: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. > :00:49.what are the issues and arguments that will determine the result?
:00:50. > :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. > :00:58.Many of those tipped for promotion are women.
:00:59. > :01:02.So have efforts to promote diversity in public life barely started or
:01:03. > :01:11.And don't know whether to support Germany or
:01:12. > :01:20.Later in the programme: political guide to the World Cup.
:01:21. > :01:22.A dramatic week in Cardiff Bay ends a very eventual first half
:01:23. > :01:40.It's World Cup final day and as usual the BBC's snagged the
:01:41. > :01:46.Yes, eat your heart out, ITV, because for top football analysis
:01:47. > :01:49.we've got Gary Lineker, Alan Hansen, and Alan Shearer.
:01:50. > :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. > :02:11.in and who'll be out, though they don't really know.
:02:12. > :02:14.The Mail on Sunday has one of the more eye-catching lines,
:02:15. > :02:16.reporting that former defence secretary and right-winger Liam Fox
:02:17. > :02:19.is in line for a return to the political front line.
:02:20. > :02:26.But there's general agreement that women will do well and some
:02:27. > :02:30.of the old men in suits guard will do badly.
:02:31. > :02:39.Here's senior Tory backbencher David Davis speaking to this programme.
:02:40. > :02:46.It's good to make parliament more representative.
:02:47. > :02:49.But you've got to do it in a way that doesn't create
:02:50. > :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. > :03:03.accelerated too far too fast and they come to
:03:04. > :03:09.a screeching halt where they have to catch up with themselves.
:03:10. > :03:22.I am not going to give an example. Is this not a bit cynical? He is
:03:23. > :03:30.going to promote these women into cabinet positions, but they will not
:03:31. > :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. > :03:51.refreshed ourselves? Generally it doesn't refresh the government.
:03:52. > :03:58.David Cameron wants to send out a new signal. You're going to see the
:03:59. > :04:02.old guard getting a P 45 and you will see a lot of women come in and
:04:03. > :04:09.a lot of younger men. We will find there will be a lot of resignations.
:04:10. > :04:15.A lot of, dear Prime Minister, as I told you 18 months ago, I want to
:04:16. > :04:19.move on. Because the Conservatives have this perception of not being
:04:20. > :04:24.very good with women and not being good with black and ethnic minority
:04:25. > :04:31.voters, they are going to want to do something about that. Why did he not
:04:32. > :04:37.do it before? This reshuffle might be the triumph of the a list. A lot
:04:38. > :04:42.of the women coming through the ranks have been from the a list
:04:43. > :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. > :04:57.long-term strategy. David Cameron is not the world's most raging
:04:58. > :05:01.feminist. He is doing this for practical reasons. He knows he has
:05:02. > :05:11.an image problem for the party and he has to solve it. He was stung by
:05:12. > :05:14.that picture of the all-male bench at Prime Minister's Questions
:05:15. > :05:19.because visibly it gave you the problem that you have been talking
:05:20. > :05:24.about. I do not think he has allowed it to be all-male since that
:05:25. > :05:27.embarrassing image. I can understand the criticism made of this approach
:05:28. > :05:34.if it was the case that all the women being promoted by talentless
:05:35. > :05:39.but you have to be very harsh to look at them and say that they would
:05:40. > :05:52.have much less to offer than the likes of Andrew Lansley. You can be
:05:53. > :05:55.pro-feminist. The tests for David Cameron is that having raised
:05:56. > :06:00.expectations he has to give them substantial jobs. They have to be
:06:01. > :06:04.given departments to run or big portfolios to carry. If they are
:06:05. > :06:09.given media campaign positions in the run-up to the election it looks
:06:10. > :06:15.perfunctorily. He is under some trouble to perhaps suggest a female
:06:16. > :06:24.commissioner to the European Union Commission. Jean-Claude Juncker has
:06:25. > :06:29.made clear that if he proposes a woman candidate they will get a
:06:30. > :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 would be
:07:06. > :07:08.great scepticism of giving it to Andrew Lansley. People would think
:07:09. > :07:17.he was the man who mucked up the reform of the NHS. Who is it going
:07:18. > :07:22.to be? Either a woman or a man. I would not be surprised if they go
:07:23. > :07:28.for someone believe dynamic. Someone who would square the party. Would
:07:29. > :07:35.that not mean a by-election? It might. She is a high profile
:07:36. > :07:40.Eurosceptic. She is a very competent former banker. It would be the smart
:07:41. > :07:42.choice. I have no idea but my favourite rumour is Michael Howard.
:07:43. > :07:50.That had some legs for a while. The Mystic Megs of Fleet Street
:07:51. > :07:55.predict with confidence that the PM is going to promote more women
:07:56. > :07:56.in his cabinet reshuffle. The move can be seen as part
:07:57. > :07:59.of a move across British public life to do more to make our institutions
:08:00. > :08:02.less male and less white. But as the list
:08:03. > :08:04.of schemes to encourage diversity grows ever-longer, have we abandoned
:08:05. > :08:20.the idea of appointment by merit? Tunnelling. Hard hats, and all for
:08:21. > :08:25.new trains. It does not get more macho than the Crossrail project.
:08:26. > :08:26.When Crossrail looked at the construction industry they realise
:08:27. > :08:37.that less than 20% was made up construction industry they realise
:08:38. > :08:39.women and they asked, can we fix it? They are trying with a recruitment
:08:40. > :08:46.drive that has brought in female engineers like this woman. She even
:08:47. > :08:50.has a tunnel named after her. Having more female engineers and
:08:51. > :08:56.construction brings a bigger range of opinions, a bigger range of
:08:57. > :09:00.ideas, more diversity, into the industry, and makes it better as a
:09:01. > :09:04.whole. It is the issue being grappled in another male dominated
:09:05. > :09:08.workplace, the Cabinet. There is about to be a reach shuffle and the
:09:09. > :09:12.rumour is David Cameron is going to promote a lot of female ministers.
:09:13. > :09:18.It was a lack of promotion that annoyed Harriet Harman this week.
:09:19. > :09:22.She claimed Gordon Brown did not make her Deputy Prime Minister
:09:23. > :09:25.because she was a woman. It was strange that in a hard-fought highly
:09:26. > :09:30.contested election to be deputy leader of the Labour Party, and
:09:31. > :09:33.having won against men in the Cabinet, to succeed to be deputy
:09:34. > :09:38.leader of the Labour Party I discovered that I was not to be
:09:39. > :09:42.appointed as Deputy Prime Minister. For women in this country, no matter
:09:43. > :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. > :09:58.the City the EU wants a quarter for women in the boardroom but that goal
:09:59. > :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. > :10:27.on screen and off and helping social mobility. Employers like Crossrail
:10:28. > :10:31.are not allowed to positively discriminate but under the quality
:10:32. > :10:36.act of 2010 if two candidate for a job are just as good you are allowed
:10:37. > :10:41.to base your decision on characteristics like race, sexuality
:10:42. > :10:48.and gender. Some worry it has chipped away at the idea of hiring
:10:49. > :10:53.on merit. A woman and three men going for a job, two of the men are
:10:54. > :10:56.really good and the woman is not quite as good but she gets the job
:10:57. > :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. > :11:19.construction industry. The question is, what tools do you use when it
:11:20. > :11:31.comes to the rest of society? I'm joined now by
:11:32. > :11:32.Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, a columnist for the Independent,
:11:33. > :11:35.and by Munira Mirza, the deputy mayor of London responsible
:11:36. > :11:47.for education and culture. Cabinet wee shovel coming up punches
:11:48. > :11:54.though. Should David Cameron be promoting women? He is going to do
:11:55. > :12:00.it anyway. He should have a long time ago. It does not feel quite
:12:01. > :12:06.right that a few months before the election it would do the party a lot
:12:07. > :12:10.of good to be seen as a party properly reflective of the entire
:12:11. > :12:15.population. He should promote women because they are women? I think he
:12:16. > :12:18.should think about lots of different factors, whether the people he wants
:12:19. > :12:25.promote have proven themselves in their current reefs, whether they
:12:26. > :12:30.are good performers in the media, whether they represent different
:12:31. > :12:34.parts of the party, but the main principle is to promote on basis of
:12:35. > :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. > :12:46.The thing about positive discrimination as it flies in the
:12:47. > :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. > :13:12.every other country throughout history. We are asking as women, all
:13:13. > :13:19.minorities, let us get into the same game. What do you say? You cannot
:13:20. > :13:24.solve the racism or the sexism of the past by more racism and sexism.
:13:25. > :13:29.It is not the past. There are complex reasons why a smaller number
:13:30. > :13:35.of women will appear in certain industries. It has a lot to do with
:13:36. > :13:38.childcare, education, expected. You cannot short cut that by setting a
:13:39. > :13:43.target. That is not how you achieve equality. Things are changing and
:13:44. > :13:48.more women are appearing in engineering and so on but it will
:13:49. > :13:50.take time. My worry is that these kinds of measures are
:13:51. > :13:52.counter-productive and undermine the perception that women can do it on
:13:53. > :13:54.their own merit rather counter-productive and undermine the
:13:55. > :13:59.perception that women can do it than because they need a helping hand. It
:14:00. > :14:10.is not a helping hand. It is to say, we are as good as men and these
:14:11. > :14:12.hidden barriers. Dot. Either they are not as good or they do not want
:14:13. > :14:16.it, which is just how we persuade are not as good or they do not want
:14:17. > :14:21.it, which ourselves that it is not happening, or there are barriers.
:14:22. > :14:29.How we judge meritocracy is at the heart of it. Are lots of industries
:14:30. > :14:36.won there are not that many women, such as engineering. We need more
:14:37. > :14:42.engineers generally. I think it is fine to try to encourage more women
:14:43. > :14:50.to study that subject. By setting a target you put pressure on an
:14:51. > :15:11.organisation. You tried to ignore the complex reasons why women do not
:15:12. > :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. > :15:28.injection of women coming up because the system was changed and a large
:15:29. > :15:35.percentage of women went into Parliament under the all-female
:15:36. > :15:42.short list were brilliant, so why not? So if the Prime Minister is
:15:43. > :15:50.mailed the Deputy Prime Minister has to be female and vice versa? Yes,
:15:51. > :15:59.absolutely, 50-50. We need to reflect the population. If we want
:16:00. > :16:04.to play this as a symbolic gesture, ideally we should have one of each.
:16:05. > :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. > :16:28.this. I hear the disgruntled man and I want to come -- them to come with
:16:29. > :16:32.us. You're choosing people on the basis of traits they were born
:16:33. > :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. > :16:50.ones, and we don't see another female one coming down the pipe very
:16:51. > :16:56.quickly... In the time before women short lists by the way. If you had a
:16:57. > :17:02.male prime minister with a female Deputy Prime Minister, wouldn't that
:17:03. > :17:08.give some balance? Why women? Why not working class person, which
:17:09. > :17:12.group do you prioritise? I would go with you that we need something
:17:13. > :17:17.fundamental to change. This idea that what we have now is a
:17:18. > :17:21.reflection of a genuine meritocracy is highly questionable. I would
:17:22. > :17:23.argue that when you look at the statistics things are changing.
:17:24. > :17:25.argue that when you look at the statistics things There are more
:17:26. > :17:34.women appearing in parts of public life, that is a long-term trend, but
:17:35. > :17:38.if you are trying to appoint people on what they were born with... That
:17:39. > :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. > :18:05.position and if you institutionalise it you reinforce that suspicion.
:18:06. > :18:13.Harriet Harman is still complaining women are not being treated fairly.
:18:14. > :18:16.I think the policy reinforces the prejudice that women are not getting
:18:17. > :18:23.there because they are treated on the same basis. Although you may not
:18:24. > :18:27.want to have the all-female short list forever, wasn't it the kind of
:18:28. > :18:32.shock to the system that made a visible change in female
:18:33. > :18:40.representation, which the Tory side hasn't got? Of course it will work
:18:41. > :18:44.short-term but longer term it has a very degrading effect on the
:18:45. > :18:49.principle of equality and the fact Harriet Harman is saying she wasn't
:18:50. > :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. > :19:10.woman lying patronising, and speaking of patronising women, you
:19:11. > :19:14.spoken your Independent column, she presses all of the buttons for white
:19:15. > :19:20.people... Was that patronising and offensive? Probably. I wrote it
:19:21. > :19:25.because I felt that at the time but the point is that I was a token when
:19:26. > :19:31.I was appointed. The paper brought me in because I was a woman and I
:19:32. > :19:37.was a muslin or whatever. You are not writing about yourself. I was
:19:38. > :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. > :20:06.back what you wrote? No. Do you really think positive discrimination
:20:07. > :20:12.has gone too far? I think there is already a suspicion out there that
:20:13. > :20:16.in certain sectors women are being promoted for the wrong reasons or
:20:17. > :20:22.ethnic minorities are being promoted for the wrong reasons. That is a
:20:23. > :20:26.shame and my worry is that by tying funding to your ethnicity or your
:20:27. > :20:31.gender, by saying you will get a promotion if you check that box, but
:20:32. > :20:41.you feel that resentment and prejudice and undermine the case for
:20:42. > :20:47.inequality. I wanted to be treated equally, because I am capable of
:20:48. > :20:55.doing that job. Only two months to go before Scotland takes its biggest
:20:56. > :21:01.constitutional decision in 300 years - should it quit or stay with the
:21:02. > :21:05.UK? For some in Scotland campaign has been going on forever. What has
:21:06. > :21:12.been the impact on the campaign to date?
:21:13. > :21:17.Alex Salmond says Scotland would remain part of the European Union
:21:18. > :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. > :21:35.care provision and free personal care for the elderly. The SNP claims
:21:36. > :21:40.it would leave people better off by ?1000 though that partly depends on
:21:41. > :21:47.the price of oil. With the Better Together arguing against
:21:48. > :21:51.independence, it has naturally been attacking the SNP on all fronts.
:21:52. > :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. > :22:16.EU after a yes vote. His successor this week said he agreed. Unions
:22:17. > :22:24.claim Scotland benefit by ?1400 by being part of the UK. A poll this
:22:25. > :22:30.morning shows a significant lead of 57% for the no campaign, leaving the
:22:31. > :22:35.SNP to claim it will go their way in the last ten weeks. Nicola Sturgeon,
:22:36. > :22:39.the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, joins me now. You want an
:22:40. > :22:47.independent Scotland to keep the pound, stay in NATO, stay in the
:22:48. > :22:51.EU, Scotland already has all of that but you cannot guarantee it would
:22:52. > :22:58.have any of it in an independent Scotland, why take the risk? All of
:22:59. > :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. > :23:13.enable us to grow our economy faster, to be productive, and
:23:14. > :23:19.overtime increased the prosperity of people living in Scotland. We also
:23:20. > :23:25.want powers over our social security system so that we can create a
:23:26. > :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. > :23:44.question, you cannot guarantee you would be able to keep the pound
:23:45. > :23:49.within a monetary union, stay in NATO and the EU, you cannot
:23:50. > :23:54.guarantee you could produce any of these things, correct? I would argue
:23:55. > :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. > :24:10.use that within a formal monetary union. We have had the UK minister
:24:11. > :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. > :24:31.Minister is unnamed, but nevertheless that story in the
:24:32. > :24:36.Guardian was a solid one and not substantially denied. So you are
:24:37. > :24:45.basing your monetary policy on one on named minister in one story?
:24:46. > :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. > :24:59.the rest of the UK, given their trading relationship with Scotland
:25:00. > :25:07.and the contribution Scotland's exports make. We are having a very
:25:08. > :25:19.good debate and the UK Government and the no campaign, and this is not
:25:20. > :25:24.a criticism, want to talk up in -- uncertainty to make people feel
:25:25. > :25:28.scared, but after independence there will be constructed process of
:25:29. > :25:31.negotiation. Let's stick with the monetary union because most
:25:32. > :25:35.economists agree it would be very good for an independent Scotland to
:25:36. > :25:40.have a monetary union but George Osborne, Ed Balls, Danny Alexander
:25:41. > :25:46.are unequivocal, they say you won't get it. You claim they are bluffing
:25:47. > :25:50.but again you cannot guarantee that so why the risk? I would say the
:25:51. > :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. > :26:04.be a very brave Chancellor that says to businesses in the rest of the UK
:26:05. > :26:07.that they have to incur unnecessary additional transaction costs of half
:26:08. > :26:10.a very brave Chancellor that says to businesses in the rest of the UK
:26:11. > :26:15.that they have to incur unnecessary additional transaction costs of
:26:16. > :26:19.half. What we are doing is making a case that is based on common sense
:26:20. > :26:24.and voters in Scotland will listen to that case being put forward by
:26:25. > :26:33.the other side as well, and they will come to a judgement of the
:26:34. > :26:36.common-sense position. Let's look at EU membership because you haven't
:26:37. > :26:46.been able to guarantee the monetary union. When President Barroso said
:26:47. > :26:49.that a seamless transition to EU membership for an independent
:26:50. > :26:55.Scotland was anything but certain, and one said it could even be
:26:56. > :27:04.impossible, you dismissed him because he was standing down, but
:27:05. > :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. > :27:30.said they will only do that at this stage if the UK Government ask for
:27:31. > :27:36.it, they are point blank refusing to do that, you have to ask why? It is
:27:37. > :27:42.in their interests to talk up uncertainty. Scotland is an integral
:27:43. > :27:48.part of the European Union, we have been for 40 years, we comply with
:27:49. > :27:53.the rules and regulations... Mr Juncker knows all of that but he
:27:54. > :27:59.still says it will be anything but a seamless transition. He said you
:28:00. > :28:10.could not join the European Union by sending a letter, that is not our
:28:11. > :28:16.proposal. We set down a robust proposal and the timescale we think
:28:17. > :28:21.is reasonable under these circumstances. There are many
:28:22. > :28:27.nationals of other states living in Scotland right now, if we were to be
:28:28. > :28:31.outside of the European Union for any period of time, something the
:28:32. > :28:36.current treaty doesn't even provide for, they would lose their right to
:28:37. > :28:39.stay here. The interests of Scotland and the interests of European Union
:28:40. > :28:44.are in favour of a seamless transition. It comes down to common
:28:45. > :28:45.sense and people in Scotland will make
:28:46. > :28:50.sense and people in Scotland will their own judgement on who is
:28:51. > :28:56.talking the common-sense. What about NATO, two years ago you told
:28:57. > :29:02.Newsnight the SNP's position is that we wouldn't stay in NATO. We had a
:29:03. > :29:06.democratic debate, we looked at whether it would be in the interests
:29:07. > :29:12.of an independent Scotland, which forms a significant part of the
:29:13. > :29:19.territory of the North Atlantic and the party changed its mind. It did
:29:20. > :29:27.so in a thoroughly democratic way. That is the nature of democracy.
:29:28. > :29:38.Would you accept the protection of the NATO nuclear umbrella? There is
:29:39. > :29:47.no doubt the SNP's position is that we do not want nuclear weapons in
:29:48. > :29:50.Scotland. That is not what I asked. The world rid themselves of nuclear
:29:51. > :29:54.weapons. One of the interesting point is of the 28 member countries
:29:55. > :29:59.of Natal 25 do not have nuclear weapons. An independent Scotland...
:30:00. > :30:11.I asked if you would accept the nuclear umbrella. The key feature of
:30:12. > :30:18.NATO's military dog train is now clear shrike. We would accept the
:30:19. > :30:24.basis of which NATO is founded but we would argue two things. We want
:30:25. > :30:27.Trident removed from Scotland rather than have a situation where might we
:30:28. > :30:32.are spending ?100 billion over the next generation replacing Trident
:30:33. > :30:37.and we would argue within the international community that the
:30:38. > :30:41.world should move much more quickly to rid itself of nuclear weapons.
:30:42. > :30:46.That is the principal position and won the SNP has held consistently
:30:47. > :30:51.for many years. You would get rid of one of the key parts of the NATO
:30:52. > :30:56.deterrent based in Scotland. You would kick that out. You would not
:30:57. > :31:02.accept all of the club rules because you do not like the idea of nuclear.
:31:03. > :31:07.Why would they like a member like you in? Because Scotland is a
:31:08. > :31:13.significant part of the territory of the North Atlantic. You do not
:31:14. > :31:18.subscribe to the rules. 25 of the member states of NATO are
:31:19. > :31:25.non-nuclear members. You are saying you do not follow the doctrine. NATO
:31:26. > :31:29.has said it wants to move away from reliance on nuclear weapons. An
:31:30. > :31:34.independent Scotland would be entering the majority mainstream of
:31:35. > :31:39.NATO as a country that did not have nuclear weapons. By leading by
:31:40. > :31:43.example our moral authority and encouraging others to do likewise
:31:44. > :31:48.would be increased. Money and oil, the finance minister has said that
:31:49. > :31:52.an independent Scotland would increase public spending by 3% a
:31:53. > :31:57.year. He would pay for that by borrowing. Your First Minister says
:31:58. > :32:03.he is going to stash money in an oil fund. You're going to borrow and
:32:04. > :32:10.save. How does that work? There are two points. Firstly in terms of the
:32:11. > :32:14.outlook for finances and what is one of the central debates of this
:32:15. > :32:18.referendum campaign, austerity that we know will continue if we stay as
:32:19. > :32:24.part of the Westminster system versus prosperity. The economy can
:32:25. > :32:28.afford a higher level of increase in public spending while we continue to
:32:29. > :32:34.have deficit levels at a sustainable level. What is the point of
:32:35. > :32:39.borrowing and saving at the same time? People who have a mortgage and
:32:40. > :32:45.the savings account would not themselves what the wisdom of that
:32:46. > :32:48.is. This is based on recommendations of our expert fiscal Commission that
:32:49. > :32:54.as borrowing reduces to sustainable levels it makes sense to start
:32:55. > :33:00.saving a proportion of our oil wealth. In Norway, which has many
:33:01. > :33:05.similarities to Scotland, they have an oil fund worth ?500 billion.
:33:06. > :33:10.Scotland is part of the Westminster system is sitting on a share of UK
:33:11. > :33:16.debt. We can continue to allow our oil wealth, our vast oil wealth, to
:33:17. > :33:20.be mismanaged or we can decide we are going to manage that resource
:33:21. > :33:27.better in the years to come. Your figures do not add up unless you are
:33:28. > :33:30.about oil prices and revenue and you have been consistently wrong in your
:33:31. > :33:38.predictions. Last year you forecast that revenues would be the .7
:33:39. > :33:46.billion more than they actually work -- 3.7 billion. The cost of the
:33:47. > :33:49.Scottish school system gone. There were particular reasons for that in
:33:50. > :33:54.terms of interruption to production and bigger levels of investment.
:33:55. > :34:00.Used ill have to find the money. Let me explain. They are based on robust
:34:01. > :34:03.assumptions, firstly a production estimates that is in line with the
:34:04. > :34:07.estimates of the oil and gas industry. Use of figures that are
:34:08. > :34:15.based on production of 10 billion barrels of oil. Oil and gas has been
:34:16. > :34:22.wrong as well. It is 24 billion left to be recovered. That is what is in
:34:23. > :34:28.the UK Government's oil and gas strategy so production in line with
:34:29. > :34:31.industry estimates and an oil price of $110 per barrel which is flat in
:34:32. > :34:38.cash terms would be a real terms reduction. The Department of energy
:34:39. > :34:43.is estimating $128 per barrel so our estimate compared to that is
:34:44. > :34:50.cautious. These are robust estimates based on robust assumptions. Except
:34:51. > :34:55.they have been wrong. Finally, we hear a lot from you and your fellow
:34:56. > :35:00.nationalists, you want a Scandinavian style social democracy,
:35:01. > :35:04.you know how to spend the money but you never tell us about social
:35:05. > :35:08.democratic levels of taxation. Also should grizzlies have higher levels
:35:09. > :35:14.of tax in Scotland does at the moment -- all social grizzlies. I
:35:15. > :35:21.want a Scottish style of social democracy. Free education, free
:35:22. > :35:26.medicines and balancing the books every single year. We want to get
:35:27. > :35:30.more people into work in Scotland, raise the level of distribution in
:35:31. > :35:33.the Labour market and make the economy more productive so we are
:35:34. > :35:39.raising the overall tax revenue. Over the last 33 years we have
:35:40. > :35:47.generated more taxpayer head of population than is the case and the
:35:48. > :35:51.rest of the UK. Those last 33 years, some of those years oil prices would
:35:52. > :35:55.have been high and in others they would have been law but we take
:35:56. > :35:59.different decisions. A report showed that if we go as part of the
:36:00. > :36:06.Westminster system down the plate -- route of replacing Trident then the
:36:07. > :36:11.cost will be as high as ?4 billion every year. Our share of that is the
:36:12. > :36:16.hundred million pounds a year. Let us get access to our own resources
:36:17. > :36:19.so we can make different and better decisions about how to spend the
:36:20. > :36:25.resources we have. You are promising Scandinavian style social democratic
:36:26. > :36:30.levels of public spending but you say you will not need a top rate of
:36:31. > :36:39.tax of 56% which is what Scandinavia has, that all 25%, which is what
:36:40. > :36:42.Scandinavia has and VAT of 15%. You are going to have the spending but
:36:43. > :36:49.none of the taxes that make it possible in Scandinavia. For
:36:50. > :36:54.mischievous reasons you are met -- misrepresenting what I am saying.
:36:55. > :36:59.The Scottish economy can afford it and we want to generate more wealth
:37:00. > :37:04.in our economy. We want to use the existing resources Scotland has. We
:37:05. > :37:09.are the 14th richest country in the world in terms of what we produce.
:37:10. > :37:12.We do not want to be wasting resources. We want to be spending
:37:13. > :37:17.resources on the things that other priority for the people of Scotland.
:37:18. > :37:21.These are the benefits and the opportunities really get if we take
:37:22. > :37:32.the opportunity of voting yes and becoming independent.
:37:33. > :37:49.Hello and on the Sunday Politics Wales:
:37:50. > :37:51.We hear verdicts from all parties, including Labour,
:37:52. > :37:55.We hear from Rosemary Butler, the Assembly's presiding officer, who is
:37:56. > :37:58.And we take a whistle stop tour through a busy
:37:59. > :38:10.Alun Davies was given a second chance by the First Minister when
:38:11. > :38:13.he breached the Welsh Government's code of conduct for ministers.
:38:14. > :38:17.Everyone seems to agree that Mr Davies had to go.
:38:18. > :38:20.But is there a consensus on where his dismissal from the Cabinet
:38:21. > :38:22.leaves him, the first minister and politics in the Assembly?
:38:23. > :38:39.Campaign Assembly watchers have been enthralled this week by the
:38:40. > :38:47.unfolding drama around the environment ministers sacking.
:38:48. > :38:52.We saw an angry first Minister. I am not prepared to tolerate that kind
:38:53. > :38:59.of behaviour. And an incandescent opposition. I find that answered
:39:00. > :39:03.deeply offensive because your minister was trying to seek
:39:04. > :39:07.information to cause political damage to individuals in this
:39:08. > :39:12.chamber. Do you regret not sapping Alun Davies last week and says that
:39:13. > :39:17.not speak volumes about a severe lapse in judgement on your part? A
:39:18. > :39:22.week before he was sacked Alun Davies had been given a second
:39:23. > :39:25.chance by the first Minister. He had broken ministerial rules when he
:39:26. > :39:31.lobbied a body he was responsible for about a race track in his
:39:32. > :39:34.constituency. The latest episode happened only hours after the
:39:35. > :39:41.ministers job had been spared when the first minister asked -- find out
:39:42. > :39:45.he had asked for private information on other AM is, he had to go. Alun
:39:46. > :39:51.requested information about five opposition members including the
:39:52. > :39:55.leader of the Conservatives in the assembly, Andrew R.T. Davies. I want
:39:56. > :40:00.to make sure that people have confidence that it isn't a more
:40:01. > :40:04.systematic attempt by Welsh Labour winning government to use their
:40:05. > :40:08.ministerial offices to blacken the name of either politicians,
:40:09. > :40:12.charities, businesses or individuals by using information in the wrong
:40:13. > :40:17.way. So I think we do need an independent enquiry cheered by an
:40:18. > :40:29.independent judge to look at all this. He also says the Blaenau Gwent
:40:30. > :40:33.Assembly Member is not fit to be in Assembly Member at a former Labour
:40:34. > :40:36.adviser, though agreeing the minister had to go, thinks Welsh
:40:37. > :40:44.politics needs more people like Alun Davies. It was right that he had to
:40:45. > :40:50.go. I think everybody wreck wises that but the reaction has been
:40:51. > :40:56.disproportionate to his offence. For all his faults Alun Davies is an
:40:57. > :41:01.entertaining politician. He is not afraid of debate and whilst he was
:41:02. > :41:08.wrong on this occasion I don't think you can equate a political attack,
:41:09. > :41:12.even a political personal attack, I don't think this is a smear and
:41:13. > :41:17.don't think the information he was trying to was personal. But there
:41:18. > :41:22.are plenty would disagree and believe this week 's events have had
:41:23. > :41:25.a wide-ranging impact. I think it has certainly been damaging to the
:41:26. > :41:33.first Minister. His judgement has been called into question. Having to
:41:34. > :41:37.focus on personal characters in his cabinet rather than concentrating on
:41:38. > :41:43.public services is an indictment for the first Minister. It is a bad
:41:44. > :41:49.reflection on the Welsh Government but also to an extent the National
:41:50. > :41:56.Assembly as an institution. All Assembly Members need to be aware of
:41:57. > :42:03.the fact there is only 60 of us and the spotlight shines quite heavily
:42:04. > :42:06.upon us as individuals and our actions don't only reflect us as
:42:07. > :42:13.individuals, they reflect the national democratic institution and
:42:14. > :42:18.ultimately Wales in general. It has not been a great week for the first
:42:19. > :42:23.Minister. It does not been a great week for Welsh Labour. I think the
:42:24. > :42:26.long-term damage will be minimal. I don't think people will be talking
:42:27. > :42:33.about this in the next assembly election. The challenges will
:42:34. > :42:37.continue for the Labour government but they are around public service
:42:38. > :42:41.reform. It has fascinated those within this building but the sacking
:42:42. > :42:46.had not led an impression on many of those enjoying the sun in Cardiff
:42:47. > :42:52.Bay this week. I have been out of the news this week sorry. I am
:42:53. > :42:59.Ashley from the USA. He made a decision last week and was given a
:43:00. > :43:03.second chance but what he did this week was obviously not acceptable.
:43:04. > :43:11.If they collectively decide he has done something wrong then goodbye.
:43:12. > :43:15.But those who were watching this week 's first Minister 's questions
:43:16. > :43:21.judge did to be one of the most fiery they had seen. You have now
:43:22. > :43:27.accused me a second time and I won't stand for the third time. I have no
:43:28. > :43:30.idea what he's talking about. It seemed to mark a new low in
:43:31. > :43:34.relations between the first Minister and the leader of the opposition.
:43:35. > :43:40.The latter insists it's not personal. I hope the first Minister
:43:41. > :43:47.and I get on well on a personal level. We enjoy rugby and I still
:43:48. > :43:52.they read before the assembly team. We do have a lot in common.
:43:53. > :43:56.Politically we are different. He is laid a lever and I am the
:43:57. > :44:02.Conservative leader. The chamber is the place to explore and exploit and
:44:03. > :44:08.debate those differences and ultimately the electorate will form
:44:09. > :44:11.an opinion. This is not about personality because I would like to
:44:12. > :44:17.think we have got up pretty good relationship outside the chamber.
:44:18. > :44:21.The first Minister might have a different idea but that is the way I
:44:22. > :44:26.look at it. Not the best two days for Welsh Labour and the first Mr
:44:27. > :44:30.Baird in a weeks time, Assembly Members will leave Cardiff Bay for
:44:31. > :44:32.the summer. A welcome break for some after what has been a bruising end
:44:33. > :44:38.to the political year. Mr Davies declined our request
:44:39. > :44:40.for an interview, But I'm pleased to say the Plaid
:44:41. > :44:45.Cymru AM Simon Thomas joins us from Aberystwyth, and in the studio are
:44:46. > :44:58.Eluned Parrortt from the Liberal This has obviously been a very busy
:44:59. > :45:05.week in the assembly. Is that the end of it or is there more to come?
:45:06. > :45:09.It is the end of Alun Davies' ministerial career for now but there
:45:10. > :45:14.are questions to be answered. It makes Carwyn Jones looks week and
:45:15. > :45:19.gullible as a leader. He gave somebody a second chance will reward
:45:20. > :45:25.him by breaking the ministerial code again. The second issue is looking
:45:26. > :45:29.to the future, how can we clean things up? We need to look at how
:45:30. > :45:42.the Minister the deal code is policed. -- ministerial cold. --
:45:43. > :45:47.ministerial cold. We have to move forward in a way that a clean style
:45:48. > :45:52.of politics. The first Minister says in a democracy he should be the one
:45:53. > :45:58.to decide who's in and out of this cabinet. Do you agree? Ultimately,
:45:59. > :46:03.yes I do. That has to be a question about who produces a report on the
:46:04. > :46:12.conduct of ministers, who polices that and how we can ensure it is
:46:13. > :46:17.published. In going forward we have to have an independent view of
:46:18. > :46:22.ministers conduct in office when it has been questioned. It is the first
:46:23. > :46:26.Minister who has to decide the Democratic process and he appoints
:46:27. > :46:31.the Cabinet so he should be able to sack his Cabinet but they also think
:46:32. > :46:38.we need a public element to this so we understand the nature of the
:46:39. > :46:44.breaches of the ministerial code. On this occasion we saw that being let
:46:45. > :46:48.off from the ministerial code encouraged the Minister to break up
:46:49. > :46:58.the next morning. Is this the end of the affair? It has got to be. Alun
:46:59. > :47:01.Davies was a very good Minister and nobody has criticised how he
:47:02. > :47:06.performed. Carolyn Jones was decisive. Once he knew it had been
:47:07. > :47:11.probing the second time he sacked him immediately. There was no
:47:12. > :47:18.hanging about and he dealt with it effectively. Should he have done it
:47:19. > :47:22.a week earlier? That affects every member of the government. If an
:47:23. > :47:30.issue comes up in your constituency of great importance, what can you do
:47:31. > :47:36.in order to try and help it? Alun Davies did that. As a backbench
:47:37. > :47:41.member, they would be no problem at all with what he did. Is your view
:47:42. > :47:46.that this earlier breach about the race track in Blaenau Gwent really
:47:47. > :48:00.wasn't that serious? The first Minister to did it as a technical
:48:01. > :48:06.breach. -- treated it. We are responsible to our constituents.
:48:07. > :48:13.What this boils down to is that the first Minister David second chance.
:48:14. > :48:26.Is that such a bad thing? That first breach was a very serious matter. He
:48:27. > :48:30.leaned upon the planning process to make them change their mind. They
:48:31. > :48:35.withdrew an objection to a contentious planning application and
:48:36. > :48:38.it looks like that was as a result of the Minister's intervention. If I
:48:39. > :48:43.had written to national resources will and said to them please can you
:48:44. > :48:46.withdraw your rejection to this planning application, national
:48:47. > :48:51.resources Wales would not have written back to me. The minister
:48:52. > :49:01.right back to me. They did not behave in a way of a constituency
:49:02. > :49:04.Assembly Member. Natural Resources Wales say in lobbying for the
:49:05. > :49:15.racetrack Alun Davies was acting as a constituency member so was the
:49:16. > :49:21.first breach really that serious? I believe the first breach was quite
:49:22. > :49:29.serious. If you read the report by Derek Jones it says that the
:49:30. > :49:33.interference of Alun Davies could be perceived as having changed the
:49:34. > :49:38.decision making of Natural Resources Wales. The policing of the
:49:39. > :49:42.ministerial code is clear. It is about the perception of those
:49:43. > :49:46.breaches because we must think in public confidence that ministerial
:49:47. > :49:51.decision making is then on the basis of the greater national interest
:49:52. > :49:57.which is a separate thing to individual Assembly Members lobbying
:49:58. > :50:00.for their own constituencies. When you are chosen to be in government
:50:01. > :50:04.you have to whack in a different way and the code is there to police
:50:05. > :50:08.that. I thought his first breach was sufficient to be sacked or at least
:50:09. > :50:19.to have the responsibility for natural resources Wales removed from
:50:20. > :50:23.him. We have heard the leader of the opposition who says he once assured
:50:24. > :50:27.and says this is not part of a wider misuse of the system by the Labour
:50:28. > :50:39.Party. What is your response to that? He is playing politics. I get
:50:40. > :50:42.with loads of planning applications and Natural Resources Wales
:50:43. > :50:50.generally put an objection in an then withdrew it. It is fairly
:50:51. > :50:55.common. It happened in my constituency fairly recently.
:50:56. > :51:00.Councillors would have to declare the money they had from cap. They
:51:01. > :51:06.would have to declare everything. It is wrong and we need to look at the
:51:07. > :51:11.system in the assembly so people do declare public money they are
:51:12. > :51:14.getting. Let's look at the fallout of all of this. The allegation is
:51:15. > :51:23.that he was trying to smear his opponents. I don't think he could.
:51:24. > :51:32.He could not have used the information if he had received it. I
:51:33. > :51:34.think he was probably looking for background information and
:51:35. > :51:42.consequently he acted in a way that was probably not be sensible. I
:51:43. > :51:48.don't think he was going to go out and use the information. That is
:51:49. > :51:52.delusional. Even the first Minister has said the only reasonable
:51:53. > :51:57.explanation searching for this kind of information would be to use it
:51:58. > :51:59.for party political purposes. If in sacking Alun Davies the first
:52:00. > :52:03.Minister believes he was playing politics and trying to launch a
:52:04. > :52:11.smear campaign against his opponents, why would you accept it?
:52:12. > :52:19.We had David Taylor saying that is a public interest at stake here in
:52:20. > :52:24.that if Assembly Members are talking about farm subsidy payments in the
:52:25. > :52:29.assembly they should declare whether they or their families receive
:52:30. > :52:34.them. Should that be the case? Absolutely. I have no problem with
:52:35. > :52:38.that information being published. The specific details of those farm
:52:39. > :52:43.payments are a hold-up the moment as a result of a European court
:52:44. > :52:50.judgement. Looking to find that information was in contempt of a
:52:51. > :52:56.European court decision. It was in breach of the data protection act
:52:57. > :53:01.may be as well. So there are two very serious legal breaches there.
:53:02. > :53:07.Let's hope the system out at the top and make the information public as
:53:08. > :53:12.it was prior to 2008. The first Minister says the system works and
:53:13. > :53:16.the Minister was caught doing wrong and has lost his job. What is the
:53:17. > :53:21.complaint? If the system worked, he would not have tried it the next day
:53:22. > :53:26.having given a final warning the previous day. That shows to me the
:53:27. > :53:28.system is being treated with contempt and we have to ask whether
:53:29. > :53:35.there is a wider pattern of behaviour here by some ministers
:53:36. > :53:39.were putting pressure on external organisations in terms of getting
:53:40. > :53:42.the results they want. We have had one party for a long time governing
:53:43. > :53:49.in Wales on the hole and I think there might have been an attitude to
:53:50. > :53:53.government we need to get with all -- get rid of. Do you agree this
:53:54. > :54:03.does damage the assembly as an institution? It does but Carwyn
:54:04. > :54:07.Jones acted immediately. He could have sacked Alun Davies without any
:54:08. > :54:12.reason that he actually made everything public. You can't be more
:54:13. > :54:18.open than that. The way Carwyn Jones dealt with that is a good example to
:54:19. > :54:20.other institutions in the UK on how to deal with it rather than Saxilby
:54:21. > :54:36.and keep it quiet. -- sack somebody. Parliament and the Assembly both
:54:37. > :54:38.have one week until summer. For Welsh politicians,
:54:39. > :54:40.that often means commencing the summer circuit of Eisteddfods
:54:41. > :54:42.and agricultural shows. If you hope to ambush your AM or MP
:54:43. > :54:45.at the village fete and bend their ear about what's been
:54:46. > :54:48.going on in Westminster and Cardiff Bay, here's our whistle stop tour
:54:49. > :54:54.of the Welsh political year so far. It all seemed to be progressing
:54:55. > :54:56.smoothly, Upgrading the railways in South
:54:57. > :55:03.Wales was a done deal, we thought. Then earlier this year,
:55:04. > :55:06.the mother of all rows between the Welsh and UK governments
:55:07. > :55:10.came thundering towards us. Neither side can agree who will
:55:11. > :55:15.pay for rail electrification. There?s the ongoing spat
:55:16. > :55:21.about the state of public services, Cavid Cameron calls Offa's Dyke
:55:22. > :55:27.the line between life and death. There wasn't quite
:55:28. > :55:33.a civil war within Labour about it but perhaps the most awkward
:55:34. > :55:37.accusation that Carwyn Jones has faced about the NHS came from his
:55:38. > :55:43.own side, from Labour MP Ann Clwyd. Mr Jones says at least some
:55:44. > :55:49.of them will get better He?s thrown a lot of
:55:50. > :55:54.his political weight behind a plan He'll need friends
:55:55. > :56:00.in all parties to get his way. In February, we were wondering
:56:01. > :56:03.how many friends Andrew R.T. He sacked five members of the Tory
:56:04. > :56:09.shadow cabinet who rebelled in a row about giving the Assembly
:56:10. > :56:12.income tax powers. The dismissal of Alun Davies
:56:13. > :56:19.from the Welsh Government Cabinet has ended
:56:20. > :56:22.an eventful first half to 2014. A Cabinet reshuffle in Westminster
:56:23. > :56:27.perhaps ahead And maybe some Welsh politicians
:56:28. > :56:33.fancy a busman's holiday in Scotland to lend a hand in the nation?s
:56:34. > :56:36.campaign for the independence So far in 2014, there's been no
:56:37. > :56:46.shortage of fodder for journalists like our political editor
:56:47. > :56:57.Nick Servini, who joins me now. It has been a busy week and Rosemary
:56:58. > :57:03.Butler the assembly 's Presiding Officer is going to stand down as
:57:04. > :57:08.well. She was made a Dame in the New Year 's Honours list. She has been
:57:09. > :57:13.Presiding Officer since 2011. She has been the right from the start of
:57:14. > :57:18.this devolution process in 1999. She has been a government minister, she
:57:19. > :57:25.has been a big promoter of women in front line politics. She is also
:57:26. > :57:29.pushed hard to have more Assembly Members as well. That is something
:57:30. > :57:35.she talked about when we caught up with her this morning. It is a very
:57:36. > :57:41.different organisation than the one established in 1999. We can manage
:57:42. > :57:44.with the number of people coming through but in ten years time there
:57:45. > :57:49.will be more legislation and 60 members to scrutinise properly to
:57:50. > :57:55.make sure we have the best possible laws for the people of Wales and to
:57:56. > :58:00.scrutinise the government, it's a big ask and I strongly believe as
:58:01. > :58:10.Presiding Officer that we need at least 80 members. Let's assess the
:58:11. > :58:14.Alun Davies affair. They all agreed he needed to go but the opposition
:58:15. > :58:21.clearly feel there are more questions. It was a very unusual
:58:22. > :58:27.event for a Cabinet minister to be sacked in the way he was. Alun
:58:28. > :58:31.Davies was a relatively young minister and a man who can -- most
:58:32. > :58:36.people considered in the future in politics in Wales. He was in the
:58:37. > :58:40.process of carrying out changes to the way the farming industry is
:58:41. > :58:45.funded. And he's gone. It doesn't look as if he coming back. I base
:58:46. > :58:51.that on the interview we did with Carwyn Jones in the week. The first
:58:52. > :58:57.some kind of road to Damascus moment to bring Alun Davies back into his
:58:58. > :59:01.Cabinet. -- first Minister. Some people say it has been a feeding
:59:02. > :59:09.frenzy in the last week and it has resembled Westminster more. I don't
:59:10. > :59:11.think anybody should be surprised by the response from the opposition
:59:12. > :59:16.parties. This is a minister who broke the rules by trying to dig out
:59:17. > :59:21.information he should not have about the opposition party a semi-members
:59:22. > :59:32.as two of the opposition party leaders. We picked up there on the
:59:33. > :59:37.row over the state of the NHS and reform of local. Do things like the
:59:38. > :59:40.Alun Davies story destabilise the government and make it more
:59:41. > :59:45.difficult for Carwyn Jones to make reforms? He has lost Alun Davies and
:59:46. > :59:51.a year ago he lost Leighton Andrews. Different circumstances but those
:59:52. > :59:58.two ministers had an ability to shake things up and they were not
:59:59. > :00:06.afraid to challenge the lobby of the portfolios they represented. That
:00:07. > :00:11.was useful for Carwyn Jones. A common criticism is that the Welsh
:00:12. > :00:16.Government is too cosy and the religion should with the unions and
:00:17. > :00:21.civil servants is too cosy. He has lost two ministers and he will be
:00:22. > :00:26.mindful of that in terms of a reshuffle that we will expect at
:00:27. > :00:30.some stage after the summer recess. Thank you very much for joining us.
:00:31. > :00:33.And that's all from me this week and until the autumn,
:00:34. > :00:48.will keep a bit safer. That is all the time we have.
:00:49. > :00:50.So, plenty happening in Parliament this coming week, including
:00:51. > :00:53.a controversial bill to make so-called assisted dying legal and
:00:54. > :01:13.Lord Carey has intervened in the assisted dying debate. Will it make
:01:14. > :01:20.a difference? It will make a difference because we have
:01:21. > :01:25.established in the House of Lords, I am not sure who they speak for and
:01:26. > :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. > :02:04.passed a Bill similar to this in the 1990s and things have not got out of
:02:05. > :02:07.control. That has not been an expansion or abuse. It has settled
:02:08. > :02:16.down and become part of the furniture. That makes it easier for
:02:17. > :02:20.this Bill, to make the case for it. Religious people may still have a
:02:21. > :02:23.principled objection but most other people have a practical objection,
:02:24. > :02:26.which is how to put in place safeguards to deal with unscrupulous
:02:27. > :02:31.relatives or anyone else who wants to abuse this right? Once a
:02:32. > :02:36.controversial issue is only being opposed for practical reasons it is
:02:37. > :02:40.on its way to getting its way. What is the division, is it the Church
:02:41. > :02:48.against everybody else? Is it a right and left division? What is
:02:49. > :02:53.stopping it? It is a very difficult moral issue and there are people who
:02:54. > :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. > :03:27.kicked the ball back to Parliament when they rejected the cases of
:03:28. > :03:33.three people who had been taking the case and said, we could say that
:03:34. > :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. > :04:00.record time. To comply with a European court judgement. Tom Watson
:04:01. > :04:05.and David Davis, some dissent. Are you so prized with how united the
:04:06. > :04:12.establishment, left, right and centre is? No. There is a great
:04:13. > :04:17.quote saying this has been enacted under the something must be done act
:04:18. > :04:23.and that captures it exactly. Even Cameron says he does not want to
:04:24. > :04:27.look people in the eye and say that he did not do everything he could.
:04:28. > :04:31.There is no end to the power of surveillance. It is all was about
:04:32. > :04:35.drawing a distinction. I am always suspicious when politicians look
:04:36. > :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. > :05:17.being proposed is not dramatic, it is to fill a gap that was created. I
:05:18. > :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. > :05:54.about this. My paper has taken an interest in this. It is interesting,
:05:55. > :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. > :06:14.serious questions. There's going to be a sunset clause that will run out
:06:15. > :06:20.in 2016. The Liberal Democrats, who asked pretty tough questions, have
:06:21. > :06:21.said there are assurances. Ed Miliband did not go to public
:06:22. > :06:25.school. For many English football fans,
:06:26. > :06:27.tonight's World Cup final presents How do you pick
:06:28. > :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. > :07:07.with three left-wing countries. That was the least of their problems.
:07:08. > :07:09.There was a clear domination of democratic regimes over
:07:10. > :07:12.authoritarian with only six of oratory and countries making it
:07:13. > :07:22.through to the finals and the only all authoritarian tie was dubbed the
:07:23. > :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. > :07:44.remained. Both were beaten by European democracies. By the
:07:45. > :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. > :08:01.Brazil and Argentina beating the Dutch, tonight's final repeats that
:08:02. > :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. > :08:32.only time England has won the World Cup was under a Labour government?
:08:33. > :08:37.Of course. The problem is we did not qualify for Euro 2008 when it was a
:08:38. > :08:43.Labour government. We have had some pretty shoddy results under a Labour
:08:44. > :08:47.government. As someone under the left, are you backing Argentina?
:08:48. > :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. > :09:06.football and the Germans have been fantastic. They were great in 2010
:09:07. > :09:11.as well. They started this model in 2008 and that is the sort of thing
:09:12. > :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. > :09:33.around for the Blitz. Believe it or not, I was not. There is a strong
:09:34. > :09:45.political case to support Germany. They are probably going to win the
:09:46. > :09:49.World Cup with a clear of -- with players of Polish origin. That sort
:09:50. > :09:57.of cultural change they have forced themselves to go through... You talk
:09:58. > :10:03.about them being right wing, but in fact the way that the German league
:10:04. > :10:08.is structured, and I am an expert, is based on ownership. It is very
:10:09. > :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. > :10:28.club. It is a model that all English football clubs should emulate.
:10:29. > :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. > :10:51.Eurosceptic wanted to get us out of the European Union and was for a few
:10:52. > :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. > :11:41.under Margaret Thatcher. There's one big difference with the EU, you
:11:42. > :11:49.cannot flog six Dom Acta gets to go to a European summit. Did you know
:11:50. > :11:58.that Italy won two world cups under Mussolini? Can we draw any
:11:59. > :12:04.conclusions between a political system and the performance of the
:12:05. > :12:07.football team? You can draw certain parallels between maybe national
:12:08. > :12:15.cliches, so the Germans are efficient and effective, which might
:12:16. > :12:19.reflect and the English are very polite so we let everyone score
:12:20. > :12:24.first and go into the second round. We put ourselves at the back of the
:12:25. > :12:36.queue. Is England going to qualify for the European? We are going to
:12:37. > :12:39.win the European Championship. The first country Scotland have to play
:12:40. > :12:52.is Germany. What could possibly go wrong? Who is going to win? Germany.
:12:53. > :12:56.Germany. I am going to put a few bob on Argentina. Are you going to be
:12:57. > :13:03.watching? Absolutely. Thank you. This is the last Sunday Politics
:13:04. > :13:07.for the summer. But we'll be back in early autumn
:13:08. > :13:11.and our first programme will be live from Scotland,
:13:12. > :13:17.the weekend before the referendum The Daily Politics is back tomorrow
:13:18. > :13:22.at noon and we'll bring you the last PMQs before the summer
:13:23. > :13:25.on Wednesday morning from 11:30am. Remember, if it's Sunday,
:13:26. > :13:28.it's the Sunday Politics, unless