29/10/2017

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:37 > 0:00:39Morning, everyone.

0:00:39 > 0:00:41I'm Sarah Smith, and welcome to The Sunday Politics,

0:00:41 > 0:00:44where we always bring you everything you need to know to understand

0:00:44 > 0:00:45what's going on in politics.

0:00:45 > 0:00:49Coming up on today's programme...

0:00:49 > 0:00:51The Government says

0:00:51 > 0:00:53the international trade minister Mark Garnier will be investigated

0:00:53 > 0:00:56following newspaper allegations of inappropriate behaviour

0:00:56 > 0:00:58towards a female staff member.

0:00:58 > 0:01:04We'll have the latest.

0:01:04 > 0:01:07The Prime Minister says she can agree a deal with the EU and plenty

0:01:07 > 0:01:13of time for Parliament to vote on it before we leave in 2018. Well

0:01:13 > 0:01:18Parliament play ball? New evidence cast out on the economic and

0:01:18 > 0:01:21environmental case for Heathrow expansion.

0:01:21 > 0:01:22And on Sunday Politics Scotland:

0:01:22 > 0:01:26missed targets, longer waiting Yeah, times and rising costs.

0:01:26 > 0:01:28missed targets, longer waiting times and rising costs.

0:01:28 > 0:01:30That was Audit Scotland's diagnosis of the NHS.

0:01:30 > 0:01:32I'll be speaking to Shona Robison.

0:01:39 > 0:01:41All that coming up in the programme.

0:01:41 > 0:01:45And with me today to help make sense of all the big stories,

0:01:45 > 0:01:48Julia Hartley-Brewer, Steve Richards and Anne McElvoy.

0:01:48 > 0:01:50Some breaking news this morning.

0:01:50 > 0:01:52The Government has announced that it will investigate

0:01:52 > 0:01:55whether the International Trade Minister Mark Garnier broke

0:01:55 > 0:01:56the Ministerial Code following allegations

0:01:56 > 0:02:01of inappropriate behaviour.

0:02:01 > 0:02:05It comes after reports in the Mail on Sunday which has spoken to one

0:02:05 > 0:02:06of Mr Garnier's former employees.

0:02:06 > 0:02:08News of the investigation was announced by the Health

0:02:08 > 0:02:10Secretary Jeremy Hunt on the Andrew Marr show earlier.

0:02:10 > 0:02:14The stories, if they are true, are totally unacceptable

0:02:14 > 0:02:16and the Cabinet Office will be conducting an investigation

0:02:16 > 0:02:19as to whether there has been a breach of the ministerial code

0:02:19 > 0:02:20in this particular case.

0:02:20 > 0:02:22But as you know the facts are disputed.

0:02:22 > 0:02:25This is something that covers behaviour by MPs of all parties

0:02:25 > 0:02:28and that is why the other thing that is going to happen

0:02:28 > 0:02:31is that today Theresa May is going to write to John Bercow,

0:02:31 > 0:02:35the Speaker of the House of Commons, to ask for his advice as to how

0:02:35 > 0:02:41we change that culture.

0:02:41 > 0:02:45That was Jeremy Hunt a little earlier. I want to turn to the panel

0:02:45 > 0:02:50to make sense of this news. This is the government taking these

0:02:50 > 0:02:53allegations quite seriously.What has changed in this story is they

0:02:53 > 0:02:58used to be a bit of delay while people work out what they should say

0:02:58 > 0:03:03about it, how seriously to take it. As you see now a senior cabinet

0:03:03 > 0:03:07member out there, Jeremy Hunt, with an instant response. He does have

0:03:07 > 0:03:11the worry of whether the facts are disputed, but what they want to be

0:03:11 > 0:03:16seen doing is to do something very quickly. In the past they would say

0:03:16 > 0:03:21it was all part of the rough and tumble of Westminster.Mark Garnier

0:03:21 > 0:03:25does not deny these stories, which is that he asked an employee to buy

0:03:25 > 0:03:30sex toys, but he said it was just high jinks and it was taken out of

0:03:30 > 0:03:33context. Is this the sort of thing that a few years ago in a different

0:03:33 > 0:03:39environment would be investigated? Not necessarily quite the frenzy

0:03:39 > 0:03:47that it is nowadays. The combination of social media, all the Sunday

0:03:47 > 0:03:49political programmes were ministers have to go on armed with a response

0:03:49 > 0:03:57means that you get these we have to be seen to be doing something. That

0:03:57 > 0:04:01means there is this Cabinet Office investigation. You pointed out to us

0:04:01 > 0:04:05before the programme that he was not a minister before this happened. It

0:04:05 > 0:04:10does not matter whether he says yes, know I did this or did not,

0:04:10 > 0:04:14something has to be seen to be done. Clearly ministers today are being

0:04:14 > 0:04:18armed with that bit of information and that Theresa May will ask John

0:04:18 > 0:04:22Bercow the speaker to look into the whole culture of Parliament in this

0:04:22 > 0:04:28context. That is the response to this kind of frenzy.If we do live

0:04:28 > 0:04:31in an environment where something has to be seen to be done, does that

0:04:31 > 0:04:37always mean the right thing gets done?Absolutely not. We are in

0:04:37 > 0:04:41witch hunt territory. All of us work in the Commons over many years and

0:04:41 > 0:04:46anyone would think it was a scene out of Benny Hill or a carry on

0:04:46 > 0:04:51film. Sadly it is not that much fun and it is rather dull and dreary.

0:04:51 > 0:04:56Yes, there are sex pests, yes, there is sexual harassment, but the idea

0:04:56 > 0:05:00this is going on on a huge scale is nonsense.Doesn't matter whether it

0:05:00 > 0:05:07is a huge scale or not? Or just a few instances?Any workplace where

0:05:07 > 0:05:12you have the mixing of work and social so intertwined and you throw

0:05:12 > 0:05:16a huge amount of alcohol and late night and people living away from

0:05:16 > 0:05:22home you will have this happen.That does not make it OK.It makes sexual

0:05:22 > 0:05:27harassment not OK as it is not anywhere. This happens to men as

0:05:27 > 0:05:31well and if they have an issue into it there are employment tribunal 's

0:05:31 > 0:05:35and they can contact lawyers. I do not think this should be a matter of

0:05:35 > 0:05:41the speaker, it should be someone completely independent of any party.

0:05:41 > 0:05:46People think MPs are employees of the party or the Commons, they are

0:05:46 > 0:05:49not.Because they are self-employed to whom do you go if you are a

0:05:49 > 0:05:55researcher?That has to be clarified. I agree you need a much

0:05:55 > 0:06:01clearer line of reporting. It was a bit like the situation when we came

0:06:01 > 0:06:06into the media many years ago, the Punic wars in my case! You were not

0:06:06 > 0:06:14quite sure who to go to. If you work worried that it might impede your

0:06:14 > 0:06:19career, and you had to talk to people who work next to you, that is

0:06:19 > 0:06:23just one example, but in the Commons people do not know who they should

0:06:23 > 0:06:27go to. Where Theresa May might be making a mistake, it is the same

0:06:27 > 0:06:31mistake when it was decided to investigate through Levinson the

0:06:31 > 0:06:37culture of the media which was like nailing jelly to a wall. Look at the

0:06:37 > 0:06:40culture of anybody's job and the environment they are in and there is

0:06:40 > 0:06:46usually a lot wrong with it. When you try and make it general, they

0:06:46 > 0:06:51are not trying to blame individuals, or it say they need a better line on

0:06:51 > 0:06:55reporting of sexual harassment, which I support, the Commons is a

0:06:55 > 0:06:59funny place and it is a rough old trade and you are never going to

0:06:59 > 0:07:03iron out the human foibles of that. Diane Abbott was talking about this

0:07:03 > 0:07:08earlier.

0:07:08 > 0:07:11When I first went into Parliament so many of those men had been to all

0:07:11 > 0:07:18boys boarding schools and had really difficult attitudes towards women.

0:07:18 > 0:07:22The world has moved on and middle-aged women are less likely

0:07:22 > 0:07:31than middle-aged men to believe that young research are irresistibly

0:07:31 > 0:07:37attracted to them. We have seen the issues and we have seen one of our

0:07:37 > 0:07:43colleagues been suspended for quite unacceptable language.

0:07:43 > 0:07:47That is a point, Jarrod O'Mara, a Labour MP who has had the whip

0:07:47 > 0:07:52suspended, this goes across all parties.The idea that there is a

0:07:52 > 0:07:58left or right divide over this is absurd. This is a cultural issue. In

0:07:58 > 0:08:02the media and in a lot of other institutions if this is going to

0:08:02 > 0:08:06develop politically, the frenzy will carry on for a bit and other names

0:08:06 > 0:08:10will come out over the next few days, not just the two we have

0:08:10 > 0:08:17mentioned so far in politics. But it also raises questions about how

0:08:17 > 0:08:23candidates are selected for example. There has been a huge pressure for

0:08:23 > 0:08:27the centre to keep out of things. I bet from now on there will be much

0:08:27 > 0:08:32greater scrutiny of all candidates and tweets will have to be looked at

0:08:32 > 0:08:38and all the rest of it.Selecting candidates is interesting. Miriam

0:08:38 > 0:08:42Gonzalez, Nick Clegg's wife, says that during that election they knew

0:08:42 > 0:08:47about Jarrod O'Mara and the Lib Dems knew about it, so it is difficult to

0:08:47 > 0:08:53suggest the Labour Party did not as well.There is very clear evidence

0:08:53 > 0:08:57the Labour Party did know. But we are in a situation of how perfect

0:08:57 > 0:09:04and well-behaved does everyone have to be? If you look at past American

0:09:04 > 0:09:09presidents, JFK and Bill Clinton, these men were sex pest

0:09:09 > 0:09:12extraordinaire, with totally inappropriate behaviour on a regular

0:09:12 > 0:09:16basis. There are things you are not allowed to say if you are feminists.

0:09:16 > 0:09:21Young women are really attracted to powerful men. I was busted for the

0:09:21 > 0:09:25idea that there are young women in the House of commons who are

0:09:25 > 0:09:32throwing themselves at middle-aged, potbellied, balding, older men. We

0:09:32 > 0:09:38need to focus on the right things. When it is unwanted, harassing,

0:09:38 > 0:09:41inappropriate and criminal, absolutely, you come down like a

0:09:41 > 0:09:45tonne of bricks. It is not just because there are more women in the

0:09:45 > 0:09:49Commons, it is because there are more men married to women like us.

0:09:49 > 0:09:52We have to leave it there.

0:09:52 > 0:09:54As attention turns in Westminster to the hundreds

0:09:54 > 0:09:57of amendments put down on the EU Withdrawal Bill, David Davis has

0:09:57 > 0:10:00caused a stir this week by saying it's possible Parliament won't get

0:10:00 > 0:10:03a vote on the Brexit deal until after March 2019 -

0:10:03 > 0:10:05when the clock runs out and we leave the EU.

0:10:05 > 0:10:08Let's take a look at how the controversy played out.

0:10:08 > 0:10:12And which point do you envisage Parliament having a vote?

0:10:12 > 0:10:13As soon as possible thereafter.

0:10:13 > 0:10:17This Parliament?

0:10:17 > 0:10:18As soon as possible possible thereafter, yeah.

0:10:18 > 0:10:20As soon as possible thereafter.

0:10:20 > 0:10:21So, the vote in Parliament...

0:10:21 > 0:10:22The other thing...

0:10:22 > 0:10:24Could be after March 2019?

0:10:24 > 0:10:25It could be, yeah, it could be.

0:10:25 > 0:10:27The...

0:10:27 > 0:10:28It depends when it concludes.

0:10:28 > 0:10:30Mr Barnier, remember, has said he'd like...

0:10:30 > 0:10:33Sorry, the vote of our Parliament, the UK Parliament, could be

0:10:33 > 0:10:34after March 2019?

0:10:34 > 0:10:36Yes, it could be.

0:10:36 > 0:10:38Could be.

0:10:38 > 0:10:39The thing to member...

0:10:39 > 0:10:41Which would be...

0:10:41 > 0:10:43Well, it can't come before we have the deal.

0:10:43 > 0:10:46You said that it is POSSIBLE that Parliament night not vote

0:10:46 > 0:10:49on the deal until AFTER the end of March 2019.

0:10:49 > 0:10:51I'm summarising correctly what you said...?

0:10:51 > 0:10:52Yeah, that's correct.

0:10:52 > 0:10:55In the event we don't do the deal until then, yeah.

0:10:55 > 0:10:57Can the Prime Minister please explain how it's possible

0:10:57 > 0:10:59to have a meaningful vote on something that's

0:10:59 > 0:11:04already taken place?

0:11:04 > 0:11:08As the honourable gentleman knows, we're in negotiations

0:11:08 > 0:11:11with the European Union, but I am confident that the timetable under

0:11:11 > 0:11:14the Lisbon Treaty does give time until March 2019

0:11:14 > 0:11:16for the negotiations to take place.

0:11:16 > 0:11:19But I'm confident, because it is in the interests of both sides,

0:11:19 > 0:11:22it's not just this Parliament that wants to have a vote on that deal,

0:11:22 > 0:11:25but actually there will be ratification by other parliaments,

0:11:25 > 0:11:33that we will be able to achieve that agreement and that negotiation

0:11:33 > 0:11:35We are working to reach an agreement on the final deal

0:11:35 > 0:11:38in good time before we leave the European Union in March 2019.

0:11:38 > 0:11:40Clearly, we cannot say for certain at this stage

0:11:40 > 0:11:42when this will be agreed.

0:11:42 > 0:11:45But as Michel Barnier said, he hopes to get a draft deal

0:11:45 > 0:11:50agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim is well.

0:11:50 > 0:11:54agreed by October 2018, and that's our aim as well.

0:11:54 > 0:11:56I'm joined now by the former Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary

0:11:56 > 0:11:59Benn, who is the chair of the Commons Brexit Committee,

0:11:59 > 0:12:02which David Davis was giving evidence to.

0:12:02 > 0:12:08Good morning.When you think a parliamentary vote should take place

0:12:08 > 0:12:13in order for it to be meaningful?It has to be before we leave the

0:12:13 > 0:12:16European Union. Michel Barnier said at the start of the negotiations

0:12:16 > 0:12:21that he wants to wrap them up by October of next year, so we have

0:12:21 > 0:12:25only got 12 months left, the clock is ticking and there is a huge

0:12:25 > 0:12:29amount of ground to cover.You do not think there is any point in

0:12:29 > 0:12:40having the vote the week before we leave because you could then not go

0:12:40 > 0:12:42and re-negotiate?That would not be acceptable. We will not be given a

0:12:42 > 0:12:45bit of paper and told to take it or leave it. But the following day

0:12:45 > 0:12:49Steve Baker, also a minister in the department, told our committee that

0:12:49 > 0:12:52the government now accepts that in order to implement transitional

0:12:52 > 0:12:57arrangements that it is seeking, it will need separate legislation. I

0:12:57 > 0:13:01put the question to him if you are going to need separate legislation

0:13:01 > 0:13:05to do that, why don't you have a separate bill to implement the

0:13:05 > 0:13:07withdrawal agreement rather than seeking to use the powers the

0:13:07 > 0:13:12government is proposing to take in the EU withdrawal bill.If we stick

0:13:12 > 0:13:16to the timing, you have said you do not think it is possible to

0:13:16 > 0:13:20negotiate a trade deal in the next 12 months. You say the only people

0:13:20 > 0:13:25who think that is possible British ministers. If you do not believe we

0:13:25 > 0:13:30can get a deal negotiated, how can we get a vote on it in 12 months'

0:13:30 > 0:13:34time?If things go well, and there is still a risk of no agreement

0:13:34 > 0:13:48which would be disastrous for the economy and the country, if

0:13:54 > 0:13:56things go there will be a deal on the divorce issues, there will be a

0:13:56 > 0:13:58deal on the nature of the transitional arrangement and the

0:13:58 > 0:14:01government is to set out how it thinks that will work, and then an

0:14:01 > 0:14:04agreement between the UK and the 27 member states saying, we will now

0:14:04 > 0:14:06negotiate a new trade and market access arrangement, and new

0:14:06 > 0:14:08association agreement between the two parties, and that will be done

0:14:08 > 0:14:10in the transition period. Parliament will be voting in those

0:14:10 > 0:14:15circumstances on a deal which leads to the door being open.But we would

0:14:15 > 0:14:20be outside the EU at that point, so how meaningful can vote be where you

0:14:20 > 0:14:25take it or leave it if we have already left the EU? Surely this has

0:14:25 > 0:14:31to happen before March 2019 for it to make a difference?I do not think

0:14:31 > 0:14:35it is possible to negotiate all of the issues that will need to be

0:14:35 > 0:14:40covered in the time available.Then it is not possible to have a

0:14:40 > 0:14:51meaningful vote on it?Parliament will have to have a look at the deal

0:14:51 > 0:14:54presented to it. It is likely to be a mix agreement so the approval

0:14:54 > 0:14:56process in the rest of Europe, unlike the Article 50 agreement,

0:14:56 > 0:15:00which will be a majority vote in the European Parliament and in the

0:15:00 > 0:15:02British Parliament, every single Parliament will have a vote on it,

0:15:02 > 0:15:07so it will be a more complex process anyway, but I do not think that is

0:15:07 > 0:15:13the time to get all of that sorted between now and October next year.

0:15:13 > 0:15:18Whether it is before or after we have left the EU, the government

0:15:18 > 0:15:22have said it is a take it or leave it option and it is the Noel Edmonds

0:15:22 > 0:15:29option, deal or no Deal, you say yes or no to it. You cannot send them

0:15:29 > 0:15:33back to re-negotiate.

0:15:33 > 0:15:39If it is a separate piece of legislation, when Parliament has a

0:15:39 > 0:15:44chance to shape the nature of that legislation.But it can't change

0:15:44 > 0:15:48what has been negotiated with the EU?Well, you could say to the

0:15:48 > 0:15:53government, we're happy with this but was not happy about that chukka

0:15:53 > 0:15:58here's some fresh instructions, go back in and...It seems to me what

0:15:58 > 0:16:03they want is the maximum access to the single market for the lowest

0:16:03 > 0:16:07possible tariffs, whilst able to control migration. If they've got to

0:16:07 > 0:16:11get the best deal that they can on that, how on earth is the Labour

0:16:11 > 0:16:16Party, saying we want a bit more, owing to persuade the other 27?We

0:16:16 > 0:16:19certainly don't want the lowest possible tariffs, we want no tariffs

0:16:19 > 0:16:23are taught. My personal view is that, has made a profound mistake in

0:16:23 > 0:16:29deciding that it wants to leave the customs union. If you want to help

0:16:29 > 0:16:33deal with the very serious question of the border between Northern

0:16:33 > 0:16:37Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, the way you do that is to stay in

0:16:37 > 0:16:42the customs union and I hope, will change its mind.But the Labour

0:16:42 > 0:16:46Party is simply saying in the House of Commons, we want a better deal

0:16:46 > 0:16:53than what, has been able to get?It depends how the negotiations unfold.

0:16:53 > 0:16:58, has ended up on the transitional arrangements in the place that Keir

0:16:58 > 0:17:04Starmer set out on behalf of the shadow cabinet in August, when he

0:17:04 > 0:17:08said, we will need to stay in the single market and the customs union

0:17:08 > 0:17:11for the duration of the transition, and I think that is the position,

0:17:11 > 0:17:15has now reached. It has not been helped by differences of view within

0:17:15 > 0:17:19the Cabinet, and a lot of time has passed and there's proved time left

0:17:19 > 0:17:25and we have not even got on to the negotiations. -- there's very little

0:17:25 > 0:17:31time left.On phase two, the labour Party have set out six clear tests,

0:17:31 > 0:17:35and two of them are crucial. You say you want the exact same benefits we

0:17:35 > 0:17:39currently have in the customs union but you also want to be able to

0:17:39 > 0:17:43ensure the fair migration to control immigration, basically, which does

0:17:43 > 0:17:46sound a bit like having your cake and eating it. You say that you will

0:17:46 > 0:17:50vote against any deal that doesn't give you all of that, the exact same

0:17:50 > 0:17:55benefits of the single market, and allowing you to control migration.

0:17:55 > 0:17:58But you say no deal would be catastrophic if so it seems to me

0:17:58 > 0:18:01you're unlikely to get the deal that you could vote for but you don't

0:18:01 > 0:18:06want to vote for no deal?We absolutely don't want a no deal.

0:18:06 > 0:18:12Businesses have sent a letter to the Prime Minister saying that a

0:18:12 > 0:18:15transition is essential because the possibility of a no deal and no

0:18:15 > 0:18:18transitional would be very damaging for the economy. We fought the

0:18:18 > 0:18:21general election on a policy of seeking to retain the benefits of

0:18:21 > 0:18:25the single market and the customs union. Keir Starmer said on behalf

0:18:25 > 0:18:30of the shadow government that as far as the longer term arrangements are

0:18:30 > 0:18:33concerned, that should leave all options on the table, because it is

0:18:33 > 0:18:37the end that you're trying to achieve and you then find the means

0:18:37 > 0:18:42to support it. So we're setting out very clearly those tests.If you

0:18:42 > 0:18:45were to vote down an agreement because it did not meet your tests,

0:18:45 > 0:18:51and there was time to send, back to the EU to get a better deal, then

0:18:51 > 0:18:53you would have significantly weakened their negotiating hand

0:18:53 > 0:18:58chukka that doesn't help them?I don't think, has deployed its

0:18:58 > 0:19:02negotiating hand very strongly thus far. Because we had a general

0:19:02 > 0:19:05election which meant that we lost time that we would have used for

0:19:05 > 0:19:09negotiating. We still don't know what kind of long-term trade and

0:19:09 > 0:19:16market access deal, wants. The Prime Minister says, I don't want a deal

0:19:16 > 0:19:20like Canada and I don't want a deal like the European Economic Area. But

0:19:20 > 0:19:24we still don't know what kind of deal they want. With about 12 months

0:19:24 > 0:19:29to go, the other thing, needs to do is to set out very clearly above all

0:19:29 > 0:19:33for the benefit of the other 27 European countries, what kind of

0:19:33 > 0:19:37deal it wants. When I travel to Europe and talk to those involved in

0:19:37 > 0:19:42the negotiations, you see other leaders saying, we don't actually

0:19:42 > 0:19:45know what Britain wants. With a year to go it is about time we made that

0:19:45 > 0:19:51clear.One related question on the European Union - you spoke in your

0:19:51 > 0:19:55famous speech in Syria about the international brigades in Spain, and

0:19:55 > 0:19:59I wonder if your solidarity with them leads you to think that the UK

0:19:59 > 0:20:02Government should be recognising Catalonia is an independent state?

0:20:02 > 0:20:07No, I don't think so. It is a very difficult and potentially dangerous

0:20:07 > 0:20:12situation in Catalonia at the moment. Direct rule from Madrid is

0:20:12 > 0:20:17not a long-term solution. There needs to be a negotiation, and

0:20:17 > 0:20:21elections will give Catalonia the chance to take that decision, but I

0:20:21 > 0:20:28am not clear what the declaration of independence actually means. Are

0:20:28 > 0:20:32they going to be borders, is they're going to be an army? There will have

0:20:32 > 0:20:35to be some agreement. Catalonia has already had a high degree of

0:20:35 > 0:20:40autonomy. It may like some more, and it seems to me if you look at the

0:20:40 > 0:20:45experience here in the United Kingdom, that is the way to go, not

0:20:45 > 0:20:48a constitutional stand-off. And I really hope nobody is charged with

0:20:48 > 0:20:52rebellion, because actually that would make matters worse.

0:20:52 > 0:20:57Now, the Government has this week reopened the public

0:20:57 > 0:20:59consultation on plans for a third runway at Heathrow.

0:20:59 > 0:21:01While ministers are clear the £18 billion project

0:21:01 > 0:21:03is still the preferred option, new data raises further questions

0:21:03 > 0:21:05about the environmental impact of expansion,

0:21:05 > 0:21:07and offers an improved economic case for a second

0:21:07 > 0:21:08runway at Gatwick instead.

0:21:08 > 0:21:11So, with opponents on all sides of the Commons, does the Government

0:21:11 > 0:21:13still have the votes to get the plans off the ground?

0:21:13 > 0:21:23Here's Elizabeth Glinka.

0:21:27 > 0:21:29The debate over the expansion of Heathrow has been

0:21:29 > 0:21:30going on for decades.

0:21:30 > 0:21:32Plans for a third runway were first introduced

0:21:32 > 0:21:34by the Labour government in 2003.

0:21:34 > 0:21:38Then, after spending millions of pounds, finally, in 2015,

0:21:38 > 0:21:43the airport commission recommended that those plans go ahead,

0:21:43 > 0:21:47and the government position appeared to be fixed.

0:21:47 > 0:21:49But, of course, since then, we've had a general election.

0:21:49 > 0:21:53The Government have lost their Commons majority.

0:21:53 > 0:21:56And with opposition on both front benches, the Parliamentary

0:21:56 > 0:22:01arithmetic looks a little bit up in the air.

0:22:01 > 0:22:03A lot has changed since the airport commission produced its report,

0:22:03 > 0:22:06and that don't forget was the bedrock for the Government's

0:22:06 > 0:22:08decision, that's why the government supposedly made the decision

0:22:08 > 0:22:09that it made.

0:22:09 > 0:22:12But most of the assumptions made in that report have

0:22:12 > 0:22:15been undermined since, by data on passenger numbers,

0:22:15 > 0:22:17on economic benefits, and more than anything, on pollution.

0:22:17 > 0:22:21There's demand from international carriers to get into Heathrow.

0:22:21 > 0:22:23More and more people want to fly.

0:22:23 > 0:22:26And after the referendum, connectivity post-Brexit

0:22:26 > 0:22:30is going to be absolutely critical to the UK economy, so if anything,

0:22:30 > 0:22:36I think the case is stronger for expansion at Heathrow.

0:22:36 > 0:22:38A vote on expansion had been due to take place this summer.

0:22:38 > 0:22:40But with Westminster somewhat distracted, that didn't happen.

0:22:40 > 0:22:43Now, fresh data means the Government has had to reopen

0:22:43 > 0:22:49the public consultation.

0:22:49 > 0:22:52But it maintains the case for Heathrow is as strong as ever,

0:22:52 > 0:22:58delivering benefits of up to £74 billion to the wider economy.

0:22:58 > 0:23:00And in any case, the Government says, action must be taken,

0:23:00 > 0:23:05as all five of London's airports will be completely

0:23:05 > 0:23:09full by the mid-2030s.

0:23:09 > 0:23:11Still, the new research does cast an alternative expansion at Gatwick

0:23:11 > 0:23:16in a more favourable economic light, while showing Heathrow

0:23:16 > 0:23:23is now less likely to meet its environmental targets.

0:23:23 > 0:23:27Campaigners like these in Hounslow sense the wind is shifting.

0:23:27 > 0:23:30We're feeling encouraged, because we see all kinds

0:23:30 > 0:23:32of weaknesses in the argument.

0:23:32 > 0:23:35Certainly, quite a few MPs, I think certainly Labour MPs,

0:23:35 > 0:23:38are beginning to think perhaps it's not such a great idea

0:23:38 > 0:23:40to have a third runway.

0:23:40 > 0:23:43Their MP is convinced colleagues can now be persuaded

0:23:43 > 0:23:45to see things their way.

0:23:45 > 0:23:47The Labour Party quite rightly set four key tests

0:23:47 > 0:23:50for a third runway at Heathrow.

0:23:50 > 0:23:53And in my view, Heathrow is not able...

0:23:53 > 0:23:57The Heathrow option is not able to pass any of those.

0:23:57 > 0:24:00So, I see a lot of colleagues in the Labour Party around

0:24:00 > 0:24:03the country beginning to think twice.

0:24:03 > 0:24:08And if you look at the cross-party MPs supportin this anti-Heathrow

0:24:08 > 0:24:11And if you look at the cross-party MPs supporting this anti-Heathrow

0:24:11 > 0:24:14protest this week, you will see some familiar faces.

0:24:14 > 0:24:16You know my position - as the constituency MP,

0:24:16 > 0:24:17I'm totally opposed.

0:24:17 > 0:24:20I think this is another indication of just the difficulties

0:24:20 > 0:24:22the Government have got off of implementing this policy.

0:24:22 > 0:24:24I don't think it's going to happen, I just don't think

0:24:24 > 0:24:25it's going to happen.

0:24:25 > 0:24:28So, if some on the Labour front bench are, shall

0:24:28 > 0:24:31we say, not supportive, what about the other side?

0:24:31 > 0:24:34In a free vote, we could have had up to 60 Conservative MPs

0:24:34 > 0:24:36voting against expansion, that's the number that is normally

0:24:36 > 0:24:38used and I think it's right.

0:24:38 > 0:24:40In the circumstances where it requires an active rebellion,

0:24:40 > 0:24:41the numbers would be fewer.

0:24:41 > 0:24:44I can't tell you what that number is, but I can tell

0:24:44 > 0:24:47you that there are people right the way through the party,

0:24:47 > 0:24:49from the backbenches to the heart of the government,

0:24:49 > 0:24:50who will vote against Heathrow expansion.

0:24:50 > 0:24:54And yet the SNP, whose Commons votes could prove vital,

0:24:54 > 0:24:56are behind the Heathrow plan, which promises more

0:24:56 > 0:24:57connecting flights.

0:24:57 > 0:25:01And other supporters are convinced they have the numbers.

0:25:01 > 0:25:04There is a majority of members of Parliament that support Heathrow

0:25:04 > 0:25:08expansion, and when that is put to the test, whenever that will be,

0:25:08 > 0:25:09I think that will be clearly demonstrated.

0:25:09 > 0:25:12Any vote on this issue won't come until next summer.

0:25:12 > 0:25:14For both sides, yet more time to argue about weather

0:25:14 > 0:25:21the plans should take off or be permanently grounded.

0:25:25 > 0:25:26Elizabeth Glinka there.

0:25:26 > 0:25:31And I'm joined now by the former Cabinet minister Theresa Villiers,

0:25:31 > 0:25:38under David Cameron.

0:25:38 > 0:25:43Thanks for coming in. You have made your opposition to a third runway at

0:25:43 > 0:25:47Heathrow consistently clear. , have reopened this consultation but it is

0:25:47 > 0:25:51still clearly their preferred option?It is but what I have always

0:25:51 > 0:25:54asked is, why try to build a new runway at Heathrow when you can

0:25:54 > 0:25:57build one at Gatwick in half the time, for half the cost and with a

0:25:57 > 0:26:01tiny fraction of the environment will cost average is that true,

0:26:01 > 0:26:05though? Private finance is already to go at Heathrow, because that's

0:26:05 > 0:26:09where people want to do it and that's where the private backers

0:26:09 > 0:26:12want to put it. It would take much longer to get the private finance

0:26:12 > 0:26:17for Gatwick? Part of that private finance is passengers of the future,

0:26:17 > 0:26:22but also, the costs of the surface transport needed to expand Heathrow

0:26:22 > 0:26:30is phenomenal. I mean, TfL estimates vary between £10 billion and £15

0:26:30 > 0:26:33billion. And there's no suggestion that those private backers are going

0:26:33 > 0:26:38to meet those costs. So, this is a hugely expensive project as well as

0:26:38 > 0:26:43one which will create very significant damage.Heathrow is

0:26:43 > 0:26:45ultimately where passengers and airlines want to go to, isn't it?

0:26:45 > 0:26:50Every slot is practically full. Every time a new one comes up, it is

0:26:50 > 0:26:55up immediately, it's a very popular airport. Gatwick is not where they

0:26:55 > 0:26:59want to go?There are many airlines and passengers who do want to fly

0:26:59 > 0:27:03from Gatwick, and all the forecasts indicate that a new runway there

0:27:03 > 0:27:07would be full of planes very rapidly. But I think the key thing

0:27:07 > 0:27:13is that successive elements have said, technology will deliver a way

0:27:13 > 0:27:18to resolve the around noise and air quality. I don't have any confidence

0:27:18 > 0:27:23that science has demonstrated that technology will deliver those

0:27:23 > 0:27:27solutions to these very serious environmental limbs which have

0:27:27 > 0:27:29stopped Heathrow expansion for decades.Jim Fitzpatrick in the film

0:27:29 > 0:27:34was mentioning that people think there is a need for even more

0:27:34 > 0:27:37collectivity in Britain post-Brexit. We know that business has been

0:27:37 > 0:27:41crying out for more routes, they really think it hurts business

0:27:41 > 0:27:45expansion that we don't get on with this. More consultation is just

0:27:45 > 0:27:49going to lead to more delay, isn't it?This is a hugely controversial

0:27:49 > 0:27:52decision. There is a reason why people have been talking about

0:27:52 > 0:27:56expanding Heathrow for 50 years and it is never happened, it's because

0:27:56 > 0:28:01it's a bad idea. So, inevitably the legal processes are very complex.

0:28:01 > 0:28:05One of my anxieties about, pursuing this option is that potentially it

0:28:05 > 0:28:08means another lost decade for airport expansion. Because the

0:28:08 > 0:28:14problems with Heathrow expansion are so serious, I believe that's one of

0:28:14 > 0:28:17the reasons why I advocated, anyone who wants a new runway in the

0:28:17 > 0:28:21south-east should be backing Gatwick is a much more deliverable option.

0:28:21 > 0:28:27Let me move on to Brexit. We were talking with Hilary Benn about a

0:28:27 > 0:28:30meaningful vote being given to the House of Commons chukka how

0:28:30 > 0:28:33important do you think that is?Of course the Commons will vote on

0:28:33 > 0:28:39this. The Commons is going to vote on this many, many times. We have

0:28:39 > 0:28:42also had a hugely important vote not only in the referendum on the 23rd

0:28:42 > 0:28:46of June but also on Article 50.But will that vote allow any changes to

0:28:46 > 0:28:52it? Hilary Benn seemed to think that the Commons would be able to shape

0:28:52 > 0:28:56the deal with the vote. But actually is it going to be, saying, take it

0:28:56 > 0:29:01or leave it at all what we have negotiated?Our Prime Minister

0:29:01 > 0:29:06negotiates on our behalf internationally. It's

0:29:06 > 0:29:08well-established precedent that after an agreement is reached

0:29:08 > 0:29:14overseas, then it is considered in the House of Commons.What if it was

0:29:14 > 0:29:18voted down in the House of Commons? Well, the legal effect of that would

0:29:18 > 0:29:21be that we left the European Union without any kind of deal, because

0:29:21 > 0:29:26the key decision was on the voting of Article 50 as an irreversible

0:29:26 > 0:29:32decision.Is it irreversible, though? We understand, may have had

0:29:32 > 0:29:35legal advice saying that Yukon stopped the clock on Article 50.

0:29:35 > 0:29:39Would it not be possible if the Commons voted against to ask the

0:29:39 > 0:29:42European Union for a little bit more time to try and renegotiate?There

0:29:42 > 0:29:50is a debate about the reversibility of Article 50. But the key point is

0:29:50 > 0:29:56that we are all working for a good deal for the United Kingdom and the

0:29:56 > 0:30:01I'm concerned that some of the amendments to the legislation are

0:30:01 > 0:30:04not about the nature of the deal at the end of the process, they're just

0:30:04 > 0:30:10about frustrating the process. I think that would be wrong. I think

0:30:10 > 0:30:13we should respect the result of the referendum.Will it be by next

0:30:13 > 0:30:16summer, so there is time for Parliament and for other

0:30:16 > 0:30:19parliaments?I certainly hope that we get that agreement between the

0:30:19 > 0:30:24two sides, and the recent European summit seemed to indicate a

0:30:24 > 0:30:28willingness from the European side to be constructive. But one point

0:30:28 > 0:30:32where I think Hilary Benn has a point, if we do secure agreement on

0:30:32 > 0:30:35a transitional deal, that does potentially give us more time to

0:30:35 > 0:30:40work on the details of a trade agreement. I hope we get as much as

0:30:40 > 0:30:44possible in place before exit day. But filling out some of that detail

0:30:44 > 0:30:47is made easier if we can secure that

0:30:47 > 0:30:53But filling out some of that detail two-year transitional deal.

0:30:53 > 0:30:59That is interesting because a lot of Brexiteers what the deal to be done

0:30:59 > 0:31:07by the inflammation period, it is not a time for that.I fully

0:31:07 > 0:31:12recognise we need compromise, I am keen to work with people across my

0:31:12 > 0:31:15party in terms of spectrum of opinion, and with other parties as

0:31:15 > 0:31:21well to ensure we get the best outcome.Let me ask you briefly

0:31:21 > 0:31:25before you go about the possible culture of sexual harassment in the

0:31:25 > 0:31:30House of commons and Theresa May will write to the Speaker of the

0:31:30 > 0:31:33House of Commons to make sure there is a better way that people can

0:31:33 > 0:31:38report sexual harassment in the House of commons. Is that necessary?

0:31:38 > 0:31:43A better procedure is needed. It is sad it has taken this controversy to

0:31:43 > 0:31:48push this forward. But there is a problem with MPs who are individual

0:31:48 > 0:31:53employers. If you work for an MP and have a complaint against them,

0:31:53 > 0:31:56essentially they are overseeing their own complaints process. I

0:31:56 > 0:32:01think a role for the House of commons authorities in ensuring that

0:32:01 > 0:32:05those complaints are properly dealt with I think would be very helpful,

0:32:05 > 0:32:09so I think the Prime Minister's letter was a sensible move.So you

0:32:09 > 0:32:13think there is a culture of sexual harassment in the House of commons?

0:32:13 > 0:32:20I have not been subjected to it or seen evidence of it, but obviously

0:32:20 > 0:32:23there is anxiety and allegations have made their way into the papers

0:32:23 > 0:32:27and they should be treated appropriately and properly

0:32:27 > 0:32:29investigated.Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:29 > 0:32:31Thank you for talking to us.

0:32:31 > 0:32:33Next week the Lord Speaker's committee publishes its final report

0:32:33 > 0:32:35into reducing the size of the House of Lords.

0:32:35 > 0:32:38With over 800 members the upper house is the second largest

0:32:38 > 0:32:40legislative chamber in the world after the National People's

0:32:40 > 0:32:41Congress of China.

0:32:41 > 0:32:44The report is expected to recommend that new peerages should be

0:32:44 > 0:32:47time-limited to 15 years and that in the future political peerage

0:32:47 > 0:32:51appointments will also be tied to a party's election performance.

0:32:51 > 0:32:54The government has been under pressure to take action to cut

0:32:54 > 0:32:57members of the unelected chamber, where they are entitled

0:32:57 > 0:33:01to claim an attendance allowance of £300 a day.

0:33:01 > 0:33:04And once again these expenses have been in the news.

0:33:04 > 0:33:07The Electoral Reform Society discovered that 16 peers had claimed

0:33:07 > 0:33:09around £400,000 without speaking in any debates or submitting any

0:33:09 > 0:33:13questions for an entire year.

0:33:13 > 0:33:16One of the Lords to be criticised was Digby Jones,

0:33:16 > 0:33:19the crossbencher and former trade minister, he hasn't spoken

0:33:19 > 0:33:23in the Lords since April 2016 and has voted only seven times

0:33:23 > 0:33:26during 2016 and 2017.

0:33:26 > 0:33:29Yet he has claimed around £15,000 in this period.

0:33:29 > 0:33:32When asked what he does in the House he said,

0:33:32 > 0:33:35"I go in and I will invite for lunch or meet with inward

0:33:35 > 0:33:36investors into the country.

0:33:36 > 0:33:40I fly the flag for Britain."

0:33:40 > 0:33:42Well, we can speak now to Lord Jones who joins us

0:33:42 > 0:33:46from Stratford Upon Avon.

0:33:46 > 0:33:51Thank you very much for talking to us. You provide value for money in

0:33:51 > 0:33:58the House of Lords do you think? Definitely. I am, by the way, very

0:33:58 > 0:34:03keen on reform. I want to see that 15 year tide. I would like to see a

0:34:03 > 0:34:08time limit, an age limit of 75 or 80. I would like attendants

0:34:08 > 0:34:13definitely define so the whole public understood what people are

0:34:13 > 0:34:19paying for and why. The £300, as a crossbencher I get no support, and

0:34:19 > 0:34:27nor do I want any, speech writing, secretarial assistance, none of

0:34:27 > 0:34:31that, and the £300 goes towards that.Whilst you are in there

0:34:31 > 0:34:36because we will talk about the reform of the Lords in general, but

0:34:36 > 0:34:40in terms of you yourself, you say you invite people in for lunch, is

0:34:40 > 0:34:43it not possible for you to take part in debates and votes and ask

0:34:43 > 0:34:49questions at the same time?Have you ever listened to a debate in the

0:34:49 > 0:35:01laws? Yes, many times.Yes, many times. You have to put your name

0:35:01 > 0:35:09down in advance and you have to be there for the whole debate.You have

0:35:09 > 0:35:13to be around when the vote is called and you do not know when the book is

0:35:13 > 0:35:17called, you have no idea when the boat is going to be called.This is

0:35:17 > 0:35:23part of being a member of the House of Lords and what it means. If you

0:35:23 > 0:35:26are not prepared to wait or take part in debates, why do you want to

0:35:26 > 0:35:31be a member? It is possible to resign from the House of Lords.

0:35:31 > 0:35:35There are many things members of the Lords do that does not relate to

0:35:35 > 0:35:40parrot fashion following somebody else, which I refuse to do, about

0:35:40 > 0:35:45speaking to an empty chamber, or indeed hanging on sometimes for

0:35:45 > 0:35:50hours to vote. There are many other things that you do. You quote me as

0:35:50 > 0:35:55saying I will entertain at lunchtime or show people around the House,

0:35:55 > 0:35:57everything from schoolchildren to inward investors. I will meet

0:35:57 > 0:36:00ministers about big business issues or educational issues, and at the

0:36:00 > 0:36:05same time I will meet other members of the Lords to get things moving.

0:36:05 > 0:36:09None of that relates to going into the House and getting on your hind

0:36:09 > 0:36:13legs, although I do go in and sit there and learn and listen to

0:36:13 > 0:36:15others, which, if

0:36:15 > 0:36:19others, which, if more people would receive and not transmit, we might

0:36:19 > 0:36:23get a better informed society. At the same time many times I will go

0:36:23 > 0:36:28after I have listened and I am leaving and if I have not heard the

0:36:28 > 0:36:31debate, I will not vote.

0:36:31 > 0:36:34debate, I will not vote.Voting is an essential part of being part of a

0:36:34 > 0:36:39legislative chamber. This is not just an executive committee, it is a

0:36:39 > 0:36:44legislature, surpassing that law is essential, is it not?

0:36:44 > 0:36:47essential, is it not?Do you really believe that an MP or a member of

0:36:47 > 0:36:51the Lords who has not heard a moment of the debate,

0:36:51 > 0:36:55of the debate, who is then listening to the Bell, walks in and does not

0:36:55 > 0:36:59know which lobby, the whips tell him, they have not heard the debate

0:36:59 > 0:37:04and they do not know what they are voting on and they go and do it?

0:37:04 > 0:37:10That is your democracy? Voting seems to be an essential part of this

0:37:10 > 0:37:14chamber, and you have your ideas about reforming the chamber. It

0:37:14 > 0:37:18sounds as though you would reform yourself out of it. You say people

0:37:18 > 0:37:22who are not voting and who are not taking part in debate should no

0:37:22 > 0:37:28longer be members of the House.I did not say that. I said we ought to

0:37:28 > 0:37:33redefine what attendance means and then if you do not attend on the new

0:37:33 > 0:37:37criteria, you do not have to come ever again, we will give you your

0:37:37 > 0:37:39wish.

0:37:39 > 0:37:42wish. I agree attendance might mean unless you speak, you are going.

0:37:42 > 0:37:47Fair enough, if that is what is agreed, yes. Sometimes I would speak

0:37:47 > 0:37:53and sometimes I would not. If I did not, then off I go. Similarly after

0:37:53 > 0:37:5915 years, off you go. If you reach 75 or 80, off you go. Why do we have

0:37:59 > 0:38:0492 members who are only there because of daddy.

0:38:04 > 0:38:06because of daddy.You are talking about hereditary peers. You would

0:38:06 > 0:38:12like to reduce the House to what kind of number?I would get it down

0:38:12 > 0:38:17to 400.You would get rid of half the peers there at the moment? You

0:38:17 > 0:38:22think you are active enough to remain as one of the 400?

0:38:22 > 0:38:25remain as one of the 400?No, I said that might well include me.

0:38:25 > 0:38:28that might well include me. Let's get a set of criteria, let's push it

0:38:28 > 0:38:33through, because the laws is losing respect in the whole of the country

0:38:33 > 0:38:37because there are too many and all these things about what people pay

0:38:37 > 0:38:42for. I bet most people think the money you get is paid. It is not, it

0:38:42 > 0:38:47is re-funding for all the things you have to pay for yourself. But I

0:38:47 > 0:38:51understand how respect has been lost in society. Let's change it now.

0:38:51 > 0:38:56Let's get it through and then, yes, if you do not meet the criteria, you

0:38:56 > 0:39:00have got to go and that includes me. Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking

0:39:01 > 0:39:02to us.

0:39:02 > 0:39:07Lloyd Jones, thank you for talking to us.

0:39:07 > 0:39:08Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.

0:39:08 > 0:39:10Coming up on the programme...

0:39:10 > 0:39:14Is it time for some blue-sky thinking about NHS services?

0:39:14 > 0:39:23I'll be speaking to Health Secretary Shona Robison.

0:39:23 > 0:39:30And about claims settle her sad -- sexual harassment in the Scottish

0:39:30 > 0:39:30Parliament.

0:39:30 > 0:39:33Ruled directly from Madrid and a defiant deposed leader.

0:39:33 > 0:39:35Who will be running the lives of Catalans this week?

0:39:35 > 0:39:38And we take a look back to 50 years ago when an astounding by-election

0:39:38 > 0:39:40victory in Hamilton marked the beginning of the rise

0:39:40 > 0:39:42of nationalism at the centre of political debate.

0:39:42 > 0:39:45The National Health Service has rarely been free of debilitating

0:39:45 > 0:39:49symptoms and troubling conditions and in its annual review,

0:39:49 > 0:39:51Audit Scotland's assessment is troubling, identifying a host

0:39:51 > 0:39:55of missed targets, longer waiting times and health boards struggling

0:39:55 > 0:39:57to keep up with rising costs.

0:39:57 > 0:40:00The watchdog also warned there is no "long-term plan"

0:40:00 > 0:40:01to transform the NHS.

0:40:01 > 0:40:03So is it time for some blue-sky thinking?

0:40:03 > 0:40:05I spoke to the Health Secretary Shona Robison,

0:40:05 > 0:40:08but I began by asking her about allegations today that sexual

0:40:08 > 0:40:16harassment is rife in the Scottish Parliament.

0:40:16 > 0:40:26That me first of all ask you... There is material in the papers this

0:40:26 > 0:40:28morning claiming that sexual harassment is rife in the Scottish

0:40:28 > 0:40:35Parliament. Is that a picture that you recognise?I am very concerned

0:40:35 > 0:40:41by the reports that I have read, and there is clearly a focus at the

0:40:41 > 0:40:45moment what about sexual harassment in a number of institutions, and out

0:40:45 > 0:40:49which find it hard to believe that the Scottish parliament is immune.

0:40:49 > 0:40:53What I would say to anybody is that it is really importing these issues

0:40:53 > 0:40:56are brought out, and people of this match had reported to the

0:40:56 > 0:41:02parliamentary authorities, to the police, possibly, and also, if it is

0:41:02 > 0:41:05a party issue, to the political parties. We need to bring these

0:41:05 > 0:41:09things out and the open, by the editors got is Parliament,

0:41:09 > 0:41:13Westminster or the BBC. It is really important that things that perhaps

0:41:13 > 0:41:19have been brushed under the cap before too long in regard of sexual

0:41:19 > 0:41:23harassment, these things need to be brought out, because clearly it is

0:41:23 > 0:41:28totally unacceptable that people are faced with that type of behaviour.

0:41:28 > 0:41:31Have you personally ever been subjected to behave if you feel is

0:41:31 > 0:41:34an appropriate or do you know of female colleagues who feel that way?

0:41:34 > 0:41:39I have been very lucky in that I have not had that personally, but I

0:41:39 > 0:41:47am aware in blocks of life, not used in political life, that it is

0:41:47 > 0:41:52commonplace for women to have remarks made. Actually, on social

0:41:52 > 0:41:57media, we do all get a level of abuse that I think we get as women

0:41:57 > 0:42:04that perhaps wouldn't be directed at men about how we live and what we

0:42:04 > 0:42:11were, and obviously that isn't necessarily as serious as sexual

0:42:11 > 0:42:14harassment in your day-to-day job, but I think it is part of an issue

0:42:14 > 0:42:19as a society we have where women are targeted in different ways. If it is

0:42:19 > 0:42:26in the workplace, where there is perhaps a relationship with a the

0:42:26 > 0:42:29person is being sexually harassed, that is very serious.I just wonder

0:42:29 > 0:42:35what I do think the Scottish Government needs to do something. I

0:42:35 > 0:42:38mean, to say the Scottish Government should start this would be

0:42:38 > 0:42:44ridiculous, but perhaps could do something to encourage people to

0:42:44 > 0:42:52come forward. -- should stamp this out. Nothing is being done about it,

0:42:52 > 0:42:56everybody runs for cover. They field concerns have been ignored,

0:42:56 > 0:43:02according to the lawyer.That is very serious indeed. The Scottish

0:43:02 > 0:43:05parliament as an a situation needs to look at this very seriously

0:43:05 > 0:43:09indeed antiseptic people, whoever they are, and women in particular,

0:43:09 > 0:43:13that if they are facing anything in the workplace, then the institution

0:43:13 > 0:43:19encourages them to come forward, in confidence, so there will be no

0:43:19 > 0:43:23repercussions, and confidence to report such matters, and as a party,

0:43:23 > 0:43:29I would certainly say that our headquarters are open, they will

0:43:29 > 0:43:32take any issues of concern, and they would be treated confidentially, and

0:43:32 > 0:43:41a originality -- all the other parties would say the same. This

0:43:41 > 0:43:43practice Government has taken a lot of action and equality and making

0:43:43 > 0:43:48sure that the gift in message that that type of behaviour in whatever

0:43:48 > 0:43:52institution is absolutely wrong and must be stamped out, and if there is

0:43:52 > 0:43:56anything more we can do as a Government, then I am sure we well.

0:43:56 > 0:44:00First of all, the Parliament has to make sure that it has and openness

0:44:00 > 0:44:05to say that this behaviour is wrong, and as collies, if we see anything

0:44:05 > 0:44:10like that, we should also been speaking up and think that type of

0:44:10 > 0:44:13behaviour is absolutely wrong, and I would encourage all of my colleagues

0:44:13 > 0:44:18across any of the parties to do that.There is a discussion going on

0:44:18 > 0:44:22about taxation and whether it should be increased in Scotland. No

0:44:22 > 0:44:27decision has been taken yet. Alex Neill has been saying this morning

0:44:27 > 0:44:31that any increases in tax as a result of these discussions should

0:44:31 > 0:44:38be reserved for the NHS.Would you agree? I was make a very strong PNA

0:44:38 > 0:44:43negotiations around the budget for the health budget.He is suggesting

0:44:43 > 0:44:52it should be...Olivers discussant around the budget, which are

0:44:52 > 0:44:55ongoing, but have a discussion about what the priorities are for

0:44:55 > 0:44:59Government. I think it is fair to say that they have budget has been a

0:44:59 > 0:45:07key priority for Government. It is a good £6 billion will... 2 billion

0:45:07 > 0:45:12over the course of the rest of this Parliament for the health budget.

0:45:12 > 0:45:15These discussions will be ongoing, and I will certainly be making a

0:45:15 > 0:45:18very strong case that the health budget should continue to be

0:45:18 > 0:45:27protected.You are not saying it should be

0:45:27 > 0:45:30should be increased from taxation? The NHS has already had a commitment

0:45:30 > 0:45:33to get the lion's share of resources, so I will continue to

0:45:33 > 0:45:39make that argument.There is a programme to transform the NHS. We

0:45:39 > 0:45:42have had this Audit Scotland report this week which was extremely

0:45:42 > 0:45:47critical of the performance of your Government. What I find particularly

0:45:47 > 0:45:52concerning, looking at it, was that if we look to the future, to the end

0:45:52 > 0:45:56of this, this big programme to integrate social care with the NHS

0:45:56 > 0:46:02was supposed to take pressures off hospitals so that it would be up a

0:46:02 > 0:46:09cute bed, and get people out into the community. By that as evidence

0:46:09 > 0:46:13that they're blocking has reduced, but they also say is that there is

0:46:13 > 0:46:18little indication the balance of funding will shift in the coming

0:46:18 > 0:46:24years, not just now, but in the coming years. They say that they

0:46:24 > 0:46:29have examined the situation and find that all evidence of multi-year

0:46:29 > 0:46:35plans to move funding and reduce the number of acute beds. How is that

0:46:35 > 0:46:40possible when this flagship policy has now been in place for years?

0:46:40 > 0:46:43Audit Scotland does recognise that the reforms put in place are

0:46:43 > 0:46:47beginning to show something... Assisting that even at the reforms

0:46:47 > 0:46:55work they will have no effect.I'm delayed discharge, that is making

0:46:55 > 0:47:02progress, and that is recognised. We have made a bet commitment to

0:47:02 > 0:47:08transfer £500 million of acute anti-community services.It is a

0:47:08 > 0:47:11very congregated subject, the NHS. You can quote me lots of figures.

0:47:11 > 0:47:16Audit Scotland is saying that there is little evidence of multi-year

0:47:16 > 0:47:21plans to move funding and reduce the number of acute beds. That was

0:47:21 > 0:47:25supposed to be the end point of your transformation, and they are saying

0:47:25 > 0:47:28there is no evidence that even if your transformation worked it will

0:47:28 > 0:47:32have the effect that you say it will. Just talking about the amount

0:47:32 > 0:47:38of money you in is not the point.I agree with Audit Scotland that money

0:47:38 > 0:47:43is not the answer. It has to be reformed, as well as obviously

0:47:43 > 0:47:47proper investment and enough investment, it is re-form. One of

0:47:47 > 0:47:50the recommendations and they make is for a financial Fearon to set

0:47:50 > 0:47:56alongside the health and care delivery plan to track...Why is it

0:47:56 > 0:48:01not there?What has already gone on to make sure we can put that in

0:48:01 > 0:48:07place, and it will be published in the spring to set alongside the

0:48:07 > 0:48:11health and care delivery plan to make sure that that money is tight

0:48:11 > 0:48:18as it changes. Previously, we hadn't made such a bold commitment, to

0:48:18 > 0:48:21transfer £500 million from acute anti-community services, and they

0:48:21 > 0:48:25talked about shifting the balance of the, but there was no figure. We now

0:48:25 > 0:48:30have a figure. The financial framework but track that and it will

0:48:30 > 0:48:34demonstrate how that money, going from acute into community services

0:48:34 > 0:48:40will make the difference. That needs to happen.That financial framework

0:48:40 > 0:48:44will help. A year ago, Audit Scotland produced a report saying

0:48:44 > 0:48:49the problem with all these grand what about social care, which you

0:48:49 > 0:48:53have just repeated, is that there is no funding plan in place, so no one

0:48:53 > 0:48:58knows how much it is going to cost, and there are no benchmarks in place

0:48:58 > 0:49:02so that we won't know, even if there was funding there, whether it is

0:49:02 > 0:49:08working.And yet, that is still the case. It is more than grand words,

0:49:08 > 0:49:11because £250 million went into social care through the health

0:49:11 > 0:49:15budget in order to build up those communities services, to tackle

0:49:15 > 0:49:20daily and avoid people...Audit Scotland say there are no benchmarks

0:49:20 > 0:49:27in place. There are benchmarks.They are wrong? No, they are not wrong.

0:49:27 > 0:49:30We need to do more and give transparency to that. But we have

0:49:30 > 0:49:34said that what we need to do, how we are going to do it. The financial

0:49:34 > 0:49:40framework in the spring will set out the financial dimension of that, but

0:49:40 > 0:49:44it is very clear that putting more money in and having the system same

0:49:44 > 0:49:49is not going to cut the mustard, and that is by keeping people out of

0:49:49 > 0:49:51hospital, tackling delay, and developing commuters services is

0:49:51 > 0:49:55absolutely good thing today.Just to take up something you mentioned a

0:49:55 > 0:49:59moment ago, which is a £250 million which was silly health budget,

0:49:59 > 0:50:07allocated to social care. Audit

0:50:07 > 0:50:10allocated to social care. Audit Scotland say that that money did not

0:50:10 > 0:50:14go to the NHS, it went to social care through the NHS. They say if

0:50:14 > 0:50:18you strip that money out, the revenue budget for the NHS actually

0:50:18 > 0:50:24fell in real terms last year. I can't remember the number of times

0:50:24 > 0:50:27I've had Scottish Government ministers boasting about how they

0:50:27 > 0:50:30are increasing health spending in real terms. Would you accept the

0:50:30 > 0:50:37point that if you strip out this yard and £59 which went actually to

0:50:37 > 0:50:39social care, they have budget actually fell last year in real

0:50:39 > 0:50:46terms.You can ship it out. They do. They actually don't, because they

0:50:46 > 0:50:52recognise that it is actually one system, and they said that in real

0:50:52 > 0:50:56terms, paragraph 12, on page 12, it sets out the real terms increases

0:50:56 > 0:51:00that we have seen in the health budget, and then we go on to talk

0:51:00 > 0:51:04about the last two years, and they make the point that the 250 million

0:51:04 > 0:51:07is part of an integrated system and therefore has to be included, and

0:51:07 > 0:51:11that of course means it was a real terms entries.This Pacific would

0:51:11 > 0:51:17make the point that when she's studied that out, the revenue budget

0:51:17 > 0:51:24for the health service fell last year.They don't say it should be.

0:51:24 > 0:51:29They recognise it as part of the integrated system.When you slip the

0:51:29 > 0:51:34money for integration that will go to social care, in the current

0:51:34 > 0:51:39financial climate, while the NHS budget, without that money, increase

0:51:39 > 0:51:45in real terms.The NHS budget is one budget. We don't have any acute

0:51:45 > 0:51:48services, primary care and social care all different. We have an

0:51:48 > 0:51:53antiquated system. All of the money works as one system, and of course,

0:51:53 > 0:52:00all of the parties wanted us to put money into social care. We can take

0:52:00 > 0:52:05part of the money out. It is like saying take the money out a primary

0:52:05 > 0:52:09care family have budget, take money out of social care. It is one

0:52:09 > 0:52:13integrated system, and their father has been a real terms entries in the

0:52:13 > 0:52:19health budget.What about the current year? Why can you say I do,

0:52:19 > 0:52:23yes, if you strip that money out there well I would be an entries and

0:52:23 > 0:52:28they have budget, but it doesn't matter. But that be, excluding the

0:52:28 > 0:52:32money that goes to social care, and entries any health budget in the

0:52:32 > 0:52:37current year?Yes or no. You cannot strip that money out.You can,

0:52:37 > 0:52:41because you know the figures. Why can't you just say yes or no to my

0:52:41 > 0:52:49question?No, there is not if your term reduction. You don't take this

0:52:49 > 0:52:54social care money out, because it is one system.Audit Scotland did and

0:52:54 > 0:52:59said you should in order to be honest.Audit Scotland recognise it

0:52:59 > 0:53:03as an integrated system that works through the whole attitude into

0:53:03 > 0:53:07primary-care.They raised the issue and said you could strap it out as a

0:53:07 > 0:53:10matter of transparency. They said that, not me. I suspect, from what

0:53:10 > 0:53:15you are saying, is that they would not be an entries in the revenue

0:53:15 > 0:53:19budget for the NHS.Am I right? There is an entries in the revenue

0:53:19 > 0:53:27budget for the health budget every year. You cannot strip the 250

0:53:27 > 0:53:32million. It is one system. If we did that, it is about like saying that

0:53:32 > 0:53:35it doesn't matter about delayed discharge. You could be in a

0:53:35 > 0:53:39hospital bed and not get on because you don't count that money. Of

0:53:39 > 0:53:44course you have to count that money. We haven't even touched on the fact

0:53:44 > 0:53:54about the targets. Renal health is a different -- renal health is

0:53:54 > 0:54:02difficult to learn. Performance in six out of a target is going

0:54:02 > 0:54:05backwards, and you have failed to meet seven out of eight in the last

0:54:05 > 0:54:09year, and there is no evidence the health of the population is

0:54:09 > 0:54:13improving. The opposition parties are saying, look, with a less like

0:54:13 > 0:54:20that you should resign.First of all, the system in Scotland is

0:54:20 > 0:54:24outperforming all of these systems in the UK, with the same opposition

0:54:24 > 0:54:28parties are in charge of, so that is the first thing. If you look at

0:54:28 > 0:54:33those eight targets...It is OK for you to be failing because the Tories

0:54:33 > 0:54:40are failing...It is happy critical for my opponents to be saying that

0:54:40 > 0:54:44the Scottish health system...Isn't reasonable to say, look, wouldn't it

0:54:44 > 0:54:48be better to let some have a go at this?Whoever would be in my shoes

0:54:48 > 0:54:52would face the same issues and the same problems, and they would be

0:54:52 > 0:54:55implementing this same plant, a plan that I and my colleagues put in

0:54:55 > 0:55:01place, and that there is no other plan. It is a plan that I am

0:55:01 > 0:55:05determined to deliver, and if you want to talk about the targets, the

0:55:05 > 0:55:07Audit Scotland obvious in exhibit that something to focus too much

0:55:07 > 0:55:13energy targets.You are going backwards on targets.Every look at

0:55:13 > 0:55:19the attackers, four of them are actually very close to being met. If

0:55:19 > 0:55:25you look at the 31 day cancer target, 0.1% of if I'm been met. Any

0:55:25 > 0:55:30departments, the best performing in this violence.When will they be

0:55:30 > 0:55:37met? By next year?We will make progress over the next 12 to 18

0:55:37 > 0:55:42months in meeting the cancer target, at very high priority. BA idea

0:55:42 > 0:55:48target is almost the best performing in the UK over 2.5 years. Whether as

0:55:48 > 0:55:54a problem is with elective and outpatient.We don't have time. How

0:55:54 > 0:55:59many targets for you made when Audit Scotland produces airport next year?

0:55:59 > 0:56:02I would want us to make progress on all of those targets. You will meet

0:56:02 > 0:56:08those targets? They will be going in the right direction, and the work

0:56:08 > 0:56:11that Professor Derek Bell is undertaking, Bissouma he undertook

0:56:11 > 0:56:24an unscheduled care. He is working on collective outpatient.

0:56:24 > 0:56:27on collective outpatient.I remember during the referendum campaign that

0:56:27 > 0:56:32if we voted against independence the NHS would be privatised, how much

0:56:32 > 0:56:36has the NHS being privatised since 1914? You macro this year there will

0:56:36 > 0:56:43be 20 minutes in the the private sector, that's 22% of the health

0:56:43 > 0:56:50budget. A tiny proportion going into private sector spending and. Yellow

0:56:50 > 0:56:58markers so it turned out...Welcome the NHS is not going to be

0:56:58 > 0:57:05privatised under the pet SNP. If you look at the virgin health care and

0:57:05 > 0:57:09all the other private companies coming in in England people should

0:57:09 > 0:57:13be very worried, in Scotland there will be no privatisation of health

0:57:13 > 0:57:16care in Scotland.

0:57:16 > 0:57:18Despite being sacked by Spanish Premier Mariano Rajoy

0:57:18 > 0:57:20on Friday as regional premier, Carles Puigdemont gave no indication

0:57:20 > 0:57:22in a speech on Saturday that he considered himself dismissed

0:57:22 > 0:57:25and called on "democratic opposition" to direct

0:57:25 > 0:57:27rule from Madrid.

0:57:27 > 0:57:29Our reporter Niall O'Gallagher was in Barcelona for us

0:57:29 > 0:57:37watching the events unfold.

0:57:37 > 0:57:44Even at the last minute it wasn't clear that Catalonia's declaration

0:57:44 > 0:57:50of Independence would go ahead. With the region's autonomy due to be

0:57:50 > 0:57:57suspended the pressure group to implement the result of the

0:57:57 > 0:58:00contested referendum. Supporters of independence gathered outside the

0:58:00 > 0:58:08parliament in Barcelona. But hopes of a deal receded over the horizon.

0:58:08 > 0:58:14In the morning, thousands gathered outside the Catalan part liniment.

0:58:14 > 0:58:21While they debated what to do, Spanish state power was present.

0:58:21 > 0:58:26People have been waiting for hours for the Catalan parliament to make

0:58:26 > 0:58:30that declaration of Independence, a declaration in Spain says will be it

0:58:30 > 0:58:34illegal and the people here say it is now time for the parliament to

0:58:34 > 0:58:40act. By the early afternoon, the owner moment had arrived. After a

0:58:40 > 0:58:47majority of pro-union members had left the chamber in protest, the

0:58:47 > 0:58:53rest voted by secret ballot. The result was met with judo should I do

0:58:53 > 0:58:58those waiting outside. But within the hour, the Spanish Sennett voted

0:58:58 > 0:59:06to strip Catalonia from its powers and remove the government. Catalonia

0:59:06 > 0:59:14will be ruled by Madrid until elections are held in December.But

0:59:14 > 0:59:1724 hours afterwards who has Brit recognise the Republic of Catalonia?

0:59:17 > 0:59:33No one. So it is a former president of a regional region of Spain, has

0:59:33 > 0:59:39put himself outside the law.But speaking near the border of France,

0:59:39 > 0:59:43the Catalan leader made it clear that he did not recognise the

0:59:43 > 0:59:51state's right to remove him.The best way to achieve the games of

0:59:51 > 1:00:00today is to oppose Article 155, which is against the will of the

1:00:00 > 1:00:10Catalan people and the majority have felt like a European nation.

1:00:10 > 1:00:12felt like a European nation.Two governments now claimed the right to

1:00:12 > 1:00:18govern this region and Spain has the power and the international support

1:00:18 > 1:00:23to assert its authority. Catalonia's proclamation has been heard that has

1:00:23 > 1:00:28not been accepted. After a clear day, the future remains uncertain.

1:00:28 > 1:00:30Now, Professor of Economics Sevi Rodriguez Mora has been

1:00:30 > 1:00:36following the events closely in his home city of Barcelona.

1:00:36 > 1:00:48I wonder Professor, now the Spanish government rather than arresting

1:00:48 > 1:00:54Carles Puigdemont, is this the first sign that we could have some form of

1:00:54 > 1:01:00negotiation and reconciliation?I think there was never an option to

1:01:00 > 1:01:06arrest him unless he did something openly illegal. He has said that he

1:01:06 > 1:01:13is still the president and the Spanish black is still flying on the

1:01:13 > 1:01:21government building in Catalonia and I

1:01:21 > 1:01:26I imagine there will will run normal regional elections in December.So

1:01:26 > 1:01:33you don't expect Carles Puigdemont and his colleagues to set up an

1:01:33 > 1:01:39independent state? You macro no, I don't think they have the financial

1:01:39 > 1:01:47resources to do so.They could try to do it for a external purposes,

1:01:47 > 1:01:53big demonstrations and attract international public attention, but

1:01:53 > 1:02:02the cost would be too big. It would not be reasonable to do that. This

1:02:02 > 1:02:08is completely crazy as far as I'm concerned.Can I just ask you, you

1:02:08 > 1:02:19helped define bound temp map to, so you are against independence. But

1:02:19 > 1:02:24you are in favour of elections. Someone said to me, you might

1:02:24 > 1:02:32actually do well in these elections. Our

1:02:32 > 1:02:38Our party is the largest opposition party in Catalonia, it is the third

1:02:38 > 1:02:46party in Spain. Our party was founded by the people who were

1:02:46 > 1:02:51opposed to Catalan nationalism. Would you suggest expect the Catalan

1:02:51 > 1:02:57nationalists to take part in these elections? Yes to much you macro the

1:02:57 > 1:03:05most radical of them,

1:03:05 > 1:03:11most radical of them,these guys I don't know. But the two main parties

1:03:11 > 1:03:20in the Catalan nationalist movement I think they will participate.If

1:03:20 > 1:03:26they Catalan party supporting independence in Catalonia, would you

1:03:26 > 1:03:34suggest that is a mandate to declare independence?

1:03:34 > 1:03:40independence?They should try to change the Spanish constitution.

1:03:40 > 1:03:44They will have 40% of the Spanish parliament would be willing to do

1:03:44 > 1:03:49that. They can try to do that. I think it is possible to find an

1:03:49 > 1:03:58agreement. There has been a commission instigated to present

1:03:58 > 1:04:03change.Thank you very much.

1:04:03 > 1:04:05To independence movements closer to home now.

1:04:05 > 1:04:0750 years ago this week, an astounding by-election victory

1:04:07 > 1:04:10in Hamilton marked the beginning of the SNP's rise to power

1:04:10 > 1:04:12and period of history which has seen nationalism at the centre

1:04:12 > 1:04:14of political debate, with the establishment

1:04:14 > 1:04:16of a Scottish Parliament and a referendum on independence.

1:04:16 > 1:04:19Graham Stewart looks back on why Winnie Ewing's election win of 1967

1:04:19 > 1:04:25marked a turning point in history.

1:04:25 > 1:04:33Winnie Ewing 18,300 97. Winnie Ewing's spectacular or when in

1:04:33 > 1:04:38Labour's safest seat rocked the political establishment.I was a

1:04:38 > 1:04:45threat at that time seemed a threat to both parties because they had a

1:04:45 > 1:04:49nice cosy car park, a safe labour and Tory seats a knew where they

1:04:49 > 1:04:56were. The trade union hacks and it was all nice and lo and behold a

1:04:56 > 1:05:02safe seat like Hamilton toppled and they thought if this can happen in

1:05:02 > 1:05:10Hamilton it can happen anywhere and a shiver ran down the Labour MP's

1:05:10 > 1:05:17back.The Labour MP who was supporting a majority of 16 and a

1:05:17 > 1:05:25half thousand four a majority was secured. We didn't George Leslie who

1:05:25 > 1:05:29stood for the SNP in that year believes wedding Winnie Ewing was a

1:05:29 > 1:05:39big asset to that party.All the energy she injected into the party,

1:05:39 > 1:05:44we had sometimes a community hall or a classroom and Winnie could talk

1:05:44 > 1:05:51the hind legs off a donkey. She would somehow make it so that she

1:05:51 > 1:05:58was talking person personally to every single person.I attended one

1:05:58 > 1:06:02of her meetings and she is a very good Speaker. And she gets a point

1:06:02 > 1:06:10across very good very well.Won because she is a woman and secondly

1:06:10 > 1:06:17because I agree with a lot of what she says.The legacy of Winnie

1:06:17 > 1:06:25Ewing's 1967 victory was that it put the Scottish question centre stage.

1:06:25 > 1:06:28The political establishment takes Scotland much more seriously. The

1:06:28 > 1:06:35Treasury was much more aware that

1:06:35 > 1:06:37Treasury was much more aware that they Scotland was distinct.Six

1:06:37 > 1:06:41months after Hamilton, the Tory leader Edward Hage made this

1:06:41 > 1:06:48declaration at the party's conference in Perth.We will give

1:06:48 > 1:06:51the people of Scotland genuine participation in the making of all

1:06:51 > 1:06:59events that affect them and the historic unity of the United

1:06:59 > 1:07:10Kingdom.The Labour Party also supported this. And when each Ewing

1:07:10 > 1:07:16was chosen to preside over its opening.

1:07:16 > 1:07:22opening.The Scottish parliament is hereby reconvened. White macro in

1:07:22 > 1:07:30the 1967 by-election, Winnie Ewing also supported joining the European

1:07:30 > 1:07:37community, something the SNP still holds today.Winnie Ewing put her

1:07:37 > 1:07:43insisted that Scotland was part of Europe coining the memorable phase

1:07:43 > 1:07:49stop the world, Scotland wants to get on.It was multicoloured

1:07:49 > 1:07:56multicultural, progressive thing that Winnie Ewing was progressing.

1:07:56 > 1:08:04She was rejecting ethnic nationalism and embracing civic nationalism. So

1:08:04 > 1:08:08the modern SNP really found its voice in the Hamilton by-election

1:08:08 > 1:08:18through Winnie Ewing.Winnie Ewing, 38, a Glasgow solicitor has won

1:08:18 > 1:08:25Hamilton.It has by no means been a straightforward trajectory since the

1:08:25 > 1:08:29election in 1967, but the events of 60 year 50 years ago marked the

1:08:29 > 1:08:33beginning of a political fun than on and that we are still feeling today.

1:08:33 > 1:08:40I have to say thanks to Hamilton for making history but Scotland and give

1:08:40 > 1:08:44a neat independent voice in Westminster.

1:08:44 > 1:08:47Now it's time to take a look back, as well as forwards,

1:08:47 > 1:08:51to the week ahead.

1:08:51 > 1:08:54I'm joined now by journalist Pennie Taylor and former MSP Mary Scanlon.

1:08:54 > 1:09:04Welcome to both of you.

1:09:04 > 1:09:09Let's just talk about the sexual harassment business which is all

1:09:09 > 1:09:15over everything today. Is this something you came across Mary in

1:09:15 > 1:09:23the Scottish parliament? Is it right?I read the article in the

1:09:23 > 1:09:29Herald two-day, there is very little else about it. It would be unusual

1:09:29 > 1:09:40if it didn't exist in the Scottish Parliament.

1:09:41 > 1:09:45Parliament. In an could do more. I can do more by alerting people as to

1:09:45 > 1:09:50what constitutes bullying, for example, malicious rumours,

1:09:50 > 1:09:54victimisation, exclusion, and I think people need to be much more

1:09:54 > 1:09:58aware of the insidious type of harassment that can exist, and I

1:09:58 > 1:10:03think also that many people have almost got used to, and I think both

1:10:03 > 1:10:08employers and employees through the whole country in the organisation, I

1:10:08 > 1:10:12think there is scope for a lot more awareness and training around this

1:10:12 > 1:10:21issue.Health,. This report this week is not great.It was a damning

1:10:21 > 1:10:25report following other damning report. I think, family, the

1:10:25 > 1:10:32striking message from it was serious change is required, and there is no

1:10:32 > 1:10:38evidence that it is going to happen. The evidence seems to be that in as

1:10:38 > 1:10:44it is working, it is not reducing them demand for acute beds.We have

1:10:44 > 1:10:48got a perfect storm in Scotland as you have across the UK, really, with

1:10:48 > 1:10:53growing numbers of older people, with multiple conditions needing

1:10:53 > 1:10:56treatment, but that has been entirely predictable. You have got

1:10:56 > 1:11:01an ageing workforce as well, which means that people are retiring and

1:11:01 > 1:11:05are not able to bring people in at the other end to staff the service.

1:11:05 > 1:11:12May Day, one of the things that Audit Scotland says, and they have

1:11:12 > 1:11:17said this before about the NHS and other areas in public service,

1:11:17 > 1:11:21exactly come up with grandiose games and plans, but there is nothing

1:11:21 > 1:11:26there spelling out what was count as these plans working. The

1:11:26 > 1:11:31benchmarking is not there.I think that is actually the most

1:11:31 > 1:11:35disappointing thing of all, and it should be the banner headline. There

1:11:35 > 1:11:41is no single health care assessment of the quality of health care. We do

1:11:41 > 1:11:47know that the out of 14 health boards, you can get cancer treatment

1:11:47 > 1:11:52within 62 days, but if you live in a deprived area, most people are

1:11:52 > 1:11:57actually diagnose that stage four. They have not got 62 days to this

1:11:57 > 1:12:02debate. Every year, and they are boring enough to have read all of

1:12:02 > 1:12:07these NHS Audit Scotland reports since devolution, every year,

1:12:07 > 1:12:11almost, we have increased life expectancy. That has now stood still

1:12:11 > 1:12:16for five years. Personal injury claims, money set aside for that,

1:12:16 > 1:12:20that money should be going into podiatry and physiotherapy.This

1:12:20 > 1:12:26idea benchmarking, Pennie, it is any of England seem to have got the

1:12:26 > 1:12:30message. We have had this problem in education as well. There is not

1:12:30 > 1:12:35being laid out saying, how are we going to know whether spending all

1:12:35 > 1:12:40this money and making this change is largely working? Curriculum for

1:12:40 > 1:12:44excellence being another example.It has to be measurable. And this is

1:12:44 > 1:12:49what the auditor general has said. You need milestones by which this

1:12:49 > 1:12:56service can be judged. And also she is calling for long-term financial

1:12:56 > 1:13:00planning instead of year-on-year budget setting. And I have had no

1:13:00 > 1:13:04commitment to that from the Government so far.I didn't have

1:13:04 > 1:13:08time to get into it with John Robinson, but another area is

1:13:08 > 1:13:13primary care. No one seems to have any data on the people they employ,

1:13:13 > 1:13:18what those people do, by that one GP in one area in the country is as

1:13:18 > 1:13:24efficient as one in another. There is no information.One of the

1:13:24 > 1:13:28problems with that is getting the information into the central system.

1:13:28 > 1:13:32It is very complicated. As a First Minister said, this is tough stuff.

1:13:32 > 1:13:36It is incredibly tough. It is also incredibly important to get it

1:13:36 > 1:13:42right.The most important plasma disappointing thing, listening to

1:13:42 > 1:13:46Nicola Sturgeon on First Minister's Questions, and shoulder today, I am

1:13:46 > 1:13:53sorry, but they are in total denial. We want for them is to say, this is

1:13:53 > 1:13:57very disappointing, have faith in us, we will put it right. You cannot

1:13:57 > 1:14:03put that if you are in denial. This is the worst ever Audit Scotland

1:14:03 > 1:14:06report, and it has repeated what they have been saying for years.

1:14:06 > 1:14:10You're going to have to leave it there. We are completely out of

1:14:10 > 1:14:11time. Thank you very much.

1:14:11 > 1:14:13That's all from the us this week.

1:14:13 > 1:14:15I'll be back at the same time next week.

1:14:15 > 1:14:17Until then, goodbye.