:00:40. > :00:46.comparing the mission of the European Union with
:00:47. > :00:49.what Hitler was trying to achieve - has the Leave campaign's self-styled
:00:50. > :00:56.Churchillian attack dog gone too far?
:00:57. > :00:57.He says leaving the European Union
:00:58. > :01:00.will improve the lives of the "have nots" -
:01:01. > :01:03.but is the man who presided over billions of pounds of welfare
:01:04. > :01:04.cuts really on the side of working people?
:01:05. > :01:09.Reducing the powers of the House of Lords
:01:10. > :01:11.would not be acceptable, says the woman charged with keeping order
:01:12. > :01:14.in the upper house - but with 60 government defeats
:01:15. > :01:16.in the last year alone have their Lord and Ladyships
:01:17. > :01:22.And coming up on Sunday Politics Scotland:
:01:23. > :01:25.As the dust settles on the Scottish election, we'll be speaking live
:01:26. > :01:27.to the Greens' Patrick Harvie about his party's plans and policies
:01:28. > :01:43.And with me - as always - three journalists who'd have been
:01:44. > :01:46.sure to win the Eurovision political punditry contest: Helen Lewis,
:01:47. > :01:48.Isabel Oakeshott and Amol Rajan who'll be tweeting throughout
:01:49. > :01:54.So earlier in the week the Prime Minister warned that
:01:55. > :01:56.leaving the EU could precipitate armed conflict in Europe.
:01:57. > :01:58.Today, Boris Johnson hits back, comparing the European Union
:01:59. > :02:02.to Hitler in an interview with the Sunday Telegraph:
:02:03. > :02:04."Napoleon, Hitler, various people tried this out,
:02:05. > :02:22.The EU is an attempt to do this by different methods."
:02:23. > :02:25.Boris goes on to say "The euro has become a means by which superior
:02:26. > :02:28.German productivity is able to gain an absolutely unbeatable advantage
:02:29. > :02:45.Could you organise an ordinance that British politicians should just shut
:02:46. > :02:52.up about Hitler? It is an interesting one, the campaign are
:02:53. > :02:58.getting quite grumpy, saying that he was not really talking about Hitler.
:02:59. > :03:02.Boris is to clever not to know that if you mention Napoleon and Hitler
:03:03. > :03:11.people will write headlines. He is a columnist and he knows this. It is
:03:12. > :03:19.bizarre. It was Sadiq Khan sitting at home thinking he was the only
:03:20. > :03:24.London mayor was not mentioned Hitler? The campaign has become
:03:25. > :03:31.quite personal, it is about David Cameron's relationship with them,
:03:32. > :03:41.and whether he has a hope of becoming leader. And as always like
:03:42. > :03:46.to make things personal. It does not surprisingly in the slightest that
:03:47. > :03:52.it is becoming more personal as the clock ticks towards the key date. On
:03:53. > :03:58.Boris Johnson's comments, absolutely agree with Helen but no good can
:03:59. > :04:02.come of a politician mentioning Hitler, but the reaction to the
:04:03. > :04:08.remarks has been rather hysterical. If anyone bothers reading the
:04:09. > :04:17.context... In the context. The Mac was an absolutely reasonable
:04:18. > :04:20.statement of historical fact. We should not get to a point where
:04:21. > :04:26.nobody can mention anything historical without it creating a
:04:27. > :04:32.ridiculous action. I don't think it will be arise if it helps them win
:04:33. > :04:40.votes. He fancies herself as an inherent to Winston Churchill, it
:04:41. > :04:47.was in store. In your dreams, if the copy had come in and you had seen
:04:48. > :04:53.the word logo might think you have a chance for a headline. Ever since
:04:54. > :05:05.the collapse of the Roman Empire there have been attempts to unify
:05:06. > :05:11.Europe. In a way, the Germans have that... There was a slight
:05:12. > :05:13.difference in having endless pragmatic committees and ruling
:05:14. > :05:19.tanks and to Poland. By different means is quite different. He was
:05:20. > :05:25.arguing it was an attempt to unify Europe, it is bundled together
:05:26. > :05:34.different ideas. It is a bit of a stretch. But overstretch! I think
:05:35. > :05:44.there was a real danger... And what is the European Union, parable?
:05:45. > :05:48.People support Brexit would say it was an attempt to build a European
:05:49. > :05:56.super structure without a Democratic base. Democratic nations. It is
:05:57. > :05:59.completely reasonable. Ireland begins to cover girl to make
:06:00. > :06:08.important arguments about historical trends. Butler was Fromer remark.
:06:09. > :06:27.He only mentioned Napoleon. Maybe he should have mentioned other leaders.
:06:28. > :06:33.What do you make of the polls, showing neck and neck but they are
:06:34. > :06:42.so far ahead in the economic argument, and that is why we will
:06:43. > :06:48.win. They always hoped that. The evidence is that people put the
:06:49. > :06:54.economy as the highest concern. What the Leave campaign is trying to do,
:06:55. > :07:00.we've seen this from Nigel Farage, make the point that this is not just
:07:01. > :07:08.about GDP, a few extra pounds in your pocket. The Leave campaign will
:07:09. > :07:15.be hoping to highlight the question of what this means for society.
:07:16. > :07:17.Now - would leaving the European Union be good
:07:18. > :07:19.for the poor and disadvantaged in Britain?
:07:20. > :07:21.That's the case that's being made by the former Work
:07:22. > :07:23.and Pension Secretary Iain Duncan Smith.
:07:24. > :07:25.I will be talking to him in a moment.
:07:26. > :07:28.But first let's hear the warnings earlier this week about
:07:29. > :07:29.the short-term impact of Brexit on the economy
:07:30. > :07:37.from the Governor Bank of England, Mark Carney.
:07:38. > :07:40.A vote to leave the European Union could have material economic effects
:07:41. > :07:43.on the exchange rate, on demand, and on the economy's
:07:44. > :07:48.So, this combination of influences on demand,
:07:49. > :07:51.supply and the exchange rate could lead to a materially lower
:07:52. > :08:03.path for growth and a notably higher path for inflation
:08:04. > :08:05.than in the central projections set out in today's
:08:06. > :08:21.Welcome back to the Sunday Politics. You've claimed that leaving the EU
:08:22. > :08:28.would be good for the have nots but the Governor of the Bank of England
:08:29. > :08:31.says it could lead to recession, inflation, unemployment. That could
:08:32. > :08:37.be bad. If all the predictions were right. Every single one of these
:08:38. > :08:39.predictions is done by groups of people who've got most of their
:08:40. > :08:50.predictions wrong. The point I would make to you, the Treasury prediction
:08:51. > :08:55.and the IMS prediction all show that if Britain left the EU the economy
:08:56. > :09:02.would grow. Their argument is it would not grow as fast but how you
:09:03. > :09:15.can predict a 0.6% variation is beyond me. He was the point I really
:09:16. > :09:20.believe about the bank, which is where I find this very back. I think
:09:21. > :09:25.the bank, the governor has strayed into an expression of a simple,
:09:26. > :09:29.personal prediction. I don't think it is actually possible for you to
:09:30. > :09:34.say with any absolute accuracy that that will happen. In a sense, when
:09:35. > :09:38.you listen to what he said, he started to nuance about the idea, he
:09:39. > :09:42.was not seeing it actually would be comic he said he thought it could be
:09:43. > :09:47.about that. Here is my point about the independence of the Bank of
:09:48. > :09:51.England. Section ten of the 1998 act makes it very clear that if he is to
:09:52. > :09:57.talk about monetary policies, for which he has independence, he has to
:09:58. > :10:05.be open, impartial and all things must be available. Last year, in
:10:06. > :10:08.2015, when he spoke about the threat to the British economy, he made the
:10:09. > :10:14.point which Mervyn King has made that the euro instability and the
:10:15. > :10:19.crash has been very damaging to the British economy and will be even
:10:20. > :10:22.more damaging as it goes on. Notice that when he came out on Thursday he
:10:23. > :10:32.said nothing about the overall problems if we remained in. If
:10:33. > :10:35.you're going to be impartial then you had damned well better say
:10:36. > :10:41.something about the alternative case and the threats of remaining are
:10:42. > :10:47.very clear. Mervyn King said there is a crisis going on and he does not
:10:48. > :10:56.see an end to it. Why don't we hear from him about that? Has he breached
:10:57. > :11:04.his obligations as Governor of the Bank of England? I believe that he
:11:05. > :11:11.has. Should he resign? I think he ought to be asked why he has not
:11:12. > :11:17.brought out both sides of the issue. He used to work for Goldman Sachs.
:11:18. > :11:27.They are running through this, funding the campaign, he has been
:11:28. > :11:31.very clear on it. You bring out Goldman Sachs, lack of impartiality,
:11:32. > :11:37.you think he is not keeping his remit, should he resign? I think he
:11:38. > :11:44.needs to answer about this one simple charge. I would like to see
:11:45. > :11:50.the e-mail exchange over this issue, the telephone conversation minutes,
:11:51. > :11:53.to see whether the Treasury has had any involvement in this process
:11:54. > :11:59.whatsoever, what worries me slightly about what is going on, the Bank of
:12:00. > :12:05.Scotland comes out on Thursday and then suddenly the head of the IMF
:12:06. > :12:09.comes out on Friday with a similar prediction. These are the same
:12:10. > :12:15.people that were telling us all that the UK is too small to leave and too
:12:16. > :12:19.insignificant. Now we are so insignificant that we are plunging
:12:20. > :12:29.the world into an economic crash. Are we saying this was an accident?
:12:30. > :12:37.The governor did not call? Let me ask you this, we know what made...
:12:38. > :12:45.Are you saying they are colluding? I wonder. Do you have any evidence?
:12:46. > :12:48.Suddenly on Wednesday and Thursday, you have reports coming out, do you
:12:49. > :12:54.think they spoke to each other about what they are doing? I wonder about
:12:55. > :13:02.that. The Chancellor is supporting the governor, he then stands behind
:13:03. > :13:11.Christine Lagarde. We know that they are players in this. The IMF always
:13:12. > :13:15.works with them. We know which major economic authorities you don't like.
:13:16. > :13:20.The Treasury, the IMF, the Bank of England, the OECD, which major
:13:21. > :13:24.economic authorities do you rate? There have been some good reports
:13:25. > :13:29.out, there are a number of good economists, lots of others from the
:13:30. > :13:34.city who have produced a report which got very little coverage about
:13:35. > :13:39.the prospect... Any major economic apologies? Yes but when they have
:13:40. > :13:45.come out with these reports they have said the UK would continue to
:13:46. > :13:48.grow. Not as quickly. Not as quickly. My point is if you're going
:13:49. > :13:54.to be balanced you need to constantly reference that point and
:13:55. > :13:57.if they want to say that there is a possibility this could lead to a
:13:58. > :14:04.problem he must also point out that if we remain there is a possibility
:14:05. > :14:09.that we will be damaged by this. You made that .3 times. Let me ask you,
:14:10. > :14:14.can you name a major economic authority on your side of the
:14:15. > :14:22.argument? I would not expect one to be on our side. So you have none? It
:14:23. > :14:26.would be completely unusual for all these institutions not to want to
:14:27. > :14:32.act the status quo. All these institutions said there was no
:14:33. > :14:40.problem in 2007 and then one year later we hit the buffers and the
:14:41. > :14:44.economy went down. None of them predicted it. Including the
:14:45. > :14:51.Conservatives. None of them have apologised for their failure.
:14:52. > :14:59.I want to show you this chart. This shows our balance of payments, our
:15:00. > :15:04.deficit. It is the difference between our exports and imports. We
:15:05. > :15:08.import a lot more than we export in goods and services. It has
:15:09. > :15:14.continually got worse under your government. This deficit, which is
:15:15. > :15:22.multi-billion, is financed by foreigners who buy our sterling as I
:15:23. > :15:25.to make up the gap. If Brexit create a falling pound, why would the
:15:26. > :15:31.foreigners continue to pay for our deficit? If the economy didn't
:15:32. > :15:34.perform, why would be, but if you look at all those who predicted
:15:35. > :15:39.where we would be now, they all said the threat of Brexit would actually
:15:40. > :15:43.bring the pound crashing. The pound is now rising back up, close to
:15:44. > :15:51.where it was when we started this campaign. 10% on last November. We
:15:52. > :15:55.had this deficit, it is financed by foreigners. If they lose confidence
:15:56. > :16:02.in this country, confidence in Stirling, how do we pay for this? We
:16:03. > :16:05.have to make sure we run the economy in a way that they have confidence
:16:06. > :16:09.in it, we have to get some of those regulations down, we have to make
:16:10. > :16:14.British industry more competitive. We have to have a better plan to get
:16:15. > :16:18.industry working again. That would be in the long term, this could be a
:16:19. > :16:24.short-term problem that could hit in the summer. If it results leaving in
:16:25. > :16:27.an uncontrolled, plummeting sterling, and the foreigners because
:16:28. > :16:31.of the uncertainty and sterling going down are saying we are not
:16:32. > :16:38.going to continue to finance it, the bank would have to raise interest
:16:39. > :16:42.rates, wouldn't it? If that was the circumstance, yes, but it is what
:16:43. > :16:50.you plan to do. Why are they investing in what we are doing at
:16:51. > :16:53.the moment? They buy the bonds because they believe the Government
:16:54. > :16:58.has a long-term plan to get the deficit down and reduce borrowing.
:16:59. > :17:03.Therefore they believe the UK is a good investment and running a trade
:17:04. > :17:10.surplus with the rest of the world. We are running a huge deficit. Yes,
:17:11. > :17:14.but we are running a trade surplus. If they need to finance this
:17:15. > :17:21.deficit, and it is not the budget deficit, it is how the foreigners by
:17:22. > :17:26.our assets in order to help us run this deficit. If interest rate did
:17:27. > :17:30.rise, it follows that mortgage rates could rise substantially. Yes but
:17:31. > :17:36.the alternative could be the same, in other words if they believe what
:17:37. > :17:40.we are doing is right for the economy they are prepared to back
:17:41. > :17:43.it, which means you wouldn't have rising interest rates. All of this
:17:44. > :17:50.is speculation because we don't know. Boris Johnson has admitted
:17:51. > :17:58.that after Brexit there would be a Nike tick, that he believes the
:17:59. > :18:03.economy would take a hit, but it would recover strongly. Do you
:18:04. > :18:07.believe that? Possibly but this is speculation about something nobody
:18:08. > :18:12.knows. There has been speculation about forecast in these economies,
:18:13. > :18:17.most of them are wrong because people are unable to tell us about
:18:18. > :18:21.what they think about our prospects afterwards. If we vote to leave, we
:18:22. > :18:26.are already able to show we can get our money back in due course and we
:18:27. > :18:29.are able to start planning our own economy so we are able to get the
:18:30. > :18:35.kind of deals we need. That shows you have a plan that works. You
:18:36. > :18:41.could offer short-term crisis in the interim, couldn't you? They are
:18:42. > :18:45.worried whether their mortgage will have risen by August or September of
:18:46. > :18:52.this year. If that were to happen but the word is if. This is pure
:18:53. > :18:56.speculation. The point I am making is that the reality is it may go in
:18:57. > :19:03.the opposite direction. Nobody can say that. The EU guarantees a number
:19:04. > :19:09.of social protections for workers, covering things like equal pay,
:19:10. > :19:14.working time, maternity pay. Can you pledged to fight to maintain all of
:19:15. > :19:17.these protections if we leave? All of these were accepted by the
:19:18. > :19:21.Conservative government and I believe strongly then need to be
:19:22. > :19:27.protections for workers. All of these things in a democracy are
:19:28. > :19:31.debated but the British government have actually themselves instituted
:19:32. > :19:35.protections for workers. So would you fight to keep the protections
:19:36. > :19:43.they currently have under EU guarantees? As it stands, yes. Why
:19:44. > :19:49.should people trust you because you opposed the Web Time directive in
:19:50. > :19:53.1996, and voted against the minimum wage in 1997. Why would they have
:19:54. > :19:58.not looked to you for this social protection? Because rather than
:19:59. > :20:04.forecast ahead, look back at what has happened to them. The
:20:05. > :20:08.immigration has damaged them. I'm simply saying what has happened,
:20:09. > :20:13.therefore my argument has been, and you have known that over a long
:20:14. > :20:16.time, over nine years I have argued this process has been most damaging
:20:17. > :20:25.to the people at the low skilled end. That is the migration issue, it
:20:26. > :20:29.may well be true. I'm asking you why should people trust you on these EU
:20:30. > :20:32.social protections that they would remain if we came out since you
:20:33. > :20:39.voted against them when they were being proposed? The working Time
:20:40. > :20:44.directive gave little or no flexibility at the time. It has been
:20:45. > :20:48.in place and we had to work with it. You protect the workforce but you
:20:49. > :20:54.make sure the competition that they face in terms of their jobs is
:20:55. > :20:57.actually fair competition, not unfair competition. What has
:20:58. > :21:01.happened, as you saw on Thursday with the national insurance numbers,
:21:02. > :21:07.is a very high proportion of people coming in in under 52 weeks here who
:21:08. > :21:15.have no commitment to the UK often staying in bed sits, compete on the
:21:16. > :21:18.low salary end of life. Is the working Time directive, which
:21:19. > :21:21.guarantees the hours people work in a week and proper breaks, is that
:21:22. > :21:27.guarantees the hours people work in safe after Brexit or not? UK law
:21:28. > :21:31.would enshrine what we think is best for protection of workforce and that
:21:32. > :21:36.is right. A democratic government will decide on what it thinks is
:21:37. > :21:40.right. That is possible for Labour or Conservative. I believe it is
:21:41. > :21:48.right to have it, the question is how flexible... People watching this
:21:49. > :21:53.will not be reassured by this. I will stick to the agreements we
:21:54. > :21:58.have. You point your fist in the Commons when the Chancellor
:21:59. > :22:04.announced the new national living wage, now you say it is a magnet for
:22:05. > :22:09.migrants, what changed? I said it is a good people for people wanting to
:22:10. > :22:14.come and work here because they will get a higher wage. I am wholly in
:22:15. > :22:18.favour of a rise to the minimum wage because I believe that over time
:22:19. > :22:24.what happens to businesses is they have got around paying lower
:22:25. > :22:31.wages... Would you still be in favour of it if we stayed in the EU?
:22:32. > :22:35.Yes, because it is the best way you can drive the wages up but if we
:22:36. > :22:39.stay in the EU it will become a magnet for people to come in here
:22:40. > :22:43.and it will lead to huge problems. The point I made on Tuesday this
:22:44. > :22:50.week was that have we have seen already lots of people from the EU
:22:51. > :22:55.tend to come in. The vast majority of people coming from the European
:22:56. > :22:59.Union into the UK, they tend to be low skills, they tend to be ones
:23:00. > :23:03.taking a high proportion of those low skilled jobs. They have taken
:23:04. > :23:08.them at lesser salary and driven it down. The overall average wage will
:23:09. > :23:14.still be low for those on low skills. You have brought up
:23:15. > :23:18.migration several times in this interview, isn't the blunt truth,
:23:19. > :23:22.because I was asking about the economics, you are losing the
:23:23. > :23:27.economic arguments, the polls show that, you are more dependent on
:23:28. > :23:46.scaring people. John Major says: What do you say? Rubbish. Very
:23:47. > :23:51.simple, he is talking nonsense. He said only a few years ago that there
:23:52. > :23:57.was a real issue over immigration. The Government had a target to get
:23:58. > :24:01.tens of thousands, the limit down to tens of thousands, we are not
:24:02. > :24:05.achieving that. We talked about it in the run-up to the election. The
:24:06. > :24:09.Prime Minister himself made a strong commitment that we would ensure our
:24:10. > :24:12.borders were protected against people coming to be here so it is
:24:13. > :24:17.nonsense because we are not raising this is an issue because we are
:24:18. > :24:21.trying to win the referendum. Most people in the country believes there
:24:22. > :24:32.is an issue about the open border with the European Union. Why is it
:24:33. > :24:35.demagoguery, why is it extremism to speak for British people who feel
:24:36. > :24:38.like their views are being tossed aside? If you don't do it, the
:24:39. > :24:45.extreme parties get onto it. Was it wise Boris Johnson to compare the
:24:46. > :24:51.EU's ambitions? I thought it was a good article because he spoke about
:24:52. > :24:58.this nonsensical... Was it wise to compare it with Hitler? Do you think
:24:59. > :25:03.Hitler's efforts to unify Europe are the same as the European Union's
:25:04. > :25:08.efforts? I think the whole process of trying to drive Europe together
:25:09. > :25:14.by force or democracy ultimately makes problems. Isn't this
:25:15. > :25:18.referendum getting vaguely absurd? We have the Prime Minister dangling
:25:19. > :25:23.the thought of world War three if we leave, and on your side we have
:25:24. > :25:27.Boris Johnson saying Hitler and the European Union are on the same
:25:28. > :25:32.script. It is both nonsense and you know that. All he is doing in the
:25:33. > :25:42.interview is talking about the trend towards the idea, and he's using
:25:43. > :25:46.historical parallels to explain it. You go through this great idea that
:25:47. > :25:50.somehow there is a thing called greater Europe. Whether or not you
:25:51. > :25:57.like the linguistics of this, my point remains the same. If you vote
:25:58. > :26:02.to remain on the 23rd, you are voting, the 12 residents said it
:26:03. > :26:12.clear that they intend to deepen... The five presidents. The five
:26:13. > :26:17.presidents rather. David Cameron and George Osborne won't debate other
:26:18. > :26:21.Tory ministers during the referendum, are they concerned about
:26:22. > :26:27.party unity or just running scared? You will have to ask them. My view
:26:28. > :26:30.about it is that it is right to have a proper debate and by not opening
:26:31. > :26:34.that debate the British public will be left to wonder why they were not
:26:35. > :26:38.allowed to see the two opposing sides of the argument from the
:26:39. > :26:44.leading figures. You would debate the Prime Minister? Yes, we need to
:26:45. > :26:48.get these things straight face-to-face. After all, if this
:26:49. > :26:53.were an election would be Remain side be allowed to say we won't
:26:54. > :26:59.debate Ed Miliband fustian might know, they cannot do that. There are
:27:00. > :27:05.two side to this argument, if two sides have to debate it that is
:27:06. > :27:11.right and proper. It should be down to impartiality that we have two
:27:12. > :27:15.sides, the two sets of leaders. Iain Duncan Smith, thank you.
:27:16. > :27:18.Now, the Commons are elected, the House of Lords are not
:27:19. > :27:20.and is supposed to be a "revising chamber".
:27:21. > :27:22.But have their lord and ladyships been overstepping the mark?
:27:23. > :27:24.Over the the past year, they've inflicted 60 defeats
:27:25. > :27:27.on a Government that's now poised to clip the Lord's wings -
:27:28. > :27:29.reducing their power to block changes in the law.
:27:30. > :27:32.But in an exclusive interview before she steps down as the speaker
:27:33. > :27:35.of the House of Lords in the summer, Baroness D'Souza has told us
:27:36. > :27:38.that the powers of the Lords should not be curtailed.
:27:39. > :27:46.It's very obvious why they are called the crossbenchers,
:27:47. > :27:53.My guide knows this place pretty well, how it works, who's who.
:27:54. > :27:55.Since 2011, she's been Lord Speaker, a role which involves
:27:56. > :27:57.overseeing proceedings here, representing the Lords at home
:27:58. > :28:03.and abroad, and sitting on a sack of wool.
:28:04. > :28:10.But the business in here over which Baroness D'Souza presides has
:28:11. > :28:14.come under increasing criticism from the Government.
:28:15. > :28:17.247 members of the House of Lords sit as Conservatives peers,
:28:18. > :28:19.making the governing party a significant minority of the 807
:28:20. > :28:26.members eligible to take part in the Upper House.
:28:27. > :28:30.The Government has faced 60 defeats in the House of Lords in the most
:28:31. > :28:34.The rate of defeats this time round is more than twice that
:28:35. > :28:40.Then, the Government was defeated in less than a quarter
:28:41. > :28:44.of votes compared to more than half in the present one.
:28:45. > :28:48.Now there's a sense that the Lords are too rebellious, they have been
:28:49. > :28:50.too rebellious over the last few years and essentially the Lords
:28:51. > :28:54.You know, all governments and all parliamentarians,
:28:55. > :29:01.or at least House of Commons, always feel that the House of Lords
:29:02. > :29:04.is a place that thwarts them in one way or another.
:29:05. > :29:09.And they're right, they do, but that is in the nature
:29:10. > :29:17.They have all the power and rightly so.
:29:18. > :29:20.I still think it's right that the Lords should be free
:29:21. > :29:23.to scrutinise and to question and to hold the Government
:29:24. > :29:27.to account, and to send back legislation which it feels is not
:29:28. > :29:32.adequate, either in terms of its clarity or because perhaps it
:29:33. > :29:34.infringes from time to time individual liberties
:29:35. > :29:41.And that's exactly what happened last October.
:29:42. > :29:43.The House of Lords effectively blocked the Government's proposed
:29:44. > :29:46.changes to tax credits, a massive blow to George
:29:47. > :29:53.Unelected Labour and Liberal Lords have voted down a matter passed
:29:54. > :29:56.by the elected House of Commons, that raises constitutional issues
:29:57. > :30:00.and David Cameron and I are clear they will need to be dealt with.
:30:01. > :30:03.The way they dealt with it was to ask Lord Strathclyde
:30:04. > :30:07.He concluded peers should lose their absolute veto over
:30:08. > :30:11.detailed laws known as secondary legislation, and instead be allowed
:30:12. > :30:14.only to send it back to the Commons to think again.
:30:15. > :30:18.There's going to be a lively debate about this in the House of Lords
:30:19. > :30:22.and I think that there will be a lot of views expressed and obviously
:30:23. > :30:24.you would expect the Lords to want to retain their power
:30:25. > :30:28.to scrutinise their power, their privilege.
:30:29. > :30:33.If you start curtailing or eroding or limiting the power
:30:34. > :30:37.of the Lords to do its job, there is a question
:30:38. > :30:46.There is another question, too, over the sheer number
:30:47. > :30:50.Baroness D'Souza told me she would be pushing for a Lords
:30:51. > :30:53.motion in the new session, she says the House of Lords should
:30:54. > :30:56.not be larger than the Commons, suggesting the number of peers
:30:57. > :31:00.At least 20% of them should be independents or crossbenchers,
:31:01. > :31:03.and no one party should have a political majority.
:31:04. > :31:06.She said all of that can be achieved by 2020.
:31:07. > :31:08.So, the size is making it inefficient?
:31:09. > :31:19.It does have an impact unfortunately on the role of the House of Lords
:31:20. > :31:22.in holding the Government to account.
:31:23. > :31:24.It's very difficult if you're limited to sort of say,
:31:25. > :31:27.in timed debates, a minute or two minutes to speak, to develop
:31:28. > :31:29.a sustained argument which will convince your fellow
:31:30. > :31:32.peers but also the Government of what it is you are
:31:33. > :31:36.The traditional pomp and ceremony of the Lords is well known
:31:37. > :31:38.but its relationship with the Commons and exactly
:31:39. > :31:45.what role it can play in the future is far more uncertain.
:31:46. > :31:47.And the man who was charged by the Government to review
:31:48. > :31:52.the Lord's powers, Tam Strathclyde, joins us now from Oxfordshire.
:31:53. > :32:01.Welcome to the programme. Nice to see the sun is shining rate you are.
:32:02. > :32:07.We've just heard, what would be the point of the Lloyds if the powers
:32:08. > :32:14.are watered down as your review proposes. What do you say to her?
:32:15. > :32:16.There is no suggestion and no recommendation by anybody in
:32:17. > :32:24.government to fundamentally change the powers of the House of Lords. I
:32:25. > :32:31.made the most mild and humble recommendation about process, where
:32:32. > :32:37.frankly most of us had understood that the customs and conventions
:32:38. > :32:42.that had been built up would stick. Last October, they broke down, as a
:32:43. > :32:51.result there is no consensus and agreement on what those powers could
:32:52. > :33:00.be. I propose a new power to be able to reject and ask. What is
:33:01. > :33:09.interesting is every school child knows that the purpose of the House
:33:10. > :33:15.of Lords is to scrutinise but not to block. What happened was the House
:33:16. > :33:21.of Lords using a veto and given it is unelected, I don't think that
:33:22. > :33:25.power should ever be used. Is the government going to implement your
:33:26. > :33:32.recommendations? Since I reported before Christmas there have been
:33:33. > :33:38.four further reports, three in the House of Lords and one in the House
:33:39. > :33:41.of Commons, commenting on this. I think what the government will want
:33:42. > :33:46.to do is look carefully at these reports before responding. I don't
:33:47. > :33:47.think there needs to be a rush to legislation, and there may well be
:33:48. > :33:54.an attempt to get an agreement between the parties in the House of
:33:55. > :34:00.Lords, between the two Houses of Parliament. But if that consensus
:34:01. > :34:07.cannot be reached, I think the government will have no option but
:34:08. > :34:11.to legislate on this matter. Your government has had 60 defeats at the
:34:12. > :34:15.hands of the Lords. You wonder whether the conservative tune has
:34:16. > :34:19.changed because it was Tory peers inflicting defeat on Labour
:34:20. > :34:25.governments. Now you are getting a taste of your own historic medicine,
:34:26. > :34:36.you just don't like it. I was Leader of the Opposition for most of those
:34:37. > :34:48.years, particularly after the end of the last century. We did defeat the
:34:49. > :34:50.government regularly on primary legislation, not secondary
:34:51. > :34:55.legislation. What was interesting in your package is the government has
:34:56. > :35:00.been defeated in the House of Lords many more times than it did in the
:35:01. > :35:06.first Parliament of Tony Blair's government. Over half of all the
:35:07. > :35:10.votes in the House of Lords are defeated. This is not revision and
:35:11. > :35:15.scrutiny, this is not complementing the work of the House of Commons,
:35:16. > :35:21.this is an aggressive political statement why the other political
:35:22. > :35:23.parties. Is it really? This is a government which increasingly brings
:35:24. > :35:31.forward ill thought out ideas which it has not planned in advance, not
:35:32. > :35:35.without consultation, and is forced into U-turns. There has been a
:35:36. > :35:42.series of them. That is why you need a second chamber, to do proper
:35:43. > :35:47.scrutiny. I am the greatest defender of the second chamber and indeed, a
:35:48. > :35:54.Conservative Party that fully understands the central tenets of
:35:55. > :35:58.the Constitution, the balance between the houses, but what we've
:35:59. > :36:02.seen in the last 12 months, and remember, this is the first 12
:36:03. > :36:06.months of a new conservative administration, people who were
:36:07. > :36:13.elected to government, scarcely one year ago, and what we've seen in the
:36:14. > :36:16.House of Lords are blocking tactics, using vetoes rather than working
:36:17. > :36:24.with the House of Commons in order to improve that legislation which
:36:25. > :36:28.you rightly criticise. Are you a supporter of the way that
:36:29. > :36:34.governments have bloated the House of Lords? There are over 800 active
:36:35. > :36:38.peers. The US Senate needs 100 and it has real power. You've not got
:36:39. > :36:46.much power and those over 800 of you. Is that sensible? When Mr Blair
:36:47. > :36:51.and his friends throughout the hereditary peers in the 1990s I did
:36:52. > :36:55.argue that there was an inevitable consequence that prime ministers
:36:56. > :36:58.would try to increase their own numbers in the house. What's
:36:59. > :37:11.interesting about Mr Cameron is he has created far more Labour peers.
:37:12. > :37:19.Wide of the need to be 800 of you? You don't. -- why does there need to
:37:20. > :37:23.be 800. But those who want to reduce it to 500 should say how they plan
:37:24. > :37:26.to do that. I would prefer either people to be involved in the
:37:27. > :37:30.decision and they should be directly elected. Thank you for joining us.
:37:31. > :37:32.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:37:33. > :37:41.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland who leave us now
:37:42. > :37:43.Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
:37:44. > :37:47.We'll be speaking live to the Greens' Patrick Harvie
:37:48. > :37:50.about how his MSPs will approach their role in the new parliament,
:37:51. > :37:56.With the Holyrood election over, the next choice before voters -
:37:57. > :38:07.We'll debate the case for and against Brexit,
:38:08. > :38:11.And we'll meet a couple of the new faces who've joined
:38:12. > :38:16.The dust is settling on the result of just over a week ago.
:38:17. > :38:19.The Greens trebled their number of MSPs from two in the last
:38:20. > :38:23.Not quite matching the peak of seven they held from 2003,
:38:24. > :38:27.And they've displaced the Liberal Democrats
:38:28. > :38:34.I'm joined now by the co-convenor of the Scottish Greens, Patrick Harvie.
:38:35. > :38:44.Tell us what is going on. You had a meeting with Nicola Sturgeon this
:38:45. > :38:48.week. I had a brief meeting, nothing terribly formal, the kind of thing
:38:49. > :38:52.that happened for months even during the period of majority government.
:38:53. > :38:57.Political parties talk about things all the time. Presumably were
:38:58. > :39:02.talking about cooperation in the new parliament. I think the dynamic will
:39:03. > :39:06.change. It will not be quite the same as the previous minority
:39:07. > :39:11.government when the SNP were in deep minority and unless they could get a
:39:12. > :39:17.deal with Labour on any issue they had to reach out to build consensus
:39:18. > :39:22.with any two out of the three other parties. It is a slightly more
:39:23. > :39:30.straightforward situation now where the SNP only have to persuade one
:39:31. > :39:32.party to vote or abstain. If political parties go around
:39:33. > :39:40.posturing saying they will block this or that they will not get far.
:39:41. > :39:47.Opposition parties will be influential by being constructive.
:39:48. > :39:50.Are you considering even a semiformal arrangement with the SNP
:39:51. > :40:01.or will you judge everything issue by issue? Semiformal arrangements
:40:02. > :40:08.aren't even been discussed. I think the Friday after the election the
:40:09. > :40:15.first minister said clearly they would not seek an arrangement with
:40:16. > :40:18.another party. I think the SNP's position is clear, to be a menorah
:40:19. > :40:23.take government with great flexibility. I suspect if you were
:40:24. > :40:26.in their shoes you wouldn't be seeking to tie yourself to a
:40:27. > :40:30.relationship with just one party. That's why think it is going to be
:40:31. > :40:40.about positivity and constructivist opposition parties will conduct
:40:41. > :40:44.themselves. Is it theoretically possible you could put the
:40:45. > :40:48.Government down whether other opposition parties? Can you see
:40:49. > :40:53.yourself taking part in something like a vote of no-confidence? I
:40:54. > :40:58.think there would have to be an astonishing breach of trust to
:40:59. > :41:01.justify a vote of no-confidence. I think it is a little early to be
:41:02. > :41:09.talking about events that cataclysmic. Over the next few weeks
:41:10. > :41:13.and months I think we will see times where opposition parties may have
:41:14. > :41:19.common ground, such as Parliamentary reform. One issue that came up this
:41:20. > :41:27.week, cutting off air passenger duty. As far as I understand the SNP
:41:28. > :41:31.want to do what the SNP want to do. Presently, as proposed by the
:41:32. > :41:41.Scottish Government, is that policy toast? They do not have a majority
:41:42. > :41:53.for their position, scrapping the duty. That is why I come back to the
:41:54. > :41:56.idea of it being constructive. It is not an effective environmental tax
:41:57. > :42:03.in the first place, air passenger duty. One option is that we can find
:42:04. > :42:09.an alternative policy which can command a parliamentary majority,
:42:10. > :42:15.which passes the test of emissions and social justice. How could you
:42:16. > :42:21.cut duty in a way that actually reduces emissions? Perhaps it is
:42:22. > :42:26.about one of the ideas the new economics foundation talked about, a
:42:27. > :42:29.frequent levy. Most of the burden would fall on those who take the
:42:30. > :42:37.largest number of unnecessary short-haul flights. The males of the
:42:38. > :42:40.most important for the economy. If people have an alternative, the
:42:41. > :42:46.railways, which is economically beneficial because it allows these
:42:47. > :42:49.highly paid important people to actually do some work travelling,
:42:50. > :42:56.which you can't really do on an aeroplane trip to London. If people
:42:57. > :43:01.see railways is the affordable alternative more people will choose
:43:02. > :43:09.that. There are ways of using taxation, to achieve a behavioural
:43:10. > :43:15.change, in this case to reduce emissions, and a social justice
:43:16. > :43:18.change. If the SNP can talk about alternatives, they have the
:43:19. > :43:22.opportunity to replace air passenger duty with something better. If they
:43:23. > :43:28.want to dig their heels in and say our way or nothing then nothing is
:43:29. > :43:31.likely to happen. Independence. You are the balance of power on the
:43:32. > :43:36.issue of the second referendum because you're the only party that
:43:37. > :43:42.might be in favour of it. Do you understand the SNP palsy on the
:43:43. > :43:46.second referendum? As far as I know, the First Minister's statement seems
:43:47. > :43:49.broadly sensible that those of us who supported independence didn't
:43:50. > :43:55.manage to convince people last time and we have work to do to convince
:43:56. > :43:59.people. If Britain votes to leave the EU and Scotland to stay, would
:44:00. > :44:07.you be in favour of a second referendum? The SNP appear to see it
:44:08. > :44:11.as a material change but also they wouldn't want money unless the polls
:44:12. > :44:16.were going their way. I don't think that is the most likely future
:44:17. > :44:23.scenario in which we would choose. I know you don't want me to get into
:44:24. > :44:32.which way the EU referendum will go but the less talked about scenario
:44:33. > :44:39.is that the UK stays in the EU as a result of Scottish votes, that might
:44:40. > :44:41.be more of an argument and about Scottish independence because the
:44:42. > :44:46.right wing of the Tory party would have far less interest in keeping
:44:47. > :44:49.the UK together. I support independence and so does the
:44:50. > :44:54.Scottish Green Party and if and when a referendum comes along it is the
:44:55. > :45:01.only fair way to settle the question. Would you back a second
:45:02. > :45:04.referendum. It is something we like to see in the future. You have a
:45:05. > :45:10.referendum. It is something we like tiny minority in Parliament, it we
:45:11. > :45:14.had a referendum a year and a half ago and the argument is that
:45:15. > :45:17.something very substantial and have to change and a minority party
:45:18. > :45:25.shouldn't really hold the balance on a huge issue like this. Every MSP
:45:26. > :45:35.gets the same number of votes in parliament. The point is that the
:45:36. > :45:39.situation you are describing as the large extent the reason why both the
:45:40. > :45:41.SNP and I think many of the rest of us in this rather pro-independence
:45:42. > :45:46.movement are recognising there is more work to do in convincing people
:45:47. > :45:55.to stop for example, acknowledging some of the weakness in the SNP's
:45:56. > :45:58.2014 case in currency. Even Alex Salmond acknowledged that further
:45:59. > :46:05.work is needed to ensure there is a viable and compelling proposition.
:46:06. > :46:11.What about offensive behaviour on football matches legislation? Did
:46:12. > :46:17.you get together with opposition parties and end or get rid of it? We
:46:18. > :46:21.voted against it. I think it is a bad piece of legislation. I think
:46:22. > :46:29.there is an opportunity to repeal the worst of it. I suspect a justice
:46:30. > :46:34.committee process may be better than scrapping it all together. But he
:46:35. > :46:39.would like to scrap it? There are two parts. The offensive behaviour
:46:40. > :46:43.could staff has been the most contentious and I would like to see
:46:44. > :46:49.an alternative approach to sectarianism which would be more
:46:50. > :46:51.effective. There is also the threatening communications stuff and
:46:52. > :46:55.although I have problems with it I think it should be amended rather
:46:56. > :47:00.than repealed. A justice committee process would put it in the hands of
:47:01. > :47:02.a cross-party body of people with government voices but also the
:47:03. > :47:07.majority from political parties who were against that legislation, one
:47:08. > :47:12.that would allow the thing not just to become one MSP's personal project
:47:13. > :47:17.but a more reflective situation. I think we would get a better outcome
:47:18. > :47:20.with a committee process. It has been awhile since committees have
:47:21. > :47:24.initiated legislation and they should do more. 2002 I believe. Well
:47:25. > :47:26.remembered. It's not long till Scotland will be
:47:27. > :47:29.back at the ballot box. A short time ago I spoke
:47:30. > :47:33.to the SNP's Justice and Home Affairs Spokesperson
:47:34. > :47:35.at Westminster, Joanna Cherry, and to former Conservative Scottish
:47:36. > :47:37.Secretary Lord Forsyth, currently campaigning
:47:38. > :47:40.for Vote Leave. I started by asking Lord Forsyth
:47:41. > :47:43.for his reaction to Boris Johnson's comments, comparing
:47:44. > :47:54.the EU's aims to Hitler's. I think what he was trying to say
:47:55. > :48:00.was that there isn't a European demos and if you try to force people
:48:01. > :48:03.into one country with different economies and cultures and there
:48:04. > :48:07.will be trouble and traditionally wear that has happened that has
:48:08. > :48:12.proved to be disastrous. Could he perhaps have expressed himself in a
:48:13. > :48:15.slightly different manner? His colourful way of expressing himself
:48:16. > :48:22.as one of the reasons that in tears into people. Sometimes it offends
:48:23. > :48:26.people, sometimes it makes people cheerful, but the basic point he is
:48:27. > :48:29.making, the attempt to make a country called Europe, which has had
:48:30. > :48:33.disastrous consequences for the Greeks, Spanish, Portuguese and
:48:34. > :48:39.others, 50% unemployment across Europe, and I think the five
:48:40. > :48:50.residents report, worth googling, which sets out the agenda of what is
:48:51. > :48:53.necessary to preserve the euro, resulting in catastrophic effects of
:48:54. > :48:59.the people of Europe and giving succour to extremist parties. I
:49:00. > :49:03.thought it was quite an extraordinarily ill-advised thing
:49:04. > :49:04.for Boris Johnson to say. Particularly in light of recent
:49:05. > :49:09.comments from Ken Livingstone. Particularly in light of recent
:49:10. > :49:15.suspect Michael Forsyth agrees with that but as to diplomatic to say.
:49:16. > :49:20.I'm not usually diplomatic! It is not a ludicrous comparison because
:49:21. > :49:27.the EU is about agreement and consensus and it is brought relative
:49:28. > :49:35.peace to Europe in the last 60 years. -- it is ludicrous. It has
:49:36. > :49:40.brought a common market of 5 million consumers to Scotland which is
:49:41. > :49:45.beneficial to the economy. It ensures the whole of the UK enjoy
:49:46. > :49:49.social protections, employment and human rights, which we probably
:49:50. > :49:52.wouldn't otherwise enjoy giving this right wing government at the moment.
:49:53. > :50:00.You didn't appreciate Boris Johnson's comments. What I'd like to
:50:01. > :50:06.know is what you think should the vote to go to leave the EU, what
:50:07. > :50:09.Britain should do? There are different views about whether we
:50:10. > :50:15.should be part of the single market, have some arrangement whereby we
:50:16. > :50:19.have to have free movement of labour or whether we completely get out of
:50:20. > :50:23.it and negotiate trade agreements with other countries, without being
:50:24. > :50:29.part of the single market. Where are you on that spectrum?
:50:30. > :50:36.It's extraordinary to hear a Scottish National Party run the case
:50:37. > :50:40.for an unelected Brussels bureaucracy. I think we should be
:50:41. > :50:44.able to decide a own laws and spent our own money. And the moment we are
:50:45. > :50:49.contributing ?10 billion net to be told what to do and have our laws
:50:50. > :50:54.over ridden. Does that mean you would not like to have an agreement
:50:55. > :50:59.for the Britain outside the EU to have an agreement in the way that
:51:00. > :51:02.Norway or any different model Switzerland have? Norwegians pay
:51:03. > :51:08.lots of money in and have to do a lot of what the European Union says.
:51:09. > :51:13.Norway and Switzerland are tiny, we are the fifth largest economy in the
:51:14. > :51:15.world with huge relationships around the Commonwealth and elsewhere. The
:51:16. > :51:21.single market is an agreement between 28 countries in order to
:51:22. > :51:25.have common standards for products. The Americans export into Google,
:51:26. > :51:29.the Chinese exporting to Europe. It means that within Europe you have
:51:30. > :51:35.one common approach to particular products. That would still exist if
:51:36. > :51:41.we were out. You think we should be any system which for example keeps
:51:42. > :51:48.free of labour? Absolutely not. We had to gain control of our own
:51:49. > :51:52.Borders. We should be able to decide who comes into this country, we
:51:53. > :51:56.should be able to throw people out from this country who are a threat
:51:57. > :52:00.to security and to our way of life and we should be able to decide our
:52:01. > :52:08.own laws and not be subject to a foreign court. Perhaps you can cheat
:52:09. > :52:11.at the SNP's position because when it comes to Europe, the SNP doesn't
:52:12. > :52:18.seem to like it very much. They don't want the euro, you don't like
:52:19. > :52:21.the common fisheries policy but when it comes to Britain you can't get
:52:22. > :52:26.enough of it, you want an independent Scotland to have the
:52:27. > :52:30.pound, you're quite happy to have financial regulation by authorities
:52:31. > :52:34.in London, UK going on about a social union with the UK. Why is it
:52:35. > :52:39.you want to leave the UK and stay in Europe rather than the other way
:52:40. > :52:42.around? We want to leave the United Kingdom because we're not an equal
:52:43. > :52:45.partner in the latest kingdom. We would like to remain a member of
:52:46. > :52:48.Europe because we would like to be on an equal footing with other
:52:49. > :52:52.member states and I would like to take Lord Forsyth upon something he
:52:53. > :52:58.has said repeatedly. It is not true to say the laws are made by
:52:59. > :53:04.unelected bureaucrats. The laws are proposed by the commission. My point
:53:05. > :53:08.is the SNP actually isn't in favour of any of the key institutions of
:53:09. > :53:12.the contemporary European Union. That's simply not correct. If you
:53:13. > :53:16.would let me finish, it is not correct to say that Europe is not
:53:17. > :53:19.democratic. The laws are proposed by the commission which has 28
:53:20. > :53:23.commissioners appointed by member states to go to the council which
:53:24. > :53:27.consist of ministers from the directly elected members of the
:53:28. > :53:30.member state and they are then considered by the Parliament, which
:53:31. > :53:34.consists of directly elected members of the European Parliament. It is
:53:35. > :53:38.not correct to say it is not democratic. However, it is open to
:53:39. > :53:41.improvement and the SNP have been clean about that. Next year, the
:53:42. > :53:47.native kingdom of all the presidency of the European Council. If we are
:53:48. > :53:50.wise enough to stay part of Europe. That is a great opportunity for the
:53:51. > :53:54.United Kingdom to lead the way on reform. He mentioned the common
:53:55. > :53:58.fisheries policy. You're absolutely right to say the SNP are very
:53:59. > :54:01.unhappy with the way in which that has been conducted but that is the
:54:02. > :54:05.fault of the United Kingdom Government who have simply not going
:54:06. > :54:14.to -- gone into bat properly for fishermen in Scotland. What we like
:54:15. > :54:18.to see in the future is a Scottish minister from the Scottish
:54:19. > :54:22.Government carrying out negotiations with fisheries policies. The
:54:23. > :54:27.fisheries policy is one of the pillars of the European Union. They
:54:28. > :54:31.might be able to change the way it operates but the basic principle of
:54:32. > :54:34.it as far as I understand it, certainly Alex Salmond was against,
:54:35. > :54:40.you cannot be a member of the European Union without signing up to
:54:41. > :54:43.it. Alex was very clear last week. He gave a keynote speech in Brussels
:54:44. > :54:47.and was very clean about what she wanted to see happen in the common
:54:48. > :54:51.fisheries policy and he said he wanted to see the United Kingdom
:54:52. > :54:54.alone Scottish ministers who know about the fishing industry in
:54:55. > :54:59.Scotland to negotiate on Scotland's behalf. The UK Government in the
:55:00. > :55:02.past considered the fishing industry in Scotland expendable and we have
:55:03. > :55:05.been on the back foot from the outset. I do not believe the
:55:06. > :55:09.fisheries policy could not be made to work better for Scotland but that
:55:10. > :55:14.will only work better if we have a member from the Scottish Government
:55:15. > :55:26.is making a washy oceans rather than an analog -- unelected peer --
:55:27. > :55:30.making negotiations. There is an attempt to minimise this but
:55:31. > :55:35.everyone from Mark Carney dam is saying there is a serious risk. Now
:55:36. > :55:40.he isn't. This morning he refused to say although the bank has the
:55:41. > :55:49.capacity to do so, what the long-term benefit to benefit would
:55:50. > :55:53.be if we left the EU. All he is saying that in the short-term there
:55:54. > :55:56.may be a shock that people may put off decisions because of the
:55:57. > :55:59.uncertainty. He is only looking at the short term and he is using
:56:00. > :56:05.exactly the same models as the Treasury and the IMF and everyone
:56:06. > :56:08.else. It's not a question of models, it's accepted that companies are
:56:09. > :56:13.holding off investing until they find out which way it goes. And the
:56:14. > :56:16.IMF and people with their models are saying there could be great
:56:17. > :56:19.uncertainty and difficulty. It would be surprising if they did not create
:56:20. > :56:29.the effect which they are saying may arise. On the common fisheries
:56:30. > :56:33.policy, it means that our fisheries Ali common resource. I'd say the
:56:34. > :56:38.European Union, the Scottish Government will be able to decide
:56:39. > :56:42.what the quarters and arrangements are. The Council of ministers,
:56:43. > :56:47.Britain has voted 70 times against measures in the Council of ministers
:56:48. > :56:51.and been defeated on 70 occasions. The idea of an independent Scotland
:56:52. > :56:57.having an influence is nonsense. This business about the economy. The
:56:58. > :57:00.argument is that there may be some short-term shenanigans because
:57:01. > :57:03.people are holding off decisions on investment and eight be a head to
:57:04. > :57:12.the small market if there was a vote to leave,, but over the years the
:57:13. > :57:18.effect would be minimal. I disagree, I think they would be a considerable
:57:19. > :57:22.period of uncertainty but what Lord Forsyth and his friends in the
:57:23. > :57:25.Brexit movement is simply unachievable. Countries like Norway
:57:26. > :57:30.and Switzerland which are part of the European economic area are still
:57:31. > :57:38.subject to EU regulations, they just don't have any say in how they are
:57:39. > :57:40.made. One of the big part of the Brexit movement to prevent
:57:41. > :57:43.immigration to Britain is that they don't realise if you want to be part
:57:44. > :57:48.of the European economic area you had to accept the movement as well
:57:49. > :57:50.so they are putting the United Kingdom and Scottish economy into
:57:51. > :57:53.jeopardy to achieve the unachievable. Thank you both very
:57:54. > :57:54.much indeed. Now while some may have suggested
:57:55. > :57:56.the Holyrood election campaign was a little dull,
:57:57. > :58:00.there was no mistaking the buzz at parliament this week
:58:01. > :58:02.as the victors arrived I'm joined from Edinburgh by two
:58:03. > :58:09.of them - Alex Cole-Hamilton, who won Edinburgh Western
:58:10. > :58:11.for the Liberal Democrats, and Jenny Gilruth of the SNP,
:58:12. > :58:27.who is the new MSP for Jenny Gilruth, was this your first
:58:28. > :58:32.thing standing in an election? Yes, an interesting experience for me as
:58:33. > :58:38.a first-time candidate but a great experience to be a part of. What was
:58:39. > :58:44.it like? The ready teacher before Benji? I was in modern studies
:58:45. > :58:51.teacher, a head of Department, so it is a change from my day job. We are
:58:52. > :58:55.getting involved in meetings, getting to know her Parliament
:58:56. > :59:03.works, meeting with new MPs across the political divide. It has been a
:59:04. > :59:06.fantastic experience. It must be difficult to go from a very
:59:07. > :59:10.controlled environment like a classroom to something where it is
:59:11. > :59:15.perhaps not quite so clear what you're supposed to be doing. There
:59:16. > :59:21.is a clarity in terms of what we will be doing. If you been in the
:59:22. > :59:27.there is a level of control their! there is a level of control their!
:59:28. > :59:32.-- Tricia. That is a similarity between the chamber and classroom
:59:33. > :59:35.terms of how other members and sells conductors cells so there's an
:59:36. > :59:41.element of similarity between school and the chamber you could say. Alex
:59:42. > :59:46.Cole-Hamilton, you're a bit of a veteran, aren't you? I'm something
:59:47. > :59:51.of a one horse in terms of standing. You don't join the Liberal Democrats
:59:52. > :59:55.as a career move, they do because you believe in Civil Liberties, the
:59:56. > :59:59.environment and holding the SNP to account. This is my first time
:00:00. > :00:03.standing but I finally got there and I got the glory on the shoulders of
:00:04. > :00:08.the finest people I know, a massive campaign team that worked their guts
:00:09. > :00:12.out. What did you make of your first week? My head is utterly spinning. I
:00:13. > :00:15.have worked in a Scottish week? My head is utterly spinning. I
:00:16. > :00:21.since the beginning of devilish in but I realise how much I don't know.
:00:22. > :00:25.As Jenny said, the Parliament staff have been fantastic in getting us
:00:26. > :00:30.As Jenny said, the Parliament staff settled and easing us into the flow.
:00:31. > :00:34.I'm already getting stuck in. I'm interested in whether each of you
:00:35. > :00:36.has a particular policy area or proposal for a bill which is not
:00:37. > :00:40.mainstream in your own party that you would like to push. Jenny
:00:41. > :00:44.Gilruth, is there anything you would like to be able to come out at the
:00:45. > :00:48.end of this and say, this is what I achieved? At this moment in time I
:00:49. > :00:51.already deal to the people that voted for me and my commitment
:00:52. > :00:57.absolutely as to my constituency and to those who put their trust in me.
:00:58. > :01:00.At this bomb, not thinking personally what I could get out of
:01:01. > :01:04.this, this is about representing the people who put their faith in me.
:01:05. > :01:11.Alex Cole-Hamilton, Cupid for motions already, haven't you?
:01:12. > :01:13.Absolutely. My background is in children and young people's services
:01:14. > :01:16.Absolutely. My background is in and I've spent my adult life
:01:17. > :01:26.fighting for the rights of children so I'm going to bring a lot of that
:01:27. > :01:30.was meant to Holyrood and I'm setting targets for my tenure in
:01:31. > :01:35.Parliament. If you could put forward a bill for young people, what would
:01:36. > :01:43.be in it? We often say we want to be the best place in the world to go up
:01:44. > :01:46.yet we refuse as a country to use the European Convention's rights of
:01:47. > :01:55.a tiled so I would put forward a bill to incorporate that. -- writes
:01:56. > :01:59.of a child. Jenny Gilruth, you wouldn't be against that, would you?
:02:00. > :02:06.Certainly not. I have always encouraged my class to vote in
:02:07. > :02:10.elections for class representatives. We need to get more young people
:02:11. > :02:16.involved in the political process. That's something I feel passionately
:02:17. > :02:18.about. What about in terms of your party, Jenny Gilruth, is there
:02:19. > :02:21.anything in particular you would like to see the SNP having achieved
:02:22. > :02:25.at the end of this term that isn't there now? I'm proud of our
:02:26. > :02:28.achievements in education. there now? I'm proud of our
:02:29. > :02:31.Particularly we have invested a lot of money in the attainment fund and
:02:32. > :02:37.that is something I'd like to support going forward. I know we all
:02:38. > :02:42.feel passionately about that and I think the First Minister has showed
:02:43. > :02:50.to be a credible force on that front. Alex Cole-Hamilton,
:02:51. > :02:53.presumably you would agree with that because one of the Liberal
:02:54. > :02:57.Democrats' big issue was the people premium and we can, different things
:02:58. > :03:02.but what it amounts to is money for children who are in need.
:03:03. > :03:05.Absolutely. There was a report published that said we have actually
:03:06. > :03:11.slipped down the global rankings in terms of our quality of teaching and
:03:12. > :03:14.the achievements that students get in Scottish schools. We used to be
:03:15. > :03:18.world-beater and we are now average. We don't think that's good enough.
:03:19. > :03:22.The SNP have talked a good game but have come up wanting in terms of
:03:23. > :03:28.action. That is what the central pillar of the Democrat manifesto
:03:29. > :03:37.was. He didn't manage to keep the best pals up till the end. We'll see
:03:38. > :03:40.what it's like in future. Now, as with every election, plenty of
:03:41. > :03:42.energy was spent trying to predict the outcome of the vote and produced
:03:43. > :03:48.unexpected results. Now the experts have begun
:03:49. > :03:50.the process of trying to make Our reporter Andrew Black has been
:03:51. > :03:59.speaking to some of them. We've just seen a Scottish election
:04:00. > :04:03.to the building behind me which has produced some surprising results.
:04:04. > :04:07.The main headline is the SNP will be back for a third time in office but
:04:08. > :04:12.as human oddity Government instead of a majority Government. There has
:04:13. > :04:16.also been talk of a Scottish Tory revival in Scotland after Labour
:04:17. > :04:22.slumped to third place behind the Conservatives and the Greens managed
:04:23. > :04:26.to increase their number of seats. It's got expert asking, what just
:04:27. > :04:31.happened in Scotland? As the dust from election night settles, a group
:04:32. > :04:38.of academics, politicians and others gathered in Edinburgh to offer their
:04:39. > :04:43.thoughts on what happened. One of the key questions is why the SNP
:04:44. > :04:46.when it seemed so unstoppable fell back in terms of seats. The local
:04:47. > :04:49.system had something to do with it. We know that people didn't always
:04:50. > :04:54.backed the same parties across the two ballots and I think what we
:04:55. > :05:00.called split ticket voting is certainly responsible. The SNP was
:05:01. > :05:03.leaking supporters across the constituency and regional lists more
:05:04. > :05:05.than the other main parties and that probably didn't help in the end but
:05:06. > :05:11.than the other main parties and that also I think there was tactical
:05:12. > :05:14.voting. There has been much talk of the SNP's dominance being like a
:05:15. > :05:16.1-party state but if you look at things from a Welsh perspective, the
:05:17. > :05:31.situation in Scotland is anything A position of Welsh Labour Party
:05:32. > :05:42.makes a SNP look like Johnny come latelys. The Labour Party have
:05:43. > :05:46.dominated the Welsh elections for years at. The SNP's domination of
:05:47. > :05:51.Scottish politics is much more recent, much less a deeply grounded
:05:52. > :05:57.than Labour's domination of Welsh politics. Back in Scotland, are we
:05:58. > :05:58.seeing another shift in the political tectonic plates following
:05:59. > :06:03.the significant gains made by political tectonic plates following
:06:04. > :06:14.Conservatives? The Conservatives had a very good result. However, the
:06:15. > :06:17.party denied itself, it wasn't the Conservative Party, it was the
:06:18. > :06:20.receiver to party. Fair enough, but they have to build on that and
:06:21. > :06:25.translate Rick Davidson into the Conservative Party. They have to be
:06:26. > :06:30.an effective opposition and what does that mean? They have promised
:06:31. > :06:35.to be strong opposition, if it is negative and destructive it will not
:06:36. > :06:40.help. They have to become full. Then there is labour. Many people thought
:06:41. > :06:44.of the party as Scotland's dominant political force since time began at
:06:45. > :06:51.the election so their fortunes further decline. Why was that? The
:06:52. > :06:55.SNP are seen as a more effective vehicle for standing up to Scotland
:06:56. > :06:58.and more effective in government. These are issues the Labour Party
:06:59. > :07:02.will have to confront. The Labour Party has had a terrible election
:07:03. > :07:06.but they are far from dead. They have to get their act together and
:07:07. > :07:09.work out what kind of party at us and regain the initiative as
:07:10. > :07:19.Scotland's party of progressive politics. One thing is certain, the
:07:20. > :07:20.make-up of this new parliament will probably make the next few years
:07:21. > :07:21.pretty interesting. Let's discuss some of those issues,
:07:22. > :07:25.and what to expect from the days Joining me now are the
:07:26. > :07:34.Investigations Editor at the Sunday Herald,
:07:35. > :07:37.Paul Hutcheon, and Lindsay Mcintosh who is Scottish Political
:07:38. > :07:52.Editor at the Times. Did the minority government surprise
:07:53. > :07:58.you? Yes. And it surprised the pollsters. It is a different
:07:59. > :08:07.minority government this time around compared to 2007. They had to deal
:08:08. > :08:11.with the other parties then to get their agenda through. This time they
:08:12. > :08:22.have to strike deals but it is much easier. Presumably it depends who
:08:23. > :08:28.you do deals with. On tax, the Scottish Conservatives probably have
:08:29. > :08:32.the nearest to the SNP policy but if you're the SNP he might not
:08:33. > :08:37.particularly want to be seen to be getting your tax proposals through
:08:38. > :08:44.thanks to the Tories. There are 65 opposition MSPs and 63 government
:08:45. > :08:51.supporting MSPs. They have to get one party to support them on
:08:52. > :08:56.legislation. If you look at their manifesto and they stick rigidly to
:08:57. > :08:59.that, I think they will make alliances on a case-by-case basis.
:09:00. > :09:05.And things like income tax, council tax, the SNP is probably closest to
:09:06. > :09:11.the Conservative policies but if you look at issues like the named person
:09:12. > :09:16.scheme, the Tories tried mounting an attack on that, the Greens, Lib Dems
:09:17. > :09:23.and Labour will probably back the SNP. Also the welfare powers. I'd
:09:24. > :09:28.imagine the centre-left parties will support the SNP. I think it will be
:09:29. > :09:38.fun times. I don't have gates going to be a boring five years. Just on
:09:39. > :09:42.tax, the Greens, who you might think because of their views on
:09:43. > :09:44.independence are the newest of SNP, actually are probably the furthest
:09:45. > :09:48.away from them in terms of tax. Yes, actually are probably the furthest
:09:49. > :09:54.and I think the Tories are closest in taxation. On income tax, the only
:09:55. > :09:57.difference between Nicola Sturgeon and George Osborne's policy is
:09:58. > :10:03.fiddling with the middle rate. With the SNP be prepared to be seen to
:10:04. > :10:09.get into bed with the Tories on that? It depends how they spend it.
:10:10. > :10:12.Last week when Nicola Sturgeon talked about taxation she was
:10:13. > :10:15.committed to her income tax policy but seems to suggest she might shift
:10:16. > :10:19.on business rates. There is an ongoing review of them at the
:10:20. > :10:23.moment. Read it she was willing to strike a deal with the Tories and
:10:24. > :10:28.that's where she could go. There are are some issues and could be
:10:29. > :10:32.difficult for the SNP. Air passenger duty. Everyone but the SNP are
:10:33. > :10:38.against it. It maybe they have to come back with new that perhaps
:10:39. > :10:43.modify the proposals. I expect them to modify a number of policies. The
:10:44. > :10:47.legislation that criminalise defensive behaviour at football
:10:48. > :10:52.matches. That was railroaded through by the SNP government. It is clear
:10:53. > :10:54.that all the opposition parties are against large aspect of it. Not in
:10:55. > :10:59.its entirety. I imagine that might against large aspect of it. Not in
:11:00. > :11:05.be an early casualty of the first year. Other issues like the named
:11:06. > :11:09.person thing, I think that would survive, but they will have to box
:11:10. > :11:14.clever. They will not have at their own way like the last five years. It
:11:15. > :11:19.will be more similar like the first term when they governed by minority.
:11:20. > :11:24.It will be interesting. Independence, the Greens are in
:11:25. > :11:29.favour, pro-independence gets a small majority. How do you interpret
:11:30. > :11:34.what the SNP have been saying recently? They clearly don't want a
:11:35. > :11:39.referendum any time soon. I think there is only one test for another
:11:40. > :11:43.referendum and that is when the opinion polls consistently show
:11:44. > :11:49.people will vote yes. Why would they have a referendum before that? I
:11:50. > :11:52.think although there is a majority of independent supporting MSPs in
:11:53. > :11:56.parliament now, the manifestos which they stood on do not include a clear
:11:57. > :12:00.commitment to a referendum so I cannot see us having one any time
:12:01. > :12:06.soon. The green one was particularly roundabout. It suggested there would
:12:07. > :12:09.have to be a 1 million strong petition. Nicola Sturgeon is forming
:12:10. > :12:18.a new government this week. Do you expect big changes? I think she is
:12:19. > :12:21.gone to be splitting up the finance and economy brief. The thing that
:12:22. > :12:31.interests me is the education portfolio. Nicola Sturgeon says this
:12:32. > :12:36.is a key priority and how she wants to be judged. If I was her I would
:12:37. > :12:43.want my top minister in that portfolio. Looking round the Cabinet
:12:44. > :12:50.table, John Swinney is the most competent and able. He could perhaps
:12:51. > :12:58.combine finance? Maybe move him out of finance altogether. Maybe it is
:12:59. > :13:04.not going to be as onerous as it once was. Derek Mackay, Keith Brown
:13:05. > :13:07.could step into that job. John Swinney has been in the same job for
:13:08. > :13:13.nine years. Maybe it is time for a change. Arise John Swinney, would be
:13:14. > :13:19.your view? It would be the logical change. Arise John Swinney, would be
:13:20. > :13:26.choice but whether she goes down that road is another matter. I think
:13:27. > :13:30.I agree. Nicola Sturgeon said that brief is going to be split. Although
:13:31. > :13:33.John has been in it for nine years he is a respected member of the
:13:34. > :13:38.Cabinet and he has new powers over taxation and welfare. He is seen as
:13:39. > :13:46.a steady hand. Important for a government. Think of Gordon Brown as
:13:47. > :13:50.Chancellor. A big job for John Swinney whether he stays in finance
:13:51. > :13:53.or moves education. We might see some new blood at Cabinet or
:13:54. > :14:01.ministerial level as we saw from your earlier interviews, clearly
:14:02. > :14:04.there is new SNP talent. It be interesting to see if Nicola
:14:05. > :14:09.Sturgeon wants to try them out at a lower level. There was no other
:14:10. > :14:12.brief you can see changing other than education? Education is the one
:14:13. > :14:14.that's certainly going to go. On Tuesday we'll be bringing
:14:15. > :14:18.you special coverage of the election of the First Minister at quarter
:14:19. > :14:21.past two on BBC Two. I'll be back on Wednesday afternoon
:14:22. > :14:23.with Politics Scotland Soak up the atmosphere at the most
:14:24. > :14:37.famous flower show in the world. from the RHS Chelsea Flower Show
:14:38. > :14:41.2016.