0:00:37 > 0:00:39Morning, everyone, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.
0:00:39 > 0:00:40I'm Sarah Smith.
0:00:40 > 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 the
0:00:45 > 0:00:46world of politics.
0:00:46 > 0:00:48After all the waiting we're finally going to hear
0:00:48 > 0:00:52the Prime Minister's vision for Britain's future relationship
0:00:52 > 0:00:54with the European Union, but not for another couple of weeks.
0:00:54 > 0:00:58We'll look at what she might say.
0:00:58 > 0:01:01Key to any agreement will be whether we should bind our customs'
0:01:01 > 0:01:04arrangements closely to the EU, or strike out on our own.
0:01:04 > 0:01:07We'll speak to leading figures from both sides of the argument.
0:01:07 > 0:01:10And Labour argue public ownership of services
0:01:10 > 0:01:13like the railways are an "economic necessity".
0:01:13 > 0:01:17We'll look at how the policy could work
0:01:17 > 0:01:19Coming up on Sunday Politics Scotland:
0:01:19 > 0:01:21The Scottish Government has been accused of going AWOL over
0:01:21 > 0:01:23the East Coast Mainline franchise.
0:01:23 > 0:01:26We'll be asking Humza Yousaf about transport strategy.
0:01:33 > 0:01:35Who needs the Winter Olympics when there's plenty
0:01:35 > 0:01:37of thrills, spills and potential wipeouts in the world
0:01:37 > 0:01:42of Westminster.
0:01:42 > 0:01:45And with me today are three experts who may very well go off piste:
0:01:45 > 0:01:48Tom Newton Dunn from the Sun, the Guardian's Zoe Williams
0:01:48 > 0:01:49and Iain Martin from the Times.
0:01:49 > 0:01:52So we hear that Theresa May will finally be giving her
0:01:52 > 0:01:54vision of a Brexit deal in the next few weeks.
0:01:54 > 0:01:57The news follows Mrs May hosting two Brexit cabinet meetings this week
0:01:57 > 0:01:59in an attempt to thrash out the government's
0:01:59 > 0:02:00negotiating position.
0:02:00 > 0:02:02If reports are to be believed not much was decided,
0:02:02 > 0:02:05and so there will now have to be a team building session
0:02:05 > 0:02:07at the prime minister's country residence Chequers.
0:02:07 > 0:02:10Maybe a few trust exercises will be in order.
0:02:10 > 0:02:14At the moment however we're none the wiser and the EU's Chief
0:02:14 > 0:02:18Negotiator Michel Barnier seems less than impressed.
0:02:18 > 0:02:21To start the week the EU chief negotiator, Michel Barnier,
0:02:21 > 0:02:26made a trip to Downing Street with Brexit secretary David Davis.
0:02:26 > 0:02:29Pleasantries with the PM, but the warning was clear.
0:02:29 > 0:02:35Time has come to make choice.
0:02:35 > 0:02:38All week the question was, are the Cabinet running
0:02:38 > 0:02:43away from making tough decisions on Brexit?
0:02:43 > 0:02:47As America woke up, the President took a pop at the
0:02:47 > 0:02:49National Health Service on Twitter.
0:02:49 > 0:02:51But was it all fake news?
0:02:51 > 0:02:55The Health Secretary hit back.
0:02:55 > 0:02:58The Transport Secretary, Chris Grayling, told the Commons
0:02:58 > 0:03:01that yet again the East Coast mainline franchise had failed,
0:03:01 > 0:03:05with renationalisation an option.
0:03:05 > 0:03:07While tensions in the Conservative Party on Brexit
0:03:07 > 0:03:15were on full display.
0:03:17 > 0:03:19One leading Tory Remainer did not hold back.
0:03:19 > 0:03:2135 hard ideological Brexiteers who are not Tories.
0:03:21 > 0:03:25It's about time Theresa May stood up to them and slung them out.
0:03:25 > 0:03:27On Tuesday, deeds and words, MPs celebrated 100 years since
0:03:27 > 0:03:31some women were given the vote.
0:03:31 > 0:03:37Westminster awash with suffragette colours purple, green, and white.
0:03:37 > 0:03:39Wednesday and Thursday, the Brexit War Cabinet settled
0:03:39 > 0:03:41in for crunch talks.
0:03:41 > 0:03:44They were meant to decide what the end state should look like.
0:03:44 > 0:03:45Breakthrough?
0:03:45 > 0:03:47Not yet.
0:03:47 > 0:03:50Also on Thursday, a leaked EU paper warned that the UK's single market
0:03:50 > 0:03:53access in the Brexit transition period could be revoked
0:03:53 > 0:03:56in the event of a dispute.
0:03:56 > 0:03:57Discourteous?
0:03:57 > 0:03:59The Brexit secretary thought so.
0:03:59 > 0:04:00It's not in good faith.
0:04:00 > 0:04:03We think it's unwise to publish that.
0:04:03 > 0:04:05The week ended as it began, with more warnings
0:04:05 > 0:04:08from Michel Barnier on Ireland, the customs union,
0:04:08 > 0:04:11and continuing EU UK disputes.
0:04:11 > 0:04:18If this disagreement persists, the transition is not a given.
0:04:18 > 0:04:22So, at the end of a busy week why not let off steam with a glass
0:04:22 > 0:04:24or two of Brexit juice, that's English sparkling wine
0:04:24 > 0:04:27to you and me, at the annual Conservative fundraiser the black
0:04:27 > 0:04:30and white ball.
0:04:30 > 0:04:32The highest bid of the night?
0:04:32 > 0:04:40£55,000 to spend a day with the PM.
0:04:43 > 0:04:47We could not afford to get her on to this programme but we will talk to
0:04:47 > 0:04:50our panel of experts to find out what is going on behind the
0:04:50 > 0:04:56headlines. Iain Martin, by now we thought we would know more about the
0:04:56 > 0:05:00government's final negotiating position. We had two Brexit
0:05:00 > 0:05:04subcommittee meetings this week. They were meant to come to a
0:05:04 > 0:05:10conclusion I thought. Are we any further forward?No. It is possible
0:05:10 > 0:05:15this is a cunning baldric style plan to make Britain look as confused as
0:05:15 > 0:05:22possible.A very, very cunning plan. Very cunning. But the chances of
0:05:22 > 0:05:27that are highly unlikely. It seems the meeting has happened, there was
0:05:27 > 0:05:30discussion, the Prime Minister did not express an opinion. The Prime
0:05:30 > 0:05:35Minister was more interested in secrecy and in fear of a leak, but
0:05:35 > 0:05:40it seems there was not much to leak anyway, because there was not a
0:05:40 > 0:05:47decision. Actually, the UK's closer to a position than people commonly
0:05:47 > 0:05:52understand, definitely out of the single market, but on this crucial
0:05:52 > 0:05:58question of the customs union, or a customs agreement after, there is
0:05:58 > 0:06:03still no decision taken. I think the feeling at Westminster, people on
0:06:03 > 0:06:08both sides of the argument seems to be will someone decide, make the
0:06:08 > 0:06:12case and then get stuck into the talks which lets remember our
0:06:12 > 0:06:17supposed to begin in six or seven weeks' time.This Brexit
0:06:17 > 0:06:21subcommittee is split between Brexiteers and Remainers. The Prime
0:06:21 > 0:06:25Minister sits in the middle we understand not really expressing a
0:06:25 > 0:06:29view, that is put together for careful political reasons but it
0:06:29 > 0:06:33cannot continue, can it?I think the presentation at the minute cannot
0:06:33 > 0:06:40come to a decision because they have not done their homework, student
0:06:40 > 0:06:44essay style crisis conclusion and in the case of David Davis you could
0:06:44 > 0:06:49believe that is true but the main reason they cannot come together is
0:06:49 > 0:06:54because of an implacable deadlock. There is no compromise between in
0:06:54 > 0:06:58the customs union or not in the customs union. One side has to
0:06:58 > 0:07:03vanquish the other. The Remainers really have to think it would be
0:07:03 > 0:07:07economic suicide to leave the customs union but they are also
0:07:07 > 0:07:13really aware that this deadlock is grinding government to halt. It is
0:07:13 > 0:07:17national duty pulling them in two directions. They will ultimately be
0:07:17 > 0:07:22the ones to say I do not want to cut the baby in half, you have the baby.
0:07:22 > 0:07:26At some point it will have to go to the country because it is a stupid
0:07:26 > 0:07:31idea to cut a baby in half expect what will happen for the Prime
0:07:31 > 0:07:36Minister who will have to make a decision for the kind Brexit she has
0:07:36 > 0:07:41advocated?She will do that and the danger is huge. She will have to get
0:07:41 > 0:07:46off the perch at some point. We have been sitting in these chairs for 20
0:07:46 > 0:07:49months saying the Prime Minister has to choose between prioritising
0:07:49 > 0:07:53market access and prioritise and sovereignty. That is the simple
0:07:53 > 0:07:57case. You may get a bit of both out of the EU but you will get more of
0:07:57 > 0:08:03one than the other. I think interestingly, there is a lot of
0:08:03 > 0:08:06movement going on under the surface which Number Ten are desperate not
0:08:06 > 0:08:11to show any of the machinations of it because they want to present a
0:08:11 > 0:08:14complete finished article. There is some sense of consensus growing in
0:08:14 > 0:08:22the Brexit community I am told, not to sign off on a customs union but
0:08:22 > 0:08:27to sign off on a semi-single market alignment, soap aligning with all
0:08:27 > 0:08:30the single market rules on manufactured goods is what I am told
0:08:30 > 0:08:35they are beginning to agree to do, which they feel they should do
0:08:35 > 0:08:38because British companies will go ahead and stand by all the EU
0:08:38 > 0:08:44regulations because that is what they want to continue to sell into
0:08:44 > 0:08:47the EU. There are some members of the committee who are opposed to
0:08:47 > 0:08:52this. Boris Johnson is the main one. If they do agree to allow heavily on
0:08:52 > 0:08:55manufactured goods but not on services, in other words they choose
0:08:55 > 0:09:02what to Jerry picked and can agree what to cherish pick -- cherry pick,
0:09:02 > 0:09:06but if they choose what to align on Ben Boris Johnson has do make a
0:09:06 > 0:09:13decision himself.
0:09:13 > 0:09:15decision himself. We could potentially see some Cabinet
0:09:15 > 0:09:18resignations and I put Boris Johnson at the head of it in two or three
0:09:18 > 0:09:27weeks' time. That is the root of the potential compromise.On services,
0:09:27 > 0:09:34on financial services, there is not a functioning single market. The
0:09:34 > 0:09:39question comes down to manufactured goods. A lot of the regulations have
0:09:39 > 0:09:43their origins in global standards, something like the car industry. Is
0:09:43 > 0:09:48Boris Johnson going to find himself in a position where he will die in a
0:09:48 > 0:09:53ditch over trying to make the UK diverged from globally set standards
0:09:53 > 0:09:58on carburettors? It would be an interesting position if he does.It
0:09:58 > 0:10:04sounds ridiculous but it also sounds like the sort of thing he will do.
0:10:04 > 0:10:08We will come back to this later in the programme.
0:10:08 > 0:10:11As it's still not clear what the government wants its final
0:10:11 > 0:10:13relationship with the EU will look like, we thought we'd
0:10:13 > 0:10:16try to help out by looking in detail at the key dilemma,
0:10:16 > 0:10:18when it comes to working out a customs arrangement,
0:10:18 > 0:10:21should we hug the EU close, or break out on our own?
0:10:21 > 0:10:24We've lined up two politicians from either side of the argument
0:10:24 > 0:10:25and, just for a change, they'll be asking
0:10:25 > 0:10:26the questions not me.
0:10:26 > 0:10:30So I'm joined by the soon to be former Conservative MEP and leading
0:10:30 > 0:10:32figure in the Leave campaign Daniel Hannan and by the former
0:10:32 > 0:10:34Labour frontbencher and supporter of Open Britain Seema Malhotra.
0:10:34 > 0:10:38Earlier this morning we tossed a coin to see who would go first.
0:10:38 > 0:10:41Daniel Hannan won and he agreed that he would go first.
0:10:41 > 0:10:43So here with thoughts on what our end
0:10:43 > 0:10:48relationship should be.
0:10:48 > 0:10:5290% of the world's economic growth over the next 15 years will come
0:10:52 > 0:10:57from outside the European Union. Britain is a maritime nation, linked
0:10:57 > 0:11:01to the world's fastest-growing economies by language, law, culture
0:11:01 > 0:11:06and kinship. But we cannot sign trade deals, not while we are in the
0:11:06 > 0:11:10EU's customs union. Staying in the customs union after we leave, would
0:11:10 > 0:11:15be the worst of all worlds. It would give Brussels 100% of our trade
0:11:15 > 0:11:22policy with 0% input from us. In order to take advantage of Brexit,
0:11:22 > 0:11:27we need to set our own regulations. Sometimes, for reasons of economies
0:11:27 > 0:11:31of scale, we might want to match what the EU is doing. If we do want
0:11:31 > 0:11:35to keep elements of the single market, it must be through agreement
0:11:35 > 0:11:40and on a case-by-case basis. In 1980, the states now in the European
0:11:40 > 0:11:47Union counted for 30% of the world's GDP. Today that figure is 15% and
0:11:47 > 0:11:54falling. Britain needs to raise its size. Our future bright, our future
0:11:54 > 0:11:55is global.
0:11:55 > 0:11:57Well, Seema and Dan are with me now.
0:11:57 > 0:12:03And just to explain the rules.
0:12:03 > 0:12:09Seema Malhotra has five minutes to interrogate down.This week a Tory
0:12:09 > 0:12:13MP said I think the real concern about the direction of travel when
0:12:13 > 0:12:17it comes to Brexit, we are to real crunch point and the government has
0:12:17 > 0:12:23not worked out 19 months on what the endgame is and we need to know. That
0:12:23 > 0:12:28is pretty clear, isn't it? You and others said Brexit will be easy so
0:12:28 > 0:12:36why is this the case?Nothing worthwhile is ever easy. I do not
0:12:36 > 0:12:41accept that the government has not made it position clear. It made it
0:12:41 > 0:12:46clear in Lancaster House beach and a series of white papers since. As
0:12:46 > 0:12:50Theresa May says we want to keep control of our laws, taxes and
0:12:50 > 0:12:53borders. But within that, we want to have the closest possible
0:12:53 > 0:12:57relationship with the rest of the EU, compatible with being a
0:12:57 > 0:13:04sovereign country. We want to be its best friend and ally. We will align
0:13:04 > 0:13:08with other countries but on our own terms.Things are not going
0:13:08 > 0:13:12according to plan. You and others said we will be keeping key
0:13:12 > 0:13:17agencies. David Davis said we would keep the agencies but now they are
0:13:17 > 0:13:21leaving. The European medicines agency is heading for Amsterdam, the
0:13:21 > 0:13:26European banking agency will go to Paris. That is 2000 highly skilled
0:13:26 > 0:13:32jobs being lost from the capital. Isn't this a high price we are
0:13:32 > 0:13:41paying for certainty?If you're that fixated on Eurocrats jobs then you
0:13:41 > 0:13:45there is something wrong with your priorities. All of the worries we
0:13:45 > 0:13:49had about job losses turned out to be nonsense. Instead of losing half
0:13:49 > 0:13:53a million, we have gained half a million. More people are working
0:13:53 > 0:13:58than ever before. I never claimed we would be keeping these Euro agencies
0:13:58 > 0:14:02in the UK. Of course if you leave the EU you leave these Euro agencies
0:14:02 > 0:14:09and you no longer have them on our soil. We will make our own
0:14:09 > 0:14:13regulations.You are calling these agencies Eurocrats, these are people
0:14:13 > 0:14:19helping with key sectors of our economy, scientists, those who are
0:14:19 > 0:14:22experts in finance and other sectors. I agree that Britain could
0:14:22 > 0:14:26trade more with the world and we need to, but evidence of leaks from
0:14:26 > 0:14:30the government this week shows that the impact of free trade deals
0:14:30 > 0:14:34around the world will no way compensate for the loss of trade
0:14:34 > 0:14:39with the EU which a hard Brexit would do for the UK. If you don't
0:14:39 > 0:14:43believe me, you can listen to the words of the Prime Minister who said
0:14:43 > 0:14:46during the referendum we export more to Ireland than we do to China,
0:14:46 > 0:14:52twice as much to Belgium as we do to India, it is not realistic to think
0:14:52 > 0:14:56we could replace European trade than these markets.We export more to
0:14:56 > 0:15:02Ireland than China, that is our problem! Which is the better
0:15:02 > 0:15:04long-term growth prospects?Don't you agree that there will be an
0:15:04 > 0:15:07impact on British businesses and families even in the short term and
0:15:07 > 0:15:12isn't it right that you raise that risk with the British people?
0:15:12 > 0:15:15Obviously we want free and frictionless trade with the EU and
0:15:15 > 0:15:22the freedom to my trade deals further of broad. EU does not have a
0:15:22 > 0:15:31trade deal with US, with India and old friends like Australia, the idea
0:15:31 > 0:15:35that we cannot do trade deals and bring benefits to this country I
0:15:35 > 0:15:39think is incredibly defeatist. Are we really saying it is a good idea
0:15:39 > 0:15:43to sell more to Ireland with five mil in people than to China with
0:15:43 > 0:15:49more than a billion. -- 5 million people.Their study after study
0:15:49 > 0:15:53which shows the proximity we have two nations goes a long way to
0:15:53 > 0:15:57determining our economic links, that is not just the case for us but for
0:15:57 > 0:16:04countries around the world. Of course we can do more. We have a
0:16:04 > 0:16:10trade surplus with the US already. I have spoken to investors from other
0:16:10 > 0:16:13countries who say they want to come and do more in the UK but the point
0:16:13 > 0:16:17is, part of the reason they do that is because we have access and they
0:16:17 > 0:16:21have access to the European markets of 500 million people to sell those
0:16:21 > 0:16:26goods as well. What do you say to the genuine concerns from Nissan and
0:16:26 > 0:16:29Honda, now even the Japanese ambassador talking about a challenge
0:16:29 > 0:16:32to the profitability of those companies in the UK, and the threat
0:16:32 > 0:16:38they may have to leave those operations and go elsewhere?They
0:16:38 > 0:16:41made those threats during the referendum and after the vote was in
0:16:41 > 0:16:45they confirmed that not only were they staying here but Nissan was
0:16:45 > 0:16:48increasing its productivity and activity in the UK. I think you
0:16:48 > 0:16:51should look at what they are doing rather than what they are saying.
0:16:51 > 0:16:55This idea that we are defined by our geography is an old-fashioned
0:16:55 > 0:16:5918th-century way of looking at trade. In the modern age where we
0:16:59 > 0:17:04have low freight costs, the Internet and cheap flights, geographical
0:17:04 > 0:17:09proximity has never mattered less. We are linked by language, law,
0:17:09 > 0:17:11cultural, legal systems and accountancy systems to the fastest
0:17:11 > 0:17:18growing con is the planet.
0:17:19 > 0:17:22I would like to ask you, you have set all your vision for how you
0:17:22 > 0:17:26would like to see our future relationship with the EU. How
0:17:26 > 0:17:29confident are you the Prime Minister will outline a clear vision soon and
0:17:29 > 0:17:34it will outline with Ewels?She's outlined the broad principles
0:17:34 > 0:17:39already. -- with yours. Fleshing out issues like how to make the Irish
0:17:39 > 0:17:43border were, how to make the facilitation of customs work. This
0:17:43 > 0:17:46thing nobody has explained what we can do in terms of customs is not
0:17:46 > 0:17:50true. The government produced a lengthy paper talking about how we
0:17:50 > 0:17:58can do things like expand the ... It's worth noting that both ahead of
0:17:58 > 0:18:02HMR see here and his equivalent in the Republic of Ireland have said
0:18:02 > 0:18:05there is no need for a Customs border, that companies can make
0:18:05 > 0:18:10their customs declarations in the way they make their tax
0:18:10 > 0:18:13declarations. They are now emphatically not choosing to listen
0:18:13 > 0:18:16to the experts when they say they don't need a hard order in Ireland.
0:18:16 > 0:18:20Thanks.
0:18:20 > 0:18:23Now it's the turn of Seema to be grilled but first,
0:18:23 > 0:18:25here's her thoughts on how our future relationship
0:18:25 > 0:18:26with the EU should look.
0:18:26 > 0:18:31I respect the result of the referendum. We need to move forward
0:18:31 > 0:18:37to find a deal that protects jobs in the economy. 43% of all of our trade
0:18:37 > 0:18:42is done with the EU. Staying inside the customs union gives us tariff
0:18:42 > 0:18:47free trade access to our many new partners. Issues surrounding
0:18:47 > 0:18:50immigration and sovereignty can be addressed while staying in the
0:18:50 > 0:18:54customs union and the single market. But on terms that we negotiate. We
0:18:54 > 0:18:59can also then trade freely with countries the EU has deals with.
0:18:59 > 0:19:05Deals that we have helped negotiate. And staying in the customs union is
0:19:05 > 0:19:09key to a solution on Ireland. Our select committee found that it is
0:19:09 > 0:19:14unclear how we can avoid a hardboard if we leave the customs union. I
0:19:14 > 0:19:17agree we need reform and greater controls on the freedom of movement,
0:19:17 > 0:19:21but people did not vote to become poorer. Let's leave the European
0:19:21 > 0:19:24Union in a way that puts the prosperity of families and
0:19:24 > 0:19:28businesses first.
0:19:28 > 0:19:29So as before you have five minutes to give a grilling.
0:19:29 > 0:19:31Off you go.
0:19:31 > 0:19:37Two weeks ago Jeremy Corbyn says said he was against staying in the
0:19:37 > 0:19:41customs union because it is protectionist against developing
0:19:41 > 0:19:44countries, do you agree?It's important to balance what we do need
0:19:44 > 0:19:48to see change in terms of international trade and support for
0:19:48 > 0:19:51developing countries. But also to recognise the contribution that
0:19:51 > 0:19:54being in the customs union and the European Union has made for our
0:19:54 > 0:20:00prosperity...Do you agree with Jeremy Corbyn?I think that a lot
0:20:00 > 0:20:03has been done to support development, International
0:20:03 > 0:20:06development...Forgive me, that's a different question... We're not
0:20:06 > 0:20:11talking about that, do you agree that the customs union is
0:20:11 > 0:20:13protectionist against developing countries?It can be for those
0:20:13 > 0:20:20countries that are in the customs union. That's very understood
0:20:20 > 0:20:26economics. It encourages trade creation and development between
0:20:26 > 0:20:30those countries, but it doesn't preclude, as has been shown by the
0:20:30 > 0:20:34over 60 trade agreements we have is a European Union with countries
0:20:34 > 0:20:36around the rolled, from having strong relationships with other
0:20:36 > 0:20:41countries. That's what I believe. -- countries around the world.There
0:20:41 > 0:20:46are lots of things we do not produce ourselves. We have to impose tariffs
0:20:46 > 0:20:51on oranges. In yours and my constituencies there are not orange
0:20:51 > 0:20:55plantations. Is it a reasonable thing that to protect Mediterranean
0:20:55 > 0:20:59orange growers we should be discriminating against producers in
0:20:59 > 0:21:03Africa, the Americas, developing countries, at a cost our own
0:21:03 > 0:21:07consumers?I believe what you can do is negotiate across the world in
0:21:07 > 0:21:10terms of how you encourage greater free trade and greater ways in which
0:21:10 > 0:21:15we can trade with different nations. That's what we do also already. We
0:21:15 > 0:21:20had no Norma 's track record in investing in farmers in Africa...On
0:21:20 > 0:21:26that point... -- we have had an enormous track record. That means we
0:21:26 > 0:21:29are giving Brussels total control of our trade policies but we are no
0:21:29 > 0:21:34longer EU members so we have no control.Almost 50% of our trade is
0:21:34 > 0:21:42with the EU. Over 70% of the companies... Over 70% of companies
0:21:42 > 0:21:45that export to the EU, that is jobs your constituents and my
0:21:45 > 0:21:50constituents will be dependent on, over 90% of that being small and
0:21:50 > 0:21:54medium-size enterprises. They look...I'm not having much joy
0:21:54 > 0:21:58getting answers to my questions. You are going off on a tangent. Let me
0:21:58 > 0:22:02have another go.I'm saying we can do both and that is what we should
0:22:02 > 0:22:07be doing.You think leaving the EU but staying in the customs union so
0:22:07 > 0:22:13Brussels controls 100% of our
0:22:14 > 0:22:16Brussels controls 100% of our trade but we have zero input... You think
0:22:16 > 0:22:18that gives us more influence in world trade than taking our own
0:22:18 > 0:22:21voice and vote in the world trade organisation and be able to do our
0:22:21 > 0:22:25own deals, is that what you are saying?When you talk about the WTO
0:22:25 > 0:22:29rules, if you look at the government's analysis which was an
0:22:29 > 0:22:33average of other studies, it shows even in the South East if there is a
0:22:33 > 0:22:36withdrawal based on...I'm going to have one more go to get an answer
0:22:36 > 0:22:39because you are telling me lots of interesting things which are nothing
0:22:39 > 0:22:44to do with what I'm asking. Let me have another go... The highest
0:22:44 > 0:22:50tariffs imposed by the customs union are on the items that most
0:22:50 > 0:22:55negatively impact people on low incomes, particularly food,
0:22:55 > 0:22:59clothing, and footwear. They pay a proportionately higher chunk of
0:22:59 > 0:23:00their weekly Budget on these commodities, these basic things.
0:23:00 > 0:23:05They are the most badly hit. We are clobbering poor people in this
0:23:05 > 0:23:09country in order to hurt developing nations. How can you come as a
0:23:09 > 0:23:12progressive politician with a proud history of standing up for people
0:23:12 > 0:23:16who are underprivileged, now stand there and defend a system that
0:23:16 > 0:23:21forces us to give more to wealthy French farmers than poor African
0:23:21 > 0:23:24farmers, and forces the highest bills to be paid by the lowest
0:23:24 > 0:23:28income people in Britain?I will fundamentally disagree with you. I
0:23:28 > 0:23:32believe being a member of the EU has been fundamental for our prosperity,
0:23:32 > 0:23:37for families and businesses. What you fail to highlight is numerous
0:23:37 > 0:23:43studies that show many British families are worse off as a result
0:23:43 > 0:23:46of us having had the referendum and now the uncertainty that is
0:23:46 > 0:23:54followed. People have already suffered. -- that has followed.You
0:23:54 > 0:24:00are still not answering. Let me have another crack at this. The countries
0:24:00 > 0:24:03closest to the EU economically. The countries that have opted to
0:24:03 > 0:24:08parallel or join the single market Norway, Switzerland, Iceland,
0:24:08 > 0:24:11Liechtenstein, none of them is interested in joining the customs
0:24:11 > 0:24:16union. Why do you think that is? They have separate arrangements.
0:24:16 > 0:24:19They have arrangements with each other. They have ways of resolving
0:24:19 > 0:24:23disputes. It is like a mini European Union in the way that they work
0:24:23 > 0:24:29together. I believe that we could consider approaching those countries
0:24:29 > 0:24:32to see whether that would be an arrangement that could work for
0:24:32 > 0:24:37Britain.That would mean leaving the customs union, right?Potentially
0:24:37 > 0:24:41alongside how we negotiate being in the customs union. Fundamental for
0:24:41 > 0:24:44peace in Northern Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement. It's not just
0:24:44 > 0:24:48me saying that, it's the Irish government, the head of the Irish
0:24:48 > 0:24:54police, and the Irish people.Time is up. Thank you for your questions.
0:24:54 > 0:24:57What you are advocating is not Labour policy. Do you believe you
0:24:57 > 0:25:02will change the mind of Jeremy Corbyn?You know there is a debate
0:25:02 > 0:25:10going on in the Labour Party. That is not unexpected, because as the
0:25:10 > 0:25:13situation changes, as new facts come to light, as we have to consider
0:25:13 > 0:25:17what life will be like with the end state post the transition, we will
0:25:17 > 0:25:21have that debate. It is certainly the case that the range of views
0:25:21 > 0:25:24across the Labour Party are far less in terms of the spectrum of what's
0:25:24 > 0:25:29going on in the Conservative Party. The fundamental issue is we have a
0:25:29 > 0:25:33Prime Minister and cabinet that have no idea about end state. They have
0:25:33 > 0:25:37failed to reach any sort of agreement after two days away this
0:25:37 > 0:25:43week. And I think it is embarrassing for us as a nation that 19 months
0:25:43 > 0:25:47after the referendum we are in such disarray.Thank you both very much
0:25:47 > 0:25:49for coming in and asking the questions.
0:25:49 > 0:25:52And those of you in the South of England will be lucky
0:25:52 > 0:25:55enough to see more of Dan Hannan as he'll be appearing
0:25:55 > 0:25:57in the Sunday Politics South in just over ten minutes.
0:25:57 > 0:25:59And you can find more Brexit analysis
0:25:59 > 0:26:01and explanation on the BBC website, at bbc.co.uk/Brexit.
0:26:01 > 0:26:03The recent collapse of Carillion and the ending
0:26:03 > 0:26:05of the East Coast Rail franchise early has emboldened the
0:26:05 > 0:26:08Labour Party to push its agenda for renationalising key services
0:26:08 > 0:26:09such as rail, water and energy.
0:26:09 > 0:26:12But that's not all, the party is looking into supporting local
0:26:12 > 0:26:14economies by helping councils do things like bringing
0:26:14 > 0:26:16more services in house, using local small businesses
0:26:16 > 0:26:22where possible and helping to set up new small scale energy companies.
0:26:22 > 0:26:25So, is the plan workable, and can it help Labour shed
0:26:25 > 0:26:28the image that more state control will lead to inefficiency and a lack
0:26:28 > 0:26:29of innovation and investment?
0:26:29 > 0:26:31Elizabeth Glinka has travelled to Preston,
0:26:31 > 0:26:33a Labour council the party are championing as a model
0:26:33 > 0:26:41for the future, to find out more.
0:26:48 > 0:26:52When he visited in the 1850s car Marks said industrial Preston might
0:26:52 > 0:26:57be the staging post for an economic revolution. It's taken 160 years but
0:26:57 > 0:27:04he may have been onto. -- Karl Marx said.Preston described in the press
0:27:04 > 0:27:10as a pilgrimage for London folk. LAUGHTER
0:27:10 > 0:27:15The Shadow Chancellor just dropping in this week to heap praise on
0:27:15 > 0:27:21Preston's new locally focused economic plan. Nowhere is that plan
0:27:21 > 0:27:26more visible than at the city's trendy undercover market. Traders
0:27:26 > 0:27:31rush to finish their new stalls ahead of next week's reopening. The
0:27:31 > 0:27:35so-called Preston model borrows heavily from similar schemes in the
0:27:35 > 0:27:39American rust belt. It installs the virtues of keeping more services
0:27:39 > 0:27:43in-house using worker let cooperatives. And when it comes to
0:27:43 > 0:27:49big contracts like the redevelopment of this beautiful Victorian market,
0:27:49 > 0:27:53they go not to the overextended big boys like a religion but to smaller,
0:27:53 > 0:28:01local firms, keeping the money in the area. -- like Carillion but to
0:28:01 > 0:28:05smaller, local firms. Matt Brown, a local boy motivated by what he saw
0:28:05 > 0:28:10as the continued decline of a once great city, is behind this.We came
0:28:10 > 0:28:14to the conclusion that a fightback we've got to do it ourselves. We
0:28:14 > 0:28:17cannot be dependent on central government that is cutting back on
0:28:17 > 0:28:22money. The public sector is pretty much buying locally from local
0:28:22 > 0:28:26suppliers. We are looking to form cooperatives. We're selling our own
0:28:26 > 0:28:30energy in partnership with other councils. Pensions are invested
0:28:30 > 0:28:36locally. These alternatives around the world. In American cities like
0:28:36 > 0:28:38York, Cleveland, and Barcelona, people are waking up to the fact
0:28:38 > 0:28:43that we have an economy that works for the top 1%. -- like New York and
0:28:43 > 0:28:48Cleveland. And the rest of us are basically fighting for the scraps.
0:28:48 > 0:28:52Under the model the council has spent an additional £4 million
0:28:52 > 0:28:58locally since 2012. It has also persuaded universities and hospitals
0:28:58 > 0:29:02to redirect their spending towards local suppliers. And it isn't just
0:29:02 > 0:29:05Preston, a number of other Labour authorities are trying something
0:29:05 > 0:29:10new.We have local councils now that have set up energy companies to
0:29:10 > 0:29:15provide cheaper, renewable energy foot we have others running bus
0:29:15 > 0:29:22networks. -- cheaper, renewable energy and we have others running
0:29:22 > 0:29:25bus networks. It is a way of getting best value for money as well as
0:29:25 > 0:29:31Democratic controlled of services. Your critics might say this is
0:29:31 > 0:29:36cuddly, cooperative windowdressing for an agenda which, long-term, is
0:29:36 > 0:29:39about mass renationalisation, which you think the public would not be
0:29:39 > 0:29:42keen on. CHUCKLES
0:29:42 > 0:29:46How sceptical people can be. I am a socialist. We should share our
0:29:46 > 0:29:50wealth. We have councillors going out to get elected. When they get
0:29:50 > 0:29:54elected they say they will use our council resources locally and in
0:29:54 > 0:29:59that way we can benefit local people.Is it back to the future? It
0:29:59 > 0:30:02was revealed this week the government may be on the brink of
0:30:02 > 0:30:06renationalising the East Coast mainline. Labour's frontbencher has
0:30:06 > 0:30:10been clear about its aspiration to renationalise not just a rail but
0:30:10 > 0:30:16energy, the Post Office, and even water. This weekend the party held a
0:30:16 > 0:30:19conference to discuss the expansion of the Preston model, but others
0:30:19 > 0:30:24remain less convinced by its wisdom. This idea is very popular nowadays,
0:30:24 > 0:30:28both on the political right, people like Trump promoting it, and on the
0:30:28 > 0:30:33political left. But it is a failure to understand the benefits of trade.
0:30:33 > 0:30:39The idea you can enrich yourself with the border. I draw a line
0:30:39 > 0:30:43around an area. And somehow that will make us better off is magical
0:30:43 > 0:30:47thinking. How you become better off is through becoming more productive.
0:30:47 > 0:30:53These ideas are tricks for becoming richer that involve boundaries. It
0:30:53 > 0:30:58is an abiding fantasy, but it is a fantasy.The doubters may doubt, but
0:30:58 > 0:31:03in a post-Carillion world labour is convinced public opinion is pulling
0:31:03 > 0:31:06in its direction.
0:31:06 > 0:31:08Well, to help me to understand more about Labour's
0:31:08 > 0:31:10plans I'm joined by Labour's Shadow Transport Secretary Andy McDonald
0:31:10 > 0:31:14who's in Newcastle.
0:31:14 > 0:31:23Good morning, thank you for joining us.John McDonnell says the plans to
0:31:23 > 0:31:26re-nationalise energy, water and rail would cost absolutely nothing.
0:31:26 > 0:31:32That sounds too good to be true. Explain how it could work?In terms
0:31:32 > 0:31:36of the rail Wales, it would bring the railways back into public
0:31:36 > 0:31:43ownership at no cost at all. -- in terms of the railways. We would
0:31:43 > 0:31:49bring them back once the franchises expire. That would be considerable
0:31:49 > 0:31:53savings of £1 billion per annum. Then you will have to find £70
0:31:53 > 0:31:57billion for the water industry, nearly 40 billion for the National
0:31:57 > 0:32:05Grid, how can that cost nothing? Because you would be acquiring an
0:32:05 > 0:32:11asset, you would be acquiring an asset, you would be paying back the
0:32:11 > 0:32:15revenues which you derive over the businesses over time and you would
0:32:15 > 0:32:20keep the costs down for the consumer.So you would be adding to
0:32:20 > 0:32:24the national debt and you would have to pay interest on that debt which
0:32:24 > 0:32:28you would do out of the revenue you get from the companies, but you also
0:32:28 > 0:32:31say it will cost less from the consumers that bills would come
0:32:31 > 0:32:39down.If you have £30.5 billion of dividends paid out, if you run
0:32:39 > 0:32:44things on a not-for-profit basis, it can ensure that customers can get
0:32:44 > 0:32:47the best possible returns.That profit might be good for customers
0:32:47 > 0:32:51but it does not sound good for paying back the interest on the
0:32:51 > 0:32:55loans that you took out for buying the organisations in the first
0:32:55 > 0:33:00place?You heard John McDonnell express the analogy of having a
0:33:00 > 0:33:05mortgage over a property. You have acquired the assets, you have the
0:33:05 > 0:33:08income derived from renting it out, it pays the gas it and you have
0:33:08 > 0:33:13still got it. It makes consulate sent to hold those acids and make
0:33:13 > 0:33:19them work for the benefit of the citizens.If interest rates rise,
0:33:19 > 0:33:24after you bought that house and you are renting it out, it is important
0:33:24 > 0:33:29that costs can derive from the rental income. We know that rates
0:33:29 > 0:33:33can rise. There is every possibility that the interest you will be paying
0:33:33 > 0:33:39will not cover the profits and cost? It is no different to the position
0:33:39 > 0:33:44now. If water companies and energy companies are financed, they have
0:33:44 > 0:33:45those structures in
0:33:45 > 0:33:48those structures in place, the rate of interest that they pay on their
0:33:48 > 0:33:53financing is passed through to the consumer ultimately.I tell you how
0:33:53 > 0:33:57it is different now, and your system it would be passed to the taxpayer
0:33:57 > 0:34:02presumably. If any of these industries started making a loss,
0:34:02 > 0:34:07who picks up the tab for that?Have they made a loss since they were
0:34:07 > 0:34:13privatised? They have not, they have made very great profits.The reason
0:34:13 > 0:34:20they are giving up the east Coast franchise is because they have lost
0:34:20 > 0:34:23£200 million.That shows how the franchising system is completely and
0:34:23 > 0:34:29utterly flawed and should be abandoned.If the government run
0:34:29 > 0:34:33East Coast Mainline lost £2 billion, who would be on the hook, the
0:34:33 > 0:34:39taxpayer?When the government last ran East Coast Mainline they ran it
0:34:39 > 0:34:43at a profit, it brought money into the Treasury. We have a good history
0:34:43 > 0:34:47of running the railways correctly and not having this bailout to
0:34:47 > 0:34:51Richard Branson and Brian Souter and the rest of them or seeing the
0:34:51 > 0:34:58dividends and profits overseas to the state-owned companies of
0:34:58 > 0:35:02continental Europe. We want to put an end to that and make sure we run
0:35:02 > 0:35:08our railways for the benefits of the public.Let's look at one company,
0:35:08 > 0:35:12Bristol energy which looks like the kind of company you are advocating.
0:35:12 > 0:35:18It is set up locally and has ethical behaviour. There are no shareholders
0:35:18 > 0:35:22so nobody is taking a profit out of it. It has lost 2 million over two
0:35:22 > 0:35:27years and does not expect to be profitable until 2021. But does not
0:35:27 > 0:35:34sound like a great deal for the taxpayer if that is how you're going
0:35:34 > 0:35:36to run the National Grid.If they are recouping the losses and they
0:35:36 > 0:35:40have the trajectory of growth and greater incomes, they will look at
0:35:40 > 0:35:48that and say to successful.The Labour government...They got tax
0:35:48 > 0:35:52breaks, public capital to set them up in the first instance, they were
0:35:52 > 0:35:57heavily subsidised so they could go on and enjoy the benefits of private
0:35:57 > 0:36:01enterprise that does not benefit the consumer or the taxpayer or the
0:36:01 > 0:36:06citizens, however you wish to describe it.The consumer and the
0:36:06 > 0:36:10taxpayer may be the same person but they have a different financial
0:36:10 > 0:36:15relationship with these companies. What comes first, using any profit
0:36:15 > 0:36:20or revenue you have used to acquire these assets or cutting bills?You
0:36:20 > 0:36:26do both. If you have got that income you can use it for those purposes.
0:36:26 > 0:36:32Do cut energy bills or do you repay the debt?Those who have benefited
0:36:32 > 0:36:36from privatisation of had the benefit of not only using that money
0:36:36 > 0:36:39to pay the debt they incurred to buy the assets, they are now using it to
0:36:39 > 0:36:44make dividend payments out to their shareholders. It clearly can be done
0:36:44 > 0:36:48and we want to be in that position so it works for the benefit of
0:36:48 > 0:36:54people and not for corporate entities.The shareholders are not
0:36:54 > 0:36:57all millionaire individuals. A lot of this is owned by pension funds to
0:36:57 > 0:37:02which many workers pensions are held, can you guarantee that you
0:37:02 > 0:37:10will reinforce the Leave reimburse them at full market value so that
0:37:10 > 0:37:15nobody's pension will lose out?The market value is the market value at
0:37:15 > 0:37:20the time these assets are required. John McDonnell has made it clear
0:37:20 > 0:37:26that they will be acquired at that rate.But not for cash, in exchange
0:37:26 > 0:37:32for government bonds?They are still in that strong position of having
0:37:32 > 0:37:35the value fully reflected. What is happening is that not everybody is a
0:37:35 > 0:37:40shareholder. It means there is greater equity for all of the
0:37:40 > 0:37:43population, not only an narrow segment of it, surely that has got
0:37:43 > 0:37:49to be for the benefit of everybody. Thank you for talking to us.
0:37:49 > 0:37:51It's coming up to 11.40, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
0:37:51 > 0:37:52Still to come:
0:37:52 > 0:37:55We'll look at the implications to the charity sector of the latest
0:37:55 > 0:37:57allegations of sexual abuse involving Oxfam staff
0:37:57 > 0:37:59Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
0:37:59 > 0:38:00Coming up on the programme:
0:38:00 > 0:38:03Lord Adonis has accused the Scottish Government
0:38:03 > 0:38:06of going AWOL over Stagecoach's running of the East Coast Mainline.
0:38:06 > 0:38:11We'll speak to the Transport Secretary Humza Yousaf.
0:38:11 > 0:38:12Has the resignation of Chief Constable
0:38:12 > 0:38:16Phil Gormley ended the questions about the management of
0:38:16 > 0:38:17Police Scotland?
0:38:17 > 0:38:18The former justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill
0:38:18 > 0:38:21and former SPA board member Moi Ali will be giving
0:38:21 > 0:38:29us their views.
0:38:29 > 0:38:33Concerns about the future of the railways are back in the headlines
0:38:33 > 0:38:39this week after it was announced that Stagecoach's contract to run
0:38:39 > 0:38:43the East Coast Mainline will end earlier than expected after the UK
0:38:43 > 0:38:50Government said it got its sums wrong.
0:38:50 > 0:38:54wrong. How realistic is that, given the large sums of money needed to
0:38:54 > 0:38:59make it happen?
0:38:59 > 0:39:04Our reporter Andrew Black looks at what's gone wrong.
0:39:04 > 0:39:15The great days of the railway. People say they are over. This was
0:39:15 > 0:39:21once the future.Not by a long way. 30 years ago, a vision was unveiled
0:39:21 > 0:39:29for a fast, reliable railway service run by the state.British rail, we
0:39:29 > 0:39:33are getting there.Division did not last and a decade later, private
0:39:33 > 0:39:38companies began running trains. If you look behind me, you can see the
0:39:38 > 0:39:42start of East Coast Mainline where trains begin their journey, you're
0:39:42 > 0:39:47in Edinburgh down to London. Services here have been run for many
0:39:47 > 0:39:53years under a Private franchise agreement. But given recent events,
0:39:53 > 0:40:00might we be seeing a return to the past? Virgin and Scots company
0:40:00 > 0:40:03Stagecoach run services on the East Coast Mainline, but maybe not for
0:40:03 > 0:40:07much longer. This week, they said they could no longer deliver the
0:40:07 > 0:40:12contract. Now the UK Government might have to take it over. That has
0:40:12 > 0:40:18once again raise the question, would our railways be better off in public
0:40:18 > 0:40:23hands?I think you have to look back to the days of British rail with
0:40:23 > 0:40:29reality. Many plans they had for a new trains, new lines, improved
0:40:29 > 0:40:34services were always held back by Government not funding them. They
0:40:34 > 0:40:39lived hand to mouth year-to-year. If we were to go back to that, would
0:40:39 > 0:40:45they be priority again? Wouldn't education and health be much higher
0:40:45 > 0:40:51priority in Government spending?The benefit of the franchise system...
0:40:51 > 0:40:55There are benefits and minuses for bold, but the minute it has been a
0:40:55 > 0:40:59guaranteed franchise free period of time where we will deliver new
0:40:59 > 0:41:06services and improvements.
0:41:06 > 0:41:10services and improvements. If the railway could enjoy the level of
0:41:10 > 0:41:13Government funding that it has since privatisation, perhaps it would
0:41:13 > 0:41:22work. But would it? I doubt it. We've been here before. In 2009,
0:41:22 > 0:41:26National Express was running trains on the East Coast Mainline, but its
0:41:26 > 0:41:30contract hit the buffers and the UK Government had to dig over. What
0:41:30 > 0:41:36went wrong with the current east coast contract? The UK Government
0:41:36 > 0:41:41said that was clear.The problem is straightforward. Stagecoach December
0:41:41 > 0:41:46is wrong, it over a bed and is now paying the price.Stagecoach admits
0:41:46 > 0:41:54it got its numbers wrong. In a statement, its chief executive
0:41:54 > 0:41:59Martin Griffiths said a lot of what happened was out of control and we
0:41:59 > 0:42:03have suffered from a ongoing unreliability on the track and
0:42:03 > 0:42:07signalling that our dreams use. This former Labour Transport Secretary
0:42:07 > 0:42:13says there must be a stiff penalty. Stagecoach and Virgin should both be
0:42:13 > 0:42:17banned from operating rail contracts, because they have walked
0:42:17 > 0:42:23away from commitments they have made to taxpayers across United Kingdom.
0:42:23 > 0:42:26When national express reneged on their contract from the East Coast
0:42:26 > 0:42:30Mainline in 2009, I banned them as a good array of state for transport
0:42:30 > 0:42:36and they are no longer in the rail business. -- as Secretary of State
0:42:36 > 0:42:39for cars bought look like some say the private model can work if it
0:42:39 > 0:42:47improves.We should consider whether the franchisees should take the risk
0:42:47 > 0:42:51and then decide how much subsidy it needs or how much it can be to the
0:42:51 > 0:42:56Treasury or the sector keep the revenue, take the revenue risk and
0:42:56 > 0:43:00simply pays the operator to operate the trains. I think in that case
0:43:00 > 0:43:04also do reduce the risk to the bidding operators, you will have
0:43:04 > 0:43:10more have more beds, lower costs. The Scottish Government is
0:43:10 > 0:43:14considering a takeover of the troubled Scot rail franchise, but
0:43:14 > 0:43:19the question is how much would it cost and can it be paid for?
0:43:19 > 0:43:20The Transport Secretary, Humza Yousaf,
0:43:20 > 0:43:28is in our Dundee studio.
0:43:29 > 0:43:33We will talk about the promise of trains any moment, but something
0:43:33 > 0:43:41else that bubbled up this morning, a fierce surrounding Hugh Gaffney. He
0:43:41 > 0:43:46wrote a letter to Richard Leonard, have you got it reply?I have not
0:43:46 > 0:43:53received a reply from him or when I have been tweeting directly to the
0:43:53 > 0:43:55ghastly response from him either and are the number of questions I
0:43:55 > 0:44:04clearly need to be answered. -- directly to Hugh Gaffney. Many of
0:44:04 > 0:44:06his former colleagues have contacted me privately to say that he would
0:44:06 > 0:44:12have done, and if that is the case, does that not further the week
0:44:12 > 0:44:17action that Richard Leonard has taken in reaction to the racial
0:44:17 > 0:44:24slurs that Hugh Gaffney has made? I am frustrated from a personal point
0:44:24 > 0:44:29of view, but it is not about me versus them, there are many people
0:44:29 > 0:44:33have contacted me whether ethnic minority or not to have been utterly
0:44:33 > 0:44:38dismayed. Labour members themselves coming up to me any chamber of
0:44:38 > 0:44:42parliament to say they are utterly appalled at their party's stance on
0:44:42 > 0:44:47this. The Labour Party are traditionally a parties has taken a
0:44:47 > 0:44:51very strong stand against racism and are showing themselves to be weak in
0:44:51 > 0:44:58the face of racial slurs. One week after one of their own colleagues,
0:44:58 > 0:45:02Anas Sarwar, came forward to tackle racism in his own party and a brave
0:45:02 > 0:45:09man indeed.Do you think you should be suspended?At the very least.
0:45:09 > 0:45:15What do you think should happen?I think he should seriously consider
0:45:15 > 0:45:19his position. If an MP used any other racial slogan I don't think we
0:45:19 > 0:45:24would say that person would be fit to hold office. I think he should be
0:45:24 > 0:45:28considering his position. I don't doubt that I am the only one who
0:45:28 > 0:45:33thinks that, but this kind of week action from Richard Leonard is
0:45:33 > 0:45:39unacceptable. It's frustrating for people outside of politics who have
0:45:39 > 0:45:42approached me to say they are utterly dismayed at the lack of
0:45:42 > 0:45:50action from him on this.Richard Leonard couldn't remove him as an
0:45:50 > 0:45:57MP, though, it would have to be Mr Gaffney.Either you're the reader
0:45:57 > 0:46:03and you did a commanding role over your MPs, you MSPs, this is another
0:46:03 > 0:46:08problem, the inconsistency of Richard Leonard. The councillor who
0:46:08 > 0:46:11made the remarks to Anas Sarwar is being investigated, E denies those
0:46:11 > 0:46:16remarks, and rightly he has been suspended. Hugh Gaffney admits
0:46:16 > 0:46:21making a racial slur, absolutely comparable to the remark made to
0:46:21 > 0:46:27Anas Sarwar and all he gets is barely a tackle on the rest. That
0:46:27 > 0:46:32week action from Richard Leonard is a slap in the face to every single
0:46:32 > 0:46:38ethnic minority in the country.Lord Adonis has suggested that the SNP
0:46:38 > 0:46:43Government demands the East Coast Mainline is nationalised and the
0:46:43 > 0:46:48share of the profits given to the Scottish Government. Will you make
0:46:48 > 0:46:51such a demand?I spoke to Chris Grayling earlier this week. Every
0:46:51 > 0:46:57option should be on the table, that includes the Government running it
0:46:57 > 0:47:02as a last resort, and I have always said that the Scottish women should
0:47:02 > 0:47:09have control over east and west Coast franchises. In fairness to the
0:47:09 > 0:47:13Secretary of State, he said the internal review and what went wrong
0:47:13 > 0:47:17is currently taking place, but he has not ruled out the option of the
0:47:17 > 0:47:24Government taking over.To be clear, are you in these talks with Mr
0:47:24 > 0:47:30Grayling arguing for taking these routes into public ownership and for
0:47:30 > 0:47:34Scotland to have some of the revenue?My first and foremost
0:47:34 > 0:47:38piracy is to ensure there is no disruption to service and the
0:47:38 > 0:47:46passengers enjoy... That has got to be the number one priority. In terms
0:47:46 > 0:47:51of what Lord Adonis said, much of what he said makes sense. The
0:47:51 > 0:47:55taxpayer was chewed £2 billion more...I still don't understand, is
0:47:55 > 0:48:01your favourite outcome what Lord Adonis is suggesting? Take East
0:48:01 > 0:48:09Coast Mainline out of public ownership?It is out to them to
0:48:09 > 0:48:16decide...It is for you to make a decision about what you want.If
0:48:16 > 0:48:21they can be a similar outcome from another method, that should not be
0:48:21 > 0:48:25discounted either. I have been promised that once the review takes
0:48:25 > 0:48:31place, we will be told as opposed to having to be told by the media, has
0:48:31 > 0:48:36unfortunately I did when we found out the powerless outcome of this.
0:48:36 > 0:48:42Lord Adonis also suggests that Stagecoach and Virgin, given what
0:48:42 > 0:48:45has happened on East Coast Mainline should be banned from bidding on
0:48:45 > 0:48:51future rail context, would you agree with that?This is a UK Government
0:48:51 > 0:48:56contract and it is up to them to decide who gets banned. If you're
0:48:56 > 0:48:59asking about Scottish Government contracts, there are things to
0:48:59 > 0:49:06consider, one, is it legally possible? I have not heard whether
0:49:06 > 0:49:10it is legally possible within the procurement legislation.Would you
0:49:10 > 0:49:15be happy if Stagecoach made a bid in the future to run ScotRail?We would
0:49:15 > 0:49:19have to take it on a case-by-case basis on its merits. I would like to
0:49:19 > 0:49:25make the point that I have no loyalty to Stagecoach nor any
0:49:25 > 0:49:29sympathy to them. They should be punished. The First Minister was
0:49:29 > 0:49:34very clear that they have serious questions to answer, but clearly we
0:49:34 > 0:49:37have procurement wasn't legislation to follow and we will follow that.
0:49:37 > 0:49:43This doesn't put Stagecoach in a very good light whatsoever.You have
0:49:43 > 0:49:50said in the past that ScotRail... You said you wanted to prepare a
0:49:50 > 0:49:53public sector bid for Scot rail, have you actually done anything
0:49:53 > 0:49:59about this?Yes, we have had a number of cross-party conversations
0:49:59 > 0:50:04that have gone very well. The latest and last of those was widely
0:50:04 > 0:50:06important, showing revealed looking at five potential options, including
0:50:06 > 0:50:11creating a new public sector bodies or having one of our existing public
0:50:11 > 0:50:17sector bodies or another public sector body taking that bid forward.
0:50:17 > 0:50:21We are committed to doing that and we introduce the legislation. The
0:50:21 > 0:50:24First Minister has already said we want get that moving and up and
0:50:24 > 0:50:29running as soon as possible. As I have said previously, I have no
0:50:29 > 0:50:33intention whatsoever of not seeing this contract to the end of its
0:50:33 > 0:50:40contract period which would be 2025. Better still the aim and know that
0:50:40 > 0:50:45ScotRail over the course of 2017 their performance improved and I
0:50:45 > 0:50:50want to see them continue.What you're proposing, to be clear, is no
0:50:50 > 0:50:57different to what John McDonald has been
0:50:57 > 0:51:01been proposing. You're not proposing that, you just put a bid in, that
0:51:01 > 0:51:06would presumably just compete with other like Stagecoach and be judged
0:51:06 > 0:51:10on its merit, secure and not proposing the same thing as Labour?
0:51:10 > 0:51:14I am not proposing the same as Labour. I found your package quite
0:51:14 > 0:51:20interesting. Taking the politicians out of it, the experts both said
0:51:20 > 0:51:23that nationalising was a very simplistic solution to a very
0:51:23 > 0:51:27complex challenge and what we are suggesting the UK Government should
0:51:27 > 0:51:32do particularly in the face of the East Coast Mainline is bring forward
0:51:32 > 0:51:37legislation as the Scottish Government has done which allows
0:51:37 > 0:51:41competition with private sector entities.If having the public
0:51:41 > 0:51:46sector running the railways is simplistic, to use your own word,
0:51:46 > 0:51:52what is the point in having a public sector bid for it?We nationalising
0:51:52 > 0:51:56every single contact is a very simplistic view of the world. I
0:51:56 > 0:52:00heard what John McDonald had to say and it seemed to suggest that we
0:52:00 > 0:52:03nationalising a whole lot of public services wasn't going to cost the
0:52:03 > 0:52:11taxpayer a penny and I find that simplistic. We know that they made
0:52:11 > 0:52:16it £3.5 billion loss, Abellio. That would have to come from the health
0:52:16 > 0:52:21budget of the education budget. I am saying, there is not a simple
0:52:21 > 0:52:26solution with what is a very complex structure with the railways and 50%
0:52:26 > 0:52:30of it is already nationalised with Network Rail. Nott thank you for
0:52:30 > 0:52:32joining
0:52:32 > 0:52:33He denied any wrongdoing over alleged bullying,
0:52:33 > 0:52:36but decided a return to duty would have been impossible.
0:52:36 > 0:52:38With Phil Gormley gone, the focus is not only on who'll
0:52:38 > 0:52:41replace him as Chief Constable of Police Scotland, but whether that
0:52:41 > 0:52:43person will be capable of healing the wounds.
0:52:43 > 0:52:46It's been a troubled time for both the force and the body
0:52:46 > 0:52:48charged with overseeing it - the Scottish Police Authority.
0:52:48 > 0:52:51It was the SPA which recommended Mr Gormley should be allowed to return
0:52:51 > 0:52:52to work in November.
0:52:52 > 0:52:54This was later reversed after Justice Secretary Michael Matheson
0:52:54 > 0:52:58questioned the decision process.
0:52:58 > 0:53:01I'm joined now by the former SNP Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill
0:53:01 > 0:53:08who was responsible for bringing in the single force plan.
0:53:08 > 0:53:11Kenny MacAskill, this is hardly satisfactory from a public point of
0:53:11 > 0:53:18view. We have got the resignation of a Chief Constable, we don't know why
0:53:18 > 0:53:21he has resigned, we don't know whether the allegations have any
0:53:21 > 0:53:25merit, we don't know who made those allegations and it looks like we
0:53:25 > 0:53:31will never know.It's highly embarrassing for the senior echelons
0:53:31 > 0:53:36of Police Scotland and it is debilitating for those in it. But it
0:53:36 > 0:53:41has to be put into the context. Police Scotland see on with the day
0:53:41 > 0:53:46job with a 43 year low in recorded crime and despite the pressures they
0:53:46 > 0:53:52face, police Scotland doing a good job. But these events are unseemly
0:53:52 > 0:53:56to say the least. The sooner they can put them behind them and get on
0:53:56 > 0:54:02with just doing the job, the better. You say put it behind them. That is
0:54:02 > 0:54:07what Susan Deacon, the new head of the SPA said, but surely if Police
0:54:07 > 0:54:17Scotland the bodies which regulate them are going to restore trust are
0:54:17 > 0:54:23to -- we have to know what has been going on? I'm not questioning that
0:54:23 > 0:54:29people trust police officers, it's the leadership of the Scottish
0:54:29 > 0:54:32policing authority and of Police Scotland. Surely the public has a
0:54:32 > 0:54:40right to know why the second Chief Constable in five years has gone?I
0:54:40 > 0:54:44think there are clear is easier. That is something that Susan Deacon
0:54:44 > 0:54:49will need to decide and Pirc will decide what they release. But he is
0:54:49 > 0:54:56gone and she is quite correctly just getting on with making sure that the
0:54:56 > 0:55:02organisation performs as well as it can
0:55:02 > 0:55:05can and the organisation overseeing it does a good job. There are issues
0:55:05 > 0:55:11which should be exposed for the purpose of clarity. A parliamentary
0:55:11 > 0:55:15committee can undoubtedly drill into this but what police got the needs
0:55:15 > 0:55:19is stability at the top and they have got now with is a deacon in at
0:55:19 > 0:55:29the SPA...You say stability, but to people watching, this looks like"
0:55:29 > 0:55:36lemon", the people -- them, the people who run this saying, run
0:55:36 > 0:55:42along, this is none of your business, we will sort this out. In
0:55:42 > 0:55:47a policing system in the 21st century, you can't do that.You
0:55:47 > 0:55:54can't stop a police constable -- Chief Constable resigning and I
0:55:54 > 0:56:00figure was a good idea and it is now done. But it is full Susan Deacon to
0:56:00 > 0:56:05decide whether to rake over Cole's or make the organisation as good as
0:56:05 > 0:56:09it can be. I think there has to be some investigation and clarity and
0:56:09 > 0:56:13some issues to look at, but as soon as Mr Gormley decided that he was
0:56:13 > 0:56:19the issue, which she was, and he has gone, he ceases to be our
0:56:19 > 0:56:25contractors employee and there is little that can be done. -- our
0:56:25 > 0:56:30contracted employee.You say that you are pleased that he has gone and
0:56:30 > 0:56:35he should have gone earlier, why? There were many complaints. I also
0:56:35 > 0:56:40personally think that Mr Gormley brought in a style that was wrong
0:56:40 > 0:56:48and even if no wrongdoing was not found, and I know that he is a
0:56:48 > 0:56:50policeman great service elsewhere, his management style did not fit.
0:56:50 > 0:56:58Why?It was dictatorial, humiliating staff in the presence of others. You
0:56:58 > 0:57:03would not accept that in any walk of life, whether in the BBC or in the
0:57:03 > 0:57:09police force.He was humiliating staff in the presence of others? Are
0:57:09 > 0:57:13you saying the complainants were correct?I think at the end of the
0:57:13 > 0:57:17day, the complaints are not here or there, many would have been held
0:57:17 > 0:57:21lacking in substance or not reaching the threshold for disciplinary
0:57:21 > 0:57:28action. But it was a failure of style rather than...Hang on a
0:57:28 > 0:57:33minute. This just gets more opaque by the moment. You say that many of
0:57:33 > 0:57:36the complaints would have not met the threshold but the guy has
0:57:36 > 0:57:42resigned. And you say you don't like his style. Sorry, he was appointed
0:57:42 > 0:57:49as the Chief Constable. Huw Jones black people or force them out of an
0:57:49 > 0:57:54organisation because you do not -- you don't sack people or force them
0:57:54 > 0:58:00out of the organisation because you do not like their style.He
0:58:00 > 0:58:05resigned. He was failing to deliver,...What was he failure to
0:58:05 > 0:58:11deliver?I am not the one you should ask, I am not be Justice Secretary
0:58:11 > 0:58:18since 2014.But you said it.I watched the same press as you. I
0:58:18 > 0:58:22think there is doubt that the complaints would have reached the
0:58:22 > 0:58:25standards that would have made it necessary to take disciplinary
0:58:25 > 0:58:33action...One what about failing to deliver?Let me finish, that doesn't
0:58:33 > 0:58:39mean there wasn't any problem was how he was running Police Scotland.
0:58:39 > 0:58:45Some of that management level, he fails to deliver. -- so, at that
0:58:45 > 0:58:49management level. Whether he would have formally breached any charges,
0:58:49 > 0:58:54that is a separate matter. I think he failed because he became the
0:58:54 > 0:58:58issue. Police Scotland was an unhappy ship at leadership level
0:58:58 > 0:59:01despite the fact that it continued to function on the ground and I
0:59:01 > 0:59:07think that was up to others, not to him.If some of these complaints did
0:59:07 > 0:59:13not meet the threshold, I don't understand why it takes so long. If
0:59:13 > 0:59:18there are allegations of bullying, why did it take for months and
0:59:18 > 0:59:21months of Phil Gormley being on gardening leave to get to the bottom
0:59:21 > 0:59:29of it?You would need to speak to the SPA or Pirc. It has moved
0:59:29 > 0:59:33shamefully slowly. Not just for the benefit of the organisation, but for
0:59:33 > 0:59:40the likes of Mr Gormley himself.How can we have any confidence that
0:59:40 > 0:59:44whoever is appointed as the next Chief Constable, he or she will not
0:59:44 > 0:59:49meet the same fate as Phil Gormley? I can't give you any guarantee about
0:59:49 > 0:59:54that but we do know that police Scotland is continuing to deliver.
0:59:54 > 1:00:00They have had remarkable successes at tackling serious crime, violent
1:00:00 > 1:00:07crime, keeping Scotland say.Kenny MacAskill, thank you very much. --
1:00:07 > 1:00:10keeping Scotland safe.
1:00:10 > 1:00:12Well, to get an insight into the role the Scottish Police
1:00:12 > 1:00:15Authority has played in events, I spoke to former board member
1:00:15 > 1:00:18Moi Ali and asked if she was unhappy that it might never be
1:00:18 > 1:00:21known if there was any merit in the allegations made
1:00:21 > 1:00:25against Phil Gormley.
1:00:25 > 1:00:30I think that is exactly right. I don't think it is in anybody's
1:00:30 > 1:00:35interest to have innocence or guilt and not properly investigated. The
1:00:35 > 1:00:38regulations say there is no alternative but those regulations
1:00:38 > 1:00:43need to be looked at to bring them into line with the regulations in
1:00:43 > 1:00:46England which provide safeguards both for those complaining and for
1:00:46 > 1:00:51those complained about.In England, the investigation could continue
1:00:51 > 1:00:58despite a resignation?Yes, as I understand it, resignation or
1:00:58 > 1:01:02retirement can be prevented by the regulations until an investigation
1:01:02 > 1:01:07has run its course and that is what has been happening for the last few
1:01:07 > 1:01:10years.Your argument is that it is not fair to the complainant or two
1:01:10 > 1:01:17Phil Gormley either because we won't know whether the complainants had
1:01:17 > 1:01:23any merit in their cases or whether he was innocent or guilty?That is
1:01:23 > 1:01:29exactly right. It is in everybody's interest. Phil Gormley has left with
1:01:29 > 1:01:33a cloud over him. Nobody knows whether that is justified or not
1:01:33 > 1:01:38because there has not been a completed investigation. It is in
1:01:38 > 1:01:42the interest of justice to complete that investigation and either clear
1:01:42 > 1:01:47his name or finding guilty of misconduct, one or the other.There
1:01:47 > 1:01:51is also an issue of public confidence. The public do not know
1:01:51 > 1:01:55why the second Chief Constable in five years has resigned. They don't
1:01:55 > 1:02:00know whether there is any merit to the case against him and they will
1:02:00 > 1:02:06never know. You can understand why many people will think they don't
1:02:06 > 1:02:10know whether they can trust the leadership of police Scotland or the
1:02:10 > 1:02:16bodies which regulate it.That is the issue. It undermines public
1:02:16 > 1:02:22confidence because there is a clear process in place but that process
1:02:22 > 1:02:25falls away with a resignation. That is the shortcoming in the Scottish
1:02:25 > 1:02:30system.Is there a systemic problem with police Scotland and its
1:02:30 > 1:02:38regulators? You famously resigned from the police -- Scottish Police
1:02:38 > 1:02:42Authority because you thought it was enmeshed in secrecy and not
1:02:42 > 1:02:47transparent enough. But there has been a list of ACs. There are other
1:02:47 > 1:02:53officers who have been suspended. -- a list of issues. It looks like
1:02:53 > 1:02:57there is something going deeply wrong with that organisation.I
1:02:57 > 1:03:02think it is a problem, not a structural problem, about how things
1:03:02 > 1:03:06are structured and how the regulation takes place, it is a
1:03:06 > 1:03:10problem about individuals. The structures are right if people did
1:03:10 > 1:03:16their job properly. The problem is that people have become, the SPA
1:03:16 > 1:03:21board became too close to government and was not independent enough. And
1:03:21 > 1:03:26that led to a number of issues. It also led to a loss of confidence by
1:03:26 > 1:03:30parliamentarians and by the public in the way that policing was being
1:03:30 > 1:03:37policed.You could argue what is a personal problem, what is a
1:03:37 > 1:03:41structural problem, but from what you are saying, the fact that an
1:03:41 > 1:03:45organisation whose job it is to regulate the police, all the
1:03:45 > 1:03:49individuals in it have become too close to government, sounds like a
1:03:49 > 1:03:55structural problem to me.You could argue that it is a structural
1:03:55 > 1:03:58problem. Structures can facilitate or stand in the way of things but if
1:03:58 > 1:04:03you have the right people, they can make the right things work. That has
1:04:03 > 1:04:09been the issue. Partly a closeness to government and partly about the
1:04:09 > 1:04:13way in which the board was appointed. There was an emphasis on
1:04:13 > 1:04:17bringing in people who had a business background for example, as
1:04:17 > 1:04:26with the case with the last two chairs and if you have a more values
1:04:26 > 1:04:30are based appointment process, you will get people who are doing the
1:04:30 > 1:04:38job for the right reasons.What do you mean, values -based?Looking at
1:04:38 > 1:04:43people's values, as opposed to their professional background. If you want
1:04:43 > 1:04:48people with business skills or finance skills, it is easy to find
1:04:48 > 1:04:51people who fit the bill. But if you decide to take the route of looking
1:04:51 > 1:04:59for somebody who has a commitment to policing, a commitment to serving
1:04:59 > 1:05:01communities, to openness and transparency, you might well appoint
1:05:01 > 1:05:09different people. I think that asking for evidence of a background
1:05:09 > 1:05:14in standing up, standing out, making a stand, it is all important because
1:05:14 > 1:05:18if you have people who were willing to take a stand and do the job in
1:05:18 > 1:05:24the right way, then you would have a functioning board. The shortcoming
1:05:24 > 1:05:28has been that the board has been a little bit too eager to please
1:05:28 > 1:05:34government and a little unwilling to make a stand over important things
1:05:34 > 1:05:37and to assert its independence. I think that has been one of the major
1:05:37 > 1:05:43shortcomings that has led us to where we are now.What changes would
1:05:43 > 1:05:47you lie to see? We have talked about changing the system so that either
1:05:47 > 1:05:54people could not resign before investigations were finished or
1:05:54 > 1:05:58investigations could continue after they have resigned, and you would
1:05:58 > 1:06:01like to see people with more individualism on the board. But in
1:06:01 > 1:06:06the eyes of the public, not the police force, they do their job very
1:06:06 > 1:06:12well, but the leadership of the police board, the SPA and all the
1:06:12 > 1:06:18other anagrams surrounding it, it is just a mess.Identikit is a mess. I
1:06:18 > 1:06:22don't think the structure is wrong and there are some very good people
1:06:22 > 1:06:28both in the SPA and in police leadership. So I think the issue is
1:06:28 > 1:06:33that it has got into a mess and it needs to get itself out of that mess
1:06:33 > 1:06:35and get back to doing what it does.
1:06:35 > 1:06:38It's time to look back on what's happened this week
1:06:38 > 1:06:43and what's coming up.
1:06:43 > 1:06:45Joining me now is journalist Pennie Taylor
1:06:45 > 1:06:53and Holyrood magazine journalist Jenni Davidson.
1:06:54 > 1:07:01Kenny MacAskill and the police was a bit extraordinary, but why?For me,
1:07:01 > 1:07:08the reluctance to look back, to learn lessons from what has happened
1:07:08 > 1:07:13here I find utterly extraordinary. The new chair of the FPA and Kenny
1:07:13 > 1:07:26MacAskill are all very keen to say don't let rake over old calls.
1:07:26 > 1:07:30don't let rake over old calls. You canwe didn't think there was much
1:07:30 > 1:07:34merit in the style of Phil Gormley and he should have resigned earlier.
1:07:34 > 1:07:39Trust as far as I am concerned has to be based on transparency and
1:07:39 > 1:07:45having the information to reach that position.We should make the point
1:07:45 > 1:07:49that trust in the organisations that run the police, the top of Police
1:07:49 > 1:07:53Scotland, nobody is saying there is any problem with bobbies on the
1:07:53 > 1:07:58beat, that is not the issue here, it is not about police officers doing
1:07:58 > 1:08:02their every day duty, it is about does the public have the right to
1:08:02 > 1:08:07know what an earth has been going on there?Those bobbies on the beat
1:08:07 > 1:08:11will also be wondering what's going on at the top of their organisation.
1:08:11 > 1:08:16I think the fact that somebody can actually resign and the whole
1:08:16 > 1:08:20investigation into allegations of gross misconduct is shelved after
1:08:20 > 1:08:25that resignation is wrong. That's something that needs to be changed.
1:08:25 > 1:08:30It has been changed in England and Wales, the change that at the
1:08:30 > 1:08:36beginning of 2015.Is it that people are not allowed to resign until the
1:08:36 > 1:08:40investigations are complete?You're not allowed to resign if
1:08:40 > 1:08:44investigations are being conducted into you. There are special
1:08:44 > 1:08:47circumstances but ill-health, but generally you have to wait until the
1:08:47 > 1:08:52end of the enquiry. I think we should have that here.Moi Ali made
1:08:52 > 1:09:01the point that it is fairness to both sides. Both the people who
1:09:01 > 1:09:07complained about Phil Gormley and him himself.We need some accurate
1:09:07 > 1:09:11understanding here of what has happened. Surely in order to learn
1:09:11 > 1:09:18for the future and for this not to happen again.If this was a one-off
1:09:18 > 1:09:25incident, but has been nothing but controversy with that organisations
1:09:25 > 1:09:29and was created.I heard Molly Ali Savary clearly there that she didn't
1:09:29 > 1:09:35think the structure was wrong, if the individuals. -- Moi Ali say very
1:09:35 > 1:09:40clearly. It's a point about trusting the police right through the
1:09:40 > 1:09:44organisation. Sometimes the leadership of the organisation also
1:09:44 > 1:09:48dictates what happens further down and I think that matters to everyone
1:09:48 > 1:09:57in Scotland.Railways? Clear blue water is going to say, but it is
1:09:57 > 1:10:01clear black and yellow water between them and labour. I've never heard it
1:10:01 > 1:10:06expressed like that that the SNP are not in favour of nationalising the
1:10:06 > 1:10:11railways and Labour are clearly are. It's clear that what they favour is
1:10:11 > 1:10:16having some sort of publicly owned body that would bet, but bid against
1:10:16 > 1:10:20private sector bodies in the same kind of bidding process we have now.
1:10:20 > 1:10:25Mother than we nationalising completely and bring it back into
1:10:25 > 1:10:32state ownership. -- rather than. The SNP seem to be quite in favour of
1:10:32 > 1:10:36Caledonian MacBrayne who run the ferries on the West Coast bidding
1:10:36 > 1:10:40for the railways in future. That seems to be the direction they are
1:10:40 > 1:10:44pushing for.The other side of this is that ScotRail have got a
1:10:44 > 1:10:51passenger approval rating of something like 85% of that lots of
1:10:51 > 1:10:55companies would be very envious. The other question is, what exactly is
1:10:55 > 1:11:00the problem that either it nationalisation or public sector
1:11:00 > 1:11:04bids is supposed to be solving?I think ultimately people who use
1:11:04 > 1:11:07trains want to know that trains are going to stop at the stops they are
1:11:07 > 1:11:12meant to stop at that and not overshoot, so it's about
1:11:12 > 1:11:16performance, getting to your work on time. I remember a 30 years ago, I
1:11:16 > 1:11:19think it to request time to travel from Glasgow to Edinburgh then that
1:11:19 > 1:11:27it does now. Those of the things that matter to me. I am perhaps less
1:11:27 > 1:11:30interested in who owns them, although I would want to know that
1:11:30 > 1:11:34the money that is spent on them means that we have an efficient
1:11:34 > 1:11:39train service and for me that is fundamental.Yes, the ownership
1:11:39 > 1:11:44thing is clearly the big political points Labour want to make, but
1:11:44 > 1:11:49that's not some thought into the SNP, they are more whatever runs the
1:11:49 > 1:11:54railways best.They wanted to be run well, but the ownership does come
1:11:54 > 1:11:59into it, because part of the problem is that Network Rail are state owned
1:11:59 > 1:12:03and then we have operators who are private and they don't actually own
1:12:03 > 1:12:09the train stock. Often the yard leasing the train stock the using.
1:12:09 > 1:12:16-- often they are. Some of the lateness issues will be due to track
1:12:16 > 1:12:20problems or signal failure and others will be train related. In
1:12:20 > 1:12:27terms of faults when there are problems, having multiple companies
1:12:27 > 1:12:32involved can be part of the issue. Sorry, we are running out of time
1:12:32 > 1:12:34and I want to talk about Europe, because there were suggestions in
1:12:34 > 1:12:41the papers this morning this whole argument about this clause 11, the
1:12:41 > 1:12:45clause in the Brexit bill which seems to contradict the devolution
1:12:45 > 1:12:50act by saying things have to be devolved after their return to UK...
1:12:50 > 1:12:56But that will be sorted out this week?Yes, I suspect that is a bit
1:12:56 > 1:13:02positive or optimistic, rather. We still have a lot of issues. So far
1:13:02 > 1:13:04in the Brexit things we are seeing there is no problem and then it
1:13:04 > 1:13:08turns out actually is a problem. I will believe it when I see it I
1:13:08 > 1:13:14think would be my view on that.Good luck with asserting that went out
1:13:14 > 1:13:19this week is what I would say in response to that question.This
1:13:19 > 1:13:25clause 11 is only one sentence, all somebody needs to do is rewrite it.
1:13:25 > 1:13:30And say is that OK? That's fine.We have seen how easy that is in
1:13:30 > 1:13:36connection with any aspect of Brexit over the last couple of years.We
1:13:36 > 1:13:41should confidently expect this to rumble on?I would have thought.At
1:13:41 > 1:13:49Israeli fundamental to Scotland and the UK's ship afterwards. -- it is
1:13:49 > 1:13:50fairly fundamental.
1:13:50 > 1:13:51That's all from the us this week.
1:13:51 > 1:13:54Parliament is in recess this week, so I'll be back at the same
1:13:54 > 1:13:56time in two weeks' time.
1:13:56 > 1:13:59Until then, goodbye.