0:00:36 > 0:00:38Morning everyone, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
0:00:38 > 0:00:41I'm Sarah Smith.
0:00:41 > 0:00:43And this is the programme that will provide your essential briefing
0:00:43 > 0:00:45on everything that's moving and shaking in
0:00:45 > 0:00:46the world of politics.
0:00:46 > 0:00:49Can the Conservative Party speak with one voice on Brexit?
0:00:49 > 0:00:53As Tory splits spill out in to the open once again this week,
0:00:53 > 0:00:55can the Prime Minister reassert her authority
0:00:55 > 0:00:57over a divided party?
0:00:57 > 0:01:00We'll be speaking to the former Conservative Cabinet
0:01:00 > 0:01:02Minister, Theresa Villiers - hitherto a loyal voice,
0:01:02 > 0:01:06but who says she's now worried about Brexit being diluted.
0:01:06 > 0:01:09Is Jeremy Corbyn heading for a fight with Labour councillors?
0:01:09 > 0:01:13As local government chiefs accuse the party's ruling body of trying
0:01:13 > 0:01:14to intervene in local decisions,
0:01:14 > 0:01:19we'll be speaking to one of Jeremy Corbyn's key allies.
0:01:19 > 0:01:20And on Sunday Politics Scotland:
0:01:20 > 0:01:21New allegations around the shenanigans enveloping
0:01:21 > 0:01:22Scotland's Force.
0:01:22 > 0:01:24The Conservative Justice spokesperson tells this programme
0:01:24 > 0:01:31they are absolutely extraordinary.
0:01:34 > 0:01:35All that coming up in the programme.
0:01:35 > 0:01:37All that coming up in the programme.
0:01:37 > 0:01:40And to help me to make sense of all the big stories today, I'm
0:01:40 > 0:01:43joined by Camilla Tominey, Rafael Behr and Rachel Shabi.
0:01:43 > 0:01:46I'm sure they certainly won't all speak with one voice.
0:01:46 > 0:01:48The newspaper headlines make pretty grim reading
0:01:48 > 0:01:49for the Government this morning.
0:01:49 > 0:01:52'Tories in Turmoil', 'Brexit betrayal',
0:01:52 > 0:01:55'PM told to raise her game'.
0:01:55 > 0:01:57Tory Brexit divisions erupted in public once again this week.
0:01:57 > 0:01:59So, is the Government's biggest priority now
0:01:59 > 0:02:04becoming its biggest headache?
0:02:11 > 0:02:16Morning, Home Secretary. They divided cabinet?A new cabinet since
0:02:16 > 0:02:23that modest reshuffle but still the same old Brexit split. Foreign
0:02:23 > 0:02:27Secretary Boris Johnson, who spent so much time on that infamous boss
0:02:27 > 0:02:33promising extra money for the NHS, went off Brive at the meeting on
0:02:33 > 0:02:39Tuesday, pushing the government to honour that much maligned pledge.Do
0:02:39 > 0:02:43you want to be the health secretary? Philip Hammond was in Brussels from
0:02:43 > 0:02:49where he sent a swift review.Mr Johnson is the foreign secretary. I
0:02:49 > 0:02:55gave the Health Secretary an extra £6 billion at the recent budget.And
0:02:55 > 0:03:00labour leader Jeremy Corbyn piled in at Prime Minister 's questions.Does
0:03:00 > 0:03:03the Prime Minister agree with the Foreign Secretary that the national
0:03:03 > 0:03:07Health Service needs an extra £5 billion?I think the right
0:03:07 > 0:03:11honourable gentleman, as I recall was here for the autumn budget which
0:03:11 > 0:03:14was given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, where he announced he
0:03:14 > 0:03:20would be putting £6 billion more into the National Health Service.
0:03:20 > 0:03:24Meanwhile, Jacob Rees-Mogg took on the Brexit Secretary David Davis
0:03:24 > 0:03:28over the transition deal.We are only actually out at the end of the
0:03:28 > 0:03:32transition. That is a big shift in government policy and a big move
0:03:32 > 0:03:43away from the vault.I do not accept your description.
0:03:43 > 0:03:45your description.Next day, Theresa May travelled to the World Economic
0:03:45 > 0:03:50Forum in Davos to heal a different divide, this time her special
0:03:50 > 0:03:56relationship with Donald Trump.
0:04:00 > 0:04:02relationship with Donald Trump. Her Chancellor described in modest
0:04:02 > 0:04:05change in Britain's relationship with the EU. Now he was being
0:04:05 > 0:04:12rebuked by furious colleagues as well as his boss. David Davies
0:04:12 > 0:04:19insists the Cabinet are united. They want a good deal.There is no
0:04:19 > 0:04:22difference between the Chancellor and myself and indeed the Prime
0:04:22 > 0:04:25Minister, in terms of the fact we both want a Brexit that serves the
0:04:25 > 0:04:30British economy and the British people.The EU will set out their
0:04:30 > 0:04:35bargaining position for a phase two of the Brexit negotiations tomorrow.
0:04:35 > 0:04:40But can we find an agreed British response.
0:04:40 > 0:04:44So to discuss the implications of all of the week's events I've got my
0:04:44 > 0:04:50expert panel. Welcome. Camilla, these are quite remarkable headlines
0:04:50 > 0:04:54this morning about the party being in turmoil over Theresa May's
0:04:54 > 0:04:58leadership and the direction of Brexit policy. Let's start with
0:04:58 > 0:05:04Brexit. How deep are the divide?I think they are very deep. The tide
0:05:04 > 0:05:09has turned a bit in the last week. Normally when you are covering these
0:05:09 > 0:05:13issues in the lobby, there is underlying hysteria. I think there
0:05:13 > 0:05:15are quite a lot of people on both sides scratching their heads,
0:05:15 > 0:05:20looking at some of the editorials we saw in the week about the Tory
0:05:20 > 0:05:24party, particularly when referring to Theresa May as a Wizard of Oz
0:05:24 > 0:05:30character. A lot in the Tory party can't disagree with that. They
0:05:30 > 0:05:34regard her as a caretaker Prime Minister. A lot of them have been
0:05:34 > 0:05:37giving her the benefit of the doubt particularly on Brexit because she
0:05:37 > 0:05:43has been consistent about what Brexit means. That did not mean
0:05:43 > 0:05:48leaving the single market and the Customs Union. -- that it must mean.
0:05:48 > 0:05:52To have Boris Johnson and Philip Hammond freelancing on the sidelines
0:05:52 > 0:05:56makes her look weak and unable to keep the Cabinet together. That
0:05:56 > 0:06:00gives the general impression to the country that they aren't quite in
0:06:00 > 0:06:04charge of things and that she particularly isn't across her brief.
0:06:04 > 0:06:08The key question at the heart of this is which of these Cabinet
0:06:08 > 0:06:14ministers are reflecting the Prime Minister pots opinion on this --'s
0:06:14 > 0:06:18opinion on this. Does she agree with Philip Hammond, or is she looking
0:06:18 > 0:06:23for a more significant divergence? This is absolutely critical. We talk
0:06:23 > 0:06:30about Brexit divisions. We are used to thinking about the division being
0:06:30 > 0:06:33about Remainers and levers. That is not the division we are talking
0:06:33 > 0:06:39about. There is a group of people in government who have now focused on
0:06:39 > 0:06:42the practical technical difficulty of what is required to get Britain
0:06:42 > 0:06:46safely out of the European Union. And they for the most part, and I
0:06:46 > 0:06:51will include the Prime Minister, have understood it is a long
0:06:51 > 0:06:54incremental process. You want an arrangement that looks pretty much
0:06:54 > 0:06:58like the status quo. If there is going to be divergence from EU
0:06:58 > 0:07:02rules, it will be incremental. We get the impression the Prime
0:07:02 > 0:07:04Minister has signed off on that approach because she is a cautious
0:07:04 > 0:07:09person. The problem is the Chancellor said it out loud. He had
0:07:09 > 0:07:15the temerity to say it. This is the plan. You have the other group of
0:07:15 > 0:07:19people, the harder, more ideological Brexiteers are not in government,
0:07:19 > 0:07:22who don't have to focus on the practical reality, look at that and
0:07:22 > 0:07:26think, that doesn't sound like emancipation and freedom, that
0:07:26 > 0:07:32sounds a bit boring. When you listen to what some of the critics of the
0:07:32 > 0:07:36Prime Minister from the hard Brexit position are saying, it is not
0:07:36 > 0:07:39obvious what they are asking her to do. What they want from her is a
0:07:39 > 0:07:47sense of clarity, a sense of whether or not she can have the confidence
0:07:47 > 0:07:50to stand up and say, the Chancellor is right. They are testing courtesy
0:07:50 > 0:07:55of she can do that and she won't do that because she doesn't want the
0:07:55 > 0:08:01huge tsunami of betrayal from the right.It is also impossible
0:08:01 > 0:08:05Bridgeford Theresa May to try and cross. How can she reconcile these
0:08:05 > 0:08:09different views of what Brexit is going to look like at the point
0:08:09 > 0:08:14where we have to start laying out what Britain's approach will be?
0:08:14 > 0:08:18That is the problem. The divisions are seemingly irreconcilable in the
0:08:18 > 0:08:23party. That is their own problem. It has become a national problem
0:08:23 > 0:08:28because they are doing it while in government. They have a over us
0:08:28 > 0:08:31while they are falling apart. That is completely irresponsible. In
0:08:31 > 0:08:38terms of where we are going to end up, we all know. We saw from phase
0:08:38 > 0:08:44one of EU that actually everything was conceded to the soft Brexit
0:08:44 > 0:08:49model was conceded two in what was agreed to during the parameters of
0:08:49 > 0:08:53phase one. It seems like, do we really have to go through this all
0:08:53 > 0:08:57again, this pretend, this bickering, this biting, when we know in the end
0:08:57 > 0:09:02we are going to end up with a situation that is a soft Brexit
0:09:02 > 0:09:06because this is where the major constituency is in Westminster and
0:09:06 > 0:09:10the country.We have a couple of guest to make disagree with that. We
0:09:10 > 0:09:12will return to you guys later.
0:09:12 > 0:09:14Well, the Cabinet Minister David Lidington was talking
0:09:14 > 0:09:16to Andrew Marr this morning, and was asked about the backlash
0:09:16 > 0:09:19on the Government's Brexit strategy from Jacob Rees-Mogg and other
0:09:19 > 0:09:21Conservative MPs.
0:09:21 > 0:09:28Jacob, like everybody else, needs to see how negotiations go. We are
0:09:28 > 0:09:31about to start negotiations. I'm not going into detail about that
0:09:31 > 0:09:37process. Secondly, the very fact that we will have left the European
0:09:37 > 0:09:42Union is a big deal indeed. The bill in front of Parliament extinguishes
0:09:42 > 0:09:46the power of the European Court and supranational EU law over the UK.
0:09:46 > 0:09:48I'm joined now by the former Cabinet Minister, Theresa Villiers.
0:09:48 > 0:09:51She has written a piece in today's Sunday Telegraph telling
0:09:51 > 0:09:55of her growing concern that Brexit is being diluted.
0:09:55 > 0:10:02Thank you for coming on. What do you mean by Brexit been diluted?I have
0:10:02 > 0:10:07consistently argued the case for compromise and I recognise it is
0:10:07 > 0:10:13necessary. What I was saying in my article this morning was that if you
0:10:13 > 0:10:16go too far with compromise, eventually you get to the point
0:10:16 > 0:10:19where we wouldn't generally be leaving the European Union, we
0:10:19 > 0:10:23wouldn't be respecting the result of the referendum.You are concerned
0:10:23 > 0:10:29that is the direction they're heading in?I am concerned. We must
0:10:29 > 0:10:33retain the right to divergence Romeu laws. One of the key points of
0:10:33 > 0:10:37leaving the European Union is to ensure that we make our own laws in
0:10:37 > 0:10:43our own parliaments and not be subject to laws made by people we
0:10:43 > 0:10:47don't elect and can't remove.What has made you concerned that is the
0:10:47 > 0:10:51direction in which we are heading? Is it Chancellor talking about
0:10:51 > 0:10:54modest changes or something happening behind the scenes?It is a
0:10:54 > 0:11:00combination of things. I think in part the government faces a
0:11:00 > 0:11:03difficult challenge convincing people on the Leave side of the
0:11:03 > 0:11:07debate. So many times in the past there have been Prime Ministers
0:11:07 > 0:11:11who've gone to Brussels and said, it will be fine, we would bring you
0:11:11 > 0:11:15back a deal, and at the last minute there has been, territory has been
0:11:15 > 0:11:19given away. We have made compromises. I accept the need for
0:11:19 > 0:11:23that. There is only so far you can go before ultimately you find
0:11:23 > 0:11:29yourself in a position where you are deleting Brexit so much that it
0:11:29 > 0:11:32isn't leaving the European Union in a real sense.When you hear Philip
0:11:32 > 0:11:37Hammond say they will only be modest changes to our relationship with the
0:11:37 > 0:11:41EU, you think he is reflecting government policy? Downing Street
0:11:41 > 0:11:48tried to refute what he was saying. Only actually said was, you can't
0:11:48 > 0:11:52call leaving the single market and Customs union a modest change. You
0:11:52 > 0:11:55are anxious, are you, that right at the top they are worried about
0:11:55 > 0:12:01keeping fairly close alignment with the EU?The Prime Minister set out a
0:12:01 > 0:12:05bold vision for Brexit in her Lancaster House speech. My article
0:12:05 > 0:12:09is about appealing to the government to stick to that vision and
0:12:09 > 0:12:12implemented so that once we leave the European Union we are back in
0:12:12 > 0:12:18control of our laws, money and borders.The Prime Minister has set
0:12:18 > 0:12:21this out in Lancaster House and in Florence. Why do you think she would
0:12:21 > 0:12:27be backsliding? Makes you think anything has changed?I don't think
0:12:27 > 0:12:32she wants to backslide. I think what is happening is that she is under
0:12:32 > 0:12:36huge sustained pressure from a range of quarters to reverse the result of
0:12:36 > 0:12:41the referendum. So in part, but I am trying to do is to re-emphasise the
0:12:41 > 0:12:45positive case for Brexit. And we emphasise that whilst there are
0:12:45 > 0:12:52those who want to soften things up and frustrate the implementation of
0:12:52 > 0:12:55the referendum, others are enthusiastic about implementing that
0:12:55 > 0:12:59vision in the Lancaster House speech.Were those people who want
0:12:59 > 0:13:03to frustrate her? You must be worried they are right inside the
0:13:03 > 0:13:08Cabinet for you to write a newspaper article about this. You must be
0:13:08 > 0:13:13worried if his right at the top of government?I don't believe that. I
0:13:13 > 0:13:20think the Cabinet is united in wanting to do this.
0:13:20 > 0:13:23wanting to do this.After the different views we had this week?
0:13:23 > 0:13:27This is an issue that has divided the country. The key battle now is
0:13:27 > 0:13:33what is going to be the end state we ask for in the negotiations? We must
0:13:33 > 0:13:37ask for an end state based on the Lancaster House speech, which means
0:13:37 > 0:13:40retaining control, making our own laws in our own Parliament. That is
0:13:40 > 0:13:44how we have -- we become genuinely an independent country again and
0:13:44 > 0:13:50respect the result of the referendum.Do you think the
0:13:50 > 0:13:53Chancellor was contravening stated policy when he talked about modest
0:13:53 > 0:13:58changes. --? Was he out of line?I wouldn't make too much of that one
0:13:58 > 0:14:02comment. That has not wanted my concerns. What I want to do is
0:14:02 > 0:14:08ensure the case for a real Brexit is made. I fully acknowledge the
0:14:08 > 0:14:12technical scale of the exercise of withdrawing from the European Union.
0:14:12 > 0:14:17It is very complicated. That is one of the reasons why I have had a --
0:14:17 > 0:14:21advocated and supported compromise. There is only so far you can go
0:14:21 > 0:14:25without -- with compromise without finding yourself selling out on the
0:14:25 > 0:14:28people who voted to leave.The next phase will be about the
0:14:28 > 0:14:33implementation period before we get to the final future relationship
0:14:33 > 0:14:38with the EU. We learned a little bit more about the government approached
0:14:38 > 0:14:41and that this week. David Davis made it sound as if there will be no
0:14:41 > 0:14:45changes to free movement of people whatsoever during the two-year
0:14:45 > 0:14:50transition phase. Does that concern you? That seems to be a change in
0:14:50 > 0:14:55policy.For me, the important issue is what happens at the end of the
0:14:55 > 0:15:01transition period.You are relaxed about two years of transition which
0:15:01 > 0:15:06looks most identical to staying in the EU?I accept that looks like
0:15:06 > 0:15:09what is current to happen. I think there is a case for a transition
0:15:09 > 0:15:15period. I think my worry now is if we go into the transition period
0:15:15 > 0:15:17without the clearest possible understanding of what the
0:15:17 > 0:15:21arrangements are when we leave, so I believe that we must have as much
0:15:21 > 0:15:26detail as possible in relation to our agreement with the European
0:15:26 > 0:15:30Union, that we reach before the transition period starts. If we go
0:15:30 > 0:15:37into it not knowing the end state, that would worry me.
0:15:38 > 0:15:42When it comes to the end state, what are the things you couldn't sign up
0:15:42 > 0:15:49to? What's being described as easy movement of people in and out of the
0:15:49 > 0:15:53UK, would that lead to a point it was a Brexit deal you couldn't agree
0:15:53 > 0:16:00to?The key issues are the end state must allow the UK to run its own
0:16:00 > 0:16:04trade policy and make its own decisions on rules and regulations.
0:16:04 > 0:16:10So no involvement from the European Court of Justice?The Government has
0:16:10 > 0:16:17agreed a time limited role for that. I don't see it as a problem but any
0:16:17 > 0:16:20enlargement of that role I would see as worrying.Do you think there's
0:16:20 > 0:16:26any possibility you could end up voting against this in Parliament?
0:16:26 > 0:16:29I'm not going to make predictions on how I will vote on a deal that
0:16:29 > 0:16:34hasn't been agreed yet. I want to make sure we work together to try to
0:16:34 > 0:16:37bridge divisions, to come up with an agreement with the European Union
0:16:37 > 0:16:42which gives us a new partnership with them, which hopefully a
0:16:42 > 0:16:46majority can be comfortable whichever way they vote in June 2000
0:16:46 > 0:16:4816.Thank you.
0:16:48 > 0:16:51Joining me now from Newcastle is the Brexit
0:16:51 > 0:16:53Minister Lord Callanan.
0:16:53 > 0:16:56Can you offer any reassurance to Theresa Villiers and any other
0:16:56 > 0:16:59members of your party who are worried about this that government
0:16:59 > 0:17:04is not going soft on Brexit?We are not going soft, there's been no
0:17:04 > 0:17:10backsliding on the Prime Minister's Lancaster house speech. We will be
0:17:10 > 0:17:15regaining control of our laws, money and borders. We will be establishing
0:17:15 > 0:17:22an independent trade policy as she set out in her speech.
0:17:22 > 0:17:25set out in her speech.Theresa Villiers is completely wrong when
0:17:25 > 0:17:30she says she's worried Brexit is being diluted, is she?Yes, she is
0:17:30 > 0:17:35wrong. It's not being diluted, the Prime Minister is in charge of the
0:17:35 > 0:17:38negotiations and we will be negotiating with our European
0:17:38 > 0:17:42partners in good faith, our friends and allies, but the objectives
0:17:42 > 0:17:46remain as she set out.So it was the Chancellor who was wrong when he
0:17:46 > 0:17:51said there would only be modest changes in our relationship?No, the
0:17:51 > 0:17:55Chancellor has said he is of the vision the Prime Minister has set
0:17:55 > 0:18:00out.
0:18:00 > 0:18:05out. We will be negotiating with our European partners to bring about
0:18:05 > 0:18:08frictionless trading arrangements but the important part of the
0:18:08 > 0:18:12negotiations is that we have to regain control of our ability to set
0:18:12 > 0:18:16our own rules and undulations. Though there may be some areas where
0:18:16 > 0:18:21if there are integrated supply lines we might want to reflect current EU
0:18:21 > 0:18:24regulations but the important thing is we decide those matters for
0:18:24 > 0:18:29ourselves.David Davis presumably speaks for government when he is
0:18:29 > 0:18:33describing the transition phase, and he says during this implementation
0:18:33 > 0:18:38period people will of course be able to travel between the UK and the EU
0:18:38 > 0:18:42to live and work. That sounds like free movement is continuing as
0:18:42 > 0:18:50before but we were told it would end as soon as we left the EU in 2019.
0:18:50 > 0:18:55We would introduce a registration scheme so we knew he was coming to
0:18:55 > 0:18:59the country.You could do that right now. This registration idea, this is
0:18:59 > 0:19:04not something that comes about because we have left the EU, we
0:19:04 > 0:19:10could have introduced that years ago if we wanted to. Several European
0:19:10 > 0:19:17countries asked the UK citizens to register.Let's see what the
0:19:17 > 0:19:20negotiations produced, but what we want to do is reflect current rules
0:19:20 > 0:19:24and regulations as closely as possible so that at the end of the
0:19:24 > 0:19:28implementation period, and it's important that is strictly
0:19:28 > 0:19:32time-limited, we agree with the EU on that, at the end of that state we
0:19:32 > 0:19:37will introduce a new immigration policy and take control of our
0:19:37 > 0:19:45rules, regulations and borders. It sounds
0:19:47 > 0:19:52sounds a lot like a red line that has gone very pale pink.
0:19:52 > 0:19:55We are about to have the negotiations. We will sit down in
0:19:55 > 0:19:59good faith with our European partners, talk about how the
0:19:59 > 0:20:03implementation period will work and what the end state will be.But we
0:20:03 > 0:20:07don't have to wait to find out what the UK Government position is
0:20:07 > 0:20:12because David Davis set it out this week and pretty much described free
0:20:12 > 0:20:17movement continuing as it is.As I said, we are having the
0:20:17 > 0:20:20negotiations, we are about to start them, let's not give away our
0:20:20 > 0:20:25positions before we do that. We want to reach an agreement as soon as
0:20:25 > 0:20:28possible so we get certainty that business knows where we are going at
0:20:28 > 0:20:33the end of the period and we move towards the new state at the end of
0:20:33 > 0:20:39a strictly time-limited implementation period.So would it
0:20:39 > 0:20:42be helpful if the Prime Minister were to make another speech, where
0:20:42 > 0:20:44she set out clearly what the Government's position is on the
0:20:44 > 0:20:47future direction of travel on the transition period and future end
0:20:47 > 0:20:51state so that instead of listening to Cabinet ministers with diverging
0:20:51 > 0:20:56views on this, we knew from the Prime Minister what the Government's
0:20:56 > 0:21:03policy was?The policy remains what she set out in detail in the
0:21:03 > 0:21:06Lancaster house speech followed up by the Florence speech where she
0:21:06 > 0:21:10outlined the new end state we want to end up with and the procedures
0:21:10 > 0:21:16for getting there. She set it out in great detail, that was very clear
0:21:16 > 0:21:24but we need to have under -- negotiation at the end of the day.
0:21:24 > 0:21:27These are difficult, complicated and tricky areas but we remain focused
0:21:27 > 0:21:32on the end state which is we will be leaving the single market and the
0:21:32 > 0:21:37customs union, having independent trade policy and deciding our own
0:21:37 > 0:21:40rules and regulations.The EU Withdrawal Bill will come to the
0:21:40 > 0:21:47Lords this week to your house, are we going to see government
0:21:47 > 0:21:53compromise?We will be listening to the debate. We showed that we were
0:21:53 > 0:21:58prepared to reflect and think about contributions made, and if people
0:21:58 > 0:22:01have suggestions that we agree with that we will improve the legislation
0:22:01 > 0:22:06and of course we will do that. The House of Lords has a very important
0:22:06 > 0:22:09role and we will carry that out effectively and we will listen to
0:22:09 > 0:22:14what the debate says.So you are open to government amendments
0:22:14 > 0:22:22changing the EU Withdrawal Bill? On issues like Henry VIII powers or
0:22:22 > 0:22:26something like that?We have already compromised on those areas in the
0:22:26 > 0:22:30House of Commons so we will listen to what the debate brings. Peers
0:22:30 > 0:22:34take their role of scrutinising EU legislation closely and we will
0:22:34 > 0:22:38reflect on that and introduce changes if we think they are
0:22:38 > 0:22:42warranted.Thanks for talking to us this morning.
0:22:42 > 0:22:45And you can find more Brexit analysis and explanation on the
0:22:45 > 0:22:46BBC website.
0:22:46 > 0:22:48This week Labour's ruling body, the National
0:22:48 > 0:22:50Executive Committee, or NEC, stepped in to a bitter row
0:22:50 > 0:22:52about a controversial housing project in the London
0:22:52 > 0:22:53borough of Haringey.
0:22:53 > 0:22:56It's led to deep divisions between the NEC and councillors
0:22:56 > 0:22:58across the country, with the Labour leader of Newcastle City Council
0:22:58 > 0:23:04calling it a "declaration of war".
0:23:05 > 0:23:06With Jeremy Corbyn supporters consolidating their grip
0:23:06 > 0:23:09on the ruling body of the party, Emma Vardy's been looking
0:23:09 > 0:23:14at the new battle lines being drawn.
0:23:14 > 0:23:19You might not think to look at it but this council estate in north
0:23:19 > 0:23:22London is being seen as a battle ground for the very soul of the
0:23:22 > 0:23:28Labour Party. Labour run Haringey plans to redevelop the estate in
0:23:28 > 0:23:33partnership with a private company but the pro-Corbyn pressure group
0:23:33 > 0:23:40momentum has led a campaign opposing it.You do not gift people's houses
0:23:40 > 0:23:45to a private developer and say you can demolish these...When Labour's
0:23:45 > 0:23:50ruling body, the NEC, intervened telling Haringey to force the
0:23:50 > 0:23:55project, some Labour supporters were outraged.We have now got the
0:23:55 > 0:23:57National executive committee effectively telling a Labour council
0:23:57 > 0:24:04what to do and I'm thinking where does this end?This, some believe,
0:24:04 > 0:24:09is what they see as the hard left of the party using the row as an excuse
0:24:09 > 0:24:14to get rid of more moderate Labour council is ahead of next year 's
0:24:14 > 0:24:18elections. Around a third of the Haringey Labour group of either been
0:24:18 > 0:24:23deselected or they have stood down. How is this being seen by other
0:24:23 > 0:24:28Labour council is looking on? There's 100 names on an open letter
0:24:28 > 0:24:32to the NEC today saying stay out of local council business, and one of
0:24:32 > 0:24:38them, the Labour leader of Corby Borough Council who can be found up
0:24:38 > 0:24:45there, called it a disgrace.I signed the letter because I wanted
0:24:45 > 0:24:49to demonstrate solidarity with a colleague, also to send a message to
0:24:49 > 0:24:52the NEC that we believe it is inappropriate to intervene in the
0:24:52 > 0:24:58way they did. Labour and local government are the people governing
0:24:58 > 0:25:02here in this country, we are not in Government nationally, we are in
0:25:02 > 0:25:08Government locally and we are doing a good job locally. We are
0:25:08 > 0:25:12protecting our people.Do you think the NEC will listen?I would hope
0:25:12 > 0:25:17so.The intervention that led to this row came for the first time
0:25:17 > 0:25:24since Momentum leader was elected as one of its members.The NEC has
0:25:24 > 0:25:29expressed a view, it has not mandated, not stormed in and taken
0:25:29 > 0:25:33over, and I think for every person you can find who is upset I can find
0:25:33 > 0:25:38tenants who are delighted.Jeremy Corbyn's support base on the NEC has
0:25:38 > 0:25:41been strengthened after recent elections so could this lead to
0:25:41 > 0:25:45sweeping changes on party policy in the future?Where you can see
0:25:45 > 0:25:51greater radicalism is on areas of economic policy, following Carillion
0:25:51 > 0:25:55Labour has been clear they want an end to outsourcing completely if
0:25:55 > 0:25:58they are elected, that they would like to take contracts back
0:25:58 > 0:26:03in-house, and at a local of all the tensions exist as well.What is the
0:26:03 > 0:26:09risk with upsetting councils?Is it causes local divisions and they want
0:26:09 > 0:26:16parties to be focused on governing. It also threatens to cause tensions
0:26:16 > 0:26:20between MPs. A lot of MPs see Labour councillors as proud bastions of the
0:26:20 > 0:26:25party and see them as a barrier to those who they think are taking too
0:26:25 > 0:26:31much of a faction or ideological approach.What would your message
0:26:31 > 0:26:35beta Jeremy Corbyn?That the Labour Party are very fortunate to have a
0:26:35 > 0:26:39large cohort of very experienced and talented councillors up and down the
0:26:39 > 0:26:45country. We know what we are doing, a us to get on with that.Local
0:26:45 > 0:26:53councils aside, in Parliament Jeremy Corbyn has won the
0:26:53 > 0:26:56Corbyn has won the support of many Labour MPs who now believe he should
0:26:56 > 0:26:59lead them into the next election, but could it be the relationship
0:26:59 > 0:27:01with the wider party in local government that becomes the one that
0:27:01 > 0:27:02is more difficult to manage?
0:27:02 > 0:27:03Emma Vardy reporting.
0:27:03 > 0:27:06Jon Trickett is a member of the Shadow Cabinet, and also sits
0:27:06 > 0:27:07on Labour's National Executive Committee.
0:27:07 > 0:27:12He joins me now from Yorkshire.
0:27:13 > 0:27:18We have got the leader of Newcastle City Council, the Labour leader,
0:27:18 > 0:27:23saying this is a declaration of war, the NEC getting involved in the
0:27:23 > 0:27:29local government decision.The first thing to say is Labour is in
0:27:29 > 0:27:32Government throughout this country in local councils, we are very proud
0:27:32 > 0:27:36of our record in local government but the NEC took a decision the
0:27:36 > 0:27:41other day, it was unanimous by the way, nobody voted against it, and
0:27:41 > 0:27:44Nick was in the room. He made a strong case for the autonomy of
0:27:44 > 0:27:48councils and in general that is what we think too. In fact we want to
0:27:48 > 0:27:54bring more powers back to local council...You cannot reconcile
0:27:54 > 0:27:59giving more power to councils with the idea there is a top-down diktats
0:27:59 > 0:28:04on what decisions councils must take.Let me just finish the point
0:28:04 > 0:28:10because what the NEC did was to ask for a pause. We did it politely but
0:28:10 > 0:28:14we said before that should happen, let's have a conversation between
0:28:14 > 0:28:18Haringey and the NEC and that conversation is now taking place or
0:28:18 > 0:28:23Wilby. I think this is an exaggerated row and when people look
0:28:23 > 0:28:28at the facts, we have asked for a pause is not necessarily a change in
0:28:28 > 0:28:35policy, though we think the policy was wrong and we want a conversation
0:28:35 > 0:28:40with Haringey.You are having a conversation between the NEC and
0:28:40 > 0:28:43Haringey. If Haringey Council refused to change their minds about
0:28:43 > 0:28:49this, they will then be subject to a diktats from the NEC, will they not?
0:28:49 > 0:28:52I'm not going to go into a speculative conversation with you
0:28:52 > 0:29:00but let's remember the background to this. This is effectively a huge
0:29:00 > 0:29:04deal outsourcing huge amounts of resources and assets in Haringey. It
0:29:04 > 0:29:10is very controversial and remember this, the NEC received a letter from
0:29:10 > 0:29:1522 Labour councillors on Haringey Council asking for a pause. We
0:29:15 > 0:29:20reacted to that request from within Haringey itself and all of this
0:29:20 > 0:29:25takes in the background of problems at Grenfell and also with the
0:29:25 > 0:29:28collapse of Carillion, both of which I think our matters we need to be
0:29:28 > 0:29:33thinking about when we are thinking in local councils about outsourcing
0:29:33 > 0:29:36additional provision. I am optimistic we will find an amicable
0:29:36 > 0:29:41way forward.It gets to a fundamental policy aspect of the
0:29:41 > 0:29:44Labour Party as to who makes decisions and surely you say some
0:29:44 > 0:29:54Labour councils were concerned about this, the majority of Labour members
0:29:54 > 0:30:00on the council were in favour of it.
0:30:00 > 0:30:03The ruling body of the Labour Party is obliged by the Constitution to
0:30:03 > 0:30:11take a view where there is clearly a dispute within one of our
0:30:11 > 0:30:14constitutional elements. And there was an absolutely clear position
0:30:14 > 0:30:19that there was a dispute. We were asked to intervene. We took a view
0:30:19 > 0:30:23and asked the council to think about it again and agreed to mediation. I
0:30:23 > 0:30:29don't think this is unreasonable. The Constitution of the party
0:30:29 > 0:30:32requires the NEC from time to time to make sure that the constitutional
0:30:32 > 0:30:35elements operate within the policies, programmes and principles
0:30:35 > 0:30:42of the Labour Party. I think it is a storm in a teacup.It is about the
0:30:42 > 0:30:47controversial issue of outsourcing. That is something you are speaking
0:30:47 > 0:30:52out about this week, saying the Labour government would reverse
0:30:52 > 0:30:55outsourcing, setting out clear rules for companies you would give
0:30:55 > 0:30:57contracts to, including the idea that the boss should not be paid
0:30:57 > 0:31:04more than 20 times more than the lowest paid worker. It would be
0:31:04 > 0:31:11quite difficult to find construction companies to build, say, HS2 if
0:31:11 > 0:31:16you're going to stick to those rules?Well, there are all kinds of
0:31:16 > 0:31:19different contracts which are outsourced. Some of them can be done
0:31:19 > 0:31:24by the public sector, others can't. We will be thinking about those
0:31:24 > 0:31:30services which are outsourced. The facts are if you work for the
0:31:30 > 0:31:33Council or the government, the top ratio to the average pay is 20 to
0:31:33 > 0:31:42one. In the private sector it is 156 to one. That means in a year's work
0:31:42 > 0:31:46by a chief executive, the average worker has to work 156 years, almost
0:31:46 > 0:31:52for working like -- lifetimes. We don't think that is how taxpayers
0:31:52 > 0:31:56want the money spent.When you say you won't give government contracts
0:31:56 > 0:32:03to companies who don't have this 20 to one pay ratio you are talking all
0:32:03 > 0:32:09government contracts?We have said we want to move towards a ratio of
0:32:09 > 0:32:1220 to one. I don't think people watching will have any compunction
0:32:12 > 0:32:20to say that is not unreasonable. If you are a boss you should definitely
0:32:20 > 0:32:24earn more than the average pay. But 156 times? I don't think that is
0:32:24 > 0:32:31reasonable.Depends how quickly you would move towards this. If you got
0:32:31 > 0:32:37into government and took over the management of say HS2, and there are
0:32:37 > 0:32:42£7 billion worth of contracts, most are companies which don't fit your
0:32:42 > 0:32:45criteria, would you be cancelling those contracts are maintaining
0:32:45 > 0:32:52contracts with companies that don't fit your pay rules?Contracts which
0:32:52 > 0:32:56are already left, you cannot easily break those contracts, nor should
0:32:56 > 0:33:01you want to. It would be illegal. If the contract was operating in a way
0:33:01 > 0:33:04which was contrary to the contract, clearly we would want to look at
0:33:04 > 0:33:13bringing that back in-house. It is horses for horses -- courses.
0:33:14 > 0:33:17horses for horses -- courses.So you would continue with the contracts
0:33:17 > 0:33:20the government signed for the construction of HS2 even though
0:33:20 > 0:33:25these companies don't meet your criteria?In the case of HS2,
0:33:25 > 0:33:30remember, it went to Carillion, and 20 Carillion after government knew
0:33:30 > 0:33:37they were in trouble.There are ten more companies involved in this.But
0:33:37 > 0:33:41Carillion are in trouble. The truth is the government gave them billions
0:33:41 > 0:33:46of pounds, I think it was £1.4 billion, to a company which was
0:33:46 > 0:33:49clearly going belly up. It is completely wrong.
0:33:49 > 0:33:56Jon Trickett, thank you. I will talk to the panel about what we have
0:33:56 > 0:34:00heard on the programme so far. In Trieste -- interesting ideas from
0:34:00 > 0:34:07Jon Trickett. It would be harder to impose their rules about outsourcing
0:34:07 > 0:34:14and private companies, wouldn't it? Not necessarily. The Carillion thing
0:34:14 > 0:34:21as come at an interesting time. It has exposed in bold the kind of
0:34:21 > 0:34:26suspicion we have had for some time, which is that these PFIs are really
0:34:26 > 0:34:32just a vehicle for private companies to take public funding and not
0:34:32 > 0:34:37deliver on the services that they were supposed to do. It ends up
0:34:37 > 0:34:43costing us more. It is in line with a shift in public mood we have seen.
0:34:43 > 0:34:46There is overwhelming support for nationalisation across sectors, from
0:34:46 > 0:34:53utilities to railways and actually across politics. Conservative voters
0:34:53 > 0:34:58favour nationalisation. It is no wonder that we have this level of
0:34:58 > 0:35:04discontent when we see something like Carillion happen. Yes, it might
0:35:04 > 0:35:08be difficult in the short term to return some of those contracts into
0:35:08 > 0:35:11public hands. But it is going to be cheaper and more efficient and
0:35:11 > 0:35:17better for everyone in the long term, that much is clear.Camilla,
0:35:17 > 0:35:22do you think it is even possible to impose these kinds of rules, the 20
0:35:22 > 0:35:28to one pay ratio, four any company with a government contract?No. And
0:35:28 > 0:35:32as Andrew Gilligan's piece in the Sunday Times showed, a lot of these
0:35:32 > 0:35:38ideological premises have no basis in law whatsoever. Momentum has
0:35:38 > 0:35:44suggested to Capp pay at £60,000. What effect would that have on head
0:35:44 > 0:35:47teachers in Haringey? The people in Haringey did not vote for a
0:35:47 > 0:35:51Momentum, they voted for Labour. Haringey is a broad church. It takes
0:35:51 > 0:35:57in top on one hand and Highgate on the other. Our Momentum's policies
0:35:57 > 0:36:01representative of the constituency as a whole? No. It is deeply
0:36:01 > 0:36:08worrying people are being deselected by people with fanatical views. John
0:36:08 > 0:36:13Landis man is hugely controversial figure. He claims to be a Bastian of
0:36:13 > 0:36:19socialism and socialist policies, yet at the same time we have
0:36:19 > 0:36:20discovered, and the Sunday Express have had a lot of in-depth analysis
0:36:20 > 0:36:25of his own finances, he recently loaned £5,000 to his son's property
0:36:25 > 0:36:33company, which in turn is charged with franchising McDonald's outlets.
0:36:33 > 0:36:41John Landsman is not here to defend himself. Move on from that point.
0:36:41 > 0:36:46Let me bring in Raphael first. Haringey is emblematic of a wider
0:36:46 > 0:36:51thing happening in the Labour Party. You have got the NEC that met this
0:36:51 > 0:36:55week, the first time since you had more Momentum members elected.
0:36:55 > 0:36:58Interesting to watch if it changes the decisions they make. How
0:36:58 > 0:37:03worrying will it be people to see them getting involved in something
0:37:03 > 0:37:08as local as the decisions in Haringey?Momentum is a complex
0:37:08 > 0:37:11institution. It is not an ideological phalanx or something
0:37:11 > 0:37:18captured by the hard left. What is very interesting about this is that
0:37:18 > 0:37:21this is a tension within the left and labour that predates Jeremy
0:37:21 > 0:37:28Corbyn and Momentum. You have a tension between people who would
0:37:28 > 0:37:31start with a fixed idea of what it means invincible to be on the left,
0:37:31 > 0:37:33and people who take a slightly more pragmatic view to
0:37:35 > 0:37:37pragmatic view to get elected. Broadly within the Labour Party at
0:37:37 > 0:37:41the moment Jeremy Corbyn as won the ideological argument. People have
0:37:41 > 0:37:45been marginalised. The problem is when you had the election last year
0:37:45 > 0:37:49and labour did better than a lot of people thought, including a lot
0:37:49 > 0:37:53better than Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell thought, something
0:37:53 > 0:37:57switched and Labour thought, we can do this, we can get into government.
0:37:57 > 0:38:00Suddenly the pragmatic tendency started to appear within the Corbyn
0:38:00 > 0:38:06movement. The tension is not between anti-Corbyn and pro Corbyn. It is
0:38:06 > 0:38:12about how you sneak up power, not alienate too many people. Can you
0:38:12 > 0:38:16actually win, beat Theresa May and get into government? That tension is
0:38:16 > 0:38:19happening inside the head of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell. It is
0:38:19 > 0:38:22happening inside the head of Jon Trickett. We have to leave
0:38:22 > 0:38:23Trickett. We have to leave that now.
0:38:23 > 0:38:27It's coming up to 11.40 - you're watching the Sunday Politics.
0:38:30 > 0:38:32Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
0:38:32 > 0:38:34Coming up on the programme:
0:38:34 > 0:38:35New allegations about the Phil Gormley affair -
0:38:35 > 0:38:37the Tories' Justice spokesperson tells this programme
0:38:37 > 0:38:43they are "absolutely extraordinary".
0:38:43 > 0:38:45Could the Lib Dems be about to back the Scottish Budget?
0:38:45 > 0:38:47I'll be asking party leader Willie Rennie.
0:38:47 > 0:38:49And as austerity continues to hammer council budgets,
0:38:49 > 0:38:51could culture be the next victim?
0:38:51 > 0:39:00We'll have a special report from Stirling.
0:39:01 > 0:39:05The loss to the city will be enormous. Has ever heard of a city
0:39:05 > 0:39:13without a museum? -- who has ever heard?
0:39:13 > 0:39:15The Scottish Police Authority was set up to oversee Police Scotland
0:39:15 > 0:39:18independently of Government.
0:39:18 > 0:39:20Last November they reached a unanimous decision to reinstate
0:39:20 > 0:39:22the suspended Chief Constable Phil Gormley.
0:39:22 > 0:39:24He was informed, and press releases drafted announcing
0:39:24 > 0:39:25his return to work.
0:39:25 > 0:39:27Then, following two meetings with the Justice Secretary,
0:39:27 > 0:39:29the chair of the Scottish Police Authority changed his
0:39:29 > 0:39:30mind and emailed board members, recommending
0:39:30 > 0:39:31the decision be "paused".
0:39:31 > 0:39:34He also contacted Mr Gormley on his way back to Scotland
0:39:34 > 0:39:36at the time, and told him not to come back.
0:39:36 > 0:39:38MSPs are concerned about political interference in the day-to-day
0:39:38 > 0:39:40running of the police.
0:39:40 > 0:39:41The Justice Secretary Michael Matheson
0:39:41 > 0:39:45insists he only asked essential and pertinent questions.
0:39:45 > 0:39:48So what happened in those un-minuted meetings?
0:39:48 > 0:39:52Was the chair of the SPA made to change his mind?
0:39:52 > 0:39:55It all came under intense scrutiny at Holyrood this week -
0:39:55 > 0:40:03firstly in Committee and then in Parliament itself.
0:40:03 > 0:40:08Did basically tell you at that first or second meeting to change your
0:40:08 > 0:40:15mind?No, it was not that exquisite. So why did you change our mind?As I
0:40:15 > 0:40:20said in my earlier answer, I think that for the Chief Constable to
0:40:20 > 0:40:24return it would be best that it was in the most conducive situation
0:40:24 > 0:40:28possible. If the Cabinet Secretary was unhappy for reasons that I did
0:40:28 > 0:40:32not understand, and what it was best to try and resolve those issues
0:40:32 > 0:40:38before he returned.You were asked earlier whether you felt that the
0:40:38 > 0:40:42cabinet secretary was directing you to stop the process. Will you accept
0:40:42 > 0:40:45that if you look at that objectively, it is quite difficult
0:40:45 > 0:40:52not to conclude that you felt the cabinet secretary was telling you to
0:40:52 > 0:40:57stop this process?I think direction is a more formal term, and I could
0:40:57 > 0:41:03not say that I had been directed. The position I was in, I felt I was
0:41:03 > 0:41:08at not in a position to move forward with that decision.You had no
0:41:08 > 0:41:15choice but to pause the decision? Yes.Thank you.It was called a
0:41:15 > 0:41:18one-sided meeting and he felt he had no choice but to reverse the
0:41:18 > 0:41:24decision of his independent board by changing his mind based on the
0:41:24 > 0:41:28cabinet secretary being unhappy. So the independent chair of an
0:41:28 > 0:41:32independent body has two meetings with the Justice Secretary where in
0:41:32 > 0:41:35the first he has told he has made a bad decision, and after the second
0:41:35 > 0:41:40years left in no doubt that he had to reverse it. Andrew Flanagan
0:41:40 > 0:41:44clearly said he had not been requested by the Justice Secretary
0:41:44 > 0:41:47to change his decision, and he was not directed to do so. Questions
0:41:47 > 0:41:53were asked, and as I said, I absolutely and of the view that the
0:41:53 > 0:41:58Justice Secretary was right to ask those questions.
0:41:58 > 0:42:00Well, the Justice Secretary Michael Matheson declined our invitation
0:42:00 > 0:42:03to come on the programme, so earlier I spoke with
0:42:03 > 0:42:04the Conservative's Justice Spokesperson Liam Kerr,
0:42:04 > 0:42:12and the SNP's Ben Macpherson.
0:42:12 > 0:42:18First of all, I am curious as to what you make of these reports that
0:42:18 > 0:42:22were in the Sunday Post this morning, and I should briefly
0:42:22 > 0:42:26explain what this is about. Kate Frame, the police investigations and
0:42:26 > 0:42:31review Commissioner, suggested that the Government was trying to
0:42:31 > 0:42:36interfere with her independence. It was about to the publication of a
0:42:36 > 0:42:39report on the Phil Gormley avail. She claims that summoning the
0:42:39 > 0:42:45Scottish Government was trying to delay it. What did you make of that?
0:42:45 > 0:42:48I found this extraordinary. These are absolutely extraordinary
0:42:48 > 0:42:55revelations. What they show is that Government interference in
0:42:55 > 0:43:01supposedly independent bodies, trying to do an independent job, is
0:43:01 > 0:43:05endemic throughout the system. But it also shows is that there is a
0:43:05 > 0:43:11wider issue of Government, because we have seen John Swinney trying to
0:43:11 > 0:43:15interfere in the named person witnesses, or at any rate there are
0:43:15 > 0:43:20delegations to that. This is showing that this interfering is with
0:43:20 > 0:43:24independent public bodies is endemic throughout the Scottish Government.
0:43:24 > 0:43:29In MacPherson, what do you make of it? This is arguably more serious
0:43:29 > 0:43:35than the allegations about Michael Matheson. -- Ben MacPherson. He
0:43:35 > 0:43:42could have said he hadn't interfered in the timing and could be judged to
0:43:42 > 0:43:46be irresponsible, given the circumstances. This looks much more
0:43:46 > 0:43:51on the face of it, if these e-mails are accurate, like a straightforward
0:43:51 > 0:43:57case of the Government trying to interfere in the normal day-to-day
0:43:57 > 0:44:01workings of someone who is supposed to be an independent commissioner.
0:44:01 > 0:44:04On issues important like this, it is important to be rational and
0:44:04 > 0:44:10reasonable. This is a story that has broken this morning. There has not
0:44:10 > 0:44:14been any Parliamentary time or otherwise to look at it. What is
0:44:14 > 0:44:20absolutely clear from the story in the Sunday Post, and the statement
0:44:20 > 0:44:23made by the park, is that no incidents of Government interference
0:44:23 > 0:44:31have taken place. Those are his words rather than mine.-- her
0:44:31 > 0:44:35words. Only because she resisted. Let me just read you what Kate
0:44:35 > 0:44:41Frame, the piece to make sure in review said, she said if these
0:44:41 > 0:44:45e-mails are accurate, my perception of your remarks is of governmental
0:44:45 > 0:44:49interference with my independence. That is a direct quote.That was
0:44:49 > 0:44:57correspondence to give the context but a Government official. But as a
0:44:57 > 0:45:02comment to the story, they have made very clear that there had been no
0:45:02 > 0:45:07incidents of Government interference.But again, I make the
0:45:07 > 0:45:11point only because it would appear that Kate Frame resisted them. She
0:45:11 > 0:45:19herself is saying that the remark she received from this fellow, who
0:45:19 > 0:45:23is the deputy director of police division of the Scottish Government,
0:45:23 > 0:45:25were, and ever video game, my perception is of governmental
0:45:25 > 0:45:31interference. If this was the former Labour Liberal Democrat
0:45:31 > 0:45:34administration, and something like this had happened, the SNP would be
0:45:34 > 0:45:39all over it like a rash. Saying, this is an absolutely outrageous
0:45:39 > 0:45:43interference.I am not going to comment on that. I think it is
0:45:43 > 0:45:46important that we look at this story in the context of the days ahead,
0:45:46 > 0:45:49the policing subcommittee that I sit on the well perhaps want to take a
0:45:49 > 0:45:55look at it. But what is very clear to me today is that when asked to
0:45:55 > 0:45:58react to this story, they have said that there is no instance of
0:45:58 > 0:46:05Government interference.On the other issue at stake, which is about
0:46:05 > 0:46:08Michael Matheson, I am not quite clear what your objections are to
0:46:08 > 0:46:12what he did. I do think that the substance of what he did, to stop
0:46:12 > 0:46:19the return of Phil Gormley, was OK? It is just the way it was done?I
0:46:19 > 0:46:22think it is interesting how you phrase that. The substance of
0:46:22 > 0:46:26Michael Matheson and interfere to prevent the return of Phil Gormley.
0:46:26 > 0:46:33The situation...But was that wrong? The issue here is that there was a
0:46:33 > 0:46:37meeting to which the independent chair of an independent body, the
0:46:37 > 0:46:45SPAD, is called into, unannounced, between the cabinet secretary and
0:46:45 > 0:46:49the former SPAD chair. This is a meeting that is an minuted. The
0:46:49 > 0:46:53chair goes then, with a unanimous board decision we heard in committee
0:46:53 > 0:46:59last week, saying the situation of Phil Gormley should be coming back
0:46:59 > 0:47:03to work. He emerges a short time later. From an an minuted meeting
0:47:03 > 0:47:09with no notes, with an eight different decision. Mr Matheson
0:47:09 > 0:47:14would have us believe that he did not play any part in that decision.
0:47:14 > 0:47:19For all of the people, this is just process. You seem to agree that he
0:47:19 > 0:47:26was right to interfere and stop Phil Gormley returning, or am I
0:47:26 > 0:47:29misunderstanding you?What you are misunderstanding, if I may, if that
0:47:29 > 0:47:33this meeting, if Michael Matheson wished to interfere, he can do that.
0:47:33 > 0:47:39What he does not have power to do is just do it in a closed meeting.Side
0:47:39 > 0:47:43you are objecting to the process. Michael Matheson makes the point
0:47:43 > 0:47:47that if he had not intervened, giving the people inside Police
0:47:47 > 0:47:51Scotland had not been made aware of the suburbs and return of Mr
0:47:51 > 0:47:55Gormley, if he had not intervened people like you would be screaming
0:47:55 > 0:48:00that this was an appalling and that the SNP Government was incompetent,
0:48:00 > 0:48:04and that of course it was ministers responsibility to stop a situation
0:48:04 > 0:48:08like this are rising.On the contrary, what is appalling is that
0:48:08 > 0:48:13if Mr Matheson is now saying that he did intervene, which he previously
0:48:13 > 0:48:18didn't, if he did intervene, then he has to go through an appropriate
0:48:18 > 0:48:22process, and that process involves not waiting, apart from anything
0:48:22 > 0:48:27else, for nine weeks to come before Parliament and talk about what
0:48:27 > 0:48:31happened in that meeting.What is your response to that, Ben
0:48:31 > 0:48:37MacPherson? Again, I think he is not quite say this, but the issue of
0:48:37 > 0:48:40substance is conceded, but you presumably could see the issue of
0:48:40 > 0:48:46process, that he should have... The meeting should have been minuted. He
0:48:46 > 0:48:53should have towed -- told MSPs what is going on.It's important to
0:48:53 > 0:48:56recognise there is an ongoing statutory investigation with these
0:48:56 > 0:49:03allegations. We should all be mindful of that. What is clear, and
0:49:03 > 0:49:08implicitly Liam Cooper has just admitted, that the Cabinet secretary
0:49:08 > 0:49:11was absolutely right to ask the questions about the process in which
0:49:11 > 0:49:21the decision of the SNP was made. -- Liam Kerr.We don't have endless
0:49:21 > 0:49:25time, what about the point of process? He should have told what
0:49:25 > 0:49:28MSPs was going on, and he should have made sure minutes were taken.
0:49:28 > 0:49:34We have just got people post like word for what has happened. --
0:49:34 > 0:49:36people post like word.
0:49:45 > 0:49:50In terms of correspondent from the Scottish Government, the Public
0:49:50 > 0:49:53audit committee has received correspondent detailing the fight
0:49:53 > 0:49:58that the follow-on correspondent that took place there after the
0:49:58 > 0:50:03meeting was much more substantial than any formal minute.OK. Running
0:50:03 > 0:50:10out of time. Liam Kerr, returning to these e-mails to and from Kate
0:50:10 > 0:50:15frame, the police investigation commission, what do you think should
0:50:15 > 0:50:21happen about this? What will you be asking for?I think first of all the
0:50:21 > 0:50:25Cabinet Secretary needs to reflect very carefully on events of the last
0:50:25 > 0:50:30few months and indeed the debate that to please in Parliament when I
0:50:30 > 0:50:36cold on transparency. I would expect that to be happening. There needs to
0:50:36 > 0:50:41be a fool public enquiry. A public enquiry? Into the SNP. The way
0:50:41 > 0:50:45Nicola Sturgeon was my government is conducting itself is losing
0:50:45 > 0:50:50confidence from the public, hang on, you cannot have a public enquiry
0:50:50 > 0:50:55into the fact that you do not like the SNP government, that is silly.
0:50:55 > 0:50:59Of course not. I think we need a filling quietly into what is going
0:50:59 > 0:51:07on here.Do you mean the relationship between ministers and
0:51:07 > 0:51:12independent bodies?We need tact transparency. There has been no
0:51:12 > 0:51:15transparency throughout this process. There has been no
0:51:15 > 0:51:20transparency from the Cabinet Secretary.I am not quite sure why
0:51:20 > 0:51:29you want an enquiry?I wonder -- want an enquiry into transparency.
0:51:29 > 0:51:33John Swinney is currently facing allegations over a billion of
0:51:33 > 0:51:39independent witnesses on the main person -- named person enquiry.What
0:51:39 > 0:51:45do you want to happen specifically about this Kate frame situation?
0:51:45 > 0:51:50Will your committee be doing anything about this?That is a
0:51:50 > 0:51:55question for our committee to discuss. That will be for John
0:51:55 > 0:51:59Finnie to take forward. That is not a question I can answer at the
0:51:59 > 0:52:05moment. This is an important matter. It seems like you do not know what
0:52:05 > 0:52:10to do about it.We have seen a headline this morning about how we
0:52:10 > 0:52:14can take this matter forward. It will be discussed in Parliament this
0:52:14 > 0:52:21week. It is important that there is a lot of sensational as from Liam
0:52:21 > 0:52:26Kerr today. They have been proven wrong and it has proven that the
0:52:26 > 0:52:30Cabinet Secretary was right to act the way he did. There has been
0:52:30 > 0:52:33touring have Chrissy, it is about time we got behind our police
0:52:33 > 0:52:41service. -- hypocrisy.I was wondering how long it would take for
0:52:41 > 0:52:46one of you to say you are not backing the fleece. Thank you both
0:52:46 > 0:52:46very much indeed.
0:52:46 > 0:52:49Now, since we recorded that interview, the Police Investigations
0:52:49 > 0:52:51and Review Commission have confirmed to the BBC that the emails
0:52:51 > 0:52:52are genuine.
0:52:52 > 0:52:54However, they insist that, since the report came out
0:52:54 > 0:52:58as scheduled, there was no actual Government interference.
0:52:58 > 0:53:00And in a statement, the Scottish Government said:
0:53:00 > 0:53:02"There have been no incidents of Government interference,
0:53:02 > 0:53:04and the release of the audit document went ahead
0:53:04 > 0:53:09within the planned timescale."
0:53:09 > 0:53:12Now, since the SNP no longer has a Holyrood majority, they depend
0:53:12 > 0:53:14on support from at least one of the other parties
0:53:14 > 0:53:16to pass their budget.
0:53:16 > 0:53:18It was thought that would come from the Greens,
0:53:18 > 0:53:21but could the Lib Dems be about to outmanoeuvre them?
0:53:21 > 0:53:23Well, let's find out, because their leader, Willie Rennie,
0:53:23 > 0:53:26joins me now from Dundee.
0:53:26 > 0:53:33I know you are dying to talk about the budget. Let's get your views on
0:53:33 > 0:53:39this. The report which is at the centre of these new allegations was
0:53:39 > 0:53:42not about Phil Gormley, it was apparently about procedures in
0:53:42 > 0:53:48general terms, to do with cases like Phil Gormley but it did not name
0:53:48 > 0:53:52them. What do you make of these relegations this morning and what
0:53:52 > 0:53:57you think should be done about them? -- revelations. The government is
0:53:57 > 0:54:03developing an unhealthy culture of intervention. If I was in the
0:54:03 > 0:54:07Justice Secretary's position, I would probably have made the same
0:54:07 > 0:54:11cold because the circumstances about Phil Gormley's return were not
0:54:11 > 0:54:20right. That is not the centre of the problem here. We have a
0:54:20 > 0:54:23concentration of power within the justice system. We have the Justice
0:54:23 > 0:54:28Secretary, the chair of the police authority and the Chief Constable.
0:54:28 > 0:54:33Those three positions held by three people, you do not have that
0:54:33 > 0:54:38dispersed power, share power across the country.What about specific
0:54:38 > 0:54:42allegations not about Kate frame but with matters to do with keep
0:54:42 > 0:54:47reading?It is inevitable that you get to circumstances like this
0:54:47 > 0:54:51because the power is concentrated in just three hands. That is why we
0:54:51 > 0:54:54need to change the system to disperse power because the Justice
0:54:54 > 0:54:59Secretary is not tempted in the way that he has inevitably he has been
0:54:59 > 0:55:04on both those issues. It is inappropriate to intervene in such
0:55:04 > 0:55:09cases, but it is inevitable that it happens because power is so close to
0:55:09 > 0:55:13the Justice Secretary. He can intervene so easily without telling
0:55:13 > 0:55:19parliament, and that is why we need to have an independent review of how
0:55:19 > 0:55:22the police structure is operated. We should -- believe it should be
0:55:22 > 0:55:30changed.Another dancing on the head of a pinpoint, Michael Matheson
0:55:30 > 0:55:35saying he did not interfere in the return of Phil Gormley, but you
0:55:35 > 0:55:39would accept that he intervened. It is the difference between the two
0:55:39 > 0:55:50words. This case
0:55:52 > 0:55:58with Kater Frame and the delay of the publication of a document. Would
0:55:58 > 0:56:05you accept that something on that last remark -- Kate Frame.To be
0:56:05 > 0:56:10honest I have not seen all the detail on that. I think it is a
0:56:10 > 0:56:14culture where the government seems to readily interfering and
0:56:14 > 0:56:19intervening in many cases like this. Even if he didn't actually
0:56:19 > 0:56:23interview, they did try to. I think that is the kind of questions we
0:56:23 > 0:56:27need to be asking. I think there should be a statement to Parliament
0:56:27 > 0:56:32on this issue this week and we need to put an end to it.The budget,
0:56:32 > 0:56:36everyone's Patrick Harvey and the Greens would come to the
0:56:36 > 0:56:43government's rescue. Are you galloping to the rescue instead?
0:56:43 > 0:56:47Talks with Derek Mackay broke down before Christmas on an important
0:56:47 > 0:56:51issue for the Northern Isles on the internal ferry services because
0:56:51 > 0:56:55there was a promise that they had made to fund the services to avoid
0:56:55 > 0:56:59massive cuts to the lifeline services and public services. They
0:56:59 > 0:57:03withdrew that commitment that they had made over many, many years and
0:57:03 > 0:57:09then tried to strong arm is into voting for the budget. There was a
0:57:09 > 0:57:13breakdown of trust so we broke down the talks as a result of that. There
0:57:13 > 0:57:19is still time to the the damage and that was done. We could talk to the
0:57:19 > 0:57:22government, there is still time left before we finalise the budget and
0:57:22 > 0:57:28agree the budget, and we have powers over education, that I have
0:57:28 > 0:57:34explained to you before.Is the issue over the ferry is your red
0:57:34 > 0:57:37line issue? If they conceded on that you would fought with them?That is
0:57:37 > 0:57:43not the only issue we are voting for. But the handled it, broke down
0:57:43 > 0:57:48the trust between us and them we have had in previous years. There
0:57:48 > 0:57:52was a precondition before any talks with the government, was that the...
0:57:52 > 0:57:56But do you have any redline is beyond that? On the face of it you
0:57:56 > 0:58:00are seeing is a much more modest amount than the demands that were
0:58:00 > 0:58:06made by Patrick Harvey about, you know, effectively about £200 million
0:58:06 > 0:58:12worth of restoration cuts to councils. It was a precondition for
0:58:12 > 0:58:16further talks about the big issues that we have been arguing for, about
0:58:16 > 0:58:24investment in mental health, investment up to £1.2 billion, but
0:58:24 > 0:58:28also £500 million investment in education for schools, nurseries and
0:58:28 > 0:58:33colleges.Those have been a priority set out in our manifesto in 2016. We
0:58:33 > 0:58:38put out these issues for discussion and debate, we could not reach
0:58:38 > 0:58:42agreement last year, I was hoping we could beat agreement this year or
0:58:42 > 0:58:50remove some weight on tax which will raise more men of the. -- more
0:58:50 > 0:58:55revenue.I am slightly chuckling here. Your phrase, what is a red
0:58:55 > 0:59:02line? Could sum up the history of the Liberal Democrats.What I am
0:59:02 > 0:59:06explaining here are the kinds of things we want to see. We are not
0:59:06 > 0:59:11the biggest party in parliament so we cannot provide everything that we
0:59:11 > 0:59:17want. We have put forward and coherently a package of proposals to
0:59:17 > 0:59:21transform the education system to invest in that system, to boost the
0:59:21 > 0:59:25economy. Because the economy hasn't struggling in recent months
0:59:25 > 0:59:29following the Brexit vote. We need to make that investment to turn
0:59:29 > 0:59:33around the economy, but we also need to invest in mental health.Those
0:59:33 > 0:59:39are the things we would be happy with. You had a clash with Nicola
0:59:39 > 0:59:42Sturgeon, at First Minister's Questions. You appear to be accusing
0:59:42 > 0:59:48her of lying and there was a bit of bad-tempered exchanges. Would you
0:59:48 > 0:59:54like to withdraw that allegation?I accept what the presiding officer
0:59:54 > 0:59:58has said about the use of language in Parliament. You can understand my
0:59:58 > 1:00:03frustration and strong feelings on this issue when the First Minister,
1:00:03 > 1:00:08in a debate that I was part of back in 2016, when she gave assurance to
1:00:08 > 1:00:12the question that she would be standing up for the children's Ward
1:00:12 > 1:00:16in Paisley. When she knew fine well that it was a matter of discussion
1:00:16 > 1:00:21and debate for the health board and the community. She said to the
1:00:21 > 1:00:26question, there are no proposals. That is a politician's Ansa, she was
1:00:26 > 1:00:32dodging it and she got round of applause at the of her question and
1:00:32 > 1:00:35her answer. The audience were convinced she was going to stand up
1:00:35 > 1:00:39for the ward. I think it is inappropriate note to say it is the
1:00:39 > 1:00:44doctors who forced her to make this decision. I therefore think that
1:00:44 > 1:00:48what she said back then was misleading the parents of sick kids
1:00:48 > 1:00:53in Paisley. That is why I felt so strongly about the issue.That is
1:00:53 > 1:00:58just a difference of words. You have swapped the word lying for a
1:00:58 > 1:01:03misleading.The presiding officer has given it a ruling. I think you
1:01:03 > 1:01:08know what I mean and you know how strongly as I feel about this issue.
1:01:08 > 1:01:13You are not withdrawing what you said?I have written to the
1:01:13 > 1:01:17presiding officer, I have made it clear I accept his judgment about
1:01:17 > 1:01:22the language. But I feel incredibly strongly about this issue. Because
1:01:22 > 1:01:25the First Minister did mislead the people of Paisley believing she was
1:01:25 > 1:01:30quick to stand up for that ward and I think those issues of integrity
1:01:30 > 1:01:34are incredibly important.This is where you get to fit on your best
1:01:34 > 1:01:41big smile. There is a full thing that people want another referendum
1:01:41 > 1:01:47on the EU? It is fantastic. You have been saying that you have had
1:01:47 > 1:01:50discussions with the SNP about your position on having another
1:01:50 > 1:01:57referendum. Have you had any meetings?Tavish Scott did have a
1:01:57 > 1:02:01meeting and they are sitting on the fence. I would rather they came of
1:02:01 > 1:02:08that fence and back what is going in popular position, to have a say on
1:02:08 > 1:02:11the final outcome of the Brexit deal. It would be sensible for them
1:02:11 > 1:02:17to do that. I suspect they are a bit too attracted to having an
1:02:17 > 1:02:21independence referendum than backing our proposal.If polls in Scotland
1:02:21 > 1:02:25swing to people saying they want another independence referendum, we
1:02:25 > 1:02:30will have the same big smile from you and you will see, yes, bring it
1:02:30 > 1:02:35on.We rejected a bad deal three years ago, I do not think we will
1:02:35 > 1:02:38have another one.Willie Rennie, thank you very much.
1:02:38 > 1:02:40Now, as local authorities across Scotland battle
1:02:40 > 1:02:42to balance their books, is it inevitable that arts
1:02:42 > 1:02:43and culture will lose out?
1:02:43 > 1:02:45Stirling Council published dozens of proposals this week aimed
1:02:45 > 1:02:48at saving around £20 million over the next five years.
1:02:48 > 1:02:50Among the projects facing funding cuts are the city's museum
1:02:50 > 1:02:51and a children's orchestra.
1:02:51 > 1:02:54The council is encouraging people to get involved in its consultation
1:02:54 > 1:02:56before any final decision are made next month.
1:02:56 > 1:03:04Katie Hunter reports.
1:03:04 > 1:03:11One, two, three.These women find sunshine singing in the sterling
1:03:11 > 1:03:19museum. The facility's funding could be cut. Doctor Victoria McBurney
1:03:19 > 1:03:28will be singing, says it is good for people's health.Cutting the arts is
1:03:28 > 1:03:33a big mistake, it is a huge mistake because the arts give us pleasure
1:03:33 > 1:03:39and they encourage creativity. If we do not have that, I really am fed up
1:03:39 > 1:03:44sending people to psychology departments and signing them offer
1:03:44 > 1:03:49stress and trying to offer them some help when they are saying, let's get
1:03:49 > 1:03:55back to creators. If you would get the first people to survive...It
1:03:55 > 1:03:59could lose almost a quarter of £1 million of council funding over the
1:03:59 > 1:04:12next five years.It was literally a big...The museum tells many stories
1:04:12 > 1:04:19of Striling's bloody past, now it faces a fight for the future.We
1:04:19 > 1:04:26have the world's oldest football, world's oldest curling stone, the
1:04:26 > 1:04:32War of Independence, you name it, we have it. If it is about Striling, it
1:04:32 > 1:04:36is here. And most of the city will -- the laws of the city will be
1:04:36 > 1:04:48enormous.It isn't just the city's museum facing cultural cuts, this is
1:04:48 > 1:04:53the wrap Lough estate, home to a project that aims to transform
1:04:53 > 1:05:01children's lives through music. -- Raploch. Big noise has been behind
1:05:01 > 1:05:06Major concerts in Scotland and beyond. It works and some of
1:05:06 > 1:05:12Scotland like most deprived communities. It could lose £200,000
1:05:12 > 1:05:18of funding by 2023, a worrying prospect for families who take part.
1:05:18 > 1:05:23Hannah, she is very musical, she enjoys it very much so. It is
1:05:23 > 1:05:25something she can do with her friends as well, Hannah is quite
1:05:25 > 1:05:35shy. When she wants to be. She comes out shell and she is quite energetic
1:05:35 > 1:05:39and I would not say loud, she is very vocal when she comes to big
1:05:39 > 1:05:45noise.What is it you like about playing the cello?Because I didn't
1:05:45 > 1:06:02want... I didn't want an oestrogen. -- -- E string. I have played in
1:06:02 > 1:06:12some... One of them I had... There were a couple of big noise all
1:06:12 > 1:06:24playing on stage. Did you play at the Albert Hall? Yes.Striling
1:06:24 > 1:06:27council needs to save £23 million over the next five years. It has set
1:06:27 > 1:06:32out dozens of areas that could be cut. The final decisions will be
1:06:32 > 1:06:37made next month. The groups we spoke to said they were sympathetic to the
1:06:37 > 1:06:42challenges the council faces. The leader says that they will not have
1:06:42 > 1:06:53to close their doors.Art and culture are very important to
1:06:53 > 1:06:57Stirling. We are determined to maintain that in the city as we move
1:06:57 > 1:07:02forward. What we have to look at, are there any potential
1:07:02 > 1:07:07efficiencies, any potential to increase income? Is their ways that
1:07:07 > 1:07:15we can improve the financial model so that the council becomes less
1:07:15 > 1:07:18exposed and we can create a more sustainable model in terms of arts
1:07:18 > 1:07:26and culture?Back at the Stirling Smith, the singers have moved into
1:07:26 > 1:07:38the sunshine. And to coin a cliche, they have made this on their own.
1:07:38 > 1:07:44Don't take our Smith away.
1:07:44 > 1:07:46Now it's time to take a look back over events,
1:07:46 > 1:07:48and forwards to those looming in the week ahead.
1:07:48 > 1:07:50Joining me now are two journalists and broadcasters -
1:07:50 > 1:07:56Lesley Riddoch and David Torrance.
1:07:56 > 1:08:00Let's start with these new allegations about the police, David
1:08:00 > 1:08:03Ford. The Scottish Government insist no actual interference happened.
1:08:03 > 1:08:08Does that get them off the hook? On the face of it, the e-mails try to
1:08:08 > 1:08:12interfere, and evidence credit here, it is to police investigations
1:08:12 > 1:08:16Commissioner was turning up to it. O'Shea the Scottish Government on
1:08:16 > 1:08:21this, that there was no interference, spectacularly misses
1:08:21 > 1:08:28the point, as the e-mails clearly show there was a anattempt, not the
1:08:28 > 1:08:33first time he has been in the news incidentally. As you say, the
1:08:33 > 1:08:40Commissioner has had a clear no to that attempt. An attempt to
1:08:40 > 1:08:45influence the timescale, not a musty conclusions. But it is yet another
1:08:45 > 1:08:51example of civil servants going beyond their remit and behaving
1:08:51 > 1:08:55quite politically.Why do they do things like this? Would it not be
1:08:55 > 1:08:59better to just not bother? The report came out and it was not much
1:08:59 > 1:09:05of a fuss about it.I bothered to look back at what the complete audit
1:09:05 > 1:09:09said, and it baffles me about journalism in Scotland that we end
1:09:09 > 1:09:14getting so hung up on these particular personal details when
1:09:14 > 1:09:18really there is some substantial points in that. Not enough
1:09:18 > 1:09:25explanation on how the SBA, who are meant to be the watchdog for the
1:09:25 > 1:09:28police, the standards authority. There was no information or
1:09:28 > 1:09:33explanation about how they reached decisions, the average time to
1:09:33 > 1:09:36resolve something is excessive. The public having to produce evidence
1:09:36 > 1:09:39regarding complaints is not appropriate. There is no guidance
1:09:39 > 1:09:44about whistle-blowing. That would worry me as a... That is the framing
1:09:44 > 1:09:51of our police system.There clearly was on the face of it, and we know
1:09:51 > 1:09:55these e-mails are genuine, an attempt by the Scottish Government
1:09:55 > 1:10:00to say, could you delay this?Having looked at that, they seem to be
1:10:00 > 1:10:03suggesting that you can actually find a different way that is less
1:10:03 > 1:10:08public to resolve this instead are published yet. Before the big
1:10:08 > 1:10:11investigation that is going on it to the Chief Constable. I don't know
1:10:11 > 1:10:16whether that really washes very well, but I also don't know how long
1:10:16 > 1:10:21this interest in the quite pernickety business of these details
1:10:21 > 1:10:25of timing will continue. I don't know that Michael Matheson's jacket
1:10:25 > 1:10:32is a shaky peg.This seems to be dragging on for ever. There is now a
1:10:32 > 1:10:37big row surrounding Police Scotland. Obviously that does not affect
1:10:37 > 1:10:43policing on a day-to-day level, but surely this has to be sorted out and
1:10:43 > 1:10:48quickly.It does. Having written a couple of articles about Police
1:10:48 > 1:10:50Scotland myself when of its considerable worry about the control
1:10:50 > 1:10:54room is not responding properly to urgent calls, there is also worries
1:10:54 > 1:11:01about 40-50 stations being closed. It is overcentralised, and I
1:11:01 > 1:11:05completely agree with Willie Rennie, there is not the underpinning of any
1:11:05 > 1:11:09local accountability. Because I used to be able to be the one that hired
1:11:09 > 1:11:12and fired chief constables, now they are way beyond reach and that system
1:11:12 > 1:11:17is one that the Scottish Government set up, a lot of police on the beat
1:11:17 > 1:11:25want to see and broken back up into 34 units.David, could Willie Rennie
1:11:25 > 1:11:30gallop to the rescue on the Scottish budget? The significance of what he
1:11:30 > 1:11:35was saying, his commands I say more moderate than the demands of last
1:11:35 > 1:11:39Sunday, Patrick Harvie on this programme basically demanding tens
1:11:39 > 1:11:44of millions of pounds. It was less clear that Willie Rennie is
1:11:44 > 1:11:48demanding that.It was clear in that interview that Willie Rennie was
1:11:48 > 1:11:53trying to keep the negotiations giving, on that front. I suspect he
1:11:53 > 1:11:59is pushing an open door. I have spoken to some SNP MSPs, one who'd
1:11:59 > 1:12:03used the phrase about finding a new dance partner, which I thought was
1:12:03 > 1:12:08quite amusing. In relation to those budget negotiations, and a lot of
1:12:08 > 1:12:11nationalist find the Greens quite tricky to deal with. I think Willie
1:12:11 > 1:12:15Rennie is probably aware of that. The interesting thing is that it is
1:12:15 > 1:12:18a reminder that this is a menorah to Government, and it often gets
1:12:18 > 1:12:24overlooked. In the first term, back in 2007, there was this sort of
1:12:24 > 1:12:27dance that took place quite frequently over the budget
1:12:27 > 1:12:33negotiations.Your referendum, Jeremy Corbyn this morning on
1:12:33 > 1:12:39television was absolutely adamant that Labour will not back another
1:12:39 > 1:12:43poll.The poll was showing a majority of a second referendum, but
1:12:43 > 1:12:47when you break it down, Labour voters, young people and Scots are
1:12:47 > 1:12:54the three groups who support for domain has increased.It also showed
1:12:54 > 1:12:58that there might be a tiny majority for domain, but certainly not enough
1:12:58 > 1:13:06that could be changed.I wrote something about this myself, do not
1:13:06 > 1:13:09go for a second referendum, because this was an advisory referendum,
1:13:09 > 1:13:14every time that a referendum takes place our Parliamentary sovereignty,
1:13:14 > 1:13:18you weaken an already weakened idea in British politics. The MPs need to
1:13:18 > 1:13:24stand up and do something here. You look at the Midlands, the big areas
1:13:24 > 1:13:30that were in favour of leaving, it is still so.If Jeremy Corbyn is
1:13:30 > 1:13:35saying no and the Conservatives are saying no, it is not a runner.The
1:13:35 > 1:13:39SNP have made noises in favour of it, but they are still not gone as
1:13:39 > 1:13:44far as backing it.Willie Rennie's meetings do not seemed getting far.
1:13:44 > 1:13:49I think the point is salient. The figures show a chef, I wonder how
1:13:49 > 1:13:54strongly voters actually feel about the idea of a second referendum.As
1:13:54 > 1:13:59they rank it? Other things like the NHS are more important.They might
1:13:59 > 1:14:02say yes if boost, but do they at least feel strongly about it? I
1:14:02 > 1:14:04suspect not.
1:14:04 > 1:14:06That's all from the us this week.
1:14:06 > 1:14:08I'll be back on Wednesday with Politics Scotland.
1:14:08 > 1:14:16Until then, goodbye.