11/06/2017 Sunday Politics Scotland

But stay with us for more drama as we can now go straight

to the Sunday Politics with Andrew Neil who's

We are indeed in the sunshine. Welcome from the heart of

Westminster. Theresa May reappointing key figures

to the Cabinet, sacking had to closest aides, Nick Timothy and

Fiona Hill. After Conservative MPs demanded their removal in the

Conservative failure to win an overall majority in the House of

Commons. Over the next hour and a bit we'll continue to take stock on

the remarkable events of the last 72 hours and try to work out where we

go from here. First though, here's Adam Fleming

with a reminder of the high octane I was going to say this

chair is quite warm. Michael Fallon's bum

was on this chair. Bums on seats, its election

night at the BBC, hosted This is David Dimbleby's

actual seat! Look, he's got four pencils,

stopwatch and a calculator. And what we are saying

is the Conservatives Note, they don't have an overall

majority at this stage. 314 for the Conservatives,

that's down 17. Luckily there were plenty

of politicians who never are. What does this exit

poll actually mean? Well, if it's accurate it means

Theresa May has just presided over the greatest catastrophe that I can

think of in the Conservative We haven't seen a seat change hands

and we are hearing about possible Conservative gains in the Midlands

and losses in London, People will write Ph.D.s about the

2017 election Labour candidates were winning

in unexpected places. Tories were losing in unexpected

places, including eight members of the Government,

like Treasury minister The Home Secretary, Amber Rudd,

held on in Hastings...just. OK, the former Deputy Prime Minister

and former leader of the Liberal Democrats,

Nick Clegg, has been beaten I've always sought to stand

by the liberal values I believe in, but I, of course, have encountered

this evening something many people have encountered before tonight,

and I suspect many people will encounter after tonight,

which is - in politics you live by the sword, and you

die by the sword. Lib Dem leader Tim Farron

was narrowly re-elected in Cumbria, unlike the SNP's Westminster

leader Angus Robertson, who lost his seat, former First

Minister Alex Salmond defeated too. The Scottish National Party have

lost many fine parliamentarians this evening, and that is a grievous blow

to the SNP. But overall the results in Scotland

show the SNP will have won a majority of the seats in this

country and a majority of the vote. Paul Nuttall failed to get

elected in Skegness So, the green room looking a bit

ruined, a bit like Ukip I think we are doing

better than the SNP. We deliberately didn't stand in some

seats to try to give Brexit I think it's quite interesting

the main leading Brexit candidates in this election

are getting their seat back. Right, it's dawn in the real world

and I found a pub that has been open What state are they going

to be in, in there? And was it young people

who had seen Corbyn, voted, and got the T-shirt who helped

the Labour leader to Right, five past five

in the morning, we are outside Jeremy Corbyn's house in Islington

in north London. Surprisingly small press pack

for the man who's destroyed Jeremy!

Jeremy! If there is a message from

tonight's result, it's this - the Prime Minister called

the election because Well, the mandate she's got is lost

Conservative seats, lost votes, I would have thought that's enough

to go actually and make way for a government that will be truly

representative of all Theresa May did the opposite,

popping to the palace, What the country needs more

than ever is certainty, and having secured the largest

number of votes and the greatest number of seats in the general

election, it is clear that only the Conservatives and Unionist Party

have the legitimacy and ability to provide that certainty

by commanding a majority As we do, we will continue to work

with our friends and allies, in the Democratic Unionist Party

in particular. 15 hours after election night

started, it's all over. And joined by Tom Newton Dunn, Julia

Hartley-Brewer and Steve Richards. Julia, why did it go so wrong for

the Conservatives? You can't run a presidential campaign if you have a

candidate with less than the charisma of this desk. If you're not

going to put her out to debate, if she's not coming to the people and

selling herself, which she studiously didn't do, you can't run

that campaign. There was the possibility another leader could

have walked that with 800 majority against Jeremy Corbyn. Another

campaign, we will never know, could have delivered a majority of 30 or

40, without the deal with the DUP. I'm not saying it was fundamentally

wrong to call the election at this time, but it was the wrong candidate

and the wrong campaign. The third election in a row that Labour has

failed to win. It was still a substantial and historic achievement

for Jeremy Corbyn. If you consider the context in which this election

was called, Theresa May, on her honeymoon to die for, politically,

with Labour voters split over Brexit, suddenly calling an election

when most Labour MPs were not willing to cooperate with whatever

campaign was being held by Labour, for them to do as well as they have

done is an extraordinary achievement. They got no more seats

than Gordon Brown in 2010, roughly the same. But the context couldn't

have been more daunting, and to wipe out a majority of this figure, who

six weeks ago was walking on water and appeared to have Brexit as part

of her ammunition against the split Labour vote, remains astonishing.

One of the errors she made and so many others she made and probably

all of us, was to underestimate the potency of Corbyn and the relatively

modest social Democrat manifesto. Doesn't it take stupidity bordering

on genius to turn a 20 point lead at the start of the campaign into a

hung parliament? It does and it did. That's what happened. I think the

lead was soft, largely because Theresa May was unknown. We know her

because we have been having lunch and interviews with her for years on

end. The public didn't know her. They got to know her and they

discovered she was the Maybot, which is the term that will stick after

this campaign. I differ from my two colleagues here, it wasn't the

amazing right of Corbyn, it was a complete failure to remember that

people wanted a revolution when they voted for Brexit, and she came

across as the party and candidate of continuity. As things stand, we are

where we are. Where are we?! Where do we go from here? I was with

College Green with you in the early hours of Friday morning and I didn't

see anybody that said, see you back here in October. A second election?

God forbid, nobody wants a second election, but I can't see the Tories

being able to stay in power with the DUP and I'm personally very unhappy

with a lot of DUP policies, their stance on gay rights, capital

punishment, abortion rights, and there will be an awful lot of

people, floating voters, who will recoil in horror at that, even on

unofficial lines. I get the sense Jeremy Corbyn will be up for a

second election, as quick as it comes. I'm sure he is, and if there

was one company might well win it, which is why there won't be. All

logic points to another election but I don't think there will be one,

because I don't think any Conservative Prime Minister will

feel strong and confident enough after the trauma of this. They would

have to be 50 points ahead in the polls to take the risk. I think

rather like between 74 and 79 we will have a frail and fragile House

of Commons with a minority government for quite a long time,

simply because whoever is Prime Minister will not have the

confidence to call an election. So the Tories fear of a quick second

election could well result in them going more leniently on Mrs May than

they really want to. We have seen already, Miss Mrs May is still Prime

Minister. That wouldn't have happened by now if they thought they

could win a second snap election. I think they will stabilise. They are

also desperate to get Brexit negotiations underway. That's

another reason she is still there. She is the one who needs to pull the

trigger. Most of the Tory party are aching to have the trigger pulled.

When that is bold, when I have stabilised, and when Jeremy Corbyn

is back the House of Commons, where remember he's not very good, I think

they might your right. Lots more to talk about. Thank you for being with

me in the open air, the Westminster penthouse, open to the world. I just

need to find the cocktail bar. Although it is early.

So, let's take a look at the election results

Here's how the parties fared in the election on Thursday.

And here's how they got on in the previous general

As you can see, the Labour vote is up dramatically, by ten points.

But the Conservative vote also rose quite significantly, by five points.

The SNP and the Liberal Democrats both saw declines in their support.

And Ukip's vote has almost completely collapsed,

from 13% in 2015 to just 2% this time around.

So the resurgence of two-party politics is one of the key

The combined vote share of the two main parties is now 82%,

the highest it's been since the election in 1970.

And it's more if you exclude Northern Ireland.

That's partly explained by the collapse of Ukip.

According to one estimate, the Conservatives may have got 57%

It's also thought that last year's EU referendum has helped to polarise

support along the traditional Labour and Conservative lines.

In polls carried out before the election,

it was estimated that 50% of remain voters supported Labour and nearly

two-thirds of leave voters supported the Conservatives.

There's also speculation that a rise in the number of young voters may be

behind the boost in Labour's support - but we don't yet have

But it's notable that Labour did well in certain constituencies

For example, it's thought that the large number of students

in Canterbury helped Labour win the seat for the first time

ever, with a 9% swing from the Conservatives.

The two main parties have also seen changes in their number of seats.

Labour lost six seats but gained 36, giving them a net gain of 30 seats.

Most of those Labour gains were in England,

where the party took 27 seats, mainly from the Conservatives.

They also gained three seats in Wales and six

As for the Conservatives, they lost a total of 33

seats but also gained 20, giving them a net loss of 13 seats.

Most of those 20 Conservative gains came in Scotland,

where the party took 12 seats from the SNP.

Meaning the Scottish Tories are allowing Mrs May to try to form a

government this week! Who would have thought!

In England, the Conservatives won

Joining me now from Glasgow is the brains behind Thursday

night's astoundingly accurate exit poll, the polling expert

And John, the Tories saw a 5-point rise in the share of the votes to

42%, very high by recent historical standards, but still lost over a

dozen seats, why? Under our first past the post electoral system, the

share of the vote you get is almost irrelevant. What is crucial is how

you do relative to your opponents. In particular so far as Conservative

and Labour are concerned, what determines the fate is the gap

between them. In the 2015 election, the Conservatives had a 7-point

lead, that only got them a majority of 12, and somebody should have said

to the Prime Minister before she pulled the trigger, you do realise

you have to be a long way ahead of the Labour Party in order to

increase your majority. The opinion polls say you are at that point now

but if they fall you are in trouble. In the end of the Conservative lead

is 2.5 points, which is not enough to secure a majority given that

Northern Ireland is out of the frame, Scotland still has a majority

of third party MPs, and there are still Liberal Democrats and greens.

This now looks like a two party race once again. We have still got much

more in the House of Commons than in 1970 which makes a hung parliament

much more likely. Meanwhile there weren't that many marginal seats. It

is the relative standing of the parties that's crucial. And how do

we explain the 10% rise in Labour's share of the vote? There's a lot of

anecdotal evidence of a youth Surge, and I'd like to know if we can nail

that down, but also the work of the swings too. Some green voters moved

into Labour, some Liberal Democrats, even perhaps some Ukip voters moved

into Labour, what do we know? I think we can pick up three crucial

patterns. The first is a lot of people who at the beginning of the

campaign said are usually vote Labour but cannot imagine doing so

under Jeremy Corbyn, he so hopeless. Because of his relatively strong

performance they came back into the fold so by the time we got to

polling day there was many 2015 voters who said they would vote

Labour again. That was the crucial point, getting the faithful back on

board. It is certainly clear there was a substantial swing to young

voters during the campaign. Labour started off well in that group, the

opinion polls had it around 65% by the time the election came. We don't

know exactly the turnout amongst young people, but certainly the

pattern of the results suggests the turnout was going up more in places

where there were young people so probably somewhat more of them did

turn out to vote. The third crucial patent is that this was an election

which to some degree voters did polarise around the issue of the

shape of Brexit, weather you are a Remain or Leave voter. Labour's

progress during the campaign was disproportionately amongst Remain

voters so although the parties were not thought to be that far apart on

the shape of Brexit, they seem to be sufficiently far apart that Labour

was more attractive for those less keen on the kind of Brexit Theresa

May had in mind. John Curtice, thank you as always. We are now going to

Salford. Graham Brady, you think Mrs May should soldier on, why? There's

no other party in a position to form a government. Clearly these aren't

the circumstances that either the Prime Minister nor I nor my

colleagues would want to be dealing with at the moment but this is what

we are presented with and it's our duty to make the best of it and try

to offer government as resilient as it can be an quite difficult times.

But is she ever going to be more than a caretaker leader now? I think

one of the odd things about the experience of the last 12 months is

Theresa May performed well as Prime Minister and the public rather liked

her as Prime Minister. I think few people would say the campaign

succeeded in projecting her qualities as strongly as it could

to government, albeit in difficult to government, albeit in difficult

circumstances and dependent on support from other parties, I think

we will see people once again seeing the steady, calm, thoughtful Theresa

May as Prime Minister. Do you fear a leadership election might lead to a

second general election, and that prospect terrifies you, doesn't it?

I'm not sitting here terrified, but I think there is zero appetite

amongst the public for another general election at the moment, and

I don't detect any great appetite amongst my colleagues for presenting

the public with a massive additional dose of uncertainty by getting

involved in a rather self-indulgent Conservative Party internal election

campaign. That's because they are frightened they might lose, that's

why they don't want another one. I think most of us are motivated by a

belief in the national interest and we are responsible people who want

to try to offer that responsible, steady government, especially at

this point as we know it's just a matter of days until those important

negotiations on leaving the European Union begins. It's a time when we

need experience and responsible people in Government, and I think

it's our duty to try to offer that. Many Tories have said to me that Mrs

May must never be allowed to leave your party into another general

election, do you agree with that? No, these are judgments that will be

made in the fullness of time by the Prime Minister and by colleagues, as

is always the case with any Prime Minister and leader of the party,

but at the moment we are resolutely focused on trying to make sure the

country can have the responsible study government that it really

needs at this point, and that should be our focus too. In what way should

Mrs May change? I think there are all sorts of lessons we can pick up

from the campaign and the reaction to it, even from the thing that

surprised most of us, the way in which Jeremy Corbyn, in spite of all

of his manifest failings, in particular his extreme political

views, was able to present himself in a rather avuncular way. I didn't

ask about Mr Corbyn. I'm saying I think there are some lessons there,

in terms of relaxing little bit into communicating with the electorate.

It is something she does very well in person, increasingly so since she

became Prime Minister. That's not the experience of the campaign, the

more people saw her the more they didn't like the colour of her gym.

It didn't communicating the campaign, but also I think we need

to see a much more open and inclusive approach within

government, within Parliament as well. That's not just a kind of

desirable outcome, which I think always would have been desirable and

I've had this conversation with previous prime ministers as well.

It's a necessity in the circumstances, trying to make a hung

parliament and minority government work really requires a much more

inclusive approach. You are being brought into the decision taking

process on the deal being done with the DUP? I have said to the Prime

Minister I think it is important she speaks to colleagues as soon as

possible. I'm hoping to bring it forward to tomorrow so she can

talk... But are you being involved in this more inclusive process? I am

not on a negotiating team but I saw the Prime Minister very early after

the election had taken place, I went to London on Friday afternoon and

met with her and we had a discussion about all sorts of things that need

to be addressed over the coming days and weeks. When Mrs May spoke in

Downing Street after she'd gone to see the Queen, it was another

robotic performance. It didn't even express any regrets for the Tories

that had lost. You had to into being to get her to make a second

statement, didn't you? No, she was already going to give the interview

she gave. You urged her to do so. She was already scheduled to give

the interview. I happen to see her in between the statement and

interview, and I was keen to press home that in the past Conservative

Party that has been very poor in its communications with colleagues who

have lost their seats in the general election, that is something none of

my colleagues likes to see so I certainly did say that I think it's

important we do better this time. What bits of the manifesto will you

now have to jumk for the Queen 's speech? That will be an interesting

process to witness. I don't think it will just be the Queen 's speech, it

will be the whole experience of government. There's no point in

sailing ahead with items that were in the manifesto which we won't get

through Parliament so I think we will have to work very carefully. No

doubt we will slim down the Queen's speech. So tell me, which bits will

you have to junk? Back to the triple lock on pensioners and no grammar

schools? How about that? I would be upset if we couldn't make any

progress on allowing people to have a choice of grammar schools if they

wanted. Are you hoping they will drop it? If we cannot get things

through Parliament, we cannot do them so I certainly would suggest

that we can look for instance at a rather modest sort of pilots,

opening some state grammar schools in inner urban areas, especially

where education at the moment is not offering great opportunities to

people of lower income backgrounds. I think that is something that could

command quite broad support. I have heard from friends on the Labour

ventures quietly that they would like that approach to be taken. We

will certainly have to trim our policies carefully according to what

we think Parliament will support. Graham Brady in Salford, thank you.

Let's go to Nottingham where I am joined by Anna Soubry. In the early

hours of Thursday morning you called on Theresa May to consider her

position. Is that still your view? Yes, she obviously has considered

her position and she is set to go in due course, but I very much agree

with Graham, we don't want her to go now. We want a period of stability

and she has got to reach out and form a consensus and she has got to

form a consensus in particular on Brexit. She has now got to make sure

she understands that the British people have rejected a hard Brexit.

We are leaving the EU, I don't think there's any change there but we are

not going to be leaving the EU in some irresponsible weights that will

damage future generations in our country and there's a big lesson to

be learned as you've already identified in your programme, about

younger people and the message they have sent out in this election. I

will come onto Brexit in the moment, but you have said she is set to go

in due course, what does that mean? I don't know. After the summer,

before the end of the year? I would have thought so. She is flawed,

she's in a desperate situation. Her position is untenable and I think

she knows that and she is doing the right thing, which is she's got rid

of these special advisers, she's brought in Gavin Barwell, and she's

listening to people from all parts of not just the party but the

country. She has got to reach out more and broaden the base within her

Cabinet, and she's got to include people from all parts of my party as

well as all points of view across Parliament. So what impact in your

view will, as you describe it, Mrs May's much more weakened position,

what impact will that have on her current Brexit stance? Will she have

to change it and water it down? Yes, absolutely. The country did not vote

for a hard Brexit. This is based on my experience of having knocked on

the literally thousands of dollars, actually since February. I have

listened to a lot of people, and the idea of a hard Brexit, people didn't

like that. It's one of the reasons we haven't won this election. They

accept we are leaving, I accept it, but we want to get the best deal and

she must not turn her back on British business as I'm afraid she

has. She's got to listen to British business and Philip Hammond, she's

got to listen to Greg Clark. Wise owls who know what British business

once and they want that single market and they also wanted proper

immigration policy that recognises we need immigrants and free movement

in order for British business to continue to flourish.

She has to at least listen to these things, and she hasn't in the past.

Is that what Ruth Davidson, leader of the Scottish Conservatives, about

the only Conservative to emerge with credit on Thursday, is that what she

means? We should remain members of the single market, remain in the

customs union and put the economy before immigration. Is that what you

are talking about? Absolutely. And I always have. And in my literature I

made it very clear I would continue to make the case for the single

market and positive benefits of immigration. Although my majority

was reduced, I put on 1800 more votes. It's not about me, obviously,

it's about me being a Conservative, but I made my position clear and I

have not faulted on that. Turning our back on the customs union in

particular is the stuff of madness. The single market sees off the

Nationalists and their desire for a second referendum, although the

mighty Ruth Davidson is already done that with her remarkable result in

Scotland, but it would also solve the problem with Ireland. Don't you

risk reopening all those Tory divisions over Europe on this? I

haven't. You have held these views for a long time. There are 20 of

other, probably more Tories, who want what you call a hard Brexit. --

plenty of other. It's what the people want. But you don't have a

majority. At this election the people have spoken and they have

rejected the hard Brexit. I think we can all agree on that. That doesn't

mean to say we are not leaving the EU, we will leave the EU, and I

believe even people who voted to remain accept we are leaving. I

found very few angry Remainers on the doorsteps. People accept the

result, but they do not want a hard Brexit. That's the message coming

out from this and I hope Theresa May gets that. If she does, then she has

to build the con census. There's nothing to stop her working with

sensible people in the Labour Party, who also accept the referendum

result, no we will be leaving the EU, and know we have to get the best

deal, and we can't close our minds on the single market and Customs

union. What are the bits of the Tory manifesto you will now have to drop

to keep your new bedfellows happy in the DUP? I don't think we have

reached a deal yet with the DUP. But that is the aim. Apparently it's the

aim. I will tell you now, Andrew, you probably know far more than I

do. I get on well with a number of members of the DUP. I don't like a

lot of their policies on abortion, gay and lesbian issues, I completely

disagree with them, but if we can put those issues aside and put the

focus on making a stable government and putting the national interest

first, we might well make strides forward. Many people have been

talking about public services and public sector pay, but we have to do

recognise that at the same time we are going into choppy economic

waters, and that's why I think it's so important Theresa May listens to

Philip Hammond and puts him much more at the core and front of this

government. It's the economy that matters more than anything else.

That's one of the spectacular failings of the campaign. The issue

that was hardly mentioned during the campaign. Never mentioned it. Anna

Soubry, we will leave it there. After Theresa May had been to see

the Queen at Buckingham Palace on Friday she made a brief statement on

Friday. We can remind ourselves what she said.

We will continue to work with our friends and allies,

in the Democratic Unionist Party in particular.

Our two parties have enjoyed a strong relationship over many

years, and this gives me the confidence to believe

that we will be able to work together in the interests

This will allow us to come together as a country

and channel our energies towards a successful

Brexit deal that works for everyone in this country.

Securing a new partnership with the EU that guarantees our

That's what people voted for last June, that's what we will deliver.

I've been joined by the Conservative MP Dominic Raab -

a former government minister who's been tipped for a return in Theresa

We shall see. Welcome to the programme. Her two most senior

advisers have fallen on their swords. Most of the Cabinet has gone

to ground since the result. Could Theresa May be any more isolated? I

don't think that's true. You have three Cabinet ministers doing

television this morning. We are in the middle of a reshuffle, so you

wouldn't expect them all to be out on the airwaves, and we also in the

business of hammering out the detail on the supply and confidence

arrangement with the DUP. Where are we on that? On the question of Chief

of staff, a new appointment has been made, Gavin Barwell, I know him

well, a smart policy guide and also very sensitive on the political

radar and that shows we are moving forward. It was forced on her. I

think they did the honourable thing. The two aids that fell on their

sword? Yes. The key point is, looking forward, which we have to

do, we had the outcome of the election and the people have spoken

and we have to make the best of it. Gavin Barwell is an important

appointment. Conservative MPs across-the-board know, respect and

trust him. Nobody in the country has heard of him, but maybe that doesn't

matter. How many had heard of Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill before they

were appointed? They do now. Do you agree with Anna Soubry that Theresa

May is no more than a caretaker Prime Minister now? I don't.

Emotions are way up. But we still won the most votes and most seats.

My reading from talking to MPs across-the-board is the overwhelming

majority want to see Theresa May continue in office. As a matter of

necessity, the people have spoken, and we have to respect what the

people have decided, so we will do this supply and confidence

arrangement with the DUP. There are strong areas of overlap but we don't

agree on everything. The key thing is to give the country certainty and

direction moving forward. That's the only viable option and people are

rallying behind that. Not all. George Osborne said this morning on

the BBC that Mrs May was a dead woman walking. He has made the

transition from Conservative MP to mischievous journalist with ease.

Most MPs when they listen to that will think it's disloyal,

unprofessional and frankly pretty self-indulgent. In reality I think

it will shore up support among a lot of MPs for Theresa May. What went

wrong? I'm not going to candy coat, sugar-coat the result here. We did

far worse than expected and we need to figure out the lessons to learn.

I know it went wrong, but why? There isn't anyone thing. You have to take

time to learn the lessons. We need to show some humility about the

result. Nick Timothy has written a column that touches on some of the

issues from his perspective. To be honest with you, I'm focused now, I

missed all the drama and disappointment of not getting the

result we wanted, focus on the facts. We got 56 more seats than the

Labour Party and we are the only ones who can put together a

legitimate parliament that can also be affected, passing a judgment and

legitimate parliament that can also pass legislation, however tricky it

may be. That remains to be seen, you might not be able to do that. We are

the only ones, with the DUP, who could form a viable and effective

government that would reflect legitimately the outcome of the

election and we will focus 100% on that. Let's do that. Mrs May

promised strength and stability. We now have a hung parliament and she

is dependent on the DUP for the slimmest of majorities. There is

nothing strong and stable about that. I have said to you, I will not

tell you this result is the one we wanted. We are disappointed. It's

not strong and stable. It can still be effective. It's also the only

outcome that can respect and be legitimate of the outcome of the

election. At the end of the day, we had campaigning, we can differ on

the opinions, but the facts and parliamentary arithmetic is there.

The only way we can have an effective government of any time

that Del Paso budget is the Conservatives with the support of

the DUP. To do that you'll have to make compromises you would not have

to do make if you had won a substantial majority. What part of

the manifesto will have to go to get a budget and a confidence motion

through? 48 hours after the election I can't answer that definitively.

What we do have to do, every MP, whatever part of the country they

were elected, has to deliver as best can be manifesto commitments. At the

same time, that's what the country expects. At the same time we had

forced on us the need to be flexible. The people didn't vote for

your manifesto in the end. Something has to go. The triple lock for

pensioners that you were going to change, the DUP is in favour of the

triple lock. Does that bit of the manifesto go? You can ask me any

aspect of the manifesto, we'll know more answers the detail next week.

You were on our programmes more than any Cabinet minister. You will be

drafted back in. You should know. I don't bet too much money on the

tittle tattle in the media. We have the outline of the supply and

confidence arrangement with the DUP. We are hammering out the details.

Next week we will publish the details. What about social care? You

asking me about different points in a manifesto but you know I can't

answer that question until... I want to deliver as much of the manifesto

as possible. You don't have a mandate to do that. That's because

we've got... The Queen's speech is only a week away, a week tomorrow.

You are trying to work out what parts, Labour lost, but you didn't

win, and I'm trying to work out how you just said we will have to

comprise and make changes. It's legitimate to ask which parts... I'm

explaining I don't have the answers on the detail because until we have

formed the supply and confidence arrangement with the DUP, we will

not have those details. My starting point is that we deliver as much of

the manifesto as we conceivably can. That's what the country expects

because that's what they are elected us to do. They have given us their

verdict, we need to respect the outcome of the election and we will

not do it in the same way will as if we had a stonking majority,

obviously. The result has given a kind of new spring in the step of

politicians who wanted to remain in the European Union. What do you

make, and we heard Anna Soubry, and many others have said it as well,

that you need to reconsider your Brexit stands, and in their language

community soften your Brexit stands. Whether you are a Scottish, Welsh or

English MP, elected to Parliament behind me on the basis of a

manifesto that sets out in great detail, a 75 page white Paper, the

approach to Brexit. All this talk of hard Brexit, our ambition is to get

the best possible deal we can with our EU partners. Do you change your

stands because you didn't get a majority for your Brexit position.

Do you follow the advice of Ruth Davidson, who talked of an open

Brexit, framing a new Brexit strategy? Hard and soft Brexit, I

don't know exactly what Ruth means by that. But she did a great job in

Scotland. But every MP was elected on our manifesto. We will deliver

the plans of that manifesto as best we can, including and especially on

Brexit. Just a point of fact, obviously be Conservative number of

votes went up, Labour effectively... The vote share went up, but we lost

seats, but we are 56 seats ahead of the Labour Party. The Labour Party

effectively endorsed the leave the EU strategy we set out and they

didn't offer a alternative. So no change on the Brexit strategy? And

the anti-Brexit parties, the SNP and Lib Dem, both suffered a fall in

their vote share. The country has said they want us to make a success

of Brexit. So no change? The plans in the White Paper set out are the

right ones and the voters expect us to deliver on the manifesto we ran

on, whether you are a Scottish, English or Welsh MP. I can hear your

helicopter arriving to whisk you off to the wry ministerial meeting. Let

us know to the wry ministerial meeting. Let

u? know what Good morning and welcome

to Sunday Politics Scotland. With nine days to go before

Brexit negotiations begin, I'll be asking Scottish Government

minister Mike Russell how a diminished SNP presence

at Westminster plans And all smiles for the Tories here,

but why the reluctance Nothing is certain in life,

and especially not in the life When this election was called,

many commentators were confidently predicting that the Conservatives

would increase their majority - Now, they're rushing to explain

why they got it wrong - and why Theresa May got

it VERY wrong. What do the results mean

for Scotland's parties though - They have a lot to celebrate but on

Friday morning there was a sombre tone. The SNP was happy about

sending the most Scottish MPs to Westminster but reflecting on the

loss of some big beasts. I want to pay tribute to Angus Robertson. I

also want to make particular mention of Alex Salmond. Where does this

leave our second independence referendum? Nicola Sturgeon said,

watch this space. I will reflect on the result. Would it be wise to roll

back from the Independence Lane and listen to a different message from

voters? The SNP has had a track record of being a very competent

government and being able to manage policy well. Part of their problem

is they've been challenged on health care and education and have not been

delivering with the same degree of competence that they were

previously. It's very clear, the evidence shows that people support

the SNP because of the way they govern, not independence. Meanwhile,

the Scottish Conservatives chose the shadow of Stirling Castle to

introduce their MPs. Ruth Davidson has been cast as green maker. Now,

she must look on as the distinctly gay-unfriendly again to work with

the Tories. I sort of categoric reassurance there would be no

rollback of rights in the UK. We are the party of equal marriage. We

brought it forward in England and Wales. I wanted reassurances that we

would use our influence to advance those rates in Northern Ireland. The

speed with which Ruth Davidson moves could signal a shift in power. The

fact that came out as a public matter so quickly goes to show many

conservatives will be looking to assert themselves in Westminster

matters. She's already a fairly well-known figure across the UK and

I think that will only increase. Rutherglen town hall and Kezia

Dugdale was celebrating worth her six new MPs. But who was responsible

for this? Kezia Dugdale or her maligned boss, Jeremy Corbyn?

They've not always been in step and she did not want him to be leader.

I've done nothing but been behind Jeremy Corbyn all through this

campaign. There is a combined message of being a prounion party,

talking up the benefits of the United Kingdom but also showing how

we can do different. It may not be a case of Kezia Dugdale tucking into

humble pie. They may have concocted a successful formula. Between the

two of them they made a perfect pairing. On the question of

independence, it benefited them. She was saying they will not have

another, but in London he was saying, and sometimes in Scotland,

the door is open. The message got over, they were looking for the

final nudge. The Scottish Liberal Democrats have jumped from one MP3

format. They want a second referendum on Brexit. But under

Charles Kennedy they had dozens more MPs across the UK saw how much

difference can they make? We've quadrupled our representation from

Scotland in Westminster. We are back on track and making progress and

people were very clear, they want are a positive agenda on mental

health. They want to say no to another divisive independence

referendum and the right to reject a bad deal on Brexit. They are the

only party calling for a second referendum on the Brexit deal. I

wonder why that did not play better? I don't think it played better

because I think most parties have said, this is a done deal, let's

make the most of it. At a time when you've got continuing political

flux, we don't know where politics will be this time next week never

mind next year. It is difficult for any party to say we should have

another referendum in Scotland, particularly where they've not been

getting a good press. Alison Rowat finishing that

report by John McManus. Well, joining me from Colintraive

is the man charged with looking after Scotland's Brexit

negotiations, Mike Russell. Given there is now a minority

government, do you see a role for the SNP at Westminster in trying to

have some influence over a softer Brexit than we saw a few days ago?

It is important that the entire Brexit policy is scrapped and they

start again. The first part of that is to persuade Theresa May that

clinging to Downing Street is not a sensible idea. She is presided over

chaos over the last year. This election shows people don't trust

her. I don't think her position is tenable. There needs to be a look at

everything and that includes the Brexit policy. There a committee

established which is not dependent on there being a Tory government. It

needs to meet urgently. It has not met since February. That needs to

look at the way that Brexit goes forward. First, we need some

stability. People everywhere are crying out for stability and they've

had nothing but chaos and instability. It is continuing this

weekend with the announcement that there was a deal with the DUP and

there was not ideal. This is just nonsense. You produced a detailed

plan for a Scottish form of Brexit which you claim was dismissed by the

previous government and David Davis in particular. Will you be

contacting the new government to put that back on the table? We believe

it is still on the table. It started with the premise that the whole of

the UK should start in the single market. In Scotland, Ruth Davidson

and her Tories voted against that on every occasion. Her manifesto was

exactly the same as Theresa May. In reality, it is changed

circumstances. Let's move forward. What do you plan to do as a

government? That is a key political point. As a government we intend to

continue to promote Scotland's place in Europe. If others wish to join us

they would be very welcome. If the Tories have genuinely changed their

view on Brexit, I will be very pleased that is the case. But the

forum to take this forward is the joint ministerial committee. I don't

think Theresa May can stay as Prime Minister. There is potential for a

progressive Alliance in the House of Commons and I'm sure the SNP would

like to see that but we need to sit down this week. The reality is we

need to sit down this week and look at the Brexit situation and the

initial documents from the European Union. We need to devise a new

approach. Theresa May has tried to make all the decisions and look at

the mess. Did you say in a formal way your proposals have never been

rejected? We've had one paragraph in a 4-page letter from Davis Davis --

David Davis but that they were not feasible. This was on the day of the

Article 50 letter. There was a huge amount of work done by civil

servants. The conclusion did not arise out of that work. That work

was continuing. That document is still there and it starts with the

easiest solution of all. If the UK stays in the single market, the

negotiations change. They become negotiations about how that takes

place. There is a way to do that. Those things are available and on

the table and it seems to me to be a good starting point. You're still

the biggest party in Scotland but you lost a lot of seats. Both John

Swinney and Nicola Sturgeon accepted this. Would you drop an idea of an

independence referendum any time soon? They are right to say we need

to focus on this. We have lost seats and I deeply regret that. We've lost

good people. There is a group of people we would like to have seen

there. That requires a period of reflection. The priority is to

achieve some stability because it has been utterly chaotic and has

been led by Theresa May saw the first priority is to do that. We

must do that this week. 60% of the electorate have voted for parties

who had, on the front page of the appeal to the public, no

independence referendum. You say you want stability and I'm sure a lot of

the people watching will be shouting at the TV set that they want

stability from you, not to have a period of reflection, stop this

right now. Take it off the table. I don't think people are shouting,

don't have a period of reflection. They want stability you want. We

need to move forward to get that stability. Reflecting on the detail

of this is important but the first thing we've got to do is sit round

the table and talk about Brexit and what is going to take place. As you

pointed out, the negotiations are meant to start a week tomorrow.

We've got to get a position in place this week that says, this is what is

going to happen. If Theresa May tries to put her position on the

table she will be in deep trouble. Would you honestly trust that women

to read these negotiations after what you've seen, what we've all

seen over the last 12 months? Surely not. You keep going on about Theresa

May. I come back to IndyRef2. A lot of people say the SNP claims to

represent Scotland but now has a ten represent Scotland but now has a ten

-- now is taking the Michael. You've been told in no uncertain terms what

people think of your proposal. You need to say that you will take it

off the table until the next Scottish elections. The First

Minister has said she will reflect on that. The reality is, I'm not one

of these politicians that blank things but we won 35 seats out of

59. We have an overall majority of those seats. The best result was 56

but before that we only had six. Hang on a second here. We won this

election but of course we will reflect on it. The First Minister

said absolutely immediately. Your policy was to overturn the results

of a referendum with an extremely high turnout. You say you won the

majority of the seats. You did that in a system which skews the result,

is unfair and unjust according to SNP policy. If you ran an election

on the basis you support, you would have 37% of the seats.

We are now into hypotheses built on hypothesis. The proposal for the

referendum was based on one set of circumstances only in the election

we won in 2016, and that was if Scotland was to be dragged out of

Europe against its will, that would be the circumstances. That is

exactly the circumstances we find ourselves in. Now we go forward and

say, what is going to happen with Brexit? To some extent everything is

off the table in the sense that Brexit has to start to be sorted

this week. That is the urgent priority. There is a way to do it,

which is to get the J MC meeting. But you have a problem with

credibility even on that. Everyone knows the more there is a move

towards a soft Brexit, the more it undermines your case for another

independence referendum, so you are caught in a contradiction. If you

get your way on Brexit, no indyref2. It might even seem better if there

was a hard Brexit. The Scottish government brought to the table in

December the most comprehensive plan of how to move forward with a

compromise. I have not spent the last six months

trying to make that work with people who simply were not listening to it

to abandon it. That document is still there and it contains

compromise proposals. It starts with the UK staying in the single market

and that is a very good step forward. The Scottish government is

committed to that still. I am sure there is a seaplane behind you ready

to whisk you back home. Thank you very much indeed.

Now in case you're wondering, we did try to get a Scottish

Tory on the programme, but despite their remarkable

election performance here, we were unable to find

a Conservative politician willing to come on the programme.

Well Labour's performance also improved on Thursday and they're

being slightly less reticent so I'm joined by Scottish Labour's election

First of all, on indyref2, is what Mike Russell said acceptable? It is

clear the SNP have not listened to the result of the election on

Thursday. Look at what happened. They are down nearly 500,000 votes

from 2015 and the reason for that is that people are fed up with the SNP,

not only obsessing about indyref2, but failing to tackle the issues

they are responsible for in Scotland. What do you think they

should do on that issue? They need to make it absolutely clear that

indyref2 is off the table, but more importantly they need to take

responsibility for the issues that matter in Scotland. For example,

child poverty has gone up 40,000 to 260,000, and the SNP approach for

that. I think we know Labour wants them to concentrate on domestic

issues, but I want to put this to you. I know we have a pre-recorded

interview with Christine Jardin of the Liberal Democrats and she says

what they want is for the SNP to bring forward legislation to the

Scottish Parliament, in effect cancelling the vote for indyref2 and

to take it off the table until at least the next Scottish elections in

2021. Is that something you would support? I have seen that Liberal

Democrat proposal, it is interesting. If I vote comes to the

Parliament, we will obviously oppose indyref2. But the clear thing that

the SNP need to start doing is getting responsible. Last year in

the budget they underspent the housing budget by ?20 million and

there are homeless people dying on our streets and they do not seem

able to tackle that. It went under the radar but you said yesterday,

and please tell me if I misinterpret you, you said it was important that

the new and unexpectedly large Scottish Labour group in Parliament

was represented in Jeremy Corbyn's Parliament and that at the very

least there had to be a Secretary of State for Scotland or a shadow

Secretary of State for Scotland who was a Scottish MP. Am I interpreting

what you said correctly? We return to Westminster next week and we are

a group of seven MPs who will play an active role in Jeremy Corbyn's

team and at the forefront of that there needs to be a leap person

speaking for Scotland in the shadow cabinet. And that has to be a

Scottish MP? Yes. Presumably if asked, perhaps some of the Scottish

MPs in Parliament could play a role in Parliament other than that one

post, but there could be more? We are delighted with the team we are

sending down there. There is some real depth and experience and we

think we can contribute in the Parliament, but also contribute as

part of the Labour team, as part of Jeremy Corbyn's team in Westminster.

I am not sure that you would necessarily agree with what you

would say with what Alison was saying and the mixed messages

between Kezia Dugdale and Jeremy Corbyn in Scotland. He was a bit

more ambiguous. Is that something you would want to have talks about

and make sure there was one line coming out? Jeremy Corbyn made clear

during the campaign that the prospect of Independence would mean

turbo-charged austerity. He said he would talk to the Scottish

government about it and you do not want him to do that? We need to

tackle the budget of 15 million. The prospect of indyref2 takes us away

from the real issues and the prospect of independence would be a

disaster for Scotland and Jeremy Corbyn understands that. RUC Labour

policy now, whether in Westminster or Holyrood, is no second

independence referendum until there is at least some sign in another

election there has been a mass support from the Scottish people?

You can see the SNP are starting to roll back from a second independence

referendum, so I do not see them bringing back forward any time soon.

They have acknowledged it cost them hundreds of thousands of votes on

Thursday and they need to reflect on that and get back to the issues that

matter. Is there a lesson for the Scottish Labour Party in what Jeremy

Corbyn did against everyone's expectations? First of all the mass

membership Labour have achieved in England. I know you have more

members here, but nothing like what he has managed to achieve. Also the

different way he went about campaigning. Will you be sitting

down and learning the lessons and trying to replicate in Scotland some

of the things he did in England? We will look closely at this going for

it. Six of the seats in Scotland had majorities of less than 400. Six of

you or a Labour sees? Exceeds of SNP majorities of less than 400, so

there is a chance of us moving forward to take those seeds and

others. But you will be looking to see what they were doing in South

and replicating it up here? The lesson of the election is talking

about what matters to people. No, the lesson is mobilising young

people and going to rock concerts like Jeremy Corbyn did, and you can

do much better than people think you would. But ultimately you need to

think about what matters to people like ?10 minimum wage. We have all

heard that, we do not want to hear your manifesto again. Thank you very

Well, earlier this morning I spoke with one of the Scottish Liberal

Democrats' new intake at Westminster, Christine Jardine.

What, in your view, does the Scottish government have to do now

about another independence referendum? They have to make it

clear it is off the table and they have to bring forward legislation to

say they will not be another independence referendum. It was

clear on the doors from day one in the general election that there is

no will amongst the public, even amongst SNP supporters we spoke to.

There was a reticence to go ahead with another independence

referendum, perhaps for different reasons, thinking it would be a no

vote again, people did not want it. You say they need to bring forward

legislation to cancel the current position of the Scottish Parliament.

You cannot ask the SNP to give up on independence, it is the nature of

the SNP. Is it your argument they need to take it off table until the

next Scottish election? We want them to make a clear statement to the

people of Scotland they will not be another independence referendum in

this Parliament. I am confident when we come to another Scottish election

we may get another different result. But this time round it is clear.

When I say a different result, the SNP may not be in a position to have

a referendum after the next Scottish election, but for the time being

they have to make it absolutely clear that they have listened, they

have heard people are not happy with the idea of going through another

divisive debate and put it to one side. And your view would be what?

Saying they reflect on this might get them through the next few days,

but that is not good enough? That is not good enough because we have seen

so often over the past two years Nicola Sturgeon say it is off the

table. The other thing that is clear from this general election result

and two years ago is that two years ago people thought it was off the

table and this time it was not. Nicola saying we will reflect on it

will not be enough for people. They will want something that the SNP can

be held to, that they can I say after another few months that the

situation has changed and they will call for another independence

referendum. It has to be off until the next election? Yes. Their

argument is they got a majority of seats in this election and they have

a triple lock. What do you make of that? They lost seats, they went

down by 13%. They still have a majority. They lost seats at the

Scottish election and they have a minority in the Scottish Parliament

and the Green Party will be thinking people obviously are not in favour

of an independence referendum. The SNP need the support of the Green

Party in the Scottish Parliament if they are to have it. Your argument

is 60% voted for parties which clearly do not want another

independence referendum. By the same token can we look forward to in the

next few days the Liberal Democrats withdrawing their demand for another

referendum on Europe? The vast majority of the electorate

throughout the UK have voted for parties which do not want another

referendum. What we are seeing is two very different dynamics in

Scotland and England. Brexit was not as much of an issue up here. By the

very same argument you have made about the SNP, the Liberal Democrats

need to say right now within the next few days, we withdraw our

policy of having a second referendum in Europe. What we need to know is

exactly now what the government policy on Brexit is. It is not clear

exactly what will happen with Brexit. Hang on a second. You work

telling me a minute ago we have to know what the Scottish government

policy is on indyref2, you said they had to withdraw it. By the same

token you need an overwhelming idea that the majority of people in Great

Britain have voted for parties who do not want another referendum. You

need to withdraw it right now. I made it clear, the Liberal Democrats

who won, made it clear on the doorsteps that we would be

campaigning to keep the UK at the heart of Europe. We were elected on

that platform and we will not go back on it and we will continue to

campaign and push for the best possible relationship with the

European Union. I take what you are saying. Thank you very much. As an

SNP MP you will continue to campaign? As the SNP, I would never

hear them say they will give up on independence. I would like to hear

them say that, but I accept that will never happen, but you are never

hear a Liberal Democrats say they have given up on Europe.

Well joining me now is Professor John Curtice.

A week ago you said, my takeaway line from the polls was that Jeremy

Corbyn could do as well as Tony Blair did in 2005, but you can top

that takeaway line today. Yes, Jeremy Corbyn one is slightly bigger

share of the vote than Tony Blair managed in 2001 as well. There is no

doubt as compared to where the Labour Party started this election,

which according to the opinion polls were 26%, no party had ever started

an election in so bad a position. The turnaround for the Labour Party

was truly remarkable. However, we need to remember that in the end the

Labour Party in terms of seats they'd hardly any better than Gordon

Brown did in 2010. What we can say is Jeremy Corbyn has demonstrated

that you can fight and effective election campaign standing from the

left, you do not have to follow the New Labour line of tracing the

centre, and that does not lead to disaster. What Jeremy Corbyn now

needs to demonstrate is that his strategy can actually push the

parties such that it could win a general election. Winning a general

election will not be easy. It will be very difficult unless the party

can regain much more ground in Scotland than it has been capturing

so far. It would still need to be five or six points ahead of the

Conservatives to have some chance of a majority. There is an awful lot

that the Labour Party needs to do before it would look like a majority

government. How does the conservative vote compared to David

Cameron? They got the highest since 1979. They both did relatively well

but the crucial thing is what matters under first past the post is

not the sheer of the vote. What matters is how well you do relative

to your principal opponents. Failure to appreciate that has led a number

of conservative politicians to say, hang on, we did better than we've

ever done. But it's also a failure to appreciate that means Labour

politicians are overestimating how well they've done because they were

beaten by the Conservatives, by 2.5 percentage points. The Labour Party

must demonstrate they can beat the Conservatives. There is a

probability of boundary changes that will disadvantage Labour. They've

got to demonstrate they can beat the Conservatives handsomely. What

happened in Scotland? Do we know why the SNP lost a lot of seats? Are

people voting tactically, buying into the line Labour and the

Conservatives were saying, stop independence referendum to? It was a

factor, of the dozen seats, it is perfectly clear in nine of them that

either Labour or the Lib Dems were squeezed. It may have been tactical

in some places. In Berwickshire people are going for who they

prefer. There is an element of tactical voting. What we should

remember in the rhetoric, the problem was not it could not

appreciate -- appealed to people, but it failed to get those who are

in favour of independence to vote for it. Only 75% of them voted for

the SNP this time. People say, hang on, we should not hold a referendum

now. It is clear there is not the kind of enthusiasm. But there are

other explanations. Some supporters are disappointed with their domestic

record. And the SNP never did particularly well in Westminster

elections before now and it may be that some of that has kicked back

in. One of the things that happened towards the end is the rise of the

Labour Party donor so that one over young voters and probably damaged

the SNP. The truth is there were a number of explanations. It is not

simply the question of in the rest to dash of IndyRef2. We should not

assume it is wholly off the table for the next three years. Thank you.

Time for a look at the week ahead. Joining me here in Glasgow

are freelance journalist Kathleen Nutt and Severin Carrell

who's Scotland Editor And in Edinburgh, Political

commentator David Torrance. David, let us start with the

question of IndyRef. If you were the SNP, what would you do? I don't envy

them. It is a fiendishly difficult circle to square. On the one hand,

if Nicola Sturgeon says it is often dash off the table, she has a

problem with the independence wing who are impatient, they want a

referendum regardless of the outcome. If she says it is on the

table, the fuel that propelled them to those gains is left burning. She

is between a rock and a hard place. She needs to neuter the backlash and

at the same time keep the dream alive for that section of her own

party. It is not clear how she does that. I think Nicola Sturgeon will

be working carefully at UK politics, and what will happen in terms of

Brexit. It seems there will be a chance of a soft Brexit, if that

continues, which is not a given, that could be the way out of it. The

only reason she puts IndyRef on the table is because Theresa May had

rejected the proposals for a soft Brexit. Those proposals were

published by the Scottish Government but Theresa May did not respond

until Article 50 was triggered at the end of March. David Davis said

it was not feasible. Then Nicola Sturgeon pushed ahead and announced

she would go ahead with the second referendum but that was the

situation that faced her. If it is a hard Brexit then it will be on the

table but soft Brexit, she was not suggesting it. Is that way out? Do

remember Angus Robertson said, I asked him on this programme, if

there is not a hard Brexit, would that mean in the -- IndyRef is not

on the table and he said yes. Yes, Nicola Sturgeon is an onlooker. The

outcome of the machinations at Westminster, the questions about the

DUP, whether or not to reason may survive is, they are the critical

questions. It is those outcomes which will shape Nicola Sturgeon's

reaction. She has another problem. She needs to reassert herself on the

domestic agenda. It is fine to start talking about Brexit and more

conversation to happen in the SNP. Do you agree with David that they

have to find some way of parking IndyRef? Yes. This is the

opportunity. She can save face. The instability and uncertainty is so

great that... She will say, we will park this, maybe we will not have

the hard Brexit. They sort of leave it and then they can fight it in

2021. It is more to do with the fact that there is so much fluidity in

the way the UK Government will respond to Brexit, it gives them an

opportunity. They now have an opportunity to get back into the

conversation. I'm not sure how meaningful the SNP's insertion into

the debate is going to be because they were decapitated on Thursday.

It was a seriously difficult outcome. Having said that, one of

the things that is unclear is what the Parliamentary involvement is

going to be in the Brexit negotiations. Nobody seems very

clear about it. Nobody seems to know the answer. You might be wrong,

maybe the SNP group, the opposition would only need Kenneth Clarke and

half a dozen of his mates and they would be in business. That is what

awaits Nicola Sturgeon. If Jeremy Corbyn brings together an alliance,

then the SNP are in a significant position. They are still the third

biggest party at Westminster. Nicola Sturgeon needs to make a huge

strategic decision, perhaps the most difficult, whether she decides in

the rest -- IndyRef is off the table to give a coherent alliance down so.

Labour will expect a concession on that if they are to start

collaborating. David, we should remind everyone, the SNP are still

winning, it is just in the last Scottish elections, the local

elections and now this general election, support has been going

down. Do you think leaving aside Brexit, they need to relaunch

themselves as the Scottish Government, say, we have some fresh

ideas and we really are going to genuinely try to sort out issues

like the health service and education and this is what we are

going to do? Yes, one former adviser said was, reset. There's a feeling

within some sections of the party that they need to push to be set

button on all that. Even they are it is kind of difficult. Education is

fiendishly difficult to sort out over ten years, it has obviously

declined on certain measurements. It is a push to think by the next

election that will have been Karen Brown significantly. Another problem

is a narrative one. The predominant tropes over the past few years,

Scotland is implicitly anti-Tory and does not vote for conservatives and

the Scottish Labour Party is right wing, neither of those attack claims

can work. It hinges on Brexit. That is the only opportunity left. Let's

talk about narratives. You get the feeling, people are so outraged at

being dragged out of the European Union that even people who were

against independence will say, we would rather be a separate country.

There is no evidence of that happening. The SNP did not run a

great campaign, I'm not sure I agree that it was all about opposition to

a second independence referendum. Perhaps not and John Curtis made

that point. I think the SNP did not put a very positive message in this

campaign. It is not just Europe, the narratives are not attached to

anything, the idea Scotland is different to England looks less

credible when 30% of the population faltered for the Conservatives. If

you say that the Tories are toxic you are insulting a third of the

electorate. There was a clear difference, apart from

anti-independence there was nothing else in the Tory manifesto. Are

people really voting Tory to get tuition fees? Do they really know

the consequences of what a Tory government would be at Holyrood?

David said it was a reset. Do they need to do that? Absolutely crucial.

Nicola Sturgeon needs to find a way of bringing the Scottish electorate

back into love with the Scottish National Party. She will need to

make a speech fairly quickly when she offers something that allows the

SNP to get back on top of the agenda. I would agree with that. She

needs to refresh the message and bring some new policies that will

win over these yes supporters that have moved to Labour. That is all

from us. Goodbye.