19/03/2017 Sunday Politics Scotland


Andrew Neil and Gordon Brewer with the latest political news, interviews and debate. Andrew is joined by head of NHS Providers Chris Hopson, Nick Clegg MP and Andrew Gwynne MP.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 19/03/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.


She faces huge political fights over Brexit, Scottish independence,


After a tumultuous political week, we'll analyse the PM's prospects.


With chatter increasing about a possible early General Election,


Jeremy Corbyn's campaign chief joins me live.


NHS bosses warn health services in England are facing "mission


impossible" and waiting times for operations will rocket,


unless hospitals are given more cash this year.


The chief executive of NHS Providers joins me live.


The stand-off continues - Theresa May says "Not now"


but Nicola Sturgeon insists the will of the Scottish Parliament


will prevail and there WILL be a second independence referendum -


All that to come before 12:15pm, and I'll also be talking


to the former leader of the Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg


from his party's spring conference in York.


With me here in the studio, throughout the programme,


three of the country's top political commentators:


Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.


They'll be tweeting their thoughts using #bbcsp.


So, the political challenges facing Theresa May are stacking up.


As well as negotiating Britain's exit from the EU,


the PM must now deal with SNP demands for a second referendum


on Scottish independence, backbenchers agitating against cuts


to school budgets, and a humiliated Chancellor forced to u-turn on a key


budget measure just one week after announcing it.


Here's Adam Fleming on aturbulent political week


Monday, 11:30am, TV crews gather in the residence of the First


Minister of Scotland, who's got a surprise.


She wants a vote on whether Scotland should leave the UK


By taking the steps I have set out today I am ensuring that Scotland's


future will be decided, not just by me, the


Scottish Government, or the


SNP, it will be decided by the people of Scotland.


Westminster, 6:25pm the same day, MPs reject


amendments to the legislation authorising the Prime Minister to


The Bill ceremonially heads to the Lords where peers abandoned


attempts to change it and it becomes law.


But Downing Street doesn't trigger Article 50 as many had expected.


Some say they were spooked by Nicola Sturgeon.


We get an e-mail from the Treasury can the


We get an e-mail from the Treasury cancelling


the planned rise in National Insurance for


the self-employed announced the budget.


It's just minutes before Prime Minister's Questions at noon.


The trend towards greater self-employment does create a


We will bring forward further proposals


but we will not bring forward increases to NICs later in this


It seems to me like a government in a bit of chaos here.


By making this change today we are listening to our colleagues


fulfil both the letter and the spirit of our manifesto tax


Thursday, 7am, Conservative campaign HQ and the


Electoral Commission fines the party ?70,000 for misreporting spending


But that's not what the Prime Minister


Because at 12:19pm she gives her verdict on a


We should be working together, not pulling apart.


We should be working together to get that


right deal for Scotland, that


So, as I say, that's my job as Prime Minister and


so for that reason I say to the SNP now is not the time.


Friday and time for the faithful to gather.


SNP activists at their spring conference


Conservatives in Cardiff to hear the Prime Minister


promote her plan for a more meritocratic Brexit Britain.


At 11:10am comes some news about a newspaper that's frankly


I'm thrilled and excited to be the new editor of The


Evening Standard and, you know, with so many


big issues in our world what


good analysis, great news journalism.


It's a really important time for good journalism that The


Evening Standard is going to provide.


There was no let-up yesterday as Gordon Brown launched proposals


Under my proposals we keep the Barnett


Formula, we keep the fiscal transfers, but we also bring the


and fisheries back to the Scottish Parliament.


And just think, all this and we're still counting down to the


What a week in politics. It has been a torrid week for the government,


Isabel Oakeshott, but does Theresa May shake it off, or is this a sign


of worse to come? We may all be feeling a bit breathless after the


events of last week and we are in for a a long war of attrition with


the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon's strategy will be to foster over lengthy


periods of time as much resentment and anger as she can in Scotland and


try to create the impression that independence is somehow inevitable.


Is Scotland the biggest challenge for Theresa May in the next year or


so? I think it probably is because if you look at how relatively easily


the Brexit bill went through on an issue where people could hardly feel


more passionate in the Commons, and actually despite all the potential


drama it has gone through quite smoothly. To go back to your


original question, she just carries on. Don't underestimate the basic


quiet and will towards Theresa May amongst the majority of Tory


backbenchers. Yes, there are difficult little issues over school


funding, sorry, it's not a little issue, it is a big one but she will


get over that and treat each thing as it comes and keep pressing on.


Has she not called Nicola Sturgeon's Bluff in that the First Minister


said I want a referendum, here is roughly when I wanted, the Prime


Minister says you're not having one. What happens next? She has done


quite well and impact the progress Theresa May made this week in


frustrating Nicola Sturgeon was evident when Nicola Sturgeon said,


OK, maybe we can talk about the timing after. Nicola Sturgeon has


already been the first one to blink. I would slightly disagree with


Isabel Oakeshott, I don't agree Scotland will be the biggest hurdle


for her. What this week showed as is Theresa May... It was a reality


bites week. Theresa May is juggling four mammoth crises at the same


time, Brexit obviously which I still think will be the biggest challenge


to get a good deal, Trump left field who popped up at GCHQ on Friday and


Scotland and the fiscal challenge, this enormous great problem, and it


reinforced the point this is not an easy time in politics. The budget is


over four years. That was one small problem, the immediate problem is


how to fill the social care crisis and the ageing demographic. This is


not normal times in British politics and Theresa May does not have a


normal workload on her plate, hence why I think we will see more


mistakes made as time goes on and as she has this almost impossible


workload to juggle. How tempted do you think the Prime Minister is to


call an early election? There is more chatter about it now. Is she


tempted and if there is will she succumb? I will answer that in a


second as Harold Wilson used to say. I want to agree, disagree with the


rest of the panel about how she has out manipulated Nicola Sturgeon this


week. I think Nicola Sturgeon expected Theresa May to say no to


her expected timetable. It would be amazing if she had said yes. She


expected her to say no but Sturgeon catalyst that will fuel support for


her cause. There is no sign of that. The latest poll this morning shows


66-44 against independence and only 13% think they would be better off


with an independent Scotland and a clear majority do not want a second


referendum. But the calculation of resistance from Westminster combined


with Brexit which hasn't started yet, I think this is her


calculation, she didn't expect Theresa May to say, sure, go ahead,


I'm sure she expected Theresa May to say no, you can't have it at your


desired timetable. On the wider point, I think Theresa May is in a


fascinating position, she is both strong because she faces weak


opposition and is ahead in the opinion polls. But faces the most


daunting agenda of any Prime Minister for 40 or 50 years, I


think. So it's a weird combination. I don't think she wants to call an


election. I don't think she has thought about how you would


manipulate it, what the trigger would be, and whether she's got the


energy and space to prepare for and then mount a campaign was beginning


the Brexit negotiation. Now, you could see the cause would be the


small majorities that will make her life hellish, which it will do.


Whether a landslide would help is another question, they can be


difficult too. But I think the problems outweigh the advantages of


going early. Do you think she would go for an early election? I don't


and I think you have to look at the rhetoric coming out of No 10 which


is so firm on this question, it is a delicious prospect for us as


commentators to think there might be an election around the corner but


they are so firm on this I can't see it happening. I agree, we are in


unanimous agreement on this one. It is superficially attractive because


she would love the big majority and she would get a lot more through


Parliament especially with Brexit. The nitty-gritty of it makes an


early General Election this year almost impossible. How do you write


a manifesto on high Brexit versus soft Brexit, it opens up a Pandora's


box of uncertainties. And there is enough with the European elections.


The EU will say are we negotiating with you or the person who may


replace you? How do you keep the Tory party united going to an


election? How do you call one, with a vote of no confidence in yourself


you may end up losing. Easy on paper but difficult in practice. We shall


see. So if Theresa May did go


for an early election this spring, The party's campaigns


and elections chief Andrew Gwynne Andrew Gwynne, the government, as we


have just been talking about, executed one of the most


embarrassing U-turns in recent history this week. It has been a


torrid time for the Theresa May government. Why are the Tories still


so chipper? The Labour Party has been on an


early election footing since before Christmas and we are preparing


ourselves for that eventuality in case that does come. That means that


we've got to get ourselves into a position whereby we can not only


challenge the government but we can also offer a valuable alternative


for the British people to choose from should that election arise. So,


would you welcome an early General Election? Well, of course, I don't


want this government to be in power so of course if there is an


opportunity to put a case to the British people as to why there is a


better way, and I believe the Labour way is the better way than of course


we would want to put that case to the country. So, would Labour vote


in the Commons for an early election? Well, of course as an


opposition, not wanting to be in opposition, wanting to be in


government should the government put forward a measure in accordance with


the Fixed-term Parliaments Act then that's something we would very


seriously have to consider. I know you would have to consider it but


would you vote for an early election or not? Well, of course we want to


be the government so if the current government puts forward measures to


bring forward a General Election we would want to put our case to the


British public and that's one of the jobs that I've been given, together


Labour Party organisation early into a position where we can fight a


General Election -- organisationally. For the avoidance


of doubt, if the Government work to issue a motion in the Commons for an


early election, the Labour Party would vote for an early election?


It would be very difficult not, Andrew. If the Government wants to


dissolve parliament, wants a General Election, we don't want the Tories


in government, we want to be in government and we want to have that


opportunity to put that case to the British people.


Are you ready for an early election? You say you have been on a war all


but since the Labour conference last autumn, but are you ready for one?


How big is the election fighting fund? We have substantial amounts of


money in our fighting fund, that is true, because not only has the


Labour Party managed to eliminate its own financial deficit that it


inherited from previous election campaigns, we have also managed to


build up a substantial fund in the off chance we have an election. We


have also expanded massively operations at Labour HQ, we are


taking on additional staff, and one of the jobs that myself and Ian


Lavery who I job share with are currently doing is to go around the


Parliamentary Labour Party to make sure that Labour colleagues have the


support and the resources that they need, should they have to face the


electorate in their constituencies. So you are on a war footing, ready


for the fight, you say you would vote for the fight, so have you got


your tax and spend policies ready to roll out? That is something the


shadow Treasury team will be discussing. One of the things is, if


there is an early General Election, the normal timetable for these


things gets fast-track because our policy decision-making body, its


annual conference, we have the national policy forum that creates


policies suggestions. You have been on a war footing since the last


Labour conference, that is what Mr Corbyn told us. So you must have a


fair idea of what policies you would fight an early election on. How much


extra per year would you spend on the NHS? Well, look, I'm not going


to set out the Labour manifesto for an election that hasn't been called.


I'm just asking you about the NHS. You must have a policy for that. We


have a policy for the NHS. So how much extra? I will not set out


Labour's tax-and-spend policies here on The Sunday Politics when there


hasn't even been election called. You said you had been on a war


footing and you are prepared to vote for one, so if you can't Tommy that,


can you tell me what the corporation rate tax on company profits be under


a Labour government -- tell me that. You will have to be patient. I have.


And wait for Mrs May to trigger an early election. If there is an


election on the 4th of May the rich would have to be issued on the 27th


of March, so that's not long to wait. If that date passes we aren't


having an election on the 4th of May and the normal timetable for policy


development will continue. All right. You lost Copeland, I think


you were in charge of a by-election for Labour, your national poll


ratings are still dire, even after week of terrible times for the


Tories. Sometimes you even lose local government by-elections in


safe seats, including in the place you are now, in Salford. How long


does Mr Corbyn have to turn this around? Well, look, the issue of the


Labour leadership was settled last year. The last thing the Labour


Party now needs is another period of introspection with the Labour Party


merely talks to the Labour Party. We are now on an election footing in


case Mrs May does trigger an early General Election. We need to be


talking to the British people are not to ourselves. So any speculation


about the Labour leadership might excite you in the media but actually


for us in the Labour Party it's about re-engaging and reconnecting


with the voters. Rather than being excited, I feel quite daunted at the


prospect of an early election. So I wouldn't get that right. Normally,


given the number of mistakes this government has made, and its


mid-term, you would expect any self-respecting opposition to be


about ten points ahead. On the latest polls this morning you are 17


behind. There is a 27-30 point gap from where you should normally be as


an opposition. Are you telling me that if that doesn't change, you


still fight the General Election with Mr Corbyn?


These are matters for the future. I believe the leadership issue was


settled last year. We have had two leadership contest in two years.


Would you seriously contemplate going into the next election, if it


is early I perfectly understand Jeremy Corbyn is your man, but if it


is not until 2020, and you are still 17 points behind in the polls, will


you go into the next election like that? There is a lot of future


looking and speculation there, I don't know what the future holds,


where the Labour Party will be in 12 months let alone by 2020 summit


cross those bridges when we come to it. My main challenge is to make


sure the Labour Party is in the best possible place organisationally to


fight an election, that's my challenge and I'm up for that to


make sure we are in the best possible place to make sure Labour


returns as many Labour MPs as possible. Thank you for joining us.


And we're joined now from the Liberal Democrats' spring


conference in York by the former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg.


Good morning. In his conference speech today, Tim Farron lumps


Theresa May with Vladimir Putin, Marine Le Pen and Donald Trump. In


what way is Mrs May similar to Marine Le Pen? Of course he is not


saying Theresa May is identical to Marine Le Pen, I think what Tim


Wilby spelling out shortly in his speech is that we need to be aware


what's going on in the world, the International settlement that was


arrived at after the First World -- Second World War, that bound


supranational organisations is under attack from characters as diverse as


Vladimir Putin, Marine Le Pen and Donald Trump, and that by side in so


ostentatiously with Donald Trump and pursuing this very hard Brexit,


Theresa May appears to be giving succour to that much more


isolationist chauvinist view of the world than the multilateral approach


that Britain has subscribed to for a long time. The exact words he plans


to use are welcome to the New World order, Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump,


Marine Le Pen, Theresa May, aggressive and teenage to, anti-EU,


nationalistic. In what way is Mrs May fitting into any of that? In


what way is she similar to Vladimir Putin? I'm not aware she has


interfered with other people's elections. The clue is in the quote


you just read out, which is the world order. The world order over


the last half century or more, by the way a lesson I'm afraid we have


to learn in Europe because of the terrible bloodshed of two world was


in the space of a few decades, was based on the idea might is not


right. Strong arm leaders cannot throw their weight around. What we


have now with Putin, the populism across parts of Europe and Donald


Trump who thinks the EU will unravel is a shift to a radically different


view of the world. Mrs May doesn't think any of that. She is not


antenatal, not anti-EU, she says she wants the EU to succeed. She's not


aggressive as far as I'm aware so I'm not sure why you would lump the


British Prime Minister in with these other characters. Let me explain, by


choosing this uncompromising approach to Brexit, clearly in doing


so she, in my view, maybe not yours or others, is pursuing a self


harming approach to the United Kingdom but also pulling up the


threads that bind the rest of the European Union together, in so


ostentatiously siding with Donald Trump, somehow declaring in my view


speciously that we can make up with the trade we will lose, she's not


challenging the shift to a more chauvinist approach to world affairs


that is happening in many places. You are at your party's Spring


conference, I think we can agree any Lib Dem come back will take a long


time. Would Tory dominance be more effectively challenged by a


realignment of the centre and the centre-left? Are you working towards


that? I missed half the question but I think you are talking about a


realignment. As a cook a way to get over Tory dominance, would you want


that to happen? Are you working towards that? My view is the


recovery of the Lib Dems will be quicker than you suggest. People


often forget that even the low point of our fortunes in the last election


we still got a million more votes than the SNP, it's only because we


have got this crazy electoral system... But the SNP fight in


Scotland, you fight in the whole country! But I'm saying the way


seats are allocated overlooks the fact that 2.5 million still voted


for us. But my own view is of course there are people feeling


increasingly homeless in the liberal wing of the Conservative Party


because they are now in a party which is in effect indistinguishable


from Ukip on some of the biggest issues of the day, and homeless folk


on the rational, reasonable wing of the Labour Party. I would invite


them to join the Liberal Democrats and I would invite everyone across


parties to talk about the idea is that bind us because the Westminster


village can invest a lot of energy building new castles in the sky,


inventing new names for parties when actually what you want is for people


on the progressive centre ground of British politics to talk about the


ideas that unite them, from the dilemmas of artificial intelligence


to climate change. Do you think in your own view, can Brexit still be


thwarted or is it now a matter of getting the best terms? I think we


are in an interlude, almost a calm between two storms, the storm of the


referendum itself and the collision between the Government's stated


ambitions for Brexit and the reality of having to negotiate something


unworkable with 27 other governments. The one thing I can


guarantee you is that what the Government has promised to the


British people cannot happen. Over a slower period of time we will work


out our new relationship with the European Union. Theresa May said she


will settle divorce arrangements, and pensions, so one, negotiate new


trade agreements, new climate change policies and so on, and have all of


that ratified within two years, that will not happen so I think there


will be a lot of turbulence in the next couple of years. Will you use


this turbulence to try to thwart Brexit, to find a way of rolling


back the decision? It's not about repeating the debates of the past or


thwarting the will of the people but it is comparing what people were


promised from the ?350 million for the NHS every week through to this


glittering array of new trade agreements we will sign across the


world, with the reality that will transpire in the next couple of


years and at that point, yes it is my belief people should be able to


take a second look at if that is what they really want. A couple of


quick questions, would you welcome an early general election? I always


welcome them, we couldn't do worse than we did last time. That is


certainly true. You have a column in the Evening Standard, have you


spoken to the new editor about whether he will keep your column or


spike it? No, I wait in nervous anticipation. Can you be a newspaper


editor in the morning and an MP in the afternoon? Do I think that's


feasible? Sorry, I missed a bit. There is no prohibition, no law


against MPs being editors. They have been in the past and no doubt will


again in the future. He is taking a lot on, he is an editor, also


wanting to be an MP, a jetsetting academic in the States, working in


the city, I suspect something will give. It seems to me even by his


self-confidence standards in his own abilities I suspect he is taking on


a little bit too much. Very diplomatic, Mr Clegg, I'm sure you


will get to keep the column. Thanks for joining us.


Now, for the last six months England's NHS bosses have been


warning the health service needs more money to help it meet


But in his first Budget, the Chancellor offered


no immediate relief, and today the head of


the organisation representing England's NHS trusts says hundreds


of thousands of patients will have to wait longer for both emergency


care and planned operations, unless the Government


Warnings over funding are not exactly new.


Back in 2014 the head of the NHS in England, Simon Stevens,


published his plan for the future of the health service.


In his five-year forward view, Stevens said the NHS in England


would face a funding shortfall of up to ?30 billion by 2020.


To bridge that gap he said the NHS would need more money


from the Government, at least ?8 billion extra,


and that the health service could account for the rest by making


The Government says it's given the health service more than what it


asked for, and that NHS in England will have received


That number is disputed by NHS managers and the chair


of Parliament's health committee, who say the figure is more


like ?4.5 billion, while other parts of the health and social care budget


have been cut, putting pressure on the front line.


Last year, two thirds of NHS trusts in England finished


the year in the red, and despite emergency bailouts


from the Government, the NHS is likely to record


Meanwhile national targets on waiting times for A


departments, diagnostic tests, and operations are being


This month's Budget provided ?2 billion for social care


but there was no new cash for the NHS, leading trusts to warn


that patient care is beginning to suffer, and what is being asked


And I'm joined now by the Chief Executive of NHS


Providers in England, Chris Hopson.


Welcome to the programme. Morning, Andrew. I will come onto the extra


money you need to do your job properly in a minute but first, part


of the deal was you had to make 22 billion in efficiency savings, not a


bank that money but spend it on patient care, the front line, and so


on. How is that going? So, last parliament we realised around 18


billion of productivity and efficiency savings, we are realising


more this year so we are on course to realise 3 billion this year, that


is a quarter of a billion more than last year but all of us in the NHS


knew the 22 billion would be a very stretching target and we are


somewhat inevitably falling short. So it is 22 billion by 2,020.


Roughly. That was the time. We are now into 2017. So how much of the 22


billion have you achieved? We realised around 3 billion last year


and we will realise 3 billion this year, Court of billion more, 3.25


billion this year, so we are on course for 18-19,000,000,000. By the


2021 period? You are not that far away. The problem is the degree to


which demand is going up. We have record demand over the winter period


and that actually meant we have seen more people than we have ever seen


before but performance is still under real pressure. Let me come


onto that. When you agreed on the 22 billion efficiency savings plus some


extra money from the government, I know there is a bit of an argument


about how much that is actually worth, had you not factored in this


extra demand that you saw coming over the next three or four years?


Let's be very clear committee referred to Simon Stevens's forward


view and we signed up to it but the 22 billion was a process run at the


centre of government by the Department of Health with its arms


length bodies, NHS England and others and is not something that was


consulted on with the NHS. But you signed up to it. We always said that


the day that that Spending Review was announced, the idea that the NHS


where customer demand goes up something like four or 5% every


year, the idea that in the middle years of Parliament we would be able


to provide the same level of service when we were only getting funding


increases of 1.3%, 0.4% and 0.7%, and I can show you the press release


we issued, we always said there was going to be a gap and that we would


not be able to deliver what was required. The full 22 billion in


other words? What we said to Simon Stevens at the Public Accounts


Committee a few months ago, the NHS didn't get what it was asked for.


Today the NHS, cope with the resources it has according to you.


How much more does it need? Are reported is about 2017-18 and we


estimate that what we are being asked to do, and again, Andrew, you


clearly set it out in the package, we are a long way off the four-hour


A target and a long way off the 92%. The waiting times and


operations. How much more do you need? And we are making up a ?900


million deficit. If you take all of those into account we estimate you


would need an extra ?3.5 billion next year in order to deliver all of


those targets and eliminate the deficit. That would be 3.5 billion


on top of what is already planned next year and that would be 3.5


billion repeated in the years to come too? Yes, Andrew it is


important we should make an important distinction about the NHS


versus other public services. When the last government, the last Labour


government put extra money into the NHS it clearly said that in return


for that it would establish some standards in the NHS Constitution,


the 95% A target we have talked about and the 92% elective surgery


we have talked about. The trust we represent are very clear, they would


want to realise those standards, but you can only do it if you pay for


it. The problem is at the moment is we are in the longest and deepest


financial squeeze in NHS history. As we have said, funding is only going


up by 1% per year but every year just to stand still cost and demand


go up by more than 4%. There is clearly a demand for more money. I


think people watching this programme will think probably the NHS is going


to have to get more money to meet the goals you have been given. I


think they would also like to be sure that your Mac running the NHS


as efficiently as it could be. We read this morning that trusts have


got ?100 million of empty properties that cost 10 million to maintain, 36


office blocks are not being used, you have surplus land equivalent to


office blocks are not being used, 1800 football pitches. Yes, there


are a number of things that we know in the NHS we need to do better but


let me remind you, Andrew, in the last Parliament we realised ?18


billion worth of cost improvement gains. We are going to realise


another 3 billion this year, 0.25 billion more than last year so these


things are being targeted. But having that surplus land, it is


almost certainly in areas where there is a demand for housing.


Absolutely. So why not release it for housing? You get the money, the


people get their houses and its contribution and a signal that you


are running NHS assets as efficiently as you can? Tell me if


I'm going to too much detail for you. One of the reasons as to why


our trusts are reluctant to realise those land sales is because there is


an assumption that the money would go back to the Treasury and wouldn't


benefit NHS trusts. You could make a deal, couldn't you? That's part of


the conversation going on at the moment. The issue is that we would


want to ensure that if we do release land, quite rightly the benefit,


particularly in foundation trusts which are, as you will remember,


deliberately autonomous organisations, that they should keep


the benefit of those land sales. Have you raised that with the


Yes we have. What did they say? They are in discussions of it. We heard


somebody who moved from one job and then to another job and given a


somebody who moved from one job and salary and then almost ?200,000 as a


payoff. There is a national mood for the NHS to get more money. But


before you give anybody any more money you want to be sure that the


money you have got already is being properly spent, which for us, is the


patient at the end of the day. And yet there seem to be these enormous


salaries and payoffs. I've worked in a FTSE 100 on the board of Her


Majesty's Revenue and Customs and I have worked in large organisations.


I can look you completely straight in the eye and tell you that the


jobs that our hospital, community, mental health and ambulance chief


Executives do are amongst the most complicated leadership roles I have


ever seen. It doesn't seem to me to be unreasonable that in order to get


the right quality of people we should pay an appropriate salary.


The reality is the salaries are paid are not excessive when talking about


managing budgets of over ?1 billion a year and talking about managing


tens of thousands of staff. There was a doctor working as a locum that


earned an extra ?375,000. One of the problems in the NHS is a mismatch


between the number of staff we need and the number of staff coming


through the pipeline. What is having to happen is if you want to keep a


service going you have to use Mackem and agency staff. Even at that cost?


You would not want to pay those amounts. But you are. The chief


Executives's choice in those areas is giving the service open or


employing a locum. I'm sure you could find a locum prepared to work


for less than that. What indication, what hopes do you have of getting


the extra ?3 billion? The government has been very clear, for the moment


it wants to stick to the existing funding settlement it has agreed. So


there was nothing in the budget. Can I finish by making one important


point. Please, finish. This is the first time the NHS has said before


the year has even started that we can't deliver on those standards. We


believe, as do most people who work in the NHS, that the NHS is on a


gradual slow decline. This is a very important inflection point to Mark,


this is the first time before the financial year starts that we say we


cannot meet the targets we are being asked to deliver and are in the NHS


Constitution. We have run out of time. Chris Hopson, thank you for


being with me. It's just gone 11:35am,


you're watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers


in Scotland who leave us now Good morning and welcome


to Sunday Politics Scotland. Coming up on the programme -


the battle of the wills. Nicola Sturgeon insists


there will be a second referendum but with Theresa May insisting


there will not be one now - Our country stands at a crossroads,


the future of the UK looks very different today than it did two


years ago. And on Wednesday the Scottish


Parliament votes on Indyref2 - I'll be speaking to the Tories


who plan to vote no and the Greens, without whose support


the Scottish Government cannot win. If you're watching this


programme in England, Wales or Northern Ireland and feel


a bit peeved with Brexit and rather fancy living


in an independent Scotland - Because yesterday, at her


party's spring conference, the First Minister invited


all Britons to settle in the "progressive outward looking


country" that the SNP believes The only fly in this utopian


ointment is the need to win a referendum first -


and in order to win a referendum, Shortly I'll be speaking


to the Scottish Government's Cabinet Secretary for External Affairs -


Fiona Hyslop. But first, Graham Stewart's been


assessing the mood among delegates, These kind of referendums are once


in a generation events. No means we stay in, we are members of the


European Union. We can't keep spending money you haven't actually


got. The dream shall never die. Ecclesial all added misty eyed,


doesn't it? If only someone could help us relive that festival of


democracy. I can confirm today that Nick Clegg I will seek the authority


of the Scottish Parliament to agree with the UK Government the details


of a Section 35 Order. The procedure that will enable the Scottish


Parliament to legislate for an independence referendum. Nicola


Sturgeon's announcement set Tomic the UK Government off-guard. While


it took them a few days to formulate a response, when the answer came, it


was repeated over and over again. Now is not the time. Now is not the


time. Now is not the time. When is the right time? Now is not the time.


Is not now, when? That's the question that has been exercising


delegates at the SNP conference this weekend. But wondering which side


benefits from I think it benefits the SNP and I think the SNP will


have factored this in. They are willing to go all the way up to


2020, 2021, which I think pre-Brexit was the original planning. They will


have anticipated the Prime Minister in the UK Government saying not


until after the exit. And they will be comfortable with something later


on. Not, however, with anything after May 2021, which is where I


think it becomes harder for the SNP. If Brexit is chaotic and nasty and


extraordinarily exhausting, as we expected to be, because after all,


every aspect of European law has to be unpicked may be integrated and


then removed, if all of that begins to hit people the most incredible


double they have ever experienced, then the longer it goes on, the


better it works for Scottish independence. -- guddle. When I


heard the announcement, I had shivers down my spine and went back


home and trying to find my posters and badges and I just want to get


going and change those people that said no before. The Scottish people


have certainly demanded it, by returning 57 out of 59 MPs, I think


that is another proof that the second referendum is required. I


wasn't actively involved in persuading other people last time,


other than through social media but I think I'm actually tread the


boards and knock on doors. Having to persuade former Yes voters who had


switched sides because of Europe gobsmacked I don't want Scotland to


come out of one United Kingdom of 60 million and then go into another one


of 400 million, where people have even less voice, so, no thank you.


One third of SNP supporters basically think the same as me. What


kind of reaction have you had since you announced publicly you were


moving from yes to no? People Act as though I have betrayed the faith, I


have been called a traitor, I've been told to get out, I have been


told I am a liar, the ultimate insult is chilly unionist. Other


voters are switched from no to yes because of the exit. My reasons are


twofold, I believe there is an economic case for Scotland to remain


in the single market, we cannot do that if we leave. The other is a


moral case, I think that liberal democracy in Europe is under threat


moral case, I think that liberal and to say no two that sort of


thinking is important for Scotland. But for Nicola Sturgeon that is the


small matter of agreeing a date first. If only it was as easy as


days gone by... # Can it be that it


was so simple then? Joining me now from Linlithgow


is the Cabinet Secretary Fiona Hyslop, on the assumption that


the Scottish Parliament votes for another referendum and Theresa May


says she will not put a Section 35 Order before Parliament, what


happens next? Well, welcome to Linlithgow, it is the case that we


have to get through the process, we not calling for a referendum now. It


will be an opportunity to learn more behind Brexit opportunity is going


to be so this week is important because this is a vote for the


Scottish Parliament, the elected Scottish Parliament, in terms of the


process of securing the discussions around Section 30... Sure, but one


the reason may refuses and says, I am not ruling out a referendum, wait


until Brexit has taken effect and see what effect it has only Scottish


economy, by all means come and see me and we will have a discussion,


what do you say? Well, there are two sides to that. The first part of it


is about Section 30 trans-Pennine the powers to have the timetable and


DP legislation to have a referendum. But of course, Theresa May has not


said they would not be a referendum at all. She thinks it should not


happen now. We do not want now and what we wanted at the time when we


have more information. So, that first part, that process to make


sure powers transferred, Theresa May could agree to that as of now and


the discussions about the timetable, and the First Minister has said she


is willing to have discussions with Theresa May, those could take place.


The second part is making sure we have information about what the deal


might mean. One aspect of that is, can we have the referendum at a time


when we know what the relationships might be with customs union, that is


a huge economic consequence to Scotland, we don't even know within


days of the Article 50 being triggered, or the customs union


position might be for the UK Government. If we wait too long,


that would see Scotland suffer and the idea of 5% of the GDP reduction


for the Scottish economy because we're out of the single market would


have consequences, so waiting too long may leave it too late for the


Scottish economy and the Scottish people.


Sorry, what is too long? If the British Government or indeed the


Scottish Conservatives say, look, whatever the dealers, wait for a few


years until we see evolving are consequences for Scotland you


forecast actually happen. In terms of the substance of the issue,


rather on the process, what is the argument against that? Even if you


are correct, you have accepted that Scotland will have to reapply for


membership of the EU anyway, so what is a matter whether it happens in


2018, 2019, 2020, or 2023 for that matter? It doesn't really matter,


does it? Well, we have a choice and we need clarity. We need to know


what type of deal the UK wants. Remember Michel Barnier and David


Davis this week echoing Act, determined that the deal would need


to be known and the circumstances and arrangements by autumn 2018 to


have application across Europe or the other countries. Wouldn't it be


ironic if every other country across the EU could decide whether this was


a good enough deal but the people of Scotland could not? Particularly


when 62% had voted to remain. But you're talking about processes, I am


talking about substance. The point I am making is that if it is accepted


that Scotland will have to reapply to join the European Union, should


that be your policy in a referendum campaign? What doesn't matter if it


is 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, if you want to have another referendum, on


the substance of the issue, it is that you want to join the EU, it


doesn't have to be in 20182019. In terms of the substance, coming out


of the single market will have huge economic consequences. We will know


by automating, and if we do not know I would be very concerned about UK


Government position, what the arrangements might be, we want to be


part of the EU, that is our policy. The circumstances that we would find


ourselves in at the point at which the UK leads, would be far far


clearer in 18 months' time, when the deal is European Union. But you have


not yet answered the point about substance. The Conservatives and the


British Government will say that we do not believe the consequences of


coming out of the EU will be as dire as your forecasting. By did we not


wait and see what the consequences actually argument if you're correct,


by all means have a referendum and you will probably win but at least


give it a chance to see what happens. Is that not just common


sense? Well, I think a wish and a pair, relying on a hard Tory


right-wing Government, is not what we can accept. If they want to slash


taxes, regulation and workers' rights, the disincentive to


investment, there are discussions happening all over Europe about


financial companies moving to Luxembourg or to Dublin. I think


this is a very real issue. The substance cannot wait for years to


find out if perhaps the UK Government will...


It can wait for a couple of years can't it? Many members of the public


will say, we don't know what this argument is about, let's wait and


see what happens after Brexit and if you are right, we'll support you in


another referendum but we don't want to have one that soon. You don't


seem to have any arguments are doing that either. Only today, we've got


some fantastic results for the growth of the exports of the


Scottish sector. ?156 million increase in the food exports. 153 on


food and drink to Europe. If we don't know what the standards of the


exports of our food companies exporting into the EU are by the


time we leave it in 2019, that puts our food exports at a disadvantage.


There are jobs dependent on our food industry and a successful industry,


we want that to continue, which is why we have to have the clarity


we want that to continue, which is about whether the UK Government will


still have any arrangement to allow access to the single market or


preferably membership of the single market. We've set out compromise


proposals and we are taking the substance of the Scottish economy


very seriously which is why the timetable set out by the First


Minister is very sensible. timetable set out by the First


running out of time. Can we be clear, if you at some point have


another referendum campaign, the SNP's policy will be for Scotland to


rejoin the European Union as a full member? Yes, our policy is... And to


rejoin the common fisheries policy? In terms of our negotiations, we


want to be in the best possible position and that is why we need to


have the referendum before the UK leaves. We have to leave it there.


We will leave you to your loch, not With me now are the Scottish Deputy


Leader of the party that's said No to another independence referendum


now and the co-convenor of the party without whom the SNP will lose


Tuesday's vote in Holyrood. What... Will you vote for another


referendum? We decided as long ago as October to call for an order.


What is your mandate? As a political party? Our mandate for policy comes


from our members. You stood last year and in your manifesto, the


entire basis for the SNP saying they have a mandate for another


referendum, you said nothing about having another referendum. We didn't


anticipate there would be... Like most people... Let me read it to


you, you said if there is another referendum, it should come about by


the will of the people and referendum, it should come about by


driven by calculations of party political advantage. Where is the


will of the people for another referendum? We suggested a citizens


initiative. Where is it? It was intended to be a way in which we


could judge the appetites... Can I answer the question. What we


suggested was a way of... "It should come about by the will of the


people." We never suggested the Scottish Parliament should be


stripped of its ability to make a decision. One way of judging public


appetite... The reality has changed. In June last year, the world changed


around us. I know that, the entire basis of the SNP's case for another


referendum is that they have what they call a cast iron mandate


because of what they said in the manifesto they put to the people of


Scotland only last year. Your manifesto doesn't give you any


mandate to vote at the moment for another referendum. Arguably, if you


vote, you are in breach of your manifesto. I do not think that.


Where is the will of the people? We're not in breach of the


possession our party members decided. You no mandate from the


people who voted last year which is the reason you are in Parliament in


the first place. This is not just about the Greens. The entire basis


of the Scottish Government saying it has a mandate is because of the cast


iron mandate it has, they can only win this vote this week with your


support and you are arguably in breach of your manifesto and


certainly, there is no mandate in your manifesto so from precisely the


reasons the Scottish Government say this is legitimate, you are going to


make it illegitimate. When you have an election, the winning party has a


responsibility to implement its manifesto. A party in opposition


needs to look at its policy and in June last year, the world changed


around us and our party debated how to respond to that and our members


voted in favour of a motion. You got the press release just like everyone


else. You ought to either may be not to vote against it this week but the


very least, you ought to abstain. Given the way the parliamentary


arithmetic works, abstaining would be functionally equivalent, the SNP


will gain a majority in the Scottish Parliament on any issue if anyone


opposition party abstained so are abstaining basically says we are in


favour of... Do you think... It's not just about the Greens, the


entire argument of the SNP is that they have a cast iron mandate but


entire argument of the SNP is that they don't. Not if they are relying


on the support of a party which doesn't have any mandate. I think


Patrick is dancing on the head of a pin. The referendum was eventually


supported by 92% of the people and... To have a referendum. A super


majority of every single MSP in the Parliament voting for it. That


consent does not exist at this point. We are told this morning only


32% support it. Do you think relying on the Greens affects its


legitimacy? I do. In any event, I don't think the Scottish Government


has ignored these resolutions of the Scottish Parliament over the last


six weeks, health and education, the funding Council, the police. Nicola


Sturgeon has three times ignored the Scottish Parliament. What exactly


are the Conservatives saying? If you are saying, let's do the Brexit


negotiations and see what happens and then have a referendum after


that, I think some people will understand that. There seem to be


some attempts by Conservatives like Ruth Davidson to say, we mean, they


would have to be a period of several years until we see how Brexit runs


out and that is not reasonable. The Prime Minister has said it is. We


have to leave the European Union and we then have to see how Scotland are


settling down in the new arrangement. They can then be a


referendum at the point there is clear public support for one and


that is the crucial point. There is none at the moment. Many people


watching this will say, we can see the logic saying let's do the Brexit


deal first but now they are changing the rules and saying there has to be


a majority in the opinion polls and we have to have several years after


Brexit. What you are doing is trying to put this off until the 2020


Scottish election. I'm saying what Nicola Sturgeon said would that be


it would be wrong to ask for the Scottish people to vote in another


referendum until there is evidence they had changed their minds and


that is in there. What do you think of that? This idea of putting it off


until some years after Brexit has happened is essentially saying we


will drag you off a cliff and let's wait and see what happens. The


consequences of leaving the European Union are so profoundly damaging


economically, politically, socially, environmentally, that this... I


wanted to get you on the democracy of this because some people will


say, it's reasonable to wait until after Brexit. But some people will


say, if the Scottish Parliament is then denied after that for a period


of years, this looks like the Conservatives are just manoeuvring


so there will be another Scottish election, the SNP might lose the


majority they have with you and they might lose that. So this is just


party political manoeuvring. That manoeuvring is clearly part of their


party political manoeuvring. That calculation. The Democratic argument


is clear, what's going to happen for the next couple of years. This


period of uncertainty is the result of the Brexit shambles going on. The


first 18 months of it, we will see a government that we did not choose


negotiating with EU institutions on which we will no longer be


represented. For a Brexit path Scotland did not vote for. After


that, six months in which every other EU member state gets a chance


to ratify it. In this process, critically important to this


country, Scottish voters are the only people in the whole of Europe


who will not have a voice and that is unacceptable. Will you work for a


better argument for your mandate between now and Wednesday, it will


have to be more convincing? My party mix of policy democratically on the


conference floor and our members vote for it. We took a motion and...


On the contents of Brexit because Brexit changed the world. When this


row develops, will you say, isn't it reasonable to say, from your point


of view, not before Brexit, but after Brexit, yes, we recognise the


Scottish Parliament has legitimacy? If the people of Scotland want


another referendum... That's what the First Minister and others said,


they had to be clear, public expression of support for another


referendum and it's not there. Why does everyone else in Europe gets to


choose the country's future except the people of Scotland? I know you


want to carry on but we cannot. Sitting patiently in Edinburgh


through the programme so far is constitutional expert


Professor Michael Keating - Just on this question of the


European Union, are we now accepting that Scotland will one way or


another, as to says, leave the European Union or is they ate


possibility if there was a referendum towards the end of the


Brexit process, Scotland could somehow stay in? If there was a


referendum before Brexit occurred, it would be possible to try to get a


bridging arrangement and eventually get into the European Union. The


danger of having a referendum after we've left, we will be out of the


European Union, into whatever arrangement the UK negotiated and it


would be difficult to pick. One halfway has suggested, is Scotland


could become independent going into the European economic area, which


would keep it in the single market, along with Norway, maybe it would


then be able to go for EU membership that would take time. There is an


argument from your point of view, if people are in favour of


independence, there is an argument for having a referendum before the


Brexit process is finished and then saying, let's have some transitional


deal for Scotland? That would be possible, that is technically


possible. Independence itself would be complicated and take some time.


We will have the difficult negotiations anyway. This European


economic area alternative is being talked about a lot more recently. As


a transition thing, not as an alternative? Some people might see


it as a permanent arrangement. The downside is that you have to accept


all of the policies but you don't get any say. The advantages, we


would keep the single market, we wouldn't be in the agricultural and


fisheries policies and we could negotiate a free arrangement with


the United Kingdom. I'm interested in your take on this week's


stand-off. One assumes Theresa May, I may be wrong, but for the sake of


the argument, that she won't have a section 30 odd and if in a few


years' time, we want another referendum after Brexit, let's talk


about it. What happens, anything the Scottish Government can do? They


could try to stage a unilateral referendum, try to find a form of


words that would get around the courts. There was a few years ago


talk about a question of whether the Scottish Government should seek new


powers to negotiate Scottish independence. If that got through,


the problem would be political because they referendum is only


convincing if both sides participate. This has been the case


in Quebec in the past, the federal government did not recognise the


referendum but never the less, they participated.


Just to clarify the law, the power to hold a referendum or not is


reserved to Westminster? That's quite clear, the Scottish Government


has agreed that in its consultation paper on the referendum. Whether


some other form of words could be found to make it legal, I do not


know. It has been tried in Catalonia a couple of years ago and didn't


really get anywhere. The question a couple of years ago and didn't


was so unclear legal position was unclear and the did not turn out and


did not really resolve anything. I Act on that cheerful note of


positivity, Michael Keating, we will have to leave it there.


Now it's time to take a look back and at events coming


Joining me this week are the Sunday times Scotland columnist


and the SNP's former head of communications -


Kevin Pringle and Herald columnist and former advisor


to Alistair Darling - Catherine MacLeod.


The obvious first question is, are you going to get involved in another


campaign if one happens? I think what will happen. I think people


across Scotland would love to be involved in such a campaign on both


sides. It is a question of when, rather than if. That seems clear,


even from what Theresa May said last week. The difficulty she got into


was that it looks very much like blocking the referendum, in terms of


blocking... Your carefully avoiding my question. Do you want to get


involved? Of course. But we are in the very early stages and we are in


a battle of hearts and minds over who will win the banner for


reasonableness. Which side sounds more reasonable? It looks


unreasonable, I think, in terms of the timescale the First Minister set


out, to knock back the request. It was accepted last year by


conservatives in Scotland that it would be wrong for the UK Government


to block a referendum. She's not here to defend herself but with


Davidson would say I am not standing against a referendum but I do not


agree that there should be one in the near future. I think that the


campaign is for who can win the contest for reasonableness. That is


what we'll see when you next few days and weeks. I was a very


convoluted answer to the question, are you going to get back involved?


Do you have a shorter answer? Well, if there is a campaign, and I am not


convinced there will be, but I would get involved. I am surprised that


Kevin said that as an appetite for another campaign. He mixes in


different circles from me. He said it was a battle for hearts and


minds. He said there were a lot of people on both sides looking forward


to the campaign. But that is not in my experience. A lot of people feel


referendumed out. They would be dismayed at the prospect of another


referendum campaign. If you want to hear what Alistair Darling thinks,


you would have to ask him. But what I do think is that there are dozens


of meetings going on in London between officials in Scotland and


officials in the UK Government and I think the less that we do to


undermine the UK's position in the negotiations with Brussels, the


better. Everybody, both sides of the border, want to have a tether free


trade agreement, to protect workers' rights, to look after EU citizens


and British citizens abroad. We should focus on that, not on whether


or not we want to break up the UK. Playing the politics of this will be


interesting, Kevin. There is this odd thing is that where everyone


knows about the SNP will say our timetable is reasonable, actually


they will look for any excuse for a referendum. And everyone knows that


everyone who is against the referendum would like to never have


a referendum again. It will be politically how you cut through


that. Yes, I think opinion is quite balanced on this question. Even


looking at the Sunday Times poll, the idea of having a referendum by


the time of the Brexit negotiations being over, which is actually


October, 2018, according to the European Commissioner's chief


negotiator, Michel Barnier, that actually reflect the First


Minister's timetable for a referendum. It is quite balanced.


Probably about 50-50. 52% was suggested by one hole. What about


the idea from Jackson Carlaw that the Conservatives are raising, that


there should be a bedding in period, it is not just about voting to leave


and that is it. Let's wait and see if the dire things the Nicola


Sturgeon says would arise from that actually do arise or not. Because


they can't point the way the economy has performed since friends and say,


look, all these forecasts of gloom and doom turned out to be wrong so


far, maybe they will happen, but let's wait to see. But I don't think


it can be open-ended. There was a famous anecdote where someone was


asked about the impact of something in the 1970s and he said it was too


early to tell. I think the point of judgment surely would be around


about the autumn of 2018, when we know that parameters and detail of


Brexit negotiations. And also, as a matter of democracy, given a mandate


that was secured in the election last year obviously applies to its


Holyrood parliament, I think is a matter of democracy, the question


needs to be passed before the end of this Parliament... The Greens


arguably do not have a mandate. As Patrick said, even if the Greens


abstained, the SNP majority carries anyway. There will be a Scottish


Parliament vote on Wednesday and will formally call for a referendum


within the timescale of autumn 2018, Spring 2019 but I detected from the


First Minister's Speech yesterday that she is prepared to negotiate


about that. What do you make of this, Catherine? I think Nicola's


position is understandable, she can enter politics to the UK and that is


what she wants do. What Patrick was saying, I do not understand at all.


Here is a party, a Green Party, who, the environment should be their


raison d' tre for being in politics, raison d'etre for being in politics,


they have got a position, Scotland has a position, the UK has a


position to negotiate the best for the environment in Scotland and yet


they seem to be undermining and ready to undermine the negotiations


that are going on at the moment. The timescale? I don't know. I think


2018 will be too early because people in Scotland will be being


asked to vote for a pig in a poke... Will you be better to leave it for a


few years after that? None of us know what we're voting for. People


talk about hard Brexit, soft Brexit, these are meaningless. Theresa May,


I am not here to defend her, but she will be wanting the best Brexit


outcome for the UK. What people mean by hard or soft, I have no idea. In


2018, if that is when they think we should ask, what will be the promise


to the Scottish people and when the team? Before anybody has any more


votes, I think that is what was wrong with the original... What


about this conservative ideology of a few years to see if it actually


works? I can see sense in that. It is better to know what people are


voting for to give people a chance to have a sensible vote on their


future rather than putting your finger in the wind. There will be


another Scottish election in 2021, so the mandate runs out, so they


would before then? Yes. The mandate was achieved for this Parliament and


that is when it needs to happen. Thank you for joining us. I have a


feeling this debate may continue. That's all for this week,


I'm back at the same time next week.


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

As the NHS in England warns of a severe financial crisis, Andrew talks to Chris Hopson, head of NHS Providers. He is also joined by former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg MP and Labour Party campaign and elections chair Andrew Gwynne MP.

On the political panel are the Sun's Tom Newton Dunn and journalists Isabel Oakeshott and Steve Richards.

Download Subtitles