:00:35. > :00:40.Just two months to go until Scotland decides if it should stay
:00:41. > :00:43.As the campaign heads for the final furlong,
:00:44. > :00:47.what are the issues and arguments that will determine the result?
:00:48. > :00:51.The SNP's deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon joins me live.
:00:52. > :00:54.David Cameron's scheduled a major cabinet reshuffle on Tuesday.
:00:55. > :00:57.Many of those tipped for promotion are women.
:00:58. > :01:01.So have efforts to promote diversity in public life barely started or
:01:02. > :01:10.And don't know whether to support Germany or
:01:11. > :01:18.And in the south east: political guide to the World Cup.
:01:19. > :01:20.It is a familiar announcement, "Your train is delayed."
:01:21. > :01:22.We will be asking whether p`ssengers are getting a fair deal
:01:23. > :01:39.It's World Cup final day and as usual the BBC's snagged the
:01:40. > :01:44.Yes, eat your heart out, ITV, because for top football analysis
:01:45. > :01:48.we've got Gary Lineker, Alan Hansen, and Alan Shearer.
:01:49. > :01:50.And for top political analysis you may
:01:51. > :01:54.as well tune in to them too because all we could come up with is Nick
:01:55. > :02:04.David Cameron will reshuffle his cabinet on Tuesday.
:02:05. > :02:07.The Sunday papers are full of stories telling us who'll be
:02:08. > :02:10.in and who'll be out, though they don't really know.
:02:11. > :02:12.The Mail on Sunday has one of the more eye-catching lines,
:02:13. > :02:15.reporting that former defence secretary and right-winger Liam Fox
:02:16. > :02:18.is in line for a return to the political front line.
:02:19. > :02:25.But there's general agreement that women will do well and some
:02:26. > :02:28.of the old men in suits guard will do badly.
:02:29. > :02:38.Here's senior Tory backbencher David Davis speaking to this programme.
:02:39. > :02:45.It's good to make parliament more representative.
:02:46. > :02:48.But you've got to do it in a way that doesn't create
:02:49. > :02:51.injustices, and you can't put people in a job who can't do the job.
:02:52. > :02:59.And I've seen that too over the last 20 years, people being
:03:00. > :03:01.accelerated too far too fast and they come to
:03:02. > :03:07.a screeching halt where they have to catch up with themselves.
:03:08. > :03:21.I am not going to give an example. Is this not a bit cynical? He is
:03:22. > :03:29.going to promote these women into cabinet positions, but they will not
:03:30. > :03:34.be able to do anything. I am sceptical of Cabinet reshuffle. It
:03:35. > :03:41.is an un-written pact in that the media and the government have a
:03:42. > :03:45.great interest in talking it up The government says, haven't we
:03:46. > :03:50.refreshed ourselves? Generally it doesn't refresh the government.
:03:51. > :03:56.David Cameron wants to send out a new signal. You're going to see the
:03:57. > :04:01.old guard getting a P 45 and you will see a lot of women come in and
:04:02. > :04:08.a lot of younger men. We will find there will be a lot of resignations.
:04:09. > :04:14.A lot of, dear Prime Minister, as I told you 18 months ago, I want to
:04:15. > :04:18.move on. Because the Conservatives have this perception of not being
:04:19. > :04:23.very good with women and not being good with black and ethnic minority
:04:24. > :04:30.voters, they are going to want to do something about that. Why did he not
:04:31. > :04:35.do it before? This reshuffle might be the triumph of the a list. A lot
:04:36. > :04:40.of the women coming through the ranks have been from the a list
:04:41. > :04:45.which was a half measure because they knew they could not bring all
:04:46. > :04:50.of them in. You are going to see more women but that is a result of a
:04:51. > :04:56.long-term strategy. David Cameron is not the world's most raging
:04:57. > :04:59.feminist. He is doing this for practical reasons. He knows he has
:05:00. > :05:10.an image problem for the party and he has to solve it. He was stung by
:05:11. > :05:12.that picture of the all-male bench at Prime Minister's Questions
:05:13. > :05:18.because visibly it gave you the problem that you have been talking
:05:19. > :05:23.about. I do not think he has allowed it to be all-male since that
:05:24. > :05:26.embarrassing image. I can understand the criticism made of this approach
:05:27. > :05:32.if it was the case that all the women being promoted by talentless
:05:33. > :05:38.but you have to be very harsh to look at them and say that they would
:05:39. > :05:50.have much less to offer than the likes of Andrew Lansley. You can be
:05:51. > :05:54.pro-feminist. The tests for David Cameron is that having raised
:05:55. > :05:58.expectations he has to give them substantial jobs. They have to be
:05:59. > :06:03.given departments to run or big portfolios to carry. If they are
:06:04. > :06:08.given media campaign positions in the run-up to the election it looks
:06:09. > :06:14.perfunctorily. He is under some trouble to perhaps suggest a female
:06:15. > :06:22.commissioner to the European Union Commission. Jean-Claude Juncker has
:06:23. > :06:28.made clear that if he proposes a woman candidate they will get a
:06:29. > :06:35.better job. Saying they would like ten out of the 28 to be women. We
:06:36. > :06:41.are going to get the name of the British candidate at the same time
:06:42. > :06:47.as the reshuffle. The first face-to-face meeting, he will be
:06:48. > :06:54.able to put a name. There are other names in the frame. People like
:06:55. > :07:03.Archie Norman. That come from? His name is in the frame. There would be
:07:04. > :07:06.great scepticism of giving it to Andrew Lansley. People would think
:07:07. > :07:15.he was the man who mucked up the reform of the NHS. Who is it going
:07:16. > :07:20.to be? Either a woman or a man. I would not be surprised if they go
:07:21. > :07:27.for someone believe dynamic. Someone who would square the party. Would
:07:28. > :07:34.that not mean a by-election? It might. She is a high profile
:07:35. > :07:38.Eurosceptic. She is a very competent former banker. It would be the smart
:07:39. > :07:40.choice. I have no idea but my favourite rumour is Michael Howard.
:07:41. > :07:49.That had some legs for a while. The Mystic Megs of Fleet Street
:07:50. > :07:53.predict with confidence that the PM is going to promote more women
:07:54. > :07:54.in his cabinet reshuffle. The move can be seen as part
:07:55. > :07:58.of a move across British public life to do more to make our institutions
:07:59. > :08:01.less male and less white. But as the list
:08:02. > :08:03.of schemes to encourage diversity grows ever-longer, have we abandoned
:08:04. > :08:19.the idea of appointment by merit? Tunnelling. Hard hats, and all for
:08:20. > :08:24.new trains. It does not get more macho than the Crossrail project.
:08:25. > :08:25.When Crossrail looked at the construction industry they realise
:08:26. > :08:36.that less than 20% was made up construction industry they realise
:08:37. > :08:38.women and they asked, can we fix it? They are trying with a recruitment
:08:39. > :08:45.drive that has brought in female engineers like this woman. She even
:08:46. > :08:48.has a tunnel named after her. Having more female engineers and
:08:49. > :08:54.construction brings a bigger range of opinions, a bigger range of
:08:55. > :08:59.ideas, more diversity, into the industry, and makes it better as a
:09:00. > :09:02.whole. It is the issue being grappled in another male dominated
:09:03. > :09:06.workplace, the Cabinet. There is about to be a reach shuffle and the
:09:07. > :09:10.rumour is David Cameron is going to promote a lot of female ministers.
:09:11. > :09:16.It was a lack of promotion that annoyed Harriet Harman this week.
:09:17. > :09:20.She claimed Gordon Brown did not make her Deputy Prime Minister
:09:21. > :09:23.because she was a woman. It was strange that in a hard-fought highly
:09:24. > :09:28.contested election to be deputy leader of the Labour Party, and
:09:29. > :09:32.having won against men in the Cabinet, to succeed to be deputy
:09:33. > :09:37.leader of the Labour Party I discovered that I was not to be
:09:38. > :09:41.appointed as Deputy Prime Minister. For women in this country, no matter
:09:42. > :09:47.how able they are, the matter how hard they might work, they are still
:09:48. > :09:52.not equal. There are initiatives to make the world feel more equal. In
:09:53. > :09:57.the City the EU wants a quarter for women in the boardroom but that goal
:09:58. > :10:02.of making 40% of the top floor female. At the BBC the boss of the
:10:03. > :10:08.TV division says no panel show should ever be all-male. In the ever
:10:09. > :10:12.glamorous movie business the British film Institute announced their new
:10:13. > :10:18.thematic system to get lottery funding projects improving diversity
:10:19. > :10:26.on screen and off and helping social mobility. Employers like Crossrail
:10:27. > :10:30.are not allowed to positively discriminate but under the quality
:10:31. > :10:34.act of 2010 if two candidate for a job are just as good you are allowed
:10:35. > :10:40.to base your decision on characteristics like race, sexuality
:10:41. > :10:47.and gender. Some worry it has chipped away at the idea of hiring
:10:48. > :10:51.on merit. A woman and three men going for a job, two of the men are
:10:52. > :10:55.really good and the woman is not quite as good but she gets the job
:10:56. > :11:02.anyway. That will create injustice, a feeling that she did not deserve
:11:03. > :11:12.the job, resentment. It does not advance equality in society at all.
:11:13. > :11:16.On this project they want to leave a concrete legacy of a more diverse
:11:17. > :11:18.construction industry. The question is, what tools do you use when it
:11:19. > :11:29.comes to the rest of society? I'm joined now by
:11:30. > :11:31.Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a columnist for the Independent
:11:32. > :11:33.and by Munira Mirza, the deputy mayor of London responsible
:11:34. > :11:46.for education and culture. Cabinet wee shovel coming up punches
:11:47. > :11:53.though. Should David Cameron be promoting women? He is going to do
:11:54. > :11:58.it anyway. He should have a long time ago. It does not feel quite
:11:59. > :12:05.right that a few months before the election it would do the party a lot
:12:06. > :12:09.of good to be seen as a party properly reflective of the entire
:12:10. > :12:14.population. He should promote women because they are women? I think he
:12:15. > :12:16.should think about lots of different factors, whether the people he wants
:12:17. > :12:24.promote have proven themselves in their current reefs, whether they
:12:25. > :12:28.are good performers in the media, whether they represent different
:12:29. > :12:33.parts of the party, but the main principle is to promote on basis of
:12:34. > :12:37.merit. There are many talented women who fill that description. It should
:12:38. > :12:41.be that merit is the important thing rather than what you were born with.
:12:42. > :12:45.The thing about positive discrimination as it flies in the
:12:46. > :12:50.face of that kind of principle. You are shaking your head. We have
:12:51. > :12:57.always had positive discrimination. Men of a certain class have
:12:58. > :13:02.appointed in their own image because they feel most comfortable with
:13:03. > :13:04.that. We have had unspoken positive discrimination in this country and
:13:05. > :13:11.every other country throughout history. We are asking as women all
:13:12. > :13:17.minorities, let us get into the same game. What do you say? You cannot
:13:18. > :13:23.solve the racism or the sexism of the past by more racism and sexism.
:13:24. > :13:27.It is not the past. There are complex reasons why a smaller number
:13:28. > :13:33.of women will appear in certain industries. It has a lot to do with
:13:34. > :13:37.childcare, education, expected. You cannot short cut that by setting a
:13:38. > :13:41.target. That is not how you achieve equality. Things are changing and
:13:42. > :13:46.more women are appearing in engineering and so on but it will
:13:47. > :13:49.take time. My worry is that these kinds of measures are
:13:50. > :13:50.counter-productive and undermine the perception that women can do it on
:13:51. > :13:53.their own merit rather counter-productive and undermine the
:13:54. > :13:58.perception that women can do it than because they need a helping hand. It
:13:59. > :14:08.is not a helping hand. It is to say, we are as good as men and these
:14:09. > :14:11.hidden barriers. Dot. Either they are not as good or they do not want
:14:12. > :14:15.it, which is just how we persuade are not as good or they do not want
:14:16. > :14:20.it, which ourselves that it is not happening, or there are barriers.
:14:21. > :14:28.How we judge meritocracy is at the heart of it. Are lots of industries
:14:29. > :14:34.won there are not that many women, such as engineering. We need more
:14:35. > :14:41.engineers generally. I think it is fine to try to encourage more women
:14:42. > :14:48.to study that subject. By setting a target you put pressure on an
:14:49. > :15:10.organisation. You tried to ignore the complex reasons why women do not
:15:11. > :15:19.go into those sectors. I think an all-female short list achieved
:15:20. > :15:23.miracle in Parliament. This is following up from having an
:15:24. > :15:27.injection of women coming up because the system was changed and a large
:15:28. > :15:33.percentage of women went into Parliament under the all-female
:15:34. > :15:41.short list were brilliant, so why not? So if the Prime Minister is
:15:42. > :15:49.mailed the Deputy Prime Minister has to be female and vice versa? Yes,
:15:50. > :15:58.absolutely, 50-50. We need to reflect the population. If we want
:15:59. > :16:03.to play this as a symbolic gesture, ideally we should have one of each.
:16:04. > :16:09.Why should a man get the job if you have a great female prime minister
:16:10. > :16:16.and a great female Deputy Prime Minister? I personally wouldn't mind
:16:17. > :16:26.this. I hear the disgruntled man and I want to come -- them to come with
:16:27. > :16:31.us. You're choosing people on the basis of traits they were born
:16:32. > :16:37.with. Are there too many Indian doctors in the NHS? I would argue
:16:38. > :16:41.not. Given that we tend to have male prime ministers rather than female
:16:42. > :16:49.ones, and we don't see another female one coming down the pipe very
:16:50. > :16:55.quickly... In the time before women short lists by the way. If you had a
:16:56. > :17:01.male prime minister with a female Deputy Prime Minister, wouldn't that
:17:02. > :17:06.give some balance? Why women? Why not working class person, which
:17:07. > :17:11.group do you prioritise? I would go with you that we need something
:17:12. > :17:15.fundamental to change. This idea that what we have now is a
:17:16. > :17:20.reflection of a genuine meritocracy is highly questionable. I would
:17:21. > :17:21.argue that when you look at the statistics things are changing.
:17:22. > :17:24.argue that when you look at the statistics things There are more
:17:25. > :17:32.women appearing in parts of public life, that is a long-term trend but
:17:33. > :17:37.if you are trying to appoint people on what they were born with... That
:17:38. > :17:40.is not the only reason but it is an additional reason. She has to be
:17:41. > :17:46.able to do the job, obviously. I am saying the policy of hazard to
:17:47. > :17:50.discrimination explicitly state that you should choose somebody who is
:17:51. > :17:54.female because they are female. At the moment there is already enough
:17:55. > :18:01.suspicion about women who are successful to get to the senior
:18:02. > :18:04.position and if you institutionalise it you reinforce that suspicion
:18:05. > :18:11.Harriet Harman is still complaining women are not being treated fairly.
:18:12. > :18:15.I think the policy reinforces the prejudice that women are not getting
:18:16. > :18:22.there because they are treated on the same basis. Although you may not
:18:23. > :18:25.want to have the all-female short list forever, wasn't it the kind of
:18:26. > :18:31.shock to the system that made a visible change in female
:18:32. > :18:38.representation, which the Tory side hasn't got? Of course it will work
:18:39. > :18:43.short-term but longer term it has a very degrading effect on the
:18:44. > :18:45.principle of equality and the fact Harriet Harman is saying she wasn't
:18:46. > :18:56.treated equally, whether it is Harriet Harman is saying she wasn't
:18:57. > :19:00.there. A number of women find this position must be reserved for a
:19:01. > :19:09.woman lying patronising, and speaking of patronising women, you
:19:10. > :19:13.spoken your Independent column, she presses all of the buttons for white
:19:14. > :19:19.people... Was that patronising and offensive? Probably. I wrote it
:19:20. > :19:24.because I felt that at the time but the point is that I was a token when
:19:25. > :19:30.I was appointed. The paper brought me in because I was a woman and I
:19:31. > :19:36.was a muslin or whatever. You are not writing about yourself. I was
:19:37. > :19:52.writing... It doesn't mean you don't criticise other women. We absolutely
:19:53. > :19:59.have to be tough, Manira is tough and so am I. Do you want to take
:20:00. > :20:05.back what you wrote? No. Do you really think positive discrimination
:20:06. > :20:10.has gone too far? I think there is already a suspicion out there that
:20:11. > :20:14.in certain sectors women are being promoted for the wrong reasons or
:20:15. > :20:20.ethnic minorities are being promoted for the wrong reasons. That is a
:20:21. > :20:25.shame and my worry is that by tying funding to your ethnicity or your
:20:26. > :20:29.gender, by saying you will get a promotion if you check that box but
:20:30. > :20:40.you feel that resentment and prejudice and undermine the case for
:20:41. > :20:46.inequality. I wanted to be treated equally, because I am capable of
:20:47. > :20:54.doing that job. Only two months to go before Scotland takes its biggest
:20:55. > :21:00.constitutional decision in 300 years - should it quit or stay with the
:21:01. > :21:04.UK? For some in Scotland campaign has been going on forever. What has
:21:05. > :21:10.been the impact on the campaign to date?
:21:11. > :21:15.Alex Salmond says Scotland would remain part of the European Union
:21:16. > :21:20.with sterling as its currency in a monetary union with the rest of the
:21:21. > :21:26.UK, but he has also promised more public spending, increased child
:21:27. > :21:33.care provision and free personal care for the elderly. The SNP claims
:21:34. > :21:39.it would leave people better off by ?1000 though that partly depends on
:21:40. > :21:45.the price of oil. With the Better Together arguing against
:21:46. > :21:50.independence, it has naturally been attacking the SNP on all fronts
:21:51. > :21:56.George Osborne says there will be no monetary union. President Barroso
:21:57. > :22:01.told the BBC it would be extremely difficult for Scotland to join the
:22:02. > :22:15.EU after a yes vote. His successor this week said he agreed. Unions
:22:16. > :22:22.claim Scotland benefit by ?1400 by being part of the UK. A poll this
:22:23. > :22:29.morning shows a significant lead of 57% for the no campaign, leaving the
:22:30. > :22:34.SNP to claim it will go their way in the last ten weeks. Nicola Sturgeon,
:22:35. > :22:38.the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, joins me now. You want an
:22:39. > :22:45.independent Scotland to keep the pound, stay in NATO, stay in the
:22:46. > :22:50.EU, Scotland already has all of that but you cannot guarantee it would
:22:51. > :22:57.have any of it in an independent Scotland, why take the risk? All of
:22:58. > :23:00.these things should be the case because they are in the best
:23:01. > :23:06.interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK but we want the powers to
:23:07. > :23:12.enable us to grow our economy faster, to be productive, and
:23:13. > :23:17.overtime increased the prosperity of people living in Scotland. We also
:23:18. > :23:23.want powers over our social security system so that we can create a
:23:24. > :23:27.system that meets our needs, one that also has a safety net for the
:23:28. > :23:34.most vulnerable people in our society. Independence is about
:23:35. > :23:38.letting us decide our own priorities. You didn't answer my
:23:39. > :23:43.question, you cannot guarantee you would be able to keep the pound
:23:44. > :23:48.within a monetary union, stay in NATO and the EU, you cannot
:23:49. > :23:53.guarantee you could produce any of these things, correct? I would argue
:23:54. > :23:58.that we can because these things are also in the interest of the rest of
:23:59. > :24:03.the UK. No country can be prevented from using the pound, I suggest we
:24:04. > :24:09.use that within a formal monetary union. We have had the UK minister
:24:10. > :24:13.quoted in the Guardian saying the position of the UK Government right
:24:14. > :24:17.now is one based on campaign rhetoric and following a yes vote,
:24:18. > :24:25.of course there would be a currency union. Who is that minister? The
:24:26. > :24:30.Minister is unnamed, but nevertheless that story in the
:24:31. > :24:35.Guardian was a solid one and not substantially denied. So you are
:24:36. > :24:44.basing your monetary policy on one on named minister in one story?
:24:45. > :24:49.Basing it on Common sense because monetary union would be in the best
:24:50. > :24:53.interests for Scotland but also overwhelmingly in the interests of
:24:54. > :24:58.the rest of the UK, given their trading relationship with Scotland
:24:59. > :25:06.and the contribution Scotland's exports make. We are having a very
:25:07. > :25:17.good debate and the UK Government and the no campaign, and this is not
:25:18. > :25:23.a criticism, want to talk up in -- uncertainty to make people feel
:25:24. > :25:27.scared, but after independence there will be constructed process of
:25:28. > :25:29.negotiation. Let's stick with the monetary union because most
:25:30. > :25:34.economists agree it would be very good for an independent Scotland to
:25:35. > :25:39.have a monetary union but George Osborne, Ed Balls, Danny Alexander
:25:40. > :25:45.are unequivocal, they say you won't get it. You claim they are bluffing
:25:46. > :25:49.but again you cannot guarantee that so why the risk? I would say the
:25:50. > :25:53.benefits of independence are substantial but I would also say to
:25:54. > :25:57.George Osborne and his counterparts in the other parties that it would
:25:58. > :26:03.be a very brave Chancellor that says to businesses in the rest of the UK
:26:04. > :26:06.that they have to incur unnecessary additional transaction costs of half
:26:07. > :26:09.a very brave Chancellor that says to businesses in the rest of the UK
:26:10. > :26:13.that they have to incur unnecessary additional transaction costs of
:26:14. > :26:18.half. What we are doing is making a case that is based on common sense
:26:19. > :26:23.and voters in Scotland will listen to that case being put forward by
:26:24. > :26:32.the other side as well, and they will come to a judgement of the
:26:33. > :26:35.common-sense position. Let's look at EU membership because you haven t
:26:36. > :26:45.been able to guarantee the monetary union. When President Barroso said
:26:46. > :26:48.that a seamless transition to EU membership for an independent
:26:49. > :26:53.Scotland was anything but certain, and one said it could even be
:26:54. > :27:02.impossible, you dismissed him because he was standing down, but
:27:03. > :27:09.been -- venue EU president says the same, do you dismissed him? What we
:27:10. > :27:14.are doing... I should say at the outset of this, we have said
:27:15. > :27:18.repeatedly to the UK Government let's go jointly and ask for a
:27:19. > :27:22.formal opinion on the EU commission. The EU commission have
:27:23. > :27:29.said they will only do that at this stage if the UK Government ask for
:27:30. > :27:35.it, they are point blank refusing to do that, you have to ask why? It is
:27:36. > :27:40.in their interests to talk up uncertainty. Scotland is an integral
:27:41. > :27:47.part of the European Union, we have been for 40 years, we comply with
:27:48. > :27:52.the rules and regulations... Mr Juncker knows all of that but he
:27:53. > :27:57.still says it will be anything but a seamless transition. He said you
:27:58. > :28:09.could not join the European Union by sending a letter, that is not our
:28:10. > :28:14.proposal. We set down a robust proposal and the timescale we think
:28:15. > :28:20.is reasonable under these circumstances. There are many
:28:21. > :28:25.nationals of other states living in Scotland right now, if we were to be
:28:26. > :28:29.outside of the European Union for any period of time, something the
:28:30. > :28:34.current treaty doesn't even provide for, they would lose their right to
:28:35. > :28:38.stay here. The interests of Scotland and the interests of European Union
:28:39. > :28:43.are in favour of a seamless transition. It comes down to common
:28:44. > :28:43.sense and people in Scotland will make
:28:44. > :28:49.sense and people in Scotland will their own judgement on who is
:28:50. > :28:55.talking the common-sense. What about NATO, two years ago you told
:28:56. > :29:01.Newsnight the SNP's position is that we wouldn't stay in NATO. We had a
:29:02. > :29:05.democratic debate, we looked at whether it would be in the interests
:29:06. > :29:11.of an independent Scotland, which forms a significant part of the
:29:12. > :29:17.territory of the North Atlantic and the party changed its mind. It did
:29:18. > :29:26.so in a thoroughly democratic way. That is the nature of democracy
:29:27. > :29:37.Would you accept the protection of the NATO nuclear umbrella? There is
:29:38. > :29:45.no doubt the SNP's position is that we do not want nuclear weapons in
:29:46. > :29:48.Scotland. That is not what I asked. The world rid themselves of nuclear
:29:49. > :29:53.weapons. One of the interesting point is of the 28 member countries
:29:54. > :29:58.of Natal 25 do not have nuclear weapons. An independent Scotland...
:29:59. > :30:09.I asked if you would accept the nuclear umbrella. The key feature of
:30:10. > :30:16.NATO's military dog train is now clear shrike. We would accept the
:30:17. > :30:22.basis of which NATO is founded but we would argue two things. We want
:30:23. > :30:26.Trident removed from Scotland rather than have a situation where might we
:30:27. > :30:31.are spending ?100 billion over the next generation replacing Trident
:30:32. > :30:36.and we would argue within the international community that the
:30:37. > :30:40.world should move much more quickly to rid itself of nuclear weapons.
:30:41. > :30:44.That is the principal position and won the SNP has held consistently
:30:45. > :30:50.for many years. You would get rid of one of the key parts of the NATO
:30:51. > :30:55.deterrent based in Scotland. You would kick that out. You would not
:30:56. > :31:00.accept all of the club rules because you do not like the idea of nuclear.
:31:01. > :31:05.Why would they like a member like you in? Because Scotland is a
:31:06. > :31:11.significant part of the territory of the North Atlantic. You do not
:31:12. > :31:16.subscribe to the rules. 25 of the member states of NATO are
:31:17. > :31:24.non-nuclear members. You are saying you do not follow the doctrine. NATO
:31:25. > :31:27.has said it wants to move away from reliance on nuclear weapons. An
:31:28. > :31:32.independent Scotland would be entering the majority mainstream of
:31:33. > :31:38.NATO as a country that did not have nuclear weapons. By leading by
:31:39. > :31:42.example our moral authority and encouraging others to do likewise
:31:43. > :31:47.would be increased. Money and oil, the finance minister has said that
:31:48. > :31:50.an independent Scotland would increase public spending by 3% a
:31:51. > :31:55.year. He would pay for that by borrowing. Your First Minister says
:31:56. > :32:01.he is going to stash money in an oil fund. You're going to borrow and
:32:02. > :32:09.save. How does that work? There are two points. Firstly in terms of the
:32:10. > :32:13.outlook for finances and what is one of the central debates of this
:32:14. > :32:17.referendum campaign, austerity that we know will continue if we stay as
:32:18. > :32:22.part of the Westminster system versus prosperity. The economy can
:32:23. > :32:26.afford a higher level of increase in public spending while we continue to
:32:27. > :32:32.have deficit levels at a sustainable level. What is the point of
:32:33. > :32:37.borrowing and saving at the same time? People who have a mortgage and
:32:38. > :32:44.the savings account would not themselves what the wisdom of that
:32:45. > :32:46.is. This is based on recommendations of our expert fiscal Commission that
:32:47. > :32:52.as borrowing reduces to sustainable levels it makes sense to start
:32:53. > :32:59.saving a proportion of our oil wealth. In Norway, which has many
:33:00. > :33:04.similarities to Scotland, they have an oil fund worth ?500 billion.
:33:05. > :33:09.Scotland is part of the Westminster system is sitting on a share of UK
:33:10. > :33:15.debt. We can continue to allow our oil wealth, our vast oil wealth to
:33:16. > :33:19.be mismanaged or we can decide we are going to manage that resource
:33:20. > :33:26.better in the years to come. Your figures do not add up unless you are
:33:27. > :33:29.about oil prices and revenue and you have been consistently wrong in your
:33:30. > :33:37.predictions. Last year you forecast that revenues would be the .7
:33:38. > :33:44.billion more than they actually work -- 3.7 billion. The cost of the
:33:45. > :33:48.Scottish school system gone. There were particular reasons for that in
:33:49. > :33:52.terms of interruption to production and bigger levels of investment
:33:53. > :33:59.Used ill have to find the money Let me explain. They are based on robust
:34:00. > :34:02.assumptions, firstly a production estimates that is in line with the
:34:03. > :34:06.estimates of the oil and gas industry. Use of figures that are
:34:07. > :34:14.based on production of 10 billion barrels of oil. Oil and gas has been
:34:15. > :34:20.wrong as well. It is 24 billion left to be recovered. That is what is in
:34:21. > :34:26.the UK Government's oil and gas strategy so production in line with
:34:27. > :34:29.industry estimates and an oil price of $110 per barrel which is flat in
:34:30. > :34:37.cash terms would be a real terms reduction. The Department of energy
:34:38. > :34:41.is estimating $128 per barrel so our estimate compared to that is
:34:42. > :34:48.cautious. These are robust estimates based on robust assumptions. Except
:34:49. > :34:54.they have been wrong. Finally, we hear a lot from you and your fellow
:34:55. > :34:58.nationalists, you want a Scandinavian style social democracy,
:34:59. > :35:02.you know how to spend the money but you never tell us about social
:35:03. > :35:06.democratic levels of taxation. Also should grizzlies have higher levels
:35:07. > :35:13.of tax in Scotland does at the moment -- all social grizzlies. I
:35:14. > :35:19.want a Scottish style of social democracy. Free education, free
:35:20. > :35:25.medicines and balancing the books every single year. We want to get
:35:26. > :35:29.more people into work in Scotland, raise the level of distribution in
:35:30. > :35:31.the Labour market and make the economy more productive so we are
:35:32. > :35:37.raising the overall tax revenue Over the last 33 years we have
:35:38. > :35:45.generated more taxpayer head of population than is the case and the
:35:46. > :35:49.rest of the UK. Those last 33 years, some of those years oil prices would
:35:50. > :35:53.have been high and in others they would have been law but we take
:35:54. > :35:57.different decisions. A report showed that if we go as part of the
:35:58. > :36:05.Westminster system down the plate -- route of replacing Trident then the
:36:06. > :36:10.cost will be as high as ?4 billion every year. Our share of that is the
:36:11. > :36:14.hundred million pounds a year. Let us get access to our own resources
:36:15. > :36:18.so we can make different and better decisions about how to spend the
:36:19. > :36:23.resources we have. You are promising Scandinavian style social democratic
:36:24. > :36:28.levels of public spending but you say you will not need a top rate of
:36:29. > :36:37.tax of 56% which is what Scandinavia has, that all 25%, which is what
:36:38. > :36:41.Scandinavia has and VAT of 15%. You are going to have the spending but
:36:42. > :36:47.none of the taxes that make it possible in Scandinavia. For
:36:48. > :36:53.mischievous reasons you are met -- misrepresenting what I am saying.
:36:54. > :36:57.The Scottish economy can afford it and we want to generate more wealth
:36:58. > :37:02.in our economy. We want to use the existing resources Scotland has We
:37:03. > :37:07.are the 14th richest country in the world in terms of what we produce.
:37:08. > :37:11.We do not want to be wasting resources. We want to be spending
:37:12. > :37:15.resources on the things that other priority for the people of Scotland.
:37:16. > :37:19.These are the benefits and the opportunities really get if we take
:37:20. > :37:31.the opportunity of voting yes and becoming independent.
:37:32. > :37:47.This is the Sunday Politics in the South East.
:37:48. > :37:50.Imagine a child who cannot live at home with their own parents.
:37:51. > :37:53.For their own safety, they have to be cared for bx
:37:54. > :37:58.We will explore the consequdnces for the 1200 youngsters
:37:59. > :38:03.With me in the studio is Caroline Lucas,
:38:04. > :38:05.Green party MP for Brighton Pavilion,
:38:06. > :38:23.and Rehman Chishti, the Conservative MP for Gillingham and Rainh`m.
:38:24. > :38:26.Before we go on to talk abott trains I will talk about aeroplanes.
:38:27. > :38:29.An environmental report into the impact of an island airport on the
:38:30. > :38:32.North Kent coast concluded ht would cost up to ?2 billion to provide
:38:33. > :38:35.This airport has been proposed by London Mayor Boris Johnson.
:38:36. > :38:37.Caroline, this is an interesting one.
:38:38. > :38:38.Environmental considerations being taken very seriously.
:38:39. > :38:40.Do you find that politically significant?
:38:41. > :38:42.It is interesting that they are taking it seriously.
:38:43. > :38:45.The report as well said that it would cost ?2 billion
:38:46. > :38:48.We should not just assume that habitats can be swapped
:38:49. > :38:53.There are issues as to whether you can find them.
:38:54. > :38:54.They talked about Sussex and Essex as possibilities,
:38:55. > :38:58.You have to read this in a cursory fashion to get
:38:59. > :39:01.a sense that there are very real risks to our environment from this
:39:02. > :39:07.It is talking about risks in terms of it failing as a project.
:39:08. > :39:10.The bottom line is, from a climate change perspdctive,
:39:11. > :39:15.is that we cannot keep thinking we can build our way out through more
:39:16. > :39:18.and more airport expansion, that we keep on going for ever.
:39:19. > :39:19.From a climate change perspdctive, we cannot.
:39:20. > :39:22.Some are already getting thd hang of this.
:39:23. > :39:28.are already doing more video conferencing instead.
:39:29. > :39:36.There were four studies abott this this week.
:39:37. > :39:42.One concluded that the airport could create nearly 100,000 jobs.
:39:43. > :39:45.That is a higher figure than I have ever heard about this.
:39:46. > :39:47.Also that Kent businesses are in favour.
:39:48. > :39:50.There are parts of the country that would bhte
:39:51. > :39:52.your hand off for this investmnent, why not Kent?
:39:53. > :39:55.In terms of the cost to build this airport,
:39:56. > :40:03.In terms of the local structure we do not have
:40:04. > :40:05.the local infrastructure to have it there
:40:06. > :40:08.and also if you're going to have this airport in the estuary,
:40:09. > :40:15.Therefore you have to put all those people in Kent and Medway
:40:16. > :40:17.There is not that infrastructure there.
:40:18. > :40:21.To say all of these Kent businesses are for it, I think it is nonsense.
:40:22. > :40:25.There are some individuals but the local authorities, membdrs of
:40:26. > :40:28.Parliament and local residents do not support it and the environmental
:40:29. > :40:34.We will leave it there because we will be back to
:40:35. > :40:36.the airport in September because that is when the final shortlist
:40:37. > :40:41.If you regularly travel by rail chances are you will be
:40:42. > :40:44.familiar with the announcemdnt saying that your train is ddlayed.
:40:45. > :40:47.Just this week, Network Rail was fined more than ?50 million
:40:48. > :40:51.Our reporter has been looking at where the money goes
:40:52. > :41:07.and asking whether the travdlling public is getting a fair de`l.
:41:08. > :41:10.These are some of the busiest railways in the country.
:41:11. > :41:15.Vital commuter routes from Kent and Sussex feeding into the caphtal
:41:16. > :41:20.More of us than ever before are taking the train.
:41:21. > :41:23.But delays are still a familiar story.
:41:24. > :41:27.Just last week, Network Rail was fined ?53 lillion,
:41:28. > :41:31.partly for lack of punctualhty in London and the south east.
:41:32. > :41:35.If services are delayed or cancelled then passengers
:41:36. > :41:39.But a recent report by rail regulators found th`t
:41:40. > :41:44.three quarters of people ushng the trains are not aware of that.
:41:45. > :41:52.But it is not just passengers that get compensation for disruption
:41:53. > :41:54.Behind`the`scenes, the train companies get mondy back
:41:55. > :42:01.also, in a separate, automatic payment from Network Rail.
:42:02. > :42:05.It works like this, if Network Rail causes servhces to
:42:06. > :42:10.run late, it pays a heavy price to the operator for the inconvdnience.
:42:11. > :42:14.It could be planned delays like lineworks or unplanned
:42:15. > :42:19.Last year, Network Rail paid train companies
:42:20. > :42:26.in Kent and Sussex ?26 millhon for causing unplanned delays.
:42:27. > :42:29.Meanwhile, just ?2 million was paid out to
:42:30. > :42:33.passengers for late arrivals and cancellations by Southe`stern,
:42:34. > :42:40.So are they making a profit from travel
:42:41. > :42:47.There is no doubt that at some point it is worthwhile for the tr`in
:42:48. > :42:51.operators to suffer delays because whereas they might lose somd
:42:52. > :42:56.passenger revenue, the compdnsation they get is probably more than
:42:57. > :43:00.the fares they have lost from passengers who have been delayed
:43:01. > :43:06.There is a perverse situation whereby the train operators can
:43:07. > :43:11.profit out of a compensation scheme that is really designed to
:43:12. > :43:17.But where is the incentive for late running passengers to claim
:43:18. > :43:22.back their money, paid incidentally in the form of rail vouchers?
:43:23. > :43:25.One railway workers' union says the two`tiered system
:43:26. > :43:33.The train operators and Network Rail operate as a closed club for
:43:34. > :43:39.All of the money raised for the railway should be spent
:43:40. > :43:43.on the railway, making fares affordable or providing vit`l
:43:44. > :43:47.infrastructure and other improvement works so that trains run on time
:43:48. > :43:54.and people can get where thdy need to go at a reasonable price.
:43:55. > :43:56.The rail industry denies th`t it profits from delays
:43:57. > :44:00.and says the payment of proceeds from Network Rail is designdd to
:44:01. > :44:05.protect passengers and taxp`yers and to incentivise good performance.
:44:06. > :44:09.It stresses that the internal system is separate
:44:10. > :44:14.and unrelated to the compensation arrangements for passengers which,
:44:15. > :44:17.it says, have become far more generous and easier to applx for.
:44:18. > :44:21.The region also has some of the highest fares in Europe.
:44:22. > :44:26.A season ticket from the Kent coast to London costs ?5,000.
:44:27. > :44:30.This, coupled with poor punctuality,
:44:31. > :44:32.has put Southeastern Railwax's customer satisfaction
:44:33. > :44:40.Customers say operators need to be more transparent.
:44:41. > :44:43.There is a job to do for the train company to make p`ssengers
:44:44. > :44:44.more aware of what compensation is available
:44:45. > :44:47.and to make it easier to complain.
:44:48. > :44:49.But the amount that passengdrs are claiming
:44:50. > :44:58.Use your rights and make your voice heard.
:44:59. > :45:01.The rail regulator has urged operators to be more proacthve
:45:02. > :45:06.in helping passengers to cl`im compensation for poor puncttality.
:45:07. > :45:09.But will that ever happen in a system
:45:10. > :45:16.Joining us from London is Mhchelle from South Eastern Trains.
:45:17. > :45:20.You heard in the report that typicallx only
:45:21. > :45:29.whereas you get yours from Network Rail automatic`lly
:45:30. > :45:39.One is overseen by the Government and involves compensation p`yments
:45:40. > :45:45.that are made to train oper`tors that compensate for lack
:45:46. > :45:47.of access to the track that we need
:45:48. > :45:52.That is something that is ddsigned to provide value for taxpaydrs.
:45:53. > :45:59.They are perfectly within their rights to make claims
:46:00. > :46:05.Those claims come to us and are funded directly by ts
:46:06. > :46:09.and we are being proactive in encouraging our passengers to
:46:10. > :46:12.make claims through that delay repay compensation scheme.
:46:13. > :46:15.You would accept that given how expensive that it is to travel
:46:16. > :46:18.by train, my guests in the studio have told me ?450
:46:19. > :46:25.from one of their constituencies to London, this is hardly generous
:46:26. > :46:28.We have actually paid a record levels
:46:29. > :46:33.of compensation to passengers over the past five months.
:46:34. > :46:38.The reason is that performance has slipped.
:46:39. > :46:41.We have also gone above and beyond the delay repay schele
:46:42. > :46:46.payment to make additional one off payments to passengers
:46:47. > :46:50.That includes passengers who were travelling on our Hastings line
:46:51. > :46:55.where we simply were not offered to offer a service for eight wdeks
:46:56. > :46:58.Let's let the viewer decide about the generosity.
:46:59. > :47:01.Someone who pays up to ?5,000, as we heard in a report,
:47:02. > :47:07.very seriously inconveniencdd by a 55 minute delay, let's say.
:47:08. > :47:10.They will get half the pricd of their compensation ticket price,
:47:11. > :47:14.and it will come in the forl of couple of pieces of paper
:47:15. > :47:24.The vouchers are set as an `mount that can be claimed to offsdt
:47:25. > :47:31.This is a scheme that is an industrywide scheme.
:47:32. > :47:36.It is set up industrywide to provide passengers with
:47:37. > :47:43.You could allow people to t`ke their vouchers to the station
:47:44. > :47:48.You could move to a smart thcket system where the compensation
:47:49. > :47:53.Just to remind people, your delay compensation from Network R`il
:47:54. > :47:58.The way that the system works at the moment is that we ard locked
:47:59. > :48:03.into a scheme as to what thd Government expects us to offer. .
:48:04. > :48:08.You're suggesting that the Government would not allow xou
:48:09. > :48:15.We can but we do need to get previous agreement
:48:16. > :48:18.from the Government to offer a more generous schemd.
:48:19. > :48:20.The reason for that is the way
:48:21. > :48:26.the franchising is set up is that we have to factor that in in advance
:48:27. > :48:32.before we sign any agreement with Government, to protect taxp`yers.
:48:33. > :48:38.Caroline, you are arguing for the re`nationalisation
:48:39. > :48:40.Is there any evidence that would= solve this issue?
:48:41. > :48:47.We have just heard about the problems caused by the lassive
:48:48. > :48:50.fragmentation of our railwax system and the idea that that is providing
:48:51. > :48:52.good value for the taxpayer is ludicrous.
:48:53. > :48:58.?290 million of rail money hs spent simply on the administration
:48:59. > :49:05.The guide to it is 90 pages long as it is so complex.
:49:06. > :49:08.Essentially, when we've got so many different parts
:49:09. > :49:10.of the railway with different interests, the only ones who are
:49:11. > :49:23.You travel a lot by train, you must have been delayed
:49:24. > :49:28.I do travel a lot and I havd claimed once or twice but that has tsually
:49:29. > :49:32.been when there has been soleone at the train station handing ott forms.
:49:33. > :49:35.By the time you have made up the lost time, all of the inconvenience,
:49:36. > :49:39.and have to go on your comptter and find out how to do it,
:49:40. > :49:51.I have used trains for many years, I commute back `nd
:49:52. > :49:54.forwards from Kent to London, but I haven't.
:49:55. > :49:57.What we need to do is what other operators are doing.
:49:58. > :50:02.National Express are doing `utomatic compensation after two minutes
:50:03. > :50:10.Also if there is a delay it goes automatically
:50:11. > :50:14.I have written to South Eastern to say they should do that.
:50:15. > :50:18.I am waiting for a response but I think at the end of the day you
:50:19. > :50:22.should do what is in the interests of the passenger and simply having
:50:23. > :50:24.to go through a process of papers and vouchers is wrong
:50:25. > :50:27.and it should be about ensuring that people,
:50:28. > :50:30.are able to get a compensation claim.
:50:31. > :50:33.That's a lot of money that we heard about in the report,
:50:34. > :50:36.those automatic payments to the rail operators, is a strange sittation.
:50:37. > :50:41.The delays are a good thing for the train companies.
:50:42. > :50:46.That seems to be a perverse incentive to allow them to run late.
:50:47. > :50:50.What we should do then is looking at the compensation they pax
:50:51. > :50:54.so that if they have to pay the passenger more,
:50:55. > :51:00.like she was saying paying above and beyond. .
:51:01. > :51:02.She is saying that the Government would ask
:51:03. > :51:08.Their contract comes to an dnd in 2018
:51:09. > :51:11.and they will put in another bid.
:51:12. > :51:14.And my view is that if they do not put in a bid
:51:15. > :51:16.that is good for the passenger, I would not support it.
:51:17. > :51:19.I would say put that in so that if you cause delays
:51:20. > :51:26.But the private railway system has simply failed.
:51:27. > :51:29.You only need to look at the opinion polls and people s
:51:30. > :51:32.experiences of railways in this country, it is hugely expensive
:51:33. > :51:37.60% of the rail operators who are running our railways
:51:38. > :51:41.are state operators from other European countrids.
:51:42. > :51:43.Let's look at whether we will ever see nationalisation back.
:51:44. > :51:50.You have got the East Coast Main Line already in public hands.
:51:51. > :51:53.But will it ever make it into the Labour Party manifdsto
:51:54. > :51:57.Ed Miliband is forever accused of being in the pocket of the tnions.
:51:58. > :52:00.It would be political suicide for him because this is seen
:52:01. > :52:02.as the greatest ambition of the rail unions.
:52:03. > :52:05.I am absolutely amazed that Ed Miliband has not recognised that
:52:06. > :52:07.this would be a wonderful w`y of making himself popular.
:52:08. > :52:10.This is not electoral suicide but a massively popular polhcy
:52:11. > :52:13.that would work in the East Coast Main Line
:52:14. > :52:15.that is currently in public hands...
:52:16. > :52:19.No, they do not like the threat of a good example!
:52:20. > :52:22.East Coast Main Line is doing better than any other franchise,
:52:23. > :52:26.Quickly, what I would like to say about nationalisation...
:52:27. > :52:28.To do that you have to increase taxes...
:52:29. > :52:34.You do and I think the argulent with the Green party is always
:52:35. > :52:36.about more taxing, whether ht is aviation tax,
:52:37. > :52:43.We have an austerity problel and we have to...
:52:44. > :52:49.if you would take it back into public hands.
:52:50. > :52:52.Thank you, I am going to stop you on that one
:52:53. > :52:54.but thank you both for your passion on that subject.
:52:55. > :52:57.Tens of thousands of childrdn in England do not live
:52:58. > :53:02.Many are placed with foster families miles away from home.
:53:03. > :53:04.This week we learned that Kdnt takes more of these children
:53:05. > :53:12.The Government recently introduced new rules for these long`distance
:53:13. > :53:15.placements but the numbers coming to Kent have not yet changed.
:53:16. > :53:18.Joining us now from London hs Lily, from The Children's Society.
:53:19. > :53:31.Well, in some cases, of course, certain children, it is important
:53:32. > :53:34.that they are taken to a new area because it may be the safest thing.
:53:35. > :53:37.But the number of children who are being forced
:53:38. > :53:43.We are talking about, in Kent, half of the children are not frol Kent.
:53:44. > :53:46.It is unlikely that for all of those children that is
:53:47. > :53:51.What are the consequences if it is not a good thing for them?
:53:52. > :54:18.All of the experts agree th`t placing a vulnerable child who might
:54:19. > :54:21.been neglected, accused of traffic far away from home increases the
:54:22. > :54:24.risk because it is very hard for a social worker to monitor thd safety
:54:25. > :54:27.of a child 100 miles away and it is harder for them.
:54:28. > :54:29.It increases the risk of them running away,
:54:30. > :54:33.In a few cases it is the right thing for them but very
:54:34. > :54:38.Is there a perverse incentive encouraging councils like Greenwich
:54:39. > :54:41.and Lewisham to send their looked after children to Kent?
:54:42. > :54:44.The fact is, when you look across the country at where care is
:54:45. > :54:48.In some areas there is very little care available so yot are
:54:49. > :54:52.In some areas, like Kent, you have a huge concentration
:54:53. > :54:54.of the most vulnerable children being placed in one area.
:54:55. > :54:57.That puts a strain on services and puts them at risk.
:54:58. > :55:12.They have come up with the idea that it has
:55:13. > :55:19.the senior children's officdr that signs every child off who is being
:55:20. > :55:22.Do we need to see more action from the Government?
:55:23. > :55:25.They have at least recognisdd that this is an issue but that two
:55:26. > :55:28.or three years ago and we h`ve not seen any change in the numbdrs.
:55:29. > :55:32.In Kent, you have got just `s many children coming in from othdr areas.
:55:33. > :55:35.Not enough is being done and we need to look right across the cotntry
:55:36. > :55:38.at the care available and m`ke sure it is the right thing for children.
:55:39. > :55:42.These new regulations that the Government has brought hn,
:55:43. > :55:46.as you heard, are not making any difference yet.
:55:47. > :55:48.Does the Government need to go further?
:55:49. > :55:51.What we have got to be clear on is that these new clarifhcations
:55:52. > :55:56.came out in January this ye`r so we are only a few months in.
:55:57. > :55:59.We should not look at distance by itself but the quality of care,
:56:00. > :56:10.But the experts are saying that is an issue.
:56:11. > :56:13.What it says is the Governmdnt have recognised it and the procedure that
:56:14. > :56:16.they have put forward by seding the senior director has the samd as of
:56:17. > :56:20.and also the other requiremdnts and regulation is that before a child is
:56:21. > :56:22.placed out of care they havd to share information
:56:23. > :56:26.If the provision is not right, they cannot do it.
:56:27. > :56:31.But the Government would not even sanction a study into this 20 mile
:56:32. > :56:37.It is the overall package and provision that goes with it
:56:38. > :56:44.If you look at what the Govdrnment has done, it has made it quhte clear
:56:45. > :56:48.overall in terms of finding support for children in care, there is an
:56:49. > :56:51.additional premium for children and it is making sure that therd is a
:56:52. > :56:54.person responsible for education throughout thd county
:56:55. > :57:02.But I accept that care should be local but in exceptional
:57:03. > :57:06.circumstances, if they have to move, taking into account the welfare of
:57:07. > :57:11.the child, that it has to bd signed off by one identified indivhdual.
:57:12. > :57:19.Is this an issue for the local authorities r`ther
:57:20. > :57:22.We know that local authorithes' budgets are significantly ctt but
:57:23. > :57:30.What could be more important than this?
:57:31. > :57:34.The heart of this debate has to be what is in the best interests
:57:35. > :57:37.of the children and it may be that in a few occasions it is safer
:57:38. > :57:42.But at the moment the system is not working when up to
:57:43. > :57:48.I think the Government should have done an impact assessment to look
:57:49. > :57:51.at what would have been the impact of having a prestmption
:57:52. > :57:58.Not to say all the cases but that there would need to be
:57:59. > :58:13.If you did that you would move to a situation where you would
:58:14. > :58:17.need to have more children closer to home and lesser risk to the threats.
:58:18. > :58:19.We are seeing the most senior person in e`ch area
:58:20. > :58:22.We will see the numbers drop, will we not?
:58:23. > :58:26.It is early days but we have not yet.
:58:27. > :58:28.You mentioned local authority budgets and that is a key issue
:58:29. > :58:31.The senior children's officdr is also going to be subject to a lot
:58:32. > :58:38.Unless they have got another framework that is saying thdre is
:58:39. > :58:41.a presumption in favour of 20 mile radius then they're not
:58:42. > :58:44.going to have the influence they need within their own authority to
:58:45. > :58:48.It'll be interesting to look at this in a year when we can more hmpact.
:58:49. > :58:52.Now, for a round`up of the other political events you might have
:58:53. > :59:06.Medway Maritime Hospital, already in special measures, has ag`in been
:59:07. > :59:08.rated inadequate, with concern over A, levels
:59:09. > :59:12.The NHS Trust claims improvdment has been made, including
:59:13. > :59:17.It has been called the biggest construction project
:59:18. > :59:20.in the south east since the Channel Tunnel and the publhc
:59:21. > :59:25.consultation for the proposdd Paramount Park is finally underway.
:59:26. > :59:30.The plans include a univershty, 5000 hotel rooms and 27,000 jobs.
:59:31. > :59:32.The challenge is to manage them to make sure
:59:33. > :59:39.We do not want things to be done to us, but with us.
:59:40. > :59:42.A councillor who referred to soldiers as armed killers on
:59:43. > :59:46.Armed Forces Day has been rdjected from Brighton and of's Green Party.
:59:47. > :59:50.Ben Duncan posted the tweet during a parade but later apologisdd.
:59:51. > :59:52.East Grinstead residents have railed against plans to close
:59:53. > :59:54.a garden centre and install a permanent travellers
:59:55. > :00:04.The proposals will go to consultation.
:00:05. > :00:12.It is not the sort of thing politicians
:00:13. > :00:26.I think we do need the authorities to have a statutory
:00:27. > :00:33.There is no Sunday Politics next week.
:00:34. > :00:46.will keep a bit safer. That is all the time we have.
:00:47. > :00:48.So, plenty happening in Parliament this coming week, including
:00:49. > :00:51.a controversial bill to make so-called assisted dying legal and
:00:52. > :01:12.Lord Carey has intervened in the assisted dying debate. Will it make
:01:13. > :01:18.a difference? It will make a difference because we have
:01:19. > :01:24.established in the House of Lords, I am not sure who they speak for and
:01:25. > :01:31.why they should have a privileged position, but he was a big opponent
:01:32. > :01:34.and has made a change of heart. The fact that the Daily Mail has printed
:01:35. > :01:46.this shows this is a big intervention. The Bill being pushed
:01:47. > :01:52.through, is it now on the agenda? I think it is. There are international
:01:53. > :01:57.examples of assisted dying elsewhere. The state of Oregon
:01:58. > :02:03.passed a Bill similar to this in the 1990s and things have not got out of
:02:04. > :02:05.control. That has not been an expansion or abuse. It has settled
:02:06. > :02:14.down and become part of the furniture. That makes it easier for
:02:15. > :02:18.this Bill, to make the case for it. Religious people may still have a
:02:19. > :02:22.principled objection but most other people have a practical objection,
:02:23. > :02:25.which is how to put in place safeguards to deal with unscrupulous
:02:26. > :02:29.relatives or anyone else who wants to abuse this right? Once a
:02:30. > :02:35.controversial issue is only being opposed for practical reasons it is
:02:36. > :02:38.on its way to getting its way. What is the division, is it the Church
:02:39. > :02:47.against everybody else? Is it a right and left division? What is
:02:48. > :02:52.stopping it? It is a very difficult moral issue and there are people who
:02:53. > :02:57.can have genuinely held Christian beliefs or non-Christian beliefs who
:02:58. > :03:01.can be on both sides. I think that the Lord Carey intervention is
:03:02. > :03:05.potentially a game changer not just because he is a former Archbishop of
:03:06. > :03:09.Canterbury but because he was on the Evan Jellicoe side of the Church of
:03:10. > :03:16.England. That is quite a big move. The response was to say, please
:03:17. > :03:21.withdraw your bell and let us have a royal Commission. The Supreme Court
:03:22. > :03:26.kicked the ball back to Parliament when they rejected the cases of
:03:27. > :03:32.three people who had been taking the case and said, we could say that
:03:33. > :03:36.banning the right to life is against the European Court of Human Rights,
:03:37. > :03:45.but it is a moral issue and an issue for Parliament. Parliament needs to
:03:46. > :03:50.decide. The data act that is going to be pushed through Parliament In
:03:51. > :03:59.record time. To comply with a European court judgement. Tom Watson
:04:00. > :04:03.and David Davis, some dissent. Are you so prized with how united the
:04:04. > :04:11.establishment, left, right and centre is? No. There is a great
:04:12. > :04:15.quote saying this has been enacted under the something must be done act
:04:16. > :04:22.and that captures it exactly. Even Cameron says he does not want to
:04:23. > :04:25.look people in the eye and say that he did not do everything he could.
:04:26. > :04:30.There is no end to the power of surveillance. It is all was about
:04:31. > :04:33.drawing a distinction. I am always suspicious when politicians look
:04:34. > :04:40.something up and said, we have all agreed. Are there at the centre is
:04:41. > :04:49.right or is the political establishment right? I think the
:04:50. > :04:55.establishment is right. I think it is stronger than other issues. We
:04:56. > :04:57.are in a unique position where all three political parties have
:04:58. > :05:02.relatively recent experience of government so they now that security
:05:03. > :05:09.threats are not made up by unscrupulous people. The legislation
:05:10. > :05:15.being proposed is not dramatic, it is to fill a gap that was created. I
:05:16. > :05:21.do not see the political controversy. All three political
:05:22. > :05:29.parties support it. David Davis and Liberty are against that, and always
:05:30. > :05:33.are. Would you not have expected... The Lib Dems are in government, but
:05:34. > :05:40.a bit more rebellion on the Labour backbenches? There is no political
:05:41. > :05:46.controversy put outside parliament there's quite a lot of controversy
:05:47. > :05:53.about this. My paper has taken an interest in this. It is interesting,
:05:54. > :06:01.it does not feel, it is not a 1950s, three public school boys
:06:02. > :06:05.setting, let us have this deal. The Liberal Democrats and Labour have
:06:06. > :06:13.serious questions. There's going to be a sunset clause that will run out
:06:14. > :06:19.in 2016. The Liberal Democrats, who asked pretty tough questions, have
:06:20. > :06:20.said there are assurances. Ed Miliband did not go to public
:06:21. > :06:23.school. For many English football fans,
:06:24. > :06:26.tonight's World Cup final presents How do you pick
:06:27. > :06:29.between two traditional foes Well, if you're
:06:30. > :06:32.a political obsessive, like these three, you could always back the
:06:33. > :06:35.nation according to how it votes. The website LabourList has produced
:06:36. > :06:50.a political guide to the tournament. At the beginning of the tournament,
:06:51. > :06:55.it was a fairly balanced playing field politically with 15 left wing
:06:56. > :06:59.and 17 right-wing countries. England found themselves isolated in a group
:07:00. > :07:06.with three left-wing countries. That was the least of their problems
:07:07. > :07:08.There was a clear domination of democratic regimes over
:07:09. > :07:11.authoritarian with only six of oratory and countries making it
:07:12. > :07:21.through to the finals and the only all authoritarian tie was dubbed the
:07:22. > :07:24.worst match of the World Cup. By the second round 16 teams remained. The
:07:25. > :07:29.left had a clear advantage with nine, seven from the right and
:07:30. > :07:34.authoritarian countries all but wiped out. Two representatives
:07:35. > :07:43.remained. Both were beaten by European democracies. By the
:07:44. > :07:49.semi-finals, all was even Stephen. A right-wing Protestant Europe taking
:07:50. > :07:54.on Catholics South America. With one victory apiece, Germany knocking out
:07:55. > :07:59.Brazil and Argentina beating the Dutch, tonight's final repeats that
:08:00. > :08:09.pattern. Who will win? Angela Merkel's Germany or Argentina?
:08:10. > :08:11.We're joined now by Britain's only Labour adviser
:08:12. > :08:25.Should we read political significance in to the fact that the
:08:26. > :08:30.only time England has won the World Cup was under a Labour government?
:08:31. > :08:36.Of course. The problem is we did not qualify for Euro 2008 when it was a
:08:37. > :08:41.Labour government. We have had some pretty shoddy results under a Labour
:08:42. > :08:46.government. As someone under the left, are you backing Argentina
:08:47. > :08:51.Absolutely not. I do not think it has anything to do with politics. It
:08:52. > :08:59.is a bit of fun. People should choose it is Don Hoop plays the best
:09:00. > :09:05.football and the Germans have been fantastic. They were great in 2 10
:09:06. > :09:09.as well. They started this model in 2008 and that is the sort of thing
:09:10. > :09:14.people should be supporting. Who should a Eurosceptic support? I
:09:15. > :09:19.would not say Argentina because that is the country that has tried to
:09:20. > :09:27.seize British sovereign territory within my lifetime. You were not
:09:28. > :09:31.around for the Blitz. Believe it or not, I was not. There is a strong
:09:32. > :09:33.political case to support Germany. They are probably going to win the
:09:34. > :09:46.World Cup with a clear of -- with They are probably going to win the
:09:47. > :09:50.players of Polish origin. That sort of cultural change they have forced
:09:51. > :09:57.themselves to go through... You talk about them being right wing, but in
:09:58. > :10:05.fact the way that the German league is structured, and I am an expert,
:10:06. > :10:09.is based on ownership. It is very different from the Premier League.
:10:10. > :10:17.It is about football as a usual good. The ticket prices are lower.
:10:18. > :10:24.The fans are involved in running the club. It is a model that all English
:10:25. > :10:30.football clubs should emulate. Germany had a strong football team
:10:31. > :10:37.under centre right governments and centre left governments and a
:10:38. > :10:45.coalition. A strong football team and a strong economy. The
:10:46. > :10:49.Conservative MP who is the arch Eurosceptic wanted to get us out of
:10:50. > :10:55.the European Union and was for a few weeks ago when people were making
:10:56. > :10:59.jokes about Jean-Claude Juncker he was outraged and said you should not
:11:00. > :11:05.do that, so he could happily support Germany. What was interesting about
:11:06. > :11:10.the authoritarian and democratic regimes, what is great is that the
:11:11. > :11:22.World Cup is run by this open and democratic organisation Fifa. It is
:11:23. > :11:29.similar to the EU in many regards. Two countries led by women. Maybe
:11:30. > :11:36.gender is the thing. We did not win under Margaret Thatcher. There's one
:11:37. > :11:43.big difference with the EU, you cannot flog six Dom Acta gets to go
:11:44. > :11:56.to a European summit. Did you know that Italy won two world cups under
:11:57. > :11:58.Mussolini? Can we draw any conclusions between a political
:11:59. > :12:04.system and the performance of the football team? You can draw certain
:12:05. > :12:10.parallels between maybe national cliches, so the Germans are
:12:11. > :12:15.efficient and effective, which might reflect and the English are very
:12:16. > :12:19.polite so we let everyone score first and go into the second round.
:12:20. > :12:25.We put ourselves at the back of the queue. Is England going to qualify
:12:26. > :12:35.for the European? We are going to win the European Championship. The
:12:36. > :12:43.first country Scotland have to play is Germany. What could possibly go
:12:44. > :12:54.wrong? Who is going to win? Germany. Germany. I am going to put a few bob
:12:55. > :13:01.on Argentina. Are you going to be watching? Absolutely. Thank you
:13:02. > :13:06.This is the last Sunday Politics for the summer.
:13:07. > :13:09.But we'll be back in early autumn and our first programme will be live
:13:10. > :13:15.from Scotland, the weekend before the referendum
:13:16. > :13:20.The Daily Politics is back tomorrow at noon and we'll bring you
:13:21. > :13:23.the last PMQs before the summer on Wednesday morning from 11:30am.
:13:24. > :15:02.Remember, if it's Sunday, it's the Sunday Politics, unless
:15:03. > :15:08.You have been selected to take part in an antiques TV programme.