09/07/2017 Sunday Politics Scotland

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

Donald Trump says he wants to do a "powerful" trade deal

Theresa May says other countries are ready to talk too.

But could the transitional deal with the EU that some are pushing

for scupper the Prime Minister's plans?

Having defied expectation in last month's general election,

are Jeremy Corbyn and his allies about to purge the party

The deadliest fire in London since the Second World War has

devastated a community and shocked Britain, but will the political

storm that's blown up in its aftermath help uncover

And on Sunday Politics Scotland: Far from going into recession

But is there still an underlying problem?

I'll be talking to the Economy Secretary Keith Brown.

If we are darking today we apoll jierks it could be a power cut or

the BBC is trying to save money with its fuel bill! Assuming you can see

them... And with me - as always -

for TV's second most keenly watched on-screen relationships

after Love Island, the Sunday Politics panel -

Steve Richards, Julia Hartley-Brewer They'll be tweeting

throughout the programme. So - Donald Trump says a trade

deal with UK could be Theresa May says that

other world leaders, including those of China,

India and Japan, are also keen to do President and PM were speaking at

the G20 summit of the world's major President and PM were speaking at

the G20 summit of the world's major But could the transitional

deal that some want, that would keep the UK in the EU's

single market and Customs Union for several years after exit,

put paid to those plans? Here's what the man likely to be

the next Lib Dem leader - Vince Cable - told the Marr show

earlier. I'm beginning to think that

Brexit may never happen, The problems are so enormous,

the divisions within the two major parties are so enormous,

I can see a scenario We're joined now from

Shropshire by the former Conservative Cabinet Minister

and leading Brexit Ogise, it could be a power cut or

the BBC is trying to save money with its fuel bill! Assuming you can see

them... Good morning to you, Vince Cable says that he thinks Brexit may

now not happen, what do you say to that? What is new? Vince Cable

always wanted to stay in the European Union, he is chucking

buckets of water round, we had a huge vote last year, we had an

enormous vote in the House of Commons, 494 votes to trigger

Article 50, we had an election campaign in which the two main

parties took 85% of the vote they back the speech and leaving the

customs union and the single market and the ECJ and Vince Cable's party

went down in votes as did the other parties that want to stay in the

European Union. So Vince is behind history, we are going to leave, we

are on target, Michael Gove triggered leaving the 1964 London

convention so we can take back control of the seas and bring back a

sane fishing policy and more important getting environmental

gained in our marine environment, so... You think we are still heading

for the exit but Mrs May called the election because she wanted a

mandate for her version of Brexit. She didn't get it. Surely you can't

just continue with business as usual? Well, we have been over the

election, we did not get the number of sees we wanted but on votes, we

got 13.7 million, that is more than the great Blair landslide. You had

an overall majority and you lost it. That is a fact. I said that. We know

that. So you didn't get the mandate. We got the vote! We got a lot votes

and so did the Labour Party. You know we are in a Parliamentary

system where what matters is the number of seats you get in the

Commons, you know enough about the British constitution to know a that

is what determines the mandate. Not the number of votes, we are not a

Presidential system. I am First Minister throughly wear

of that. 85% of the election voted for parties that wanted to leave. If

you take votes in the Commons last week on the Queen's Speech not a

single Conservative MP abstained or voted against and the Labour Party

unwisely, Chuka Umunna triggered and amendment wanting us to stay in the

customs union and got hammered. So, I am clear that we have to deliver

this, much the most important point in all this, is if we do not deliver

a proper Brexit which means leaving the single market, leaving the

customs union and the jurisdiction of the ECJ, there will be appalling

damage to the integrity of the whole establishment. Not just political,

you, the media, and the judicial establishment. Some would say that

damage has already been done in other area, let us look at the

detail. Under Article 50 Britain leaves the EU in 20 months which

means the deal will have to be done in 15 or 16 months to allow for

people to approve it in the various Parliaments and so son. Progress has

the been glacial. We have only just begun. Why should there not be a

transitional deal that keep some of the current arrangements in place to

mitigate this falling off a cliff? As Liam said in the Commons, Liam

who? Liam Fox, this should be one of the easiest ever deals to conclude,

because already, we have zero tariffs, already we have complete

conformty on standards and already, those who are negotiating with us

have an enormous surplus, the Germans sold an enormous number of

cars, so that is the basis on which, if you look at Nafta... We haven't

even started talking about free trade yet. That is not on the agenda

yet. Let me finish. If you look at Nafta, that took 14 months, we are

starting on a basis of mutual recognition of all our standard and

zero tariffs so yes, there will be an implementation period but it is

very very important politically this is concluded fast, as a huge

economic imperative as well, because it is uncertainty about this that

will damage future investment and job, the quicker we get on with it

and we know where we are going and we can reach out to the world, we

can take advantage of the fact stated on the European Commission

website that 9 a 5% of the world's growth is going to come from outside

European Union, which is what we are seeing, we have seen sales go from

61% to 43% and it is tumbling to 43%. We cannot take advantage of

these wonderful opportunities in the wider world... Why not? Why not?

Germany does. Because they can't conclude free trade deals. Germany

runs a balance of payment surplus, it finds it possible to trade with

the rest of the EU and with the rest of the world. It has a bigger

surplus than China, if Germany can do both why can't we? They can't.

They can't conclude deal, we Trump wants to do a deal with us. You saw

Theresa May sitting down with the economies of the future, India,

China, South Korea, these are all longing to do more business with us,

we can only do that once we are out of the customs union, that is vital

for the future of this country, that is where the future growth is. The

business in this country says we should stay in the single market and

the customs union, at least through a transition period. Does that count

for nothing, is Tory party now so antebusiness it ignores the wealth

creators? I think what you are saying is that the CBI which

represents very large organisations has made that statement, but talking

to business widely, and smaller private businesses which dominate

the economy, what is vital on this is to have a rapid implementation

period. That is what is important. And there has to be clarity of where

we are going, if we are in permanent limbo which will take a enormous

amount of negotiation and will take ratification by the 27 countries and

the European Parliament as well as our own, that will drag things out.

What we need to do is a clean Claire statement of reciprocal free trade

which should be really pretty easy to negotiate because we have that,

we have conformty of standard, we have an implementation period. That

needs to be done rapidly. Latest by the next election. OK, we shall see

how simple it turns out to be. Thank you for joining us here.

What do you make of this increasing talk of transition period in which

it is not clear, we remain full members of the single market, full

members of the customs union? Which came we cannot conclude very

quickly, in Mr Trump's word a free trade deal? This is where the battle

is now heading, between Brexiteer, levers, re-levers and the lot of it.

This will be really what the only thing we could achieve in the next

negotiations, what has changed since the general election which you were

touching on there, is of course Brussels in the year 2017 are no

longer negotiating with Theresa May, they are negotiating with the House

of Commons and the you know majority for a softer Brexit, so this will

begin, the transition deal will define the rest of deal, the rest of

the final relationship, so getting the transition on the right

trajectory is crucial, hence why you have Philip Hammond making a major

play to try and keep one foot in the EU, if not necessarily in the custom

union and the single market and everyone else says get out. These

are the opening skirmishes on what will certainly be the nettle that

will will be grasped round about some time between October and spring

next year. Are you worried that the election result, the fact that she

didn't get this mandate that she had looked for and she has ended up in a

weaker position than she was before the election, is going to make

Brexit more difficult, it is going to muddy the water, it means her

idea of Brexit is not necessarily the one that become Brexit? Yes I am

worried are about as a Brexiteer, the same remain yaks would have been

trying to scupper the will of the British people as expressed in June

2016. Now they might succeed. I don't think any will succeed. We

have to stop this nonsense and the media included, of this talk of soft

Brexit an transition period. We have a transition period once we are out

when we are leading to the next process, with have to be out of the

single market, and not under the European Court of Justice. All

within the two years, all by March... That happens automatically,

then we can agree for a two, three year max, three year period we will

have a position as we move to the new deal, but I don't think there

many Leave voters, most Remain voters accept that result, unlike

the people like the CBI who are fighting against it still, they will

accept anything more than that. I think Owen Paterson is right. We are

in a situation where we will face some serious disflus the

establishment, the political world, the Melissa Reidia if we don't obey

the will of the people. What do you make of the reports in the Sunday

papers, it was only ten days ago, two weeks' ago Mr Hammond was going

to be the caretaker leader, that is a story that didn't seem to last

48-hour, but what do you make of the remain MPs on both sides of the

House, plus peers, are going to try to derail this repeal act, that the

Government needs to push EU law on to the UK statute book. I I think

they will use it to at certain key points to attempt to defeat the

Government, not over the whole thing, this summer reminds me so

much of the summer of 92 who the Maastricht Treaty coming into a

fragile John Major Government, and people then were plotting, in the

opposite direction, Eurosceptics to try and stop that. He won with a

huge percentage of the vote. Tiny majority, 23, bigger than she would

have died for that. A shock victory. The The summer was full of talk and

plotting, some which came to fruition in the sessions after and

some will come into fruition from this autumn on ward where you will

see alliances across the Commons manned the Lords, there will be

moments of high Parliamentary drama, I think. Sounds like a long hot

autumn. An a long hot autumn, and winter.

Winter too? I thought it was all global warming. This will add to the

Now, Jeremy Corbyn may not have won the election,

but by confounding almost everyone's expectations he is unassailable

as Labour leader for the foreseeable future.

So what does that mean for his MPs, most of whom - just a year ago -

Labour's new chairman and key cupping Ally said last week the

party may be too broad church. He also seemed to endorse the idea of

deselecting labour MPs critical of the leadership by saying if you get

deselected there must be a reason. But he has since wrote back from his

deselected there must be a reason. comments in another interview. Chris

deselected there must be a reason. Williamson, the newly appointed

labour frontbencher said some of his colleagues in the Parliamentary

party think they have a God-given right to rule. He also said that if

MPs don't support the leadership's programme, local constituency

parties should find someone else who will. And in the seat of liveable

waiver treats this week, left wing supporters of Jeremy Corbyn won

several positions on the committee. One said she must get on board quite

quickly now, and also publicly apologise for not supporting Mr

Corbyn in the past. Some Labour MPs rushed to Luciano Berger's defends.

Elsewhere, a list of 49 Labour MPs was published, and they said these

usual suspects should join the Liberals. The list included

prominent former frontbencher is like Chris Leslie, Chuka Umunna and

tidying -- Heidi Alexander. And this is what the Shadow

Education Secretary and Jeremy Corbyn ally,

Angela Rayner, had to say earlier. Anyone that talks of deselecting

any of my colleagues, frankly they need to think

about actually, who are Who are making the problems

for our communities at the moment? Who have made those disastrous

policies that are hurting the people It doesn't help them if we're

fighting each other. We're joined now from

Sheffield by former Labour Cabinet Minister,

Caroline Flint. Welcome to the programme. Labour

frontbencher Chris Williamson has said, where Labour MPs don't support

the leadership's programme it's incumbent on local members to find

someone else who will. What do you make of that? I think it's very sad

that talk of deselection is the line people are taking. We had an

election where 262 Labour MPs, very different ones, have all won a

mandate from their electorate and our job is, as Angela Rayner said

this morning, is to focus on a government that is in disarray and

how we can learn from the general election to broaden our appeal but

also develop our policy is ready in time for the next election whenever

that is called so I think all talk of deselection is misplaced and

doesn't help Labour. But do you feel a purge of what is often referred to

as the moderates in your party is now inevitable? No, because we have

been here before in the 1980s when talk of deselection was suggested,

it didn't happen in the way people thought it would, and I do believe,

hearing how Ian Lee very, and I have worked with him in the 2010, 2015

government and I have worked with Chris Williamson, Ian has already

refined what he said, and what he's clearly was this deselection talk

and the way to go ahead on it is not the right way forward. We to focus

on looking outwards to understand that we have across the party

hard-working Labour MPs with maybe different views across the Labour

political spectrum, and I would have to say that Luciana is one of the

most hard-working MPs in Parliament and homework on mental health is

outstanding. That may be true, let's look at Luciana Berger's

constituency. One of the committee members on her committee says she

now has to get on board quite quickly. And even publicly apologise

for past disloyalty. The direction of travel is clear, isn't it? That

is one person on a committee in one constituency... Where there is a

majority for that point of view now. I don't think there is, and the

truth is... They took nine seat. Her constituency is all of the members

in that constituency and what I would say, and I don't know this

individual, look at the track record of Luciana and what she has done.

Jeremy, in the 20 years I have been an MP under both Tony Blair and

Gordon Brown, voted against the Labour whip on numerous occasions,

he has been very upfront and honest about this, do you know in those 20

years I never heard anybody say about Jeremy or anybody else who

didn't vote with the Labour whip that they should face deselection or

apologise. I think that represents the broad church of the Labour Party

and we should look at what brings us together rather than differences on

policy point of view and we should be looking outwards and dealing with

that and working on it. You have said that three times but it has not

happened and it may be that the people around Mr Corbyn, they think

moderates like you, your day is over. You lost the 2015 election

badly, you allowed Jeremy Corbyn to stand as leader, you failed to stop

him twice, you thought he would make a mess of the June election and he

didn't. Can you blame his supporters for wanting a career out of people

who took these positions? I think there are some people who supported

and still support Jeremy who feel that way but I don't believe they

represent the people who supported Jeremy, and I don't believe Jeremy

thinks this is in the best interests of the party. Only a few weeks ago

John McDonnell praised my work on tax transparency. Since my election

I have bumped into Jeremy and we have had a chat about what happened

in the election and Jeremy recognises that we were up against

an arrogant Tory party and has said to me he does understand this and

said to the broader Parliamentary Labour Party... If I could just

finish... What has he said about deselection? For example he said to

me that he recognised that we have won in numerous places in

outstanding circumstances but he's also said to me that he recognises

that we need to broaden our reach and understand why we were

working-class voters. That says to me that that is a leader who is up

for and open to looking at the reasons why we were successful and

the reasons we weren't and he wasn't closing down conversation on that. I

take him on his word on that. He has not said that publicly. What we need

from a leader is to challenge our party about where to go next and he

has said that, Diane Abbott has said at a conference I was at a few weeks

ago that we need now to look at our manifesto and look more clearly

issues around tax and spend policies because obviously clearly now we

have more time to look at those issues and also we may be facing a

very different election when the time comes. That's what I want from

the leadership team, talk about how we improve our message and reach,

and by doing that get away from what song, a minority I have to say, are

saying about deselection. Corbynistas like Paul Mason think

moderates like you were to blame for the defeat. He said moderates were

always attacking Mr Corbyn, that is quite popular view in the Jeremy

Corbyn wing. I think that is Paul Mason's view and he is fundamentally

wrong. When we look at the results of the last election, we can see a

continuing from 2015 where Labour is losing support among older voters

and what we see is in this election in 2017 Labour has... I think we are

at our highest point amongst the middle-class voters compared to

where we were in 1979 but the Tories are highest among working-class

voters since 1979 as well. Those working-class voters weren't voting

for a more left alternative to Labour and sadly they were voting

Tory and we have to address that because our party is this broad

church and representing working-class people is at the heart

of what the Labour Party is about and that's a discussion we need to

have. That is the depth of discussion we need to get into. That

would put's with a fighting chance of taking on a Tory party that is in

disarray. Caroline Flint, thank you for joining us.

This week it was announced that the Grenfell Tower inquiry

would hold its first public hearings in September, as it prepares

to begin to examine what caused the tragedy.

But some have warned that the situation now needs

to be de-politicised, or it will damage

In a moment we'll hear from the MP for Kensington and Chelsea

where the Grenfell Tower fire took place.

But first Emma Vardy looks at how political arguments have played

a significant part in the aftermath of this terrible event.

When you come here and you actually see it, your immediate thoughts

are about the people, not about the politics.

What happened up there is just so difficult to comprehend.

But in the days after this tragedy, there was such outrage

at governments and authorities, it became a political

storm that those in power struggled to respond to.

We want justice, we want justice, we want justice...

People vented their anger outside Kensington town Hall.

A visit to the Grenfell site by Theresa May saw her forced

At Prime Minister's Questions, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn linked

What the tragedy of Grenfell Tower has exposed is a disastrous

And speaking at Glastonbury, Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell

Those families, those individuals, 79 so far and there will be more,

were murdered by political decisions that were taken over recent decades.

I can't remember a major national tragedy that has been politicised

I think using terms like murder is completely reckless

The key thing is that we try to ascertain the facts

this tragedy occurred to ensure it can never be repeated.

And as soon as you introduce emotive phrases or emotive accusations

or emotive allegations of that nature, then the discourse

The whole debate around the tragedy becomes politicised and it makes it

Some argue the political language that was used was wrong and helped

to ramp up the vitriol in an unhelpful way, but

for others, it was entirely justified.

That's what an opposition party is for, it's to challenge

the Government and to ask the right questions and I think people

round here would say thank goodness, there's somebody in politics

Pilgrim Tucker had helped Grenfell Tower residents campaign

for building improvements in previous years, and returned

I've been to meetings before the fire and I've been

to meetings since the fire, attended by ordinary residents

with no involvement in politics and they are saying very political

things about land in London and property ownership in London,

Had we campaigned harder, would we have prevented this?

Fire safety campaigners say they were trying to draw attention

to certain issues long before what happened at Grenfell Tower,

and say it's no one political party but the whole system has failed.

It's easy to say, "You've got an inquiry, let's wait for that."

We already know two very clear things.

Had the people there been protected by sprinklers,

People don't die in homes protected by sprinklers.

The second thing is the outrage that the building regulations had

They should be done year in, year out.

Generally people in house fires die in ones, twos

or threes, which doesn't make a political statement.

So the political parties haven't really needed

They weren't prepared for 70 or more people to die at once

The public inquiry, which will address some of those issues,

has already faced calls for its newly appointed

And that was a view echoed by the Labour MP

You would call on him, would you, to stand down?

I don't think there will be any credibility and some people

are saying they won't cooperate with it so it's not going to work.

I will look into this matter to the very best of my ability...

I think the attacks on the chair have to cease, I think the attacks

It actually makes it harder to get to the facts and get

to the truth and that's the most important thing now.

Some said it was unavoidable that this tragedy became political,

but will the politics help get to the truth?

I'm joined now by the Labour MP for Kensington -

who we heard at the end of that film - Emma Dent Coad.

Now this judge, leading the Grenfell inquiry, have you met him? I haven't

met him, no. So what evidence do you have that he doesn't in your words

understand human beings? Well, I am reflecting what people are telling

me out there, that they as soon as his name was announced everybody

looked up his credentials, they found a particular case he had been

involved in, the very issue that people are most worried about, post

Grenfell is they will be moved out of the borough somewhere else. This

issue about social cleansing. It was insensitive to have chosen somebody

with that on his record. Whether he made that decision according to the

rules. It is one judgment in a long career, he may be able to defend

what he did. You have said he doesn't understand human beings but

you have told us you have never met him? It is nothing to do with

meeting him. It is the system where people have to be friends in order

to work together, judged by the evidence, judge by what people have

done that, judge by merit and whether or not you can be friendly.

What has he done wrong in his career? It is symbolic the issue he

made a decision about, it is symbolic for everybody. I am

reflecting the community who are been betrayed. You don't think in

your often view you don't take the view he doesn't understand human

beings. Personally I do. I do actually but I am reflecting what

people are saying, the people who elected me, who have been badly

betrayed by the authority, they are seeing it that way, they have been

betrayed and now they see you know, they worst fear is this will be used

top socially cleanse north Kensington. What is the evidence for

that? About social cleansing? No, this will be used to do so. Whether

or not there is ever, there is no trust in somebody who has been part

of that process. He has been chosen by the Lord Chief Justice, not as

the Prime Minister as some have said. He has a long ex perness of

commercial contracts and disaster, both of which will be vital. It is a

lot to do with overlapping commercial contract, he is a

specialist in that area, what bit doesn't make his qualified and and

doesn't he reflect the independence of the judiciary? Well, we certainly

need somebody who can do the detail. This is a human disaster as much as

anything else. We need somebody who, we saw in the meeting there, there

is a lot of anger and people aren't trusting. . That would be true, we

all understand the anger, of course, but that would be true whoever was

chosen. Are you really after... Do you want someone to head up this

inquiry that will give you a show trial rather than an independent

inquiry. It is exactly the opposite. . Woe won't give us a show trial, is

he? If there is no trust, people won't co-operate with him. A lot of

people will need to co-operate with him. Some of the groups are not

involved, they are protest groups who are not representing the

victims, or the survivors, we have very little evidence that those who

directly affected by this are saying they are not going to co-operate.

Well, everybody who lives round there is a victim to some extent,

they have all been affected, myself as well, I live three blocksia from

it and a lot of the groups are very much involved in that community, not

only the people who lived there who survived, but some of the campaign

groups have been campaigning for years about social housing in area.

What sort of person to you think should head up the inquiry is this

If it has to be Martin, we need an advisory panel with representatives

from different groups who can at least advise and feed in

information, at least if we have no choice, we need at least that. But

rather than him, what sort of person? I am not sure, are you

saying he should remain but he needs to be assisted by a panel or he

should be replaced? If we have no choice, then we should have an

advisory panel to back it up. Something that people trust in. At

the moment they don't trust the process, which is understandable,

and his name was announced the same day as the Hillsborough disaster,

the criminal investigation and so on, that after 28 year, this is what

people, how people see it. They want, they don't trust the process s

it won't work proppism it is not just what I think, it is what people

who are directly involved thing. John McDonnell the Shadow Chancellor

says people who died at Grenfell were murdered by political decision

do you agree? That is a strong way of putting it. I know a lot of

people feel like that. There is massive failure of political

decision, I have seen that happening. But murder? That is an

active verb. It means you intended to kill. So for Mr McDonnell to be

right, these were political decisions taken intended to kill. I

don't share his view on that particular issue, there has been a

failure of care, for many, many years and a failure of investment

for many year, as I have seen myself. But part of the problem has

been investment. They had nine million spent on this block I was

looking at it today, the other tower blocks round it have not been clad.

Of course if they had gone on fire, the disaster would not have been on

the same scale. Nine million helped to produce this. In indeed. The

process of how that building was refurbished. It says it is to make

it look better, half a mile down the road, the tower blocks have been

clad, they were clad in mineral wool. I spent a day at a seminar by

chance understanding, it is non-combustible. Who made that

decision to use rain cladding rather than mineral wool. You were on the

the board of who took that decision. The council had no say about the

specification, we didn't have any involvement at all. It didn't come

before you, because it has tenants on it too. The TMO does, The

advisory committee to the TMO. There is the TMO. I was not there at the

time. As far as I understand a sub group decided or reviewed the

specifications of that. The housing and property committee is part of

the council. Obviously you a say, but whether or not, we don't have

any say at all over specification, I want to say somebody because I have

been accused of... That because my predecessor said I

there is no foundation for that allegation. I thank you for clearing

that up. Thank you for joining us too.

Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.

A long way to go, but small signs of an economic improvement.

So how does the Scottish Government ensure progress is maintained?

And we hear from an organisation which hopes to do for

Scottish Labour what Momentum has done for Jeremy Corbyn.

There was relief all round this week as new figures showed the Scottish

economy has not fallen into recession - in fact,

it grew by 0.8% in the first quarter of this year,

compared to growth of only 0.2% across the UK as a whole.

Although growth across the UK had been stronger on an annual basis,

some of the growth seems down to recovery in the oil and gas

industry, which has been hammered by collapsing oil prices.

But the question still remains: are Scotland's problems more

Last week the former First Minister, Alex Salmond, called

opposition politicians, economists, the media in general

and this programme in particular 'merchants of doom' for our coverage

So should we turn into dealers in delight?

Or perhaps pay close attention to Mr Salmond's injunction not

to take one set of figures too seriously - something we too

pointed out, incidentally, in our coverage last week.

Well, in a moment we'll speak to the Economy Minister Keith Brown.

I spoke a little earlier to David Johnston, a digital entrepreneur,

and to David Bell, an economist from Stirling University. Both of them

featured in our report last week. You are both under strict

instructions to have your best have the clappy demeanour on. These

figures this week were pretty good, would they? I think they were. I

think it is a reason to be glad about Scotland's economic

performance. The trend had been, and I think this is what the forecasters

have been looking at, relatively negative, but in the last quarter

things have picked up a lot. Particularly in manufacturing. I

guess the real issue here is, is that nothing to be explained? The

Scottish Government's statisticians say that 60% of the relative

underperformance of the Scottish economy over recent months has been

due to the decline in oil and gas. But that leaves 40% to be explained.

Is your view that there is something else to be explained? I think there

are a political uncertainties around, but it's almost impossible

to quantify what effects these might have. Part of the success of the

rest of the UK, maybe, has been that it has been more successful in

setting up complex value chains around the manufacturing sector cars

and so on. Scotland doesn't quite have the critical mass around that.

But I British are the Scottish Government is aware of this issue

and is trying to do it, for example, in the food and drink industry,

which is very important for our economy. What could they do? Is

there a need for them to address this in the short term? Alex Salmond

takes the view that because of the way the national accounts account

for oil and gas, in other words that will production goes in the UK

accounts, and when we talk about oil and gas in Scotland, it's only the

economic activity surrounding it. There is nothing to explain, the

underperformance is entirely under accounted for that. Even taking the

employment and other activity, that is it in itself quite considerable.

The wages of the people working in the industry and the activity around

different parts of the country. It is bound to have a multiplier effect

on other sectors of the Scottish economy, so I think oil and gas

clearly is a pretty big explanation of where we have got to. It then

begs the question, is there a need for the Scottish Government to be

thinking of doing something in addition to what it was trying to do

anyway, indeed can it do anything? I think it can do stuff, but that kind

of stuff doesn't hit the headlines all that much. Also it's on a slow

burner. The long-term performance of the Scottish economy has been pretty

much in line with the rest of the UK, and we know the UK has a number

of weaknesses in comparison with other developed countries.

Particularly around issues like skills, but ownership, access to

finance. -- entrepreneurship. The Scottish Government can do its own

bid to a certain extent to address these issues, I think it is trying

to do so, but a lot of that doesn't make the headlines. David Johnston,

presumably you welcomed the figures we saw this week, although we should

stress it is just one set of figures. The underlying growth, if

you analyse the growth rate over the past year, Scotland is still lagging

behind the rest of the UK. Do you think something other than the

obvious effects are to blame? David mentioned small businesses getting

access to finance. That's something the government could help with. It

will definitely help us sort of grow the business and what we are trying

to do, not just in the UK but we are looking further afield now to North

America. We are finding that the services we provide in the states,

we have the talent here and... You help people make websites?

Basically, digital strategy all the way through to the design and build

up of websites. Was held in July from the government you feel you're

not getting? -- what helped do you feel you're not getting? Is a lot

the private sector can do as well. One of the things we are a big

proponent of this getting young people into digital at an early age.

It's not just about working in our sector, but Digital is a great

enabler for a lot of the difference work streams. Life sciences,

renewable energy. We are members of the body called us like a body you

read this and our industry. What can the government do that would help

you? We spoke about access to finance. We are trying to develop a

number of products that we think will help the business scale and

grow. What we find is that there doesn't seem to be these sort of

pots of money that we can access to do that. You were talking about

loans? Loans or in some shape or form, something to help stimulate

what we are trying to do. In places like California, I imagine someone

might yourself would find a range of capital funds falling all over you.

Yes, digital goals. We had a team member go to San Francisco, and it

is a different world there in terms of people's... The likelihood of

actually getting access to funds to do these things, to create these

products. And actually stimulates the economy. Is there a case for...

Labour this week have proposed ?20 billion Scottish investment. I know

there is a Scottish investment bank already, but it doesn't seem to be

anything like that size. Could that be a game changer? Is there a case

for doing something pretty bowls? I am all for both strategies, but you

have to be careful, because you run into difficulties of picking

winners. We know the Scottish economy has some great companies

that are innovative, but developing products which they can sell

internationally. And it's important to support these. It's also

important to realise that we have a long tail of companies that are less

productive, and need some kind of stimulus to get them to innovate, to

get them to take on more skilled workers. The question of how you use

your finance, the strategy of doing that has to be fought through --

thought through very carefully. The good kicking you are referring to,

how could that be administered? You can do it passively by improving

skills. Especially around the technical. College based, perhaps.

That helps. All companies, if the quality of the Labour they are

receiving is improved. Then the question is how do you particularly

add value to the once you are instilling so well? I don't know, it

might be that we need a more competitive environment. It is clear

that some of our companies do very well in a competitive environment,

but others just seem to roll along. You talked in the film we did last

week about your concerns about not getting people equipped with the

skills from, coming from university to companies like yours. What did

you mean by that? They don't have specific computer skills? Or more

generally they're not very literate and numerate? The skills we are

looking for is far more than just literacy and numeracy. It is

specific skill sets around developers, people who can do the

actual coding of websites. You are not getting that? When we recruit,

it seems to be, certainly in certain roles, we do struggle to find these

people. That might not just be... We might not be an attractive company

to work for, so there is end that we can do. I think it has to start a

lot earlier than University, at schools. When I said earlier about

digital skills being such an enabler, I think it has to start

writing the beginning. Kids? Mobile phones, that's already happening.

You hear the stories about kids touching papers and wondering why

they're not interactive! You both maintain smiles on your face

throughout, thank you very much. Well, I'm joined now by

the Economy Secretary, Keith Brown. On the issue of whether there is

something to be explained other than the obvious decline in oil and gas,

what is your view? This is very good news, not just because of the four

times the rate of the UK growth, but also productivity has increased. A

record number of businesses in Scotland now. It's baffling

performance once again for FDI in Scotland. On the negative side,

there are two governments involved in this economy. Look what the UK

Government is doing, nearly 3% inflation. ?100 billion for every

year they have been in power in doubt. Ringing in new taxes like the

apprenticeship levy. Taxes proposed for self-employed people. You have

to get the two governments working together. It would be very useful to

have a debate, and to get the UK Government to come out and say some

of the things they should be doing in the Scottish economy. Get behind

Scottish businesses. There is something to explain, but why should

it be the UK Government's fault? The UK Government policies apply in

England and Wales as well. Happiness explain a relative underperformance

by the Scottish economy? I don't they get is a relative

underperformance. Four times the rate of growth in Scotland's.

Unemployment is lower in Scotland than it is in the rest of the UK.

And things we keep Government could do Scottish economy, and the never

challenged on these things, they are not made to come and justify these

things. Perhaps it would be a good idea to do that everyone thanks

these figures are really good this week. The Scottish economy as board

and the UK economy has grown by more than 2%, so clearly there is an ICQ,

and what I am asking is why should the UK Government policies explain

that gap, which is largely oil and gas but not entirely, when their

policies apply in England as well? I think you just heard from David Bell

and others about their disability impact of the downtime and Scott is

in gas in Scotland, and also the way these figures are recounted in

Scotland. But you're right, we have to drive up the number of companies

that export in Scotland. We have also had about some of the

challenges in terms of skills, is basic computer skills. We have to do

more of those things and get those things right, and also to continue

to drive productivity. We have increased it by 74% by last ten

years. That's all it takes is up to the level of the UK. We have to

start competing by set with France and Germany. A lot of work still

today. Some your opponents have been saying this morning, my God, they

are celebrating because they are not in reassessing, but there is a much

bigger challenge you. Oil and gas... We should point out that we are

talking about the economic activity that surrounds the industry of oil

and gas. That might never recover. I don't think that is the case. I

mean, to the levels it was before. I am not celebrating. These are good,

encouraging figures. But we have seen salivating by the opposition

parties trying to talk up things before these businesses commit.

Businesses out to asset to the back teeth of the Scottish economy being

talked down by the Tories and Labour. There is huge interest in

tapping into their expertise in Scotland. I was in Kazakhstan and

there are more opportunities are you suggesting that oil and gas activity

could get back to the level it was at before the collapse? I think

there is a huge future for oil and gas. There are some ice expertise in

Scotland. I was in Abu Dhabi, and they have a huge amount of... What I

find most have 80 Scottish companies when, because they know that there

are tenets of markets. They are very switched on to looking at these

other markets and we want to encourage that. But that is not

showing up in the figures yet? We have seen some improvement, we have

seen a 3.4% increase in terms of productivity don't oil and gas, and

we are starting to see that. Perhaps attitudes it is companies been very

forward looking and looking at overseas markets. Scotland need

something to fill an. I remember when SNP first came to power, all

the talk was about renewables. I note this creates jobs, because when

time bound and things like that, what was meant was that Scotland

could develop a new Andy Street, it could be manufacturing, expertise.

It was the big thing that was going to drive the Scottish economy. It

hasn't really happened, has it? Can you point to any impact? I can point

to the impact of the UK Government in the Scottish economy. People will

tell you they have had the legs sticking out from underneath them by

the UK Government's failure to support carbon capture and also

because of the subsidy programme that was there before. I thought

that subsidy programme was for onshore? Offshore renewables was

going to be the big thing, and in fact there are no huge offshore wind

turbine development in England's, but have anything in Scotland. It

has timed out to be the opposite of what we were told. There are very

exciting developments to beat coming. We have seen carbon capture

possibilities that have been delayed or cancelled, the point I'm trying

to make is that what we have in Scotland is a Government, if you

look at growth and employment, the number of businesses with FDI. Look

at what the duty is not doing. Look at the lack of scrutiny for the UK

is not doing. When is the last time you had someone from the UK

Government and listed you're talking about the economy in Scotland. You

should do that. We are getting behind businesses in Scotland.

Ministers are held to account over the economy. Do you think that you

need to... What you are saying... It is fine? You mentioned encouraging

exporters, but you need to take any bold new initiatives? For example,

Scottish Labour over the last few days said, why don't we have a ?20

billion Scottish investment back. I know there is one already, but

nothing like that scale. We have asked a number of times, because

they had to get the borrowing consent of the UK Government, that

is read the rules work. We asked the Scottish futures trust to do exactly

that, in the way that other countries can support

infrastructure, takes bets on some really innovative companies and

support them at that bold measure. We don't have ?20 million, I wish

that dead. We're stuck with the Tories, which the Labour Party is

happy to support in this regard. In the meantime, we have to concentrate

on doubling the number of FDI staff we have in Europe... Your message to

Labour is that you would do the investment back if Labour could find

the money? If they supported our cars. I don't figure has been a

Labour Government oratorio Government... One UIQ, the other

thing that we haven't seen from the Scottish Government the SNP idiot

economic plans for independence. All day, the referendum might be kicked

into the long grass in the mean time. I view planning soon to come

out with something specific? We will come out when they think the time is

right. As you have just said, we will not be having a referendum

until Brexit is clear. That is the right way to do these things. I

didn't see any other sparkling on prior to basic uneven Brexit. We

will work on that. We will also provide... When? Before the last

referendum. In the meantime, we will get on with their business are

supporting businesses in Scotland. But you can't give us a date or even

a year when we will see their support? We'll have to see the

referendum is. We will give a detailed perspective of what we

intend. Thank you. The Momentum movement

certainly made an impact in the last general election -

helping to push Jeremy Corbyn closer towards the winning line than many

had thought possible. But while the group have firmly

established themselves on the political map down south,

their role here is taken by the Momentum grew out of Jeremy Corbyn's

2015 election campaign and it stated aim is to get Labour into

Government. It claims to have a campaigning network over 23,000

members, and 200,000 supporters. And it is taking some of the credit for

Labour's performance in a general election. I manifest offer something

very, very different. Like carbon, they are most definitely left of

centre, in favour of we disappeared in wealth, pitting the planet before

corporate interest, and renationalisation public services.

This seems appealing to younger voters, with a slight social media

and door-to-door campaign. My name is Elena from the Labour Party.

Momentum also want to transform Labour into a more modern party.

That has worried some Labour MPs. They feel rules could be changed to

see those considered off message face reselection. But they grip us

Finder insist they are for all. And the general election campaign, we

campaign for a Labour candidates and respective of registered in the past

on Jeremy Corbyn. We helped win seats for candidates supported

progress just as hard as we helped when teesra candidates who had

always supported us. That is the way we are going to carry on. There is

no equivalent movement in Scotland. Here the Campaign for Socialism

takes that role. They did against Kezia Dugdale for Scottish Labour

leader, but Kezia one. leader, but Kezia one.

# Oh, Jeremy Corbyn # Can then emulate the success not

of the border? Well, earlier I spoke

to the chair of Campiagn Let's start with Labour as a

movement. Down south, they became to be the biggest mass movement party

in Western Europe. There has not been a sunlight up search in the

party here. I figure has been an increase in membership. It has not

been as high as across England and Wales, but it certainly have seen

people get involved. Presumably, you would like to ramp that up? I think

there is much more we can do to get people involved in a genuine

movement. What needs to happen up here for that to happen? Because the

carbon effect in England, arguably, I'm interested in whether you agree,

many people are saying that Labour's unexpectedly good result in Scotland

was largely to do with the Corbyn effect. I think that is largely

true. There was a huge difference in England and Wales, a huge surge down

there. There was only maybe two or 3% up here. I think we should have

been far more focused on Corbyn and a manifesto that he represents, and

they would have seen more games are paid if we had done that. What about

the Labour leadership up here? Are you fans of them? They are pretty

hostile to Jeremy Corbyn. I don't think there is any secret that Kezia

Dugdale voted for John Smith in the last leadership election. I don't

necessarily think it's about leadership are pure. It's about the

policies and a membership that the one to have. I figure has been

lessons learned. There was an e-mail from Kezia Dugdale to the full

membership basically saying that we want to campaign on the For The Many

manifesto. Whatever the policy lunches is industrial strategy,

soggy bobby creating good jobs across the economy... What Labour up

you haven't done... There is no Jezza effect in the medicine has

been an angling. Kezia Dugdale isn't turning up at Rock festivals and

addressing everyone and having centres eyes and people cheering

hard. That is a difference. No. But I think Jeremy Corbyn has captured

something and represent something. It is not about him, while the ad

champ team -- chanting his name. We need something better. A real

alternative and a different vision for how this country should be run

and organise. Do you take the aim of your talking about as an acceptance

from the leadership that they had to change? I can't speak for them, but

it certainly an indication that the party wants to get behind the

manifesto policies and devising, and sat to build on that, because that

is what got us against in the general election. I don't think

there is many people dispute that. The upsurge in interest in politics

in young people that these with Jeremy Corbyn, in Scotland tended to

happen for the SNP. It was the Yes campaign that mobilised thousands of

people. The SNP put on 100,000 new members. Do you think Labour...

Really, Labour dead lows, but there's anything you can do to when

over those people. Yes. I think a quarter are people who voted yes in

the referendum voted Labour this time, and I think the reason so many

people went to the SNP last year signed, because it was for a better

society. They put a campaign for others and for a different country

and how great would be better for. I think what they were offering was a

dead-end and wouldn't have actually provided they change, and I think

what the Labour Party is putting across is actually about genuine

change, giving workers more control and a fairer society. If the Prozac,

we will begin to when. Why do you think it was the SNP who were able

to communicate to young people and not to Labour Party? At that time, I

think the better together campaign was about what young people couldn't

have, about things that would be different. I think, this time round

Labour is now thinking about big ideas, about changing things and

about creating for the many, not if you. I think that is a really clear,

simple message about what Labour stands for. We didn't have that

before. You effectively saying, we think independence is a dead end?

Are you also saying basically that it's just not very interesting? We

have different things to talk about? I think that is correct. There are

people in the Labour Party who supported yes, the majority

supported no. I think we can welcome all opinions on this issue. If we

want to see real change, we need to talk about the financial system, the

economy, taxation, things that whether we like it or not organised

at a UK level. With Jeremy Corbyn and Labour, we have a real wave of

change. Give me one way you would like the Scottish Labour leadership

to change to attempt to get the kind of momentum that Labour in England

have seemed to have? I don't think there is one thing. We have already

talked about them getting behind the policy, bringing that Morse before,

rather than talking about being anti-independence and the SNP.

Fizzing across a positive vision is a really good move and I would

encourage more of that. Thank you. And time now for a look

at the Week Ahead. I'm joined by freelance

journalist and columnist And she's alongside former

Scottish Conservative MP and former chair of the Scottish Conservatives,

Raymond Robertson. are you convinced by Keith Brown's

lying on the economy? That was an interesting interview there he

struggled to get to grips with what is actually happening in the

Scottish economy. He managed to get through almost ten minutes without

mentioning the referendum, which is one of the biggest problems, that is

causing instability for business. It's difficult to find any evidence.

No, it's not. It's causing instability, uncertainty. These are

two things businesses don't want or need. He was going to come and

invest in Scotland where the constitutional future is all the

First Minister is assessing about? They're not interested in helping

Scottish business. Lots of people, according to the figures for inward

investment. Which are very high. I don't know which figures you are

referring to. He is having to double the number of operatives abroad

which doesn't really augur well for inward investment, it is having to

do that. The basic problem of the Scottish economy is uncertainty and

instability. That has been caused by a First Minister he was of Sastre by

a referendum. Wanted you make of that? I think it's right that keep

down didn't talk about independence when you are asking questions about

the economy. He was remaining on topic. The main uncertainty that's

been caused throughout the UK is the uncertainty presented by Brexit. We

are trying to mitigate against the damage that's going to cause. Brexit

is happening across the UK, so can't explain the specifics to Scotland.

Ed Kassig when why Scotland is doing better. Is it something the Scottish

Government is doing? -- it can't explain why. If the opposite result

had come out and the Scottish Government was underperforming

compared to the rest of the UK, the Scottish Government would have been

blamed unfairly. It's also not very fair to say that it's all down to

what they're doing. Connecting our first night in with our second item,

is the SNP in danger of being outmanoeuvred by Labour? Labour in

Scotland are coming up with these bold new ideas, let's have a ?20

billion investment and so on. The SNP is starting to look a bit like

the people you have been in power for ten years, and don't really have

much new to say. I don't think they're being outmanoeuvred by

Scottish Labour, I think we are hearing about the idea of Scottish

Labour getting behind Jeremy Corbyn's agenda. But there isn't an

individual within Scottish Labour around whom there is any momentum.

As long as Labour get the moment, it's bad news for the SNP. I haven't

got enough momentum. They didn't manage to become the government in

the last General Election. Jeremy Corbyn might talk about being a

government in waiting but it is just talk. To you think there is... You

go to tell me there is a marvellous future for the Conservative party in

Scotland. Absolutely. If you look at the number of seats are vulnerable,

it is more to Labour. The arithmetic might look like that, but if you had

to ask anyone which party in Scotland has momentum, used that

phrase, it would be the Scottish Conservatives. That is obvious.

There's no doubt the Jeremy Corbyn has breathed new life into the

Labour Party in Scotland, but the question is what happened at the

General Election a dead cat bounce, with something more deep and

fundamental? Talking of dead cats and bouncing, can Theresa May last

very long? As Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative party.

She is the Prime Minister and a leader of the Conservative party.

Let's see. I don't think anyone knows. She can't be the

Conservatives into another election. Absolutely. Let's say you were

taking your former role as chair of the Conservative party. You're asked

for advice, what would you say? Try and stay in power as long as

possible? My advice would be to do what she said to the 1922 committee

after the election, but she got the party into this mess and she has to

get us out. I think she has to be given time to get as out of the

mess. What would you do? I think it's unfair to say she got us into

this mess because she was not in -- not in favour of Brexit. She did

call the General Election, obviously a tactical error, but in answer to

the question of whether she will remain as Prime Minister, the only

reason she may continue for longer than expected is because of the

clownish nature of the other candidates that seem to be eyeing

her job. Do you think what they will do is let her do the tough stuff,

exits? David Cameron resigned, he said on his way out of Downing

Street, they can do this. She said she got us into this mess, and she

did. I think she have to lead us out of it. What happens one or two years

down the road, I don't know yet. To think she will take the Conservative

party into a second General Election? Candidly, I don't. We are

going into the summer, everything is becoming a bit silly season, but we

still don't have the faintest idea what Brexit means other than Brexit,

or what the UK Government's plan is in terms of what it once... I think

the reason there isn't a plan is because they can make up for the

plans they want. The you're holding the cards. We have heard that Donald

Trump is going to do a very big deal with the UK. None of that can happen

until March 2019. All this talk is completely meaningless. We need to

wait and see what we are given. We're not clear on what the British

government intends to negotiate. It almost doesn't matter. They are not

necessarily going to get it. They won't tell us what they want because

they will have egg on their face when they don't get it. I was

usually encouraged about what President Trump was saying, that

Howard next predecessor would be at the front of the queue. And that he

was ready to proceed, to do a full copper hands of trade deal with the

United Kingdom. -- copper hands of deal. You think it can turn into

something that is beneficial? The British people have spoken. I accept

the result of the referendum. Are all these discussions, would you go

for it staying in the single market with a customs union? Although I

voted remain, I think the British people voted to leave the EU and

that's what we have to do. Still leave the customs union, single

market? I think that's what the British people voted for. You asked

the British people if they wanted to stay in the customs union, most

would say what is the customs union? The campaign did mean when

permission about what I was voting for. Obviously we have to leave

because that was the vote, but it would be wrong to conclude from that

referendum on what was going through anyone's heads when they cast the

votes. I'll be back at the

same time next week.