21/02/2016 Sunday Politics Scotland

Good morning, and welcome to the Sunday politics. David Cameron has

finally named the day to see whether England remained

# Britain remains part of the EU. About a quarter of the ministers who

sit with Mr Cameron in the Cabinet don't agree, they have said they

will campaign for the UK Tilly. We will be talking to one of those

wanting out, leader of the of commons, Chris Grayling. We will be

debating over which way this man will swing. The Mayor of London has

been apparently agonising over his decision, although all the money is

on him supporting the Lead campaign. Jeremy Corbyn wants to stay within

the EU saying it would be better for Security and investment. We will be

joined by the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Hilary Benn. And with me,

three of Fleet street's finest, so, David Cameron has done a deal. Not

everyone is convinced, even one of the Prime Minister's best Cabinet

buddies, Michael Gove has decided to campaign on the Leeds side. Those

who want to stay and those who want to leave have come out all guns

blazing this morning. Let's see what David Cameron had to say on show

little earlier. If we stay within a reformed EU we know what we are

getting. We know how to deal with economic recovery, jobs, if we leave

them there is seven-year is uncertainty, and at the end of that

process can't be certain that our business will have access to the

market so it could cost jobs, or overseas business not investing in

Britain. It would be a step into the dark, a real uncertainty and that's

just doubt what we don't need in our country right now. Laura, the tone

in the language has changed. All the reports from you and others

whereabouts Cabinet meeting. Now, of course, the gloves are off. Teresa

Bailey is said it was very emotional. I think this is where we

will see gut emotions spilling out. He's moved into this campaigning

language, because the stakes are so high for him. He knows fine well

that he's taking a huge gamble with his only do ship. He's taking a huge

gamble with the country's membership the European Union, which he did say

he might argue any end to leave, though very few people believe that.

The other thing he's taking a gamble with is his own party's union. It

still impart a last-minute plea to those waivers to get on his side.

This is something we will see play out, perhaps quite dramatically,

this blue on blue action. David Cameron isn't going to stand up and

debate directly with people opposing him, so he's doing it in a different

way. Another thing he has said which was really quite strong and a bit

sharp, maybe, he suggested that those, including Boris Johnson who

wanted to campaign for out where linking arms with George Galloway

and Nigel Farage. What about the waivers? Boris Johnson. He wasn't

able to persuade Michael Gove or George Osborne. Will he campaign for

out? There is talk as to why the media are so assessed with one

politician, but it's not often may have single name recognition, as we

do from time to time, you go out campaigning with politicians to see

how they do. People come out of the shops to see Boris Johnson, they

want their pictures taken with him, he's a rare kind of politician. He

can add real fees to a campaign and cut through to the public. Some

people love him. Of course, some despise him, but be pointed his

addition into the out campaign, which is absolutely what we expect,

it will change the dynamics of the campaign, and particularly for the

Out side, who haven't landed one obvious leader, it would be a real

significant bill after them. We are finally going to hear from Boris at

10pm tonight. The surprise would be if he decided to stay in. You never

know with Boris Johnson. He's an unpredictable character, and

instinctively, many who know him well see at heart he is a Europhile,

he's not somebody who is naturally a sceptic. Just briefly, how is it

going to play out now between Cabinet ministers on either side.

Are they really going to go to hold it together over the weeks of

campaigning? One of the story things about this is that we have official

division, and officially divided Cabinet and in normal politics they

have to stick together, come hell or high water. I think people are going

to do their best to be polite, but I think friendships and loyalties will

be tested. What it does mean, all of the focus is going to be in Europe.

The challenge for David Cameron, whatever the result, is whether he

can keep the party together after the vote. So, after a near sleepless

night on Friday, European Union -- leaders were meant to agree a deal

over a civilised English breakfast. They didn't bother with afternoon

tea, in the end they came up trumps over dinner. History starts with a

lot of waiting around as I discovered on Friday. At least it's

not raining. Waiting for news from the EU summit, Westminster had

ground to a halt. Sniffing out any news from Brussels? European leaders

were on their second day of wrangling. The French president was

worried about the City of London getting a special deal. The Polish

Prime Minister feared that the citizens of hers living in the UK

would lose their benefits and the great pro Minister was concerned

about migrants. David Cameron says that he was battling for a debt deal

for Britain, which involved lots of talk, quite a few axons and not a

lot of action. Suddenly, back at Westminster, a thing happen. One of

the league campaigns, grassroots, out where it was rumoured it would

be a surprise supporter. Who'd you think is a special guest? For me,

probably Douglas Carswell? Sorry, it was actually George Galloway.

Comrades and friends. When he turned up, a bunch of people there. We

don't want anything to do with him. Do you often have that effect? It

looks pretty busy to me. About 50 people got up and left. My unaided.

There are people waiting for Nigel. You are clutching at straws there.

Finally in Brussels a deal to keep Britain in the EU was done over

dinner. The hacks were briefed by a clearly knackered Prime Minister.

Good evening, and welcome. Within the last hour I have ago she hated a

deal to give United Kingdom special status with inside the European

Union. Angela Merkel was snapped going for some chips. Which singer

Kurt Jolly good idea. Good night all. -- which seemed like a jolly

good idea. More waiting at Downing Street, this time for the first

Cabinet meeting on a weekend since the Falklands, and David Cameron's

chance to brief his colleagues on the deal. This is the deal, the EU

will exempt the UK from ever closer union. There will be safeguards for

the City of London. When it comes to in work benefits, the UK will be

able to apply the emergency brake which means the people migrating

will get the same rate for a few years. Time for ministers to give

their verdict. Home Secretary, are you Romanian? Chancellor, I'm

guessing your and in, aren't you? Each gave their answer in a two-hour

meeting in number ten, then the Prime Minister appeared to press a

button marked referendum. The choices in your hands. But my

recommendation is clear. Believe that Britain will be safer, stronger

and better of in a reformed European Union. And apparently now totally

fine for the members of the cabinets to disagree. What was it like when

Michael Gove spoke? Was he sad? Of course, because he and the Prime

Minister and the rest of us we we all know each other, the remarkable

thing about one of these -- this Government is that we know each

other, like each other and we are friends. We had each other's numbers

and we text and talk to each other. But the six ministers for the

outvote headed straight to the vote leave campaign headquarters. Free at

last to point the exit. I will be voting to leave the EU, because I'm

profoundly optimistic about the UK. I believe we can flourish outside

the European Union, so I think the better option is to take back

control, and restore the ability to make our own laws and controller

Rome borders in this country. Big smiles! Now the referendum campaign

will be brought to a street near you, like the Britain Stronger In

Europe, there is one more thing we are waiting for. Which side will

Boris Johnson join? He will reveal his intentions to night. Is he going

to campaign to come out? It looks very much like it. People that I've

spoken to, some pro-European MPs have now resigned themselves to

Boris going for Leave. Apparently, it was all down to this great big

incident he had with Michael Gove. There it was that Boris was given an

argument he found very hard to refuse. And it appears they've done

a deal to do this together. Is it more about leadership ambitions than

history feelings towards the EU? I think everyone is going to presume

that. Not least because Boris Johnson is known as an inner. He's

spent time in Brussels, New York. He's always been one for reform but

not for leaving. He's been telling people privately and quite openly

that he is going to campaign for in, so he's clearly worked out that the

electric that matters here for him, are the grassroots Tories and MPs

who are sceptical. But does he look sincere in doing this? He's going to

have to make a extremely good argument here tonight, as to why

he's done this U-turn. Let's talk about some of the substance, Melanie

Phillips, because there are people who say that actually, not many

people in the voting public will not look at the fine detail, they will

go on emotion. Do you think that's true, or do you think there are

salient issues that could capture the imagination? The two aren't

necessarily in contradiction with each other. They are both part of

it. There will play a great deal, will have a lot to do campaign. We

must cling on to the fear of something worse, which the promised

will continue to play on. I was struck by this morning's interview

with the Prime Minister, where he addressed the most important issue,

which is sovereignty and he redefined it. He was so keen to slip

away from it because it's a dangerous for him. The ultimate is

that Britain will still have no control over its own laws. It was

still be dictated significantly... He says it will be a mechanism. He's

clinging to his apparent concession that he's run out of them not to

have ever closer union. That's a a meaning -- meaningless thing. We in

Britain will be still bound by Europe. He's floated some sort of

constitutional settlement. This is a nonsense because there is nothing

that can override that superiority. Opponents of the EU appeared vexed

that we have no ability to make our own laws, but aren't bothered about

the fact that we can decide whether we can go to war not. There could be

a situation with Turkey and Russia could find themselves at war. What

happens then? We are then bounce to go to war on Turkey's behalf because

Turkey is a member of Nato. And posers of the European Union don't

seem bothered by that and that will be an argument that the prime in to

use. Will security be the overriding thing that convinces people? The

winners of this campaign will be the thing that convinces people? The

safest option, and the losers will be the riskiest option. That's why

every other word the Prime Minister says is about risk. He is saying,

what are you out as having as a vision for outside the European

Union. As we've been hearing, as soon as David Cameron announced the

referendum, campaign that attack members of the Cabinet were given

free rein. So who will be campaigning to see in and he will be

campaigning to leave? So, the deal has been done and it time for

ministers to pick a side. No surprise that George Osborne, David

Cameron and Philip Hammond were how campaigning to stay in. They will be

pleased that potential outers, Liz truss, Savage added, and Theresa May

are remaining in the remaining team. These politicians will be

campaigning to leave and they will be cheering that Michael Gove, after

much soul-searching, has plucked for the leave camp. However, there is

one big-name waiting on the sidelines. Boris Johnson. His

support could sway a lot of voters. Surely it can't be long to wait now.

And the Leader of the House of Commons, Chris Grayling, is with us

now. Why do you think the deal that the Prime Minister secured was

enough? He's made some progress in Brussels and we give him credit for

that, but does this represent a transformation that would see to me,

we should stay within the European Union? No, it doesn't. I think it

holds us back. I think these we should be taking for our country.

But the ability to decide how many people come to live and work here.

Forging free-trade deals round the world. We are spending ?350 million

a week on subscriptions to the EU that should and could be spent on

the National Health Service. That doesn't take into account the rebate

that the UK get. So, in your mind, the Prime Minister has failed in his

attempt to secure fundamental. What he's brought back is a deal for a

sustained European Union. I don't agree. I think we should leave. That

will be the debate in the next few months. What could he have done to

secure your support? There are key questions about our membership in

the EU, and we talked a moment ago about risk. The ability to control

our borders, set limits on those who work here. All our national

statisticians are saying that our population is going to rise

significantly. I don't think we can cope without estimation. I don't

think we have the houses, hospitals, school places. Your Government

hasn't done anything about migration figures, has it? One of the reasons

we can't do anything about it is because of the free movement rules

in the European Union. What would be acceptable for a migration level for

you? Its 330,000 now. If the UK pulled out of the EU, you would get

levels of tens of thousands? We would have the ability to set

limits. We could look at the migration pressures that we face and

where we have skills needs. We can take decisions in the interest of

Britain at the moment we cannot do that. So, there isn't anything that

David Cameron could have secured because you boys wanted to come out

of the EU. I've sat through European meetings for five years. I do not

believe we are probably able to look after our national interests, our

businesses, our citizens. I think too many decisions have been passed

to Brussels. Michael Gove brightly yesterday talked about the number of

changes that come across our desks as ministers that we can't do

anything about it. Give me an example of something you cant

because of the EU? In the arena of health and safety, there were

changes that were brought in that were going to cost British

businesses money. Which one did you not what to bring in? You always

talk about regulations and so do others and euro-sceptic ministers,

but which specific bills we are not able to pass, which laws were forced

on you by the EU? I would not have imposed massive change -- it took

years to reduce a package that could been damaging. You want to strip

away health and said -- safety regulations? The youth that example

before. You'd like to get rid of that. I want us as a nation to

decide what health and safety rules we want in the UK, not to happen

imposed on us. I want less regulation. I want the right

regulation. I don't want huge extra burdens put on business. What was

the atmosphere like in the Cabinet yesterday? Cordial. It was a

friendly meeting. The Prime Minister immediately accepted that they were

different views around the table, but we all committed to working in

the next few months for the cause that we believe in, on one side or

the other in a constructive and friendly way. It would be dominated

by this issue, won't it? We don't have two attack each other

personally. It's already happening, though. You've already said that the

Prime Minister is scare mongering and you said it will be project

fear. That's not friendly and cordial. I haven't actually said

that. You said it's too risky to leave. I criticised easyJet who have

said somehow that cheap airfares could disappear from Europe. That's

nonsense. There are regional airports in constant Europe that

would go bust if it wasn't for low-cost aviation for the United

Kingdom. It's simply not true. You can guarantee that, can you, to the

British people? You can guarantee these things for the British people

the day after we vote to be the EU? Why would people in continental

Europe cost themselves money? You can't guarantee, can you Rhys ask

yourself a question, on the day after Britain leads the European

Union, the Germans will say we aren't going to sell Brent W is to

the British? There will be a trade deal, you are absolutely right. The

issue is, will it be the same deal? Will there be full access for the UK

to goods and services? Are you saying that they will be this utopia

where the same deal will be struck. We wait have to be part of freedom

of movement use and we won't have to pay a penny towards the EU? Is that

what you're saying the British people. We are... Can you guarantee

that we will have full access to trade and services in the way that

exists now, without freedom of movement and without paying into the

EU? Why would they take a risk with jobs in Germany and France, and

other European countries by not agreeing a proper, modern free-trade

agreement for goods and services. They ran a massive trade surplus

with us. They sell more to ask them we sell to them. They lose out

financially those trading agreements not continue. I'm not saying they

will continue forth upon talking about the terms. Everyone says we

don't know what outward look like, what I'm tried to get from you is

how long would it take? Two years? Seven years like Canada? And would

be on the same terms we have now? Why would it not be on a free trade

basis because it costs them money. It doesn't cost us financially free

don't have a free-trade agreement, is Germany, France and other

European crunchies. -- European countries. How long do you think

that will take? It will take a relatively short period of time. How

long? If it Canada seven-year 's? How long will it take the UK? There

is a process of negotiation set out in the treaty. I would not expect

those countries to take a risk because at the end of two years they

would lose out financially. Well, even over the negotiations, they

have said, particularly Francois Hollande, that actually he's not

going to give special treatment to Great Britain. Why would these

countries, who's been polled through the ringer over negotiations then

suddenly immediately, on your timescale want to set up favourable

terms of trade with the EU? Is Francois Hollande going to say to

farmers, who are a fairly lively bunch, you don't have too sell your

wine, cheese or agricultural products to Britain. Why would he

take that political breeze? That we don't know the terms. You admit

that. We know what you would like and you can't believe it would be

another option, but it is a risk, isn't it? That's what the Prime

Minister is saying and he is right. It's a risk for the French not have

a free-trade agreement with us, because otherwise their businesses

lose out. With the Business Secretary doesn't agree with you and

he says you are wrong. He says it's too risky for business. I think the

risk is on the other side. Is he wrong to say the risk is too great?

We run huge trade deficit with continental Europe. The Business

Secretary is contradicting you. What do you know that he doesn't? We have

different views around the Cabinet table, and we set those out

yesterday. Some of us were in and some, out. We will have the ultimate

over the next few months that in a constructive way. He's a good

Business Secretary and he's the be unhappy about the European Union.

But he is campaigning to remain. He's been loyal to the Prime

Minister. We've taken different views in this. We're both loyal to

the Prime Minister. Well you're not on this issue, right you? Government

ministers are free to take their own decision on this argument. It's a

brave, bold decision and I agree with it. You worried about your job

if you lose in a referendum? Why, it could be a situation where David

Cameron will say to you in your colleagues who are campaigning out,

that South. Game over. He can decide the construct of his Government in

his own way in the future. This is a matter of principle for me. It's not

about my career, my job. So, you're prepared to lose your job? And doing

what I believe is the right thing for the country. It's neither here

nor there in job terms, I'm doing it for the country. I think it's the

low risk option for my country. Is it right that a majority Government,

for the first time in years, fighting, spit and divided over this

issue? People expect us as politicians to be grown-up. They

don't expect us to agree all the time. We are not automatons. We are

going to have a constructive debate because we disagree but we are going

to stay friends, respectful of the Prime Minister and work together

that we carry on governing the country well. If you win is the

Prime Minister had to go? So, you trust him, totally to renegotiate

bilateral trade agreements as the prime in this who campaigned to stay

in the EU. I campaigned for him as the row minister who gave the

country a bold choice. He will lead us in Government if we stay

organised. He would really be favoured person to lead those

negotiations. You'd still trust after this? I'd still trust. In

terms of your colleagues, do you think it would be possible for him

to stay? Absolutely. What we don't need at the end of this, whether we

vote to leave or stay is a elliptical bloodbath. We've got a

good team. It needs to carry on and do what the country needs is today.

How big boost would Boris beat your campaign? He would be a great boost

I don't know what his intentions but I hope will. If you lose will that

be a? If the people vote then -- in then we'll probably won't return to

it. Will that be for a generation? If we stay there we stay, if we

leave them we leave. Now, what of labour? Jeremy Corbyn has been

sceptical of the EU in the past. He voted to leave the European economic

meet in 1975. Times have changed, though. The Labour leader says the

EU brings investment, and protection. In a moment, we'll be

talking to the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Hilary Benn, that let's

hear what Jeremy Corbyn had to say speaking in Wales yesterday. We were

voted to stay in the EU because it brings protection for British

workers and consumer -- consumers. We believe it's a vital framework

for Corporation in the 21st-century, and the vote to remain using the

best interests of our people. But, we want progressive change in

Europe, to make the EU works for working people, that includes

workers rights, putting jobs and sustainable growth at the heart of

economic policy, greater accountability of institutions, and

a halt, and absolute halt to privatise public services by some

element in the European Union. And Hilary Benn joins me now. Dit David

Cameron do a good deal? Well, he went through this whole process

because of splits within the Conservative Party. It hasn't

changed our view. We are in favour of remaining. He announced there was

don't be a referendum, renegotiation and we are still in favour. It

hasn't made a difference in that respect. But some of the changes,

the red card, that something that is good for Britain. A red card on laws

we don't like? I think that it's a good thing. The changes on child

benefit, we believe in fair contribution, but, this referendum

is not in the end going to be about David Cameron's deal, is going to be

about whether we are better off In or Out. Chris Grayling wasn't able

to answer your perfect their question about what trade

relationships will replace the free access to the largest single market

in the world because we are in the EU. Let's go back to the deal. You

see why make a difference, but you do concede that introducing a red

card, some sort of challenge to EU laws that UK doesn't lie, and

restriction on child benefits, even though exact that they went exactly

what the Prime Minister promised? Those changes that we ourselves

called for, but when it comes to this decision, it's about much, much

than that. It hasn't changed Labour's view about the case for

Britain remaining in the European Union, because it's good for jobs,

investment and growth. Let's take an example. We export cars to Europe

with no tariff. When the Japanese and Americans export then they had

to pay a 10 cents tariff. That's what the single market means. That's

why there's a lot of investment in Britain, investment in the car

industry which is now growing and expanding. People thought it was on

the way out. It isn't. Why wouldn't we -- we can't guarantee that. No

one voting out can guarantee access. There could be high skill jobs that

depend on that. They wouldn't go, would they? That is project fear, as

Nick Clegg used to say that 3 million jobs would disappear. That's

not based in fact, is it? I'm not saying that. Let's look at the

alternative, we've got no way. In order to get access to the single

market, Norway has to pay a contribution which is the same per

capita as ours. They have to accept all the rules. But that's because

the Norwegian establishment wanted that. But they don't have any say

over the rules in Europe. Now, how is that an advantage, an improvement

on what we've got now? It isn't. It's a worse deal. Even the

Norwegians don't recommend that we go down that route. That's why the

league campaign is, as we've just seen with Chris Grayling's inability

to answer your question is that they cannot tell us what our would look

like, so why we take the risk? Are you saying that Britain just can't

survive outside E U. You are implying that this country can do

well on its own. Because survive, that you are scaremongering in that

sense. That's what brexit-mac ministers are saying. Four. Are you

saying that this country isn't capable of being able to run its own

affairs. I'm making this argument, we'll ready have a lot of great

trade deals with other countries in the world precisely because we are

part of the EU, which gives us tariff free access. We are part of

the largest single market in the world. Why would we trade what we've

got at the moment, which is good deals, for the price that -- of

deals that are just as good when guys that have campaigned to leave

can't tell us what it will look like. Are you happy with levels of

net migration? What about our borders? The issue of free movement

in the European Union is that it's part of the rules. So there would be

limitless migration in that sense, over the next 5-10 years, bearing in

mind with what's happening in the moment, it will be impossible to

bring those levels down. What's happening in the world as a separate

argument if you are talking outside of the European Union. Once those

people within the EU get citizenship then they will be ever to come over

to Britain, rightly or wrongly. But it is something people are concerned

about. Being part of the EU does mean that being part of the EU means

that we cannot control our borders. If we look at the number of people

Germany are taken in because of the crisis in Syria. It will be many

years before they can acquire citizenship. I do think they would

choose to move from Germany to the United Kingdom in large numbers.

Look at the economic opportunities and standards in Germany. There are

many British people who living and working in other European countries,

and EU migrants who have come to Britain who are working as nurses,

lecturers and in manufacturing, and they are paying into the British

economy. They are net contributors, as you know because they work and

pay tax. That gives us more revenue of the country. Did you agree with

Jeremy Corbyn attacking the deal, particularly because of the brake on

benefits to EU migrants? Our view on that is that we believe in fair

contribution. Jeremy Corbyn said the deal is tinkering around the edges,

particularly when the focus is on a brake on benefits for EU migrants.

He doesn't like it. Do you? We agreed that there aren't abuse and

is the right price. Are you sure he signed up to that? We are agreed

that their contribution is the right approach he was making a different

argument. His argument was that it is irrelevant to the view that

Labour is taking about the benefits and being in the European Union. It

doesn't change our position in that sense. Jeremy's is campaigning to

stay in as are the whole Labour Party. So will you share a platform

with David Cameron. I won't. The Prime Minister can make his case to

his party which is bitterly divided, as we've seen, over the last few

months. You were always going to stay within the EU, thereby backing

the status quo. Why wouldn't you share a platform with the Prime

Minister. Surely it's too big an issue to be partisan? We make our

own arguments in a railway to try and win the case. The Prime Minister

can do the same in his way in his party, with the people he's seeking

to persuade. In the end, the decision that the British people

make is we safer? This is important, because in the last decade or so,

5000 people who were suspected of crimes had been removed from the

country to face justice elsewhere. One of the bombers on the 21st of

July fled to Italy, and he was returned to Britain to face justice

and he was convicted. Why? Because of the European arrest warrant.

These are practical considerations that show we are safer being in the

EU rather than leaving. Good morning and welcome

to Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up on the programme:

We know the date. And on the streets of Scotland,

campaign groups are quick to get It was the worst kept secret

in British politics, but now the details

have been confirmed. The Prime Minister came

home with a deal which, he says, is good enough

to keep the UK in the EU. Though his political opponents have

already dismissed it as pathetic. So the starting gun has been fired

for that In Out Euro referendum, which will take place

on Thursday the 23 June. Get your Jhumpa Lahiri gladrags on!

The Eurovision Song contest announced a change to the voting

system since its bigger shake-up since 1975 and now David Cameron

says he has done a deal which means that Britain should stay in the E U.

Our plan for Europe gives us the best of both worlds. It underlines

our special status, through which families across Britain get all the

benefits of being in the EU, including more jobs, lower prices

and greater security. But our special status also means we're out

of those parts of Europe that do not work for asked. It's already clear

that not everyone is convinced. Bring back full control of our own

affairs to the UK, so we asked three of the European court of justice,

the unelected bureaucracy in Brussels, and we are free to set up

our own trade agreements with other countries around the world. And we

are free to cooperate with our nearest neighbours, on our turns.

But the main political parties in Scotland will all be campaigning to

stay in the EU. Let's hear the case, and the SNP will be making the case

for Scotland to stay in the EU, because it's good for jobs,

protections, social employment, and it's good to enable independent

countries come together to have sovereignty, and deal with things

like climate change and the refugee crisis. Scots farmers believe on

balance we are better off. We want to stay because Westminster have

said nothing. There's been nothing said about agriculture in Europe.

40% of the European budget directed at agriculture means it's important

it's got right. If there's an eternity of weed consider, but for

the moment we want to stay in. Jerry the independence referendum, the EU

told us to get stuffed -- during. I don't see why should go to an

organisation that told us to get stuffed. I think they will tell us

to get stuffed in the second independence referendum. I've got

more fundamental objections than that it's a profoundly undemocratic

organisation. He says that Brexit could mean a bright future for

Scotland, independent and a member of the free trade area. I wish that

some people in the SNP leadership would go and have a look at the

Treaty. If the UK emerges with a very good trade agreement, then it's

much easier for Scotland to peel off as an independent member and still

be associated with that trade agreement with the rest of the EU,

giving us the access that we want to that 500 million market, but at the

same time, allowing us to be much more sovereign than we would be if

we were a small member states in the EU, ruled by a Brussels. But a

different vision which is simpler and bureaucratic. I'd like to see

reforms along the lines of more simplification, and are taking away

of the regulations that are causing problems within our industry. It's

not really delivering an awful lot. It's a deep joy to be here and I'm

happy to announce the results of the United Kingdom. So, now will have to

see if David Cameron's deal will get UK votes or Null point.

I'm joined by Kiran Stacey from the Financial Times.

There's a lot of talk about Boris Johnson. Do you think it makes a

difference what way he jumps? I think it makes more difference than

the way Michael Gove jump. He cuts through on a level which many

politicians aren't able to, even David Cameron. He has a status in

the public mind which transcend politics and if he goes out and

makes a populist case for the EU, that will be herds in a way that

other members of the Cabinet which voters might not have heard of, are

able to make that point. If you have a look at all the choreography

behind Boris's move, is difficult to see that he would be backing the UK

saying in the EU after all. Do you think he'd be an automatic leader of

the league campaign, because one of the dangers they have, Cabinet

ministers about, perhaps interesting cranks and oddballs, that

nevertheless cranks and oddballs. The question is which group is going

to lead. Vote lead? Leaves EU? There a number of factions battling the

supremacy. There is a faction around Nigel Farage who is saying that

there should be a campaign to Leeds based on the core vote. And there's

more cross-party consensus which involves people from Labour, the

Conservatives, and they save they need to lead a more moderate, broad

wide ranging campaign. I think RS would fit better into that latter

group and perhaps ease the figure to bring the two camps together, but at

the moment, they are so divided that they will keep fighting for the next

few months until the electoral commission decides who is in charge.

On the other side of the argument, the stay in people, they will be led

by David Cameron, Nicola Sturgeon has been clear the SNP will be

campaigning BS, so it's all going well, but could that be the problem?

One of the phenomena we are seeing in Europe, at the moment, is that

people just want to give a bloody nose to the establishment, and it

anything looks like the political establishment in Britain gang up on

one side of the argument, this is it. I think that's slightly and

overdone argument. If you look at the 2015 results for the election,

it was a surprise result. I think voters want to give a bloody nice

politicians when they think the stakes are a little bit lower. So,

at an EU election, they might go vote en masse for a party like Ukip,

but when I think it comes to the really big stuff, they are much more

cautious. Especially on an issue where lots of people haven't been

engaged in the argument, it don't necessarily care about a comic

doesn't affect their daily lives. I think that most people will be risk

averse and think they are better of staying where they are because they

know what happened in the current setup stop do you think the Yes

Campaign has to get a certain tone to it. Nicola Sturgeon make the

point that initially -- all the momentum went towards them during

the campaign and they were seen as more positive, and that the stay in

campaign in Europe doesn't have that margin to lose? I think it does have

a bit of margin to lose. I think a negative campaign, which is what

Nicola Sturgeon is warning against, could be effective by saying that

voting for things with huge risks, it means there are like to vote for

it. That very briefly, do you expect

business to come out, like big multinational companies, much sooner

than in the Scottish Referendum and say, look, hang on, folks. Your jobs

will go for we leave the EU. And I could see the trade union saying, do

you know what's? They are right. I think you'd start to see that very

same. The CBI, who have always been EU, have come out. And I think other

organisations will join them. They will save jobs are on the line. They

will couch it carefully but the message will be clear.

Joining me now is the MP Stephen Gethins, who is the SNP's

And John Mills, who is the founder of consumer product empire JML

John Mills, before we talk about the actual issues, just on the Labour

Lead campaign, does it concern you that the doesn't appear to be any

major figures in the Labour Party involved in it? I think you've got

to wait and see what happens over the next day or two. I think you'll

find more Labour figures will declare in favour Britain to leave

the EU, and that will be a very welcome development. But the point

is, with the Conservatives talking about Boris Johnson, I'm not sure

there's anyone in the Labour Party with that kind of clout and

influence you could come and join your campaign. I think we've got

major figures who are well-known to the that you will see. Boris Johnson

is in a class of his own, I'll admit. If he comes to the league

campaign then it will be a big plus. He does reach out to people in a way

that other politicians to, I think it will be a real acid becomes

on-board. -- a big asset if he comes on board.

What is Labour lead's attitudes or are you happy to join up with anyone

who is interested in leaving. We don't take the view that we only

want to campaign on our own. We are happy to campaign with everyone who

shares our views about coming out of the EU, and we think that unity

across the board there is a big plus. Stephen, what about the SNP on

that front? Are you going to have your own SNP campaign? Nicola

Sturgeon was asked about this and rather neatly avoided it by saying

that David Cameron won't necessarily want to share a platform with her.

Should he want to, what would your attitude to that the? I think the

SNP will run its own campaign. I want to see a yes vote in Scotland,

and I don't know how much David Cameron can Andrew do -- contribute

to that. Boris Johnson might cut through, but I do did make a lot of

difference in Scotland. But Bruce Davidson could help you? Yet. They

are still bumping along, they've just got the worst result since

1865, so we just want to focus on having our own column a positive

campaign, and talk about the benefits we get from sharing common

rules on issues, and helping us to trade with our neighbours, and

educational benefits, workers rights. Brussels has made a lot more

progress than London did on workers' writes and these are the issues we

want to campaign on. You just heard is John Mills outlining a social

democratic case. You want the case for leaving, what is it? I think

that there are a number of things in the number of people in this country

who are worried about the cost, migration. They are worried about

some of the effects that the budget is spent, particularly on

agriculture, and with high food prices, there. But they are worried

about Chrissy, the European Union having to move towards migration and

the euro zone, which is not where people want to be. So, I think

there's a very strong social democratic case to say we are better

to come out and negotiate a better deal than we got at the moment. But

watch would you reply to Stephen's points at about workers right. He

argues that they've been more protected by the European Union

British governments? I think there's some truth in that that the European

Union led the way, but the idea that Britain came out -- that if Britain

came out of the EU, then all these rights will be swept away. There are

some issues around the edges about a 48-hour week, but generally

speaking, there's complete unity across-the-board now. That workers

rights on paternity need to stay in place and I'm sure they will do.

Stephen, what about that? Not least because you disagree with the new

trade union legislation, but George Osborne and David Cameron have made

a great play that they want to be on the side of working people. Well,

they might make a great play a bit, but I'm not sure that that stands up

to the facts. If we withdraw from the EU, these powers go to London.

Now, we've had nothing about powers returning to Scotland or Wales, or

island. So, leaving ourselves at the mercy of London, is not something I

feel entirely comfortable with. In this debate, there's a good

opportunity to talk about the benefits we get to the European

Union. We are quick to criticise, even when the UK signs up to these

measures, but the EU doesn't always get the benefit of some of the good

that it's done over the years, and I think there's an opportunity to do

that over the coming months. What your opponents will argue is, let's

take this question of health and safety, social legislation that

affects workers' hours, at the bottom line here is that you should

be up to Britain to democratically elect governments who in a

democratic manner, decided what those rights should be. But what --

you might like -- you might not like the results, but this is the

alternative to Brussels imposing democratic governments in Britain

things which they don't necessarily agree with. First of all, with the

UK Government disagreeing on what's is going on in Brussels, the UK

Government hasn't yet voted against a proposal that had to be adopted,

finally. In terms of issues like health and safety, the UK signs up

to this because we have a common set of rules that are greed throughout

Europe, so it's a level playing field, which makes it a lot easier

for businesses and other organisations to go out and work

together. So, there are benefits to that. John Mills, what's your

response -- response going to be about sovereignty, being made

increasingly by supporters of staying in. They are saying that we

are members of Nato, that should Turkey end up in a war with Russia,

which is not inconceivable over the next few weeks, we would be bound by

the rules of Nato to join in on Turkey's side. That's a much greater

succession of sovereignty than one could almost imagine happening in

the EU. There's a difference between our role in Nato 's and other

organisations which are essentially intergovernmental. In the EU, it's

different. The EU law is superior to British law, and I think that's very

undemocratic. I think it would be better if we have the same sort of

relationship with the rest of the European Union as we do in Nato and

the United Nations. The logic of what you are saying is that

difference would only exist, to take my hypothetical example of Turkey

and Russia, Britain turning round and saying we don't want any of

that, we will leave Nato. We'd have the right to do that because of an

interdict that -- intergovernmental agreement. You got to look at recent

events where countries have different views about what sort of

action should be taken, Nato is a really presenting united front on

this any more than the Union is. We're running out of time. Stephen,

I wanted to ask you about the No Campaign in Scotland, the timing.

I'm not sure I'm best place for that, Gordon! You were opposed to

David Cameron's timing on this. I know you were disappointed that the

European elections happen before the Scottish Referendum in Ukip won a

seat. Because of the meshing of these two things, is your concern

that you could get a lot more publicity and potentially did quite

well in the Scottish elections? Look, Ukip have yet to see the

deposit in a Parliamentary election, so perhaps a bit of an irrelevance.

The reason we want to see a long campaign is because I think the case

for Scotland as a member of the EU, and the UK, stands up to scrutiny,

so let's put it under scrutiny, and as Nicola Sturgeon wrote in her

letter and as was agreed by the first ministers of Northern Ireland

and Wales, to having just six weeks to do this was not a lot of time.

I'll be back at the usual time of 11.00am next week.