:00:36. > :00:41.Boris Johnson hosts a summit of allies in London
:00:42. > :00:45.to discuss how to broker a peace settlement in Syria.
:00:46. > :00:48.But as war continues to rage, could "no-bomb zones" -
:00:49. > :00:51.thought to be backed by the Foreign Secretary -
:00:52. > :00:54.protect civilians, and how would they work?
:00:55. > :00:58.We were told by the Remain campaign that a vote to leave the EU would
:00:59. > :01:03.But with the economy growing and employment at record
:01:04. > :01:08.Can Theresa May make a decision on airport expansion
:01:09. > :01:10.without triggering a Conservative cabinet bust-up
:01:11. > :01:15.We look at what's at stake, as the PM prepares to choose
:01:16. > :01:21.And on Sunday Politics Scotland - the SNP aim to put Scotland
:01:22. > :01:24.at the heart of Europe and call for a cross-party coalition
:01:25. > :01:36.against a hard Brexit at home, but will there be any takers?
:01:37. > :01:39.All that to come before 12.15 - and the Scottish Secretary, David
:01:40. > :01:41.Mundell, on Nicola Sturgeon's plans for a second referendum
:01:42. > :01:47.And with me throughout - Tom Newtown Dunn,
:01:48. > :01:50.Julia Hartley-Brewer and Steve Richards.
:01:51. > :01:52.They'll all be tweeting their thoughts and comments
:01:53. > :01:58.So, in just over an hour, the Foreign Secretary,
:01:59. > :02:01.Boris Johnson, will host a meeting of foreign allies in London,
:02:02. > :02:04.including US Secretary of State John Kerry,
:02:05. > :02:07.to discuss military options in Syria.
:02:08. > :02:10.Last week, Mr Johnson said the public mood had changed
:02:11. > :02:13.after relentless bomb attacks on Aleppo
:02:14. > :02:22.and that more "kinetic action" might be possible.
:02:23. > :02:29.Has the public mood changed on Syria? There is a desire to end the
:02:30. > :02:34.horror, but has the public mood really changed? Not really. When
:02:35. > :02:39.asked, the Public say that something must be done and we must stop the
:02:40. > :02:45.slaughter, but when also asked whether to put British troops there,
:02:46. > :02:48.they say, probably not. We have a new Foreign Secretary and British
:02:49. > :02:53.government, and we will have a new White House come January for sure.
:02:54. > :02:59.So there is a feeling that what has gone so far in terms of not
:03:00. > :03:04.intervening, not trying to oppose or block Putin from doing what he wants
:03:05. > :03:09.in Syria has failed, so time to try something else. There was talk of a
:03:10. > :03:16.no-fly zone. There's not so much talk about it now. Now there's
:03:17. > :03:20.suddenly a no-bomb zone. Are we clear what that would be? It is
:03:21. > :03:26.meaningless without a no-fly zone and no one is willing to enforce it.
:03:27. > :03:30.For me, the biggest issue is, what is the point of the United Nations?
:03:31. > :03:35.With Russia vetoing any possible peace plan, we are in a situation
:03:36. > :03:39.where we are basically handing over our moral authority in the world for
:03:40. > :03:44.dealing with humanitarian disasters and war crimes being committed by
:03:45. > :03:49.the side regime and Putin to an organisation which is controlled by
:03:50. > :04:01.Putin effectively because he has a veto on the Security Council. The
:04:02. > :04:04.situation is untenable. We cannot sit and pretend we don't want to be
:04:05. > :04:07.involved in this war. We are already at war, and we will be at war. We
:04:08. > :04:10.need to get to grips with it sooner or later. If we are willing to say
:04:11. > :04:14.that we don't care about Syrian children dying... But we are not
:04:15. > :04:19.willing to say that, so we need to do something about it. We could care
:04:20. > :04:26.deeply but admits there is not something we can do about it.
:04:27. > :04:31.Indeed. When Julia says "Get involved", that does not translate
:04:32. > :04:37.to anything precise or specific. The problem is you go round in circles
:04:38. > :04:41.when it comes to reaction, because when people are then asked what the
:04:42. > :04:48.endgame is - and you do need to have a sense of the end and an aim, and
:04:49. > :04:52.one of the problems with Iraq was that there was not that - you can
:04:53. > :04:58.simply say, something needs to be done and we are involved and there
:04:59. > :05:02.should be military action, but that raises 10,000 other questions which
:05:03. > :05:05.no one is capable of answering. As I understand it, the no-bomb zone
:05:06. > :05:09.would be that we would designate areas where no bombing would be
:05:10. > :05:15.allowed. We wouldn't have planes to stop it happening, but if bombing
:05:16. > :05:20.did happen in those areas, we would use missiles to take out Syrian
:05:21. > :05:26.infrastructure. It seems complicated, and to not take into
:05:27. > :05:28.account what we would do if the Russians put anti-missile batteries
:05:29. > :05:35.around this Syrian infrastructure, as well they might. And you could go
:05:36. > :05:40.one step further. Your understanding is the same as mine. Doing something
:05:41. > :05:47.to prevent drops being -- ones being dropped in that area, but without
:05:48. > :05:54.engaging with Russia. You could fire cruise missiles into a runway, which
:05:55. > :05:58.we were warned could be done, but the problem is, you could have a
:05:59. > :06:04.Russian jet in the middle of that runway, or a bus of school kids. We
:06:05. > :06:09.know that they are capable of doing that. You are looking towards a
:06:10. > :06:12.confrontation with Russia, what ever you do. Boris Johnson would say this
:06:13. > :06:18.is the kind of HARDtalk we need to get the man to listen, because
:06:19. > :06:22.everything else has failed. Mr Kerry being there is significant, but at
:06:23. > :06:33.this stage in the election cycle, it's hard to sue what -- see what Mr
:06:34. > :06:38.Obama would do. We have no idea what to reason may's foreign policy is in
:06:39. > :06:44.terms of intervention. The last thing she would want to do is to get
:06:45. > :06:49.involved in a Middle Eastern war. But we are already involved. And the
:06:50. > :06:54.idea that our entire foreign policy should be based on not having a
:06:55. > :06:59.conflict in the Putin... The West as a whole is not wanting to have a
:07:00. > :07:05.conflict with him, and that is why he is acting how he is.
:07:06. > :07:08.Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister of Scotland, has repeated her
:07:09. > :07:11.warning that, if the UK leaves the single market, she will push for
:07:12. > :07:14.Speaking to Andrew Marr earlier this morning, Ms Sturgeon said
:07:15. > :07:17.she would not hesitate to protect Scotland's economic interests.
:07:18. > :07:18.There's a principle here about, you know,
:07:19. > :07:22.Does what we think, and what we say, and how
:07:23. > :07:26.And that's what's going to be put to the test, I think,
:07:27. > :07:29.Theresa May, perfectly legitimately, says she values the UK,
:07:30. > :07:33.In the Independence Referendum, Scotland was told repeatedly
:07:34. > :07:38.My message to the Prime Minister is, it's now time to prove these
:07:39. > :07:41.things, and demonstrate to Scotland that our voice does count
:07:42. > :07:44.within the UK, and our interests can be protected.
:07:45. > :07:46.Because if that's not the case, then I think Scotland
:07:47. > :07:49.would have the right to decide whether it wanted to follow
:07:50. > :07:58.I've been joined by the Secretary of State for Scotland, David Mundell.
:07:59. > :08:06.Welcome to the Sunday Politics. During the Scottish referendum
:08:07. > :08:09.campaign, two years ago, the ETA Together campaign claimed that the
:08:10. > :08:17.only guaranteed way for Scotland to remain in the EU was to stay in the
:08:18. > :08:22.UK. That turned out to be untrue. You owe the people of Scotland an
:08:23. > :08:27.apology. That isn't the full facts. It was made clear during the
:08:28. > :08:33.referendum in Scotland that there could be an EU referendum. Ruth
:08:34. > :08:36.Davidson, on many occasions, made it clear that people in Scotland would
:08:37. > :08:41.have the opportunity to vote on whether or not they remained in the
:08:42. > :08:46.EU. What was clear in that referendum, and you played a
:08:47. > :08:50.significant part in highlighting it, was that those who were advocating a
:08:51. > :08:56.yes vote could not set out a clear route for Scotland to get into the
:08:57. > :09:01.EU as an independent nation. They were told if they stayed in the UK,
:09:02. > :09:07.that was their best route to remaining in Europe. It turned out,
:09:08. > :09:11.it is obvious that that was untrue. It was a route that meant there was
:09:12. > :09:17.going to be an EU referendum. That was made very clear throughout that.
:09:18. > :09:21.People voted in Scotland decisively to remain part of the UK in full
:09:22. > :09:26.knowledge that there would be a referendum on whether the United
:09:27. > :09:29.Kingdom remained in the European Union. That is what the vote on the
:09:30. > :09:35.23rd of June in Scotland was about. It was about the UK remaining in the
:09:36. > :09:38.EU, not Scotland. The people of Scotland were told to vote for the
:09:39. > :09:47.union to be sure of staying in the UK. They also voted 62% to 38% to
:09:48. > :09:52.stay in the EU. Now they are being dragged out against their will.
:09:53. > :09:56.Surely that is grounds for a second Scottish referendum? I don't accept
:09:57. > :10:01.that. I've voted to stay in the EU, but I didn't do so on the basis that
:10:02. > :10:06.if I didn't get my own way that Scotland would be dragged out of the
:10:07. > :10:13.United Kingdom. We have had a once in a generation vote as to whether
:10:14. > :10:17.Scotland remained part of the UK. There was a decisive result in that.
:10:18. > :10:22.On the assumption that we would also remain part of the European Union,
:10:23. > :10:26.so a major change has taken place. I don't accept that analysis. People
:10:27. > :10:31.were told that there would be a vote on whether the UK remained in the
:10:32. > :10:34.EU. The reasons for Scotland remaining in the UK were
:10:35. > :10:40.overwhelmingly economic, and those issues remain today in relation to
:10:41. > :10:41.the UK single market. It is very odd that people who are concerned about
:10:42. > :11:00.the EU single market are quite willing to
:11:01. > :11:02.give up the UK single market, which is four times as valuable to
:11:03. > :11:04.Scotland, and responsible for a million jobs. If the Scottish
:11:05. > :11:06.Government demands another referendum, will the UK Government
:11:07. > :11:10.grant it? The UK Government will have two agreed to a referendum, but
:11:11. > :11:15.we want to argue that there shouldn't be another referendum. It
:11:16. > :11:20.is in Scotland's best interests at the two governments work together
:11:21. > :11:24.with 18 UK approach to get the best possible situation for Scotland...
:11:25. > :11:31.If the Scottish Parliament decides that we do want -- we do not like
:11:32. > :11:35.the terms of Brexit and we want another referendum, would you grant
:11:36. > :11:40.it? There would have to be an agreement between the two
:11:41. > :11:44.governments in the same form as the Edinburgh Agreement. The great shame
:11:45. > :11:49.of the Edinburgh Agreement, which the SNP used to quote repeatedly, is
:11:50. > :11:54.that they have not adhere to it, because a fundamental part of that
:11:55. > :11:58.would be that both sides would respect the result. Viewers will
:11:59. > :12:02.notice that you haven't really answered my question. Could Scotland
:12:03. > :12:07.remain inside the single market in Europe as part of the Brexit
:12:08. > :12:11.process? From the outset, I have said we would listen to any proposal
:12:12. > :12:16.that the Scottish Government brought forward in relation to Scotland's
:12:17. > :12:21.interests. We have had for months and no specific proposals have come
:12:22. > :12:26.forward. Nicola Sturgeon was talking about proposals this morning, but at
:12:27. > :12:33.this moment, I see it impossible that Scotland could remain within
:12:34. > :12:36.the EU whilst the rest of the UK leads. It would be difficult to see
:12:37. > :12:40.how that could be achieved. But we will listen to any proposals the
:12:41. > :12:44.Scottish Government bring forward in relation to achieving the best
:12:45. > :12:49.interests of Scotland. I am convinced that Scotland's best
:12:50. > :12:54.interests are being part of the UK. You praised Scotland's membership of
:12:55. > :12:59.the single market during the referendum. In March of this year
:13:00. > :13:04.you said it secured jobs, was vital to tourism and industry, inbound
:13:05. > :13:09.visitors and the rest of it. So why would you not want to retain it for
:13:10. > :13:13.Scotland? I agree with the benefits Scotland has received from the
:13:14. > :13:19.single market, but we are in a different situation now. The UK is
:13:20. > :13:23.negotiating its exit from the EU. The Prime Minister has said it is
:13:24. > :13:28.not going to be on the basis of existing arrangements, it will be on
:13:29. > :13:33.the basis of a new arrangement, and as part of that, we will want to
:13:34. > :13:39.secure the best arrangement for Scottish businesses. Given the
:13:40. > :13:42.history we have gone through, do you want to guarantee a special post
:13:43. > :13:47.Brexit status for Scotland. We leave the EU, but Scotland will have a
:13:48. > :13:53.distinct status? I'm willing to look at any proposal brought forward that
:13:54. > :13:57.looks at Scotland's interests. We have had no specifics from the
:13:58. > :14:06.Scottish Government. They say now that they have them. It is a bit rum
:14:07. > :14:09.to attack the Scottish Government. The principle is, could Scotland
:14:10. > :14:15.have a special position, and would you help that or not? I am willing
:14:16. > :14:20.to listen to any proposal brought forward. Will fishing and farming go
:14:21. > :14:26.back to Edinburgh? The devolution settlement are going to be a
:14:27. > :14:33.change,... Will they go to Edinburgh or to London? We will have a
:14:34. > :14:39.decision at the end of that process. I want to make sure we have the best
:14:40. > :14:43.arrangement for Scotland. You can't answer the question? We want to
:14:44. > :14:49.listen to what fishermen and farmers say, and the people of Scotland. It
:14:50. > :14:54.will be a package of arrangements, clearly, that need to be taken
:14:55. > :14:58.forward as a result of leaving the EU. One final question. If the
:14:59. > :15:03.Scottish Nationalist MPs vote against grammar schools, which are
:15:04. > :15:05.purely for England, isn't that proof that your English votes for English
:15:06. > :15:15.laws isn't working? It demonstrates all MPs in the
:15:16. > :15:20.Parliament have the opportunity to vote on all issues. You wouldn't
:15:21. > :15:31.mind if they voted to stop Grammar schools? Of course I wouldn't --
:15:32. > :15:39.would mind... I think we have got the balance right in that
:15:40. > :15:41.legislation. It is meaningless if they can vote to stop grammar
:15:42. > :15:48.schools when it doesn't affect Scotland. They have to answer for
:15:49. > :15:52.that, based on an opportunistic approach and cause resentment in
:15:53. > :15:53.England. Thank you for being with us.
:15:54. > :15:55.During the EU Referendum campaign, leading Remain supporters repeatedly
:15:56. > :15:58.warned that a vote to leave the European Union would cause
:15:59. > :16:02.Three months on, were their forecasts accurate?
:16:03. > :16:06.Since the vote on June 23rd, the economic news
:16:07. > :16:10.The value of the pound has been in pretty steady depreciation
:16:11. > :16:12.since referendum day, falling to a 31-year
:16:13. > :16:20.It was as low as $1.18 but has still rebounded a bit.
:16:21. > :16:24.The weak pound left Tesco in a situation.
:16:25. > :16:27.They stopped selling Marmite and other products for a day online
:16:28. > :16:31.And a leaked Treasury report said that Government tax revenues
:16:32. > :16:34.could be down by 66 billion a year in a post-Brexit economy.
:16:35. > :16:41.Though the report emanated from Project Fear days.
:16:42. > :16:43.However, many of the short-term economic fundamentals
:16:44. > :16:51.The dominant service sector grew a healthy 0.4% in July.
:16:52. > :16:54.In the same month, the unemployment rate dipped to under 5%,
:16:55. > :17:00.House-buying has also been rising since the referendum,
:17:01. > :17:03.nearly 110,000 properties were purchased in August.
:17:04. > :17:10.Is the economy already suffering from the Brexit blues or not?
:17:11. > :17:13.Joining me now is the former shadow Europe Minister,
:17:14. > :17:15.the Labour MP Pat McFadden, who was a Business Minister
:17:16. > :17:29.Do you know concede that nearly all the short-term economic forecasts
:17:30. > :17:34.made by the Remain campaign have turned out to be untrue at best,
:17:35. > :17:39.scaremongering at worst? No, I think this week was the week that the
:17:40. > :17:44.beginnings of the economic effects of Brexit began to take hold, most
:17:45. > :17:48.obviously on the currency fall. You talk about short-term, this began on
:17:49. > :17:53.the night of the referendum itself and was given booster rockets by the
:17:54. > :17:58.signals sent out by the Conservative Party conference. In terms of the
:17:59. > :18:01.warnings next to reality, the warnings about the fall of the
:18:02. > :18:08.currency speculated that it might fall in value by about 12%, the
:18:09. > :18:17.reality is closer to 20%. Let's look at some of the warnings. We will
:18:18. > :18:19.come back to the currency, but let's look at this. The Treasury report on
:18:20. > :18:33.maybe 23rd said the following: That turned out to be untrue, didn't
:18:34. > :18:38.it? What has happened here, which isn't in line with those warnings,
:18:39. > :18:41.is consumer confidence has remained high. The actions of the Bank of
:18:42. > :18:45.England in cutting interest have been important, so the short-term
:18:46. > :18:53.effect in terms of consumer confidence... So it is wrong? Hasn't
:18:54. > :18:57.turned out in line with that, but it would be complacent in the extreme
:18:58. > :19:01.to conclude that with the effects of the currency which we know also from
:19:02. > :19:07.the Bank of England's comments the other dates will feed into higher
:19:08. > :19:15.prices, which will hit lower income consumers hardest. But we don't know
:19:16. > :19:19.yet, I will come onto that but in the short term, I will show you
:19:20. > :19:20.another one. A month before the referendum, the Chancellor George
:19:21. > :19:34.Osborne said this: That turned out to be wronged too,
:19:35. > :19:38.didn't it? We are not in recession but if you look at the forecasts of
:19:39. > :19:43.growth over the next few years, the Bank of England have forecast growth
:19:44. > :19:52.next year to not be the 2.3% it thought before the referendum but to
:19:53. > :19:56.be 0.8%. Is it forecasting a recession? No, but it is forecasting
:19:57. > :20:02.a slowdown which would mean GDP after two years would be for the ?5
:20:03. > :20:05.billion less than the estimates before the referendum took place.
:20:06. > :20:12.And it might be wrong, because look, it was wrong about the recession. Is
:20:13. > :20:18.anybody now forecasting a recession? I don't know if anybody is
:20:19. > :20:21.forecasting a recession. The IMF are certainly forecasting a slowdown in
:20:22. > :20:28.a similar way to the Bank of England. George Osborne also said
:20:29. > :20:36.house prices will plummet by 18%. Any sign of that? House prices are
:20:37. > :20:40.not plummeting by 18%. Your side that you represent made much of the
:20:41. > :20:45.IMF's claim that provoked Leave would mean an immediate slide into
:20:46. > :20:52.recession, a collapse in house prices, and a crash in stock markets
:20:53. > :21:00.which of course are currently at record levels. Even the IMF admits
:21:01. > :21:05.there is none of that. There maybe longer term dangers but in the
:21:06. > :21:09.short-term it happen. In the short-term it didn't happen. In the
:21:10. > :21:14.short term what has happened here, as I said a moment ago, is consumer
:21:15. > :21:18.confidence has remained high, the Bank of England cut interest rates
:21:19. > :21:23.which put more money into people's pockets and I think the action they
:21:24. > :21:27.took was important, but I think it would be wrong to say imply that
:21:28. > :21:32.because these things haven't happened in the first few months
:21:33. > :21:36.that we are somehow out of the woods on the economy. I understand that,
:21:37. > :21:40.that's the last thing I would say, but here's the question - most of
:21:41. > :21:44.these forecasters are still pretty gloomy about the long-term but if
:21:45. > :21:50.they couldn't get the last few months right, why would you trust
:21:51. > :21:55.them for 2025 when they couldn't say what will happen in September? Why
:21:56. > :22:02.would you trust them to say what happens five years from now? People
:22:03. > :22:08.will ask the question but the big tangible we have is in the decline
:22:09. > :22:13.of the currency and that is a real and now effect. We can talk about
:22:14. > :22:17.whether it is lost or minus, but the Government said the other day this
:22:18. > :22:21.would bring inflation back, to use his words it is going to get
:22:22. > :22:26.difficult, particularly for people on lower incomes and that will feed
:22:27. > :22:30.into people's purchasing power. The international markets partaking of
:22:31. > :22:36.you have our future prospects and at the moment it is not a vote of
:22:37. > :22:40.confidence. Do you agree with the latest Remain mantra that people
:22:41. > :22:46.might have voted to leave the EU but didn't necessarily vote to leave the
:22:47. > :22:49.single market? I do agree with that. A lot of people have said people who
:22:50. > :22:54.voted to leave didn't know that's what they were voting for, so let me
:22:55. > :22:59.show you a clip of David Cameron at the height of the referendum
:23:00. > :23:04.campaign. The British public would be voting if we leave to leave the
:23:05. > :23:09.EU and the single market, we then have to negotiate a trade deal from
:23:10. > :23:14.outside with the European Union. There you have it loud and clear on
:23:15. > :23:19.BBC television, voting Leave means leaving the single market, not
:23:20. > :23:23.losing access to it but leaving the membership of it. We have George
:23:24. > :23:28.Osborne on tape saying the same thing, so why do you make out Leave
:23:29. > :23:33.voters didn't know what they were voting for? I think people voted
:23:34. > :23:37.Leave for a number of different reasons. For some it might have been
:23:38. > :23:42.immigration, for some it might have been the promise of more money for
:23:43. > :23:46.the NHS, but there are number of countries outside the EU which can
:23:47. > :23:51.have full access to the single market, we know about Norway and on.
:23:52. > :23:57.But they all have to pay in and have free movement. We can come onto that
:23:58. > :24:01.but what I'm saying is it's not the case that when you are outside the
:24:02. > :24:05.EU you necessarily have to be outside the single market and the
:24:06. > :24:09.reason this is important is because this has been a cornerstone of
:24:10. > :24:16.British economic policy for many years, particularly in terms of our
:24:17. > :24:19.inward investment, and the reasons why both manufacturing industry and
:24:20. > :24:25.financial services has invested and created employment in the UK, and I
:24:26. > :24:30.think it would be cavalier to begin this negotiation by closing the door
:24:31. > :24:34.on that. Is it Labour's policy, I know you don't speak for Labour
:24:35. > :24:39.leadership, but is it their policy to remain in the single market? You
:24:40. > :24:44.are right, I'm a backbencher, but it is the policy to have as full access
:24:45. > :24:51.as possible to the single market. At least what we have now in terms of
:24:52. > :24:54.goods and services. You can call it membership or not but that is what
:24:55. > :25:02.Keir Starmer and the Labour Party wants. The old party home affairs
:25:03. > :25:05.select committee is blaming Jeremy Corbyn's lack of leadership for
:25:06. > :25:12.creating a safe space for what they call vile anti-Semitism. Do you
:25:13. > :25:16.agree with that? I think this report should be taken seriously. The
:25:17. > :25:21.atmosphere in the Labour Party, there has been a lot of nasty things
:25:22. > :25:26.said on social media over the past year in particular. I hope we don't
:25:27. > :25:30.make the mistake of shooting the messenger, I hope we take the report
:25:31. > :25:34.seriously and I hope we don't fall into the trap that sometimes I see
:25:35. > :25:40.when these accusations are wielded, that we point to antiracism records
:25:41. > :25:45.and say look at our virtue in our record here, that must mean we
:25:46. > :25:49.cannot be anti-Semitic. Let me be clear about this, pointing to your
:25:50. > :25:52.own sense of righteousness is no excuse for nastiness or cruelty to
:25:53. > :25:58.someone else so we should take this very seriously indeed. Pat McFadden,
:25:59. > :26:03.thank you for being with us this morning.
:26:04. > :26:06.A third runway at Heathrow was first given the green
:26:07. > :26:08.light by Gordon Brown's government in 2009.
:26:09. > :26:10.Almost eight years on, could Theresa May be about finally
:26:11. > :26:12.to allow Heathrow expansion to go ahead?
:26:13. > :26:16.Or could she surprise everyone and back Gatwick instead?
:26:17. > :26:19.Maybe she will come out in favour of both of them!
:26:20. > :26:21.A decision is expected imminently, but it's not straightforward
:26:22. > :26:25.Several members of her cabinet are opposed to any plan to expand
:26:26. > :26:27.Heathrow, and reports suggest as many as 60 of her backbenchers
:26:28. > :26:31.Our reporter, Mark Lobel, has been looking at
:26:32. > :26:40.A growing number of people want to take more flights and some
:26:41. > :26:42.accuse the Government of dragging their feet over
:26:43. > :26:52.All the while, our airports are operating flat-out.
:26:53. > :26:59.So this is fully autonomous, you just have to press the start
:27:00. > :27:05.Matthew Hill is from a business-backed group campaigning
:27:06. > :27:09.We haven't had a full-length runway in London and the south-east
:27:10. > :27:14.Gatwick was built in the 1930s, Heathrow in the 1940s,
:27:15. > :27:20.Heathrow is full, Gatwick will be full in the next few years.
:27:21. > :27:23.Matthew's group claims the lack of a new runway is costing us
:27:24. > :27:30.I think there are huge economic benefits from the construction
:27:31. > :27:34.At the moment, because we don't have that new runway, we don't
:27:35. > :27:36.have that new capacity, the new flights to new markets,
:27:37. > :27:40.we are missing out on ?9.5 billion a year in lost trade.
:27:41. > :27:42.Until we get that decision and we get that runway
:27:43. > :27:46.built, we will continue to lose out on that trade.
:27:47. > :27:49.One airport that's eager to expand is Heathrow,
:27:50. > :27:52.either by expanding this northern runway, the one closest to us here,
:27:53. > :27:55.or, the Airports Commission's favourite proposal, building
:27:56. > :27:59.a new runway parallel to here, about a kilometre that way in place
:28:00. > :28:07.It's said that would offer 40 new destinations from the airport,
:28:08. > :28:09.carry lots more air freight, provide 70,000 new jobs
:28:10. > :28:14.and an overall boost to economic activity in the country,
:28:15. > :28:17.with a promise of no night flights, new environmental and community
:28:18. > :28:27.Heathrow's hub status also services many of the UK's other airports,
:28:28. > :28:33.On average, every year a quarter of a million passengers travel
:28:34. > :28:35.to and from this key exporting region via Heathrow,
:28:36. > :28:41.While we've been very strong supporters of a third runway
:28:42. > :28:43.at Heathrow, we think it's in the best interests
:28:44. > :28:45.of the north-east, we also think it's in the best
:28:46. > :28:54.Our services connect to many, many destinations across the world,
:28:55. > :29:02.and allow businesses to trade right the way across the globe.
:29:03. > :29:08.Gatwick Airport also wants to expand with another runway here.
:29:09. > :29:11.By doubling Gatwick's capacity, the plan would create 22,000
:29:12. > :29:14.new jobs, a vastly expanded short-haul network, and more
:29:15. > :29:20.I think the expansion of Gatwick will bring firstly
:29:21. > :29:23.the certainty of delivery, we can have spades in the ground
:29:24. > :29:29.in this Parliament and we can be operational in the next,
:29:30. > :29:31.so that's within ten years we can have a new runway,
:29:32. > :29:34.and Gatwick can provide the increased capacity at a price
:29:35. > :29:42.Now, before anyone gets carried away, there are of course some
:29:43. > :29:48.people who would far prefer no extra planes in the sky.
:29:49. > :29:50.We already fly more than everybody else,
:29:51. > :29:52.most of these are leisure flights, well who's taking
:29:53. > :29:58.Actually 70% of all of our flights are taken by 15% of the population.
:29:59. > :30:02.It's a wealthy frequent-flying elite.
:30:03. > :30:07.But with approval of a third runway looking likely,
:30:08. > :30:16.could more protests be on the horizon?
:30:17. > :30:20.I can tell you now, they are dusting off the handcuffs, you know,
:30:21. > :30:23.And you have to remember, Heathrow, if they choose to expand
:30:24. > :30:25.Heathrow, you are talking about hundreds of homes
:30:26. > :30:28.being bulldozed, whole communities being eradicated, wiped off the map.
:30:29. > :30:31.Over the last few years, since the last big protest around
:30:32. > :30:33.Heathrow, the relationship between local people around
:30:34. > :30:36.the airport and grass roots climate change activists
:30:37. > :30:41.Those guys are going to get together and just cause merry hell for people
:30:42. > :30:50.The Prime Minister, Theresa May, who once called for a better not
:30:51. > :30:53.bigger Heathrow whilst in opposition, will chair a select
:30:54. > :30:56.group of colleagues expected to decide imminently
:30:57. > :30:59.on whether to build a new runway and where.
:31:00. > :31:02.It will then take months for a national policy statement
:31:03. > :31:07.outlining the new works to get drawn up before MPs get to vote on it,
:31:08. > :31:11.leaving plenty of time for any further opposition to airport
:31:12. > :31:19.I've been joined by two Conservative MPs.
:31:20. > :31:21.Adam Afriyie is opposed to Heathrow expansion,
:31:22. > :31:42.Adam, the independent Daviess report into runway expansion said the case
:31:43. > :31:48.for Heathrow was clear and unanimous in the Commission. 180,000 more
:31:49. > :31:53.jobs, more than ?200 billion in economic benefits. So why are you
:31:54. > :31:57.putting the interests of your constituency before the national
:31:58. > :31:59.interest? I will fight tooth and nail for the interests of my
:32:00. > :32:03.constituents, but the wonderful thing about the binary choice
:32:04. > :32:08.between Heathrow and Gatwick is that it is not in the regional or
:32:09. > :32:16.consumers' interests to expand Heathrow. The Daviess report has
:32:17. > :32:22.already been largely undermined. There are 17 reasons why it doesn't
:32:23. > :32:29.work and is wrong. Number one, they said Gatwick would not have 42
:32:30. > :32:33.million passengers until 2024. This year, they already have 42 million
:32:34. > :32:38.passengers. Gatwick have increased their destinations to 20 now, which
:32:39. > :32:43.they didn't expect either. The Davies review was good in its day,
:32:44. > :32:49.but is it had a limited remit. They were talking about Heathrow as a
:32:50. > :32:55.hub, but the airline industry has changed. We have to pay to this for
:32:56. > :33:04.more than 15 years. The government White Paper in 2003 suggested we
:33:05. > :33:09.should expand Heathrow. ?20 million and 12 years later, the Davis Report
:33:10. > :33:11.came to the same conclusion. We are never going to get any form of
:33:12. > :33:16.progress on this is competing MPs never going to get any form of
:33:17. > :33:21.are allowed to frustrate the process. You could have had about
:33:22. > :33:26.three people who are Gatwick MPs arguing very passionately against
:33:27. > :33:31.Adam's desire to expand Gatwick. The point is, we are in a paralysis. We
:33:32. > :33:39.are having a theological debate that will last decades, and Heathrow
:33:40. > :33:42.is... Why Heathrow? Why not expand Gatwick and increase the capacity of
:33:43. > :33:46.our regional airports? I thought the government's strategy was to
:33:47. > :33:52.rebalance the economy in favour of the North and the Midlands. If you
:33:53. > :33:56.listen to northern MPs, or people representing Northern or Scottish
:33:57. > :34:01.interests, they all say they want to increase Heathrow. The SNP said last
:34:02. > :34:04.week they wanted Heathrow to be expanded. If you want to help the
:34:05. > :34:11.economy is in those areas, listen to what they are saying. They are
:34:12. > :34:16.saying expand Heathrow. 32 regional airports support the expansion of
:34:17. > :34:21.Heathrow to maintain its position as one of the global hubs. Even the
:34:22. > :34:26.Scottish Government agrees with expanding Heathrow. They all say, we
:34:27. > :34:31.want to be a serious player in aviation. We need a global hub, and
:34:32. > :34:35.that is Heathrow. The interesting thing is that there is no argument
:34:36. > :34:40.that Heathrow is the UK hub, and no one is trying to get rid of that.
:34:41. > :34:43.But if you are adding a single new runway, is it better to add it at
:34:44. > :35:01.Heathrow or Gatwick, and for me it is overwhelmingly clear. Heathrow is
:35:02. > :35:03.the most expensive airport in the world. If you add another runway at
:35:04. > :35:06.taxpayer expense, you make it even more expensive. So flight prices go
:35:07. > :35:08.up. Whether or not Heathrow could ever be delivered is another
:35:09. > :35:13.question. My own Borough Council as part of the legal action... So even
:35:14. > :35:19.if the decision is made, we may not see the capacity. At Gatwick is dirt
:35:20. > :35:26.cheap. It can be delivered within ten years. But it is not a global
:35:27. > :35:30.hub airport. But the hub that we have at Heathrow is perfectly
:35:31. > :35:38.adequate for the next ten or 15 years. It is running at 99%
:35:39. > :35:43.capacity. Every airline, the new planes being ordered... The airline
:35:44. > :35:50.have decided that the hub capacity is sufficient and they are moving to
:35:51. > :35:54.a different model. Let me ask you this. We haven't built a major new
:35:55. > :36:03.runway in London and the south-east for 60 years. Since 1946, so 70
:36:04. > :36:09.years. Why not expand Heathrow and Gatwick? Personally, I would do
:36:10. > :36:13.both. If we are serious about having international trade and Golding
:36:14. > :36:17.links to the outside world, especially after Brexit, we have to
:36:18. > :36:22.get serious about aviation and accept that we need more capacity. I
:36:23. > :36:26.think it's scandalous we haven't managed to expand capacity for 70
:36:27. > :36:31.years, when we think of the economic growth that has happened in that
:36:32. > :36:35.time. If we want to build a prosperous economy, it seems bizarre
:36:36. > :36:39.we are reluctant to increase aviation. Whatever the decision, do
:36:40. > :36:52.you think there will be a free vote on this? I think this is one area
:36:53. > :36:55.where I think the government does need to take a lead, and I hope they
:36:56. > :36:58.will make a rational choice for Gatwick. If the government comes out
:36:59. > :37:03.for Heathrow, will you defy the whips? Yes. I will always vote for
:37:04. > :37:04.for Heathrow, will you defy the Heathrow, because it doesn't make
:37:05. > :37:12.for Heathrow, will you defy the economic sense. If MPs are happy at
:37:13. > :37:16.the prospect of Heathrow... Does the figure strike a chord with you? I
:37:17. > :37:22.would hope there would be more, but it depends on the political position
:37:23. > :37:26.of Labour and the SNP. I hope that the government decides
:37:27. > :37:31.inclusively... Ad is doing what he feels is the best for his
:37:32. > :37:39.constituents. I think 60 is way off the mark. I don't know what
:37:40. > :37:43.journalists suggested 60 Tory MPs. My sense is that it is probably
:37:44. > :37:50.about 20 hard-core people in the House of Commons. I think it will be
:37:51. > :37:55.a free vote. If it is 20 hard-core, you will need Labour to get it
:37:56. > :38:02.through? Labour MPs were very keen on supporting Heathrow, in my
:38:03. > :38:04.experience. It may be delayed again, of course. After 70 years, what's
:38:05. > :38:07.another week here or there! Good morning and welcome
:38:08. > :38:15.to Sunday Politics Scotland. She's set out the stall -
:38:16. > :38:20.Scotland at the heart of Europe We'll be asking the SNP's newly
:38:21. > :38:25.elected deputy leader just how the party will to turn its grand
:38:26. > :38:43.plans into reality. We will also work to persuade
:38:44. > :38:48.others, labour, liberals and moderate Tories to join us in a
:38:49. > :38:50.coalition against a hard Brexit, not just for Scotland, but for the whole
:38:51. > :38:51.of the UK. Labour's only MP in Scotland tells
:38:52. > :38:54.us if he thinks the call for an alliance against hard Brexit
:38:55. > :38:57.matches the mood in Westminster. So the First Minister's set
:38:58. > :38:59.piece speech at the end of the SNP conference was -
:39:00. > :39:01.as promised - full There were initiatives
:39:02. > :39:04.on trade, and Trident. And a revolution in the way young
:39:05. > :39:07.people in care are looked after. But - inevitably -
:39:08. > :39:10.analysts will be poring over the details of what Nicola Sturgeon
:39:11. > :39:12.did - and didn't - Not least because -
:39:13. > :39:16.at the start of the conference - she'd announced a quick consultation
:39:17. > :39:28.on legislation for The SEC see a Glasgow plays host to
:39:29. > :39:32.all kinds of events. Just a couple of weeks ago, at comic con, super
:39:33. > :39:36.heroes and villains took over the halls. For the past few days, the
:39:37. > :39:42.costumes have been more restrained, but the conference has had heroes
:39:43. > :39:47.and heroines. On day one, they stood and applauded as the First Minister
:39:48. > :39:52.promised a consultation on and independence referendum. The
:39:53. > :40:01.independence referendum bill will be published for consultation next
:40:02. > :40:06.week. Once the speech was over, what did they think of that? She said
:40:07. > :40:10.this because it's the democratic right of the people in Scotland to
:40:11. > :40:12.not be dragged out of Europe against their will and we have to start
:40:13. > :40:17.laying the foundations for a new their will and we have to start
:40:18. > :40:21.referendum, should all other avenues fail. Scotland needs to get out of
:40:22. > :40:28.the nightmare situation that we are in right now, being bossed by
:40:29. > :40:31.Westminster. It's what Scotland voters need to hear. We will have
:40:32. > :40:37.the consultation next week and see what is in that. I'm not saying we
:40:38. > :40:43.are shooting ourselves in the front, if this is to quit. A fringe event
:40:44. > :40:48.discusses renewing the case for independence. Has something gone
:40:49. > :40:51.wrong with the argument or the weight is presented? It is
:40:52. > :40:54.self-evident that is the case for independence always has to be
:40:55. > :40:58.reviewed and updated and we have to look at what things worked in 2014
:40:59. > :41:01.and what didn't. We also have to look at how the world has changed
:41:02. > :41:06.since then. There is a lot of thoughtful going on on what the next
:41:07. > :41:10.offer of Independence will actually look like. It is looking at those
:41:11. > :41:16.areas that we maybe didn't give enough information to the public who
:41:17. > :41:19.were maybe under standard or the voters, that helped them come to the
:41:20. > :41:24.conclusion that independence is the way forward. We have to have sound
:41:25. > :41:29.answers about currency, about banking, about what we would
:41:30. > :41:37.nationalise, what we wouldn't. To build the basis, for building a new
:41:38. > :41:41.Scotland. A country that works and is effective. The organiser wants a
:41:42. > :41:48.new claim of Right for Scotland, published on St Andrew's Day 2018.
:41:49. > :41:52.What we need now is not a more sprawling vision document like last
:41:53. > :41:56.White Paper, but something that is a consolidated business plan, so it is
:41:57. > :42:00.a workmanlike business plan saying what processes, institutions, rules
:42:01. > :42:03.we would need to produce to create an independent Scotland that we
:42:04. > :42:06.currently don't have an saying here is how we will do it, this is what
:42:07. > :42:14.it will cost and this is how we will get it done. Nicola Sturgeon was
:42:15. > :42:23.back on stage yesterday, picking up the I word. Your Mac or not that
:42:24. > :42:26.one. Not yet! The word I want you to remember is this. Inclusion.
:42:27. > :42:35.Inclusion is the guiding principle for everything we do. She went on to
:42:36. > :42:40.talk twice about Scotland's home rule journey. So what did delegates
:42:41. > :42:44.and members leaving the conference think? She was reserved enough but
:42:45. > :42:47.gets us happy in terms of keeping independence on the table. She has
:42:48. > :42:52.been quite clear that that is on the table amongst other options.
:42:53. > :42:56.Inclusion is important. Inclusion is really important. We want a much
:42:57. > :43:02.fairer Scotland. We are on our way. What she said today is I don't care
:43:03. > :43:06.what you say, somewhere along the line if we don't get the deal we
:43:07. > :43:10.want from down the road, we will go for independence two. But David
:43:11. > :43:14.Cameron's story tells us things can for independence two. But David
:43:15. > :43:18.go badly wrong for a leader who calls a referendum just to keep
:43:19. > :43:21.their party happy. Avoiding that trap may need political superpowers
:43:22. > :43:24.their party happy. Avoiding that will stop so perhaps there is more
:43:25. > :43:26.in common with comic con than you might imagine.
:43:27. > :43:28.Joining me now from Moray is the SNP's newly elected deputy
:43:29. > :43:46.Angus, Nicola Sturgeon this morning said she was focusing on trying to
:43:47. > :43:50.convince the British government to take seriously some of the Scottish
:43:51. > :43:56.permits's proposals on Brexit. She seemed to accept that Scotland could
:43:57. > :44:04.not really, in any meaningful sense, negotiate with the EU. You would
:44:05. > :44:07.accept that, too, presumably? The focus is absolutely on trying to
:44:08. > :44:15.impress on the UK Government that it has to do find a bespoke solution to
:44:16. > :44:20.the Brexit conundrum that satisfied both the 62% vote in Scotland to
:44:21. > :44:25.remain within the EU, but also the vote south of the border in favour
:44:26. > :44:30.of Brexit. That is why the Scottish Government has laid an offer on the
:44:31. > :44:31.table to work with the UK Government to try to protect Scottish interests
:44:32. > :44:39.in the EU context, foremost amongst to try to protect Scottish interests
:44:40. > :44:42.that is remaining within the single market, but there are other areas of
:44:43. > :44:46.priority which the Scottish element will be outlining in the weeks
:44:47. > :44:52.ahead. Have you had any indication... Have you had any
:44:53. > :44:56.indication... You are the lead at Westminster. The indication is the
:44:57. > :45:00.UK Government will take that seriously. Whilst the straws in the
:45:01. > :45:03.wind are not particularly good, the rhetoric saying that, of course one
:45:04. > :45:10.is going to liaise with the Scottish Government and so on, the rhetoric
:45:11. > :45:14.exists, but the reality points to something far less convincing. Just
:45:15. > :45:19.this week, for example, we have the publication of the key committees
:45:20. > :45:23.that the UK Government is considering Brexit in the Secretary
:45:24. > :45:28.of State for Scotland is not a serious player in that. It doesn't
:45:29. > :45:32.look as if the UK Government is taking things seriously thus far,
:45:33. > :45:37.which is why I think the First Minister's unambiguous statements
:45:38. > :45:44.are very helpful and it has clearly been heard, as we know the rounds of
:45:45. > :45:46.interviews on today because of political programmes across the
:45:47. > :45:50.networks have all led on the Scottish dimension to the Brexit
:45:51. > :45:55.challenge. And so I hope and we hope quite genuinely that to reason me
:45:56. > :45:59.and her colleagues understand that they do have to seriously work with
:46:00. > :46:04.the Scottish Government is to try to find ways of protecting Scotland's
:46:05. > :46:08.place in Europe whilst quite properly having to respect the
:46:09. > :46:13.mandate that exists south of the border in favour of Brexit. I
:46:14. > :46:19.wondered if you and the SNP had noted the meeting that is to reason
:46:20. > :46:24.me had with the boss of Nissan on Friday, which he seemed very happy
:46:25. > :46:28.with. There was all sorts of talk in the financial papers afterwards that
:46:29. > :46:35.there might be... Can you repeat that? I wondered if you noted the
:46:36. > :46:43.meeting that to Reza me had with the head of Nissan, who seemed happy
:46:44. > :46:47.after the meeting. I'm sorry, the sound is breaking out. I heard was I
:46:48. > :46:53.aware of the meeting between the Prime Minister and suddenly from
:46:54. > :46:57.Nissan. I've not. But I hope that the UK Government is listening to
:46:58. > :47:02.the great many people in the business community, for whom the UK
:47:03. > :47:05.remaining within the single market, not just having access to it, is
:47:06. > :47:10.fundamentally important. That is really relevant in the north-east of
:47:11. > :47:14.England with the Nissan works there, but there are many other companies,
:47:15. > :47:18.many other industries for whom being a part of the single market is
:47:19. > :47:23.really important and I join you from the heart of Scotland's food and
:47:24. > :47:29.drink industry, where it is really, really important that if you are
:47:30. > :47:33.producing foodstuffs or shellfish, which are largely exported into the
:47:34. > :47:37.single market or all of the whiskey distilleries that surround me, it is
:47:38. > :47:41.really important that we don't support the kind of barriers in
:47:42. > :47:47.place to the largest single market in the world. My apologies for this
:47:48. > :47:51.line, Angus Robertson. I hope you can hear me. The point I was going
:47:52. > :47:56.to make is that there are suggestions the British government
:47:57. > :47:59.might negotiate deals whereby specific industries, like the car
:48:00. > :48:03.industry, could sort of stay in the single market, even if Britain
:48:04. > :48:07.leaves, and my point about Nissan was I wondered if the SNP would say,
:48:08. > :48:16.if that should apply to industries, why not geographical areas like
:48:17. > :48:20.Scotland? It makes the case that the First Minister has been pressing and
:48:21. > :48:25.weighing the SNP at Westerners are having underlining. Whilst it is not
:48:26. > :48:28.simple, and we understand that it is not straightforward, it is possible
:48:29. > :48:32.to find different solutions. We know that already within the UK, there
:48:33. > :48:35.are different solutions and relationships with Europe, so take
:48:36. > :48:39.for example the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man. In the case of
:48:40. > :48:44.Denmark, look at how Greenland fits into the pictures. There are ways of
:48:45. > :48:47.having asymmetric relationships, but it depends on the UK Government.
:48:48. > :48:51.Let's go back to your first question. It is the UK Government
:48:52. > :48:55.that will have the key negotiating discussions with the EU whenever
:48:56. > :49:03.they trigger the article 50 procedure. It will depend on a UK
:49:04. > :49:07.Government to take the needs, interests, concerns and expectations
:49:08. > :49:12.of the Scottish Gottman and people, 62% voted to remain in the EU, to do
:49:13. > :49:15.what they have said previously to respect the fact that they say
:49:16. > :49:22.Scotland is an equal partner in the UK. They are prepared to find a
:49:23. > :49:26.bespoke arrangements for companies or four industries, then they should
:49:27. > :49:31.be prepared to do it for nations in the UK, like Scotland or Northern
:49:32. > :49:36.Ireland. You have said that, should there be a hard Brexit, that will be
:49:37. > :49:41.justification for a second independence referendum. Presumably,
:49:42. > :49:44.the contrary is the case, that should the British government take
:49:45. > :49:49.note of Scotland's concerns and those of some in England, and there
:49:50. > :49:53.should be some sort of soft Brexit or medium way between soft and hard
:49:54. > :49:55.Brexit, you will withdraw the proposal to hold a second
:49:56. > :50:10.referendum. If the United Kingdom delivers on
:50:11. > :50:14.the priorities that the Scottish Government is going to be setting
:50:15. > :50:17.out in the next week, that is going to be the focus of our continuing
:50:18. > :50:20.and renewed relationship with the European context. At the Scottish
:50:21. > :50:23.Government is satisfied, I don't see how they would pursue a further
:50:24. > :50:26.independence referendum. Given that all of the straws in the wind show
:50:27. > :50:29.that the UK Government has not taken seriously this far, is exactly why
:50:30. > :50:34.it is right and proper for the Scottish Government to begin
:50:35. > :50:37.consultations on an independence referendum, just in case the UK
:50:38. > :50:44.Government does not deliver on what is required. The premise of your
:50:45. > :50:47.question is correct. If they do deliver on the priorities the
:50:48. > :50:51.Scottish Government want, then we wouldn't need to go ahead with a
:50:52. > :50:54.referendum. But it is right and proper, given that we don't have
:50:55. > :51:01.those guarantees, to have all of those options on the table. This is
:51:02. > :51:06.important, because you are arguing for an alliance. That is against
:51:07. > :51:11.hard Brexit at Westminster. Conservative or Labour or Liberal
:51:12. > :51:16.Democrat MPs say we might ally with the SNP and work together to oppose
:51:17. > :51:21.it, but we are not going to do it if it is just another SNP data for
:51:22. > :51:27.independence. But you seem to be accepting that strips you get some
:51:28. > :51:39.of the stuff you want, independence is off the table? -- should you get?
:51:40. > :51:43.Yellow I am not going to second-guess all of that. In terms
:51:44. > :51:46.of the discussions with other members of the Westminster
:51:47. > :51:51.Parliament, I've not yet had any conversations where there is an F
:51:52. > :51:54.and but from others. There are moderate forces within the Labour
:51:55. > :51:57.Party and even some moderate moderate forces within the Labour
:51:58. > :52:01.conservatives for whom being taken out of the single market is
:52:02. > :52:05.something so problematic that not only do we want to have properly
:52:06. > :52:10.scrutinised it can Westminster, we need answers from the government. If
:52:11. > :52:14.what they are proposing is so damaging and not something that the
:52:15. > :52:18.government had a mandate for, then the SNP will be opposing that. You
:52:19. > :52:24.want to work with others in Parliament against hard Brexit.
:52:25. > :52:28.There has also been a lot of talk about a broader progressive alliance
:52:29. > :52:35.against the Conservatives. What is your view of that? I didn't hear
:52:36. > :52:40.again. My apologies. There has been much talk in the last few days about
:52:41. > :52:45.a broader alliance against the Tories. A Progressive Alliance at
:52:46. > :52:48.Westminster. Is that something you are in favour with? And are you
:52:49. > :52:59.getting anywhere in trying to create it? Forgive me, you dropped out
:53:00. > :53:02.again. But I did hear you talk about a Progressive Alliance. I will do my
:53:03. > :53:06.best to interpret what the rest must have been. There are
:53:07. > :53:10.parliamentarians across the House of Commons who are very fearful of the
:53:11. > :53:16.impact of a hard Brexit. What it means is being taken out of the
:53:17. > :53:23.single market, the biggest one in the world, and have barriers to UK
:53:24. > :53:27.exporters to that key markets. This must be a concern for all of us. And
:53:28. > :53:32.we were being given an impression by many people in the leave camp in the
:53:33. > :53:36.European referendum that we would have full access to the single
:53:37. > :53:39.market and we would even be able to remain. And that is why I think it
:53:40. > :53:44.is really important for all of us who want to make sure that we do not
:53:45. > :53:48.go through an even more damaging exit process that needs to be the
:53:49. > :53:55.case. That we work together. I cannot predict how that is going to
:53:56. > :53:58.develop. In the weeks and months ahead will have different potential
:53:59. > :54:06.stages where we will be working together. We will be holding the
:54:07. > :54:09.government to compound. And I have asked the Prime Minister question
:54:10. > :54:14.she has not been able to answer. There will be a Brexit committee set
:54:15. > :54:19.up. All of these circumstances, we will work together. We have to
:54:20. > :54:22.protect Scotland's interests. And I am respectful of the rest of the UK
:54:23. > :54:29.who wish to do the best for their part of the world, too. Thank you.
:54:30. > :54:31.My apology for the quality of the sound line and that it didn't match
:54:32. > :54:33.the scenery. Thank you. It might not have been
:54:34. > :54:36.exactly an olive branch, but the First Minister's appeal
:54:37. > :54:38.to Labour, Liberals and even moderate Tories to join the SNP
:54:39. > :54:41.in a coalition against a hard Brexit may still have taken
:54:42. > :54:43.some by surprise. It wasn't that long ago though
:54:44. > :54:45.that the Shadow Scottish Secretary, Dave Anderson, and former
:54:46. > :54:47.Shadow Defence Secretary, Clive Lewis, were making
:54:48. > :54:51.overtures to the SNP. And there've been other rumblings
:54:52. > :54:54.in Westminster that some form of loose or progressive alliance
:54:55. > :54:56.may be the way forward. Joining us from London is Scotland's
:54:57. > :55:08.only Labour MP, Ian Murray. Let's stick to the question of
:55:09. > :55:16.Brexit. Angus Robinson and the SNP Let's stick to the question of
:55:17. > :55:22.proposed an alliance with you and whoever is prepared to join them. --
:55:23. > :55:27.Angus Robertson. To get a soft Brexit. Is that something you are
:55:28. > :55:31.keen on? The First Minister is slightly behind the curve. This is
:55:32. > :55:38.what we have been doing already. Angus Robertson's own Brexit spoke
:55:39. > :55:43.person is from the SNP. Myself and Anna Seabury all ask the same
:55:44. > :55:48.question to the Secretary of State, David Davis about page 74 of the
:55:49. > :55:52.Conservative manifesto saying yes to the single market. We already have
:55:53. > :55:56.that broad alliance in Westminster already against a hard Brexit. We
:55:57. > :56:02.will be pushing hard on that to make sure that is what we get.
:56:03. > :56:06.will be pushing hard on that to make Robertson, he said pretty clearly
:56:07. > :56:10.there that should the Scottish Government get what it wants,
:56:11. > :56:15.basically what you want, staying single market from its negotiations
:56:16. > :56:18.with UK Government, that's the SNP would have no reason to call another
:56:19. > :56:23.independence referendum. He was pretty clear on that. That is,
:56:24. > :56:27.presumably, something you would welcome. Yes, but 40 or so said was
:56:28. > :56:31.the Scottish Government set out their criteria on what they would
:56:32. > :56:35.want at these negotiations. I can guess it will put something in there
:56:36. > :56:41.that is undeliverable in order to keep independence on the table. --
:56:42. > :56:49.he also said. Scotland being in the EU, which I agree with, is an
:56:50. > :56:51.intelligent argument. We need to put the other referendum out of the
:56:52. > :56:54.question. Rule it out and work for the other referendum out of the
:56:55. > :56:58.the best possible solution for Brexit across the United Kingdom.
:56:59. > :57:02.And make sure that if Scotland is open for business, let's take away
:57:03. > :57:06.the uncertainty of a second independence referendum and move
:57:07. > :57:09.forward together to get the very best out of this bad situation. What
:57:10. > :57:14.about this idea that Angus Robertson was talking about about a broader
:57:15. > :57:20.progressive allies against the Tories. That doesn't seem to be very
:57:21. > :57:28.popular with Labour on Scotland. -- in Scotland. But it does seem to
:57:29. > :57:34.have supporters amongst Jeremy Corbyn's back people. There already
:57:35. > :57:37.is. We have always made clear that when there are issues we agree with
:57:38. > :57:43.other parties on, we will come together and vote with them. And
:57:44. > :57:47.make the argument in the House of Commons chamber parliament on in the
:57:48. > :57:51.wider country. Where we disagree with parties, whether it is on our
:57:52. > :57:55.own side or opposite, we will disagree with them. Jeremy Hunt
:57:56. > :58:02.Kezia Dugdale have been clear that we cannot do a former progressive
:58:03. > :58:12.Alliance, rather than make United Kingdom on Scotland better. So you
:58:13. > :58:17.would rule out an electoral pact with the SNP? Yes. The irony is that
:58:18. > :58:25.it helps the Conservative Party. They are able to play their own
:58:26. > :58:30.agenda. That is what happened in 2015. It is likely to happen again.
:58:31. > :58:39.If you look at the finance secretary and what he said that they will put
:58:40. > :58:42.a judge -- budget together. We want fundamental differences. You rule
:58:43. > :58:47.out an electoral alliance with the SNP. Would you rule out a government
:58:48. > :58:52.with them? After the next election, if other forces have a majority,
:58:53. > :58:56.would you rule out bringing the SNP into some sort of coalition? We have
:58:57. > :59:02.discussed this at great length on your show for a number of times. We
:59:03. > :59:05.are now talking about a General Election in 2020. All those issues
:59:06. > :59:07.that are completely irrelevant at this point. What we have been
:59:08. > :59:10.clearer than what we will this point. What we have been
:59:11. > :59:14.been clear on is that when political parties agree, we will work with
:59:15. > :59:18.them enthusiastically. Where we disagree, we will oppose them and
:59:19. > :59:22.make sure it is Labour values and what the Labour Party wants to do.
:59:23. > :59:27.One example is that we will be amending the Scottish budget to make
:59:28. > :59:30.sure that it can raise the resources in Scotland to invest in public
:59:31. > :59:35.services. The SNP are fighting that. They do not want to go forward with
:59:36. > :59:40.investing in public services. Therefore, they are only doing
:59:41. > :59:44.something that is marginally different of the Tories. We cannot
:59:45. > :59:49.work with the SNP on that basis. What is extremely relevant right now
:59:50. > :59:52.to the current electoral cycle is whether a Scottish MP should be
:59:53. > :00:00.Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland. Are you going...? It is a
:00:01. > :00:06.very simple answer. I have not been asked. And, therefore, I will
:00:07. > :00:10.continue to fight Scotland's corner from the backbenches. Out of the
:00:11. > :00:17.shackles of the Shadow Cabinet, I can be of the select committee. But
:00:18. > :00:22.if he asks you, will you rejoin? He has not. And I have been very clear
:00:23. > :00:30.to Jeremy that I would rejoin if he brought back the shadow cabinet
:00:31. > :00:33.elections. Are you saying that as a condition of rejoining? It has been
:00:34. > :00:40.good enough for people like Kia condition of rejoining? It has been
:00:41. > :00:45.Starmer. Jeremy Corbyn just won a victory. A second time in a year. If
:00:46. > :00:51.that is good enough for people like him, wires and a governor for you? I
:00:52. > :00:55.have been perfectly clear that I have backed him. We will all unite
:00:56. > :00:59.and make sure we have an effective opposition. It is a huge issue. --
:01:00. > :01:03.and make sure we have an effective why isn't it good enough for you? It
:01:04. > :01:07.was right that he recognised that and went back into the Shadow
:01:08. > :01:13.Cabinet. I have been clear that if he grabs the olive branch for the
:01:14. > :01:22.Labour Party, brings back Shadow Cabinet elections... He said -- you
:01:23. > :01:25.said he burned it. Therefore, we cannot have that conversation as I
:01:26. > :01:30.resigned. He is a principled cannot have that conversation as I
:01:31. > :01:36.politician. I have my own and I'm enjoying myself on the backbenches.
:01:37. > :01:42.I have been able to press the Prime Minister as Secretary of State. And
:01:43. > :01:46.this week I am trying to set up a cross-party group on the sectorial
:01:47. > :01:51.interests of Brexit. I can be just as effective. You said that you
:01:52. > :01:55.backed Jeremy Corbyn and since he was elected again. But, sorry,
:01:56. > :02:02.saying the EU will not consider joining his Shadow Cabinet, unless
:02:03. > :02:07.he implements elections, which he is clearly against, that is not
:02:08. > :02:12.supporting him. That is surely just petulantly refusing to recognise a
:02:13. > :02:18.huge vote for your party has just had? Not at all. We can be united as
:02:19. > :02:23.a party. We will continue to be. I will say nothing to undermine Jeremy
:02:24. > :02:27.Corbyn's leadership. Dave Anderson, you spoke to him, he is perfectly
:02:28. > :02:33.capable of being surgery Secretary of State for Scotland. I can be on
:02:34. > :02:39.the select committee. -- Shadow Secretary. I can ask loads of
:02:40. > :02:44.questions. I can push the government on what is a huge issue. I can do
:02:45. > :02:47.all that. I cannot do it if I'm sitting in the Shadow Cabinet. I
:02:48. > :02:51.will be restricted. What you have just said might be perfectly
:02:52. > :03:00.reasonable, where you any old Labour MP. You are not. You are only label
:03:01. > :03:05.MP -- Labour MP in Scotland. Supporters right across Scotland
:03:06. > :03:09.surely have the right to expect that the only Labour MP in Scotland will
:03:10. > :03:14.act as the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland? You are letting all of
:03:15. > :03:17.them down. Not just your own constituents. How possibly can I be
:03:18. > :03:24.letting anyone down when I haven't been asked to serve? You could
:03:25. > :03:28.offer? Yes, that you have just put conditions on it which Jeremy Corbyn
:03:29. > :03:33.cannot accept. There is a whole list of conditions. I do not think people
:03:34. > :03:39.in my constituency and across Scotland are worried about being in
:03:40. > :03:43.the Shadow Cabinet. They want politicians to be arguing the case
:03:44. > :03:50.for Scotland on issues like Brexit. Are you seriously saying...? Are you
:03:51. > :04:00.seriously saying it does not matter whether or not Scottish -- a
:04:01. > :04:06.Scottish MP is the Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland? No. I able to
:04:07. > :04:11.sit on the select committee which is doing great work under the
:04:12. > :04:19.leadership of peat wisher. I can set up cross-party groups. I could not
:04:20. > :04:24.do that if I was in the cabinet. We are making strong arguments and I am
:04:25. > :04:26.making sure of that. I am the only politician in Scotland that is
:04:27. > :04:36.currently arguing that of the moment. And the SNP with the
:04:37. > :04:45.incoherent argument that the EU is good and the UK is bad. Do you think
:04:46. > :04:47.Jeremy Corbyn can lead Labour into the next General Election? Do you
:04:48. > :04:54.Jeremy Corbyn can lead Labour into think he can win it? I'm sorry. I
:04:55. > :04:59.didn't catch the question. Well, everyone has the opportunity to win.
:05:00. > :05:03.I know he had the opportunity. Do you think you can win it? It is
:05:04. > :05:08.going to be difficult unless he has a policy platform that means he can
:05:09. > :05:15.give the country hope in the Prime Minister of this country. Is that a
:05:16. > :05:20.roundabout way of saying no? No. I don't think so. It is going to be
:05:21. > :05:27.difficult for him. The next election will be in 2020. Unless Theresa May
:05:28. > :05:31.brings forward something different. Three and a half years to lay out
:05:32. > :05:34.that vision. Deal with globalisation and make sure working people are
:05:35. > :05:39.looked after and progressing in the workplace. By making sure the next
:05:40. > :05:43.generation is progressing. It takes time to build up a policy platform
:05:44. > :05:44.that does that. We are in a good place of Brexit. You have seen the
:05:45. > :05:50.Labour Party use their entire day of place of Brexit. You have seen the
:05:51. > :05:54.opposition time to talk about it on Wednesday. We won the argument,
:05:55. > :06:00.because we did not have to push this to a vote. We have worked across the
:06:01. > :06:03.board to put forward those arguments. These are the things that
:06:04. > :06:07.are important to people. And these other things we will be working hard
:06:08. > :06:10.on to push in Parliament. That is what is important.
:06:11. > :06:14.It's time to look back at the events of the past week and see what's
:06:15. > :06:23.I'm joined now by the journalist Lynsey Bews and the SNP's former
:06:24. > :06:37.What did you make... I was slightly surprised that Angus Robertson was
:06:38. > :06:40.so open in saying if we got what we want, we wouldn't have a second
:06:41. > :06:45.independence referendum. Do you think it is more spin? I think he
:06:46. > :06:48.made a fit of an admission that actually, yes, the second
:06:49. > :06:53.independence referendum would really be taken off the table if the wishes
:06:54. > :06:57.of the Scottish Government are met. The trouble is, what the Scottish
:06:58. > :07:00.pigment is asking for is quite a long wish list, really. They are
:07:01. > :07:04.looking for remaining in the single market, they are looking for more
:07:05. > :07:09.powers for Scottish Parliament, control over immigration in
:07:10. > :07:13.Scotland, and the ability to make these international trade deals
:07:14. > :07:16.themselves. It is whether or not you can see the UK Government actually
:07:17. > :07:19.saying, OK, we will deliver that for you, and whether or not the rest of
:07:20. > :07:24.the EU agrees with that proposal. It you, and whether or not the rest of
:07:25. > :07:28.is a tricky one this because it is fungible in both directions because
:07:29. > :07:31.it will always be possible unless it is an absolutely hard exit, for
:07:32. > :07:35.Theresa May to say look, the SNP have been unreasonable, I did
:07:36. > :07:38.conceive this, I did listen, and on the other side it will be possible
:07:39. > :07:41.for the Scottish Government to say, they might have conceded this, but
:07:42. > :07:48.they didn't concede that, that, and that. Theresa May will never concede
:07:49. > :07:52.everything that was Scottish Government asked for. She only has
:07:53. > :07:56.to concede a bit for Nicola Sturgeon's opponents to say, come
:07:57. > :08:00.off it, this was all a ruse for a second referendum. She has conceded
:08:01. > :08:05.some. And if she doesn't constitute all, Nicola can say the opposite. My
:08:06. > :08:09.guess would be an independence referendum at some point in the
:08:10. > :08:19.future. When do you think they would have to hold that? I think Nicola
:08:20. > :08:22.Sturgeon herself said on this programme it would have to be... I
:08:23. > :08:28.might be wrong, but my recollection is it would have to be before the
:08:29. > :08:33.end of the formal negotiations which would be March 2019? You can say any
:08:34. > :08:39.time from March next year to March 20 19. Any time in that timescale.
:08:40. > :08:43.If you want a specific date, you are as well looking a figure out of the
:08:44. > :08:46.air. I don't think anyone knows, I don't think Nicola herself as
:08:47. > :08:52.probably decided yet. She won't until she says democracies which way
:08:53. > :08:55.the wind is blowing. Obviously, they would need the permission of the
:08:56. > :09:02.British government to have another referendum. Again, I think I'm right
:09:03. > :09:06.in saying that both Ruth Davidson and David Mandel has said on this
:09:07. > :09:08.programme over the past couple of months that while they didn't want
:09:09. > :09:12.another independence referendum, they thought the UK Government
:09:13. > :09:17.should not stand in the way of it. I don't know if you saw David on
:09:18. > :09:23.Andrew Neil earlier, he was much more equitable, wasn't he? It is a
:09:24. > :09:26.tricky one because I think, politically, it would be very
:09:27. > :09:30.difficult to deny a second independence referendum if the SNP
:09:31. > :09:34.can point to their manifesto and say, well, the circumstances have
:09:35. > :09:38.changed. The circumstances set out for a second referendum that the EU
:09:39. > :09:41.was part of that. Politically, it would be very difficult to say they
:09:42. > :09:45.wouldn't get one. The British governance could say, hang on, you
:09:46. > :09:51.are having a referendum before we have finalised a deal. We might
:09:52. > :09:58.allow you to have won after it is final, but it is not reasonable to
:09:59. > :10:03.have one before. That is where the timing becomes tricky. At what point
:10:04. > :10:07.in the two-year period do we have the amount of certainty to know
:10:08. > :10:11.exactly what the Brexit deal, which is going forward, is going to look
:10:12. > :10:15.like. All negotiations are not going to have been completed. I think
:10:16. > :10:18.Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP will probably want to have the second
:10:19. > :10:23.independence referendum within that two-year period probably towards the
:10:24. > :10:25.end of the two-year period if possible to try to take away some of
:10:26. > :10:32.the difficulties of Scotland's membership of the EU if the UK and
:10:33. > :10:36.Scotland as part of it has gone outside the EU. Everything is
:10:37. > :10:40.unclear. There seems to be a bandwagon growing, not just from the
:10:41. > :10:44.SNP, although they are part of it, in Parliament for MPs saying, hang
:10:45. > :10:50.on, we've got to have some sort of say in what kind of Brexit deal
:10:51. > :10:58.there is. So many people, especially south of the border, voted because
:10:59. > :11:02.of the immigration issue. Now, they also probably... Boris Johnson told
:11:03. > :11:07.them leaving the EU did not mean leaving the single market. Well, you
:11:08. > :11:10.can't have both. If you are in the single market, you have freedom of
:11:11. > :11:14.movement. You can't have one without the other. If we are in the single
:11:15. > :11:19.market, you have freedom of movement, which is the reason that
:11:20. > :11:26.many people voted Brexit. Again, going back to David Mandel, he can
:11:27. > :11:31.say Westminster will not allow another referendum... He doesn't say
:11:32. > :11:34.that. It was unlikely. He hinted very strongly that they would oppose
:11:35. > :11:42.it. I think it is politically unacceptable. This issue of MPs
:11:43. > :11:45.having a say, again, there have been various interviews this morning. The
:11:46. > :11:50.formulations are always, MPs will be involved, we've already had debates.
:11:51. > :11:54.That is not what people like Nick Clegg and Nicola Sturgeon said this
:11:55. > :11:59.morning in interview, she would agree with the demand that MPs be
:12:00. > :12:02.given SA on article 50, but she would presumably agree that she
:12:03. > :12:05.would be given a say on what kind of Brexit there would be. It is unclear
:12:06. > :12:11.that will ever happen. Rio it is all very well to have a debate in
:12:12. > :12:14.Parliament about what MPs think, but if there is no definitive say at the
:12:15. > :12:17.end of that for MPs, it really doesn't make a difference as to what
:12:18. > :12:22.the UK Government do. The triggering of Article 50, should we have a say?
:12:23. > :12:27.The Brexit deal at the end, should they have a say over that? It is
:12:28. > :12:31.more likely they will get a say of the Brexit deal at the end of it
:12:32. > :12:36.rather than the triggering of article 50, but it is unlikely they
:12:37. > :12:40.will get a say. Let's say there is a hard Brexit, and that is negotiated
:12:41. > :12:43.by the British government. If the British government then comes back
:12:44. > :12:49.to Parliament and says, right, you can vote on this, and Parliament, as
:12:50. > :12:56.is quite possible, voted against that, what does that mean? Are they
:12:57. > :13:00.saying go away for another two years and negotiate? Renegotiate, yes.
:13:01. > :13:03.Interestingly, when the Scottish MEPs were discussing what would
:13:04. > :13:07.happen in Europe regarding this, they said the MEPs would be asked to
:13:08. > :13:11.vote on it and it could be likely that they would reject the deal put
:13:12. > :13:15.forward to the European Parliament, which would mean that they would
:13:16. > :13:18.have to go away and look at new terms around a new deal, so maybe
:13:19. > :13:22.something like that would happen if the UK Parliament got a vote, but it
:13:23. > :13:27.looks unlikely that they will. If you are still advising them, this
:13:28. > :13:33.SNP idea of alliance in Parliament, would you go for that? Informally,
:13:34. > :13:37.yes. No formal alliances. I cannot imagine a circumstance where Labour
:13:38. > :13:43.would go into a formal alliance with the SNP. You mentioned earlier the
:13:44. > :13:48.possibility of the SNP joining Labour in a future UK Government. I
:13:49. > :13:50.cannot imagine that for a moment. Your ideas and Ian Murray's are very
:13:51. > :13:51.similar. I'll be back at the
:13:52. > :13:56.same time next week.