:00:37. > :00:42.Just two months to go until Scotland decides if it should stay
:00:43. > :00:45.As the campaign heads for the final furlong,
:00:46. > :00:50.what are the issues and arguments that will determine the result?
:00:51. > :00:53.The SNP's deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon joins me live.
:00:54. > :00:56.David Cameron's scheduled a major cabinet reshuffle on Tuesday.
:00:57. > :00:59.Many of those tipped for promotion are women.
:01:00. > :01:03.So have efforts to promote diversity in public life barely started or
:01:04. > :01:12.And don't know whether to support Germany or
:01:13. > :01:24.I have been talking to our political guide to the World Cup.
:01:25. > :01:38.I have been talking to our contingent of new UKIP MEPs.
:01:39. > :01:41.It's World Cup final day and as usual the BBC's snagged the
:01:42. > :01:46.Yes, eat your heart out, ITV, because for top football analysis
:01:47. > :01:50.we've got Gary Lineker, Alan Hansen, and Alan Shearer.
:01:51. > :01:52.And for top political analysis you may
:01:53. > :01:56.as well tune in to them too because all we could come up with is Nick
:01:57. > :02:06.David Cameron will reshuffle his cabinet on Tuesday.
:02:07. > :02:09.The Sunday papers are full of stories telling us who'll be
:02:10. > :02:12.in and who'll be out, though they don't really know.
:02:13. > :02:15.The Mail on Sunday has one of the more eye-catching lines,
:02:16. > :02:17.reporting that former defence secretary and right-winger Liam Fox
:02:18. > :02:20.is in line for a return to the political front line.
:02:21. > :02:27.But there's general agreement that women will do well and some
:02:28. > :02:30.of the old men in suits guard will do badly.
:02:31. > :02:40.Here's senior Tory backbencher David Davis speaking to this programme.
:02:41. > :02:47.It's good to make parliament more representative.
:02:48. > :02:50.But you've got to do it in a way that doesn't create
:02:51. > :02:53.injustices, and you can't put people in a job who can't do the job.
:02:54. > :03:01.And I've seen that too over the last 20 years, people being
:03:02. > :03:04.accelerated too far too fast and they come to
:03:05. > :03:09.a screeching halt where they have to catch up with themselves.
:03:10. > :03:23.I am not going to give an example. Is this not a bit cynical? He is
:03:24. > :03:31.going to promote these women into cabinet positions, but they will not
:03:32. > :03:36.be able to do anything. I am sceptical of Cabinet reshuffle. It
:03:37. > :03:43.is an un-written pact in that the media and the government have a
:03:44. > :03:47.great interest in talking it up The government says, haven't we
:03:48. > :03:52.refreshed ourselves? Generally it doesn't refresh the government.
:03:53. > :03:59.David Cameron wants to send out a new signal. You're going to see the
:04:00. > :04:03.old guard getting a P 45 and you will see a lot of women come in and
:04:04. > :04:10.a lot of younger men. We will find there will be a lot of resignations.
:04:11. > :04:16.A lot of, dear Prime Minister, as I told you 18 months ago, I want to
:04:17. > :04:20.move on. Because the Conservatives have this perception of not being
:04:21. > :04:25.very good with women and not being good with black and ethnic minority
:04:26. > :04:32.voters, they are going to want to do something about that. Why did he not
:04:33. > :04:38.do it before? This reshuffle might be the triumph of the a list. A lot
:04:39. > :04:43.of the women coming through the ranks have been from the a list
:04:44. > :04:47.which was a half measure because they knew they could not bring all
:04:48. > :04:52.of them in. You are going to see more women but that is a result of a
:04:53. > :04:58.long-term strategy. David Cameron is not the world's most raging
:04:59. > :05:02.feminist. He is doing this for practical reasons. He knows he has
:05:03. > :05:12.an image problem for the party and he has to solve it. He was stung by
:05:13. > :05:14.that picture of the all-male bench at Prime Minister's Questions
:05:15. > :05:20.because visibly it gave you the problem that you have been talking
:05:21. > :05:25.about. I do not think he has allowed it to be all-male since that
:05:26. > :05:28.embarrassing image. I can understand the criticism made of this approach
:05:29. > :05:35.if it was the case that all the women being promoted by talentless
:05:36. > :05:40.but you have to be very harsh to look at them and say that they would
:05:41. > :05:52.have much less to offer than the likes of Andrew Lansley. You can be
:05:53. > :05:56.pro-feminist. The tests for David Cameron is that having raised
:05:57. > :06:00.expectations he has to give them substantial jobs. They have to be
:06:01. > :06:05.given departments to run or big portfolios to carry. If they are
:06:06. > :06:10.given media campaign positions in the run-up to the election it looks
:06:11. > :06:16.perfunctorily. He is under some trouble to perhaps suggest a female
:06:17. > :06:24.commissioner to the European Union Commission. Jean-Claude Juncker has
:06:25. > :06:30.made clear that if he proposes a woman candidate they will get a
:06:31. > :06:37.better job. Saying they would like ten out of the 28 to be women. We
:06:38. > :06:43.are going to get the name of the British candidate at the same time
:06:44. > :06:49.as the reshuffle. The first face-to-face meeting, he will be
:06:50. > :06:56.able to put a name. There are other names in the frame. People like
:06:57. > :07:05.Archie Norman. That come from? His name is in the frame. There
:07:06. > :07:07.Archie Norman. That come from? His great scepticism of giving it to
:07:08. > :07:11.Andrew Lansley. People would think he was the man who mucked up the
:07:12. > :07:13.reform of the NHS. Who is it going to be? Either a woman
:07:14. > :07:51.favourite rumour is Michael Howard. That had some legs for a while.
:07:52. > :07:55.The Mystic Megs of Fleet Street predict with confidence that the PM
:07:56. > :07:56.is going to promote more women in his cabinet reshuffle.
:07:57. > :08:00.The move can be seen as part of a move across British public life
:08:01. > :08:03.to do more to make our institutions less male and less white.
:08:04. > :09:26.But as the list of schemes to encourage diversity
:09:27. > :09:30.But as the list leader of the Labour Party, and
:09:31. > :09:34.having won against men in the Cabinet, to succeed to be deputy
:09:35. > :09:39.leader of the Labour Party I discovered that I was not to be
:09:40. > :09:43.appointed as Deputy Prime Minister. For women in this country, no matter
:09:44. > :09:49.how able they are, the matter how hard they might work, they are still
:09:50. > :09:54.not equal. There are initiatives to make the world feel more equal. In
:09:55. > :09:59.the City the EU wants a quarter for women in the boardroom but that goal
:10:00. > :10:04.of making 40% of the top floor female. At the BBC the boss of the
:10:05. > :10:10.TV division says no panel show should ever be all-male. In the ever
:10:11. > :10:14.glamorous movie business the British film Institute announced their new
:10:15. > :10:20.thematic system to get lottery funding projects improving diversity
:10:21. > :10:28.on screen and off and helping social mobility. Employers like Crossrail
:10:29. > :10:32.are not allowed to positively discriminate but under the quality
:10:33. > :10:36.act of 2010 if two candidate for a job are just as good you are allowed
:10:37. > :10:42.to base your decision on characteristics like race, sexuality
:10:43. > :10:49.and gender. Some worry it has chipped away at the idea of hiring
:10:50. > :10:53.on merit. A woman and three men going for a job, two of the men are
:10:54. > :10:57.really good and the woman is not quite as good but she gets the job
:10:58. > :11:04.anyway. That will create injustice, a feeling that she did not deserve
:11:05. > :11:14.the job, resentment. It does not advance equality in society at all.
:11:15. > :11:18.On this project they want to leave a concrete legacy of a more diverse
:11:19. > :11:20.construction industry. The question is, what tools do you use when it
:11:21. > :11:31.comes to the rest of society? I'm joined now by
:11:32. > :11:33.Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a columnist for the Independent
:11:34. > :11:35.and by Munira Mirza, the deputy mayor of London responsible
:11:36. > :11:48.for education and culture. Cabinet wee shovel coming up punches
:11:49. > :11:55.though. Should David Cameron be promoting women? He is going to do
:11:56. > :12:01.it anyway. He should have a long time ago. It does not feel quite
:12:02. > :12:07.right that a few months before the election it would do the party a lot
:12:08. > :12:11.of good to be seen as a party properly reflective of the entire
:12:12. > :12:16.population. He should promote women because they are women? I think he
:12:17. > :12:18.should think about lots of different factors, whether the people he wants
:12:19. > :12:26.promote have proven themselves in their current reefs, whether they
:12:27. > :12:30.are good performers in the media, whether they represent different
:12:31. > :12:35.parts of the party, but the main principle is to promote on basis of
:12:36. > :12:39.merit. There are many talented women who fill that description. It should
:12:40. > :12:43.be that merit is the important thing rather than what you were born with.
:12:44. > :12:47.The thing about positive discrimination as it flies in the
:12:48. > :12:52.face of that kind of principle. You are shaking your head. We have
:12:53. > :12:59.always had positive discrimination. Men of a certain class have
:13:00. > :13:04.appointed in their own image because they feel most comfortable with
:13:05. > :13:06.that. We have had unspoken positive discrimination in this country and
:13:07. > :13:13.every other country throughout history. We are asking as women all
:13:14. > :13:19.minorities, let us get into the same game. What do you say? You cannot
:13:20. > :13:25.solve the racism or the sexism of the past by more racism and sexism.
:13:26. > :13:30.It is not the past. There are complex reasons why a smaller number
:13:31. > :13:35.of women will appear in certain industries. It has a lot to do with
:13:36. > :13:39.childcare, education, expected. You cannot short cut that by setting a
:13:40. > :13:43.target. That is not how you achieve equality. Things are changing and
:13:44. > :13:49.more women are appearing in engineering and so on but it will
:13:50. > :13:51.take time. My worry is that these kinds of measures are
:13:52. > :13:52.counter-productive and undermine the perception that women can do it on
:13:53. > :13:55.their own merit rather counter-productive and undermine the
:13:56. > :14:00.perception that women can do it than because they need a helping hand. It
:14:01. > :14:11.is not a helping hand. It is to say, we are as good as men and these
:14:12. > :14:13.hidden barriers. Dot. Either they are not as good or they do not want
:14:14. > :14:17.it, which is just how we persuade are not as good or they do not want
:14:18. > :14:22.it, which ourselves that it is not happening, or there are barriers.
:14:23. > :14:30.How we judge meritocracy is at the heart of it. Are lots of industries
:14:31. > :14:36.won there are not that many women, such as engineering. We need more
:14:37. > :14:43.engineers generally. I think it is fine to try to encourage more women
:14:44. > :14:50.to study that subject. By setting a target you put pressure on an
:14:51. > :15:12.organisation. You tried to ignore the complex reasons why women do not
:15:13. > :15:21.go into those sectors. I think an all-female short list achieved
:15:22. > :15:25.miracle in Parliament. This is following up from having an
:15:26. > :15:29.injection of women coming up because the system was changed and a large
:15:30. > :15:36.percentage of women went into Parliament under the all-female
:15:37. > :15:43.short list were brilliant, so why not? So if the Prime Minister is
:15:44. > :15:51.mailed the Deputy Prime Minister has to be female and vice versa? Yes,
:15:52. > :16:00.absolutely, 50-50. We need to reflect the population. If we want
:16:01. > :16:05.to play this as a symbolic gesture, ideally we should have one of each.
:16:06. > :16:11.Why should a man get the job if you have a great female prime minister
:16:12. > :16:18.and a great female Deputy Prime Minister? I personally wouldn't mind
:16:19. > :16:29.this. I hear the disgruntled man and I want to come -- them to come with
:16:30. > :16:33.us. You're choosing people on the basis of traits they were born
:16:34. > :16:39.with. Are there too many Indian doctors in the NHS? I would argue
:16:40. > :16:43.not. Given that we tend to have male prime ministers rather than female
:16:44. > :16:51.ones, and we don't see another female one coming down the pipe very
:16:52. > :16:57.quickly... In the time before women short lists by the way. If you had a
:16:58. > :17:03.male prime minister with a female Deputy Prime Minister, wouldn't that
:17:04. > :17:08.give some balance? Why women? Why not working class person, which
:17:09. > :17:13.group do you prioritise? I would go with you that we need something
:17:14. > :17:17.fundamental to change. This idea that what we have now is a
:17:18. > :17:22.reflection of a genuine meritocracy is highly questionable. I would
:17:23. > :17:23.argue that when you look at the statistics things are changing.
:17:24. > :17:26.argue that when you look at the statistics things There are more
:17:27. > :17:35.women appearing in parts of public life, that is a long-term trend but
:17:36. > :17:39.if you are trying to appoint people on what they were born with... That
:17:40. > :17:42.is not the only reason but it is an additional reason. She has to be
:17:43. > :17:48.able to do the job, obviously. I am saying the policy of hazard to
:17:49. > :17:52.discrimination explicitly state that you should choose somebody who is
:17:53. > :17:56.female because they are female. At the moment there is already enough
:17:57. > :18:03.suspicion about women who are successful to get to the senior
:18:04. > :18:06.position and if you institutionalise it you reinforce that suspicion
:18:07. > :18:13.Harriet Harman is still complaining women are not being treated fairly.
:18:14. > :18:17.I think the policy reinforces the prejudice that women are not getting
:18:18. > :18:24.there because they are treated on the same basis. Although you may not
:18:25. > :18:28.want to have the all-female short list forever, wasn't it the kind of
:18:29. > :18:33.shock to the system that made a visible change in female
:18:34. > :18:40.representation, which the Tory side hasn't got? Of course it will work
:18:41. > :18:45.short-term but longer term it has a very degrading effect on the
:18:46. > :18:50.principle of equality and the fact Harriet Harman is saying she wasn't
:18:51. > :18:58.treated equally, whether it is true or not, the perception is still
:18:59. > :19:02.there. A number of women find this position must be reserved for a
:19:03. > :19:11.woman lying patronising, and speaking of patronising women, you
:19:12. > :19:15.spoken your Independent column, she presses all of the buttons for white
:19:16. > :19:21.people... Was that patronising and offensive? Probably. I wrote it
:19:22. > :19:26.because I felt that at the time but the point is that I was a token when
:19:27. > :19:32.I was appointed. The paper brought me in because I was a woman and I
:19:33. > :19:38.was a muslin or whatever. You are not writing about yourself. I was
:19:39. > :19:54.writing... It doesn't mean you don't criticise other women. We absolutely
:19:55. > :20:01.have to be tough, Manira is tough and so am I. Do you want to take
:20:02. > :20:07.back what you wrote? No. Do you really think positive discrimination
:20:08. > :20:13.has gone too far? I think there is already a suspicion out there that
:20:14. > :20:16.in certain sectors women are being promoted for the wrong reasons or
:20:17. > :20:23.ethnic minorities are being promoted for the wrong reasons. That is a
:20:24. > :20:27.shame and my worry is that by tying funding to your ethnicity or your
:20:28. > :20:31.gender, by saying you will get a promotion if you check that box but
:20:32. > :20:42.you feel that resentment and prejudice and undermine the case for
:20:43. > :20:48.inequality. I wanted to be treated equally, because I am capable of
:20:49. > :20:56.doing that job. Only two months to go before Scotland takes its biggest
:20:57. > :21:02.constitutional decision in 300 years - should it quit or stay with the
:21:03. > :21:06.UK? For some in Scotland campaign has been going on forever. What has
:21:07. > :21:13.been the impact on the campaign to date?
:21:14. > :21:18.Alex Salmond says Scotland would remain part of the European Union
:21:19. > :21:22.with sterling as its currency in a monetary union with the rest of the
:21:23. > :21:28.UK, but he has also promised more public spending, increased child
:21:29. > :21:36.care provision and free personal care for the elderly. The SNP claims
:21:37. > :21:41.it would leave people better off by ?1000 though that partly depends on
:21:42. > :21:48.the price of oil. With the Better Together arguing against
:21:49. > :21:52.independence, it has naturally been attacking the SNP on all fronts
:21:53. > :21:58.George Osborne says there will be no monetary union. President Barroso
:21:59. > :22:03.told the BBC it would be extremely difficult for Scotland to join the
:22:04. > :22:17.EU after a yes vote. His successor this week said he agreed. Unions
:22:18. > :22:24.claim Scotland benefit by ?1400 by being part of the UK. A poll this
:22:25. > :22:31.morning shows a significant lead of 57% for the no campaign, leaving the
:22:32. > :22:36.SNP to claim it will go their way in the last ten weeks. Nicola Sturgeon,
:22:37. > :22:40.the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, joins me now. You want an
:22:41. > :22:47.independent Scotland to keep the pound, stay in NATO, stay in the
:22:48. > :22:52.EU, Scotland already has all of that but you cannot guarantee it would
:22:53. > :22:59.have any of it in an independent Scotland, why take the risk? All of
:23:00. > :23:02.these things should be the case because they are in the best
:23:03. > :23:08.interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK but we want the powers to
:23:09. > :23:14.enable us to grow our economy faster, to be productive, and
:23:15. > :23:20.overtime increased the prosperity of people living in Scotland. We also
:23:21. > :23:26.want powers over our social security system so that we can create a
:23:27. > :23:29.system that meets our needs, one that also has a safety net for the
:23:30. > :23:36.most vulnerable people in our society. Independence is about
:23:37. > :23:40.letting us decide our own priorities. You didn't answer my
:23:41. > :23:45.question, you cannot guarantee you would be able to keep the pound
:23:46. > :23:50.within a monetary union, stay in NATO and the EU, you cannot
:23:51. > :23:55.guarantee you could produce any of these things, correct? I would argue
:23:56. > :24:00.that we can because these things are also in the interest of the rest of
:24:01. > :24:05.the UK. No country can be prevented from using the pound, I suggest we
:24:06. > :24:11.use that within a formal monetary union. We have had the UK minister
:24:12. > :24:15.quoted in the Guardian saying the position of the UK Government right
:24:16. > :24:19.now is one based on campaign rhetoric and following a yes vote,
:24:20. > :24:27.of course there would be a currency union. Who is that minister? The
:24:28. > :24:32.Minister is unnamed, but nevertheless that story in the
:24:33. > :24:37.Guardian was a solid one and not substantially denied. So you are
:24:38. > :24:46.basing your monetary policy on one on named minister in one story?
:24:47. > :24:51.Basing it on Common sense because monetary union would be in the best
:24:52. > :24:55.interests for Scotland but also overwhelmingly in the interests of
:24:56. > :25:00.the rest of the UK, given their trading relationship with Scotland
:25:01. > :25:08.and the contribution Scotland's exports make. We are having a very
:25:09. > :25:19.good debate and the UK Government and the no campaign, and this is not
:25:20. > :25:25.a criticism, want to talk up in -- uncertainty to make people feel
:25:26. > :25:29.scared, but after independence there will be constructed process of
:25:30. > :25:32.negotiation. Let's stick with the monetary union because most
:25:33. > :25:36.economists agree it would be very good for an independent Scotland to
:25:37. > :25:41.have a monetary union but George Osborne, Ed Balls, Danny Alexander
:25:42. > :25:47.are unequivocal, they say you won't get it. You claim they are bluffing
:25:48. > :25:51.but again you cannot guarantee that so why the risk? I would say the
:25:52. > :25:55.benefits of independence are substantial but I would also say to
:25:56. > :25:59.George Osborne and his counterparts in the other parties that it would
:26:00. > :26:05.be a very brave Chancellor that says to businesses in the rest of the UK
:26:06. > :26:08.that they have to incur unnecessary additional transaction costs of half
:26:09. > :26:11.a very brave Chancellor that says to businesses in the rest of the UK
:26:12. > :26:16.that they have to incur unnecessary additional transaction costs of
:26:17. > :26:20.half. What we are doing is making a case that is based on common sense
:26:21. > :26:25.and voters in Scotland will listen to that case being put forward by
:26:26. > :26:34.the other side as well, and they will come to a judgement of the
:26:35. > :26:37.common-sense position. Let's look at EU membership because you haven t
:26:38. > :26:47.been able to guarantee the monetary union. When President Barroso said
:26:48. > :26:50.that a seamless transition to EU membership for an independent
:26:51. > :26:55.Scotland was anything but certain, and one said it could even be
:26:56. > :27:05.impossible, you dismissed him because he was standing down, but
:27:06. > :27:11.been -- venue EU president says the same, do you dismissed him? What we
:27:12. > :27:16.are doing... I should say at the outset of this, we have said
:27:17. > :27:20.repeatedly to the UK Government let's go jointly and ask for a
:27:21. > :27:24.formal opinion on the EU commission. The EU commission have
:27:25. > :27:31.said they will only do that at this stage if the UK Government ask for
:27:32. > :27:37.it, they are point blank refusing to do that, you have to ask why? It is
:27:38. > :27:43.in their interests to talk up uncertainty. Scotland is an integral
:27:44. > :27:49.part of the European Union, we have been for 40 years, we comply with
:27:50. > :27:54.the rules and regulations... Mr Juncker knows all of that but he
:27:55. > :27:59.still says it will be anything but a seamless transition. He said you
:28:00. > :28:11.could not join the European Union by sending a letter, that is not our
:28:12. > :28:17.proposal. We set down a robust proposal and the timescale we think
:28:18. > :28:22.is reasonable under these circumstances. There are many
:28:23. > :28:28.nationals of other states living in Scotland right now, if we were to be
:28:29. > :28:31.outside of the European Union for any period of time, something the
:28:32. > :28:37.current treaty doesn't even provide for, they would lose their right to
:28:38. > :28:40.stay here. The interests of Scotland and the interests of European Union
:28:41. > :28:45.are in favour of a seamless transition. It comes down to common
:28:46. > :28:45.sense and people in Scotland will make
:28:46. > :29:18.sense and people in Scotland will their own
:29:19. > :29:26.sense and people in Scotland will so in a thoroughly democratic way.
:29:27. > :29:36.That is the nature of democracy Would you accept the protection of
:29:37. > :31:01.the NATO nuclear umbrella? There is no doubt the SNP's
:31:02. > :31:06.you do not like the idea of nuclear. Why would they like a member like
:31:07. > :31:09.you in? Because Scotland is a significant part of the territory of
:31:10. > :31:14.the North Atlantic. You do not subscribe to the rules. 25 of the
:31:15. > :31:23.member states of NATO are non-nuclear members. You are saying
:31:24. > :31:28.you do not follow the doctrine. NATO has said it wants to move away from
:31:29. > :31:32.reliance on nuclear weapons. An independent Scotland would be
:31:33. > :31:37.entering the majority mainstream of NATO as a country that did not have
:31:38. > :31:41.nuclear weapons. By leading by example our moral authority and
:31:42. > :31:48.encouraging others to do likewise would be increased. Money and oil,
:31:49. > :31:50.the finance minister has said that an independent Scotland would
:31:51. > :31:55.increase public spending by 3% a year. He would pay for that by
:31:56. > :32:00.borrowing. Your First Minister says he is going to stash money in an oil
:32:01. > :32:09.fund. You're going to borrow and save. How does that work? There are
:32:10. > :32:12.two points. Firstly in terms of the outlook for finances and what is one
:32:13. > :32:17.of the central debates of this referendum campaign, austerity that
:32:18. > :32:23.we know will continue if we stay as part of the Westminster system
:32:24. > :32:27.versus prosperity. The economy can afford a higher level of increase in
:32:28. > :32:33.public spending while we continue to have deficit levels at a sustainable
:32:34. > :32:38.level. What is the point of borrowing and saving at the same
:32:39. > :32:40.time? People who have a mortgage and the savings account would not
:32:41. > :32:47.themselves what the wisdom of that is. This is based on recommendations
:32:48. > :32:53.of our expert fiscal Commission that as borrowing reduces to sustainable
:32:54. > :32:57.levels it makes sense to start saving a proportion of our oil
:32:58. > :33:03.wealth. In Norway, which has many similarities to Scotland, they have
:33:04. > :33:09.an oil fund worth ?500 billion. Scotland is part of the Westminster
:33:10. > :33:15.system is sitting on a share of UK debt. We can continue to allow our
:33:16. > :33:19.oil wealth, our vast oil wealth to be mismanaged or we can decide we
:33:20. > :33:25.are going to manage that resource better in the years to come. Your
:33:26. > :33:29.figures do not add up unless you are about oil prices and revenue and you
:33:30. > :33:33.have been consistently wrong in your predictions. Last year you forecast
:33:34. > :33:43.that revenues would be the .7 billion more than they actually work
:33:44. > :33:48.-- 3.7 billion. The cost of the Scottish school system gone. There
:33:49. > :33:52.were particular reasons for that in terms of interruption to production
:33:53. > :33:59.and bigger levels of investment Used ill have to find the money Let
:34:00. > :34:03.me explain. They are based on robust assumptions, firstly a production
:34:04. > :34:07.estimates that is in line with the estimates of the oil and gas
:34:08. > :34:13.industry. Use of figures that are based on production of 10 billion
:34:14. > :34:19.barrels of oil. Oil and gas has been wrong as well. It is 24 billion left
:34:20. > :34:23.to be recovered. That is what is in the UK Government's oil and gas
:34:24. > :34:30.strategy so production in line with industry estimates and an oil price
:34:31. > :34:35.of $110 per barrel which is flat in cash terms would be a real terms
:34:36. > :34:40.reduction. The Department of energy is estimating $128 per barrel so our
:34:41. > :34:46.estimate compared to that is cautious. These are robust estimates
:34:47. > :34:53.based on robust assumptions. Except they have been wrong. Finally, we
:34:54. > :34:57.hear a lot from you and your fellow nationalists, you want a
:34:58. > :35:02.Scandinavian style social democracy, you know how to spend the money but
:35:03. > :35:05.you never tell us about social democratic levels of taxation. Also
:35:06. > :35:13.should grizzlies have higher levels of tax in Scotland does at the
:35:14. > :35:20.moment -- all social grizzlies. I want a Scottish style of social
:35:21. > :35:24.democracy. Free education, free medicines and balancing the books
:35:25. > :35:29.every single year. We want to get more people into work in Scotland,
:35:30. > :35:32.raise the level of distribution in the Labour market and make the
:35:33. > :35:38.economy more productive so we are raising the overall tax revenue
:35:39. > :35:41.Over the last 33 years we have generated more taxpayer head of
:35:42. > :35:49.population than is the case and the rest of the UK. Those last 33 years,
:35:50. > :35:52.some of those years oil prices would have been high and in others they
:35:53. > :35:57.would have been law but we take different decisions. A report showed
:35:58. > :36:03.that if we go as part of the Westminster system down the plate --
:36:04. > :36:09.route of replacing Trident then the cost will be as high as ?4 billion
:36:10. > :36:14.every year. Our share of that is the hundred million pounds a year. Let
:36:15. > :36:17.us get access to our own resources so we can make different and better
:36:18. > :36:24.decisions about how to spend the resources we have. You are promising
:36:25. > :36:28.Scandinavian style social democratic levels of public spending but you
:36:29. > :36:36.say you will not need a top rate of tax of 56% which is what Scandinavia
:36:37. > :36:41.has, that all 25%, which is what Scandinavia has and VAT of 15%. You
:36:42. > :36:46.are going to have the spending but none of the taxes that make it
:36:47. > :36:50.possible in Scandinavia. For mischievous reasons you are met --
:36:51. > :36:57.misrepresenting what I am saying. The Scottish economy can afford it
:36:58. > :37:01.and we want to generate more wealth in our economy. We want to use the
:37:02. > :37:06.existing resources Scotland has We are the 14th richest country in the
:37:07. > :37:11.world in terms of what we produce. We do not want to be wasting
:37:12. > :37:15.resources. We want to be spending resources on the things that other
:37:16. > :37:19.priority for the people of Scotland. These are the benefits and the
:37:20. > :37:21.opportunities really get if we take the opportunity of voting yes and
:37:22. > :39:59.becoming independent. will call in the manifesto, I am
:40:00. > :40:06.sure. It will have to be scrutinised properly. The Liberal Democrat
:40:07. > :40:12.position is different. And cable has said that today. Our MPs do not have
:40:13. > :40:16.the minimum threshold. Why should anyone who is a public sector
:40:17. > :40:23.worker? We need to work with the unions. I think it is a shale that
:40:24. > :40:33.make up as antagonised thesd people. As a teacher myself, I know that you
:40:34. > :40:39.did not strike likely. Is hd making things worse? Our members whll be
:40:40. > :40:47.extremely disappointed to hdar that the discussion today is abott strike
:40:48. > :40:49.ballots. What they want to hear is that it is not great, does not fear
:40:50. > :40:54.that people delivering local that people delivering local
:40:55. > :40:58.government services should be asked to work on poverty pay. That they
:40:59. > :41:21.should have no pay rise for five years above inflation. They have
:41:22. > :41:27.lost 20% of the value of thdrapy. Those people should not be `sked to
:41:28. > :41:37.pay `` to make up a deficit. That is not justice. Surely the bal`nce ``
:41:38. > :41:45.the ballot, at two`year`old ballot, why restrict or? Why inconvdnience
:41:46. > :41:56.people. I cannot speak on that. , but we have a mandate for action.
:41:57. > :42:05.Would you have preferred a workplace ballot? We had a clear mand`te. Our
:42:06. > :42:15.members requested that. It hs their decision to strike, not mind. I
:42:16. > :42:18.think attempts to undermine that and make the discussion about the ballot
:42:19. > :42:22.and the legitimacy of the strike, rather than the real issue, which is
:42:23. > :42:29.about fair wages, is the wrong message to send those workers. Fair
:42:30. > :42:41.wages. Liberal Democrats were supposed to be about that. No here
:42:42. > :42:44.is the tax funded part of otr economy been told that they will
:42:45. > :42:47.have to take less each year. People are struggling. That is why we
:42:48. > :42:53.brought in the raising of the tax threshold to ?10,000. That was a key
:42:54. > :42:56.promise and manifesto. On one hand, you need to rebalance the t`x system
:42:57. > :43:02.so that those who are doing the hardest work on mortgages are those
:43:03. > :43:09.that are rewarded. That is why we want a tax above `` on homes above
:43:10. > :43:14.?2 million. So you would rather that we paid them more? I would rather
:43:15. > :43:22.that public sector workers were getting paid... Well, it is not up
:43:23. > :43:27.to me to decide what. If I get elected in the next `` next
:43:28. > :43:36.election, will not be DTP rhce and they do also. I think it is right.
:43:37. > :43:42.The fact that our members are struggling by, will MPs takd 11 , I
:43:43. > :43:48.think that is unfair. There is a crisis in the public sector at the
:43:49. > :43:59.moment, workloads are up. Pdople, we have lost 400,000 jobs ``.
:44:00. > :44:12.It is absolutely right that the government, listens to this. That is
:44:13. > :44:16.what the strike was all abott. It seems that it is not being taken
:44:17. > :44:24.seriously. I think it is behng taken very seriously. Talking abott
:44:25. > :44:26.balances and thresholds, it is a bit of a misnomer. We have to rdmember
:44:27. > :44:32.that the debt `` the deficit that we that the debt `` the deficit that we
:44:33. > :44:39.have. The caution came together in the national interest to trx to
:44:40. > :44:42.skill this country's debts. Would I like to be sitting here as ` member
:44:43. > :44:49.of Parliament, what David C`meron as prime Minster, offering teachers are
:44:50. > :45:08.much bigger pay rise? Of cotrse we would. We're not in this business to
:45:09. > :45:14.make people more power. `` poor People are making money. Th`t is
:45:15. > :45:25.what the public sector is. `` private sector. But in the public
:45:26. > :45:30.sector, we have to be responsible. I do not think the government can move
:45:31. > :45:43.on this. I think the strikes are unhelpful. Do you think there will
:45:44. > :45:49.be changed before the next election? We will have to do that.
:45:50. > :45:59.If we do not get to `` if wd do not see movement, that will happen.
:46:00. > :46:04.Members deserve that. Thank you for coming in.
:46:05. > :46:08.The European elections back in May were a bit of a bloodbath for
:46:09. > :46:13.Liberal Democrats. They werd left one solitary MP representing the
:46:14. > :46:18.south`east. You kept at its best election ever and is now thd largest
:46:19. > :46:19.group from the UK. In the l`st month he had been settling into the new
:46:20. > :46:33.jobs and offices. We have won some very competent
:46:34. > :46:40.MEPs. May 21 We have won some very competent
:46:41. > :46:51.MEPs. May sought ten Liberal Democrat MEPs called from the group.
:46:52. > :46:57.I am beginning to feel like now I set with a group of people, nearly
:46:58. > :47:08.70 of us, who are the fourth largest party in the Parliament, so we will
:47:09. > :47:11.have a lot of sway on the votes Are the others within the Liber`l
:47:12. > :47:16.Democrat groups more federalist Samar is, some are not. The Germans
:47:17. > :47:26.are less federalist, interestingly enough, because they come from a
:47:27. > :47:35.company that is federated. How do you see the next five years? Is it
:47:36. > :47:42.all unknown? I have things that I want to achieve. I want to get
:47:43. > :47:46.environmental protection buhlt in and what to do some more work on the
:47:47. > :47:53.trafficking of human beings. There's a lot that I personally want to do.
:47:54. > :47:57.I just been elected as a qudst. It means that I am the MEP's
:47:58. > :48:07.representative on the bugle that runs the Parliament. It is not like
:48:08. > :48:16.being in Westminster, where one MP cannot gain animate `` cannot get an
:48:17. > :48:19.amendment. We work together, whether I am working with a socialist one
:48:20. > :48:26.day or Christian Democrats the next day, we find people that we can work
:48:27. > :48:36.with and we work. It is what I call grown`up politics. Miguel, one block
:48:37. > :48:41.over, here. The furniture looks like something my grandmother wotld have
:48:42. > :48:58.had. There is supposed to bd a drinks cabinet. Yes, I belidve it is
:48:59. > :49:04.here. What is the letter? I do not know. It is probably a death threat,
:49:05. > :49:11.I would imagine, from the Lhberal Democrats! It is somebody asking for
:49:12. > :49:17.a job. We will appoint the star I warn we're a point staff th`t will
:49:18. > :49:18.do something properly. Therd is no point just enjoying `` employing
:49:19. > :49:32.your friends. And speaking of friends... He is a
:49:33. > :49:38.veteran of the last Parliamdnt, when the party lost half of its LEPs I
:49:39. > :49:46.knew within weeks that therd was going to be trouble. That is not the
:49:47. > :49:52.case this time. Different pdople? Different people, I think some
:49:53. > :49:57.people are born troublemaker is anyway. I do not think we h`ve any
:49:58. > :50:14.of that in this group of people He has a book on fishing. Taking his
:50:15. > :50:18.work seriously? Cod, there `re no coddle left. I do fishing in the
:50:19. > :50:53.channel and when you're catching cod, the common fisheries
:50:54. > :51:01.find somewhere to love? `` the incest. `` they insist. The money is
:51:02. > :51:06.there if you want to make it. I would rather just as nonlivhng, to
:51:07. > :52:35.be honest. It is even more corrupt, even more anti`democratic and even
:52:36. > :52:41.Apart from the bride and groom, the only names on their are of the
:52:42. > :52:47.blade's father and the grool's father. Mothers do not get `lbum
:52:48. > :52:50.again. This woman wants to get things change. If you're
:52:51. > :52:55.passionately about this. Yes, I do. I do not think there should be a
:52:56. > :53:01.legal document which in 2014 is discriminating against women in this
:53:02. > :53:04.way. Cheating in a Victorian week, the whole thing as our business
:53:05. > :53:17.transaction between two fathers Yes. Woman have been written out of
:53:18. > :53:22.history. Is it really that serious? I think that it has very important,
:53:23. > :53:27.because it is part of a widdr pattern. People are very upset about
:53:28. > :53:30.it. They have been explaining on my petition, they have been getting
:53:31. > :53:37.married and not being able to include their mothers. Therd have
:53:38. > :53:40.been registrars have signed the petition who are saying that every
:53:41. > :53:49.day there haven't explained to people that the form is still in use
:53:50. > :53:54.Where I got married, they h`ve one Where I got married, they h`ve one
:53:55. > :53:59.bit that they have had sincd the 1800, with the names of the people
:54:00. > :54:07.that got married and that vhllage. It is a bit of history. Do xou see
:54:08. > :54:11.for that bit away? Not at all. You could have space on the reghsters
:54:12. > :54:15.and on the marriage certificates at the moment to start recording
:54:16. > :54:19.mothers, and perhaps bring hn new certificates and new registdrs when
:54:20. > :54:24.the old ones were used up. H think it is important, in 2014, that this
:54:25. > :54:36.legal inequality needs to bd stopped. People are raising
:54:37. > :54:41.practical objections. I was people using it as a ruse? I think most
:54:42. > :54:49.people are in support of it, or they are not against it. Because there
:54:50. > :54:55.are still an entrenched atthtude and society, you think there nedds to
:54:56. > :55:03.change? Yes, it is an important message. It is part of this wider
:55:04. > :55:10.pattern and there it is being brought to people's attention, with
:55:11. > :55:16.109 in `` MPs signing the e`rly days of motion and the it's been talked
:55:17. > :55:23.about in the House of Commons, I am looking for the Home Office to get
:55:24. > :55:35.it changed. Will the change it? I hope so. The initial reply was that
:55:36. > :55:44.they had no plans to change the law. That is a classic reply. Thdy have
:55:45. > :55:48.come at this week and seeing that the government is actively looking
:55:49. > :55:57.at this. It seems to me that this is a bit of a no`brainer. Why hs it not
:55:58. > :56:03.happening? As we were seeing Elliott, we need to make sure that
:56:04. > :56:07.there are not things stopping people getting equal pay. It took ` lot to
:56:08. > :56:11.get equal marriage fruit Parliament. We need to focus on things that are
:56:12. > :56:16.of the Day today, it's huge inequalities. Why should thd mother
:56:17. > :56:22.not to be inequalities. Why should thd mother
:56:23. > :56:35.there? Some people are brought up either ``
:56:36. > :56:45.campaign to get parents' nales on children who pause passports. ``
:56:46. > :56:50.children's passports. I don't favour is any sinister plot here, ht is
:56:51. > :56:58.just a piece of old law that needs updating. `` I don't think. The only
:56:59. > :57:03.reason the Government is looking at it is because I have mobilised
:57:04. > :57:09.60,000 people online. Have xou signed it? Yes, that is how
:57:10. > :57:27.democracy works. I think shd is onto something.
:57:28. > :57:30.On Monday Government ministdrs fanned out trumpet in new
:57:31. > :57:36.infrastructure growth deals. The Defence Secretary in Oxfordshire
:57:37. > :57:39.said they were trusting loc`l enterprise partnerships. Getting
:57:40. > :57:40.away from centrally determined priorities to locally deterline
:57:41. > :57:47.priorities. A huge flood relief scheme
:57:48. > :57:50.for Oxford's on the list, but six months on from flooding
:57:51. > :57:53.in Basingstoke, some are not back in their homes, and others worry
:57:54. > :57:55.they'll be hit again. If we do get another downpotr,
:57:56. > :57:59.we?re going to be back to how we was before because they're not
:58:00. > :58:01.maintaining the drains. Thousands of care workers
:58:02. > :58:04.in the South are getting less than the minimum wage, because they?re
:58:05. > :58:06.not paid to travel between jobs If I've worked it,
:58:07. > :58:08.I should be paid it. 140 staff at Oxfordshire Cotnty
:58:09. > :58:11.Council could be asked to work in Winchester, as they shard admin
:58:12. > :58:14.and finance with Hampshire. Meanwhile, it's costing ?20,000
:58:15. > :58:16.a month to keep Reading Prison That's the amount being spent
:58:17. > :58:34.on security, gas and electrhcity. That is ridiculous. And you are so
:58:35. > :58:41.focused on trying to find s`vings, but they are not always obvhous
:58:42. > :58:44.That business with the care workers, somewhere along the lines some
:58:45. > :58:49.private people have... Last time I was on this programme the ldader of
:58:50. > :58:59.Redding Council was sitting next to me, and I suspect they will be ``
:59:00. > :59:04.she will be onto that. `` Rddding. It is very difficult to drive
:59:05. > :59:07.efficiency. Is this idea of growth deals making things more local?
:59:08. > :59:13.Could that go wrong because people have the wrong way? The thing about
:59:14. > :59:19.these growth deals is they have been driven by Nick Clegg' `` Nick
:59:20. > :59:24.Clegg's office. It is at thd heart of localism to drive the economy
:59:25. > :59:30.with people who understand how that local economy works. So the
:59:31. > :59:34.Oxfordshire `` they have worked closely with the county councils and
:59:35. > :59:38.district councils, parish councils, and we have to work out how best to
:59:39. > :59:42.do it. The best people to s`y how to do that other people on the ground.
:59:43. > :59:48.When you have centralisation, that is when you have wastage. More
:59:49. > :59:53.savings to be made to? In the next Parliament? Whoever is in
:59:54. > :59:57.Government, there will be a long`term economic land. We have
:59:58. > :00:06.talked about the local enterprise partnerships, they have dond very
:00:07. > :00:11.well. `` economic plan. Thex have done very well out of the growth
:00:12. > :00:18.deal, and we want more. The coalition is united on pushhng
:00:19. > :00:24.power, pushing resources. To end `` we end our series with the
:00:25. > :00:30.two of you at least United! That is it for today. Thank you to ly
:00:31. > :00:35.guests. You can keep up`to`date by reading my blog.
:00:36. > :00:48.will keep a bit safer. That is all the time we have.
:00:49. > :00:51.So, plenty happening in Parliament this coming week, including
:00:52. > :00:53.a controversial bill to make so-called assisted dying legal and
:00:54. > :01:14.Lord Carey has intervened in the assisted dying debate. Will it make
:01:15. > :01:20.a difference? It will make a difference because we have
:01:21. > :01:26.established in the House of Lords, I am not sure who they speak for and
:01:27. > :01:33.why they should have a privileged position, but he was a big opponent
:01:34. > :01:36.and has made a change of heart. The fact that the Daily Mail has printed
:01:37. > :01:48.this shows this is a big intervention. The Bill being pushed
:01:49. > :01:54.through, is it now on the agenda? I think it is. There are international
:01:55. > :01:59.examples of assisted dying elsewhere. The state of Oregon
:02:00. > :02:05.passed a Bill similar to this in the 1990s and things have not got out of
:02:06. > :02:07.control. That has not been an expansion or abuse. It has settled
:02:08. > :02:17.down and become part of the furniture. That makes it easier for
:02:18. > :02:20.this Bill, to make the case for it. Religious people may still have a
:02:21. > :02:24.principled objection but most other people have a practical objection,
:02:25. > :02:27.which is how to put in place safeguards to deal with unscrupulous
:02:28. > :02:32.relatives or anyone else who wants to abuse this right? Once a
:02:33. > :02:37.controversial issue is only being opposed for practical reasons it is
:02:38. > :02:40.on its way to getting its way. What is the division, is it the Church
:02:41. > :02:49.against everybody else? Is it a right and left division? What is
:02:50. > :02:54.stopping it? It is a very difficult moral issue and there are people who
:02:55. > :02:59.can have genuinely held Christian beliefs or non-Christian beliefs who
:03:00. > :03:03.can be on both sides. I think that the Lord Carey intervention is
:03:04. > :03:07.potentially a game changer not just because he is a former Archbishop of
:03:08. > :03:11.Canterbury but because he was on the Evan Jellicoe side of the Church of
:03:12. > :03:18.England. That is quite a big move. The response was to say, please
:03:19. > :03:23.withdraw your bell and let us have a royal Commission. The Supreme Court
:03:24. > :03:28.kicked the ball back to Parliament when they rejected the cases of
:03:29. > :03:34.three people who had been taking the case and said, we could say that
:03:35. > :03:38.banning the right to life is against the European Court of Human Rights,
:03:39. > :03:47.but it is a moral issue and an issue for Parliament. Parliament needs to
:03:48. > :03:52.decide. The data act that is going to be pushed through Parliament In
:03:53. > :04:01.record time. To comply with a European court judgement. Tom Watson
:04:02. > :04:05.and David Davis, some dissent. Are you so prized with how united the
:04:06. > :04:13.establishment, left, right and centre is? No. There is a great
:04:14. > :04:17.quote saying this has been enacted under the something must be done act
:04:18. > :04:24.and that captures it exactly. Even Cameron says he does not want to
:04:25. > :04:27.look people in the eye and say that he did not do everything he could.
:04:28. > :04:32.There is no end to the power of surveillance. It is all was about
:04:33. > :04:36.drawing a distinction. I am always suspicious when politicians look
:04:37. > :04:42.something up and said, we have all agreed. Are there at the centre is
:04:43. > :04:51.right or is the political establishment right? I think the
:04:52. > :04:57.establishment is right. I think it is stronger than other issues. We
:04:58. > :04:59.are in a unique position where all three political parties have
:05:00. > :05:04.relatively recent experience of government so they now that security
:05:05. > :05:11.threats are not made up by unscrupulous people. The legislation
:05:12. > :05:18.being proposed is not dramatic, it is to fill a gap that was created. I
:05:19. > :05:23.do not see the political controversy. All three political
:05:24. > :05:31.parties support it. David Davis and Liberty are against that, and always
:05:32. > :05:35.are. Would you not have expected... The Lib Dems are in government, but
:05:36. > :05:42.a bit more rebellion on the Labour backbenches? There is no political
:05:43. > :05:48.controversy put outside parliament there's quite a lot of controversy
:05:49. > :05:55.about this. My paper has taken an interest in this. It is interesting,
:05:56. > :06:03.it does not feel, it is not a 1950s, three public school boys
:06:04. > :06:07.setting, let us have this deal. The Liberal Democrats and Labour have
:06:08. > :06:15.serious questions. There's going to be a sunset clause that will run out
:06:16. > :06:21.in 2016. The Liberal Democrats, who asked pretty tough questions, have
:06:22. > :06:22.said there are assurances. Ed Miliband did not go to public
:06:23. > :06:25.school. For many English football fans,
:06:26. > :06:28.tonight's World Cup final presents How do you pick
:06:29. > :06:31.between two traditional foes Well, if you're
:06:32. > :06:34.a political obsessive, like these three, you could always back the
:06:35. > :06:37.nation according to how it votes. The website LabourList has produced
:06:38. > :06:52.a political guide to the tournament. At the beginning of the tournament,
:06:53. > :06:57.it was a fairly balanced playing field politically with 15 left wing
:06:58. > :07:01.and 17 right-wing countries. England found themselves isolated in a group
:07:02. > :07:08.with three left-wing countries. That was the least of their problems
:07:09. > :07:10.There was a clear domination of democratic regimes over
:07:11. > :07:13.authoritarian with only six of oratory and countries making it
:07:14. > :07:23.through to the finals and the only all authoritarian tie was dubbed the
:07:24. > :07:26.worst match of the World Cup. By the second round 16 teams remained. The
:07:27. > :07:31.left had a clear advantage with nine, seven from the right and
:07:32. > :07:36.authoritarian countries all but wiped out. Two representatives
:07:37. > :07:45.remained. Both were beaten by European democracies. By the
:07:46. > :07:51.semi-finals, all was even Stephen. A right-wing Protestant Europe taking
:07:52. > :07:56.on Catholics South America. With one victory apiece, Germany knocking out
:07:57. > :08:02.Brazil and Argentina beating the Dutch, tonight's final repeats that
:08:03. > :08:11.pattern. Who will win? Angela Merkel's Germany or Argentina?
:08:12. > :08:13.We're joined now by Britain's only Labour adviser
:08:14. > :08:27.Should we read political significance in to the fact that the
:08:28. > :08:33.only time England has won the World Cup was under a Labour government?
:08:34. > :08:38.Of course. The problem is we did not qualify for Euro 2008 when it was a
:08:39. > :08:43.Labour government. We have had some pretty shoddy results under a Labour
:08:44. > :08:48.government. As someone under the left, are you backing Argentina
:08:49. > :08:53.Absolutely not. I do not think it has anything to do with politics. It
:08:54. > :09:01.is a bit of fun. People should choose it is Don Hoop plays the best
:09:02. > :09:07.football and the Germans have been fantastic. They were great in 2 10
:09:08. > :09:12.as well. They started this model in 2008 and that is the sort of thing
:09:13. > :09:16.people should be supporting. Who should a Eurosceptic support? I
:09:17. > :09:21.would not say Argentina because that is the country that has tried to
:09:22. > :09:29.seize British sovereign territory within my lifetime. You were not
:09:30. > :09:34.around for the Blitz. Believe it or not, I was not. There is a strong
:09:35. > :09:46.political case to support Germany. They are probably going to win the
:09:47. > :09:50.World Cup with a clear of -- with players of Polish origin. That sort
:09:51. > :09:58.of cultural change they have forced themselves to go through... You talk
:09:59. > :10:03.about them being right wing, but in fact the way that the German league
:10:04. > :10:09.is structured, and I am an expert, is based on ownership. It is very
:10:10. > :10:17.different from the Premier League. It is about football as a usual
:10:18. > :10:25.good. The ticket prices are lower. The fans are involved in running the
:10:26. > :10:29.club. It is a model that all English football clubs should emulate.
:10:30. > :10:33.Germany had a strong football team under centre right governments and
:10:34. > :10:45.centre left governments and a coalition. A strong football team
:10:46. > :10:49.and a strong economy. The Conservative MP who is the arch
:10:50. > :10:52.Eurosceptic wanted to get us out of the European Union and was for a few
:10:53. > :10:58.weeks ago when people were making jokes about Jean-Claude Juncker he
:10:59. > :11:04.was outraged and said you should not do that, so he could happily support
:11:05. > :11:09.Germany. What was interesting about the authoritarian and democratic
:11:10. > :11:21.regimes, what is great is that the World Cup is run by this open and
:11:22. > :11:27.democratic organisation Fifa. It is similar to the EU in many regards.
:11:28. > :11:36.Two countries led by women. Maybe gender is the thing. We did not win
:11:37. > :11:42.under Margaret Thatcher. There's one big difference with the EU, you
:11:43. > :11:49.cannot flog six Dom Acta gets to go to a European summit. Did you know
:11:50. > :12:36.that Italy won two world cups under Mussolini? Can we
:12:37. > :12:37.that Italy won two world cups under win the European Championship. The
:12:38. > :12:40.first country Scotland have to play is Germany. What could possibly go