21/02/2016 Sunday Politics Scotland


Andrew Neil and Gordon Brewer with the latest political news, interviews and debate. Andrew is joined by Hilary Benn MP and Tim Farron to discuss the EU referendum.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 21/02/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



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.


Andrew Neil and Gordon Brewer with the latest political news, interviews and debate.

Andrew is joined by Hilary Benn MP and Tim Farron to discuss the EU referendum, and Melanie Phillips, Tom Newton Dunn and Nick Watt make up the political panel.