23/10/2011 The Politics Show Scotland

This week on the Politics Show: where it does this man stand on the

euro crisis? Ed Miliband joins us alive. And on the Politics Show

Scotland, The First Minister Alex Salmond, fresh from firing up the

party, will a pledge to fight full square for independence in the

coming referendum. But will independence light also be on offer

to the Scottish voters - and who is going to tell us what it is? The

First Minister says only full blown independence will deliver for

Scotland and the current alternatives just don't make the

grade. Fiscal responsibility and real

economic power is a legitimate proposal. We could introduce

competitive a business tax and fair taxation. All good and necessary,

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 1578 seconds

He raised huge amounts of money for the NSPCC. An excellent example of

corporate responsibility. You said you wanted Cameron in

Brussels and not Australia. But the Commonwealth summit, they will

expect him to produce �6 billion worth of new business. A chance to

engage with India. 53 countries, a modernising agenda. Turning the

Commonwealth in to a 21st century organisation. And you just say, up

viewers. I definitely did not say that. But

when there are crucial decisions be made about jobs and growth in this

country the idea that the Prime Minister can be here to squabble

with his party on Monday but then has to be -- but then cannot be in

Brussels on Wednesday to fight for the country's economic interest is

the wrong choice. Can I ask, on the vote in the House

of Commons, surely the problem is a back support for a referendum.

Surely there is a democratic deficit caused by the Government of

which you where a member saying there would be a referendum on the

European constitution. Then a win that was jumped by the people of

France and Netherlands it came back with a different name. -- when it

was junked. I am very clear about this. You do

not have to pay to play, as you say. Gordon Brown, at an important

summit in 2009, was part of the key decision-making. That is what and

responsible Prime Minister should do. Force at Burton's issues onto

the agenda. I do not accept your comments on the referendum. --

force Bratton's interests. -- Britain's interests. Some of these

issues reflect the way Europe has done business.

Finally, on Libya. We saw Tony Blair and Gordon Brown embrace

Gadaffi. David Cameron has overthrown him. Our congratulations

to you? Definitely. That is why I supported

him. And I am proud that we supported an intervention which was

not an army of occupation but which helped the Libyan people shake

Welcome to the politics show in Scotland. Coming up: the First

Minister, live from Inverness. We will ask, are there no limits to

his referendum options? And a disability campaigners on the

streets fighting for welfare reforms. They say they are enforced

and to poverty and isolation. First, the news. The SNP finance secretary

John Swinney will tell delegates in in a mess that Scotland would

become of the world's richest -- six richest country if it took a

fair share of North Sea oil. Essential argument will be that our

economic prospects are being held back by the union. He will say that

if you give Scotland a geographical share of oil revenues it could be

six richest nation in the world. The United Kingdom would be 16th.

And also on the topic of money the SNP will disclose a legacy of

nearly �1 million from the estate of their late poet Edwin Morgan.

They intended to spend that primarily on the referendum

campaign. The first passenger service -- ferry service sailed out

of Harris this morning heading for Uig. Caledonian MacBrayne had been

accused of ignoring local people who opposed sailings on the Sabbath.

They claim they went ahead with the crossing only after consulting the

local community. A memorial will be held this afternoon to commemorate

the victims of the Clarkston Toll gas explosion for 30 years ago. A

massive amount of gas escaped from beneath the shops and more than 100

people were injured. And the weather, the best of the brightness

over Orkney and the north coast. Mild and a breezy tonight. Winds

reaching a gale force in the north. After the Inverness conference

independence is being shouted from the podium by all the key speakers.

The First Minister claimed the party will campaign a full square

for independence in the referendum. But what is that lurking in the

wings which could muddy the waters? A devolution and Max auction there

may also be on offer. It is proving popular with the general public

according to the polls. Is it an insurance policy for the party or a

big mistake? I am joined now by the First Minister. Thank you very much

indeed for talking to us. There is a slight delay on the line but we

will be able to work that out between us. Well a devolution Max

option definitely be offered to the Scottish public in a referendum?

What will definitely be on the ballot paper is a yes/no question

to independence as spelt out on the White Paper. But I am open to

including a second question that on what is called devolution Macs or

fiscal autonomy. But opponents of that must come forward and give

their detail that we are already providing on independence so that

people can judge on that question also. I am in favour of increasing

options to the people of Scotland. Limiting choice is something that

Westminster politicians do. But from the SNP point of view a yes/no

question will definitely be on the agenda and I will campaign on

favour. When they you talk about giving the

Scots the auctions, and a number of options, when we look at what

Nicola Sturgeon said, she said, fell on nationalists, we have an

opportunity that many have worked hard for over years. A once in a

generation opportunity for independence and it is down to us

to grasp it. Some supporters may believe that by offering fiscal

autonomy you throw away your best chance at gaining independence.

It is in no great surprise. That was the line we took in the last

Parliament. No surprise to anybody. I am just sticking to what was said

during the election campaign. We received an overwhelming election

majority and want to keep faith with the people who gave us it. So

we will bring forward the independence referendum in the

timescale we said during the election campaign. Nicola Sturgeon

was correct to say we are confident about the result. We will have to

work hard but that is something the party is good at doing.

But my point is that most people in the polls support fiscal autonomy.

Allowing that to go forward as a question are lessons are your

chances of full-blown independence. Potentially.

I do not accept that. For two reasons. First of all, I do not pay

attention to opinion polls. But the last two which tested this issue

showed independence in the lead. They also show the SNP in an

extraordinary lead. And we have been here before in Scottish

politics. Their wealth to straight questions in 1997 - do you want a

parliament, on a parliament with economic powers? Lot of people said

that the second question would not be passed but it was a yes/Yes vote.

So why do not believe that this logic of another auction at

limiting people's chances of voting for the first holds up to scrutiny.

It is up to the people of Scotland to look at the choices before them

and vote accordingly. Do you accept that in order to make

informed choices the people of Scotland will have to have far more

details from all of the parties involved about what the options

actually are and their consequences could be?

Yes, I do. That is why the process involves the publication of white

papers. That explains things in great detail. It is a consultative

referendum as it has to be. So we look at the White Paper and Basque

a question based on it. Again, as we did in 1997. There is nothing

innovative about proceeding in that fashion and the Scottish Parliament

is perfectly capable of doing exactly that.

Can you, at this stage, answered all the questions? Scotland's share

of the national debt is �77 million. You will have to keep bond markets

on side in an independent Scotland. Why would they favour a less

austere approach to spending than the Westminster government is fit -

- producing at the moment? They there are two reasons our

fiscal position would be stronger. We have been in a stronger position

even within the confines of the UK during the last five years. People

in the bond markets will pay attention to your immediate balance

when weighing up your indebtedness. And whilst the UK is in debt to one

that trillion of pounds - I will say that again, one that trillion

pounds - Scotland's share would have to be put up again. So the

second thing of the bond markets would look at is what the assets of

a country where in comparison with the liabilities. As John Swinney

will explain this afternoon there are few other countries in the

world which have few -- more assets in terms of oil and gas and other

natural resources than Scotland. Our biggest resource is the

ingenuity and talent of our people. It will because a substantial and

economic success. You are saying that oil revenues

would steady nerves in the bond markets and pay for innovative

programmes. And you are also spoken about a trust fund for future

generations. These are three objectives for won the pot of money.

You cannot have a triple spend on this.

We end you look at the last five the years and take the relative

surplus compared to the United Kingdom, if you had chosen to put

that sockless - instead of disappearing down the whole of the

London Treasury - if you had created an oil fund as the

Norwegians did 15 years ago, it would already be at several million

pounds and the interest would be making a substantial contribution

to the budget balance. -- several billion pounds. The biggest failure

of oil and gas in the United Kingdom in the last four decades

has been that the failure to establish an oil fund as the

Norwegians dead in such spectacular fashion. From small beginnings that

is now worth 300 billion of pounds. But that is my point. You cannot

save it and spend it. That point I am making is that if

you had done that over the last five years - and this was

demonstrated during the election campaign with people showed their

satisfaction with the SNP over five years - if we had put that we would

have a substantial surplus when compared with the United Kingdom.

The interest from the oil fund would be contributing to the budget

balance of Scotland. The lesson of Orwell and pension funds in the

Norway is you can start from small beginnings. -- oil and pension

funds. But from small acorns, mighty oaks grow.

There is a sense that whoever owns devolution of Max, because of its

popularity, would be on the front foot. Is there any way that the SNP

can own independence and own a devolution of Max?

I am not interested in ownership of these things. I am interested any

illegitimate proposal. Whether it is Henry McLeish, Malcolm Chisholm,

a respected Labour MSPs, or the reform Scotland Group, either way,

they must produce a proposition which can be put to the people in a

yes/no question. But is it an insurance policy for

the SNP? People might say that If fiscal autonomy goes through you

are still moving, more gradually, in their direction that you want to

go. Do you see it that way? No. I am saying that I am not

ruling out the options available to people in Scotland but what we said

during the election campaign was that we would bring forward the

independence referendum. We're going to do that. We said we are

open to fiscal autonomy and if that can come forward and a crystallised

fashion I am friendly too often people an auction. My only

requirement is that people get the opportunity to vote for

independence. Apart from that I want to open up options not try to

for close them. Say, hypothetically, fiscal

autonomy wins the day. You are still and a majority government.

How often do we come back to the independence referendum?

I have pointed out any number of interviews that in my view the

independence referendum is once in a generation. Luckily, I think

people will vote Yes and this will be the independence generation.

How should you or MPs to vote tomorrow in the EU referendum

debate. Presumably you cannot vote against a referendum.

The group at Westminster will come to its own mind before the vote.

That is how we work in the SNP. But a very strong argument is that to

vote for a referendum it must have been in your manifesto. The

Scottish Government has legitimacy in putting forward this referendum

because we campaigned for it and won an overwhelming majority. The

trouble with the euro referendum is the only people who stated they

wanted one where the Liberal Democrats. Anybody else put in it

for what is doubt Senate on the people without informing them of it

in the election last year. That is just opportunistic politics. I was

at, incidentally, amused to hear today that there was Sable --

sabre-rattling from William head. He said we could not have a

referendum in Europe because he wanted to concentrate on the

economy. They are in disarray in To clarify and confirm, the

Scottish referendum date - 2014? will be in the second half of the

parliamentary term. It is quite true that the second half starts

and 2014 but we have not specify I think it was to you yourself that I

said in the election campaign we will argue for the referendum in

the second half of the parliament. Having promised that to you and the

Scottish people, I can hardly go back on that. That is why I hope

you would confirm it was 2014 because of that special

relationship but we will have to leave that.

Thank you. Hundreds of disabled people have been gathering in

Edinburgh this weekend to protest against the UK Government's planned

reforms to disability benefits. Campaigners say they're terrified

that proposed welfare changes and forthcoming local authority cuts

will push Scotland's disabled into further poverty, isolation and debt.

Similar demonstrations have been taking place elsewhere in the UK.

Here's Christine Macleod. People with disabilities and the

about proposed welfare reforms. They are fearful that way, more

than any other group, will bear the brunt of government spending cuts.

They are terrified that money will be cut to the extent they have to

make choices between food and heating. Choice is that we do not

expect people do have to take in a civilised state. Protesters here

say it/is the disability benefits could see a lot of money cut over

the next four years. That is before they know what the impact of

forthcoming local authority cutbacks will mean for their care

charges and services. In particular, many worry that changes to

disability living allowance and employment support allowance will

hugely dent their income. DLA is to be replaced by personal

independence payments. A benefit the Government intends to cut by as

much as 20%. 59-year-old Paul McCann from Helensburgh has a

learning difficulty and lives in supported accommodation with is

severely disabled life. He is afraid he will not qualify for as

much money as he did under DLA, forcing him to make tough choices

over what he and his wife can afford to eat. I go, this is my

shopping list. Eggs, milk, soup. Not a very balanced diet and you

cannot live off of cups of tea. year-old David Nicol has cerebral

palsy and lives in supported accommodation in Edinburgh. He

fears the proposed changes will take away his mobility and the

independence that goes with it. They cut the De La so much that it

is impossible for me to have a wheelchair or pay for things. --

DLA. Fears had been heightened they will lose benefits they are

entitled to. The assessment test has been widely criticised for up

rejecting people when the appeals process is later proved them wrong.

It is wrong that two million people have been at written-off to a life

on benefits. That needs to change in people be judged on what they

can do rather than what they cannot. More protests against disability

cuts. This time not in Scotland, but the Netherlands, where they are

cutting care budgets by 50%. Could this be a path more countries are

forced to take in times of austerity.

In the studio we have Pam Duncan from Inclusion Scotland and Andrew

Lowe who is Director of Social Work for Borders Council and also

President of the Association of Directors of Social Work. Thank you

both. I know you're horse because you're on a demonstration yesterday.

When we are looking at this, how significant the you think it is in

terms of disabled people's rights? Disabled people tell us at

Inclusion Scotland this is the biggest attack they have faced in

40 years. They are facing the double whammy of the cuts as they

are disproportionately affected. Not just specific cuts to

disability benefits, such as the 20% reduction of disability living

allowance, but the impact of the Independent living Fund closing its

doors. They are also facing huge impact to the cuts in other areas.

General welfare reform, the housing benefit, and there really genuinely

facing a disproportionate impact on them. When we hear these things and

everybody says they have to take a cut in their budgets, what impact

does this actually have one real people's lives? Disabled people

have been coming together under the banner of the hardest hit because

they genuinely are the hardest hit. We don't have the broader shoulders

to bear the brunt. 47.5 per cent of disabled people live in poverty and

that many disabled people and work have their jobs under threat as a

result of redundancies. The majority of those who do work work

in the public sector and their jobs under threat. For those who don't

work, the majority of disabled people, face cuts in their pocket.

They are terrified of the impact of the cuts. Presumably, and an

intensely competitive job market it is more and more difficult for

disabled people to get work? A lot of the cuts are focused on what

people can do rather than what they cannot. That is the language that

disabled people have used for a long time. We have spoken about

being contributed to society and what we need to get there. The

answer is not to pull the rug from under us. I have seen a statement

from the Department of Work and Pensions that speaks about how much

they spend on disabled people. There are already huge inequalities

in terms of poverty and access to housing. That �40 billion simply

does not cover the genuine experience that disabled people are

having. It is also another message that disabled people cannot

contribute to society and that is something we need to start

challenging. When we look to the funding, there is a statement

amount of money. Do you think it is being used appropriately just now

are could there be more grassroots initiatives? This is the obligation

of this issue. Very few people doubt we need welfare reform

because at the moment that is complicated and not always

equitably distributed. That being said, there is a complicated over

layer of a need to make savings. Sometimes one is used to disguise

the other. If you say to me, is it necessary to make these reforms, I

don't think these reforms are necessary and we should not be

putting a price on the independence of people with disabilities. It is

outrageous. Every local authority is required to promote social

welfare. That is our founding statute and what we have to deliver.

Clearly, there is a challenge but we have to find a way. We will

continue to try to find ways to make sure that we can promote the

independence of people. It is quite interesting that if you don't, what

we're seeing in the English courts, is people going into court and

saying this is not a case of I don't want to do it but I am

obliged under statute to do this. Could we see more of this in

Scotland? A this is clearly an issue that could become a litigious

issues. That would be regrettable. The coalition government in

Westminster has got enormous challenge is to meet. There is a

need for reform but we have to find a way through that does not throw

people back into the 1970s. I was in the House of Lords for the

debate on the second reading of the Reform Bill. Ba and S Campbell,

another contributor to public life in the UK, was saying it my life is

built on stores. If you take them away, it collapses. While

understanding the need for reform, we are passionate about the need to

retain the place of people and control of their own lives and we

have to find ways to do that. that is so intensely political,

will you see Michael Moore? We have asked Michael Moore if he would set

a meeting up with Mario Mullah and disabled people's organisations and

Scotland to talk about the issues so they can hear it from the

horse's mouth. So they can have an understanding of the genuine fear

disabled people are experiencing. I mentioned there is one woman

yesterday so terrified that the cuts being made, as well as the

rise in charges over community care, that she did not want to take her

dog with her to the rally in case someone judged her for it. That to

me is a measure of where we are in society. We have asked Mario Mullah

and Michael Moore to come to Scotland to talk to disabled people

but that has not yet come to fruition. We would invite them to

come to Scotland and talk to disabled people about these issues.

We have to lead that there as we are out of time but we will come

back to it. It set it says here The lovely

Angus Macleod from the Times has been up in Inverness. You are here

because of your expertise in things political. What you think about

devolution Max being on a referendum paper? Good for the SNP?

I think what Alex Salmond is trying to do here is. The way for the

opposition parties. He obviously wants the opposition parties to

embrace some concept of evolution MACS in order to get himself

political cover with his own party, to put it on the referendum.

Whether end of the opposition parties Gaspar embrace that

opportunity is a moot point. One of the problems of evolution Max is no

one quite knows what it is. There are several questions bouncing

around stretching back to the steel commission of 10 or 11 years ago. I

think he probably wants a two option a referendum. The difficulty

Alex Salmond may have is, I was interested in his parallels with

1997, when the death Aleutian referendum that year. The parallel

is not quite right. The first question there was about the

principle of setting up a Scottish Parliament. The second was what

else do you want as well as the parliament? This referendum, he

seems to be going towards two alternatives. Not directly opposed

to each other but certainly two alternatives for voters to choose

between. We are almost out of time, but wherever it goes, we have to be

clear about what the options are. Absolutely, but that is the

opportunity for the opposition parties. They might then be on the

right side of the argument in terms of evolution Max. The SNP have to

tell us what evolution Max's. only that, but people like reform

Scotland and this deal Commission have reduced their own models. It