:00:36. > :00:41.Jeremy Corbyn struggles to get a grip on the turmoil inside his
:00:42. > :00:44.party after Ken Livingstone's comments on Hitler and Zionism.
:00:45. > :00:47.But will the Labour leader's latest anti-Semitism review draw
:00:48. > :00:53.Despite demands he should be booted out, Mr Livingstone insists he'll
:00:54. > :00:56.fight to stay in the party, and refuses to apologise for saying
:00:57. > :01:05.We'll discuss the implications for Labour and its leader.
:01:06. > :01:08.The row comes just days before Thursday's elections across the UK.
:01:09. > :01:13.We'll hear from Lib Dem leader Tim Farron and the Conservative's
:01:14. > :01:27.Four days to go until the voters go to the polls. What can the parties
:01:28. > :01:30.do at this late stage of the campaign to win you over?
:01:31. > :01:38.why he should be London now. -- mayor.
:01:39. > :01:41.And with me for the duration - Nick Watt, Janan Ganesh
:01:42. > :01:44.They'll all be tweeting using the hashtag #bbcsp.
:01:45. > :01:48.This time last week Jeremy Corbyn was in a pretty good place.
:01:49. > :01:50.He'd put in a decent performance at PMQs,
:01:51. > :01:56.the Tories were ripping themselves apart over the EU referendum
:01:57. > :01:59.and any Labour rows seemed small beer in comparison.
:02:00. > :02:01.But that was before the Guido Fawkes political blog uncovered
:02:02. > :02:07.anti-Semitic tweets from a novice Labour backbencher called Naz Shah -
:02:08. > :02:12.made before she was an MP - and Ken Livingstone called Hitler
:02:13. > :02:17.in her aid - perhaps not the most helpful of modern
:02:18. > :02:19.political interventions - leading to his suspension,
:02:20. > :02:22.along with Ms Shah's from the party and calls for him to be
:02:23. > :02:26.So what might have been no more than a little local difficulty has
:02:27. > :02:29.become the biggest crisis in Mr Corbyn's leadership.
:02:30. > :02:34.Here's Ellie with a reminder of how the story unfolded.
:02:35. > :02:37.I accept and understand that the words are used caused upset
:02:38. > :02:41.and hurt to the Jewish community, and I deeply regret that.
:02:42. > :02:49.Naz Shah was apologising for this - a Facebook post that suggested
:02:50. > :02:55.She'd shared it and other offensive comments two years ago.
:02:56. > :02:58.On Tuesday afternoon she resigned as Parliamentary Private Secretary
:02:59. > :03:00.to the Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell.
:03:01. > :03:07.The next day a fellow shadow frontbencher was calling
:03:08. > :03:12.There has to be a suspension and an investigation when something
:03:13. > :03:15.like this occurs, because it is so serious and it does have such
:03:16. > :03:18.a knock on effect on people outside of parliament, in the real world.
:03:19. > :03:22.Moments later, the Prime Minister waded in.
:03:23. > :03:25.The fact that, frankly, we have a Labour Member
:03:26. > :03:27.of Parliament, with the Labour Whip, who made remarks about
:03:28. > :03:31.the transportation of people from Israel to America and talked
:03:32. > :03:34.about "a solution", and is still in receipt of the Labour whip
:03:35. > :03:39.After hours of speculation, Naz Shah, who was only elected
:03:40. > :03:40.last year, was suspended from the Labour Party
:03:41. > :03:47.But if the Labour leadership had hoped it would draw
:03:48. > :03:49.a line under the issue, they were sorely disappointed,
:03:50. > :03:51.because the next day, this happened...
:03:52. > :03:53.You didn't find that to be anti-Semitic?
:03:54. > :04:00.You have to remember, when Hitler won his election
:04:01. > :04:03.in 1932 his policy then was Jews should be moved to Israel.
:04:04. > :04:05.He was supporting Zionism, before he went mad and ended up
:04:06. > :04:14.You Nazi apologist, you Nazi apologisist.
:04:15. > :04:15.Rewriting history, rewriting history!
:04:16. > :04:21.Go back and check what Hitler did, go back and check what Hitler did.
:04:22. > :04:24.There was a book called Mein Kampf, you obviously haven't heard of it.
:04:25. > :04:27.Ken Livingstone was on the phone to another radio station
:04:28. > :04:31.when he got interrupted by the Labour MP John Mann.
:04:32. > :04:33.Watched by most of the country's media, they took it inside
:04:34. > :04:37.and continued their interesting difference of opinion
:04:38. > :04:43.You dare say, you dare say Hitler supported Zionism.
:04:44. > :04:47.I think you've lost it, Mr Livingstone.
:04:48. > :04:53.It's a deliberate, calculated attempt to cause problems,
:04:54. > :04:59.You certainly shouldn't be an Labour's National Executive.
:05:00. > :05:03.I've not said Hitler was a Zionist, what I said was his policy in '32
:05:04. > :05:04.was to deport Germany's Jews to Israel.
:05:05. > :05:10.John Mann was called to the Chief Whip's office for that
:05:11. > :05:12.and told he shouldn't have big rows on the telly.
:05:13. > :05:16.Other MPs voiced their opinion in Parliament instead.
:05:17. > :05:21.Anti-Semitism is wrong, full stop, end of story.
:05:22. > :05:24.I am sick and tired of people trying to explain it away -
:05:25. > :05:27.and yes - I'm talking to you, Ken Livingstone.
:05:28. > :05:29.Less than an hour later Ken Livingstone was suspended
:05:30. > :05:32.from the Labour Party, and chased by the media.
:05:33. > :05:34.Do you want to apologise for causing any offence?
:05:35. > :05:42.While Ken was indisposed, Jeremy Corbyn was trying not to let
:05:43. > :05:46.the issue occupy his local election campaigning, even if he had been
:05:47. > :05:50.forced to suspend one of his closest allies.
:05:51. > :05:53.It's not a crisis, there is no crisis.
:05:54. > :05:56.Where there is any racism in the party, it will be dealt with,
:05:57. > :06:01.I have been an anti-racist campaigner all my life.
:06:02. > :06:06.I suspect that much of this criticism, that you're saying
:06:07. > :06:09.about a crisis in the party, actually comes from those
:06:10. > :06:12.who are nervous of the strength of the Labour Party at local level.
:06:13. > :06:14.But it has been a damaging week for Labour, whose leadership
:06:15. > :06:16.promised to get a grip on anti-Semitism.
:06:17. > :06:20.Ken Livingstone insisted he had nothing more to say.
:06:21. > :06:23.I've got to do the washing now, doing some work on the pond,
:06:24. > :06:33.Well, Ken Livingstone didn't stay quiet for long.
:06:34. > :06:36.In fact yesterday morning he appeared on the London radio
:06:37. > :06:45.After the broadcast, he had this to say to
:06:46. > :06:48.If people have been offended, I'm really sorry about that.
:06:49. > :06:50.But they're not offended because I said the truth,
:06:51. > :06:53.exactly the same thing as the Prime Minister of Israel said
:06:54. > :06:55.48 hours earlier, they've been offended by the scrutiny
:06:56. > :07:00.of embittered old Blairite MPs stirring up all these
:07:01. > :07:03.accusations of anti-Semitism, when I said on the programme 80
:07:04. > :07:05.Labour Party Jewish members have a letter in the Guardian
:07:06. > :07:07.today saying they've never experienced anti-Semitism.
:07:08. > :07:09.We've had a handful of people who have said things
:07:10. > :07:14.They have been suspended or expelled immediately by Jeremy.
:07:15. > :07:20.It is filled with people campaigning against racism and anti-Semitism.
:07:21. > :07:23.Speaking on BBC One earlier this morning,
:07:24. > :07:26.the new Israeli Ambassador to the UK, Mark Regev,
:07:27. > :07:28.said a line has been crossed in the anti-semitism row
:07:29. > :07:35.Of course people have the right to criticise the government of Israel -
:07:36. > :07:43.If you follow the very vigorous public debates
:07:44. > :07:45.we have in my country, you'll know that every
:07:46. > :07:47.government position is open to debate in the parliament,
:07:48. > :07:50.in the press, in a very, very robust civil society.
:07:51. > :07:51.It's not about criticising Israel, it's about demonising
:07:52. > :07:55.The comments we've heard over the last two or three weeks
:07:56. > :07:59.that were made public, it has nothing to do
:08:00. > :08:02.with criticising this or that particular Israeli policy -
:08:03. > :08:05.it's demonising and a vilification of my country, and its
:08:06. > :08:14.But Jeremy Corbyn's close ally Diane Abbott told Andrew Marr
:08:15. > :08:18.that Labour doesn't have a problem with anti-semitism.
:08:19. > :08:23.The reality is that there have been 12 for incidents in the period
:08:24. > :08:25.when Jeremy's leader, and some of those remarks predate
:08:26. > :08:29.200,000 people have joined the party.
:08:30. > :08:35.What is your message to him now, should he apologise properly?
:08:36. > :08:37.Have you ever known Ken apologise for anything?
:08:38. > :08:40.No, but this might be the time to start!
:08:41. > :08:43.Ken's remarks were extremely offensive.
:08:44. > :08:46.He was suspended within hours, there's going to be an investigation
:08:47. > :08:54.and the party will decide what happens to Ken.
:08:55. > :08:58.We did ask the Labour Party for an interview with someone
:08:59. > :09:01.from the Shadow Cabinet, but no one was available.
:09:02. > :09:03.We're joined now from Exeter by the former Labour culture
:09:04. > :09:18.Welcome to the programme. In your view how big a problem does Labour
:09:19. > :09:22.have with anti-Semitism? Well, in a week where the Conservatives are
:09:23. > :09:24.doing terrible damage to our education system, the National
:09:25. > :09:28.Health Service and are themselves apart on Europe, I would not want to
:09:29. > :09:32.be on your programme on Sunday talking about this. In a way I agree
:09:33. > :09:35.with Diane Abbott, I don't think we have a massive problem but the way
:09:36. > :09:39.we have mishandled this whole crisis, which has been going on for
:09:40. > :09:43.weeks, although Ken Livingstone has done his best to make it worse, the
:09:44. > :09:50.way we have handled the crisis has made it seem worse than it is. What
:09:51. > :09:53.do you make of Ken Livingstone's claim this is just basically a group
:09:54. > :09:56.of embittered old Blairite MPs trying to undermine the new order?
:09:57. > :10:02.I've seen you would include you in that.
:10:03. > :10:09.One of the first people to call for Ken Livingstone to leave the party
:10:10. > :10:13.was John Lassman, the head of Momentum, on the hard left. I think
:10:14. > :10:18.the popular left-wing commentator Owen Jones was also very quick to
:10:19. > :10:25.call for Ken Livingstone's resignation so to try to describe
:10:26. > :10:30.this as some Blairite... , it looks more like some left on left battle.
:10:31. > :10:34.I am increasingly of the view Ken Livingstone is a Conservative Party
:10:35. > :10:39.spy who has been planted in the Labour Party and has now emerged to
:10:40. > :10:42.do as much damage as he possibly can to the Labour Party. That is
:10:43. > :10:47.certainly the view of my loyal Labour Party members and activists
:10:48. > :10:51.and voters who came up to me asking what was going on. They were
:10:52. > :10:55.outraged by his comments and defeat comes back into the party, they
:10:56. > :10:59.won't vote for the party. Jeremy has finally gripped it this week with
:11:00. > :11:09.the inquiry but we have got to act quickly and decisively. Has Jeremy
:11:10. > :11:12.Corbyn let it drag on? There have been very sensible voices across the
:11:13. > :11:17.political spectrum in the Labour Party who, for several weeks if not
:11:18. > :11:20.months, have been raising concerns about this and calling for quite
:11:21. > :11:24.simple and sensible solutions to wait. I think if they had been
:11:25. > :11:34.listened to earlier, we could have nipped this problem in the bud. I
:11:35. > :11:39.hope it has now been gripped but it will be judged on what we do.
:11:40. > :11:43.Parties are judged on what they do, not what they say. The leadership
:11:44. > :11:50.have said all the right things, we now need to see action. What is the
:11:51. > :11:55.difference between Ken Livingstone's attitude to Israel and the Jews and
:11:56. > :12:01.Jeremy Corbyn's attitude to Israel and the Jews? I'm not quite sure I'm
:12:02. > :12:05.qualified to comment on either of their attitudes to Israel and the
:12:06. > :12:10.Jews. All I know is someone who has been a very strong friend of
:12:11. > :12:15.Palestine, a supporter of the two state solution, the Labour Party has
:12:16. > :12:18.a proud tradition of believing and supporting Israel as a state with
:12:19. > :12:23.the right to exist but I think there is a problem on parts of the left.
:12:24. > :12:31.They don't seem to recognise where criticism... Legitimate criticism
:12:32. > :12:36.crosses over to hatred for Israel and anti-Semitism. The Labour Party
:12:37. > :12:42.supports absolutely Israel's right to exist. We always have and I hope
:12:43. > :12:45.we always will. We also support a Palestinian state and if we allow
:12:46. > :12:49.ourselves to be diverted from that sensible position which is held by
:12:50. > :12:52.all progressives all over the world, that will be a very dangerous path
:12:53. > :12:57.all progressives all over the world, in my view. Are you clear in your
:12:58. > :13:02.mind that Ken Livingstone and Jeremy Corbyn support Israel's right to
:13:03. > :13:07.exist? I cannot speak for them, I can just speak for myself. I am not
:13:08. > :13:12.inside their brains and I think anybody who tried to get inside Ken
:13:13. > :13:16.Livingstone's brain would find that a very challenging process. So you
:13:17. > :13:23.are not sure your leaders support Israel's right to exist? The Labour
:13:24. > :13:28.Party and Jeremy Corbyn I am sure 100% support Israel's right to
:13:29. > :13:33.exist, but these are questions the leader can speak for on behalf of
:13:34. > :13:38.himself. The chance would be a nice thing but we are grateful to speak
:13:39. > :13:48.to you. In your view, I know there is due process to follow, should Ken
:13:49. > :13:54.Livingstone be rejected from the Labour Party? Countless Labour Party
:13:55. > :13:58.members and supporters came up to me on the streets of Exeter yesterday
:13:59. > :14:04.where we are fighting very important and tough local council elections on
:14:05. > :14:10.Thursday to say that if he came back, they wouldn't vote for us. If
:14:11. > :14:15.he was brought back, what would be the reaction amongst your
:14:16. > :14:20.colleagues? I think they would be dismayed. There is genuine anger
:14:21. > :14:25.about the damage this has done at a time when the Conservatives should
:14:26. > :14:30.be on the ropes. We should be 20% ahead in the opinion polls, we are
:14:31. > :14:36.behind, facing very difficult local elections. We are not being an
:14:37. > :14:41.effective opposition because the talk is all about turmoil in Labour.
:14:42. > :14:44.Labour people are furious about that, they want the leadership to
:14:45. > :14:49.get a grip, they want to be an effective opposition and they want
:14:50. > :14:55.to make sure we win the next election and the elections across
:14:56. > :15:01.the UK and in London. Thanks for joining us. Apologies for the
:15:02. > :15:05.quality of the sound. Nick Watt, how much is this being used by those
:15:06. > :15:11.opposed to Jeremy Corbyn to undermine his leadership? Yes,
:15:12. > :15:15.certainly the majority of the PLP don't support his leadership. A
:15:16. > :15:19.significant number of them would like to get him out, hope to do so
:15:20. > :15:23.after the European referendum. That had appeared to go away and now we
:15:24. > :15:27.have this crisis so maybe it will come back but I think those people
:15:28. > :15:32.who want to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn are not rubbing their hands and
:15:33. > :15:37.saying doesn't this make him look awful. They are, as most people in
:15:38. > :15:40.the Labour Party are, horrified by what this makes the Labour Party
:15:41. > :15:45.look like to the electorate as a whole and would like to deal with
:15:46. > :15:49.it. If you have two senior figures running after each other on
:15:50. > :15:54.stairways, whatever the cause, that looks dreadful for voters but then
:15:55. > :15:58.the issue you are talking about is supremely sensitive issue of
:15:59. > :16:06.anti-Semitism and the people I talk to who want to get rid of Jeremy
:16:07. > :16:08.Corbyn just hate what is going and feel that it is very dangerous and
:16:09. > :16:13.sensitive territory for the Labour Party. Where does it go from here?
:16:14. > :16:19.It depends whether the party decides this is just an embarrassment that
:16:20. > :16:24.can be got over. This is when Jeremy Corbyn's leadership stopped being
:16:25. > :16:28.funny, it is serious and it is not an accident or the mistake of
:16:29. > :16:32.judgment that meant he didn't get rid of Ken Livingstone immediately.
:16:33. > :16:35.They are very old allies, they go back a long way and you have to
:16:36. > :16:43.understand that this juncture of reality, the perception is so
:16:44. > :16:47.confused. I started my life on the Trotskyist left. I knew people, in
:16:48. > :16:53.fact I was in Hornsea when Jeremy Corbyn was on the council there.
:16:54. > :16:59.These people socialise with each other, marry each other, they never
:17:00. > :17:04.go outside of their very closed self referring political activist circle.
:17:05. > :17:09.So that picture that Jeremy Corbyn's first white painted of him standing
:17:10. > :17:14.over a photocopier eating baked beans, we all knew that person in
:17:15. > :17:19.the 1970s. These people live within their closed political frame of
:17:20. > :17:23.reference, that's why there was this horrendous misunderstanding of the
:17:24. > :17:29.significance of what Ken Livingstone had done and said. When they called
:17:30. > :17:33.John Mann in, they insisted the whip's office called him in to be
:17:34. > :17:36.disciplined as if there was some kind of moral equivalence between
:17:37. > :17:40.what Ken Livingstone had said and what John Mann had said in
:17:41. > :17:46.reprimanding him, that is another reflection of how out of touch they
:17:47. > :17:51.are. People will wonder why the Labour Party, which has a long
:17:52. > :17:56.historic track record of fighting racism, introduced legislation going
:17:57. > :18:02.way back to the 1960s on something like this, why does it now have to
:18:03. > :18:08.have an investigation into racism and a code of conduct on racism?
:18:09. > :18:13.Because they have at the very least turned a blind eye to this kind of
:18:14. > :18:16.behaviour, I would imagine for about 30 years now. I'm only surprised
:18:17. > :18:21.that other people are surprised by this incident. In the 1980s people
:18:22. > :18:26.like Ken Livingstone were giving views not just on Zionism but on the
:18:27. > :18:32.foreign policy issues that were strident to say the least. When
:18:33. > :18:35.Frank Dobson was installed rather than Ken Livingstone as London
:18:36. > :18:44.mayoral candidate, a huge part of the soft left took Ken's side, now
:18:45. > :18:51.we have this disproportionate punishment of John Mann versus Ken.
:18:52. > :18:55.For a pattern of my lifetime there is an indulgence towards this
:18:56. > :18:59.behaviour and the only surprised that it has taken this amount of
:19:00. > :19:04.time for it to manifest in a crystal clear crisis which I imagine makes
:19:05. > :19:08.the average swing voter look upon Labour as something unpalatable.
:19:09. > :19:15.Will it have an effect on Thursday's elections? Sadiq Khan is nervous it
:19:16. > :19:19.will have an effect on him as the candidate for London mayor. He
:19:20. > :19:24.nominated Jeremy Corbyn but has done a good job of distancing himself
:19:25. > :19:31.from him. And he was one of the first to criticise him. He did it
:19:32. > :19:32.immediately. He is nervous but it is probably too late to affect the
:19:33. > :19:36.campaign. OK. After their disastrous results
:19:37. > :19:39.in last year's General Election, the Liberal Democrats are hoping
:19:40. > :19:41.for some better luck this week. Their leader, Tim Farron,
:19:42. > :19:44.says the local elections are utterly critical for the party's "survival,
:19:45. > :19:46.revival and rebirth", as they go in defending just over
:19:47. > :19:48.300 seats in England. But has Mr Farron's leadership over
:19:49. > :19:51.the past year made any difference The last general election left
:19:52. > :19:57.the party in a sorry state, going from 57 MPs down
:19:58. > :20:01.to a measly eight. The result caused former leader
:20:02. > :20:03.Nick Clegg to resign the very next day, triggering
:20:04. > :20:07.a party leadership election. Two candidates went head-to-head -
:20:08. > :20:11.the then Party President Tim Farron and former Care Minister Norman
:20:12. > :20:17.Lamb. I am up for this, you are up
:20:18. > :20:26.for this, I am optimistic but it will take hard work
:20:27. > :20:30.and bloody mindedness. Over the last year, it's been
:20:31. > :20:33.an uphill struggle for Mr Farron, having to prove to the political
:20:34. > :20:36.classes that, even with eight MPs, his party is still a force
:20:37. > :20:38.to be reckoned with. Although the Lib Dems successfully
:20:39. > :20:41.used their hundred-odd peers to defeat the Government
:20:42. > :20:51.in the Lords over tax credits, trade union reform and child
:20:52. > :20:54.refugees, Lord Rennard's resignation
:20:55. > :20:56.from the party executive and the legal action
:20:57. > :21:04.over the election of MP And next week, Mr Farron
:21:05. > :21:18.will once again be put Both the big parties are polling
:21:19. > :21:28.badly, it couldn't be a better time for a Lib Dem could -- come back,
:21:29. > :21:37.could there? You have summed it up very nicely. The general election
:21:38. > :21:40.result last May was obviously devastating, and I am going to argue
:21:41. > :21:45.it was devastating for the country as it was for the Liberal Democrats.
:21:46. > :21:50.You think of these issues going on at the moment, the attack on junior
:21:51. > :21:54.doctors, the Balkanisation, even potential privatisation of our
:21:55. > :21:58.school system across the UK, the heartless approach to orphaned
:21:59. > :22:02.refugees in Europe, and yet we are talking about divisions within the
:22:03. > :22:05.Labour Party. They are indeed the most ineffective official opposition
:22:06. > :22:14.probably in British political history. What would come back look
:22:15. > :22:18.like? It would look like a 50% increase in our membership and
:22:19. > :22:22.gaining more council by-election seats and more votes in those
:22:23. > :22:26.by-elections than any other party, which incidentally is exactly what
:22:27. > :22:30.is happening. There is a real sense we are finding people on the
:22:31. > :22:34.doorsteps being very ready to listen to our message. We have got to fight
:22:35. > :22:40.for attention and to get onto the stage at all. The results last May
:22:41. > :22:53.but us in that position but I am an optimistic kind of person. We have
:22:54. > :22:55.an enormous challenge on our plate, we have a Tory government which is
:22:56. > :22:58.very arrogant, taking for granted the fact they are in office, being
:22:59. > :23:00.all the more arrogance because their official opposition is shambolic,
:23:01. > :23:06.and the desperate need for the good of Britain to be a Liberal Democrat
:23:07. > :23:09.revival. Given that you are doing so well in local government
:23:10. > :23:14.by-elections, you must hope to do much better on Thursday than the 331
:23:15. > :23:21.English councillors you currently have? I think I would be in
:23:22. > :23:24.dangerous territory if I start giving you figures but I am
:23:25. > :23:29.increasingly confident we will do much better than we did last May.
:23:30. > :23:33.The sense I am getting on the doorstep around the country is
:23:34. > :23:37.positive, people listening. Lots of people who are progressive,
:23:38. > :23:42.centre-left voters who feel utterly disappointed with the Labour Party
:23:43. > :23:46.as a movement at the moment. And many people switched off by the
:23:47. > :23:50.Conservatives, one example of that was a councillor in Yeovil who is a
:23:51. > :23:54.case worker for the Conservative MP there who defected to the Liberal
:23:55. > :23:58.Democrats, actually having to give up her job in the process because
:23:59. > :24:07.she realised that what the Tories were offering last May is not what
:24:08. > :24:12.they are delivering. We have started down the road of serious unfairness,
:24:13. > :24:16.taking money away from people with disability, people dependent on the
:24:17. > :24:25.NHS and care services, and behaving in an inhuman way towards the child
:24:26. > :24:32.refugees. Will you add to your tally of council seats? I hope so. I hope
:24:33. > :24:38.so and I couldn't tell you either way. You have been telling me how
:24:39. > :24:40.good you are doing in the local government by-elections, why
:24:41. > :24:46.wouldn't you do just as well on Thursday? I am telling you things
:24:47. > :24:51.that have happened, I'm not capable of telling you things that will
:24:52. > :24:57.happen. Let me come onto your key message. Your key message for the
:24:58. > :25:02.local elections is you are pledging to fight unnecessary cuts to
:25:03. > :25:07.university services, how credible is that when you spent five years in
:25:08. > :25:11.power with the Tories presiding over these cuts?
:25:12. > :25:17.We spent five years writing the economy and protecting front-line
:25:18. > :25:20.services from those cuts. What happened is over five years we help
:25:21. > :25:23.to get the country in a position where the books were all but
:25:24. > :25:27.balanced. We got to a crossroads where we make a decision as a
:25:28. > :25:31.country, do we carry on cutting or is this the time we say, we have
:25:32. > :25:36.stabilise the financial situation, now it is the time to go easy and to
:25:37. > :25:39.put money into front-line services? You will see at this point in time
:25:40. > :25:47.we have a Conservative government that has chosen to give away tax
:25:48. > :25:51.cuts to the wealthy at a time it is passing on cuts through local
:25:52. > :25:55.government to social services, to schools, highways and so on. We say
:25:56. > :26:01.politics is about choosing. At this point, having got the economy from
:26:02. > :26:03.the brink, this is the point of government, and if the Liberal
:26:04. > :26:08.Democrats are in government, we would be choosing not to give tax
:26:09. > :26:12.cuts to the wealthy but supporting public services such as those run by
:26:13. > :26:19.local authorities. When you were in power, in government, you close to
:26:20. > :26:24.350 libraries, closed 350 youth centres and around 600 sure start
:26:25. > :26:30.centres. Now you are posed as the anti-cuts party, no one will believe
:26:31. > :26:34.you? When we were in government we prevented the Conservatives making
:26:35. > :26:40.far greater cuts. One of the great sadness is for me, or an irony is it
:26:41. > :26:43.has taken the last 12 months of seeing what the Conservatives do
:26:44. > :26:51.without us to see what a difference we made. They managed to do that
:26:52. > :26:55.with you in power. And now you are trying to tell the voters who are
:26:56. > :27:02.against all these cuts, cuts you presided over in government. I am
:27:03. > :27:05.not Jeremy Corbyn, I won't come onto this programme and say you never
:27:06. > :27:08.need to make tough decisions in government. We were very clear over
:27:09. > :27:12.those five years we were acting in the national interest to balance
:27:13. > :27:20.those books. Whether you blame Labour or the
:27:21. > :27:25.banks, the mess was there. We responded responsibly. But one of
:27:26. > :27:30.the issues we should be talking more about this week but sadly Labour's
:27:31. > :27:34.internal divisions has taken it off the front pages is the junior
:27:35. > :27:37.doctors scandal. Remember, just over a year ago it was my colleague
:27:38. > :27:41.Norman Lamb who prevented that contract being written in the first
:27:42. > :27:45.place. It was only the Conservatives getting into power on their own
:27:46. > :27:50.without us which meant they pushed forward on that cart to our national
:27:51. > :27:54.health service. If forcing of schools to turn into academies,
:27:55. > :27:57.something we blocked. Further cuts to the police, we blocked, the
:27:58. > :28:01.Conservatives are now putting in place. We were the party that
:28:02. > :28:06.believed we should live within our means, in our ability to fund public
:28:07. > :28:09.services on the basis of how wealthy the country is. Over five tough
:28:10. > :28:15.years the Liberal Democrats helped balance the books and get us out of
:28:16. > :28:20.the financial crisis. We say you don't then make more cuts you don't
:28:21. > :28:28.need to. You didn't lose the books, Mr Farron. You left behind a deficit
:28:29. > :28:33.of about ?80 billion. Let me just finally ask you this, you have five
:28:34. > :28:42.members in Holyrood, five in the cabinet is amply, two in the London
:28:43. > :28:45.assembly. Of the seats up for grabs, three and 31 councillors. If you
:28:46. > :28:51.don't improve in at least a couple of these areas, does your leadership
:28:52. > :28:55.come under pressure, doesn't have consequences for you? -- 331
:28:56. > :28:58.councillors. You set out the case clearly at the beginning of this
:28:59. > :29:02.interview, in the last couple of months we have been coming back from
:29:03. > :29:07.a devastating result for us. I don't expect it to be an overnight
:29:08. > :29:11.success, but my sense is as I have been knocking on doors is you find a
:29:12. > :29:16.warming towards a Liberal Democrat message. A sense if you vote Liberal
:29:17. > :29:20.Democrat, makes a difference. That you have people working on the
:29:21. > :29:24.ground in your local community to get things done. So you will do
:29:25. > :29:29.better? I just want to know if you will do better or not? I am no more
:29:30. > :29:33.others since sales and new, but I'm optimistic about how we will do this
:29:34. > :29:39.week. It feels more positive than a year ago. With a shocking Tory
:29:40. > :29:43.government, arrogant as it is, and a Labour opposition so shambolic, this
:29:44. > :29:47.is a moment where the Liberal Democrats need to recover and I'm
:29:48. > :29:50.hopeful this week we will. Tim Farron, thank you for your time.
:29:51. > :29:52.Well that's the Liberal Democrats, what about the Conservatives?
:29:53. > :29:54.Their local election campaign has been relatively low key
:29:55. > :29:57.these last few weeks, with the small matter of an EU
:29:58. > :29:59.referendum campaign taking up most of their time.
:30:00. > :30:02.You could say with Labour in the spotlight the pressure
:30:03. > :30:04.is off the Conservatives in the English local elections.
:30:05. > :30:07.These set of seats were last up for grabs in 2012,
:30:08. > :30:09.when George Osborne's so-called 'omnishambles budget' had hit
:30:10. > :30:13.the headlines and the Tories slumped to winning only 884 seats,
:30:14. > :30:21.However, Ukip are targeting Conservative seats and significant
:30:22. > :30:24.losses to Mr Farage's party could be a sign the referendum campaign isn't
:30:25. > :30:31.What's more, there's been a lot of friendly fire
:30:32. > :30:34.in the last few months, with councillors across the country
:30:35. > :30:36.criticising government policy on a range of issues,
:30:37. > :30:37.including turning all schools into academies, more directly
:30:38. > :30:39.elected mayors and reductions in the grants from
:30:40. > :30:47.It is not just the EU that the Conservative Party
:30:48. > :30:53.And the Conservative's Local Government Minister Brandon Lewis
:30:54. > :30:57.joins me now from Chelmsford in Essex.
:30:58. > :31:09.Let me go straight to this business of forced academies in England. The
:31:10. > :31:14.Tory Cabinet member for Oxfordshire County Council says she will have to
:31:15. > :31:19.suck it up, but she thinks you have gone bonkers. Why have you gone
:31:20. > :31:23.bonkers? We haven't. I have to say, from my own experience, if I look at
:31:24. > :31:30.what I have seen in East Anglia and Great Yarmouth, the academies have
:31:31. > :31:34.reformed education. It is a good step forward, about making those
:31:35. > :31:37.schools autonomous, giving them independence. I understand
:31:38. > :31:40.councillors who have been involved in education want to continue to be
:31:41. > :31:44.involved in education. We have to do what is right for the pupils to get
:31:45. > :31:48.that improvement in educational standards. She is not against
:31:49. > :31:52.academies but against you forcing every schools to be academies.
:31:53. > :31:58.Plenty others share her concerns. Why don't you listen to your own
:31:59. > :32:04.people? We are listening to people. What we are saying is... You have to
:32:05. > :32:09.have a two way conversation. Academies have the ability to
:32:10. > :32:12.improve education. I have seen this first hand myself, with vast
:32:13. > :32:15.improvement in the offer of education for pupils. We have to put
:32:16. > :32:19.the pupils first. This is about making sure young people today are
:32:20. > :32:26.getting the best education, the best life chances to move forward and
:32:27. > :32:29.benefit from economics, growth and jobs for security. This is about
:32:30. > :32:34.making sure we do what is right for the pupils and to make sure they are
:32:35. > :32:37.getting the best education. We believe by putting schools in direct
:32:38. > :32:43.control of their destiny is the best way to give pupils the best
:32:44. > :32:48.opportunity. Whom are academies responsible accountable? I didn't
:32:49. > :32:55.hear that. Whom are academies accountable to? They have shown
:32:56. > :32:58.across the country having that independence, the knowledge of the
:32:59. > :33:02.teachers, the headteachers who run those schools and know what is best
:33:03. > :33:11.in that area... Who are they accountable to? It is important they
:33:12. > :33:15.have the opportunity... I asked, to whom are they accountable? Ofsted
:33:16. > :33:19.will judge schools and Ofsted goes in and looks at schools and gives a
:33:20. > :33:23.review of what the school's position is and if it needs to improve,
:33:24. > :33:27.Ofsted is very clear. It is transparent, there is no secret and
:33:28. > :33:35.is well covered in the press local and national when schools have a
:33:36. > :33:41.challenge. No local accountability? I have never seen the school that
:33:42. > :33:45.has had a bad Ofsted report be able to keep it secret. It is a public
:33:46. > :33:48.thing and therefore there is a clear responsibility for the people in
:33:49. > :33:53.that school to move things forward, improve things. And looking at what
:33:54. > :33:57.is right for the pupils. You don't want now to have parent governors,
:33:58. > :34:01.so even if you get a bad Ofsted report, how do the parents hold that
:34:02. > :34:07.school accountable if under the white paper you propose they
:34:08. > :34:10.shouldn't be parent governors? Actually there can be parent
:34:11. > :34:14.governors. What it says is there doesn't have to be. There can be
:34:15. > :34:18.parent governors. I have seen academies in my own constituency and
:34:19. > :34:21.elsewhere where parent governors are important. Key to this is making
:34:22. > :34:27.sure the school itself, with the headteachers and the teachers
:34:28. > :34:30.themselves, who know what is best to move education board, have the
:34:31. > :34:34.opportunity to do that. This is about looking what is right and best
:34:35. > :34:38.for pupils, to get the best possible education, the best start in life.
:34:39. > :34:42.Let's look at local government spending now. You have slashed
:34:43. > :34:47.grants to local government over the years. Paul Carter, Conservative
:34:48. > :34:53.leader of Kent Council, he says the tank is now an empty and we really
:34:54. > :34:58.are, to use another analogy, scraping the barrel. Councils, even
:34:59. > :35:05.Tory councillors are saying under your government they are now
:35:06. > :35:08.scraping the barrel. Local government accounts for about 25% of
:35:09. > :35:12.all public expenditure. We have never been shy about being clear it
:35:13. > :35:15.has to play its part in dealing with debt and deficit. Over this
:35:16. > :35:19.parliament we will see local government in a very strong
:35:20. > :35:24.position. What local government can do and what it is doing when you
:35:25. > :35:30.look Oxfordshire, the Midlands, the North, East Anglia sharks, is making
:35:31. > :35:37.sure they are efficient. -- East Anglia. It is under pound cheaper
:35:38. > :35:41.than Liberal Democrat equivalents, showing really good efficiencies to
:35:42. > :35:48.deliver good quality front line services. At the same time. Paul is
:35:49. > :35:55.an excellent leader, but Lemi -- let me be clear, local government
:35:56. > :35:59.surpluses has gone up from 13 to ?22 billion. That is a testament to the
:36:00. > :36:04.efficiencies local governments have shown. It shows there is capacity to
:36:05. > :36:08.go further and also bearing in mind the grant from central government is
:36:09. > :36:15.a small part of the finance for local government. It comes from as a
:36:16. > :36:19.tax, rates and new home tax. Why does he he now Xavi cuts would have
:36:20. > :36:28.a real impact, are having a real impact on people and communities? It
:36:29. > :36:34.is a Conservative saying this? We have to live within our means and
:36:35. > :36:38.make those difficult decisions. They deliver the best decisions to do
:36:39. > :36:42.that. We have seen those efficiencies. Councils are ?80 a
:36:43. > :36:46.that. We have seen those year cheaper than the Labour
:36:47. > :36:49.equivalent. Or local authorities, particularly the district councils,
:36:50. > :36:53.though smaller local councils, as Great Yarmouth is doing, should see
:36:54. > :37:00.how they can share chief executives to make sure the efficiencies can
:37:01. > :37:05.deliver good front line services, dozens of councils across the
:37:06. > :37:08.country from Oxfordshire through to Staffordshire, East Anglia and the
:37:09. > :37:11.Midlands are doing this. We can see more of that. There is more
:37:12. > :37:15.opportunity for that. It doesn't just a liver efficiencies by better
:37:16. > :37:20.front line services. When you have been making these funding cuts, why
:37:21. > :37:25.have they disproportionately fallen on Labour areas, which tend to be
:37:26. > :37:28.poorer, and not Tory areas which tend to be richer? Why have you hit
:37:29. > :37:34.the poorer parts of this country with your cuts? With the best of
:37:35. > :37:37.respect, I think the framing of that is slightly misleading. Let's get to
:37:38. > :37:41.the core of what's going on. One of the worst hit councils in the
:37:42. > :37:45.country has been my own in Great Yarmouth. The reason for that goes
:37:46. > :37:49.back historically, before they left power Labour cut the fund that hit
:37:50. > :37:53.councils with the poorest background. And those are the same
:37:54. > :38:00.authorities that have the highest spending power. They had more to
:38:01. > :38:05.spend per household than the equivalent Conservative verities.
:38:06. > :38:08.More needs. Labour led councils like Liverpool, even if they just
:38:09. > :38:13.collected the council tax, it would be ?500 per house better off
:38:14. > :38:19.roughly. We need to make sure these efficiencies are there. The average
:38:20. > :38:24.cup per household in the Tory area is calculated to be ?68 per person
:38:25. > :38:30.per household by the end of this parliament. The Labour councils per
:38:31. > :38:36.household is ?340. You are picking on the poorer parts this country. We
:38:37. > :38:41.also have to bear in mind the spending power in the first places
:38:42. > :38:45.much higher. Because they had more than they needed to spend on. That
:38:46. > :38:49.is why their spending power can be up to ?1500 more in some places than
:38:50. > :38:54.the equivalent smaller district area. They still do have higher
:38:55. > :38:58.spending power per household. And that is why extra money, an extra
:38:59. > :39:02.?300 million was put in for those transitional works, because as we
:39:03. > :39:06.get to the end of this parliament, the change we made to put more money
:39:07. > :39:10.in with a focus on social care, those authorities start to get more
:39:11. > :39:13.money coming through again. Thank you for joining us, Brandon Lewis.
:39:14. > :39:15.It's just gone 11.40am, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:16. > :39:21.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:39:22. > :39:24.Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
:39:25. > :39:28.Coming up on the programme: Voters go to the polls on Thursday.
:39:29. > :39:31.Are their minds made up or is there anything the parties can
:39:32. > :39:37.Tax has been the dominant issue of this campaign.
:39:38. > :39:41.We'll be asking how the numbers add up and who gains and loses.
:39:42. > :39:44."Down with compromise, down with hesitancy" -
:39:45. > :39:48.the call to workers to take part in the General Strike 90 years
:39:49. > :39:57.If the Scotland Act was an attempt to allay constitutional dissent
:39:58. > :39:59.by giving Holyrood increased powers, then the current election
:40:00. > :40:02.campaign has shown the flaws in that argument.
:40:03. > :40:04.The SNP looks on course to secure a convincing
:40:05. > :40:10.Bids by Labour and the Liberal Democrats to to use the new powers
:40:11. > :40:13.coming to the Scottish parliament could result in the parties
:40:14. > :40:16.being pushed into third and fifth place respectively.
:40:17. > :40:18.Meanwhile, the Greens, which also supports independence,
:40:19. > :40:23.Even the Conservatives, bidding to take second place,
:40:24. > :40:26.does so on the basis that it will strongly oppose
:40:27. > :40:32.So after 18 months, is the constitution still king?
:40:33. > :40:42.Professor John Curtice, is in our London studio.
:40:43. > :40:47.Is there any? It is still king, isn't it? Is there any sign that any
:40:48. > :40:53.thing else is altering this campaign? No, the truth is the big
:40:54. > :40:57.division in Scottish electoral politics is the constitutional
:40:58. > :41:01.question. Opinion polls are finding, including ones out this morning,
:41:02. > :41:07.that 85% of those who voted yes in the referendum back in September
:41:08. > :41:13.2014 are now backing the SNP and conversely only about 15% of those
:41:14. > :41:17.who voted no backing the SNP. Of course, it's always been true that
:41:18. > :41:21.the constitutional question has been one of the central question is, if
:41:22. > :41:24.we go back to 2011 when the SNP won and then, the truth is that there
:41:25. > :41:26.were plenty of people out there who on that occasion were voting for the
:41:27. > :41:44.SNP, even not necessarily wanting
:41:45. > :41:46.independence. They were saying we think SNP can provide the --
:41:47. > :41:48.Scotland with the best government. But the truth is, those days are
:41:49. > :41:51.over. The foundation of the SNP's lead in the opinion polls is pretty
:41:52. > :41:53.much every body who once independence, they are determined to
:41:54. > :41:57.repeat their vote independence by voting for the SNP. That makes it
:41:58. > :42:01.pretty much impossible for any other party to make progress. From the
:42:02. > :42:05.SNP's point of view, the support for independence might not be very good
:42:06. > :42:08.when it comes to a referendum but is terrific when it comes to an
:42:09. > :42:13.election exit leaves everyone fighting over the other half of the
:42:14. > :42:19.population. That's right. In this morning's opinion personal, it is
:42:20. > :42:27.much in line with other polls since the referendum. 45%, 47% doesn't win
:42:28. > :42:31.you a referendum but for a Parliamentary election, even under
:42:32. > :42:35.proportional representation, when your opponents are divided between
:42:36. > :42:39.two or three political parties, that puts you in a dominant position
:42:40. > :42:42.because the truth is, it has looked as though the SNP have been
:42:43. > :42:47.guaranteed at least 44% of the vote for the last 18 months and as we saw
:42:48. > :42:52.12 months ago, can conceivably get 50%. The referendum may not have
:42:53. > :42:58.been one of the referendum has provided the SNP with a very
:42:59. > :43:00.foundation which is difficult to overcome for others, because it has
:43:01. > :43:04.made the constitutional question something that is more popular than
:43:05. > :43:08.it was and something which is now reflected in the ballot box to a
:43:09. > :43:12.much greater extent than before. If the polls are correct, this election
:43:13. > :43:16.is about who comes second, isn't it? Do the Tories have a chance, do you
:43:17. > :43:19.think? They would love it, wouldn't they? They would love it and the
:43:20. > :43:26.Tories have a chance but if one looks across the piste, the truth is
:43:27. > :43:30.we had one or two that have said the Tories are close to Labour, may be
:43:31. > :43:35.very slightly ahead, whereas we've had others including the one this
:43:36. > :43:39.morning which has said they have a fair lead over the Conservatives.
:43:40. > :43:44.The odds are still in Labour's favour but the results are certainly
:43:45. > :43:49.less than 100%. To that extent at least, the Tories will go into the
:43:50. > :43:50.election on Thursday still somewhat hopeful, although not expected. The
:43:51. > :43:58.fact we're talking about this, it's hopeful, although not expected. The
:43:59. > :44:03.not a commentary on how successful Conservatives are at 17% or 18%, the
:44:04. > :44:07.high end of where they've been in the polls for the last 20 years or
:44:08. > :44:14.so in Scotland, it is how far Labour can sink, and during the course of
:44:15. > :44:17.this campaign, we've had two or three opinion polls which have
:44:18. > :44:21.produced record low shares for Labour. Maybe the one thing that
:44:22. > :44:25.will help Labour out and there are signs of this is morning, is that if
:44:26. > :44:31.indeed as a result of talking about the constitutional question, and
:44:32. > :44:36.when the Conservatives but... She puts off some of those no voters
:44:37. > :44:38.that the SNP do have, at that might possibly help the Labour Party to
:44:39. > :44:45.ensure that they say about possibly help the Labour Party to
:44:46. > :44:50.conservatives. The implication is that the voters out of their hands
:44:51. > :44:54.because you've described what he SNP does and what the Tories do, rather
:44:55. > :44:57.than what Labour does. The thing Labour have discovered in the
:44:58. > :45:02.selection is the strategy be pursued on the taxation and spending issue,
:45:03. > :45:05.while it was perfectly sensible, in truth has not evidently worked. But
:45:06. > :45:08.the Labour Party worked out is the people they lost to the SNP in the
:45:09. > :45:14.wake of a referendum was essentially they're more left-wing vote, people
:45:15. > :45:18.who had a belief in a more equal society which was part of the vision
:45:19. > :45:24.of independence which the SNP put forward. Labour said we will try and
:45:25. > :45:28.win these people back by outflanking the SNP on the left by saying we
:45:29. > :45:32.will put up taxes on the SNP will not. A couple problems. While people
:45:33. > :45:38.in Scotland would be willing to pay more, they are not necessarily keen
:45:39. > :45:41.on paying more than people south of the border. At the end of the day,
:45:42. > :45:45.people are going to vote for the SNP because of their views on his
:45:46. > :45:49.independence, even though a majority of SNP supporters say that they
:45:50. > :45:53.think the basic rate of income tax should go up. The taxation issue, as
:45:54. > :45:58.central as it has been to the debate, has not shifted voters
:45:59. > :46:02.because essentially, voters's views have been trimmed by their views on
:46:03. > :46:07.the constitutional question. Do you think there is any merit in the
:46:08. > :46:12.argument to some extent people like Dugdale have, which is look, OK,
:46:13. > :46:16.we've positioned ourselves. We might not convince people for whom the
:46:17. > :46:21.main thing is independence in this election, but we are playing a
:46:22. > :46:24.longer game here. We're trying to reinvent the party. Absolutely
:46:25. > :46:28.right. The Labour Party in Scotland does need to be reinvented but what
:46:29. > :46:33.I would say is the thing the Labour Party really needs to do north of
:46:34. > :46:36.the border is not simply to come up with eye-catching policies but to
:46:37. > :46:46.come up with a story of the kind of Scotland it wants to create and how
:46:47. > :46:48.it is going to get there. I am not sure, in truth, so far cosier
:46:49. > :46:51.Dugdale has demonstrated she has that bigger story. As we saw during
:46:52. > :46:59.opinion polling in the last week, people know what he SNP stand for
:47:00. > :47:05.and the SNP told Scotland a picture of what they want to create during
:47:06. > :47:08.the independence of action. If you ask people what the latest party
:47:09. > :47:12.stands for, many people will say no. Dugdale may have a plan to reform
:47:13. > :47:19.labour but the truth is, I am not sure she has shown enough of that
:47:20. > :47:24.plan might be. -- Labour. One would expect to want to tell that story
:47:25. > :47:29.from the rooftops in advance of the selection more than waiting
:47:30. > :47:33.afterwards. The slightly tentative nature of Labour's campaign is sewn
:47:34. > :47:38.up by the fact they didn't bothered to release them manifested until a
:47:39. > :47:42.week before late election day. To be so late in coming up with the
:47:43. > :47:46.principal election document, it did seem an extraordinary decision.
:47:47. > :47:51.principal election document, it did what way think many people would say
:47:52. > :47:55.was an uneventful campaign, one of the most controversial figures has
:47:56. > :47:58.been you! You wrote a paper, an article, saying that if you support
:47:59. > :48:02.independence, there might be certain areas where you would be better off
:48:03. > :48:08.voting for one of the other parties on the SNP, like the Greens or Rise,
:48:09. > :48:11.not the SNP itself and all hell broke loose. You got lots of
:48:12. > :48:18.brickbats. Do you think that as this case? If the opinion polls are
:48:19. > :48:25.correct and the SNP are going to get maybe over 50% of the vote, as a
:48:26. > :48:29.result of that, probably mop up virtually all of the 73 first past
:48:30. > :48:32.the post constituencies that are available to be won on Thursday, and
:48:33. > :48:37.if the polls are also right in saying that on the list vote, the
:48:38. > :48:42.SNP may not do as well, in those circumstances, the truth of the
:48:43. > :48:46.arithmetic is that the SNP may well end up only getting additional MSP
:48:47. > :48:57.is in one or two regions of Scotland.
:48:58. > :49:01.What you do about that in a sense is up to you. If you are a committed
:49:02. > :49:04.SNP supporter, the truth is you are going to vote for the SNP on both
:49:05. > :49:07.votes, come what may. If, however, the position is that what actually I
:49:08. > :49:10.would like to be able to do is maximise the number of MPs, MSP 's,
:49:11. > :49:12.who are in favour of independence, maybe you will want to take the
:49:13. > :49:16.wrist of voting for the Greens who maybe you will want to take the
:49:17. > :49:19.look as though in the opinion polls they are capable of taking them on,
:49:20. > :49:26.in the hope they will get more in the way of MSP. Now, that is not a
:49:27. > :49:30.strategy that doesn't come without risk because the truth is, maybe the
:49:31. > :49:35.SNP are not going to do as well as the opinion polls say. Maybe they
:49:36. > :49:40.will need additional MSP is to get past the winning post. The paper was
:49:41. > :49:44.trying to point type of the potential limitations of the
:49:45. > :49:48.electoral system, where voters can be faced with a tactical dilemma.
:49:49. > :49:54.What voters do about it, at the end of the day, is entirely up to them.
:49:55. > :50:00.This conversation has been on the assumption that the SNP are going to
:50:01. > :50:05.walk it. They will be worried, presumably on things like turnout,
:50:06. > :50:08.about complacency. Looking at the other side, it wouldn't take that
:50:09. > :50:13.much, would it, to stop the SNP having a
:50:14. > :50:22.All parties worry about turnout. They are particularly concerned
:50:23. > :50:28.about turnout. I think certainly, perhaps in one word, I would suggest
:50:29. > :50:34.that probably don't set your expectations too high. If the
:50:35. > :50:39.constitutional question is so central to the way people are going
:50:40. > :50:45.to vote, and if that is becoming more the case and some of those
:50:46. > :50:49.people who voted no may not vote for SMP at the end of the day, the SNP
:50:50. > :50:53.might not do much better than they did five is ago. Some of the opinion
:50:54. > :50:59.polls have been suggesting they would do dramatically better. It
:51:00. > :51:03.isn't in the bag for the SNP. It never is until all the votes are
:51:04. > :51:06.counted. They need to press their expectations and I would say to
:51:07. > :51:10.Nicola Sturgeon I know you wish to maintain the enthusiasm of your
:51:11. > :51:15.supporters and that's why you're talking about the referendum but at
:51:16. > :51:19.this stage of the campaign, you are trying to appeal to as wide a
:51:20. > :51:21.section of the electorate as possible, particularly to the
:51:22. > :51:26.undecided and they weren't necessarily share the enthusiasm and
:51:27. > :51:27.interest for the independence referendum the bulk of your
:51:28. > :51:31.supporters will have. Briefly, the referendum the bulk of your
:51:32. > :51:35.Liberal Democrats, this was always going to be difficult for them. The
:51:36. > :51:39.truth is, they're not defending very much. They did very bad five years
:51:40. > :51:47.ago. The opinion polls are saying they will hang on to what they've
:51:48. > :51:53.got. The Greens could well overtake the Liberal Democrats as the fourth
:51:54. > :51:58.party in Holyrood. Willie Rennie might find himself even further back
:51:59. > :52:00.if, indeed, Patrick Harvie has more MSPs than he does after Thursday.
:52:01. > :52:03.Thank you very much for that. Tax has been the dominant
:52:04. > :52:05.theme of this campaign, with pledges to keep it the same,
:52:06. > :52:07.raise it for top earners, Some extraordinary claims have been
:52:08. > :52:12.made about the effect it Stephen Hay, who is
:52:13. > :52:21.a senior tax partner for the accountancy firm RSM,
:52:22. > :52:32.joins me from our Edinburgh studio. Let's start with a controversy about
:52:33. > :52:39.the proposal by Labour to raise the top rate of tax by 50p. While they'd
:52:40. > :52:48.like to do that, they don't want to be because they have advice that you
:52:49. > :52:51.could end up losing tax revenue explain this for those of us that
:52:52. > :53:02.aren't glued to accountancy spread to -- spreadsheets. Some people say
:53:03. > :53:09.19,000 people in Scotland pay tax at 45%. That is people who earn over
:53:10. > :53:15.hundred ?50,000 a year. The idea of putting 5p on that tax rate to get
:53:16. > :53:25.an extra somewhere between ?120 million hundred and 30 million
:53:26. > :53:37.the taxpayer that pays 45%. ?150,000 the taxpayer that pays 45%. ?150,000
:53:38. > :53:42.- ?200,000, there's about 9,000 Scottish taxpayers who earn over
:53:43. > :53:46.?200,000. What we don't know is how much they earn, so it could
:53:47. > :53:52.significant. In general, the view seems to be if you put 5p on the
:53:53. > :53:59.highest rate of tax, some of those top 9,000 could leave the country,
:54:00. > :54:04.leave Scotland, to avoid that. You deal with clients who have got
:54:05. > :54:11.fairly substantial funds. In your dealings with people, do you think
:54:12. > :54:22.people would leave just because you'll be paying tax over those
:54:23. > :54:32.earnings. Those that earn between 150-200,000 will not. I would
:54:33. > :54:38.probably have said that if I was earning over ?200,000 a year, and I
:54:39. > :54:44.was faced with an extra 5p on the tax, if I was in a position where I
:54:45. > :54:49.was in a small or medium sized enterprise and I was able to take a
:54:50. > :54:54.dividend, I would take a dividend. A dividend tax individually is going
:54:55. > :55:03.to be less than 50p, around about 38p, so you'd expect a higher rate
:55:04. > :55:08.taxpayer with a 50% band take a dividend rather than pay 5p on
:55:09. > :55:13.earnings. There are 360,000 enterprises in Scotland and 300 of
:55:14. > :55:21.those enterprises have five or fewer employees, which makes them able to
:55:22. > :55:25.take a dividend. And I think the problem here is not about people
:55:26. > :55:32.taking flight. It's about the fact that if a dividend were to be taken
:55:33. > :55:37.instead of the 5p tax, dividend taxes are not devolved to Scotland.
:55:38. > :55:40.These savings taxes. They are preserved at Westminster which means
:55:41. > :55:44.the tax itself, if collected by individuals deciding to take a
:55:45. > :55:53.dividend rather than a salary, it would go to Westminster. So people
:55:54. > :55:56.would pay less tax, as they are paying a tax on dividend, not
:55:57. > :56:00.income, but that is hopeless because the money goes straight to George
:56:01. > :56:06.Osborne. That is the point here, isn't it? Yes, it is. What about
:56:07. > :56:12.putting a penny up on the basic rate which both the Lib Dems and Labour
:56:13. > :56:17.are proposing? Is that going to drive people away? I don't think it
:56:18. > :56:22.would drive people away. It is a very interesting point. The whole
:56:23. > :56:30.point about the 1p on the tax is in the current Parliament, there is no
:56:31. > :56:34.option if one raises or lowers tax rates. You have to raise it for the
:56:35. > :56:39.lower, higher, everyone would have to have an increase, everyone would
:56:40. > :56:43.have to have a decrease. That is the problem we face today. If the
:56:44. > :56:48.parties were in power, they would use the current powers available to
:56:49. > :56:53.them to do so. The Scottish National Party have said they feel they would
:56:54. > :56:58.not... There must be presumably at least in theory a limit to this.
:56:59. > :57:02.Perhaps put people's tax up by 1p, they're not going to leave the
:57:03. > :57:11.country or take their income as dividends, as you were at
:57:12. > :57:15.describing. The more you have a divergences between Scotland and the
:57:16. > :57:20.UK, if taxes here are higher, there is more incentive to do that. What
:57:21. > :57:25.we are missing is the fact about tax 's rates and bands. We haven't seen
:57:26. > :57:31.this at the moment because Scotland doesn't have the power to raise tax
:57:32. > :57:38.rates and bands as they like. From the 6th of April 2017, that is when
:57:39. > :57:42.the difference is going to be. You might see a 30% band coming into
:57:43. > :57:49.Scotland. You might see a third % band at a particular limit, a 40% at
:57:50. > :57:53.a front limit. We might see 45 bands. That's the point a lot of
:57:54. > :57:58.parties are beginning to make. It's not about the 1p on the basic rate.
:57:59. > :58:08.It is about when do you start paying tax at a higher rate? The issue here
:58:09. > :58:13.is 25% of the population pay tax at 30%. You'd get far more people
:58:14. > :58:18.paying far more tax than you would if you put 5p on the top end where
:58:19. > :58:23.perhaps only 18,000 people would pay it. I expect to see bands coming in,
:58:24. > :58:26.and that might make a difference. Can we make something clear and the
:58:27. > :58:32.bands - the Scottish government has one of is the other parties are
:58:33. > :58:36.saying that they will not do what George Osborne is going to do which
:58:37. > :58:47.is raise the threshold for the 40p band, up eventually to ?50,000. And
:58:48. > :58:50.they claim that various amounts of money resulting from that. It's not
:58:51. > :58:55.any extra money for the Scottish government, is it? They don't need
:58:56. > :58:59.to make savings the way George Osborne has to make savings. It's
:59:00. > :59:04.interesting. What George Osborne isn't doing is not a competition.
:59:05. > :59:08.Not for a taxpayer. A taxpayer lives in a country, whether that is
:59:09. > :59:12.Scotland or the UK. What is going to happen is that in Scotland we are
:59:13. > :59:16.going to have a tax system, like it or not, and that's tax system will
:59:17. > :59:21.determine how much we pay in taxes based on our ability to raise that
:59:22. > :59:25.money to spend. What is going to happen, going forward, is no matter
:59:26. > :59:29.what George Osborne does, we will be faced with a tax position in the
:59:30. > :59:36.Scottish government here and we will have to pay it. Our alternative is
:59:37. > :59:39.to try to avoid paying it or to leave Scotland altogether and go to
:59:40. > :59:44.England, and as we've said earlier, my view is that is not something one
:59:45. > :59:49.would do unless the tax was significantly different.
:59:50. > :59:52.Significantly greater. We might find those in the middle income brackets
:59:53. > :59:57.are paying more tax than they are today. And, again, I'm not too for
:59:58. > :00:01.those people would be the people who could leave Scotland. All right,
:00:02. > :00:02.thank you very much for joining us this morning.
:00:03. > :00:05.Exactly 90 years ago today thousands of people gathered on Glasgow Green
:00:06. > :00:07.in Glasgow for a Mayday rally, wondering what was going to happen
:00:08. > :00:10.next in the dispute between the miners and the Conservative
:00:11. > :00:15.What happened, of course, was the General Strike,
:00:16. > :00:29.It started in the coalfields. A dispute about wages and hours. At
:00:30. > :00:35.pits across the country, work stopped on May the 4th, 1926, the
:00:36. > :00:42.next day the battle began to tell the story of the strike. This was
:00:43. > :00:46.produced for the government on behalf of the employers. The trade
:00:47. > :00:53.unions paper highlighted what it saw as the success of the action. World
:00:54. > :00:57.War I ended eight years earlier. Arguably, it had laid down the roots
:00:58. > :01:02.of the general strike. It dramatically affects coal mining
:01:03. > :01:08.because Cole couldn't be sent abroad. People started to rely on
:01:09. > :01:15.other countries to supply them with coal. That undermined the miners.
:01:16. > :01:21.There was an investigation into the miners' conditions and the
:01:22. > :01:29.government suggested 13.5% of their salary would be. At and their hours
:01:30. > :01:32.would be lengthened. It was a battle for control, as owners of the
:01:33. > :01:41.pre-nationalisation coal industry reasserted themselves. 1926 can be
:01:42. > :01:44.seen, I think, as an attempt by the employers to regain control which
:01:45. > :01:50.they felt had been lost during the First World War and its aftermath.
:01:51. > :01:53.They'd lost control of their workplaces, lost control of the
:01:54. > :01:58.management of reduction, to some extent, with workers more confident,
:01:59. > :02:04.aiming a much greater share of effective daily practical control
:02:05. > :02:08.over how their work was organised. Engineers and shipbuilders in the
:02:09. > :02:13.West of Scotland were not called out until seven days later, the day the
:02:14. > :02:18.strike actually came to an end. It was called off very suddenly, to the
:02:19. > :02:20.great annoyance and anger of a lot of people in Glasgow, particularly
:02:21. > :02:24.those who had actually only been called out that they face the fact
:02:25. > :02:29.they were called out and the whole strike had been called off. I think
:02:30. > :02:38.the trade union Congress absolutely lost a of support. They lost 1.5
:02:39. > :02:43.million members partly as a result of how they had given up so quickly.
:02:44. > :02:52.The impact of the general strike was remarkable. Actually, far more
:02:53. > :02:56.workers came out on strike from a sense of shared class loyalty to the
:02:57. > :03:00.miners, groups of workers in a variety of money factoring
:03:01. > :03:04.industries, including in Glasgow, in Scotland, the textile industry,
:03:05. > :03:09.there were many women workers as well as male workers involved in the
:03:10. > :03:13.stoppage, so, actually, the scale of the stoppage surprise not only the
:03:14. > :03:17.30s, the government of the day, the Conservative government of the day,
:03:18. > :03:22.but surprise the TUC itself. People in the TUC got very, very cold feet
:03:23. > :03:25.very quickly and they were scared by allegations coming from the
:03:26. > :03:30.government that the TUC was attempting to subvert the rotation
:03:31. > :03:36.constitution, the British democratic system. These images come from an
:03:37. > :03:40.album of photographs recently acquired by an adult education
:03:41. > :03:46.Centre in London. They show miners in the Fife coalfield organising,
:03:47. > :03:50.marching, and protesting in May and through the summer of 1926, as they
:03:51. > :03:58.remained locked out of the pits. For six months, miners lived, struggled
:03:59. > :04:04.without income, without work. The level of poverty, the level of...
:04:05. > :04:10.Frankly, the level of class conflict that existed in 1926 was something
:04:11. > :04:16.quite striking in Scotland. Shared with other parts of the coalfields
:04:17. > :04:21.in South Wales, for example, and the north-east of England. But that was
:04:22. > :04:25.a special characteristic of the conflict in Scotland. Mr Speaker,
:04:26. > :04:28.this stinks. Has the government water down its new trade union Bill?
:04:29. > :04:30.This shows this government really is water down its new trade union Bill?
:04:31. > :04:33.at the rotten heart of the European water down its new trade union Bill?
:04:34. > :04:38.Union. The accusation is that David Cameron did it to win support in the
:04:39. > :04:42.European referendum. So, perhaps some of the issues raised in 1926
:04:43. > :04:45.European referendum. So, perhaps are still relevant today.
:04:46. > :04:47.I'm joined by two guests this morning, the Observer columnist
:04:48. > :04:50.Kevin McKenna and Magnus Gardham, who is the political
:04:51. > :05:04.I mean, look, during the lifetime of the next parliament, there will be
:05:05. > :05:08.enormous tax powers devolved to Scotland. This should have been a
:05:09. > :05:15.very exciting election campaign because of that. And it has been
:05:16. > :05:21.pretty dull, to be honest. I think the campaign two have been
:05:22. > :05:25.lacklustre. It has been interesting because of the tax debate we've had
:05:26. > :05:29.but perhaps what has been most interesting is the extent to which
:05:30. > :05:30.it has shown the constitutional question still dominate Scottish
:05:31. > :05:38.politics. Is that the problem, that compared
:05:39. > :05:43.to we went independence, messing around with tax rates just doesn't
:05:44. > :05:49.quite do it for people? I don't know if that is a problem. I think this
:05:50. > :05:54.is certainly what is happening. On paper, labour, the Liberal Democrats
:05:55. > :05:59.have a tax policy which you would think appealed to SNP voters more
:06:00. > :06:04.than the SNP's tax plan. Have SNP voters switched to Labour and the
:06:05. > :06:09.Lib Dems? No, they haven't. I think is pretty clear that the
:06:10. > :06:16.constitution is a big factor and also the figure of Nicola Sturgeon,
:06:17. > :06:20.whose appeal transcends the political dividing line. Judging by
:06:21. > :06:24.your column in the Observer this morning, you haven't managed to get
:06:25. > :06:27.yourself very excited either, have you? The participants in the
:06:28. > :06:34.selection of fighting against the recent history of last year's
:06:35. > :06:40.Westminster election and the referendum on independence six
:06:41. > :06:44.months, eight months prior to that. In both of those elections or polls,
:06:45. > :06:50.there was a sense of history being made and a sense that people were
:06:51. > :06:53.participating in the great, important days and they were lucky
:06:54. > :07:00.that they were around to participate in Fareham. That hasn't really
:07:01. > :07:05.happened here. It has been reduced, the main issue has been tax and
:07:06. > :07:10.whether it is 1p or whether or not, whether the SNP risk-sharing all
:07:11. > :07:14.their wares for the next few years because quite frankly, they don't
:07:15. > :07:19.need to. The only historical axe back to this election is that I
:07:20. > :07:23.cannot remember any time when the UK, when not only is the outcome
:07:24. > :07:30.seemingly assured but also an overall majority, perhaps the second
:07:31. > :07:35.of Tony Blair's wins in the UK, that is the only thing that comes close.
:07:36. > :07:39.So you think the excitement is gone because there is not that sense of
:07:40. > :07:45.will show that because you have 35% will show that because you have 35%
:07:46. > :07:50.-- had 85% turnout at the referendum. You had 71% at
:07:51. > :07:58.Westminster. I think we would be struggling to get around 60% at this
:07:59. > :08:00.one. It just doesn't carry the same romance and drama. It's not to say
:08:01. > :08:04.it is not important because the FS it is not important because the FS
:08:05. > :08:10.-- if the SNP do win this, it means they are set fair for government...
:08:11. > :08:14.What has happened? The idea of lots of people becoming involved in
:08:15. > :08:17.politics for the first time, you bought into the excitement of the
:08:18. > :08:22.referendum campaign, the idea of a new movement and the rest of it. Do
:08:23. > :08:26.you think that has dissipated largely? I am not sure it has
:08:27. > :08:33.dissipated. What it has is reinforced the hegemony of the SNP.
:08:34. > :08:38.We are seeing the prevailing narrative in the selection is still
:08:39. > :08:45.the constitutional issue that we had more than 18 months ago. That has
:08:46. > :08:51.led to a bedrock of 45% to 47% of the SNP vote. That would dominate
:08:52. > :08:55.home election. I happen to disagree with Nicola Sturgeon when she says
:08:56. > :08:59.we are looking for five successive polls of 50% or more. I think going
:09:00. > :09:06.into a second referendum, whether it be in three or five years' time,
:09:07. > :09:11.with 45%, 47% still sticking with pro-independence, that is still 15
:09:12. > :09:16.points better off than when the yes campaign went in to bat a year and a
:09:17. > :09:24.half before the referendum. OK. You think... I see what you mean. You
:09:25. > :09:29.think they could put on another 10%. They are guaranteed 45% or 47%, if
:09:30. > :09:39.the next five polls showed what Professor Curtis was saying, then
:09:40. > :09:43.they are aiming for another 5%, 6%. You had a theory, didn't you, about
:09:44. > :09:49.shy Labour voters. You've been putting it up. They are very, very,
:09:50. > :09:55.very shy indeed. Do you think they might still be there? The poll today
:09:56. > :09:58.in the Sunday Times suggests they might be starting to emerge and
:09:59. > :10:03.in the Sunday Times suggests they certainly, the point that Professor
:10:04. > :10:07.Curtis was making about a Tory victory over Labour depends more
:10:08. > :10:12.actually on how low Labour sinks than it does how well the Tories
:10:13. > :10:19.perform. The Tories themselves understand that which is why they
:10:20. > :10:24.have talked about overtaking Labour but they've not ever been and
:10:25. > :10:33.confident that they are going to be able to do it. Yeah, the polls are
:10:34. > :10:39.giving Labour a bit... This phenomenon was a new one, wasn't it?
:10:40. > :10:43.It was the idea... It's used to be with the Tories, that people didn't
:10:44. > :10:46.like to tell pollsters that actually they were going to vote
:10:47. > :10:51.Conservative. You find the same thing in Scotland with Labour. Yeah.
:10:52. > :10:55.Friends in the SNP and the Tories both told me that when they are
:10:56. > :10:59.knocking on doors, people will both told me that when they are
:11:00. > :11:03.volunteer a view on the SNP and they will say yes, we like them or no, we
:11:04. > :11:07.don't like the SNP but they weren't volunteering the fact that they were
:11:08. > :11:10.Labour. It raises a big question about whether the Labour vote is
:11:11. > :11:15.there, whether it is going to turn out and all of these things. It
:11:16. > :11:18.makes it very, very difficult to predict, actually, how Labour and
:11:19. > :11:24.the Conservatives are going to do on Thursday in relation to each other.
:11:25. > :11:28.I think I am right in saying, you would have liked to have seen the
:11:29. > :11:34.SNP being a bit more radical in its programme for the next few years but
:11:35. > :11:41.I presume they would say, first of all, we've got to worry about
:11:42. > :11:43.voters, a huge number of voters who might not like that radical
:11:44. > :11:48.programme and also we don't have to because we are going to win anyway.
:11:49. > :11:55.Yeah, that is what I would like the SNP to deliver more on, its
:11:56. > :11:59.narrative since 2007. I suspect that they would say, well, look, we are
:12:00. > :12:05.the dominant party, we want to first of all ensure that we are returned
:12:06. > :12:07.as a party of government and that we maintain our overall majority. To do
:12:08. > :12:13.that, we have to continue our appeal maintain our overall majority. To do
:12:14. > :12:17.to a wide spectrum of voters, including some who maybe don't want
:12:18. > :12:21.to vote for independence. How long do you think that can last? Do you
:12:22. > :12:28.think they does come a point where perhaps people say, in the Glasgow
:12:29. > :12:33.area, where many used to be Labour, who voted SNP because they thought
:12:34. > :12:36.in a way independence became a proxy about something more radical
:12:37. > :12:43.happening van has happened up until now, do you think at any point they
:12:44. > :12:48.get fed up and say, what the SNP is proposing isn't many more radical?
:12:49. > :12:52.By the end of the next session of Hollywood, the SNP, if they win,
:12:53. > :12:58.will have been in power for 13 years. One of the main criticisms of
:12:59. > :13:04.the Tony Blair government was, at the outset in 1997, that was seen as
:13:05. > :13:08.a three term government and many on the left, not radical left, said
:13:09. > :13:13.this is great, this is more than enough time, there is more than
:13:14. > :13:19.enough opportunity for us not just to have a soft left agenda but to
:13:20. > :13:23.reverse things like Margaret Thatcher's anti-trade union laws and
:13:24. > :13:29.impose stricter laws on the financial businesses. People on the
:13:30. > :13:35.left here, including those who voted for the SNP and voted yes, will say
:13:36. > :13:39.after 13 years, who will be looking for something a little bit more
:13:40. > :13:43.radical, a little bit more reforming that goes beyond little packages of
:13:44. > :13:50.many here for nurses or GPs or primary care. I will have to cut you
:13:51. > :13:53.off because we've completely run out of time. 20 both very much indeed.
:13:54. > :13:58.I'll be back at the same time next week.