:00:37. > :00:38.Good morning, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:39. > :00:41.Police say they're treating a multiple stabbing in London
:00:42. > :00:46.As the RAF intensifies its bombing campaign over Syria,
:00:47. > :00:51.is this the latest sign of an evolving threat on British streets?
:00:52. > :00:54.Labour scored a significant win at this week's Oldham by-election,
:00:55. > :00:56.but after a tough week for Jeremy Corbyn,
:00:57. > :01:00.there are more reports of smears, abuse and even talk of a purge.
:01:01. > :01:08.We'll be speaking to a member of the Shadow Cabinet.
:01:09. > :01:10.And it's not just the Labour Party that has its rebels.
:01:11. > :01:13.We'll be talking to the Conservative MP Heidi Allen, who hit
:01:14. > :01:15.the headlines after delivering a bombshell speech against her own
:01:16. > :01:20.Coming up on Sunday Politics Scotland:
:01:21. > :01:22.With all 54 SNP MPs voting against extending air strikes
:01:23. > :01:37.on Syria, we'll ask Stephen Gethins where that leaves the party now.
:01:38. > :01:40.And joining me for all of that, three journalists who've dutifully
:01:41. > :01:46.battled through the wind and the rain to get here,
:01:47. > :01:48.even without the threat of a telling off from Andrew.
:01:49. > :01:50.It's Nick Watt, Isabel Oakeshott and Janan Ganesh,
:01:51. > :01:51.and they'll be tweeting throughout the show.
:01:52. > :01:59.that police are treating an attack at a London underground station
:02:00. > :02:03.A man carrying a knife was reported to have screamed,
:02:04. > :02:06.as he injured three men at Leytonstone station
:02:07. > :02:11.making it potentially the first terrorist attack on British soil
:02:12. > :02:15.since the murder of fusilier Lee Rigby in 2013.
:02:16. > :02:16.Mobile phone footage shows police officers
:02:17. > :02:19.wrestling with a man after he had been tasered.
:02:20. > :02:22.He was later arrested and remains in custody.
:02:23. > :02:26.The Metropolitan Police said one man suffered serious knife injuries
:02:27. > :02:28.but was not thought to be in a life-threatening condition,
:02:29. > :02:36.while two other victims received minor injuries.
:02:37. > :02:38.has this morning called the attack an "abomination",
:02:39. > :02:43.and we can speak now to the local MP John Cryer
:02:44. > :02:53.Your response? It is an appalling attack. And it is frightening, very
:02:54. > :02:56.frightening for local people. I've been talking to some of the local
:02:57. > :03:01.businesses this morning and obviously they are all very worried
:03:02. > :03:05.about it now. What the background is, what the motivation is, I do
:03:06. > :03:10.think it would be particularly helpful to speculate at the moment.
:03:11. > :03:14.-- I don't think it would be particularly helpful. So I'd rather
:03:15. > :03:19.not do that. But when something like this happens in your own area, it is
:03:20. > :03:23.not something expect. Leytonstone is a peaceful area, a lot of
:03:24. > :03:26.communities live together extremely peacefully and harmoniously, that's
:03:27. > :03:31.one of the great things about this area. People will be scared and
:03:32. > :03:35.understandably so, as you say, so what is your message to constituents
:03:36. > :03:39.as they wake up to this news? I think the message is that we carry
:03:40. > :03:46.on as normal, that we don't allow this sort of barbaric behaviour to
:03:47. > :03:51.change our lives. And I think that's the important thing. And I think
:03:52. > :03:55.people will continue as well. I'm not saying people will be blase
:03:56. > :03:59.about it, people will be very concerned. But I don't think people
:04:00. > :04:02.will allow this to change the way they live their lives on a
:04:03. > :04:08.day-to-day basis, that's the impression I've had from the people
:04:09. > :04:11.I've been talking to this morning. Now, this has happened just days
:04:12. > :04:16.after parliament voted for air strikes in Syria, people are bound,
:04:17. > :04:22.rightly or wrongly to draw a link between the two, what say you?
:04:23. > :04:26.Welcome I was opposed to the air strikes in Syria, I voted against
:04:27. > :04:31.air strikes in Syria, I think it will prove to be quite a major
:04:32. > :04:36.mistake. I am not convinced that this will be connected to the air
:04:37. > :04:41.strikes in Syria. Well I just don't know at the moment so we can only
:04:42. > :04:45.speculate. But there doesn't seem to be immediately evidence that there
:04:46. > :04:49.is a direct link. But we have to find out what the background is.
:04:50. > :04:53.Police are investigating. I have been in contact with police this
:04:54. > :04:58.morning. At I think it would be dangerous to say this is a direct
:04:59. > :05:01.consequence of air strikes in Syria. And as I say I am a fairly major
:05:02. > :05:05.critic of the government's activities. Thank you.
:05:06. > :05:06.This comes after the so-called Islamic State
:05:07. > :05:08.claimed a husband and wife who massacred 14 people
:05:09. > :05:14.were supporters of the terrorist group.
:05:15. > :05:18.So is this just the latest sign that the West faces a new type of threat?
:05:19. > :05:22.Well, we're joined now by the security expert Will Geddes.
:05:23. > :05:28.At the moment it looks like a lone wolf, no accomplices, no
:05:29. > :05:33.organisation in any major way behind it, is that how you read it? I think
:05:34. > :05:37.pretty much so. It is incredibly difficult to say right now and again
:05:38. > :05:41.it is dangerous to speculate too much until the police have
:05:42. > :05:44.undertaken their investigations to determine how this individual was
:05:45. > :05:48.motivated, under what particular an brother that might have been,
:05:49. > :05:53.whether it was alone, whether it was a self radicalisation process --
:05:54. > :05:59.what particular an umbrella that might have been. We have been
:06:00. > :06:04.expecting an attack because we have had the Paris attacks, we have had
:06:05. > :06:08.the attacks in Southern California, and there had been warnings about
:06:09. > :06:13.it, and the terror threat is still extremely high. So we shouldn't be
:06:14. > :06:16.that surprised. No, I don't think we are. And I think we are accepting
:06:17. > :06:21.the fact that unfortunately we are at a very high risk level intervals
:06:22. > :06:25.of these types of attacks. And this precedes the Syrian bombing
:06:26. > :06:29.agreements in terms of the fact that there were seven significant plots
:06:30. > :06:33.foiled this year. We have always been on the radar, it is just down
:06:34. > :06:37.to the capabilities of the individuals. Sadly, certainly in the
:06:38. > :06:40.wake of this most recent incident, it will be the platform of lone
:06:41. > :06:44.wolves more than anything else. Do you think that is the case? That is
:06:45. > :06:50.the most recent pattern, that might be what continues in, unfortunately,
:06:51. > :06:54.capitals across Europe? I think we have to be pragmatic and accept
:06:55. > :06:58.that. Ultimately we know that the individuals that are planning as
:06:59. > :07:02.cells have a far higher chance of detection. So individuals working on
:07:03. > :07:06.their own, whether it be in a very specific conceptual sort of agenda
:07:07. > :07:15.and motivation or whether it be an individual that is simply aligned to
:07:16. > :07:19.the ideologies of Daesh will add to the spectrum of Brett. Nick Watt,
:07:20. > :07:23.what do you think the little reaction will be? We have had some
:07:24. > :07:27.reaction from Jon Cryer saying stay vigilant but don't be blase. That
:07:28. > :07:31.was an incredibly important contribution you had from John
:07:32. > :07:35.Cryer, he is not just the local MP, E is the chairman of the
:07:36. > :07:39.Parliamentary party. In that capacity Jeremy Corbyn invites him
:07:40. > :07:44.to attend the Shadow Cabinet. He voted against air strikes and he is
:07:45. > :07:47.being held up as how the majority of opinion in the Labour Party is
:07:48. > :07:51.against air strikes. He was absolutely clear saying it would be
:07:52. > :07:55.dangerous to say that this attack in Leytonstone is in any way linked to
:07:56. > :07:59.the vote in parliament. The reason why that is significant is that
:08:00. > :08:02.there will be some people and indeed we are already seeing some people on
:08:03. > :08:07.Twitter saying that this attack in Leytonstone is as a result of that
:08:08. > :08:09.vote. Well, the chairman of the PLP who voted against the air strikes
:08:10. > :08:13.said it would be dangerous to make that conclusion. But people will
:08:14. > :08:17.make those links and they will continue to do so particularly in
:08:18. > :08:20.the light of Michael Fallon saying the bombing campaign is intensifying
:08:21. > :08:25.in Syria and there are likely to be civilian cavities. They may well do
:08:26. > :08:30.so but what strikes me about this attack, is awful and horrible as it
:08:31. > :08:34.is for everybody involved, is that it is a rather pathetic and little
:08:35. > :08:39.attack. Very happily the victim, as we understand it, is not going to
:08:40. > :08:43.die as a result of this attack. What strikes me is, were we in America
:08:44. > :08:47.and were the people who are prone to do these things able to get their
:08:48. > :08:51.hands on guns, this would have been a mass casualties could well have
:08:52. > :08:56.been a mass casualties attack. As it was, we're left with somebody just
:08:57. > :08:59.randomly stabbing and not really getting anywhere. Do you think
:09:00. > :09:06.people are ready for how long this campaign is going to go on for, and
:09:07. > :09:09.we are going to live in the shadow indirectly or directly of a
:09:10. > :09:13.terrorist threat? I don't know if people are ready for just Syria or
:09:14. > :09:17.maybe five years worth of security being one of the top three issues in
:09:18. > :09:21.the country. If you look at the issues index, most salient to voters
:09:22. > :09:26.in recent years, it has been the usual economy, NHS, immigration to a
:09:27. > :09:29.certain extent. I wonder whether, by the time of the next election
:09:30. > :09:34.because of this fairly consistent terror threat, security is even
:09:35. > :09:36.number one, two or three. We've got the investigatory Powers Bill going
:09:37. > :09:40.through Parliament at the moment and I think that kind of legislation,
:09:41. > :09:46.the presence of a terror threat, the kind of thing that is on the evening
:09:47. > :09:50.news might overnight over five years will change what we consider to be
:09:51. > :09:54.the most salient issues in British issues -- night after night. There
:09:55. > :09:57.had been reports that one of the Paris attackers had travelled to
:09:58. > :10:00.Britain earlier this year, and the chair of the Home Affairs Select
:10:01. > :10:04.Committee said it is a real worry that people are able to get through
:10:05. > :10:08.our borders without being detected. How worried are you by those
:10:09. > :10:12.reports? I think we are playing a bit of a catch-up game and
:10:13. > :10:15.unfortunately we have to appreciate it many capabilities in tens of the
:10:16. > :10:20.border force a Metropolitan Police and police agencies across the UK.
:10:21. > :10:23.Although there have been positive suggestions by the government in
:10:24. > :10:27.terms of boosting numbers within the security services, for example, you
:10:28. > :10:33.are still looking at approximately 18 months before those 1900 new
:10:34. > :10:38.heads within GCHQ and security services will be operationally able
:10:39. > :10:41.to fulfil their mission. Briefly on the police numbers, also a very
:10:42. > :10:45.controversial issue in terms of the spending review, that didn't happen,
:10:46. > :10:50.the cuts that people feared, the government will be relieved they did
:10:51. > :10:54.not make those cuts? Iain Duncan Smith in condemning these attackers
:10:55. > :10:56.as an abomination made that exact point, saying we kept those police
:10:57. > :10:58.numbers and they will be important in terms of attacking the terrorist
:10:59. > :11:00.threat. Now, the Prime Minister had hoped to
:11:01. > :11:03.sign off his plans for a renegotiation of Britain's EU
:11:04. > :11:05.membership later this month. have decided not give him an early
:11:06. > :11:09.Christmas present, and that means the referendum on
:11:10. > :11:22.whatever deal he does get Last month David Cameron sent a
:11:23. > :11:26.letter to Donald Tusk, president of the European Council setting out the
:11:27. > :11:30.EU reform demands. There were four main areas he once renegotiated.
:11:31. > :11:35.Protection for non-Europe countries and safeguarding their rights.
:11:36. > :11:40.Exemption from an ever closer union. And more powers for national
:11:41. > :11:46.parliaments. Restore competitiveness in the EU which involves cutting red
:11:47. > :11:50.tape and free trade agreements with other economies. And finally, the
:11:51. > :11:53.one causing the most headaches, restricting benefits for EU
:11:54. > :11:56.migrants. Under the Prime Minister's plans, EU migrants would
:11:57. > :12:03.not be able to claim any in work benefits for four years. On Thursday
:12:04. > :12:05.David Cameron abandoned hopes for an early referendum as early as May
:12:06. > :12:10.next year after admitting he would not be able to get the deal he wants
:12:11. > :12:14.at an EU summit in two weeks' time. Donald Tusk will on Monday published
:12:15. > :12:19.an assessment of the British demands in a letter to the 27 other member
:12:20. > :12:23.states. It follows a round of confessionals in which governments
:12:24. > :12:27.have outlined their concerns. He said December's meeting will pave
:12:28. > :12:35.the way for a deal in February. By then David Cameron will be forced to
:12:36. > :12:37.decide whether to campaign for a Brexit or stay in the EU.
:12:38. > :12:40.and committed eurosceptic Iain Duncan Smith
:12:41. > :12:43.has been speaking on The Andrew Marr show this morning,
:12:44. > :12:46.and he said the delay was a sign of strength, not weakness.
:12:47. > :12:53.Well the mood is actually very upbeat. I'm involved in putting
:12:54. > :12:56.together the package that the Prime Minister wants to take to the
:12:57. > :12:59.council. So we've been deep in discussion about that. The Prime
:13:00. > :13:02.Minister has been pretty clear throughout that he wants to take a
:13:03. > :13:07.package that supports the manifesto commitment. In my area for example
:13:08. > :13:10.on welfare it is very clear that he wants to have that commitment,
:13:11. > :13:12.people living here and contributing to the system, and that will be one
:13:13. > :13:14.of the key elements. We did ask for a government minister
:13:15. > :13:18.to talk to us about the prime minister's renegotiation plans
:13:19. > :13:20.but were told none was available. we can speak instead to the
:13:21. > :13:24.Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin, of the eurosceptic Conservatives
:13:25. > :13:26.For Britain group and he joins us
:13:27. > :13:37.from our Westminster studio. Welcome to the programme. Are you as
:13:38. > :13:46.upbeat and optimistic as Iain Duncan Smith? No. Ironic, really, because
:13:47. > :13:50.he and I were elected on the same day in 1992 and we both opposed the
:13:51. > :14:00.Maastricht Treaty. We both spare about the direction of the European
:14:01. > :14:03.Union. -- we both despair. And while he is gamely supporting the Prime
:14:04. > :14:09.Minister's negotiation in its centre is, I think he knows in his heart
:14:10. > :14:11.that this is a very lame renegotiation compared to what the
:14:12. > :14:15.Prime Minister was originally promising. I mean, there are a whole
:14:16. > :14:23.range of things that the Prime Minister wanted, like getting out of
:14:24. > :14:28.all the home affairs and justice revisions of the Lisbon Treaty, like
:14:29. > :14:32.getting a complete opt out of the EU Charter of fundamental rights, which
:14:33. > :14:38.is, for example, gives the power to the European court of justice to
:14:39. > :14:39.decide prisoner voting and not just the European Court of Human Rights,
:14:40. > :14:45.and so it goes on. But, you know, you know Iain Duncan
:14:46. > :14:50.Smith well, he is not known as a raging Europhile, and if he is
:14:51. > :14:56.optimistic and competent, certainly, publicly, the chances of a
:14:57. > :14:59.meaningful deal of a deal with Europe, -- meaningful chance of a
:15:00. > :15:05.deal with Europe, then why cannot you be? He is bound by his duty to
:15:06. > :15:09.the cabinet, but I am free to speak my mind, Iain Duncan Smith focus
:15:10. > :15:15.very narrowly on a very circular way, on his own, on the Prime
:15:16. > :15:19.Minister's own terms of reference. The European Union has changed so
:15:20. > :15:25.Minister's own terms of reference. dramatically over the last 20 or 30
:15:26. > :15:27.years, the question the British people are going to have to face, do
:15:28. > :15:30.they want to carry on with this journey? There is no status quo, is
:15:31. > :15:34.they want to carry on with the journey of integration, because what
:15:35. > :15:39.the prime ministers negotiating about, will not change the course of
:15:40. > :15:43.the European Union or the course of the United Kingdom within the
:15:44. > :15:46.European Union. They are relatively trivial, rather complicated, but
:15:47. > :15:52.relatively trivial negotiating demands. He's going to get the deal
:15:53. > :15:56.by February. Even if he gets the deal by February, it will not change
:15:57. > :15:59.the price of fish, it will not allow the UK Parliament to determine our
:16:00. > :16:04.own laws and it will not restrict the European court of justice,
:16:05. > :16:08.another of the Prime Minister's demands that he has now dropped. It
:16:09. > :16:15.will not restore the opt out of the social chapter, which was gained by
:16:16. > :16:20.John Major in the Maastricht Treaty, it will not achieve any of these
:16:21. > :16:24.things. There was never going to be enough concessions... I am glad you
:16:25. > :16:27.are making the point that this renegotiation was never really going
:16:28. > :16:36.to address the fundamental problems... Or, you were never going
:16:37. > :16:39.to be satisfied! The Prime Minister was making these much tougher
:16:40. > :16:43.demands. He has dropped these demands. I would be supporting the
:16:44. > :16:47.Prime Minister's negotiating position if he had stuck to his
:16:48. > :16:50.demands. Which one in particular, if there was one thing you would like
:16:51. > :16:55.to see him bring back which you could sell to your constituents,
:16:56. > :16:58.what would it be? The fundamental one, restrict the ability of the
:16:59. > :17:04.European Court of Justice to rule on almost anything. Risen a voting, I
:17:05. > :17:07.mentioned, it is now moving to that area. And the whole question of the
:17:08. > :17:11.relationship between those countries that do not want to be in political
:17:12. > :17:17.union, do not want to be involuntary union, do not want to be in the
:17:18. > :17:20.fiscal union treaty which has been redesigned by the call Eurozone
:17:21. > :17:26.states. -- prisoner voting. What we have got to face, this is not a
:17:27. > :17:29.status quo we are voting to stay in, it is a continuing development of
:17:30. > :17:35.European Union integration, if you want to have choices, you must vote
:17:36. > :17:39.Leave. It has been reported that the campaign will campaign for Brexit.
:17:40. > :17:44.LAUGHTER Would you welcome him leading the
:17:45. > :17:51.campaign from the out? You have laughed... We would welcome him
:17:52. > :17:58.joining the vote to leave campaign, but I don't think it is very likely,
:17:59. > :18:02.at the moment he is convincing people he's being really tough but
:18:03. > :18:06.we know that this is what happens in all EU negotiations, the government
:18:07. > :18:11.pretends to be tough, pretends to be a showdown, and in the end, hey
:18:12. > :18:14.presto, rabbit out of the hat, everything is marvellous. Game set
:18:15. > :18:19.and match for the British. Is there any thing, do you think, that Iain
:18:20. > :18:25.Duncan Smith will be able to sell once this renegotiation is done and
:18:26. > :18:31.dusted? Sell to the backbench... ? I doubt it, I think... As Bernard has
:18:32. > :18:34.suggested, in January, 2013, when David Cameron talked about
:18:35. > :18:37.renegotiation, he meant something sweeping, even in addition to the
:18:38. > :18:41.thing is Bernard has mentioned, even including flirting with the idea of
:18:42. > :18:45.some deep reform to European free movement, that was what was being
:18:46. > :18:48.suggested two years ago. There is not going to be anything approaching
:18:49. > :18:52.any of that in any deal that urges early next year. As it stands a
:18:53. > :18:58.number of backbenchers will find that hard to support. Tactic from
:18:59. > :19:02.Downing Street, to leak the idea that David Cameron might conceivably
:19:03. > :19:04.support the leave campaign, slightly misjudged, so transparent the
:19:05. > :19:11.obvious that he will not. If anything, it was a message sent to
:19:12. > :19:18.other European capitals, " if I don't do that smack if you do not do
:19:19. > :19:26.this deal, I may join the sceptics. -- if you do not do this deal". I
:19:27. > :19:28.agree with Jan, nobody will take seriously the idea that he will
:19:29. > :19:31.campaign for out because fundamentally that is not what he
:19:32. > :19:35.believes, he wants to stay in and has said seven the beginning.
:19:36. > :19:40.Bernard is right, there is a feeling that the renegotiation will only
:19:41. > :19:45.achieve something rather cosmetic. -- and has said so since the
:19:46. > :19:48.beginning. David Cameron may pull a rabbit out of a hat and pretend that
:19:49. > :19:53.he has got a concession but people will not be convinced. I leave it to
:19:54. > :19:55.Nick to stick up for the Prime Minister in this particular
:19:56. > :19:59.instance, what would the rabbit in the hat, the rabbit coming out of
:20:00. > :20:05.the hat, be, for David Cameron, once this deal is done and dusted. It
:20:06. > :20:10.will be examined as rabbit, because we will know about it! He cannot go
:20:11. > :20:14.beyond what he wrote in the letter to Donald Tusk, the rabbit that he
:20:15. > :20:19.takes out of a hat which says, isn't this amazing, isn't opt out from the
:20:20. > :20:22.historic commitment to ever closer union, he will say it is
:20:23. > :20:26.significant... He will say it has an impact on the European Court of
:20:27. > :20:31.judgment rulings, but the point is, first, we know that is what he wants
:20:32. > :20:35.to achieve, and also, people like Bernard, and we can see he is
:20:36. > :20:39.nodding (!), he will say this is just a cosmetic change, it is not
:20:40. > :20:46.going to change the fundamental privacy of EU law over EU law. --
:20:47. > :20:49.fundamental primacy of EU law over UK law. If there were a concession
:20:50. > :20:52.fundamental primacy of EU law over on in work benefits, many people
:20:53. > :20:58.feel that is impossible, bearing in mind the laws, would that satisfy
:20:59. > :21:01.you? It would not, in the end, the European Court of Justice will
:21:02. > :21:06.always have the power to overturn Teva has been agreed, the problem
:21:07. > :21:08.the Prime Minister has got, he started at the beginning with
:21:09. > :21:14.grappling with quite some big things, but refusing to argue with
:21:15. > :21:18.the overall architecture of the European Union. -- grappling with
:21:19. > :21:21.some quite big things. If you do not change the architecture, nothing
:21:22. > :21:25.will really change, except that the European Union will carry on
:21:26. > :21:29.morphing into a state and we will be part of that, whether we are in out
:21:30. > :21:34.of the Euro, ever closer treaty in the treaty -- ever closer union in
:21:35. > :21:36.the treaty, not in the treaty, whatever. Thank you very much for
:21:37. > :21:40.joining us. The real substance being debated
:21:41. > :21:45.by MPs in the Commons on Wednesday may have been whether to extend air
:21:46. > :21:47.strikes into Syria but it was the conflict inside
:21:48. > :21:49.Jeremy Corbyn's party that ended up
:21:50. > :21:51.grabbing just as many headlines. Even when the party finally arrived
:21:52. > :21:54.at a position, it couldn't heal the rift between
:21:55. > :21:58.the leader and some of his MPs. The party received
:21:59. > :22:00.a much-needed boost with a comfortable majority
:22:01. > :22:03.in Thursday's by-election. So when it comes to Jeremy Corbyn's
:22:04. > :22:05.Labour, just what do the voters
:22:06. > :22:17.make of it all? Labour won the old by-election and
:22:18. > :22:20.comfortable, there are majority was reduced but they increased their
:22:21. > :22:25.share of the vote, Jeremy Corbyn says it shows that Labour is
:22:26. > :22:27.electoral. We, with the help of the pollen company populace, have
:22:28. > :22:31.gathered together a group of people that once voted Labour but did not
:22:32. > :22:36.at the last election. We are going to hear of what they think of the
:22:37. > :22:40.new Labour Party and behind this screen, we have two seasoned Labour
:22:41. > :22:46.advisers to pass comment on what they hear. Vets get started. --
:22:47. > :22:50.polling company Populous. -- let's get started. All of the former
:22:51. > :22:54.Labour voters are from London, and at the general election they spread
:22:55. > :22:58.their approach to Ukip, the greens, conservatives and Lib Dem, all of
:22:59. > :23:01.them felt Labour lost their vote over the economy, Ed Miliband and
:23:02. > :23:07.being out of touch. What do they make of Labour today? -- Greens.
:23:08. > :23:10.They are moving in the right direction, with a charismatic
:23:11. > :23:22.leader, whose policies seem to be standing up for the average man. I
:23:23. > :23:27.disagree, no disrespect, for me, I am quite a middle ground person,
:23:28. > :23:34.going from the left to the right, they have gone far too left for me.
:23:35. > :23:38.For me they are unelectable. He is very principled, I respect him for
:23:39. > :23:44.that but I do not agree with his policies, particularly defence.
:23:45. > :23:49.Initial impressions? Did people know who he was before he became the
:23:50. > :23:56.Labour leader? I had not. Had you heard of him? I had heard of him...
:23:57. > :24:01.He seems principled, compassionate... He has used a term,
:24:02. > :24:10.the new politics... Have you heard that? Yes... Do you know what he
:24:11. > :24:14.means? Not specifically, I presume he means a different attitude
:24:15. > :24:21.towards leading the party and the way they make decisions perhaps.
:24:22. > :24:29.It goes back to the same problem, if you have a vague catchphrase and no
:24:30. > :24:34.substance behind it... Maybe I am not seeing the strong leadership --
:24:35. > :24:37.leadership capability, I understand he's principled, but as a leader of
:24:38. > :24:41.the country, I am not convinced. Does that sound like a good way of
:24:42. > :24:46.changing things, giving them more freedom in the way that they vote?
:24:47. > :24:50.It brings a more human feel, does not feel like everyone is a robot,
:24:51. > :24:53.all of us in this room, we could all be voting for Labour but we would
:24:54. > :25:00.all have different opinions on things. That is... That is a human,
:25:01. > :25:04.you know, that is human nature. I think the fact that is being
:25:05. > :25:08.respected, that is good. But, keeping it in line, how he's going
:25:09. > :25:15.to manage that, that may be a problem. That woman has some up the
:25:16. > :25:24.nub of the problem! That is pretty much their position right now. This
:25:25. > :25:29.is a video clip... I'm not happy with the shoot to kill policy in
:25:30. > :25:40.general, I think that is quite dangerous. That is woolly. You
:25:41. > :25:47.cannot go from principled to Willy and evasive, that is a problem. --
:25:48. > :25:54.woolly and evasive. You need crystal clear clarity on security issues.
:25:55. > :25:59.You need to give somebody a bit of time, let them lace up their running
:26:00. > :26:03.shoes (!), they find their own pace, and they get a little bit of time.
:26:04. > :26:09.It is early days, he has just started in the job. In time, he will
:26:10. > :26:19.show, you know, a lot of strength will stop courage, I think. Why not
:26:20. > :26:22.vote Labour this time? -- a lot of strength and courage. Labour was
:26:23. > :26:26.giving benefits left right and centre, if somebody needs them,
:26:27. > :26:31.fine, but they were in so much debt, the country was getting further and
:26:32. > :26:37.further into debt. There was no end to it. Do you know the if Jeremy
:26:38. > :26:44.Corbyn and John Madonna's government would spend more money, would they
:26:45. > :26:50.put up taxes? -- do you know if they Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell
:26:51. > :26:55.government. I bet there is not a single specific about how it is
:26:56. > :27:00.different. Despite the debate about austerity. They have not mentioned
:27:01. > :27:07.that word once. The fact Labour have not articulated anything... They
:27:08. > :27:11.have asked a leading question, so not to give that response, that
:27:12. > :27:18.suggest, well,... We will not make up our minds... We do not know...
:27:19. > :27:22.These people are not the British electorate, nor can they alone give
:27:23. > :27:27.Labour a victory, but there will be plenty to note, as lost Labour
:27:28. > :27:29.voters, they seem prepared to give Labour and Jeremy Corbyn time to bed
:27:30. > :27:35.in. STUDIO: And I'm joined in the studio
:27:36. > :27:37.now by the Shadow Work and Pensions
:27:38. > :27:41.secretary, Owen Smith. We have had plenty of evidence from
:27:42. > :27:46.the pollsters, you saw and heard some of it, at the last election
:27:47. > :27:49.Labour was not trusted on the economy, particularly when it came
:27:50. > :27:53.to managing the welfare bill, do you think you are on the way to learning
:27:54. > :27:58.that trust? If you take the evidence of the poll that matters, the poll
:27:59. > :28:03.with the people, looking at Oldham, then perhaps we are winning back
:28:04. > :28:07.trust. There is no doubt we did not have it at the last election, that
:28:08. > :28:14.is why Labour lost and lost badly, but we did win a victory on Thursday
:28:15. > :28:17.in Oldham, up 10%, the Tories were down 10%. Perhaps we are in the
:28:18. > :28:22.foothills of starting to win back trust. I recognise and Jeremy Ross
:28:23. > :28:27.recognises we have a long way to go, almost five years until the next
:28:28. > :28:32.election and we will have to put in place policies and ideas to win back
:28:33. > :28:36.trust fully. -- Jeremy recognises. It was a Labour victory but that is
:28:37. > :28:41.a Labour heartland, you should not be surprised that you did well
:28:42. > :28:44.somewhere like Oldham, that is despite the policies of the national
:28:45. > :28:48.party, you could say, it you could say it is because of a strong Labour
:28:49. > :28:53.parliament, that is not a Nuneaton which you need to win back. But in
:28:54. > :28:57.the media we were talking about lots of suggestions that Labour was going
:28:58. > :29:03.to lose that seat, or if we win, we would win only by 1000. Labour MPs
:29:04. > :29:07.themselves were saying that! That is my point. But the pollsters were
:29:08. > :29:12.certainly saying in their view, we were likely to struggle. For us to
:29:13. > :29:17.hold it as well as we did, increase the share of the vote from last time
:29:18. > :29:18.around, 11,000 majority, you cannot say anything other than it was a
:29:19. > :29:24.good victory for Labour. I think it say anything other than it was a
:29:25. > :29:28.has to be a vindication both of Jim McMahon, the excellent candidate,
:29:29. > :29:33.now the MP for old, a good local guy who has been a council leader, very
:29:34. > :29:39.well respected. -- Oldham. The kind of community-based politicians that
:29:40. > :29:43.we produce in labour. -- community rooted politicians. But also a
:29:44. > :29:46.vindication of Jeremy Corbyn and the rebuilding of trust. Nobody in
:29:47. > :29:48.Oldham can be in any doubts as to who is the leader of the Labour
:29:49. > :29:58.Party right now! Let's talk about welfare, we heard
:29:59. > :30:01.the lady saying Labour was giving benefits left, right and centre and
:30:02. > :30:05.leaving the country in so much debt, how do you address that? Well, I
:30:06. > :30:08.think we've got to start by doing what we did not do well enough under
:30:09. > :30:14.the last parliament which is call out the line from the Tory party
:30:15. > :30:18.that the dead this country were in and are still in, let's not forget
:30:19. > :30:23.the Tories have practically doubled debt. Let's talk about welfare
:30:24. > :30:26.specifically. Happy to. The Labour Party under Harriet Harman clearly
:30:27. > :30:32.felt it should move closer to the Conservatives on welfare and not
:30:33. > :30:35.further away, the party did not vote against their bill introducing ?12
:30:36. > :30:40.billion of saving and Harriet Harman said she was sympathetic to lowering
:30:41. > :30:46.the benefits cap. You did not vote against the limit on child tax
:30:47. > :30:51.credits for two children. In that vote we definitely were wrong and
:30:52. > :30:55.that's why Labour has now voted against the welfare bill, and the
:30:56. > :31:34.reason for that is the reason many people in this country, I
:31:35. > :31:41.And a Labour Party to be abstaining on whether we make people, working
:31:42. > :31:46.people put in this country. People want the Labour Party to stand up.
:31:47. > :31:52.What is your evidence for seeing that people want you to do that.
:31:53. > :31:56.Harriet Harman announced that did not oppose limiting tax credits to
:31:57. > :32:00.two children because we cannot say to the public that you were wrong at
:32:01. > :32:06.the election. Who is representing the people? Wii .2 Heidi Allen, who
:32:07. > :32:12.you have on the programme later on, or any of the other 30 or so Tory
:32:13. > :32:15.MPs boosted up against their own Prime Minister a few weeks ago,
:32:16. > :32:21.saying they had got it wrong on tax credits. Let's have a look... The
:32:22. > :32:26.Tories described that as welfare spending. That was part of their ?12
:32:27. > :32:32.million election spending. It is legitimate for me to speak about
:32:33. > :32:38.that. You said people want us to do this. I'm trying to get the evidence
:32:39. > :32:44.for that. Yes, on tax credits, but more broadly on Labour's perception
:32:45. > :32:49.of people of labour with welfare. We have seen leaks from opinion polling
:32:50. > :32:53.in which people said that Labour was in thrall to the undeserving. It
:32:54. > :32:58.needs to be for middle-class voters, not just down and outs, and the
:32:59. > :33:02.Labour win would have been good for people on benefits and immigrants,
:33:03. > :33:07.anyone claiming money. How will you win an election is people only see
:33:08. > :33:11.you is representing those groups? We have got to win an election because
:33:12. > :33:16.those groups and low and middle income earners in Britain, the very
:33:17. > :33:19.people being hit by tax credit cards and now the universal credit cards
:33:20. > :33:24.coming on stream next year, they need a Labour government in order to
:33:25. > :33:29.introduce fairness. They also want to know that we are in favour of
:33:30. > :33:34.reform. There is no doubt about that. We lose the evidence? This is
:33:35. > :33:39.your own focus groups and opinion polling. It is not in line with what
:33:40. > :33:45.the public want or the way that they view you. That is what I have said.
:33:46. > :33:49.In addition to supporting in work benefits for people in low and
:33:50. > :33:53.middle income jobs like tax credits and universal credit, we need to be
:33:54. > :33:59.making an argument for a reform of the wider system. Do you accept your
:34:00. > :34:03.not doing that? We are starting to do that. In the New Year I will be
:34:04. > :34:08.announcing a big commissioned by the Labour Party to look at Social
:34:09. > :34:14.Security, to present a Labour alternative for a reform Social
:34:15. > :34:17.Security system. For generations people have increasingly become
:34:18. > :34:22.mistrustful of the Social Security system. They think it is unfair and
:34:23. > :34:27.inefficient, under Labour and Tory. We need to win back the trust of
:34:28. > :34:31.people in it we cause it should be a massive positive for the country
:34:32. > :34:36.that we have a generous welfare state. Which policy decisions so far
:34:37. > :34:41.are going to back up that idea of reform rather than people's idea
:34:42. > :34:45.that only four people on benefits if you're trying to broaden your
:34:46. > :34:50.appeal? You have talked about tax credits but if you want to lower the
:34:51. > :34:54.benefit cap, if you do not want to limit tax credits, which policy
:34:55. > :35:00.areas back up what you have said about reform? We have said clearly
:35:01. > :35:04.that we support the government in capping the overall spending on
:35:05. > :35:09.social security, so they have introduced the cab. And the benefit
:35:10. > :35:15.cap? The benefit cap, interestingly, we have reserved judgment on that.
:35:16. > :35:21.Only two weeks ago... That was not your view? Let me finish, please. We
:35:22. > :35:24.had an opinion from a judge in London that the benefit cap was
:35:25. > :35:29.discriminating against disabled people. There is further evidence
:35:30. > :35:34.that it is is not doing what the government set out to do. It is not
:35:35. > :35:38.saving money. Local councils are having to spend money on
:35:39. > :35:42.discretionary housing payments to support people who been made
:35:43. > :35:48.homeless as a result of it. Only around 4% of people seem to be
:35:49. > :35:52.getting any benefit. What is this benefit cap for? We need to have a
:35:53. > :35:58.limit on the amount of money that people can have individually. And as
:35:59. > :36:04.households. It has to reflect need. That is important. It sounded like
:36:05. > :36:10.you wanted to drop the idea of the benefit cap in principle. You still
:36:11. > :36:15.support the idea of the benefit cap at ?26,000 a year? We do not. You
:36:16. > :36:21.did supported at the election. At the election, we did and since then,
:36:22. > :36:28.we have changed our view. Cutting it to ?23,000, from ?26,000, which is
:36:29. > :36:31.what was included in the Welfare Bill, it is very complicated, that
:36:32. > :36:38.would mean it would affect millions of people across Britain. What
:36:39. > :36:43.should be cap be? We need to get back to principle that people use to
:36:44. > :36:46.understand, the connection between the sort of support you might
:36:47. > :36:50.receive from the state, the amount of money you contribute, getting
:36:51. > :36:56.back to connection between contribution and reward. Also, it
:36:57. > :37:00.needs. If you have got three children are you fall pregnant in a
:37:01. > :37:06.period when you lose your job, you do not get penalised for having that
:37:07. > :37:09.third child. It seems extraordinary that the government is penalising
:37:10. > :37:14.people. You're not supporting the cap, you cannot give me a figure?
:37:15. > :37:19.You are now reviewing the whole policy. You agree with Jeremy
:37:20. > :37:23.Corbyn, it resulted in social cleansing? We said shortly after the
:37:24. > :37:28.election we would oppose the reduction. That is not true. When I
:37:29. > :37:33.spoke to your last, you said you were going to stick to the principle
:37:34. > :37:37.of a benefit cap? I did not. You did. You said in September you
:37:38. > :37:42.wanted to have the benefit cap in principle, you did not agree to
:37:43. > :37:51.lowering it to 23000 and Jeremy Corbyn was against it. I said that
:37:52. > :37:55.we were reviewing the concept of the benefit cap across the board. What
:37:56. > :37:59.that we do except there have to be limits on the amount of money that
:38:00. > :38:06.an individual household can get in benefits. We need to get to a point
:38:07. > :38:10.where we have a much fairer set of criteria to analyse and understand
:38:11. > :38:15.why we should be giving family eggs and not the other family. That
:38:16. > :38:19.should reflect the number of children they have got, the nature
:38:20. > :38:24.of work they are in, the relative security of that family, fundamental
:38:25. > :38:28.principles we have at your two. Most viewers will not understand a
:38:29. > :38:32.government that says that they will penalised children and take money
:38:33. > :38:36.away from them on the basis of how many children you have. You did at
:38:37. > :38:41.stain on that issue earlier. But you have changed your mind. In terms of
:38:42. > :38:46.Shadow Cabinet colleagues, should your colleagues worry about being
:38:47. > :38:51.sacked? I do not think they should be. I am not in charge of
:38:52. > :38:55.reshuffles. That is a job for Jeremy. This is newspaper tittle
:38:56. > :39:00.tattle. From what I have seen of the way that Jeremy has handled this in
:39:01. > :39:04.Shadow Cabinet, he has been keen to stress that we have to be respectful
:39:05. > :39:10.of the different views. I voted against, others voted in favour. Any
:39:11. > :39:15.abuse that anyone has been subject to as a result of decisions taken in
:39:16. > :39:26.good faith is disgraceful. We should not settle for it or allow it in the
:39:27. > :39:30.Labour Party. Thank you very much. It has just gone 11:40am.
:39:31. > :39:33.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:39:34. > :39:36.Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
:39:37. > :39:42.MPs vote overwhelmingly to extend air strikes into Syria, but the SNP
:39:43. > :39:47.So where does it leave the party now?
:39:48. > :39:51.We'll put that to SNP MP Stephen Gethins.
:39:52. > :39:56.Nicola Sturgeon will represent Scotland at the climate change talks
:39:57. > :39:57.in Paris, but critics say the government's record
:39:58. > :40:06.The First Minister tells the international community she has the
:40:07. > :40:09.most ambitious targets in the world but will she remember to tell them
:40:10. > :40:10.that she has not hit those targets once?
:40:11. > :40:12.And it's 25 years since Margaret Thatcher stood down
:40:13. > :40:25.SNP MPs took to Twitter and other social media swiftly
:40:26. > :40:28.after Wednesday's Commons vote to extend air strikes to Syria,
:40:29. > :40:33.to disassociate themselves from the decision.
:40:34. > :40:36.All 54 Nationalist MPs voted against the motion with the First Minister
:40:37. > :40:38.saying beforehand that giving them a free vote on the issue was
:40:39. > :40:41.unnecessary as "everybody" in the party's parliamentary group agreed
:40:42. > :40:44.that the case for air strikes had not been made. But with the
:40:45. > :40:46.government at Westminster securing a significant majority for action,
:40:47. > :40:52.Does it show a genuine fault line north and south of the border?
:40:53. > :40:55.Well, joining us from London is SNP MP Stephen Gethins, who sits on the
:40:56. > :41:11.Good morning. There seem to be some suggestions that the fact the SNP
:41:12. > :41:14.did not vote for this meant it was somehow illegitimate in Scotland.
:41:15. > :41:20.Can you explain what your party members were trying to say? 57 out
:41:21. > :41:25.of 59 Scottish MPs, remember that the sole Labour MPs voted against
:41:26. > :41:30.this as well. We are saying that a great chunk of ours voted against
:41:31. > :41:36.bombing action in Syria because it was not the right thing to do. It is
:41:37. > :41:41.a slightly odd argument to make. The reason there are so many SNP MPs for
:41:42. > :41:45.a start is because of the first past the post system that you profess to
:41:46. > :41:51.profoundly disagree with. We still do. It might benefit us now but we
:41:52. > :41:54.still disagree with that. To say that somehow or other this is
:41:55. > :41:59.illegitimate for Westminster to vote under behalf of Scotland on this
:42:00. > :42:04.issue, because you have so many MPs because of the system that you have
:42:05. > :42:08.accepted as a legitimate, that is a very peculiar writer meant. The
:42:09. > :42:13.Westminster Parliament has responsibility over foreign affairs.
:42:14. > :42:16.I'm in favour of independence. The Westminster Parliament has voted for
:42:17. > :42:20.military action. I do not think it is the right decision and as part of
:42:21. > :42:24.the Foreign Affairs Committee I have been arguing about this for months
:42:25. > :42:32.and looking at the facts. Now we are in this situation, we need to get
:42:33. > :42:35.behind our service personnel who are involved in that. Again, have you
:42:36. > :42:38.any evidence that opinion, opinion is clearly divided on this issue
:42:39. > :42:42.throughout Britain, is there any evidence that Scotland is
:42:43. > :42:47.different? I think people have different views on this. I said in
:42:48. > :42:52.the chamber this week, unlike David Cameron I respect people on both
:42:53. > :42:57.sides. People voted for air strike is who did so for very legitimate
:42:58. > :43:01.reasons. I disagree with them. My mailbox is full of people who
:43:02. > :43:05.disagree with this as well based on the fact that we have. The only
:43:06. > :43:12.opinion poll that was not an Internet opinion poll was done by
:43:13. > :43:20.YouGov. It was 50-50. 44% of people in Scotland were in favour of air
:43:21. > :43:27.strikes, 41% were against. You get different opinion polls but I have
:43:28. > :43:31.had something like 100-1, 100-1 in terms of responses in my mailbox
:43:32. > :43:37.from people who disagree what we are doing. We look at the military
:43:38. > :43:42.impact and diplomatic initiatives, we looked at the legality and found
:43:43. > :43:47.the case had not been made. This was a fact -based argument. Over the
:43:48. > :43:53.last couple of weeks, the city of Sinjar has been retaken by Kurdish
:43:54. > :43:57.forces from IS. It is widely accepted, including by the Kurdish
:43:58. > :44:04.forces themselves, they could not have done that without the support
:44:05. > :44:11.of American air power. Why was it wrong for American air power to
:44:12. > :44:16.help? Sinjar was one of the towns populated by UCD is, who faced the
:44:17. > :44:22.prospect of mass execution. Nobody said it was wrong. We said there was
:44:23. > :44:28.a need for long-term strategy. You voted against the use of air power
:44:29. > :44:32.in Iraq. This goes to the heart of the issue. There are no ground
:44:33. > :44:38.troops at the moment. There are no ground troops to take Raqqa. A few
:44:39. > :44:46.months ago, you voted against using the RAF in Iraq. I said there should
:44:47. > :44:51.be a long-term strategy. You voted against using air power in Iraq. We
:44:52. > :44:56.voted against because there was no long-term strategy. Why was it wrong
:44:57. > :45:00.for air power to be used to liberate Sinjar? There needs to be a
:45:01. > :45:06.long-term strategy and ground troops. There are no ground troops
:45:07. > :45:10.in Syria. If I were living in Sinjar, and I heard what you had
:45:11. > :45:14.said, I would but be impressed. I might well be saying, I am extremely
:45:15. > :45:20.glad that the cards have taken over Sinjar.
:45:21. > :45:31.Because you have Kurdish round true. The party previously noted
:45:32. > :45:43.against grand strategy. -- Kurdish true is. You have no exit strategy
:45:44. > :45:48.but you have got ground troops. Last week in Parliament beware debating
:45:49. > :45:53.about the fact we had no round troops. I'll hope I am wrong and
:45:54. > :45:58.that just air strikes work in putting an end to Daesh but I do not
:45:59. > :46:04.think that will be the case. Other experts do not think that will be
:46:05. > :46:12.the case either. Argue against the United States and France bombing in
:46:13. > :46:17.Syria? I think without a long-term plan, you need some kind of
:46:18. > :46:21.long-term plan here. We quite deliberately narrowly looked at the
:46:22. > :46:25.UK cause that is the Avia we are looking at what the needs to be a
:46:26. > :46:32.long-term plan. With the United States and France and other places
:46:33. > :46:38.you need a long-term plan because I struggle to see the difference air
:46:39. > :46:43.strikes will make. You are looking to liberate Sinjar because you were
:46:44. > :46:49.worried about British troops being used the. We have form about taking
:46:50. > :46:57.military action which was a disaster in Libya, in Iraq and did not work
:46:58. > :47:04.well in Afghanistan either. You voted for bombing Libya. That did
:47:05. > :47:11.not pan out too well because of the long-term effects. This is something
:47:12. > :47:15.the MoD have to answer questions on. We spent ?25 million on
:47:16. > :47:21.reconstruction in Libya. For every ?30 we spent bombing he spent ?1 on
:47:22. > :47:27.reconstruction and for me those numbers should have been the wrong
:47:28. > :47:31.way round. It could have been a humanitarian situation on the
:47:32. > :47:36.ground. What we probably should have done was interrogate further. That
:47:37. > :47:42.is over what the long-term plans where. This is a mistake the MoD
:47:43. > :47:48.have made time after time from Iraq on words. It is a field you to have
:47:49. > :47:51.a long-term plan in strategy. When you talk about the context of
:47:52. > :48:00.extending the bombing plane into Syria, what is the construction of?
:48:01. > :48:06.This is why diplomats and is so important. And the Siena process.
:48:07. > :48:15.You need some kind of agreement between BBN process partners. --
:48:16. > :48:20.Vienna process. Everyone wants to see an end to Daesh but bombing is
:48:21. > :48:25.not the way to do it. Either the spread of poisonous propaganda. When
:48:26. > :48:32.you are talking about reconstruction... Reconstruction has
:48:33. > :48:39.become and you have to have a long-term plan. I am talking about
:48:40. > :48:44.the commitment of 20 two 30 years. You talk about reconstruction of the
:48:45. > :48:49.Syrian state is that it is around. We were gradually talking about
:48:50. > :48:55.Libya a moment ago. You cannot create a vacuum. No one is
:48:56. > :49:03.suggesting using military action against a sad and the Syrian state.
:49:04. > :49:11.The wearer two years ago. We have changed their minds now. Daesh
:49:12. > :49:17.President Assad. The lack of being for reconstruction for something
:49:18. > :49:22.nobody is proposing to bomb is a reason for attacking, that seems
:49:23. > :49:28.wrong. You need a long-term plan and commitment. That has to be the
:49:29. > :49:32.lesson. If we have learned anything from the disaster in Iraq it has to
:49:33. > :49:36.be that you need to win the peace as well as having won the military
:49:37. > :49:42.conflict. You need to start planning that from the moment you enter into
:49:43. > :49:44.the military conflict. We need to end the year, thank you for joining
:49:45. > :49:46.us. 25 years ago, Margaret Thatcher
:49:47. > :49:49.was beginning a new career. After 11 years at Number 10,
:49:50. > :49:51.her behaviour and her policies were concerning colleagues, as they
:49:52. > :49:53.feared for the Conservatives' As she complained about "
:49:54. > :49:57.treachery with a smile on its face", But she was safe
:49:58. > :50:01.in the knowledge that she'd made her A quarter of a century on,
:50:02. > :50:18.our political correspondent, And steal food to differing now in
:50:19. > :50:23.Ravenscraig. Now the busy ?52 million sports centre. It is a
:50:24. > :50:30.world-class centre we have put on the site of Ravenscraig and we have
:50:31. > :50:36.a wide scope of events taking place, local, Scottish, European. It has
:50:37. > :50:44.had a fantastic response. Heavy industry declined and collapsed in
:50:45. > :50:49.the 1970s, it 80s and Ravenscraig chat in the 1990s. Arguments still
:50:50. > :50:55.rage about who is to blame for the failures. A generation of critics
:50:56. > :51:04.blame one person. We are leaving Downing Street for the first time
:51:05. > :51:09.after 11 and a half wonderful years. Wonderful for some but not others.
:51:10. > :51:13.Many in Scotland made their voices heard particularly over the
:51:14. > :51:20.introduction of the poll tax. A symbol that she feel to get
:51:21. > :51:22.Scotland. For Scotland industrial devastation, social disaster and
:51:23. > :51:27.politically she paved the way for a devastation, social disaster and
:51:28. > :51:34.new kind of Scotland. At the end of the day that might be a big plus but
:51:35. > :51:41.it has been a very, very heavy price Scotland as paid. The big plus the
:51:42. > :51:51.say is this please. The Scottish Parliament. There is a view that she
:51:52. > :51:54.left another political legacy, too. Scotland are still seen as second
:51:55. > :52:01.best which I think is to do with Mrs Thatcher. I suspect that for a long
:52:02. > :52:06.time to come the those naughty lot the Tories can do about it. The
:52:07. > :52:11.Conservatives who have been in the party for quite some time argue Mrs
:52:12. > :52:17.Thatcher had a hard job and she did it well. It was the time of great
:52:18. > :52:23.economic and social change which was painful for people but in the 1970s
:52:24. > :52:27.the economy was backward and outdated and needed modernised. At
:52:28. > :52:31.the end of Margaret Hatcher was my DD den offers we had the much more
:52:32. > :52:40.diverse party with opportunities articulate for young people. I will
:52:41. > :52:44.hand out where as a little broken. Our right to buy policy was hugely
:52:45. > :52:50.popular, an instrument of social change. Some say it would be fair to
:52:51. > :52:58.reassess our legacy and combat the mess. Ravenscraig she did not shut,
:52:59. > :53:03.it shot up after she had moved on. Now wanted have kept it open. It was
:53:04. > :53:09.not making steel competitively. The mythology of fracture lives on and
:53:10. > :53:15.people continue to hate her but frankly they should be grateful for
:53:16. > :53:19.Margaret Thatcher. It depends on your point of view but one thing has
:53:20. > :53:20.not changed, when to five years on we are still talking about Margaret
:53:21. > :53:24.Thatcher. The First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon,
:53:25. > :53:27.will be in Paris tomorrow, to attend this year's UN climate change
:53:28. > :53:29.conference as it enters its crucial, Governments from around the world
:53:30. > :53:33.are attempting to thrash out a deal Meanwhile, at home,
:53:34. > :53:36.the Scottish government has faced renewed criticism over
:53:37. > :53:39.its failure to achieve its own On Thursday,
:53:40. > :53:41.Labour leader Kezia Dugdale used First Minister's Questions to attack
:53:42. > :53:57.the government's record. She is going to Paris to show our
:53:58. > :54:01.world leading targets set the benchmark the world community needs
:54:02. > :54:06.to match. This parliament unanimously set those targets in
:54:07. > :54:10.2009 so when the First Minister tell the international community she had
:54:11. > :54:17.the most ambitious targets in the world will she remember to tell them
:54:18. > :54:21.she has not let those targets once. I would encourage Kezia Dugdale to
:54:22. > :54:25.study in some detail of the facts and information around this. In
:54:26. > :54:31.particular I would encourage her, I hope she can continue to come
:54:32. > :54:38.together, as one on this global issue, that when we set a target for
:54:39. > :54:46.2013 in 2010, the reduction in carbon that we anticipated at that
:54:47. > :54:49.time was 31.7%, that was the target we anticipated we would have do
:54:50. > :54:58.reduce emissions by. What we have achieved is 30.4% from the 1990
:54:59. > :55:03.baseline. The only reason why that means we still have not met the
:55:04. > :55:06.target is because of the increases to that baseline. Fixed annual
:55:07. > :55:12.targets were mess because of improvements to the way the data was
:55:13. > :55:16.calculated which added megatons to the 1990 baseline.
:55:17. > :55:19.Let's cross to the French capital now, and join BBC Scotland's
:55:20. > :55:20.environment correspondent, David Miller, who'll be covering
:55:21. > :55:31.First on these talks more generally, Copenhagen was a complete
:55:32. > :55:37.wash-out, is there any reason to suspect this will be more positive?
:55:38. > :55:42.That is putting it mildly in terms of Copenhagen. All the signs that
:55:43. > :55:46.this speech, the midway point at this weeks summit are indicating
:55:47. > :55:52.real progress has been made. We are right a very different ways to that
:55:53. > :55:57.which raised us back in Copenhagen in 2009. Vince the world leaders
:55:58. > :56:03.departed Paris at the start of the week when they came in to get this
:56:04. > :56:08.conference on the road, delegates from 195 countries have been working
:56:09. > :56:12.steadfastly to come up with a draft text to present to ministers when
:56:13. > :56:17.they arrive here tomorrow. That work is completed in the words of the
:56:18. > :56:23.French climate ambassador, nothing has been decided and nothing will be
:56:24. > :56:31.left behind. She said this text marks the well of all to reach an
:56:32. > :56:35.agreement. Clearly there are major stumbling blocks which remain and in
:56:36. > :56:40.particular over the next few days we have to keep a very close eye on
:56:41. > :56:45.negotiations between the developed world and the developing world. We
:56:46. > :56:53.are seeing real division beer as always that these summits but
:56:54. > :56:57.particularly here over who has two cut and make the biggest sacrifices
:56:58. > :57:05.and crucially over who he is the most. What does Nicholas Durden
:57:06. > :57:11.think she can bring to the party? The First Minister we heard still
:57:12. > :57:18.believes Scotland has a positive story to tell. Still believes
:57:19. > :57:27.Cortland can lead by example. The real danger here is we constantly
:57:28. > :57:30.parrot this line about Scotland's world leading climate change targets
:57:31. > :57:34.and perhaps we give ourselves too large a part on the back. That is
:57:35. > :57:38.certainly the argument of Kezia Dugdale as we have heard and it is
:57:39. > :57:42.interesting that when you come to these climate summits you do tend to
:57:43. > :57:49.get the white from international delegates who generally genuinely
:57:50. > :57:55.are interested in those Scottish targets, 80% by 2050, they are very
:57:56. > :58:02.ambitious targets which still attract attention internationally.
:58:03. > :58:05.Yes, of course, Scotland is failing to hit those international targets
:58:06. > :58:10.but the growing of confidence among Scottish Government ministers and
:58:11. > :58:14.their advisers and statisticians and the Scottish Government that
:58:15. > :58:22.Scotland is very definitely on track to hit that 42% target. The is still
:58:23. > :58:25.interest in Scotland's story and Nicholas to urge and will be using
:58:26. > :58:34.that example to encourage others to act. -- Nicola Sturgeon. The
:58:35. > :58:38.resonant port of way of implementing those policies around the world and
:58:39. > :58:43.B will hear more tomorrow from the First Minister about the work of the
:58:44. > :58:48.states and impact and how that is helping deliver climate change
:58:49. > :58:52.policies internationally. She will also be talking about climate
:58:53. > :58:59.justice to make sure the world's oeuvres people are not most likely
:59:00. > :59:05.to suffer climate change consequences most acutely. Despite
:59:06. > :59:11.having had the lowest emissions over centuries. Thank you for joining us.
:59:12. > :59:13.Last Thursday was International Day Of Disabled People.
:59:14. > :59:14.In recognition of under-representation
:59:15. > :59:15.in political life, the Scottish government announced
:59:16. > :59:19.The aim is to identify barriers people with disabilities face
:59:20. > :59:23.Some rules have already been changed concerning disabled candidate
:59:24. > :59:30.This pilot project will hopefully lead to improved representation
:59:31. > :59:32.in elections in Scotland over the next couple of years.
:59:33. > :59:47.Jack Ashton lead, who's no longer with us, and bang, former
:59:48. > :59:55.Westminster MP, David Blunkett, retired, and Robertson, current MSP.
:59:56. > :00:00.All political figures with a disability. 20% of Scotland's
:00:01. > :00:04.population has a disability. Campaigners say they are
:00:05. > :00:08.underrepresented in politics. A pilot project launched last week by
:00:09. > :00:17.the Scottish Government hopes to put this right. The access politics
:00:18. > :00:20.project aims to avoid practical, direct but not financial support for
:00:21. > :00:24.disabled people to come forward and participate in democracy, elected
:00:25. > :00:29.office in particular, overcome summing -- overcoming some of the
:00:30. > :00:36.barriers, providing things like mentoring, opening up meetings and
:00:37. > :00:39.documents to be more accessible. That is under the United Nations
:00:40. > :00:45.Convention, it is recognised as a human rights. We want to make that
:00:46. > :00:49.real. Inclusion Scotland, which represents people with
:00:50. > :00:55.disabilities, will administer the community empowerment front. We hear
:00:56. > :00:58.lots about a fairer Scotland, about democratic renewal participation,
:00:59. > :01:03.has labelled people having the right to be involved in all aspects of
:01:04. > :01:08.society and that most definitely includes politics and political
:01:09. > :01:12.representation. They want a UK budget to support people with
:01:13. > :01:17.disabilities into politics, at the access to elected office fund has
:01:18. > :01:22.been stopped as it was underused. That fund really only kicked in when
:01:23. > :01:27.someone wanted to stand to be selected to be a candidate. By the
:01:28. > :01:32.time you got to that point, the likelihood is you will have already
:01:33. > :01:38.found a way around all manner of barriers. It was ticking into late
:01:39. > :01:44.in the process. Of the 129 MSPs in the building behind me, only six of
:01:45. > :01:49.them have declared having a disability. To be representative of
:01:50. > :01:55.Scotland it would have to be 26. Only four out of 650 MPs at
:01:56. > :02:02.Westminster have declared a disability. Can I give you a leaflet
:02:03. > :02:07.for the SNP? One in five was set up to encourage greater participation
:02:08. > :02:11.in politics. The group, which covers all political parties, campaigned
:02:12. > :02:15.for this new Scottish initiative. The good news about the pilot
:02:16. > :02:20.project is it will be an opportunity for disabled people across Scotland
:02:21. > :02:25.to flag up the interest to Inclusion Scotland and take advantage of the
:02:26. > :02:29.support they can offer. As something like this has never been done
:02:30. > :02:34.before, we will have to wait and see what the results are. If many people
:02:35. > :02:37.put their names forward for the support, I am confident we will be
:02:38. > :02:41.able to continue and this will lead to the creation of the access to
:02:42. > :02:46.elected office fund which will break down the main barrier disabled
:02:47. > :02:50.people face, Finance. It is not always about the money. Some
:02:51. > :02:55.potential candidates believe that different ways of working could make
:02:56. > :02:56.a difference. I have several disabilities, some potential
:02:57. > :03:02.candidates believe that different ways of working could make a
:03:03. > :03:05.difference. I have several disabilities, summer for me, the
:03:06. > :03:09.barrier is that the job is completely inflexible. If we could
:03:10. > :03:12.have shared workloads and teleconferencing, it would make the
:03:13. > :03:20.job more easy for me to get involved. During this pilot period,
:03:21. > :03:21.Inclusion Scotland 120 with people from disabilities who are interested
:03:22. > :03:23.in a political career. It's time to look back over
:03:24. > :03:26.the events of the week and look Joining me now is the Scotsman
:03:27. > :03:34.journalist and political commentator Joyce McMillan,
:03:35. > :03:36.and the former special advisor to the SNP and public relations
:03:37. > :03:47.consultant Kevin Pringle. Obviously, Joyce, Syria has been
:03:48. > :03:53.dominant. At the end of it, do you think anything has advanced or gone
:03:54. > :03:58.backwards? Britain is now involved in that bombing campaign, for better
:03:59. > :04:02.or worse and that is the political reality that everyone has to deal
:04:03. > :04:11.with. It has been a fairly thorough debate, to be fair. On the side of
:04:12. > :04:16.the pro-bombers, it has been a very emotional debate. Hilary Benn's much
:04:17. > :04:25.discussed speech struck me as being 90% emotion. Its appeal was very
:04:26. > :04:29.faint historical analogies, and one that was ridiculous in the case of
:04:30. > :04:33.the International Brigade, but delivered with emotion, the need for
:04:34. > :04:42.Britain to be part of the struggle against fascism. It was acclaimed in
:04:43. > :04:47.the hothouse of Westminster. All the talk was this is some sort of huge
:04:48. > :04:53.moment in parliamentary history. I just wonder if it was. We are
:04:54. > :04:58.already involved in an IVF campaign in Iraq. Britain is already involved
:04:59. > :05:04.in so many different strands of this, humanitarian, diplomatic, to
:05:05. > :05:07.other aspects of the military. Germany made a decision this week to
:05:08. > :05:13.send a few vessels. They will not take part in direct combat but they
:05:14. > :05:17.will be involved. I do not believe that whole line of the argument. One
:05:18. > :05:21.of the problems with these kinds of discussions in the UK context is
:05:22. > :05:28.that people overestimate the significance of our role. We have a
:05:29. > :05:32.role to play. We are not a small country, but 12 planes, it will
:05:33. > :05:35.might be make or break for any west and effort anywhere. It would help
:05:36. > :05:42.us to make more rational decisions if we were to get a sense of
:05:43. > :05:46.proportion. There was a double-stranded, Kevin, it was
:05:47. > :05:50.partly about military action, but the results were sense that this is
:05:51. > :05:54.about having a seat at the top table. The supporters of bombing
:05:55. > :05:59.would say, it is not two different things. If you want to be taken
:06:00. > :06:06.seriously in the diplomatic process in Vienna, you have to be seen to be
:06:07. > :06:09.part of the coalition which is now fairly broad. I think Joyce is
:06:10. > :06:13.right. That narrative comes through too often in such issues. It was
:06:14. > :06:17.similar when Trident was debated recently in the House of Commons. As
:06:18. > :06:22.well as the actual case for Trident, which I do not think exists, rather
:06:23. > :06:27.than any military rationale, what comes across all the time is the
:06:28. > :06:32.political, the diplomatic need for the UK to have clout. There was an
:06:33. > :06:37.analogy between that debate and the debate on Syria this week. It seemed
:06:38. > :06:42.to not be settled on the military realities but on the issue of
:06:43. > :06:46.Clyde. Is that not a valid argument? I do not think it is. If
:06:47. > :06:53.you're going into military campaign, sending servicemen and women into
:06:54. > :06:58.conflict, the case has got to be signed on military grounds. This one
:06:59. > :07:01.is not. The fatal flaw, and I think this is a point that Stephen Gethins
:07:02. > :07:06.made earlier, there is no credible ground force they are. One of the
:07:07. > :07:13.good aspects of the debate in the House of Commons was a good expose
:07:14. > :07:15.in that particular regard the floor in the Prime Minister's case. That
:07:16. > :07:20.aspect of the ground force was not in the government motion, the fact
:07:21. > :07:25.there are supposedly 70,000 moderate troops. They are not there. It is
:07:26. > :07:30.like saying unless something retail scenario exists, which is never
:07:31. > :07:34.going to exist, we will do nothing? We use that as an excuse? It is not
:07:35. > :07:41.about doing nothing, it is about doing what is effective. It would be
:07:42. > :07:53.highly effective to starve -- of funding. They are extraordinarily
:07:54. > :07:58.wealthy. -- starve Daesh. We could do a lot through the banking
:07:59. > :08:07.system. The military case was lost because of the spurious diplomatic
:08:08. > :08:10.clout adamant. -- argument. Labour got bound up in this whole Syria
:08:11. > :08:15.thing and then they seemed to bounce back at the end of the week against
:08:16. > :08:25.everyone's expectations with the by-election victory. It was a very
:08:26. > :08:30.interesting results. I thought that Labour did not do well out of the
:08:31. > :08:34.debate on Syria because they appeared so divided, even if some of
:08:35. > :08:40.them were making pretty strong arguments on either side. There you
:08:41. > :08:45.go. Obviously the voters they did not seem to mind so much about
:08:46. > :08:49.Labour are being divided. It was a very low turnout. I wonder if there
:08:50. > :08:55.is an element, this thing that parties cannot be divided, it is
:08:56. > :08:59.something that political commentators say. When you speak to
:09:00. > :09:04.people about this issue, they seem to be more interested in the issue
:09:05. > :09:09.of Syria. They say, if people have different views, that is fine. The
:09:10. > :09:13.important thing is who is right and who's wrong, not whether are
:09:14. > :09:18.divided. That is an interesting question that we do not know the
:09:19. > :09:23.answer to yet. Historically being divided has not served political
:09:24. > :09:26.parties well. One of the interesting things about Jeremy Corbyn is that
:09:27. > :09:31.he is trying to change the language of it. He is trying to speak in a
:09:32. > :09:35.different way about having debates within the party and the rest of it.
:09:36. > :09:39.Admittedly it has turned nasty this week, for similar reasons to what
:09:40. > :09:44.happened during the independence referendum campaign, where one
:09:45. > :09:48.particular side was smeared by association with a few loudmouths on
:09:49. > :09:55.the Internet. That is not Jeremy Corbyn's line. He may be succeeding
:09:56. > :10:00.in making people think how much they value unity in a party, and how much
:10:01. > :10:07.of a party, and how much they value honesty. Kevin, you used to be a
:10:08. > :10:12.spin doctor. If you were advising Jeremy Corbyn, what would you be
:10:13. > :10:17.seeing? Would you be saying, we cannot have this division? I think
:10:18. > :10:21.you have got to lead. What Joyce says is correct, and obviously the
:10:22. > :10:26.by-election was successful, probably for a mix of local and national
:10:27. > :10:31.reasons, arguably more local because the candidate was a particularly
:10:32. > :10:35.strong local candidate. Certainly the national dimension did no harm.
:10:36. > :10:39.The very least that Jeremy Corbyn supporters can say is, hang on a
:10:40. > :10:45.minute, everyone said having this man as leader would be a disaster,
:10:46. > :10:50.even in our core areas. Irrespective of whether Corbyn can win in the
:10:51. > :10:54.south of England, the very least Corbyn supporters can say is that
:10:55. > :10:59.you were wrong when you said that we could not even win over our
:11:00. > :11:01.traditional heartland. Clearly Labour can win in traditional areas
:11:02. > :11:06.like Oldham. It was well served by Labour can win in traditional areas
:11:07. > :11:10.Michael Meacher for a long time. The candidate now seems to be
:11:11. > :11:16.particularly strong. That is OK in terms of where we are now. As we get
:11:17. > :11:23.closer to the next general election, in 2020, at that point Jeremy Corbyn
:11:24. > :11:28.has got to be a leader, he has got to lead. We will be well beyond the
:11:29. > :11:34.time from letting everybody say everything they like. There will
:11:35. > :11:37.come a time where there has to be collective Shadow Cabinet
:11:38. > :11:42.responsibility. That is an essential aspect for any government in
:11:43. > :11:48.waiting. Between now and 2020, Jeremy Corbyn has got to be a leader
:11:49. > :11:51.in the true sense of the term. I do not know if we have got the front
:11:52. > :11:57.page, but there was a story in the mail today. SNP hypocrites. He was
:11:58. > :12:03.involved in some sort of Jimmy Carter style tax avoidance. What did
:12:04. > :12:09.you make of this? He is saying that the kind of package he had, with tax
:12:10. > :12:13.avoidance, not illegal invasion, it was standard in the industry that he
:12:14. > :12:22.was working in at the time. We have heard that before. That is what he
:12:23. > :12:25.says. Now he is not in that industry, he will use his knowledge
:12:26. > :12:29.of that to try and get them to change the regulations so that
:12:30. > :12:33.people like the person he used to be cannot get away with it any more.
:12:34. > :12:39.That is the line. That is rather wonderful. He appears to be saying,
:12:40. > :12:44.because I was involved in this, I will use it to slack off the British
:12:45. > :12:48.government because I have inside knowledge. He would not be the first
:12:49. > :12:54.poacher turned gamekeeper. It seems to be alone that has been repaid.
:12:55. > :12:59.There is a desire to make it another story about an SNP MSP. I am not
:13:00. > :13:02.sure it really measures up. There is no suggestion that Mr Boswell has
:13:03. > :13:07.done anything illegal. It is an attempt. I would have thought that
:13:08. > :13:13.there were bigger issue is this week to put on the front page. The
:13:14. > :13:17.climate change conference, very briefly, are you optimistic? Yes, I
:13:18. > :13:21.think there is a view that the international community has got to
:13:22. > :13:28.arrive at a deal this time. It did not do before. I think Scotland can
:13:29. > :13:35.have a role to play by influence. Eurosceptical. I would say it is
:13:36. > :13:38.pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will. It is hard to believe
:13:39. > :13:44.they will do anything that will make a difference but we have to believe
:13:45. > :13:47.that we can try. OK. That is all we have time for this week.
:13:48. > :13:50.I'll be back at the same time next week.