moment, and I don't think that is
:54:11. > :54:16.going to happen for a long time to come. Labour have already lost a
:54:17. > :54:20.by-election. I think Scottish Labour now they have already lost that
:54:21. > :54:27.election. Labour is a party which is out of step not only in Westminster
:54:28. > :54:32.but also with its voters. And that is what has really happened. There
:54:33. > :54:37.is a split between left and right, and actually the Parliamentary
:54:38. > :54:41.Labour Party... Which part of the argument be taken out of step with
:54:42. > :54:44.the voters? I think the Parliamentary Labour Party as a
:54:45. > :54:47.whole is far too far to the right. Mostly reporters are further to the
:54:48. > :54:55.left, and that is traditionally where Labour comes from. On military
:54:56. > :54:58.action in Syria? Look at the marchers yesterday stop. The remark
:54:59. > :55:03.is all over the UK. Is that not the point with Jeremy Corbyn
:55:04. > :55:07.supporters? The mistake a few thousand people on a march with the
:55:08. > :55:11.mood of the country. No I don't think so, if you look at what is
:55:12. > :55:16.going on, is a one-upmanship about going to war, let on, that is the
:55:17. > :55:19.easy option, but it does not work in the Middle East for a long time
:55:20. > :55:28.now. America has been bombing for 18 months in Syria and it is not
:55:29. > :55:32.working. We can discuss the merits endlessly, but this issue of which
:55:33. > :55:38.part of the Labour Party that a step with the public, what is your view?
:55:39. > :55:42.The public is divided on the issue, the opinion polls show that. Jeremy
:55:43. > :55:45.Corbyn is in touch with his membership not with the wider
:55:46. > :55:49.public, and that includes Labour voters, people who are maybe not
:55:50. > :55:53.active in the party but have voted for the party and now deserting the
:55:54. > :55:55.party. Lets be devils advocate because you are both criticising the
:55:56. > :56:00.Labour Party. The counterargument would be to say that it is good that
:56:01. > :56:05.the Labour Party and Conservative Party are having opened
:56:06. > :56:09.discussions. Look at the SNP. There has been not one member of
:56:10. > :56:13.opposition from the SNP. Nicola Sturgeon was saying only a few days
:56:14. > :56:17.ago she wanted to hear David Cameron's arguments. Are we supposed
:56:18. > :56:22.to believe that spontaneously all 54 SNP MPs and all their members in the
:56:23. > :56:27.Scottish Parliament just agree completely with the opposition? That
:56:28. > :56:34.would be completely unnatural, wouldn't it? We have not heard a
:56:35. > :56:38.murmur of opposition. Yes, but the Labour story is a much more
:56:39. > :56:44.compelling. I'm playing devils advocate, but Labour would say, we
:56:45. > :56:46.cannot disguise the fact we are divided, at least we're having an
:56:47. > :56:52.open debate. Look at that lot, there is no debate all. Labour tried this
:56:53. > :56:59.with the Trident debate at the conference, they said we have open
:57:00. > :57:01.views. But the public do not want parties that are divided. Look at
:57:02. > :57:08.the SNP, they have rigid discipline. People voted for them in
:57:09. > :57:10.their droves. The SNP will have people who are against bombing but
:57:11. > :57:14.they will not speak out because they are strongly with. Fine changes the
:57:15. > :57:22.other issue we have been discussing today. Sara, do you have any hopes
:57:23. > :57:26.that Paris might be more... Copenhagen just was a disaster. We
:57:27. > :57:32.live in that hope, that it might work. The point about Copenhagen, it
:57:33. > :57:36.did not just not achieve things, it contributed towards taking the issue
:57:37. > :57:40.off the agenda for five years. Bill Gates is heading to Paris this week
:57:41. > :57:44.and he's bringing his pocketbook. What the Conservatives have done in
:57:45. > :57:49.taking this money away from the project that they were going to fun
:57:50. > :57:52.for carbon capture has set a very clear message. I think the
:57:53. > :57:56.Conservatives are lining up for a magical solution very sharply down
:57:57. > :58:01.the line to say," we could do fracking instead!" Which is what
:58:02. > :58:08.they would like. Who would much rather have that. Out of the
:58:09. > :58:11.arrogant -- part of the argued it would have is that you have
:58:12. > :58:17.gas-fired power stations therefore it is less important to have carbon
:58:18. > :58:20.capture and storage. Pulling that money is an idiotic move at the same
:58:21. > :58:23.time as saying, would it not be good if we have private investment? There
:58:24. > :58:26.is Bill Gates with his pocketbook ready and open for business in Paris
:58:27. > :58:32.next week, and they have kind of loan at. Alan, you said the public
:58:33. > :58:37.is divided over military action in Syria. What about climate change? Is
:58:38. > :58:42.there a sense promote people that it has just gone away, disappeared as
:58:43. > :58:50.an issue? I think it is an issue. Not as big an issue as politicians
:58:51. > :58:53.like Patrick RB would say it is. In Paris things will be put forward, it
:58:54. > :59:02.will not be legally binding, you cannot force governments to do
:59:03. > :59:05.things. And hundreds of thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide will be
:59:06. > :59:09.produced from the conference, which seems ludicrous. But going back to
:59:10. > :59:10.carbon capture, it is an easy political decision for the
:59:11. > :59:12.Chancellor to make to cut that. I'll be back
:59:13. > :59:17.at the same time next week.