19/11/2017 Sunday Politics Scotland

Morning everyone, and welcome

to the Sunday Politics.

I'm Sarah Smith.

And this is your guide

to all the big stories that

are shaping politics this weekend,

and a few of the smaller ones too.

Philip Hammond is getting ready

to deliver his latest Budget

on Wednesday and he's not short

of advice - to spend more,

show restraint, even

to stop being an Eyore -

but can he change the direction

of the country and his government?

Conservative Party darling

Jacob Rees-Mogg has

some advice of his own.

He thinks the Chancellor

is being far too gloomy about Brexit

- he joins me live to explain why.

The former Leave campaign leader,

Gisela Stuart, will be here debating

with pro-EU campaigner

Alastair Campbell, after taking

a trip to her native Germany

to speak to businesses

about Brexit.

And on Sunday Politics Scotland

today, the Scottish Government saves

BiFab from imminent administration.

But is it enough to secure

manufacturing in the long term?

I'll be asking the Economy

Secretary, Keith Brown.

Also, after a bitter battle,

Richard Leonard becomes

the ninth leader of Scottish Labour

since devolution, but will he be

able to heal the party's wounds?

All that coming up in the programme.

And with me for for all of it,

three journalists who've promised

not to show off like Michael Gove

by using any long economicky words -

although I'm not sure they really

know that many anyway -

it's Tom Newton Dunn,

Gaby Hinsliff and Iain Martin.

Let's take a look at the big

political stories making the news

this Sunday morning,

and as you might expect there's

plenty of speculation

about what might or not might be

in Philip Hammond's Budget.

The Chancellor is promising a big

investment in new technology,

including driverless cars -

which could be on the road by 2021.

He's been interviewed

in the Sunday Times,

where he talks about plans to reach

the target of building

300,000 homes every year,

or the equivalent of a city

the size of Leeds.

That paper speculates that he's

attempting to turn from "fiscal

Phil" into "hopeful Hammond"

as he tries to set out

a vision for the country,

not just a list of numbers.

The Sunday Telegraph thinks that

Mr Hammond is planning to offer

a pay rise to nurses as part

of a bid to take on Labour.

But that hasn't impressed

Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell.

He's spoken to a number of papers

and is calling for an emergency

budget to invest in public services

and help struggling households.

So that's a taste of what you might

hear on Wednesday and Mr Hammond

and Mr McDonnell have both been

appearing this morning

on the Andrew Marr Show.

I think Britain has a very

bright future ahead of it,

and we have to embrace

the opportunities that

a post-Brexit world will offer.

They will be opportunities that

are based on huge change,

huge technological evolution.

It's not always going to be easy,

but the British people have shown

time and time again that we're up

for these challenges.

For many people out there,

this is a depression.

We've had people whose wages

have been cut by 10%.

Nurses, for example.

We've had people who are now...

1.25 million food parcels handed out

in the sixth richest

country in the world.

That's what I call a recession

for large numbers of people.

We will be talking about Labour and

their economic policies in a moment,

but let's start with what we might

expect from the budget. We will talk

to our panel of political observers.

Philip Hammond is under pressure to

set out a bold vision and reset the

government's programme. Can we

expect that?

No, we can't. We have

heard enough from the Chancellor

across various broadcast and his

article in the Sunday Times. I think

we will not be getting a bold

budget. His precise words short... A

short time ago were a balanced

budget. Some Tory hearts will think.

They desperately want something to

go out and shout about, something to

capture people's imagination, and do

big and bold things, like how on

earth are they going to build those

new 300,000 houses a year? There are

good reasons why he has chosen what

appears to be a pretty staid,

Conservative budget, and that is

that they are probably unable to get

anything bold through Parliament.

His capital is so low among Tory

MPs. If you have a minority

government, it is tricky.

We have

seen ministers on programmes like

this in the last few weeks putting

in the bids for what they would like

spending on, whether it be payment

for nurses or parliament. Would he

struggled to get something radical

through the Commons?

Big ideas cost

money. That's the problem. Bold

ideas are controversial. In some

ways, Tory MPs are asking their

Chancellor to do the impossible.

Government is already doing

something big and bold, which is

Brexit. That has implications for

how much money is available, how

many risks you want to take with

everything else. What is crucial is

that he demonstrates a reputation

for competence. The reputation that

the Conservative government has for

economic competence, that many

people prefer them to Labour on the

issue of economic competence. The

worst thing he could do is come up

with a big, bold idea that

unravelled quickly. What they

absolutely don't want is to come up

with an exciting idea that falls

apart three days after the budget.

He is under pressure from

Brexiteers, who are suspicious of

him. Does he have to offer them

something?

Part of his problem is he

has to offer so many different

people different things. This is

Philip Hammond trying to be and

dynamic.

It is hard to tell

sometimes.

At least in theoretical

terms. His longer-term difficulty is

that, if you look at the economic

cycle, we are getting to a point

where we are probably overdue, if

you put Brexit to one side, overdue

some kind of correction or downturn,

if you look what has happened to

asset prices globally. What will be

worrying for the Treasury is, just

as everyone is saying we should turn

on the taps and build this or that,

we might be at the top of a cycle,

and the Treasury will want to lose

something in the armoury in terms of

probably growing the deficit if

there are economic difficulties in

the next two years, and then there

is Brexit as well.

It sounds

impossible.

I think so. Talking to

his friends and colleagues over the

last few days, he had to make a

call, which was precisely how much

can I get away with, with my

political capital being as low as it

is, with the mixed problems he had

at the last budget, and a lot of the

party disliking his approach to

Brexit. He is damned if he is,

damned if he doesn't. Universal

Credit, we are expecting a reduction

in the time it takes to wait,

business rates, affected by high

inflation... I think we will see a

problem fixing budget which will

probably do quite a lot of important

spadework in many areas.

We will

pick up on some of this later in the

programme.

Let's speak now to the Conservative

MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, this week

he helpfully launched an alternative

"budget for Brexit" and advised

the Chancellor to be less gloomy

about the consequences

of leaving the EU.

Thank you for joining us. Your

alternative budget is pretty

radical. Almost half corporation

tax, Cap Stamp duty to help the

London market. It seems you are

advocating the opposite from what we

will hear from your Chancellor on

Wednesday.

There are two parts to

the proposals I suggested. One is

that we should show that after we

have left the European Union, the UK

is open to the rest of the world. It

is about opening up to the rest of

the world. Secondly, looking at the

modelling that has been done by the

Treasury and some other forecasters,

which has been so comprehensively

wrong. The forecasts made about what

would happen after Brexit have

turned out to be hopelessly false.

The team at Cardiff University have

done some modelling based on the

classical economic principles and

what happens if you move to free

trade that would be very positive

for the economy.

You are predicting

a Brexit dividend of £135 billion,

which sounds fantastic. Why are you

right, and everybody else, including

the Bank of England and the

Institute for Fiscal Studies, why

are they all wrong?

It depends on

the type of modelling. The modelling

that have been done by the Treasury

have been based on gravity models,

which work on the basis of the

nearness of the market and the size

of the economy you are trading with.

These have been wrong in the past.

They predicted that if we joined the

euro, trade would grow by 300%. That

was then revised down to 200%, but

it is fantasyland. The model I am

working on, by Sir Patrick Minford,

who has a record of getting these

things right. He was right about the

exchange rate mechanism, right about

the euro.

Being right in the past

doesn't mean you are right about the

future. Why do you think the

Treasury will not pick up the same

numbers, if this is so obvious to

you?

I think the Treasury was

humiliated by the errors in its

forecast prior to Brexit, and is

trying to defend its position. The

short-term economic consequences of

a vote to leave was one of the most

dishonest documents to come out of

the Treasury, purely a piece of

political propaganda. They are

wounded by that and sticking to the

same script, rather than looking at

other forecasts and other experts.

You think the governor of the Bank

of England is an enemy of Brexit,

and it sounds like you think the

Treasury is opposed to it. As the

Chancellor fallen under their spell

as well, and been persuaded to be an

enemy of Brexit?

I have admiration

the Chancellor, but George Osborne,

his predecessor, was the architect

of Project Fear. He was too close to

the Bank of England and lost his

independence. That is what needs to

change. It is an opportunity in the

budget for Philip Hammond to show he

is putting aside the Treasury's

mistakes in the past. It is very

encouraging what he is saying this

morning, about a more positive

approach to Brexit.

Lord Lawson has

accused Philip Hammond of being very

close to sabotage on Brexit. He says

we need a can-do man at the Treasury

and not a prophet of doom.

I think

that Philip Hammond is an

exceptionally intelligent man, a

very thoughtful man. It is not a bad

thing to have a Chancellor who is

serious minded and steady, rather

than one who is a showman and uses

the Exchequer to interfere in

absolutely everything.

I have a lot

of confidence in the Chancellor.

When you launched your budget for

Brexit, you said the government has

to deliver the £350 million for the

NHS that was delivered during the

referendum, even though you didn't

think that promise should have been

made. Is that something they now

need to deliver wrong?

It is. This

only happens once we have left.

Politicians have to recognise that

voters don't look at the small print

of electoral policies. If you put

£350 million on the side of a bus

and say it may be available for the

NHS, it is reasonable for people to

think that is a promise. Brexit was

won by the Leave campaign, so it it

is important that they deliver on

that promise. Politicians must keep

faith with voters and deliver on

implied promises, as well as ones

that are set out in detail.

The

Cabinet will move on to talk about

the Brexit bill this week, and we

understand they may need to come up

with more money to satisfy EU

demands. The more money spent on

that is less money available for

things like spending on the NHS. Are

you worried about the size of the

exit bill?

You have your finger on

the important point. The government

will have to choose whether to give

lots of money to the European Union,

or whether to spend money on UK

public services, and that will be

part of the negotiation. On all

these issues, it comes down to

choice is the government makes. I

would encourage the government to

choose our own domestic public

services rather than expensive

schemes in continent or Europe.

Why

are you advocating that the

government should spend up to £2.5

billion on a no deal scenario?

It is important that we are ready to

leave in the event of no deal. If we

left with no deal we would on

current figures still be saving the

remains of 18 billion so we would be

saving 15 and a half billion against

paying for the financial framework.

To show we're ready on day one would

be money well spent and most would

be needed any way. We need to have

new customs arrangements in place

even if it is not for a no deal

situation.

There are suggestions

that the Government might back down

on the idea of putting the time and

date of leaving the EU on the face

of the bill. Would you be Exxon

certained if that was -- concerned

if that was remove prd the bill?

It

is in Article 50, unless Article 50

is extended by the Council of Europe

we leave on 20th March 2019 and it

makes accepts that should be the

same in -- sense that should be in

same in domestic law. But that is a

secondary concern from my point of

view. It is important that we leave

on that date.

Stay there if you

would.

We're joined in the studio

by the former minister

Stephen Hammond.

He's no relation to the Chancellor,

but he is a member

of the Treasury Select Committee

and he's one of the Tory MPs named

as "Brexit mutineers"

by the Daily Telegraph

this week - lucky him.

I'm assured you're no relation to

the Chancellor. Let's just pick up

on what Jacob Rees Mogg was saying.

How important is it to you as a

rebel that the Government does put

the date on.

I agree with Jacob it

is in the Article 50 process, the

key reason it is important is the

negotiations look like they're going

to be tricky and longer than we

expected and it may well be that we

are still negotiating up until March

2019. We could have a short couple

of weeks period of extension. Why do

harm to the economy by falling out

on a precise time? If those

negotiations need to be extended.

They won't go on for more than a

couple of weeks, because there will

be elections in Europe in June 2019

and there is no chance of a new

commission or Parliament dealing

with this. Giving it flexibility and

with this flexibility the government

said it wants flexibility in

negotiations, why give all the

advantage to the other side? Part of

that was evidenced yesterday by

somebody suggesting they will ask

for the Margaret Thatcher rebate to

be suspended. That is as a result of

putting the date on the bill.

You

did not agree with the Brexit

committee and think it is important

that we set the date and time?

I

think it is perfectly reasonable to

set the date and time and I think

these negotiations fill the time

available. The United States and

Australia agreed a free trade deal

between April 2003 and February

2004. These things don't need to be

interm Knabl if both sides want to

agree. I think the British

electorate would be very concerned

if nearly three years after the vote

to leave, we still hadn't left. I

think most people expected that we

would have left by now. The

negotiations realistically to get

through the approval of the European

Parliament and so on need to be

completed by at the end of next

year, going up to the last minute I

don't think is real is tick.

To move

on to talk about a trade deal and

getting that done, the EU need to

agree to move on and we need to

settle the divorce, cabinet are

going to be talking about the amount

that needs to be spent on that,

Stephen what manned, are you happy

for the Government to offer more?

I

hope that the Government will stick

to the Florence speech in terms of

ensuring that we fulfil our

liabilities and obligations. I'm not

clear exactly whether that is 20

billion or 40 billion and I'm not

sure the government is. If part of

the divorce bill is then some

settlement for getting the trade

deal, we will need to examine that

carefully.

Jacob Rees Mogg, is this

that might spark another war in the

party if the cabinet suggest they're

prepared to pay more?

I think we

need to go back to what you said,

that the - the EU said they want us

to settle the money first. The

Government doesn't need to follow

that. They need our money. If we

don't pay any money for the final 21

months of the framework, the EU has

about 20 billion pounds gap in its

finances and it has no legal

requirement to borrow. So it

insolvents or the Germans and the

others pay more. So our position on

money is very strong and we

shouldn't fall into the trap of

thinking just because Mr Barnier

said it it is as if he has received

tablets of stone like Moses, he has

not.

There is a sense that the

Government feels a mo generous offer

would set a good tone, the kind of

approach that Jacob Rees Mogg

suggests would not make for smooth

relations.

It probably wouldn't. But

we have to be clear what we are

paying for and what we are getting.

No one is suggesting we should hand

over money without proper scrutiny.

It may be appropriate to put money

to facilitate international trade to

secure jobs. We have to be careful

about the analysis about what the

scale and size of Brexit dividend is

and the size of payments will be.

You mustn't confuse gross and net

and there is disagreement about some

of the numbers.

On that, Jacob Rees

Mogg in his budget for Brexit

suggests in five years time we would

have a 135 billion Brexit bonus. Do

you think it is real is tick.

He is

using some analysis that has some

flaws. It is predicting a price drop

in the United Kingdom of 10%. Tariff

drops will only be 3 or 4%. It is

predicting huge productivity gains,

the likes of which we have not seen

in 20 years. Thirdly, despite his

view on modellers there is evidence

that they weren't and if you go into

the detail of the analysis, some of

the data is 14 years out of date.

Jacob Rees Mogg, you're being

hopelessly optimistic?

I don't think

that right. I think the fall in

prices comes because you make the

economy more competitive and you

take away tariffs which reduces the

price of food by 20%. That is a big

reduction. Bear in mind that the

biggest tariffs hit food, clothing

and foot wear that, harm the poorest

in society the most. The gains from

productivity come from is in

additional tariffs. Leading to other

saving and further investment I

think the modelling done by the

professor is as good as modelling

can be. That doesn't mean it is

infallible. The failure of gravity

model is well known.

Michael Gove

was accused of auditioning for the

job of Chancellor by using long

words. Do you know any good long

economic words?

I don't think that

we want to get into this type of

business actually. I think all

Conservatives and Steven and I very

much agree on this, want to show as

united a front as we can manage.

There are differences on some

aspects of policy, but in terms of

individuals we want to stand

together and support the best

interests of the government.

Thank

you.

Brexit Secretary David Davis

was in Berlin this week trying

to win the support of business

leaders there for a comprehensive

free trade deal with the EU.

He warned them against putting

'politics above prosperity'

and reportedly got a bit

of a frosty reception.

Well, the former Labour MP

Gisela Stuart was one of the leaders

of the Vote Leave referendum

campaign.

We travelled with Gisela to Germany

to meet the business leaders

she says will help secure a good

trade deal for the UK.

Here's her film.

I was born and brought up

in this part of Germany,

and although I've lived in the UK

for the past 40 years,

and represented the constituency

of Birmingham and Edgbaston for 20

years, my family still live here,

and I've kept many links.

I was chair of Vote Leave,

and together with only a handful

of other Labour MPs,

we campaigned to leave

the European Union because we

thought the country would be

better off outside.

It's hard to remember now, but back

in the 1970s, when we joined

the European Economic Community,

people thought that by joining

the club we would see the kind

of economic miracle Germany

experienced in the '70s back home.

The "Deutsche Wirtschaftswunder"

would come to Britain.

But, of course, it didn't.

Within a few short years

of the devastation of World War II,

Germany had emerged as

the largest economy in Europe.

Germany's extraordinary

success is down to

the pragmatism of its business.

German Mittelstand is family

dominated, forward-thinking,

long-term thinking, reliability,

are very important values.

Changing moods on a political

landscape and changing frameworks

are toxic for our way of doing

business, and we want

that to go away.

German business is not given

to making big political statements

out of step with government policy,

but talk to those in decision-making

positions, and it is clear

that they want to secure a good deal

with the United Kingdom.

BMW employs almost 90,000

people here in Germany,

and exports just under

1 million cars annually.

The UK is a vital market.

What we are really seeking right now

is more clarity, more certainty,

because in our cycle of investment,

cycle of development,

it's about a seven-year or so period

that we look at,

but we are now, of course, starting

to think about what comes next,

and what we need to see now

is what is going to be

the trading relationship,

how are the logistics going to look,

what is going to be

the requirements for people

moving across the continent?

Because all of these things

are important to us today.

And, by the way, they will be just

as important tomorrow.

Berlin is well aware that

if the European Commission

is allowed to put up trade barriers

against Britain, it will be

German business, German consumers

and German employees

who will suffer.

TRANSLATION:

I think it's very

important that we complete

the first phase successfully.

The first phase of the negotiations,

which looks at the financial

consequences of Great Britain

leaving the EU.

And then it's not a question

of punishment payments.

It's about when you are part

of a multilayer, contractual

obligation and you want to leave

that, then of course it takes

a whole lot of obligations

which you have to deal with,

so both sides are satisfied and can

live with the consequences.

It isn't everyone's interests

for the UK to part on good terms.

Of course there was going to be

upset when the UK voted to leave,

but creating uncertainty over

the terms of UK's exit will simply

have a disruptive effect

on exports to UK markets.

Far better to have a sensible,

amicable negotiation that results

both sides being able to trade

together and work

together post-Brexit.

Markus Krall is managing

director of Goetzpartners,

and heads the Financial

Institution Industry Group.

Is it true to say that,

if we negotiate Brexit well,

then a good Brexit can actually

strengthen the United Kingdom,

the European Union and Germany?

It's absolutely true.

I think that this

is about two things.

One, about proving that

free trade is possible

between a European Union that is

smaller and a former member country.

If you don't prove that free

trade is possible there,

then the question becomes,

what is Europe standing for?

Number two is, I also

believe the free trade,

free market and democratic and less

bureaucratic approach that Britain

has chosen as the path

into the future is a role

model for Europe.

The time has come both

for the United Kingdom

and for the EU to be more clear

about what kind of

deal we can achieve.

Both sides need to be bold.

As long as we remain open to free

trade and sensible co-operation,

we can arrive at something that

will benefit both sides.

But one thing's obvious -

if we are an open and free trading

economy, we've got one big

cheerleader on our side,

and that is German business.

That was Gisela Stuart

setting out her case

and we'll be hearing

from the opposite side

of the argument in the coming weeks.

Gisela Stuart joins us in the studio

now, as does Alastair Campbell.

He used to work for Tony Blair

in Number 10, set up

the New European Newspaper

to campaign against Brexit,

and is so pro-European that at this

year's Labour conference

he was heard playing Ode

to Joy on the bagpipes.

Welcome both of you.

We will start with your point in the

film, that you think the German

business once the EU to offer the UK

a generous deal because it is in

their interests, yet the president

of the German equivalent of the CBI

said that defending the single

market must be the priority for the

EU, and another says that the

cohesion of the remaining member

states remains the highest priority.

The president of the CBI just after

the referendum said that it would be

in nobody 's interest to introduce

tariffs and trade barriers. On the

UK side, I don't think there's a

full understanding that economic

interests are incredibly important,

that they are trying to cover

economic interests on the cohesion

of the 27. I think different

economic interests will raise the

head of different countries. The

German auto industry is as important

as the financial sector is here. The

banking crisis is far from over, but

the big riffs which were going on is

that the E U is losing its second

biggest net contributor. Countries

like Germany want a deal with the UK

that is a free open market. There

are other tensions in the EU that

wants to become more protectionist,

and that is a bad thing.

Looking at

the film there with the Jacob

Rees-Mogg interview. No matter what

side of leave you are, it is

delusional and all driven by wishful

thinking. You could find a

businessman who says Brexit will be

good for Germany. The vast bulk of

British businesses think this is a

disaster, as do the vast bulk of

European businesses. One of the

delusions on which they ran their

campaign is the idea that they need

us more than we need them. That is

not true.

Be you self about £80

billion more in goods and services

into the UK than we do to them, and

Germany has one of the biggest

deficits. It is in their interest.

Of course it is, but it is a myth

that they need us more than we need

them. The damage that will be done

to us, even with a good deal. Let's

be frank, where these negotiations

are, Theresa May is either going to

end up with a bad deal and dumber or

no Deal. A bad deal is bad, and a no

deal is a catastrophe.

You are

setting up ideas that which were not

there to begin with and knocking

them down. Delusional.

35 billion,

the Brexit bonus.

If we had a

referendum, it was a democratic

decision. I know you don't like it

and that a lot of business would

have preferred to stay with the

status quo. We have had the

referendum. Undermining political

institutions is in no one's

interests. It is functioning

democracies which lead to economic

stability.

Theresa May fought an

election Inc on a hard Brexit that

was rejected.

As we heard from BMW,

there is uncertainty for business.

There will be elections, European

elections, in 2019. There will be a

change of the Commission and the

parliament. We have a narrow window

to implement the mandate for the

referendum which Parliament voted

for. So rather than you undermining

this country, why don't you work

together to get the best deal?

Because we totally disagree.

You

don't want a good deal?

I'm in

favour of a good deal, and I could

give them some advice as to how they

get a good deal. First, you have a

cabinet that has an agreed strategy.

18 months in, they don't have that.

I am not undermining a deal. I am

continuing to pose questions about

what they are trying to do and how

they are trying to do it. This is

democracy. Democracy is the ability

for Parliament, which is not doing

its job properly, and the public, to

keep scrutinising, and if they want

to change their mind, having the

right to do that.

You were trying to

encourage the Taoiseach yesterday to

play hardball with the UK.

I am on

the side of the UK, and I am worried

that if we go down the path that we

are being taken down, and Theresa

May and Boris Johnson and the rest

of them, this shambolic path, we are

going to do fundamental, lasting

damage to the country we love. I

don't care about the Civil Aviation

Authority. I care about Britain. --

I don't care about the European

Union. If every lorry going into the

UK today was stopped for just two

minutes, we would create an instant

17 mile traffic jam. These people

just don't care...

I am not these

people!

people! Let us not conflate...

people! Let us not conflate... You

either decide that you are

implementing a democratic decision

of a referendum that was called and

over 17 million voted.

You will not

stop me debating it.

stop me debating it. Just as Nigel

Farage...

Stop talking about Nigel

Farrell Raj.

Farrell Raj. Vote Leave was not

Nigel Farage.

Nigel Farage. There is no desire in

Germany to punish the United

Kingdom.

Kingdom.

They are behaving

reasonably.

There is a battle of

protectionism and free market going

on. If we implement this properly,

give businesses the kind of

incentives they want, we can get a

good deal. So you want a bad deal?

You are driven by wishful thinking.

You are driven by wishful thinking.

Gisela Stuart, you are saying that

business will intervene to prevent

things like tariffs being put in

place? They are leaving it a bit

late to put pressure on.

You will

find that business is laying out the

kind of things they need to get

those deals. I can find as much

fault with the speed of the

progress, but what I really do

resent is that you are actually

encouraging other countries to

undermine...

Know I am not! I spoke

undermine...

Know I am not! I spoke

out in support of the Irish

Taoiseach because I spent a lot of

time with Tony Blair and his team on

the Good Friday Agreement. The

people who are driving this hard

Brexit without thinking it through,

still no answer on how you do Brexit

in our island without a hard border.

I think the Irish Taoiseach is right

to

to call out the government on the

incompetence and the fact they have

not thought it through.

You accept

the result of the referendum and the

fact that we will be leaving the EU?

I accept the result of the

referendum, but I do not accept that

the country will definitely leave,

because the country is entitled to

change its mind. As the chaos and

costs

costs mount, the public is entitled

to change its mind and will change

its mind.

There is no evidence at

the moment.

Come out with me!

Allow

me to finish the sentence.

me to finish the sentence. There is

a changing of mind happening, a

crystallisation.

crystallisation. Unlike you, I have

fought five elections and I have won

five elections. I have probably

spoken to more people like you.

You

may do, I'm just saying, come out on

the road with me...

the road with me...

40% of the

population in the middle just want

us to get on with it. What that film

showed is that

showed is that if you want to make

it a self-fulfilling prophecy that

it's a disaster, which I don't. I

want to implement a deal that is

good for British jobs.

good for British jobs. The rest of

the world is changing in terms

the world is changing in terms of

technology. Currently, Germany

hasn't even got a government, and

nobody is laughing about that.

And

they are stable without a

government!

Let's leave it there.

It's coming up to 11.40,

you're watching the Sunday Politics.

Coming up on the programme,

we'll be looking at the latest

Good morning, and welcome

to Sunday Politics Scotland.

Coming up on the programme:

600 jobs are saved, but how

safe is the future of

skilled manufacturing in Scotland?

I'll be asking the Economy

Secretary Keith Brown.

Scottish Labour elects a new leader.

And its old one heads

off to the jungle.

What reception will await

her when she gets back?

And if all that's not enough

for you, how about a bit of this?

As Robert Burns said, the gift they

give us to see ourselves as others

see us.

It's been a rocky week

for Scotland's renewable

energy industry.

Last weekend, one of the country's

most prominent engineering firms -

Burntisland Fabrications -

said it was on the verge

of going into administration.

The company, which has yards in Fife

and the Western Isles,

is at the forefront of hopes

for a global green

energy revolution.

Last night a deal was done to save

BiFab, but the Scottish Government

says more long-term work is needed.

Andrew Black reports.

I am delighted to say that after two

days of intense discussions, we have

just reached a deal to save BiFab

from administration.

It was the news

everyone hoped for. Just two days

ago, the future of Burntisland

Fabrications hung in the balance.

Employees working without pay,

hoping for a rescue deal.

Burntisland Fabrications is seen as

a company with a promising future in

Scotland pod like offshore energy

sector. In 2011 it was manufacturing

this cutting-edge wave energy

device. Alex Salmond, then the First

Minister, described BiFab as a

Scottish success story. The company

even got a visit from David Cameron,

when he was by minister. Miller

McDonnell things are looking rosy?

But things were not looking so rosy

this time last week, when

campaign-mac announced it was going

to point administrators. The problem

centre on a payment dispute between

the company and the Dutch owned

contractor Seaway Heavy Lifting.

contractor Seaway Heavy Lifting.

Come on, come Hay!

By Thursday with

the resolution in sight, the workers

and their families marched on the

Scottish Parliament.

Visitors one of

the measures to come here today and

try to lobby Parliament and hope

they can sort it out. Grigg it has

not been good, no one knows what is

going to happen. That is the

worrying part.

Are the politicians

going to help us?

We're working for

nothing does now, hopefully the

Scottish Tubman can do something

about it and get a contract.

Inside

Holyrood, the politicians grappled

with the question of Carbery's

future and the future of Scotland

pod back entire green industry. No

how can the workforce have

confidence that the Government's

transition plan will have urgent

support for their jobs and many

others that can be generated

in an

industrial strategy that commits to

fossil fuel the commission and our

renewable industries instead?

We

have been trenchant in our

commitment to renewables

development.

Yesterday morning key

players in the Carbery dispute met

the First Minister in Edinburgh, by

tea-time a result to avoid

administration, but...

There are

still a lot of work to be done for

the long-term future of BiFab, and

we will be working closely with the

company and with the unions in the

weeks and months ahead.

This paves

the way for the future. Work any

renewable industry is supposed to be

the jobs of the future.

Despite the

last week, the organisation

representing Scotland pod like

renewable industry is positive about

the future.

Carbery is part of a

strong supply chain to serve ours in

the global market. -- BiFab is part.

It has got huge potential.

BiFab has

been making equipment for a major

offshore wind farm in the Moray

Firth. That contract will not be

seen through. The question now is

what needs to be done to support

companies like BiFab in the future.

So, what's gone right?

I'm joined now by Economy

Secretary Keith Brown,

who helped broker the deal.

Obviously it is good news that you

managed to get this arrangement made

yesterday, but Nicola Sturgeon was

saying now that it is not a

long-term deal. What does that mean?

It is very good news, especially if

you are an employee who was looking

to a Christmas without wages. That

is the most important thing. It is

worth paying tribute to the

workforce, trade unions, and all the

partners that came to the table to

work out a deal, break the logjam of

a £50 million gap. The deal we have

done allows us to see through the

contract which is currently there,

through to April next year. To keep

people employed to do that. We are

actively involved with some

promising early signs in making sure

we can win further work, see

additional capital investment, and

further training of the workforce.

Ayes this goes on until April? This

is the Moray Firth, making jackets

for offshore wind turbines?

Are you

saying there is no work beyond that?

There is potential for other work.

This is the main contractor that the

companies involved in, but there is

a lot of potential, because of

further prospects in the sector, but

one thing that has been thrown out

by this crisis during the course of

the week we three times had to stop

BiFab from going into

administration, but one of the

things that has come out of this is

the regard with which the workforce

is held internationally. The

reputation of renewables...... What

do you mean never going into

reputation -- Administration three

times? They had to have a deal, they

could not sustain a situation with

people working without wages. We

have managed to avoid that. There's

added certainty that these contracts

will be seen through to April, but

beyond that, the First Minister

said, there is a huge amount of work

to do. We will be actively involved

in working with the company to make

sure we get that longer term future.

There is an issue about offshore

renewables in Scotland. It was going

to be a great new industry, but

there are some of the biggest,

largest offshore wind farms in

Europe in the UK. But they are in

England and Wales. This one any

Moray Firth will go into service,

not the only one in Scotland is at

Robin Rake which is as near as a

legacy can get without being in

England. I has not happened in a way

that we thought?

that we thought? There are huge

offshore wind farms of Lincolnshire,

one of the biggest in Europe has

just been put on the north coast of

Wales. The Thames estuary is an

enormous one. There may be

potential, but why are they not here

yet when we were told this would be

such a great thing for Scotland?

There is a huge field and further

work behind that.

That is not

working yet.

This is part of the

process, these are the jackets...

Noes what we were told was that this

would be a new industry boss got in.

We would be world leaders in the

technology behind this. There is an

offshore renewables centre in

Britain, but a subpar at the moment

it is Hull where they are building a

huge yard. There was a post be a

guard in Leith, that doesn't seem to

be happening. Why didn't that happen

in Scotland in the way that we were

told it would? Melamed I don't

agree. Whether it is come Hay, and

the other company are a fundamental

part of this.

The workforce that

they have, the expertise, very

well-regarded centre, not just in

Scotland or the UK but

internationally, and we have a

challenge to make sure we get more

business. It is not just renewables

in terms of offshore wind, other

aspects, you have two...

I am not

trying to undermine the position

that BiFab has as a leader in the

thing it does, but any basic

technology, like turbines, these are

now companies in America and Germany

and Denmark that are now world

leaders. We have missed that boat. I

take your point about things coming

on stream, but that opportunity to

make Scotland a world leader in the

industry is gone.

industry is gone.

For my visit to

North America three weeks ago, that

is not the way Scotland is

perceived. We are a centre of

excellence in renewables, despite

what you say, we are perceived to be

excellent, we have pushed the

boundaries in terms of renewables by

the Parkview deals to put it centre

of what we're doing in terms of that

ship from oil and gas and we are

very much involved as is come Hay.

We have that international

reputation.

In which particular

technology?

What is being done

currently at BiFab, the jackets.

There is not the same expertise in

the North America than it is here,

and has a lot of interest over their

bodies we are doing here. It is our

job to continue to put that positive

case of what we're doing in

Scotland, that is part of the reason

we're have managed to get the

successful resolution to this

particular problem. That is why we

have a positive future with Mane and

with the industry generally. -- with

BiFab. We would like to take away

the uncertainty over recent years

which has undermined investment. We

would like to see support and a

commitment to work with the Scottish

Government to increase that.

The

price of renewable energy is coming

down dramatically. Apparently the

last ten days were much cheaper than

nuclear, where it had been more

expensive. The Government should not

need to do anything. Under the new

contracts, offshore renewable in

Scotland as well as other parts of

the UK should be viable.

That is a

more recent development, and some

industry insiders will say though be

further volatility. That is recent,

we took the hard decisions because

of the last ten years to lead that

investment when that wasn't the

case. We want to try and continue to

give that support to the industry,

and see it joined up another part of

the

the supply chain. We should not rush

past the fact that this week we had

potentially 1400 people looking at

having Christmas without a wage and

are never have that. I would like to

come wind all those, including the

First Minister and individual

partners who closed

Will we ever be the Saudi Arabia of

wind power?

We have to have these

kind of games.

A couple of other

matters. Alex Almond, Russian

television. What did you make of his

decision to do that?

That is a

decision for him. He is a private

citizen, one with a well-known past,

it is decision to make things up.

What is your advice? I have never

been on Russia to and I do not

expect to be yet -- on it any time

soon. You do not approve? I know the

background to Russia today. I would

predict regardless of that he will

get strong viewing figures.

You do

not think it is damaging for his

party?

Here's an individual citizen.

My party is not getting involved

with Russia today, we are not part

of this programme. His link to the

party is obvious but it is decision

to make.

But people will say, this

was the chap if things had gone

according to plan, he would be the

First Minister of an independent

Scotland. Here he is working for a

channel which many people see

perceived as being linked to

Vladimir Putin.

If he was First

Minister of an independent Scotland,

he would not be making this

programme.

What a wonderful and is.

Kezia Dugdale, she is off to "I'm a

Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here". This

is not just a matter for Labour, it

is a matter of what parliamentarians

should be doing.

The fundamental

point is this, the scene was -- the

same was for Nadine Doris, which is

the primarily job which is to

represent people. What strikes me as

in this we have Kezia Dugdale

flowing off to Australia, we have

Ruth Davidson going to the great

British

British bake off,.

There has been

talk of suspension. Is that in your

view a matter for the Scottish

Labour Party or of the Scottish

parliament?

It is a matter for the

Scottish Labour Party. It is a

matter of how her party views her

absence from her primary job, as an

MSP.

Thank you for joining us this

morning.

The Scottish Labour Party has

elected a new leader.

Richard Leonard, a Corbyn loyalist,

comfortably defeated

his rival, Anas Sarwar.

Mr Leonard has promised to follow

a more 'radical policy agenda',

but when we invited him

to our programme to tell us

more about his plans

for the party, he declined.

However, we spoke to one of his main

supporters, Neil Findlay,

about Labour's future, and former

leader Kezia Dugdale's decision

to appear in the TV show "I'm

a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here".

Your man won. You must be delighted?

Absolutely delighted. Delighted for

Richard on a personal level but

politically I think this is the way

that Scottish Labour Party wants to

go forward. And we are completely

holding a different agenda.

I am

delighted. Where are you worried

about how big the margin was?

From

the beginning I thought it would be

very close. But I was pleased with

the margin of victory. And I think

it gives them a strong mandate.

Where is he? We asked on the

programme today. It is his first day

as leader of Scottish Labour, why

isn't he here to explain what he

wants to do?

I would expect after

nine weeks of a very intense

campaign, I hope he is having a rest

and time with his family. I

certainly would be after such an

intense period of campaigning.

No

you would not be. You would be

saying, here I am. I will tell you

why this is so exciting.

There is

plenty of time for that, Gordon.

People underestimate the intensity

of being involved in a campaign like

that. It is right that people spent

time with their family.

I think that

is right. He is not here and in the

news. Another person who is in the

news are not here, is Kezia Dugdale

because she is flying off to

Australia. What do you make of her

decision to appear on "I'm a

Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here"?

Utterly ludicrous. We have a

situation in the run-up to the

budget in Scotland where local

government is on its knees, where

the NHS has shown pressures like

never before, when people's living

standards of living and the expect

their MPs, MSPs and elective

representatives to be fighting on

their behalf. I do not think people

would expect them to jet off around

the world and sit around a campfire,

eating kangaroo's appendage.

What

would you say to people in the

Labour Party. There are some

supportive of Kezia Dugdale who say,

come on, we are being po-faced year,

it is a bit of fun.

Well, I think it

demeans politics when people get

involved in that. We have a very

serious job to do. People out there

are struggling and there's huge

pressures on public services. That

is the job we should be doing. I

take my job very seriously, so do my

colleagues, and I think they would

expect better.

The other person from

Labour who has been in the news this

week is Alec Crowley, in a much more

serious sense. He has been suspended

from the Labour Party pending

investigation of the case. Do you

think that was the correct decision,

to suspend?

to suspend?

-- Alex Rowley. I think

this whole thing has developed

around harassment is a very worrying

one. We have to be very supportive

of particularly the women who are

making complaints and who are

alleging wrong behaviour. We have to

be supporting them. But we also have

to be very careful about those who

are accused of misbehaviour and

there has to be due process going

through. Any workplace where I have

been in where someone has been

involved in misconduct, there is a

due process that takes place and

then a decision is made on whether

they are guilty or innocent. I think

we have to be very careful in this.

I am taking... Can I take from what

you have said that you think you may

be should not have been suspended?

The Labour Party has a process. That

process will be gone through. The

outcome of that will be there for

everyone to see.

We know that. But

should he have been suspended or

left in place pending that?

I do not

know all the details of the case. I

have only read one side, only what

has been in the media and that is a

one-sided view of events. I stress

for the woman who made those

complaints, this is a very serious

issue and I hope that she is being

supported. Just as I hope there are

systems in place to support anyone

who is accused of this.

The

challenges facing Scottish Labour. I

think it was Richard Lehnert who

kept pointing out that although you

did well relatively in the recent

general election in Scotland,

perhaps better than you expected to

do yourself, that actually there was

an optical illusion going on because

Labour only gain 10,000 votes. What

do you do to try and get their

carbon phenomenon that is sweeping

up here.

-- Corbyn.

We have someone who has

the same views as Jeremy Corbyn and

fitting that forward in the

manifesto.

We have a credible

leader. Even at the level of

membership, there has been a bit of

an increase in membership in

Scotland, but nothing like the

Labour in England. They see the

Labour Party is the biggest Labour

Party in Europe. How do you get that

momentum?

What we found on the

doorstep in the election going, we

like what the manifesto is saying,

we really like Corbyn, but we do not

know about Scottish Labour. The

thought that Scottish Labour was out

of kilter of what was being said in

the manifesto. Now I think they will

be much more aligned. Richard will

be his own man. You must be sure

about that. But I think it will be

more in line and I think it is much

more credible that someone like

Richard carries that message for the

many not the few.

So you would like

to see an uptake in membership?

Of

course. I think people who have been

questioning whether Scottish Labour

is reflective of the mood across...

Just a moment. You have asked me a

question, I need to answer it. I

think people can come and join as

supporters.

What I wanted to do was

pick up on something you said.

During people -- the election people

thought Scottish Labour was not a

line. Where the telling you that

Scottish Labour was not left wing

enough, well they tell you and it is

something that both Anas Sarwar and

Richard Lehnert said during the

election, Scottish Labour were

wobbly regarding independence.

--

Richard Lehnert. In the last week of

that election campaign, we heard

Nicola Sturgeon saying that if you

want Corbyn's politics you have two

vote SNP. Why did they put that out?

The new that Labour voters, who were

previously voters who had voted SNP,

were no going back to Labour. If we

had focused on the manifesto about

public services instead of banging

on about the referendum again, then

I think we would have had more than

seven seats.

This has to be sourced

a yes or no answers, do you want a

job in Richard's team?

I have never

asked the Labour leader for a job

now and I will not ask now.

If he

asked you for help will you help? I

will help if he asks. Should Anas

Sarwar have our role in the team?

It

is up to him. I would have the

conversation with Anas Sarwar and

appoint him.

Thank you.

Now, this week universities revealed

how they hoped to meet

Scottish Government targets to raise

the number of students

from disadvantaged areas.

By 2030, the Government wants

at least a fifth of the students

at every single university to come

from a disadvantaged background.

Just now, only two

universities meet that target.

Our education correspondent

Jamie McIvor reports.

Decades ago, University was for the

privileged few. Today's student

numbers hover around historic high.

What was your favourite thing?

Kelsey is the first from her family

to secure her place and realise she

can be a role model.

It does set an

example for my little sister and

cousin 's as well if they see

someone they know who has been to

university, it might inspire them to

go.

Kelsey helps with the University

out reach scheme, helping children

in primary schools in disadvantaged

areas. This is for primary five

students. Part of a wide-ranging

strategy.

We believe in early

intervention. We will work in

primary schools, early years,

secondary schools and colleges. It

is to allow families and children to

grasp the key to further education,

especially when barriers come into

place.

Glasgow Caledonian University

already meets these targets. The

older ones have fewer students from

disadvantaged areas and require

better exam results to get in.

Mischa is studying medicine in

Glasgow University.

I think Glasgow

is diverse and I feel in alternative

ways diverse. No one would be

disadvantaged coming to Glasgow, as

long as they have the requirements

they need further course, I do not

think they would be disadvantaged.

It is a good environment. Any

suggestion older universities are

only from youngsters from back --

better off backgrounds are nonsense.

They are the ones facing wider

challenges facing axis. Key to this

is going to a system that faces --

places more emphasis on exam

results. Just as long as the exam

results they got were over a certain

level.

The average level at the

moment of numbers coming in from

disadvantaged areas, we recognise

the scale of the challenge going

forward. 12 years is the target. We

feel everyone can improve at the

pace we have over the past ten, 12

years, we should manage to reach

that target.

The Scottish Government

feared their plans will not go far

enough. The policy is to increase

the number of new students from

disadvantaged areas but universities

want to be sure the people they give

places too will not drop out after a

few months because they find a

course too hard. And it begs another

question. Are universities being

expected to carry too much of the

burden to create up equal playing

field. And should there be more on

tackling poverty and disadvantage

itself. To make sure those from

disadvantaged areas can get the same

grades as others. It is not an easy

circle to Square, especially for a

government who has told voters to

judge them on squaring it.

Its time now to take

a look back over events,

and to the week ahead.

Joining me today is Margaret Smith,

former Liberal Democrat MSP,

and political commentator

and former Chief of Staff

to Alex Salmond, Geoff Aberdein.

Kezia Dugdale, it was interesting

that what the band had to say was

positively moderate compared to what

Neil Findlay had to say.

Extraordinary decision. An

incredible platform for her, what we

know that in the past this has

really backfired against people who

do this, George Galloway, Tommy

Sheridan. But I will be kind to her.

I think it is only 2-macro weeks,

and it is an opportunity for her, as

she is looking to go beyond

Holyrood. -- only two weeks. This is

a signal from her that she will not

finish her days after working as an

MSP she has got her sights set

somewhere else.

It is clearly a

risk, and are legitimate criticisms

of the decision. But how often does

a politician get an opportunity to

comedic take their message to 10

million people a night? We are

always discussing how engage the

younger voters are, maybe this is

the way. We should public have my

jumpers after she has been on and

analyse better then.

Richard

Leonard? He has won the election. I

am not just making a point about our

programme that he has not here, but

he is going out this afternoon to do

campaigning in a council by-election

in Rutherglen. He is going to do a

photo opportunity, but refused to

any questions from the media. Seems

bizarre given he has just been

elected.

It is a little bit strange.

The problem facing the Labour Party

is they have had seven leaders in

ten years. They need a credible

message and a credible messenger.

How can you gain that credible

message if you keep turning over

leaders? What other the differences

in opinion, I think the Labour Party

need to get behind their leader and

get some longevity and continuity to

make a sustained challenge.

Did it

stop the backbiting. Can they do

that?

They have do. It is not a

question whether we think they can,

they have two. They had to make an

imprint. One thing most people

except if that Scotland needs a

strong Labour Party, to take...

Slightly surprisingly is not here,

and you know all about running small

parties, Labour is not the

second-biggest in the country. It is

the third party in Scotland. This is

the candidate who does not have a

public profile compared to the

others.

Easily a year in there, most

people don't know who hears. This is

a great opportunity for him to top

to the nation and say, this is what

I come about. The positives of what

you said so far is that he is

focused on policy rather than

because that you should. The

positives for the result for him is

that yes, he got the trade union

backing that we expected, but he

also got the backing of the

membership, that is imported.

membership, that is imported.

There

are are huge challenges for him, but

huge opportunities. There are a lot

of seats in the general election

granny did not do better than they

thought, but they are running the

SNP quite close. There is a lot of

potential.

Scotland will become more

important with him as the leader,

because Jeremy Corbyn is coming up

next week, looking at 18 seats out

of the sick before he has to win to

form a Government, the allies

himself to Jeremy Corbyn, and I

think he has got a good opportunity,

the first thing he has to do is

bring in all the people including

Anas Sarwar who are not seen as his

supporters, he has only had a

handful of people in the

parliamentary group who have

supported him, he has to get a big

approach.

That is a question for

him. Whether he can put a team

together. It is going to rely on

people who did not support him,

because parliamentarians do not

support him. They will have to be

willing to say, despite the fact

that we supported Anas Sarwar, we

will serve all your team. Anas

Sarwar to take a lead on that.

I

would like to see him do that. You

need compromise. If you did not like

the winner, respect the boat went

the way it did. The Labour Party in

Scotland make a sustained challenge

in Scottish politics again, the need

to be united. That is something they

haven't been any number of years.

Alex Salmond on Russian television.

Let's let's have a look.

Hello. And

welcome to the very first episode of

the Alex Salmond Show. I am looking

forward to you joining me every week

as we host politicians, stars of

stage and screen, business

personalities, influenza leaders and

those who want to be any of the

above. As Robert Burns said, how

poor the gift they give us to see

ourselves as others see us.

Nicola

Sturgeon said that she had been

asked for her advice she would have

said, maybe not. You used to be his

adviser.

Abbott public had been a

Nicola's camp, and I have told Alex

that. I spoke to him afterwards. He

knows my views. I also respect the

fact that he is a private citizen

and he has an opportunity to

broadcast his views, he said he will

do it without fear or favour, I

think this show this week showed it

was a good effort in that direction.

The political probably SNP is that

the opposition parties will drag

this art at every opportunity as

long as that show goes on, and even

if it stops.

Absolutely. Alex has

taken this decision, he knew there

would be negative reaction, he is

not silly, heat it is his job to

present a show that deals with that

criticism. It will be a difficult

sell, but if any one can do it, he

can.

Your job is secure, Gordon. He

is not going to come here and

challenge you on the basis of what

we have seen. I don't think so. It

is a credibility issue. It gives

credible to two Russia Today, and to

a state funded TV company when

basically the Russians have an

approach to journalism and LGBT

rights and human rights which is not

something that the SNP wants to be

associated with. It gives a

credibility to Alex. I cannot help

but think there is a lot of other

people who would have given Alex

Salmond, given his little

background, a job before he had to

go and take the money from them.

He

is prominent enough that a lot of

politicians go on this circuit, big

speeches, company boards, becoming

involved in think tanks, Alex

Salmond is at least of a status to

do that.

Yes, when we take each

other he said that, as the often

said in Scottish politics, the more

I talk about I am known, but I said,

that everyone knows you already. He

did not need the extra status. Let

see if you can create a show without

fear, without intervention, and the

same of Kezia Dugdale, we will judge

it on its merits. But it is not a...

It is a difficult sell.

BiFab, great

news. There is this issue of whether

Scotland... That company can get

some deal in the longer term. And

also whether renewables is really

going to be in Scotland, what we

thought it was going to be.

The

first thing is to say it is

fantastic news, and there are

hundreds of families in the run-up

to Christmas now know they have

their jobs secure. It is this big

question going forward, not only the

Scottish Government but all the

opposition parties are wedded to the

fact that renewables was the future,

and Scotland's infrastructure and

industry. This shows us how

precarious that is. Nicola was often

on this week at the UN climate

conference, this is something which

has got fundamental backing and the

Scottish Government did a good job

in the last few days in terms of

turning this around, but it does

show how precarious it is and I

think that is something of a have to

work on.

Your analysis of the future

of the Goebbels, but we are

completely out of time.

That's all from the us this week.

I'll be back at the

same time next week.

Until then, goodbye.