:00:40. > :00:41.Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
:00:42. > :00:43.Hard line remainers strike back at Brexit.
:00:44. > :00:46.Are they trying to overturn the result of June's referendum
:00:47. > :00:49.by forcing a second vote before we leave?
:00:50. > :00:52.Australia's man in London tells us that life outside the EU "can be
:00:53. > :00:56.pretty good" and that Brexit will "not be as hard as people say".
:00:57. > :00:59.Could leaving the EU free Britain to do more business
:01:00. > :01:05.It's been called "disgusting, dangerous and deadly"
:01:06. > :01:08.but how polluted is our air, how bad for our health,
:01:09. > :01:20.Also coming up: Alex Salmond tells of the things the
:01:21. > :01:21.Scottish Government could call a second independence referendum and
:01:22. > :01:28.win it. And with me in the Sunday Politics
:01:29. > :01:32.grotto, the Dasher, Dancer and Prancer of political
:01:33. > :01:35.punditry Iain Martin, They'll be delivering tweets
:01:36. > :01:43.throughout the programme. First this morning,
:01:44. > :01:49.some say they will fight for what they call a "soft Brexit",
:01:50. > :01:53.but now there's an attempt by those who campaigned for Britain to remain
:01:54. > :01:56.in the EU to allow the British people to change their minds -
:01:57. > :01:59.possibly with a second referendum - The Labour MEP Richard Corbett
:02:00. > :02:02.is revealed this morning to have tried to amend European
:02:03. > :02:04.Parliament resolutions. The original resolution called
:02:05. > :02:07.on the European Parliament to "respect the will
:02:08. > :02:10.of the majority of the citizens of the United Kingdom
:02:11. > :02:26.to leave the EU". He also proposed removing
:02:27. > :02:31.the wording "stress that this wish must be respected" and adding
:02:32. > :02:34."while taking account of the 48.1% The amendments were
:02:35. > :02:46.proposed in October, but were rejected by a vote
:02:47. > :02:49.in the Brussels Constitutional Affairs Committee
:02:50. > :02:51.earlier this month. The report will be voted
:02:52. > :02:53.on by all MEPs in February. Well, joining me now from Leeds
:02:54. > :03:03.is the Labour MEP who proposed Good morning. Thanks for joining us
:03:04. > :03:09.at short notice. Is your aim to try and reverse what happened on June
:03:10. > :03:13.23? My aim with those amendments was simply factual. It is rather odd
:03:14. > :03:18.that these amendments of two months ago are suddenly used paper
:03:19. > :03:23.headlines in three very different newspapers on the same day. It
:03:24. > :03:29.smacks of a sort of concerted effort to try and slapped down any notion
:03:30. > :03:34.that Britain might perhaps want to rethink its position on Brexit as
:03:35. > :03:39.the cost of Brexit emerges. You would like us to rethink the
:03:40. > :03:45.position even before the cost urges? I get lots of letters from people
:03:46. > :03:52.saying how one, this was an advisory referendum won by a narrow majority
:03:53. > :03:54.on the basis of a pack of lies and a questionable mandate. But if there
:03:55. > :03:58.is a mandate from this referendum, it is surely to secure a Brexit that
:03:59. > :04:03.works for Britain without sinking the economy. And if it transpires as
:04:04. > :04:06.we move forward, that this will be a very costly exercise, then there
:04:07. > :04:11.will be people who voted leave who said Hang on, this is not what I was
:04:12. > :04:16.told. I was told this would save money, we could put it in the NHS,
:04:17. > :04:30.but if it is going to cost us and our Monday leg, I
:04:31. > :04:34.would the right to reconsider. But your aim is not get a Brexit that
:04:35. > :04:37.would work for Britain, your aim is to stop it? If we got a Brexit that
:04:38. > :04:40.would work for Britain, that would respect the mandate. But if we
:04:41. > :04:43.cannot get that, if it is going to be a disaster, if it is going to
:04:44. > :04:46.cost people jobs and cost Britain money, it is something we might want
:04:47. > :04:50.to pause and rethink. The government said it is going to come forward
:04:51. > :04:57.with a plan. That is good. We need to know what options to go for as a
:04:58. > :05:01.country. Do we want to stay in the single market, the customs union,
:05:02. > :05:05.the various agencies? And options should be costed so we can all see
:05:06. > :05:12.how much they cost of Brexit will be. If you were simply going to try
:05:13. > :05:17.and make the resolution is more illegal, why did the constitutional
:05:18. > :05:25.committee vote them down? This is a report about future treaty
:05:26. > :05:31.amendments down the road for years to come. This was not the main focus
:05:32. > :05:37.of the report, it was a side reference, in which was put the idea
:05:38. > :05:48.for Association partnerships. Will you push for the idea before the
:05:49. > :05:53.full parliament? I must see what the text is. You said there is a
:05:54. > :05:59.widespread view in labour that if the Brexit view is bad we should not
:06:00. > :06:04.exclude everything, I take it you mean another referendum. When you
:06:05. > :06:10.were named down these amendments, was this just acting on your own
:06:11. > :06:16.initiative, or acting on behalf of the Labour Party? I am just be
:06:17. > :06:21.humble lame-duck MEP in the European Parliament. It makes sense from any
:06:22. > :06:25.point of view that if the course of action you have embarked on turns
:06:26. > :06:30.out to be much more costly and disastrous than you had anticipated,
:06:31. > :06:34.that you might want the chance to think again. You might come to the
:06:35. > :06:40.same conclusion, of course, but you might think, wait a minute, let's
:06:41. > :06:44.have a look at this. But let's be clear, even though you are deputy
:06:45. > :06:52.leader of Labour in the European Parliament, you're acting alone and
:06:53. > :06:56.not as Labour Party policy? I am acting in the constitutional affairs
:06:57. > :07:00.committee. All I am doing is stating things which are common sense. If as
:07:01. > :07:04.we move forward then this turns out to be a disaster, we need to look
:07:05. > :07:11.very carefully at where we are going. But if a deal is done under
:07:12. > :07:15.Article 50, and we get to see the shape of that deal by the end of
:07:16. > :07:20.2019 under the two-year timetable, in your words, we won't know if it
:07:21. > :07:24.is a disaster or not until it is implemented. We won't be able to
:07:25. > :07:33.tell until we see the results about whether it is good or bad, surely?
:07:34. > :07:38.We might well be able to, because that has to take account of the
:07:39. > :07:41.future framework of relationships with the European Union, to quote
:07:42. > :07:46.the article of the treaty. That means we should have some idea about
:07:47. > :07:49.what that will be like. Will we be outside the customs union, for
:07:50. > :07:52.instance, which will be very damaging for our economy? Or will we
:07:53. > :07:58.have to stay inside and follow the rules without having a say on them.
:07:59. > :08:02.We won't know until we leave the customs union. You think it will be
:08:03. > :08:06.damaging, others think it will give us the opportunity to do massive
:08:07. > :08:11.trade deals. My case this morning is not what is right or wrong, we will
:08:12. > :08:15.not know until we have seen the results. We will know a heck of a
:08:16. > :08:18.lot more than we do now when we see that Article 50 divorce agreement.
:08:19. > :08:22.We will know the terms of the divorce, we will know how much we
:08:23. > :08:27.still have to pay into the EU budget for legacy costs. We will know
:08:28. > :08:31.whether we will be in the single market customs union or not. We will
:08:32. > :08:36.know about the agencies. We will know a lot of things. If the deal on
:08:37. > :08:40.the table looks as if it will be damaging to Britain, then Parliament
:08:41. > :08:44.will be in its rights to say, wait a minute, not this deal. And then you
:08:45. > :08:49.either renegotiate or you reconsider the whole issue of Brexit or you
:08:50. > :08:52.find another solution. We need to leave it there but thank you for
:08:53. > :09:01.joining us. Iain Martin, how serious is the
:09:02. > :09:06.attempt to in effect an wind what happened on June 23? I think it is
:09:07. > :09:10.pretty serious and that interview illustrates very well the most
:09:11. > :09:14.damaging impact of the approach taken by a lot of Remainers, which
:09:15. > :09:20.is essentially to say with one breath, we of course accept the
:09:21. > :09:23.result, but with every action subsequent to that to try and
:09:24. > :09:27.undermine the result or try and are sure that the deal is as bad as
:09:28. > :09:32.possible. I think what needed to happen and hasn't happened after
:09:33. > :09:37.June 23 is you have the extremists on both sides and you have in the
:09:38. > :09:41.middle probably 70% of public opinion, moderate leaders, moderate
:09:42. > :09:52.Remainers should be working together to try and get British bespoke deal.
:09:53. > :09:56.But moderate Leavers will not take moderate Remainers seriously if this
:09:57. > :10:06.is the approach taken at every single turn to try and rerun the
:10:07. > :10:10.referendum. He did not say whether it was Labour policy? That was a
:10:11. > :10:14.question which was ducked. I do not think it is Labour Party policy. I
:10:15. > :10:20.think most people are in a morass in the middle. I think the screaming
:10:21. > :10:24.that happens when anybody dares to question or suggest that you might
:10:25. > :10:28.ever want to think again about these things, I disagree with him about
:10:29. > :10:33.having another referendum but if he wants to campaign for that it is his
:10:34. > :10:37.democratic right to do so. If you can convince enough people it is a
:10:38. > :10:42.good idea then he has succeeded. But the idea that we would do a deal and
:10:43. > :10:47.then realise this is a really bad deal, let's not proceed, we will not
:10:48. > :10:53.really know that until the deal is implemented. What our access is to
:10:54. > :10:57.the single market, whether or not we are in or out of the customs union
:10:58. > :11:01.which we will talk about in a minute, what immigration policy we
:11:02. > :11:04.will have, whether these are going to be good things bad things, surely
:11:05. > :11:09.you have got to wait for four, five, to be good things bad things, surely
:11:10. > :11:13.six years to see if it has worked or not? Yes, and by which stage
:11:14. > :11:17.Parliament will have voted on it and there will be no going back from it,
:11:18. > :11:22.or maybe there will. We are talking now about the first three months of
:11:23. > :11:30.2019. That is absolutely the moment when Parliament agrees with Theresa
:11:31. > :11:40.May or not. One arch remain I spoke to, and arch Remainiac, he said that
:11:41. > :11:49.Theresa May will bring this to Parliament in 2019 and could say I
:11:50. > :11:54.recommend that we reject it. What is he on or she? Some strong chemical
:11:55. > :12:00.drugs! The point is that all manner of things could happen. I don't
:12:01. > :12:06.think any of us take it seriously for now but the future is a very
:12:07. > :12:10.long way away. Earlier, the trade Secretary Liam Fox was asked if we
:12:11. > :12:13.would stay in the customs union after Brexit.
:12:14. > :12:19.There would be limitations on what we would do in terms of tariff
:12:20. > :12:25.setting which could limit the deals we would do, but we want to look at
:12:26. > :12:28.all the different deals. There is hard Brexit and soft Brexit as if it
:12:29. > :12:33.is a boiled egg we are talking about. Turkey is in part of the
:12:34. > :12:41.customs union but not other parts. What we need to do is look at the
:12:42. > :12:45.cost. This is what I picked up. The government knows it cannot remain a
:12:46. > :12:49.member of the single market in these negotiations, because that would
:12:50. > :12:53.make us subject to free movement and the European Court. The customs
:12:54. > :12:58.union and the Prime Minister 's office doesn't seem to be quite as
:12:59. > :13:01.binary, that you can be a little bit in and a little bit out, but I would
:13:02. > :13:06.suggest that overall Liam Fox knows to do all the trade deals we want to
:13:07. > :13:10.do we basically have to be out. But what he also seems to know is that
:13:11. > :13:16.is a minority view in Cabinet. He said he was not going to give his
:13:17. > :13:25.opinion publicly. There is still an argument going on about it in
:13:26. > :13:28.Cabinet. When David Liddington struggled against Emily Thornbury
:13:29. > :13:31.PMQs, he did not know about the customs union. What is apparent is
:13:32. > :13:38.Theresa May has not told him what to think about that. If we stay in the
:13:39. > :13:45.customs union we cannot do our own free trade deals. We are behind the
:13:46. > :13:50.customs union, the tariff barriers set by Europe? Not quite. Turkey is
:13:51. > :13:55.proof of the pudding. There are limited exemptions but they can do
:13:56. > :14:03.free trade with their neighbours. Not on goods. They are doing a trade
:14:04. > :14:06.deal with Pakistan at the moment, it relies on foreign trade investment
:14:07. > :14:11.but Europe negotiates on turkey's behalf on the major free-trade
:14:12. > :14:15.deals. This is absolutely why the customs union will be the fault line
:14:16. > :14:19.for the deal we are trying to achieve. Interestingly, I thought
:14:20. > :14:23.Liam Fox suggested during that interview that he was prepared to
:14:24. > :14:29.suck up whatever it was. I think he was saying there is still an
:14:30. > :14:37.argument and he intends to win it. He wants to leave it because he
:14:38. > :14:41.wants to do these free-trade deals. There is an argument in the cabinet
:14:42. > :14:46.about precisely that. The other thing to consider is in this country
:14:47. > :14:50.we have tended to focus too much on the British angle in negotiations,
:14:51. > :14:53.but I think the negotiations are going to be very difficult. You look
:14:54. > :14:57.at the state of the EU at the moment, you look at what is
:14:58. > :15:04.happening in Italy, France, Germany, look at the 27. It is possible I
:15:05. > :15:09.think that Britain could design a bespoke sensible deal but then it
:15:10. > :15:16.becomes very difficult to agree which is why I ultimately think we
:15:17. > :15:17.are heading for a harder Brexit. It will be about developing in this
:15:18. > :15:22.country. So, we've had a warning this week
:15:23. > :15:25.that it could take ten years to do a trade deal
:15:26. > :15:27.with the EU after Brexit. But could opportunities to expand
:15:28. > :15:29.trade lie elsewhere? Australia was one of the first
:15:30. > :15:31.countries to indicate its willingness to do a deal
:15:32. > :15:34.with the UK and now its High Commissioner in London has told
:15:35. > :15:37.us that life outside the EU He made this exclusive film
:15:38. > :15:53.for the Sunday Politics. My father was the Australian High
:15:54. > :15:55.Commissioner in the early 70s when the UK joined
:15:56. > :15:57.the European Union, Now I'm in the job,
:15:58. > :16:06.the UK is leaving. Australia supported
:16:07. > :16:07.Britain remaining a member of the European Union,
:16:08. > :16:11.but we respect the decision that Now that the decision has been made,
:16:12. > :16:16.we hope that Britain will get on with the process
:16:17. > :16:20.of negotiating their exit from the European Union and make
:16:21. > :16:24.the most of the opportunities that Following the referendum decision,
:16:25. > :16:30.Australia approached the British Government
:16:31. > :16:33.with a proposal. We offered, when the time was right,
:16:34. > :16:36.to negotiate a free trade agreement. The British and Australian
:16:37. > :16:42.governments have already established a working group to explore a future,
:16:43. > :16:45.ambitious trade agreement once A free trade agreement will provide
:16:46. > :16:57.great opportunities for consumers Australian consumers could purchase
:16:58. > :17:02.British-made cars for less We would give British
:17:03. > :17:08.households access to cheaper, Our summer is during your winter,
:17:09. > :17:14.so Australia could provide British households with fresh produce
:17:15. > :17:17.when the equivalent British or Australian households would have
:17:18. > :17:24.access to British products Free-trade agreements
:17:25. > :17:37.are also about investment. The UK is the second-largest source
:17:38. > :17:41.of foreign investment in Australia. By the way, Australia also invests
:17:42. > :17:48.over ?200 billion in the UK, so a free trade agreement
:17:49. > :17:50.would stimulate investment, But, by the way, free-trade
:17:51. > :17:56.agreements are not just about trade and investment,
:17:57. > :18:00.they are also about geopolitics. Countries with good trade relations
:18:01. > :18:03.often work more closely together in other fields including security,
:18:04. > :18:07.the spread of democracy We may have preferred
:18:08. > :18:21.the UKto remain in the EU, We may have preferred the UK
:18:22. > :18:24.to remain in the EU, but life outside as we know can
:18:25. > :18:26.be pretty good. We have negotiated eight free-trade
:18:27. > :18:29.agreements over the last 12 years, including a free-trade agreement
:18:30. > :18:30.with the United States This is one of the reasons why
:18:31. > :18:42.the Australian economy has continued to grow over the last 25 years
:18:43. > :18:45.and we, of course, are not Australia welcomes Theresa May's
:18:46. > :18:56.vision for the UK to become a global We are willing to help
:18:57. > :19:25.in any way we can. Welcome to the programme. The
:19:26. > :19:29.Australian government says it wants to negotiate an important trade deal
:19:30. > :19:35.with the UK as efficiently and promptly as possible when Brexit is
:19:36. > :19:40.complete. How prompt is prompt? There are legal issues obviously.
:19:41. > :19:46.The UK, for as long as it remains in the EU, cannot negotiate individual
:19:47. > :19:50.trade deals. Once it leaves it can. We will negotiate a agreement with
:19:51. > :19:56.the UK when the time is right, by which we mean we can do preliminary
:19:57. > :20:01.examination. Are you talking now about the parameters? We are talking
:20:02. > :20:05.already, we have set up a joint working group with the British
:20:06. > :20:08.Government and we are scoping the issue to try to understand what
:20:09. > :20:14.questions will arise in any negotiation. But we cannot have
:20:15. > :20:21.formally a negotiation. Until the country is out. Why is there no
:20:22. > :20:24.free-trade deal between Australia and the European Union? It is a long
:20:25. > :20:31.and tortuous story. Give me the headline. Basically Australian
:20:32. > :20:37.agriculture is either banned or hugely restricted in terms of its
:20:38. > :20:40.access to the European Union. So we see the European Union, Australia's,
:20:41. > :20:46.is a pretty protectionist sort of organisation. Now we are doing a
:20:47. > :20:50.scoping study on a free-trade agreement with the European Union
:20:51. > :20:55.and we hope that next year we can enter into negotiations with them.
:20:56. > :21:00.But we have no illusions this would be a very difficult negotiation, but
:21:01. > :21:06.one we are giving priority to. Is there not a danger that when Britain
:21:07. > :21:10.leaves the EU the EU will become more protectionist? This country has
:21:11. > :21:15.always been the most powerful voice for free trade. I hope that does not
:21:16. > :21:20.happen, but the reason why we wanted Britain to remain in the European
:21:21. > :21:26.Union is because it brought to the table the whole free-trade mentality
:21:27. > :21:29.which has been an historic part of Britain's approach to international
:21:30. > :21:34.relations. Without the UK in the European Union you will lose that.
:21:35. > :21:38.It is a very loud voice in the European Union and you will lose
:21:39. > :21:44.that voice and that will be a disadvantage. The figure that jumped
:21:45. > :21:47.out of me in the film is it to you only 15 months to negotiate a
:21:48. > :21:52.free-trade deal with the United States. Yes, the thing is it is
:21:53. > :21:58.about political will. A free-trade agreement will be no problem unless
:21:59. > :22:03.you want to protect particular sectors of your economy. In that
:22:04. > :22:07.case there was one sector the Americans insisted on protecting and
:22:08. > :22:11.that was their sugar industry. In the end after 15 months of
:22:12. > :22:17.negotiation two relatively free trading countries have fixed up
:22:18. > :22:21.nearly everything. But we had to ask would be go ahead with this
:22:22. > :22:26.free-trade agreement without sugar west we decided to do that. Other
:22:27. > :22:31.than that it was relatively easy to negotiate because we are both
:22:32. > :22:34.free-trade countries. With the UK you cannot be sure, but I do not
:22:35. > :22:40.think a free-trade agreement would take very long to negotiate with the
:22:41. > :22:44.UK because the UK would not want to put a lot of obstacles in the way to
:22:45. > :22:49.Australia. Not to give away our hand, we would not want to put a lot
:22:50. > :22:55.of obstacles in the way of British exports. The trend in recent years
:22:56. > :23:00.is to do big, regional trade deals, but President-elect Donald Trump has
:23:01. > :23:05.made clear the Pacific trade deal is dead. The transatlantic trade deal
:23:06. > :23:08.is almost dead as well. The American election put a nail in the coffin
:23:09. > :23:14.and the French elections could put another nail in the coffin. Are we
:23:15. > :23:17.returning to a world of lateral trade deals, country with country
:23:18. > :23:25.rather than regional blocs? Not necessarily. In the Asia Pacific we
:23:26. > :23:28.will look at multilateral trade arrangements and even if the
:23:29. > :23:32.transpacific partnership is not ratified by the Americans, we have
:23:33. > :23:38.other options are there. However, our approach has been the ultimate
:23:39. > :23:43.would be free-trade throughout the world which is proving hard to
:23:44. > :23:46.achieve. Secondly, if we can get a lot of countries engaged in a
:23:47. > :23:53.free-trade negotiation, that is pretty good if possible. But it is
:23:54. > :23:58.more difficult. But we do bilateral trade agreements. We have one with
:23:59. > :24:03.China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, and the list goes on, and
:24:04. > :24:11.they have been hugely beneficial to Australia. You have been dealing
:24:12. > :24:14.with the EU free deal, what lessons are there? How quickly do you think
:24:15. > :24:21.Britain could do a free-trade deal with the EU if we leave? Well, there
:24:22. > :24:25.is a completely different concept involved in the case of Britain and
:24:26. > :24:30.the EU and that is at the moment there are no restrictions on trade.
:24:31. > :24:35.So you and the EU would be talking about whether you will direct
:24:36. > :24:40.barriers to trade. We are outsiders and we do not get too much involved
:24:41. > :24:46.in this debate except to say we do not want to see the global trade
:24:47. > :24:50.system disrupted by the direction of tariff barriers between the United
:24:51. > :24:56.Kingdom, the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the European
:24:57. > :25:00.Union. Our expectation is not just the British but the Europeans will
:25:01. > :25:05.try to make the transition to Brexit as smooth as possible particularly
:25:06. > :25:10.commercially. Say yes or no if you can. If Britain and Australia make a
:25:11. > :25:13.free-trade agreement, would that include free movement of the
:25:14. > :25:20.Australian and the British people? We will probably stick with our
:25:21. > :25:24.present non-discriminatory system. Australia does not discriminate
:25:25. > :25:28.against any country. The European Union's free movement means you
:25:29. > :25:33.discriminate against non-Europeans. Probably not.
:25:34. > :25:36.It could lead to a ban on diesel cars, prevent the building
:25:37. > :25:38.of a third runway at Heathrow, and will certainly make it
:25:39. > :25:40.more expensive to drive in our towns and cities.
:25:41. > :25:43.Air pollution has been called the "public health crisis
:25:44. > :25:45.of a generation" - but just how serious is the problem?
:25:46. > :25:59.40,000 early deaths result from air pollution every year in the UK.
:26:00. > :26:05.Almost 10,000 Londoners each year die prematurely.
:26:06. > :26:11.It seems at times we can get caught up in alarming assertions
:26:12. > :26:14.about air pollution, that this is a public health
:26:15. > :26:18.emergency, that it is a silent killer, coming from politicians,
:26:19. > :26:25.But how bad is air quality in Britain really?
:26:26. > :26:29.Tony Frew is a professor in respiratory medicine and works
:26:30. > :26:32.at Brighton's Royal Sussex County Hospital.
:26:33. > :26:34.He has been looking into the recent claims
:26:35. > :26:40.It's a problem and it affects people's health.
:26:41. > :26:42.But when people start talking about the numbers
:26:43. > :26:44.of deaths here, I think they are misusing the statistics.
:26:45. > :26:49.There have been tremendous improvements in air quality
:26:50. > :26:54.There is a lot less pollution than there used to be
:26:55. > :26:58.and none of that is coming through in the public
:26:59. > :27:02.So what does Professor Frew make of the claim that alarming levels
:27:03. > :27:05.of toxicity in the air in the UK causes 40,000 deaths each year?
:27:06. > :27:07.It is not 40,000 people who should have air pollution
:27:08. > :27:10.on their death certificate, or 40,000 people who
:27:11. > :27:15.It's a lot of people who had a little bit of life shortening
:27:16. > :27:21.To examine these figures further we travelled to Cambridge to visit
:27:22. > :27:26.I asked him about the data on which these claims
:27:27. > :27:31.They come from a study on how mortality rates in US cities
:27:32. > :27:38.First of all, it is important to realise that that 40,000 figure
:27:39. > :27:43.29,000, which are due to fine particles, and another 11,000
:27:44. > :27:52.I will just talk about this group for a start.
:27:53. > :27:55.These are what are known as attributable deaths.
:27:56. > :28:00.Known as virtual deaths, they come from a complex statistical model.
:28:01. > :28:03.Quite remarkably it all comes from just one number and this
:28:04. > :28:07.was based on a study of US cities and they found out that
:28:08. > :28:11.by monitoring these cities over decades that the cities which had
:28:12. > :28:17.a higher level of pollution had a higher mortality rate.
:28:18. > :28:23.They estimated that there was a 6% increased risk of dying
:28:24. > :28:28.each year for each small increase in pollution.
:28:29. > :28:31.So this is quite a big figure, but it is important to realise
:28:32. > :28:34.it is only a best estimate and the committee that advises
:28:35. > :28:40.the government says that this figure could be between 1% and 12%.
:28:41. > :28:43.So this 6% figure is used to work out the 29,000
:28:44. > :28:49.Yes, through a rather complex statistical model.
:28:50. > :28:53.And a similar analysis gives rise to the 11,000 attributable deaths
:28:54. > :29:01.How much should we invest in cycling?
:29:02. > :29:03.Should we build a third runway at Heathrow?
:29:04. > :29:07.We need reliable statistics to answer those questions,
:29:08. > :29:11.but can we trust the way data is being used by campaigners?
:29:12. > :29:16.I think there are people who have such a passion for the environment
:29:17. > :29:18.and for air pollution that they don't really
:29:19. > :29:24.see it as a problem if they are deceiving the public.
:29:25. > :29:27.Greenpeace have been running a campaign claiming that breathing
:29:28. > :29:29.London's air is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day.
:29:30. > :29:35.If you smoke 15 cigarettes a day through your adult life,
:29:36. > :29:37.that will definitely take ten years off your life expectancy.
:29:38. > :29:40.If you are poor and you are in social class five,
:29:41. > :29:42.compared to social class one, that would take seven
:29:43. > :29:47.If you are poor and you smoke, that will take 17 years off your life.
:29:48. > :29:50.Now, we are talking about possibly, if we could get rid of all
:29:51. > :29:53.of the cars in London and all of the road transport,
:29:54. > :29:56.we could make a difference of two micrograms per metre squared in air
:29:57. > :30:01.pollution which might save you 30 days of your life.
:30:02. > :30:04.There is no doubt that air pollution is bad for you,
:30:05. > :30:07.but if we exaggerate the scale of the problem and the impact
:30:08. > :30:10.on our health, are we at risk of undermining the case for making
:30:11. > :30:20.And we are joined now by the Executive Director
:30:21. > :30:39.You have called pollution and national crisis and a health
:30:40. > :30:43.emergency. Around the UK are levels increasing or falling? They are
:30:44. > :30:53.remaining fairly static in London. Nationally? If you look at the
:30:54. > :30:58.studies on where air pollution is measured, in 42 cities around the
:30:59. > :31:02.UK, 38 cities were found to be breaking the legal limit on air
:31:03. > :31:07.pollution so basically all of the cities were breaking the limit so if
:31:08. > :31:11.you think eight out of ten people live in cities, obviously, this is
:31:12. > :31:15.impacting a lot of people around the UK. We have looked at in missions of
:31:16. > :31:25.solvent dioxide, they have fallen and since 1970, nitrogen dioxide is
:31:26. > :31:31.down 69%. Let me show you a chart. There are the nitrogen oxides which
:31:32. > :31:36.we have all been worried about. That chart shows a substantial fall from
:31:37. > :31:41.the 1970s, and then a really steep fall from the 1980s. That is
:31:42. > :31:48.something which is getting better. You have to look at it in the round.
:31:49. > :31:55.If you look at particulates, and if you look at today's understanding of
:31:56. > :32:04.the health impact. Let's look at particulates. We have been really
:32:05. > :32:10.worried about what they have been doing to our abilities to breathe
:32:11. > :32:14.good air, again, you see substantial improvement. Indeed, we are not far
:32:15. > :32:23.from the Gothenberg level which is a very high standard. What you see is
:32:24. > :32:28.it is pretty flat. I see it coming down quite substantially. Over the
:32:29. > :32:32.last decade it is pretty flat. If you look at the World Health
:32:33. > :32:37.Organisation guidelines, actually, these are at serious levels and they
:32:38. > :32:40.need to come down. We know the impact, particularly on children, if
:32:41. > :32:44.you look at what is happening to children and children's lungs, if
:32:45. > :32:50.you look at the impact of asthma and other impacts on children in cities
:32:51. > :32:53.and in schools next to main roads where pollution levels are very
:32:54. > :32:57.high, the impact of very serious. You have many doctors, professors
:32:58. > :33:03.and many studies by London University showing this to be true.
:33:04. > :33:08.The thing is, we do not want pollution. If we can get rid of
:33:09. > :33:13.pollution, let's do it. And also we also have to get rid of CO2 which is
:33:14. > :33:17.causing climate change. We are talking air pollution at the moment.
:33:18. > :33:21.The point is there is not still more to do, it is clear there is and
:33:22. > :33:26.there is no question about that, my question is you seem to deny that we
:33:27. > :33:31.have made any kind of progress and that you also say that air pollution
:33:32. > :33:38.causes 40,000 deaths a year in the UK, that is not true. The figure is
:33:39. > :33:47.40,000 premature deaths is what has been talked about by medical staff.
:33:48. > :33:52.Your website said courses. It causes premature deaths. What we are
:33:53. > :33:57.talking about here is can we solve the problem of air pollution? If air
:33:58. > :34:01.pollution is mainly being caused by diesel vehicles then we need to
:34:02. > :34:05.phase out diesel vehicles. If there are alternatives and clean Turner
:34:06. > :34:08.tips which will give better quality of air, better quality of life and
:34:09. > :34:12.clean up our cities, then why don't we take the chance to do it? You had
:34:13. > :34:20.the Australian High Commissioner on this programme earlier. He said to
:34:21. > :34:26.me earlier, why is your government supporting diesel? That is the most
:34:27. > :34:32.polluting form of transport. That may well be right but I am looking
:34:33. > :34:37.at Greenpeace's claims. You claim it causes 40,000 deaths, it is a figure
:34:38. > :34:43.which regularly appears. Let me quote the committee on the medical
:34:44. > :34:52.effects of air pollutants, it says this calculation, 40,000 which is
:34:53. > :34:55.everywhere in Greenpeace literature, is not an estimate of the number of
:34:56. > :34:59.people whose untimely death is caused entirely by air pollution,
:35:00. > :35:04.but a way of representing the effect across the whole population of air
:35:05. > :35:09.pollution when considered as a contributory factor to many more
:35:10. > :35:19.individual deaths. It is 40,000 premature deaths. It could be
:35:20. > :35:22.premature by a couple of days. It could me by a year. -- it could be
:35:23. > :35:24.by a year. It could also be giving children asthma and breathing
:35:25. > :35:34.difficulties. We are talking about deaths. It could also cause stroke
:35:35. > :35:42.and heart diseases. Medical experts say we need to deal with this. Do
:35:43. > :35:50.you believe air pollution causes 40,000 deaths a year. I have defined
:35:51. > :36:00.that. You accept it does not? It leads to 40,000 premature deaths.
:36:01. > :36:04.But 40,000 people are not killed. You say air pollution causes 40,000
:36:05. > :36:09.deaths each year on your website. I have just explained what I mean by
:36:10. > :36:13.that in terms of premature deaths. The question is, are we going to do
:36:14. > :36:18.something about that? Air pollution is a serious problem. It is mainly
:36:19. > :36:22.caused by diesel. If we phased diesel out it will solve the problem
:36:23. > :36:28.of air pollution and deal with the wider problem of climate change. I
:36:29. > :36:35.am not talking about climate change this morning. Let's link to another
:36:36. > :36:40.claim... Do you want to live in a clean city? Do you want to breathe
:36:41. > :36:46.clean air? Yes, don't generalise. Let's stick to your claims. You have
:36:47. > :36:50.also said living in London on your life is equivalent to smoking 50
:36:51. > :36:57.cigarettes a day. That is not true either. What I would say is if you
:36:58. > :37:00.look at passive smoking, it is the equivalent of I don't know what the
:37:01. > :37:03.actual figure is, I can't remember offhand, but it is the equivalent
:37:04. > :37:09.effect of about ten cigarettes being smoked passively. The question is in
:37:10. > :37:15.terms of, you are just throwing me out all of these things... I am
:37:16. > :37:19.throwing things that Greenpeace have claimed. Greenpeace have claimed
:37:20. > :37:24.that living in London is equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day and
:37:25. > :37:27.that takes ten years off your life. Professor Froome made it clear to us
:37:28. > :37:31.that living in London your whole life with levels of pollution does
:37:32. > :37:36.take time off your life but it takes nine months of your life. Nine
:37:37. > :37:40.months is still too much, I understand that, but it is not ten
:37:41. > :37:44.years and that is what you claim. I would suggest you realise that is a
:37:45. > :37:49.piece of propaganda because you claim on the website, you have taken
:37:50. > :37:52.it down. I agree it has been corrected and I agree with what the
:37:53. > :37:58.professor said that maybe it takes up to a year off your life, but the
:37:59. > :38:01.thing is, there are much more wider issues as well, in terms of the
:38:02. > :38:08.impact on air pollution, and in terms of the impact on young
:38:09. > :38:13.children. We can argue about the facts... But these are your claims,
:38:14. > :38:17.this is why I am hitting it to you. It does not get away from the
:38:18. > :38:22.underlying issue that air pollution is a serious problem. We are not
:38:23. > :38:26.arguing for a moment that it is not. Do you think the way you exaggerate
:38:27. > :38:31.things, put false claims, in the end, for of course we all agree
:38:32. > :38:37.with, getting the best air we can, you undermine your credibility? I
:38:38. > :38:40.absolutely do not support false claims and if mistakes have been
:38:41. > :38:45.made then mistakes have been made and they will be corrected. I think
:38:46. > :38:49.the key issue is how we are going to deal with air pollution. Clearly,
:38:50. > :38:56.diesel is the biggest problem and we need to work out a way how we can
:38:57. > :39:00.get away from diesel as quickly and fast as possible. Comeback and see
:39:01. > :39:02.us in the New Year and we will discuss diesel. Thank you.
:39:03. > :39:08.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:39:09. > :39:10.Good morning, and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
:39:11. > :39:15.The Scottish Government prepares to reveal its Brexit plans.
:39:16. > :39:18.Alex Salmond tells us they could call and win another
:39:19. > :39:29.And 2016 - a historic year in Scottish Politics, from A to Z.
:39:30. > :39:32.Nearly six months on from the vote to leave the European Union,
:39:33. > :39:35.the Scottish Government is about to reveal its Brexit plans.
:39:36. > :39:38.On Tuesday, it's widely reported that the proposals will be based
:39:39. > :39:41.on the so-called Norway Model - where Scotland would remain
:39:42. > :39:45.in the European Free Trade area and a member of the single market.
:39:46. > :39:48.But how realistic is that, and where does it fit with the UK
:39:49. > :40:11.And it can be lonely at the top. Theresa May was in Brussels for a
:40:12. > :40:17.European summit this week, the EU's 27 of these leaders met to discuss
:40:18. > :40:24.Brexit without the PM. Downing said Brexit without the PM. Downing said
:40:25. > :40:30.-- Downing Street said it reinforced the view that Brexit means Brexit.
:40:31. > :40:35.Mrs May was joined by Ivan Rogers. He had to slip out of the car while
:40:36. > :40:40.she created eyed devotion, after it was reported he thought a post
:40:41. > :40:50.Brexit trade deal would take ten years. And many are awaiting the
:40:51. > :40:55.First Minister of Scotland's Brexit plan to keep Scotland in a single
:40:56. > :40:58.market. But Nicola Sturgeon's opponents say it is a nonstarter
:40:59. > :41:03.because it would trap the nation in a deal over which it would have no
:41:04. > :41:04.influence. So what does all that mean? Continued uncertainty over the
:41:05. > :41:07.future of the UK. Just before we came
:41:08. > :41:09.on air I spoke to the SNP Foreign Affairs Spokesperson,
:41:10. > :41:19.Alex Salmond. First of all, there is much talk of
:41:20. > :41:22.people in the SNP, you and Nicola Sturgeon, about how the British
:41:23. > :41:26.catchment is obliged to consider your proposals that you are about to
:41:27. > :41:30.publish. What does that mean? Are you saying they have two keep either
:41:31. > :41:37.Britain or Scotland in the single market all that is a breach of their
:41:38. > :41:41.operation? That is certainly the First Minister's view, and her
:41:42. > :41:46.proposal. And things looked like they are turning in that direction.
:41:47. > :41:52.The opinion poll this morning for the first time showed people across
:41:53. > :42:01.the UK giving priority to the single market. In Scotland it is 2-1 to
:42:02. > :42:06.that. So there is a position to try to force that on the Government. So
:42:07. > :42:10.whatever happens in terms of the UK, the First Minister wants to be clear
:42:11. > :42:17.how Scotland cameras aim remain within the single market. I'm
:42:18. > :42:21.curious about all the talk of another referendum on independence.
:42:22. > :42:26.If the Scottish Government doesn't get some sort of deal, that is. Is
:42:27. > :42:29.that the red Line for you? That Scotland would one way or another
:42:30. > :42:34.have to be in the single market all they would be another referendum?
:42:35. > :42:40.What matters is what Nicola Sturgeon's red lines are. And she
:42:41. > :42:51.has enunciated a simple one, two, three. One, keep Scotland within the
:42:52. > :42:58.second -- single market. And if the UK is unwilling to listen to our
:42:59. > :43:02.representations, it is likely that there will be a referendum within
:43:03. > :43:08.the next two-year is. I'm curious as to whether you see that as the red
:43:09. > :43:10.line. There could other deals. Repatriated and of powers from the
:43:11. > :43:15.European Union to the Scottish Parliament for example. Whether
:43:16. > :43:18.Britain was a segment can say we have given you lots. Are you saying
:43:19. > :43:25.it is the single market that has been the Red Line? Nicola Sturgeon
:43:26. > :43:29.has put forward her priorities. That is staying in the single market,
:43:30. > :43:36.equal treatment for other Europeans, and the rights of Scottish workers.
:43:37. > :43:40.I'm sure in the strategy document that is to be published this week,
:43:41. > :43:45.she will be outlining a range of other things that Scotland requires,
:43:46. > :43:52.particularly the powers that we will need to secure Scotland's position.
:43:53. > :43:56.There are certain powers, as you are aware, fishing, agriculture, some
:43:57. > :44:00.control of immigration, that would be required within the single market
:44:01. > :44:06.place for Scotland to operate within it, as well as the full powers of
:44:07. > :44:10.Scottish independence. Again, I don't understand. Are you saying
:44:11. > :44:14.Scotland having control of for example a fisheries policy, would do
:44:15. > :44:18.as a compromise was to mark that seems to be the opposite of staying
:44:19. > :44:22.in the single market. Scotland could get all sorts of powers by breaking
:44:23. > :44:28.away, but are you saying staying in this market is the main thing? It
:44:29. > :44:35.isn't the opposite. We just need to glance across the Northsea, to see a
:44:36. > :44:37.country called Norway which is within the single marketplace but
:44:38. > :44:44.has powers over its fishing industry. As we saw this week,
:44:45. > :44:45.fishing is very interesting, because it is probably the sole real
:44:46. > :44:51.fishing is very interesting, because industry in the rest recent European
:44:52. > :44:58.referendum which was in favour of exiting the European Union. As we
:44:59. > :45:01.saw from the House of Lords report, fishing depends on access to the
:45:02. > :45:12.single marketplace in order to sell our products. It would be great to
:45:13. > :45:21.get 20% more quarter -- quota but if there is 20% more tax any benefit
:45:22. > :45:24.will be dissipated. The single market is important to every aspect
:45:25. > :45:36.of the Scottish economy. Do you think you could win an independence
:45:37. > :45:40.referendum at the moment? Yes. Why? Last time, when I was First Minister
:45:41. > :45:49.and embarked on this process, support for independence was 28%. In
:45:50. > :45:53.2012 we ended up at 45%. I don't think Nicola Sturgeon would have any
:45:54. > :45:58.compunction about calling a referendum. What it depends on is
:45:59. > :46:03.the arguments. And in a situation where the UK Government is
:46:04. > :46:10.determined despite every opportunity to sever Scotland's links to the EU,
:46:11. > :46:14.I think many people who were previously sceptical about
:46:15. > :46:25.independence would come to the Yes side. And you think you would win?
:46:26. > :46:30.Yes. I take your point that at the beginning of the last campaign
:46:31. > :46:35.support was lower. But surely because of the last campaign people
:46:36. > :46:38.have made up their minds. There aren't a 20% who haven't made up
:46:39. > :46:41.have made up their minds. There their minds. Therefore wouldn't it
:46:42. > :46:46.be more difficult to get you over the line? I think there are a lot of
:46:47. > :46:50.people with an open mind about Scottish independence. I think there
:46:51. > :46:54.are people who are passionately in favour, and strongly against. But
:46:55. > :46:58.there are still lots of folk in Scotland who would regard Scotland's
:46:59. > :47:06.best rarity and securing their position, the rights of workers, the
:47:07. > :47:11.treatment of fellow Europeans, access to the marketplace, as
:47:12. > :47:18.priorities which if they could only be claimed by independence, could be
:47:19. > :47:25.persuaded to vote in that direction. With careful argument and all Nicola
:47:26. > :47:29.Sturgeon's powers of argument. The only problem the SNP might have is
:47:30. > :47:34.not a reader polls show that the majority of people want to stay in
:47:35. > :47:39.the UK, they also show the majority of people have no appetite for
:47:40. > :47:49.another referendum. And they also show, as I mentioned, that more than
:47:50. > :47:54.2000 -- two thirds of Scots want to maintain their position in the
:47:55. > :48:07.single marketplace and want jobs Empress parity over control of
:48:08. > :48:14.immigration. We are saying that it is a strong position to debate the
:48:15. > :48:18.independence issue. Nicola Sturgeon, correctly, has said we want the UK
:48:19. > :48:22.to stay in the single marketplace. If that is not possible we are
:48:23. > :48:28.publishing a strategy that shows how Scotland can do that. And if the UK
:48:29. > :48:33.Government says they are not interested, if they have a full
:48:34. > :48:38.Philip Hammond attitude, then it would be a different context and we
:48:39. > :48:41.would be in a strong position to have the next referendum. If the
:48:42. > :48:54.British Government turns round to the Scottish Government and says we
:48:55. > :49:01.are not going to stay in the single market... Nicola Sturgeon has talked
:49:02. > :49:10.about this. What powers do you want as a result of Brexit? As someone
:49:11. > :49:14.who reads up on these things, if you wait to see the strategy document 's
:49:15. > :49:18.Nicola is publishing, the first strategy to emerge from any
:49:19. > :49:24.political leader in these islands, I think you will find those questions
:49:25. > :49:29.answered in full in enormous detail, if I know her. The sun is coming up
:49:30. > :49:36.over your bridge, so we should leave you to it. Happy Christmas from the
:49:37. > :49:39.north-east of Scotland. Well, listening to
:49:40. > :49:53.that is Adam Tomkins Was he saying that Scotland has
:49:54. > :49:57.say in the single market or they will have another referendum? It did
:49:58. > :50:01.appear that he was saying that, which is quite different what I've
:50:02. > :50:06.from what I think Nicola Sturgeon would want him to say. And it shows
:50:07. > :50:12.again that the SNP are all over the place on this. Only two weeks ago at
:50:13. > :50:17.the Scottish affairs committee said the only way they could stay was by
:50:18. > :50:24.staying the member states and the UK... Was what he was saying any
:50:25. > :50:31.different from what Nicola Sturgeon said this morning? We don't know
:50:32. > :50:39.what she has said. Details are still to come. But what the Scottish
:50:40. > :50:43.Conservatives want is for Scotland and the whole of the UK to have as
:50:44. > :50:47.full access to and participation in the single market as is possible,
:50:48. > :50:52.consistent with the result of the referendum on the 23rd of June.
:50:53. > :50:59.Which is not necessarily what trees are made's Government wants. Let us
:51:00. > :51:04.be clear, what the Scottish Conservatives want... It's not up to
:51:05. > :51:09.you to decide. It is up to the UK to decide, because it is their decision
:51:10. > :51:14.to leave the EU. A couple of years ago Scotland voted to remain in the
:51:15. > :51:21.UK. And a few months ago the UK voted to leave the EU. The
:51:22. > :51:24.difficulty Mr Salmond has is that they are in denial about the
:51:25. > :51:28.referendum results. They are not random opinion polls put out in the
:51:29. > :51:35.field, that they can choose to abide by or ignore... If you are a
:51:36. > :51:39.democratic politician you have to abide by them. You say the Scottish
:51:40. > :51:47.Conservative position is that we should stay in the single market...
:51:48. > :51:52.We want as full and access and participation in the single market
:51:53. > :51:57.as possible. There is no such thing as membership of the single market
:51:58. > :52:02.unless you are a member state of the EU. And we just voted to leave. Are
:52:03. > :52:07.you checking that David Mundell is arguing that in Cabinet? We are all
:52:08. > :52:12.singing from the same hymn sheet. arguing that in Cabinet? We are all
:52:13. > :52:19.There is no difference of opinion and there is no change in policy. We
:52:20. > :52:26.want full access and participation as possible. I think that is exactly
:52:27. > :52:31.what the Theresa May Government is working towards. But part of your
:52:32. > :52:39.reply to add Alex Salmond would be that single market, or not single
:52:40. > :52:46.market, Brexit means single market is not as clear a statement as it
:52:47. > :52:51.might be. Absolutely. That is why a sensible Government like this one is
:52:52. > :52:58.going slowly in order to figure out what access to the single market...
:52:59. > :53:03.You were not in or out, you can have varying degrees of access depending
:53:04. > :53:11.what is in the national interest. Everybody says, it has always been a
:53:12. > :53:16.European union of bits and pieces. Switzerland's access is different
:53:17. > :53:27.from Norway's is different from Canada's... Lastly, and briefly, as
:53:28. > :53:32.a Scottish Conservative, do you think it is more likely that the
:53:33. > :53:35.British Government will say to the Scottish Government, look, whatever
:53:36. > :53:41.the single market views you have, here is a deal, you will control
:53:42. > :53:45.fisheries, some of VAT, agriculture policy... Are you really going to
:53:46. > :53:51.have another referendum if we offer you all of this? All of this is part
:53:52. > :53:54.of the negotiation to come. It is plain that the UK Government is not
:53:55. > :54:02.going to be rewritten Irving any fresh powers to Westminster. Some
:54:03. > :54:12.powers will go to Westminster some will go to Hollywood. This will --
:54:13. > :54:18.Holyrood. If the Scottish Government would stop sabre rattling about a
:54:19. > :54:21.referendum, we need to pull together and not pull apart.
:54:22. > :54:24.Brexit was one of the defining political events of 2016.
:54:25. > :54:26.The EU referendum in June followed the Holyrood election.
:54:27. > :54:42.Here's our A-Z of the last 12 months.
:54:43. > :54:50.I think the more transparency bike we can have, the better. Before we
:54:51. > :54:56.go any further we need to have a cold, calm, look at this. If a
:54:57. > :54:58.company or individual avoids tax they should not be able to benefit
:54:59. > :55:43.from public contracts. I will do everything I can as Prime
:55:44. > :55:47.Minister to steady the ship over the coming weeks and months, but I do
:55:48. > :55:50.not think it would be right for me to try to be the captain that steers
:55:51. > :57:25.our country to its next destination. This is a truly historic deal. It is
:57:26. > :57:26.based on the principles I set out in earlier legislation... That will
:57:27. > :57:29.pave the way for the Scottish Parliament to become one of the most
:57:30. > :57:34.accountable parliament is in the world. It is based on the same
:57:35. > :57:40.approach that I have used for setting all devolves taxes.
:57:41. > :57:56.I will watch you from afar and wish you well for your future and the
:57:57. > :58:13.There is no greater cause than to serve that of the people of this
:58:14. > :58:57.country. And so with that it is from goodbye from me for now.
:58:58. > :59:05.We have concluded that the UK chose to join the invasion of Iraq before
:59:06. > :59:30.the peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted.
:59:31. > :59:39.I don't know the details of plan B, we don't have a plan B, we have a
:59:40. > :59:49.plan A, we will stay in the European Union as an active member.
:59:50. > :00:04.What makes you better to run the NHS? I'm not a big fan. Sorry. I
:00:05. > :00:45.categorically voted in Parliament tonight. I saw the vote registered.
:00:46. > :00:49.Ken Macdonald Tauscher is elected as Presiding Officer of the Scottish
:00:50. > :01:04.Parliament. The measures I have announced today
:01:05. > :01:07.means the total support of the Scottish Government and through
:01:08. > :01:15.local taxation provides an increase in spending our local government
:01:16. > :01:44.services, not of 59.6 million, but of 240.6 million three point 3%.
:01:45. > :01:56.I can confirm today that the independence referendum bill will be
:01:57. > :04:05.published for consultation next week.
:04:06. > :04:14.I have never been and over wanted to be a career politician. My aim and
:04:15. > :04:35.being in politics was to get Britain out of the European Union. The
:04:36. > :04:50.country needs a strong Ukip now more than ever before, before F Ukip
:04:51. > :04:53.ceases to be on the electoral law, then there will be no impetus on
:04:54. > :05:50.Mere. The Scottish Government will
:05:51. > :05:56.undertake a three-month period where we will take input from practitioner
:05:57. > :06:00.'s as well as parents, charities, as well as young people, those who
:06:01. > :06:30.support the named person policy, and those who have concerns.
:06:31. > :06:32.Well, joining me now to discuss the year in politics
:06:33. > :06:34.is Severin Carrell, Scotland editor for The Guardian, the UK
:06:35. > :06:37.editor of The Big Issue, Paul McNamee, and Lindsay McIntosh,
:06:38. > :06:48.Let's start with Alex Salmond, he was bullish about the independence
:06:49. > :06:55.referendum. Is he right or do you think that is the Scottish
:06:56. > :06:58.Government's you? I would think that on the face of it the numbers would
:06:59. > :07:07.be in his favour. The idea that they took the Yes vote from 32 to 33% up
:07:08. > :07:11.to 45% suggest they should be to get the line up to 50. But I do not
:07:12. > :07:16.think Nicola Sturgeon is at one with them on the idea that this is a slam
:07:17. > :07:22.dunk. They have a lot to do, a lot of critical questions from 2014 that
:07:23. > :07:29.are hanging over them and even more critical questions over Brexit
:07:30. > :07:34.hanging over them, and time is running out and they have a set of
:07:35. > :07:36.pressures to manage, their own party, the yes movement and the
:07:37. > :07:42.political reality that they are now left in. It is far trickier with
:07:43. > :07:51.those facts. The other issue is that everything could be more ambiguous
:07:52. > :07:54.now. Alex Salmond suggested that Scotland or Britain did not stay in
:07:55. > :08:00.the single market could lead to another referendum vote. What does
:08:01. > :08:05.the SNP see you then. Also, the other thing is the British
:08:06. > :08:08.government could save here are more powers, over fisheries and
:08:09. > :08:13.agriculture, even if they do not stay in the single market. Will you
:08:14. > :08:18.still go through with their referendum even though we're giving
:08:19. > :08:20.you all those powers? There are all these unanswered questions,
:08:21. > :08:25.different parts of the deal that need to be worked out between the UK
:08:26. > :08:32.and the EU and Scotland and the UK. Article 50 will be triggered at the
:08:33. > :08:36.start of next year, that will be a two-year process. When does Nicola
:08:37. > :08:40.Sturgeon feel that she will have enough clarity about what Scotland
:08:41. > :08:45.will get to say to Scots, this is fine, or to go to the polls and
:08:46. > :08:52.trigger independence too. The line has been over the past year, we will
:08:53. > :09:01.have an independence referendum if the polls show that we can win it.
:09:02. > :09:08.He did not seem at all swayed by that. Yes, you could say there is a
:09:09. > :09:15.margin of error. It is not going up at the moment. It really is a major
:09:16. > :09:19.gamble to hold a second independence referendum with the numbers as they
:09:20. > :09:30.are at the moment. What about better exit macro itself poll? -- Brexit.
:09:31. > :09:34.With each week, with each piece of debate it seems messier and messier.
:09:35. > :09:40.Part of the problem with the Scottish Government is that if the
:09:41. > :09:45.pollution a particular way with Brexit, the opposition could argue,
:09:46. > :09:46.hold on you have got to govern the country before you start to think
:09:47. > :09:50.about what Brexit is. I think that country before you start to think
:09:51. > :09:55.is the case for a lot of other regions in Britain as well, whether
:09:56. > :10:00.it is Northern Ireland or Wales, they have their own particular
:10:01. > :10:05.issues and problems to deal with. Brexit seems to dominate our
:10:06. > :10:10.thoughts. The and bolts of government for people is broadly
:10:11. > :10:15.being left of it. And I think that is the problem. A big issue is two
:10:16. > :10:21.views, one, the British government has a cunning plan which it is
:10:22. > :10:25.trying to keep for its negotiating tactics. And the other is they do
:10:26. > :10:29.not have a clue they are doing. They are altering up on television
:10:30. > :10:36.studios, like Liam Fox did this morning, to punt their own version.
:10:37. > :10:43.The Tory party, the referendum was supposed to sort out the Tory
:10:44. > :10:48.party's internal warfare. What it has done it as it has exposed the
:10:49. > :10:52.warfare inside the Tory party, like Liam Fox who believe that Britain is
:10:53. > :10:56.much better as close to the United States is possible and away from
:10:57. > :11:02.Europe, and those who would rather we did not leave the EU at all.
:11:03. > :11:07.These unresolved problems are being worked out in public. I suspect they
:11:08. > :11:12.are working at various strategies in how to work things through. They are
:11:13. > :11:16.claiming 50 different teams. The problem is nobody knows quite how
:11:17. > :11:21.all the different actors and Europe will behave because the EU may be
:11:22. > :11:25.acting collectively in terms of Brussels and Strasbourg, behaving as
:11:26. > :11:30.a unified force. Germany and Spain... One of the big stories may
:11:31. > :11:32.not be whatever the British Spain... One of the big stories may
:11:33. > :11:37.government decides to do, maybe what response they get. There are also
:11:38. > :11:43.critical European elections taking place. Their own internal forces and
:11:44. > :11:46.a lot of people think this depends on what Angela Merkel wants to do.
:11:47. > :11:52.As the Germans think that keeping the UK as close as possible to
:11:53. > :11:57.Europe is in the EU's interests, that will influence really what will
:11:58. > :12:00.ends up happening. We have all the complications also to do with
:12:01. > :12:10.Ireland as well. The other thing that has changed in Scotland, but we
:12:11. > :12:13.had an election. And the SNP don't have the majority any more and
:12:14. > :12:17.everyone went on as if nothing had changed. But when the budget was
:12:18. > :12:21.produced last week, it becomes an issue, because they need to do some
:12:22. > :12:25.deals? The most important thing on the budget was the U turn on the
:12:26. > :12:34.council funding. The original plan was that council tax would get
:12:35. > :12:38.increased, but it would be put into a central pot and distributed. At
:12:39. > :12:41.the 11th hour he did a U-turn and said that individual councils could
:12:42. > :12:45.keep their funding. It is significant that it recognises that
:12:46. > :12:49.we are a minority government once again and the SNP cannot get
:12:50. > :12:55.everything their own way. It was commendable to make that change. Do
:12:56. > :12:59.you think they will do a deal? Yes, I think they will. The Greens are
:13:00. > :13:06.who we should be looking at in this. They need abstentions, not support.
:13:07. > :13:17.Paul, you mentioned the opposition. Where are they? Labour certainly
:13:18. > :13:23.have. When we looked at the list, it could have been Jeremy Corbyn. Where
:13:24. > :13:29.is he? At key points. Kezia Dugdale as well. The key points throughout
:13:30. > :13:33.this year, the Labour Party have no when they're speaking with any
:13:34. > :13:37.authority with leadership with clear policy. They have allowed themselves
:13:38. > :13:39.to become a pressure group rather than a party for government. And
:13:40. > :13:47.that is a tricky place for all of us than a party for government. And
:13:48. > :13:49.to be in, when that regulation going on around Brexit. Thank you all very
:13:50. > :13:54.much for coming in. That's all from us for this
:13:55. > :13:58.week and this year. Until then, Merry Christmas
:13:59. > :14:01.and a Happy New Year.