:00:17. > :00:18.Good aternoon and welcome to Politics Scotland.
:00:19. > :00:20.Schools are finding out how much money they'll get
:00:21. > :00:26.And here at Westminster, MPs continue their debate on Brexit,
:00:27. > :00:31.ahead of a crucial vote this evening on triggering Article 50.
:00:32. > :00:34.The UK government's White Paper on Brexit is due to be
:00:35. > :00:39.The Prime Minister made the announcement during
:00:40. > :00:43.Tonight, MPs will be voting on the legislation allowing the UK
:00:44. > :00:45.Government to trigger Article 50, which will formally start
:00:46. > :00:47.the process of leaving the European Union.
:00:48. > :00:50.The Bill is expected to be approved, despite opposition from the SNP,
:00:51. > :00:51.some Labour MPs and the Liberal Democrats.
:00:52. > :01:02.Let's cross to Westminster and our Correspondent David Porter.
:01:03. > :01:09.David, is this still a live issue? Is there a heated debate is this a
:01:10. > :01:13.formality that this goes through? There is still a lot of passion
:01:14. > :01:17.going on in the debate. There are big hitters taking part this
:01:18. > :01:22.afternoon, Ed Miliband, former Labour leader, George Osborne for
:01:23. > :01:28.the Conservatives, and Alex Salmond, who has accused MPs of succumbing to
:01:29. > :01:32.something he has called mad MPs' disease, with the whole idea of
:01:33. > :01:37.wanting to go forward with Brexit. We had 12 hours of debate yesterday,
:01:38. > :01:41.and it was incredibly impassioned at times. They will continue until 7pm
:01:42. > :01:47.today when they will vote for the first time, on an amendment put
:01:48. > :01:52.forward by the SNP which seeks to wreck the legislation and stop it
:01:53. > :01:57.going through. The SNP argument is that there has not been enough
:01:58. > :02:00.consultation by the UK Government with the devolved administrations,
:02:01. > :02:03.and therefore the legislation to give the UK Government the power to
:02:04. > :02:09.trick Article 50 should not go ahead. They will get support from
:02:10. > :02:14.Labour MPs on that one, between 30 and 50 Labour MPs who may rebel
:02:15. > :02:18.against their party on that. The maths is stacking up very much in
:02:19. > :02:22.favour of the UK Government, and UK Government ministers are all pretty
:02:23. > :02:26.relaxed about the way it will go tonight. The obvious exception of
:02:27. > :02:34.Ken Clarke, there doesn't seem to be... It's not that there is not
:02:35. > :02:37.despite this -- this fat -- dissatisfaction on the Tory benches,
:02:38. > :02:46.it is just that they've mostly one vote against it. People on the Tory
:02:47. > :02:49.benches have decided to hold their fire. They know they would not win
:02:50. > :02:55.and what they are seeking to do is perhaps as the full Brexit process
:02:56. > :02:59.and the negotiations go ahead, to try and seek that they will get more
:03:00. > :03:03.concessions from Theresa May and the UK Government on that one. They have
:03:04. > :03:07.totted up the sums and they know they cannot win, so they will keep
:03:08. > :03:13.their powder dry, so to speak. What about labour, does what you
:03:14. > :03:17.mentioned count as a revolt against Jeremy Corbyn or is it not quite
:03:18. > :03:21.enough to be that? We need to wait and see the figures. Anything north
:03:22. > :03:25.of 30 people voting against the Labour leadership tonight will be
:03:26. > :03:30.regarded as a bit of a revolt. Last week, Jeremy Corbyn said there would
:03:31. > :03:33.be a three line whip on this, an instruction to his MPs that they
:03:34. > :03:39.will vote for the triggering of Article 50. When we're talking about
:03:40. > :03:43.Europe in Westminster, we're used to talk about -- talking about
:03:44. > :03:47.Conservative splits. It will be interesting to see the size of the
:03:48. > :03:52.Labour rebellion, if indeed it is, or if a lot of Labour MPs decide to
:03:53. > :03:57.rebel. The problem for Labour is that in Labour areas, many
:03:58. > :04:03.constituents voted for Brexit, so their MPs will have to reflect that.
:04:04. > :04:10.Other Labour MPs, such as labourer -- Labour's in MP in Scotland, said
:04:11. > :04:13.that his constituency voted very much in favour of remaining within
:04:14. > :04:18.the EU and that is why he will vote against the legislation tonight. We
:04:19. > :04:20.will join you again, David. Thanks for now.
:04:21. > :04:22.Scottish headteachers have been hearing how much they'll get
:04:23. > :04:24.from a special government fund to help children from poorer
:04:25. > :04:28.They'll get about ?1,200 for every child who's known to be
:04:29. > :04:30.Nationally, the scheme's worth ?120 million.
:04:31. > :04:38.Here's our education correspondent Jamie McIvor.
:04:39. > :04:44.Remember when you get your board done, what do you shall? Mitt-mac
:04:45. > :04:47.this school cover some of the most disadvantaged parts of Glasgow and
:04:48. > :04:51.has been praised for its good work, but now it is set to get more money
:04:52. > :04:59.than any other primary school in the country from a new Government fund,
:05:00. > :05:05.almost ?280,000. It will be up to the headteacher at this -- to decide
:05:06. > :05:10.how to use it. We will need to sit down as a community of the parents,
:05:11. > :05:16.staff myself and our partners that we were left to make sure we are
:05:17. > :05:21.spending this money responsibly. Dalmarnock primary may spend some
:05:22. > :05:28.cash extending this scheme. Children can come in early Sundays for
:05:29. > :05:31.exercise and breakfast, which helps improve performance. Crucially, the
:05:32. > :05:36.Government wants this to be extra money to add to the cash councils
:05:37. > :05:39.spend on education. I want to work with local authorities to ensure we
:05:40. > :05:44.deliver the best opportunities for young people in Scottish education.
:05:45. > :05:47.The Government is putting ?120 million of resources out of
:05:48. > :05:51.Government expenditure directly into the schools of Scotland to support
:05:52. > :05:56.the efforts that were put in place to close the attainment gap. This
:05:57. > :06:01.school thinks it's had a windfall, others will get relatively modest
:06:02. > :06:06.amount or may get nothing at all. Overall council budgets are under
:06:07. > :06:11.huge pressure. Teachers' unions will want to make sure councils don't now
:06:12. > :06:16.cap their existing spending on education. The very idea of the
:06:17. > :06:20.Government giving money directly to headteachers has annoyed some in
:06:21. > :06:28.council chambers. Jamie McIvor joins me now. Jamie, if this money is
:06:29. > :06:34.all-new, then why is there so much fuss about it? Well, new, extra is
:06:35. > :06:37.the keyword. The Government wants to make sure this is extra money for
:06:38. > :06:42.headteachers to spend on new, additional things. It is to
:06:43. > :06:46.complement and enhance the cash spent by councils, but of course,
:06:47. > :06:50.council budgets are under intense pressure, Gordon, so you can be sure
:06:51. > :06:55.that teachers' unions will watch like hawks to make sure councils
:06:56. > :06:58.don't trim their existing education budgets, leaving heads spending this
:06:59. > :07:02.money on things they were already doing. I touched on council budgets
:07:03. > :07:06.there, councils are unhappy that they are being given less money by
:07:07. > :07:09.Government for ongoing spending commitments, so some aren't too
:07:10. > :07:18.pleased about this ring fenced funding which has to go to heads,
:07:19. > :07:21.and that is the reason they are not so pleased about it. Of course, the
:07:22. > :07:23.Government is consulting just know one school governance. Some councils
:07:24. > :07:25.have a concern that the role in the education system could be weakened
:07:26. > :07:30.or undermined, so in that sense, they view this cash through that
:07:31. > :07:34.particular prism. To be clear, as long as this is extra cash, it is
:07:35. > :07:38.broadly welcomed within education itself, and that is separate to the
:07:39. > :07:43.debate on just what the role of Council should be on the education
:07:44. > :07:46.system, and what powers headteachers should have. Jamie, thanks for that.
:07:47. > :07:48.In the studio with me this week is the political
:07:49. > :07:59.Hamish, am I wrong in this? A lot of parents will then, we couldn't care
:08:00. > :08:02.less what the local authority role is, we just want more money for our
:08:03. > :08:06.children? Yellow like I think there is a big difference here. If you ask
:08:07. > :08:10.the parent of any child in the country, where would they like to
:08:11. > :08:12.see the money go for their school? They say they would like the
:08:13. > :08:16.headteacher to have it because they are in the best position to decide
:08:17. > :08:23.where that money goes to. It is also worth remembering where that money
:08:24. > :08:26.comes from. For years, this has been a UK Conservative policy of giving
:08:27. > :08:29.more and more money and control to headteachers, cutting out the local
:08:30. > :08:34.authority. The SNP have come late to this, I think because they have
:08:35. > :08:36.decided is the only way to really drive up attainment, which is the
:08:37. > :08:41.thing they say they want to be judged on.
:08:42. > :08:45.It is worth marking that this is a break. Since devolution, there has
:08:46. > :08:48.been great resistance to this. It was lumped in with, we don't want
:08:49. > :08:53.league tables, and all the rest of it. To be fair to John Swinney, he
:08:54. > :08:56.has been waving his arms around, signalling he would do this for
:08:57. > :09:05.months, but it is still a departure. , It is, and local authorities see
:09:06. > :09:08.it as the thin end of the wedge. If you give a little money to some
:09:09. > :09:14.headteachers, you have started down that road of giving local autonomy
:09:15. > :09:17.to schools, and you could keep on going in that direction and cut the
:09:18. > :09:21.local authorities are almost completely. Which has implications,
:09:22. > :09:26.because for those of eyes with memories of prehistoric times,
:09:27. > :09:31.remember the Concord act with local Government, meaning they would not
:09:32. > :09:38.bring fenced money is? They said, we are not ring fencing it, we're just
:09:39. > :09:42.not giving you it at all. What are the local authorities there for? Why
:09:43. > :09:45.not give more and more money to the schools, some people might argue,
:09:46. > :09:51.and that is what councils are really worried about. Again, this is a
:09:52. > :09:55.policy copyrighted by Tony Blair in the 1990s, isn't it? It is, and
:09:56. > :10:00.pursued by other Conservative governments since then. The other
:10:01. > :10:04.side is, tell me if I'm wrong, from my reading of it, headteachers get
:10:05. > :10:07.the money, but the money doesn't have to be spent specifically,
:10:08. > :10:11.although the criterion for getting it is the number of children who get
:10:12. > :10:16.free school meals, the money does not have to be spent specifically on
:10:17. > :10:20.them, firstly. And secondly, they are not being told what exactly it
:10:21. > :10:24.is they need to do, so whether or not this actually achieved the
:10:25. > :10:29.measure of reducing the attainment gap is up in the air, isn't it? On
:10:30. > :10:36.that general point of raising the attainment gap, Nicola Sturgeon has
:10:37. > :10:39.staked how Government's reputation on it. Whether something like this
:10:40. > :10:42.or the other things they are doing will have the effect that is desired
:10:43. > :10:47.within the short time frame that we have before the next election I
:10:48. > :10:50.think is very much open to doubt. As far as giving money to schools is
:10:51. > :10:54.concerned, this is probably the fairest way of doing it. If you want
:10:55. > :10:58.to give extra money to schools that have a bigger proportion of children
:10:59. > :11:02.from deprived areas, giving it to schools that have the highest number
:11:03. > :11:07.of children on free school meals is probably the fairest way to do it.
:11:08. > :11:12.Then again, as you say, what the headteachers do with it is entirely
:11:13. > :11:15.up to them, but then they have three or four years to try and find some
:11:16. > :11:20.change to those results and everyone will wait to see if that happens. It
:11:21. > :11:24.feels like pushing a bit of string to say that this is going to close
:11:25. > :11:30.the attainment gap. It does. The attainment gap is something that no
:11:31. > :11:31.one knows whether we'll be -- whether it will be changed in the
:11:32. > :11:35.next two years. I doubt it. Time now to cross to the Chamber
:11:36. > :11:37.at Holyrood, where there's a statement from the Minister
:11:38. > :11:40.for Legal Affairs, Annabelle Ewing, who's announcing the start
:11:41. > :11:49.of an independent review At the outset, I would wish to draw
:11:50. > :11:53.attention to my entry in the register of interests, where they
:11:54. > :12:00.will find that I am a solicitor by profession, that I hold a current
:12:01. > :12:03.practising certificate, albeit I am not currently practising. I would
:12:04. > :12:06.like to inform Parliament today of action this Government is taking in
:12:07. > :12:09.respect of the legal aid system in Scotland. In the programme for
:12:10. > :12:13.Government, we made a commitment to commence engagement this year with
:12:14. > :12:17.the legal profession and others to identify specific measures to reform
:12:18. > :12:21.Scotland's system of legal aid, maintaining access to public funding
:12:22. > :12:26.for legal advice and representation in both civil and criminal cases,
:12:27. > :12:31.alongside measures to expand access to alternative methods of resolving
:12:32. > :12:35.disputes. Presiding Officer, publicly funded legal assistance
:12:36. > :12:38.plays an absolutely vital role in providing citizens with the ability
:12:39. > :12:42.to enforce their rights and in upholding social justice. In
:12:43. > :12:48.Scotland, we have maintained wide access to legal assistance are
:12:49. > :12:53.across civil and criminal cases, notwithstanding budgetary pressures.
:12:54. > :12:56.We have a demand led system with a high eligibility rate, meaning that
:12:57. > :13:00.all who apply and are eligible will receive publicly funded legal
:13:01. > :13:07.assistance. The system is founded on the legal aid Scotland act 1986, a
:13:08. > :13:11.statute that predates revolution, human rights legislation and other
:13:12. > :13:16.major reforms to the Justice system and which is now over 30 years old.
:13:17. > :13:20.It has been appropriately subject to 30 years of updating to ensure that
:13:21. > :13:23.it reflects current needs, both in human rights terms and to meet the
:13:24. > :13:26.social justice ambitions of Government. Legal aid adjustments
:13:27. > :13:30.are a regular feature of the Justice committee workload, and I would like
:13:31. > :13:34.to thank members of that committee, past and present, for their
:13:35. > :13:38.engagement, and in ensuring that we will maintain a strongly delayed
:13:39. > :13:50.system. However, as a result, we have a complex
:13:51. > :13:54.web of regulations that can be difficult, even for seasoned legal
:13:55. > :13:56.practitioners, to navigate at times. The commitment in the programme for
:13:57. > :13:59.Government reflects our view that the time is right to review the
:14:00. > :14:01.legal aid system in Scotland with a view to taking forward a programme
:14:02. > :14:03.of future reforms. As I mentioned, publicly funded legal assistance is
:14:04. > :14:08.an important aspect of improving lives and tackling inequalities.
:14:09. > :14:10.There are a range of perspectives on how the legal aid system might be
:14:11. > :14:15.improved for those that need this public service, and for those who
:14:16. > :14:18.deliver it. Therefore, I think it is important that the wide range of
:14:19. > :14:25.interests in the legal aid system play a part in shaping future
:14:26. > :14:28.reforms. I therefore intend to establish an independent review
:14:29. > :14:35.group to consider the legal aid system in 21st-century Scotland and
:14:36. > :14:39.how best to respond to the changing justice, social, economic, business
:14:40. > :14:43.and technological landscape within which a modern and flexible legal
:14:44. > :14:48.aid system should operate. Indeed, the programme of justice reform in
:14:49. > :14:53.Scotland in the last few years has been significant and is shaping a
:14:54. > :14:57.much more modern and progressive civil and criminal justice system.
:14:58. > :15:01.Importantly, this includes a greater focus on the needs of individuals
:15:02. > :15:06.engaging with the justice system. Hence, the legal aid system must
:15:07. > :15:10.keep pace with the reforms and developments in the justice sector.
:15:11. > :15:18.So, a review of legal aid is timely, and I note that the Law Society of
:15:19. > :15:21.Scotland and the Faculty of Advocates are supportive of a review
:15:22. > :15:23.being taken forward. I note also that some of the parties represented
:15:24. > :15:27.here today also had a manifesto commitment to look at our system of
:15:28. > :15:29.legal aid, so I hope that our planned review will be welcomed by
:15:30. > :15:42.members across this chamber today. The Scottish Government says it
:15:43. > :15:50.will press the American president to reconsider his controversial
:15:51. > :15:52.travel ban, directly and indirectly. Speaking to MSPs at
:15:53. > :15:53.Holyrood yesterday, the External Affairs Secretary,
:15:54. > :15:56.Fiona Hyslop, said she had already asked the UK Government to make
:15:57. > :15:58.representations to the US Government, on the implications
:15:59. > :16:07.of the restrictions here. That bans people from a number of
:16:08. > :16:12.Muslim majority countries from entering the US, on Sunday I wrote
:16:13. > :16:16.to the Foreign Secretary urging him to make the strongest reputation to
:16:17. > :16:19.the US Government about the effect the order will have on people who
:16:20. > :16:24.live, work and study here, the minister raised the issue with the
:16:25. > :16:28.PM when he met at the committee in Cardiff yesterday. I have yet to
:16:29. > :16:31.receive a reply but there has been communication at a official level.
:16:32. > :16:36.The Foreign Secretary made a statement yesterday saying the UK
:16:37. > :16:39.has secured an exemption to the ban for UK passport holders, including
:16:40. > :16:48.dual nationals, it does not go nearly far enough. We know from
:16:49. > :16:53.cases such as that of a vet studying at the University of Glasgow the ban
:16:54. > :16:58.may affect some who work and study in Scotland. We are concerned about
:16:59. > :17:01.confusion about how this ban applies and I am seeking clarification, more
:17:02. > :17:08.broadly, the imposition of a blanket ban on people on the basis of their
:17:09. > :17:13.birthplace, nationality or ridge, in the -- religion is counter
:17:14. > :17:16.productive and morally wrong. It risks exacerbating tensions between
:17:17. > :17:23.communities. It will undermine much of the work the global community has
:17:24. > :17:26.been doing to tackle streamy. The the US has welcomed people from
:17:27. > :17:30.other countries earthquake especially those fleeing
:17:31. > :17:34.persecution, we will press the US government directly to reconsider
:17:35. > :17:38.this action and adopt an approach that reflects the values of
:17:39. > :17:47.tolerance, diversity and human rights and would seek the support of
:17:48. > :17:52.the chamber in doing so. I thank the Cabinet secretary for
:17:53. > :17:56.that full reply and look forward to further reflies o ereplies from
:17:57. > :17:57.ministers such as the Foreign Secretary and the minister in
:17:58. > :17:59.Secretary and the minister in Westminster.
:18:00. > :18:01.Joining me now is Professor Christopher Carman,
:18:02. > :18:02.who's the Stevenson Professor of Citizenship at University
:18:03. > :18:05.of Glasgow, and Robina Qureshi, who's director of Positive Action
:18:06. > :18:13.in Housing - the homelessness refugee and migrant charity.
:18:14. > :18:19.Chris, you think there is a bit less slap dashry going on here than meets
:18:20. > :18:24.the eye when it comes to Trump's executive orders. I there is a bit
:18:25. > :18:31.of slap dashry, there is is a bit of making it up as they go, I think we
:18:32. > :18:34.could look at this and say this is their campaign strategy they have
:18:35. > :18:41.morphed into their governing strategy. Whenever Trump started to
:18:42. > :18:45.get into hot water, they quickly almost manufactured another story,
:18:46. > :18:49.that they could then jump to, in a way forcing the 24 hours media
:18:50. > :18:51.cycles to move on to the NEC story, instead of getting to the meat of
:18:52. > :18:56.any particular story, moving on to try to keep up. So if we look at
:18:57. > :19:01.what has happen been happening lately. The stream court nomination
:19:02. > :19:05.was originally scheduled for Thursday of this week. With the
:19:06. > :19:10.immigration ban, whatever we want to call it, going into effect in the
:19:11. > :19:14.protest round the US, they have for some reason moved up the nomination
:19:15. > :19:19.of the Supreme Court justice, so we see this sort of manufacturing one
:19:20. > :19:23.story and going from another, they have gone from one what has been
:19:24. > :19:26.called executive orders to another, to another and nobody has been able
:19:27. > :19:32.to get down into the meat of any of these. What is your sense about
:19:33. > :19:35.these huge demonstrations, we have seen in America, against the
:19:36. > :19:41.immigration orders? I mean does that mean start a protest against Trump
:19:42. > :19:44.or will Trump, will he be thinking great, that will play, if anything
:19:45. > :19:49.perhaps increase the support in middle America? It could well
:19:50. > :19:54.embolden Trump, it could well, he could play off that saying look, I
:19:55. > :19:58.am doing what I said I would do, and these are the people who, the sort
:19:59. > :20:02.of elites or the people on the left, they have been getting too much and
:20:03. > :20:06.I am standing up for the common people, for the regular Americans,
:20:07. > :20:12.out there, so I could see how this could embolden him, he is, with
:20:13. > :20:20.every one of the announcements he is saying I am fulfilling my pledges
:20:21. > :20:25.and promises. This point about fulfilling his promises, people here
:20:26. > :20:29.might disagree with the substance of what Mr Trump is proposing,
:20:30. > :20:34.President Trump is proposing but he can plausibly say not just that he
:20:35. > :20:41.is fulfilling his election pledges but it is a watered-down version of
:20:42. > :20:45.his pledges. You are referring to? The immigration orders. Well, just
:20:46. > :20:49.to give you an example of where we have, let us look at this in the
:20:50. > :20:53.context, you and I are sat here, we are probably born here both in this
:20:54. > :20:58.country, we have British passports, and you can travel to America, but I
:20:59. > :21:03.would not dare not travel, because I am a Muslim. That is the context we
:21:04. > :21:08.are here. Something frightening is happening across the UK... Why would
:21:09. > :21:14.not not dare travel to America, are you 56 effected by this? It is down
:21:15. > :21:18.to a Muslim ban, a refugee ban, and what is happening across... I want
:21:19. > :21:24.to be clear, hang on, I want to be clear about this, are you saying you
:21:25. > :21:29.wouldn't want to travel to the United States yuelds feel
:21:30. > :21:34.uncomfortable? Muslim nose we are going to be harassed if we take
:21:35. > :21:38.flights to America. It is a Muslim ban, we are potentially terroristers
:21:39. > :21:43.doesn't matter where we come from, the seven nations or UK, or France
:21:44. > :21:47.or anywhere else in Europe. The fact is America the most powerful country
:21:48. > :21:50.in the world has elected a fascist, what we have is a British Prime
:21:51. > :21:54.Minister, acting like a cut price poodle to the President of the
:21:55. > :21:57.United States, and not having the moral courage to stand up to that,
:21:58. > :22:02.but instead saying that the Muslim ban is not our problem. This is
:22:03. > :22:07.where we are, this has echoes of the 1930s, we should know the conthe
:22:08. > :22:10.tenting, we the British Prime Minister doesn't seem to know that,
:22:11. > :22:15.they won't stand up to what is going on. Do you think they should not
:22:16. > :22:19.invite Mr Trump for a state visit? Absolutely. When Britain is talking
:22:20. > :22:25.about up holding freedom and democracy they have to stop and have
:22:26. > :22:30.to put a stop to any state visit by this man, and the commentary and the
:22:31. > :22:37.rhetoric, the fear ridden rhetoric he is coming out with. We have had
:22:38. > :22:42.state visit from a whole lot of people, like Vladimir Putin.
:22:43. > :22:45.Holocaust... The President of China The Holocaust memorial has just
:22:46. > :22:50.happened a few days ago, where we said never again. This is the
:22:51. > :22:54.refrain constantly. This is the road to fascism. It happened to the dues
:22:55. > :22:59.and now Muslim, you can look at it, he is talking about building a wall,
:23:00. > :23:04.it is not just about building a wall. He is the apex of this, this
:23:05. > :23:11.has been going on for decade, this has been going on and he has built
:23:12. > :23:14.and the Prime Ministers and Presidents before him have built
:23:15. > :23:18.walls in people's hearts. When Farage is talking about stopping,
:23:19. > :23:25.protecting our borders, regarding refugees, what is he saying? He is
:23:26. > :23:32.saying refugees... I am curious, why is it OK to have the President of
:23:33. > :23:36.China on a state visit but not the newly-elected President of the
:23:37. > :23:40.United States? I would argue it isn't correct. I would say what is
:23:41. > :23:44.insidious is you have the British Prime Minister, agenting like a
:23:45. > :23:48.poodle, to the US President, and kowtowing to him as she did. It was
:23:49. > :23:54.embarrassing, she had no moral courage to stand up and say what you
:23:55. > :23:57.are doing is wrong to discriminate and creating fear. We will put
:23:58. > :24:01.millions out, across the UK, and Europe, we will put millions out to
:24:02. > :24:05.stop that state visit to send out a signal to the rest of the world that
:24:06. > :24:10.this is not acceptable behaviour, or rhetoric or conversation. How is
:24:11. > :24:15.this, how is the British aspect of this seen in the United States? I
:24:16. > :24:20.mean, not, did Theresa May's visit, was that a big story this? It was a
:24:21. > :24:24.bit of a story, certainly, any time that anything connected with the UK,
:24:25. > :24:29.obviously, does get media coverage in the US, and it was a, the fact
:24:30. > :24:34.that you have a visiting head of state, come, she gave that talk to
:24:35. > :24:40.the Republican retreat which was very well received apparently by
:24:41. > :24:43.Republican, so it, her visit did receive coverage, perhaps not
:24:44. > :24:48.extensive coverage one might otherwise think but certainly she
:24:49. > :24:54.was well regarded. There is a Brexit connection here, isn't there. Yes.
:24:55. > :24:57.That Theresa May is perhaps more reliant on relations than the United
:24:58. > :25:01.States. I don't know whether she would choose to be that or not. But
:25:02. > :25:06.more than she would choose to be because Brex is not giving her a lot
:25:07. > :25:11.of options. Yes, why the state visit? We can go back to this. Why
:25:12. > :25:15.was the invitation issued far earlier than it usually would be
:25:16. > :25:22.within a President's term of office. If we look back at the last few US
:25:23. > :25:26.President, it was well into their administration, at least half way
:25:27. > :25:31.through if not furtherment so this is quite early for the issuing of a
:25:32. > :25:37.state visit as opposed to official visit. You can see what Rubina means
:25:38. > :25:42.when she says it looks like Britain is acting like a poodle to the US,
:25:43. > :25:47.this is unusually quick. You can imagine going back to your Brexit
:25:48. > :25:51.idea, this really is then Theresa May trying to make sure that sort of
:25:52. > :25:55.in the good graces of Trump, around the idea of the trade negotiations
:25:56. > :26:01.that are going to be forthcoming. I know you are not a lawyer, I don't
:26:02. > :26:07.expect a legally watertightance to this question, the other thing that
:26:08. > :26:11.Trump said about giving preferential treatment to example to Christians
:26:12. > :26:16.from Syria, is that constitutional? This is the big question. And we
:26:17. > :26:23.would expect that will make it through the courts so we have seen
:26:24. > :26:27.at lower level courts, a stay of the ban as it were, and this will make
:26:28. > :26:31.it up through to the Supreme Court, which has implications for the
:26:32. > :26:37.nomination that we just saw last night, but... Just on the face of
:26:38. > :26:43.it, saying the United States, the land of the free, will base its
:26:44. > :26:47.immigration policy on discriminating against people because of their
:26:48. > :26:50.religion doesn't sound constitutional to me. The US
:26:51. > :26:57.Government cannot establish a state religion. Exactly. There is a
:26:58. > :27:01.separation of estate more than here. Many have argued that signalling out
:27:02. > :27:07.a particular group, and this is where the stay came from, because
:27:08. > :27:13.the intent of Trump seems to be a ban of a particular religion, there
:27:14. > :27:17.are this could be seen as the US establishing a religion state
:27:18. > :27:21.ridgen, therefore it could be seen as being unconstitutional. You
:27:22. > :27:25.presumably agree with that, I mean whether or not people agree with
:27:26. > :27:30.your, I mean, one understands how you might feel uncomfortable going
:27:31. > :27:34.to the US, certainly, if it does become official, you would almost
:27:35. > :27:39.officially be discriminated against, wouldn't you. If there was official
:27:40. > :27:42.policy. Foo people have fear in our heart, we are being terrorised.
:27:43. > :27:45.People are scared. It isn't just about individuals. This right as
:27:46. > :27:49.cross, sweeping across Europe and Britain. When you have the President
:27:50. > :27:54.of the United States coming out with rhetoric, this is the man that in
:27:55. > :27:58.Scotland terrorised a 92-year-old woman for four years and cut off her
:27:59. > :28:01.water for four year, what did the Scottish Government do about it?
:28:02. > :28:06.Nothing. They never stood up for her. She had no water for four years
:28:07. > :28:09.so he could build his golf course and try and drive her off her land.
:28:10. > :28:16.This is what you are dealing this. This. This is someone who is a
:28:17. > :28:19.malignant narcissist and is happy for his name to be mentioned 24/7.
:28:20. > :28:22.We will have to leave it there. Thank you.
:28:23. > :28:24.Now, let's speak to some MSPs at Holyrood.
:28:25. > :28:27.I'm joined by Ivan McKee for the SNP, for the Conservatives
:28:28. > :28:29.it's Liz Smith, Mark Griffin from Scottish Labour, Patrick Harvie
:28:30. > :28:31.for the Scottish Green Party, and Alex Cole-Hamilton
:28:32. > :28:46.Look, as we have got this full range of you, let's start by talking a bit
:28:47. > :28:51.about the budget, have you done a deal yet Patrick Harvie? Well are --
:28:52. > :28:56.we are making a strong case to the Scottish Government, as we have done
:28:57. > :29:00.persistently that not only sit vital that we protect public service,
:29:01. > :29:04.public services that all of us depend on every day but that is also
:29:05. > :29:07.possible do that fairly with the tax powers that are available to the
:29:08. > :29:12.Scottish Parliament. We are making that case. Let us cut to the quick,
:29:13. > :29:16.you are insisting that you won't or are you insisting that you won't
:29:17. > :29:21.vote for the Scottish budget unless they put taxes up? To be honest, I
:29:22. > :29:25.think we are the only political party that is being constructive and
:29:26. > :29:30.persistent in this process. There is going to be no budget if we can't
:29:31. > :29:35.get agreement across the chamber and a majority support for a budget. We
:29:36. > :29:39.put forward a range of ways in which we can... So let me ask you directly
:29:40. > :29:43.can you imagine a situation where taxes do not go up, but you vote for
:29:44. > :29:47.the budget? If parties dug their feet in, and said, my way or the
:29:48. > :29:51.high way, then the whole thing would Faulks and we would start the see
:29:52. > :29:56.emergency cuts happening in public services. I am not willing to see
:29:57. > :29:59.that happen but I am entirely determined to put pressure on the
:30:00. > :30:05.Scottish Government to give ground on the position it has taken so far.
:30:06. > :30:09.Right. How things change, because your insistence of a few days ago
:30:10. > :30:12.The Greens would not go for the budget unless taxes wept up seems to
:30:13. > :30:20.be a thing of distant past? I want to see where we can get to
:30:21. > :30:25.tomorrow with progressive tax increases. I think all five of us,
:30:26. > :30:29.on high incomes, can afford to pay more tax, and I am making that case
:30:30. > :30:33.strongly as I can to the Scottish Government. But it is not your
:30:34. > :30:37.condition any longer. It is to protect the public services we all
:30:38. > :30:43.depend on, because cutting those will have a terrible impact on
:30:44. > :30:47.policy, -- poverty, equality. It is vital we achieve these things and I
:30:48. > :30:52.am making every effort to achieve them. Alex Cole Hamilton, you will
:30:53. > :30:56.have to make a deal with the Government because Patrick will do
:30:57. > :31:00.one before you get the chance. I don't think things look good for a
:31:01. > :31:04.deal between the SNP and the Lib Dems. We have been in constructive
:31:05. > :31:09.talks with the Government because after a year of telling them to get
:31:10. > :31:12.on with their day job and look at public services, put aside
:31:13. > :31:15.independence, that we have an opportunity to talk to them about
:31:16. > :31:23.making that work with the budget. What we are asking for is a seismic
:31:24. > :31:27.investment in mental health, spending on child and adolescent
:31:28. > :31:30.mental health... Let me put it to you bluntly, there was a suggestion
:31:31. > :31:34.at the weekend that the Lib Dems would find it difficult to support
:31:35. > :31:37.the budget because you would be propping up a Government in favour
:31:38. > :31:40.of an independence referendum, whereas the Greens would find it
:31:41. > :31:46.difficult to vote it down because they would be bringing down a
:31:47. > :31:51.Government committed to an independence referendum. Is the lead
:31:52. > :31:56.in the -- the Lib Dem bit of that through? We have been resolutely
:31:57. > :32:02.clear that the Lib Dems are utterly oppose a second independence
:32:03. > :32:06.referendum, but I don't think the distances to grate on the issue of
:32:07. > :32:09.mental health, college funding, pupil premium, investing in giving
:32:10. > :32:14.the poorest and most deprived students the best chance in life.
:32:15. > :32:17.This is where the SNP are going to have to look to that
:32:18. > :32:20.pro-independence majority. You heard it here first. It sounds like things
:32:21. > :32:24.are warming up in that relationship, but I think it will be a distance
:32:25. > :32:29.too far to travel for the Lib Dems. Ivan McKee, do you feel particularly
:32:30. > :32:35.warm and friendly towards Patrick Harvie, given what he just said? We
:32:36. > :32:38.are in the position where the SNP Government was elected on its
:32:39. > :32:40.manifesto but we don't have a majority, and of course, we
:32:41. > :32:47.understand that we need to talk with other parties. Hang on, let's cut to
:32:48. > :32:51.the quick. The point was, you weren't prepared to raise taxes, and
:32:52. > :32:55.by the sound of what Patrick Harvie is saying, you don't need to.
:32:56. > :33:00.Theresa I am saying that discussions are ongoing and these things are
:33:01. > :33:02.moving by the hour, and I am not party to those negotiations. Finance
:33:03. > :33:07.Secretary Mackay is involved in talking to other parties as we
:33:08. > :33:11.speak. We are being constructive and we understand we need to do a deal
:33:12. > :33:14.with another party. As I say, there are a number of things on the table
:33:15. > :33:19.being talked about and I am not party to all the details, but we are
:33:20. > :33:22.approaching this in the correct spirit, understanding that we need
:33:23. > :33:24.to do a deal with someone else to get this budget through, which is
:33:25. > :33:29.very important to the people of Scotland.
:33:30. > :33:35.Liz Smith, I won't ask about the budget, because you hate it! The
:33:36. > :33:40.money to close the attainment gap, ?120 million, new money, that is
:33:41. > :33:44.good, isn't it? Yes, and we are supportive in principle. We are
:33:45. > :33:49.particularly delighted that there will be a move to devolve power to
:33:50. > :33:53.spend that money down to schools. We have a slight concern that it is not
:33:54. > :33:56.necessarily money that will follow the child every time, but I think
:33:57. > :34:01.what has been announced this afternoon is very much a step in the
:34:02. > :34:05.right direction. Why do you say it will not follow the Child? We were
:34:06. > :34:10.talking about this earlier, is it because headteachers are not being
:34:11. > :34:14.told to spend the extra money on the particular children that qualify
:34:15. > :34:19.them to get it, is that the problem? It is not a significant problem, it
:34:20. > :34:22.is the fact that if you have a fund that is disbursed to the
:34:23. > :34:26.headteacher, then there is a facility for that headteacher to
:34:27. > :34:29.spend it as they want. It does not necessarily involve every child who
:34:30. > :34:33.is eligible, and we would prefer to see a formula more likely pupil
:34:34. > :34:43.premium that is operated successfully down south. What do you
:34:44. > :34:48.make of this? The Labour Party were one of the driving forces of this in
:34:49. > :34:52.the previous parliament, but we are looking at ?120 million to schools
:34:53. > :34:58.at the same time as the schools budget is being cut by ?327 million.
:34:59. > :35:01.In my own area, North Lanarkshire Council are getting almost ?9
:35:02. > :35:07.million while at the same time the budget is being cut by ?23 million,
:35:08. > :35:12.so it is hard to see how this will make an impact on local education.
:35:13. > :35:16.Hang on, are you saying the local authority budget is being cut by ?23
:35:17. > :35:24.million? In North Lanarkshire, the budget is being cut by ?23 million.
:35:25. > :35:28.They can spend what they like on education. But when the budget is
:35:29. > :35:31.being cut by ?23 million, it is inevitable that some of those
:35:32. > :35:37.savings will fall on education, given that it is the biggest area of
:35:38. > :35:41.spending. For the Government to give out ?120 million on one hand and
:35:42. > :35:46.claw back ?327 million on the other, I think it is another act of spin by
:35:47. > :35:49.this Government. If they want to support reducing the attainment gap,
:35:50. > :35:54.they should reverse that cut and invest the ?120 million to close
:35:55. > :35:59.that attainment gap. We have given costed methods of doing that, by
:36:00. > :36:02.increasing the very top rate of tax. Patrick Harvie, everyone seems to
:36:03. > :36:07.think more money for schools is a good idea, but I suppose the
:36:08. > :36:10.question here is, Headteachers are not being mandated what to do with
:36:11. > :36:15.the money, so the connection between spending the money and actually
:36:16. > :36:22.closing the attainment gap remains to be demonstrated, doesn't it? I
:36:23. > :36:25.think that point is very enough. We also have a concern that we don't
:36:26. > :36:28.want teachers and head teachers to become principally financial
:36:29. > :36:33.managers when they are supposed to be leaders of a learning community,
:36:34. > :36:37.and I do have a concern about this notion of pushing spending decisions
:36:38. > :36:43.down to school level. But Mark is right to a certain extent - this is
:36:44. > :36:45.not just the context of the wider local Government funding, which is
:36:46. > :36:50.why we are so committed to ensuring that we invest in public services
:36:51. > :36:54.locally, but it is also about the inequality in our society. We cannot
:36:55. > :36:57.imagine that the attainment gap is suddenly going to be blown away
:36:58. > :37:02.overnight simply be because we put in a bit of extra money to schools.
:37:03. > :37:06.We have to look at the poverty and inequality in our society, and why
:37:07. > :37:16.that drives the inequality in educational attainment. Even if you
:37:17. > :37:18.did do that, you are talking 20, 30 years. Nicola Sturgeon has staked
:37:19. > :37:23.her first ministership on doing something about this. She doesn't
:37:24. > :37:26.have 30 years. Any party that is serious about this recognises that
:37:27. > :37:29.we will only make progress if we commit substantially for the long
:37:30. > :37:33.term in the things that close the inequality gap in our society, as
:37:34. > :37:36.well as changing the way that schools attempt to close the
:37:37. > :37:42.attainment gap in the short term. Both of them unnecessary. It is not
:37:43. > :37:46.either or. Patrick, they had just given you about half of what you
:37:47. > :37:50.wanted to do in your own budget. This is a long way from what we want
:37:51. > :38:03.from the pupil premium or the attainment fun. ?120 million of new
:38:04. > :38:08.money... We want an extra ?70 million on top of that to bring us
:38:09. > :38:13.into par with what is being spent on the pupil premium in England. We
:38:14. > :38:18.have seen the attainment gap close by as much as 5% just in five years,
:38:19. > :38:22.so we are lagging behind England, something the SNP are never
:38:23. > :38:25.comfortable doing, so in our budget negotiations, in order to just get
:38:26. > :38:29.to the races, let's bring us in line with English spending, and an
:38:30. > :38:34.additional ?70 million on top of what has been pledged today. Ivan
:38:35. > :38:41.McKee, if we can swing background to you. There you go, a quick view of
:38:42. > :38:45.everybody. The problem you have got is that everyone seems to welcome
:38:46. > :38:50.this money, whether or not it goes directly to Headteachers, but it is
:38:51. > :38:53.this problem the SNP have - you have got to actually reduce the gap in
:38:54. > :38:57.educational attainment, not just put money into hoping it will happen.
:38:58. > :39:03.Absolutely, we are the Government and we have to deliver on that. Over
:39:04. > :39:07.the course of the parliament, we are putting ?750 million into that fund.
:39:08. > :39:10.Interesting to hear Liz Smith welcoming it while at the same time
:39:11. > :39:14.the Tories are arguing that they don't want to pay tax for it. You
:39:15. > :39:18.also have to remember that the attainment fund will only go through
:39:19. > :39:20.if this budget goes through, so it is important that parties are
:39:21. > :39:25.constructive to get this through and get that money to schools. Thank you
:39:26. > :39:31.all very much indeed for joining us. An extra large Kast of all the
:39:32. > :39:34.parties in the Scottish parliament. Hamish McDonell is still with me.
:39:35. > :39:38.That is the issue, if you leave aside the stuff about local
:39:39. > :39:43.authorities and who should get the money, it is how you actually do
:39:44. > :39:48.this. Ivan McKee has accepted, they have to do this and demonstrate
:39:49. > :39:51.this. As we get towards the next election, this political priority of
:39:52. > :39:56.raising the attainment gap, or closing it, will become more and
:39:57. > :40:01.more important, because that is the thing which Nicola Sturgeon has
:40:02. > :40:04.said, judge me, on. Every political party and journalists will be
:40:05. > :40:09.looking at all the figures to try and see whether she has done it,
:40:10. > :40:12.because if the attainment gap is not closed to any significant extent by
:40:13. > :40:18.the next election, she will buy her own admission have failed. I have to
:40:19. > :40:25.admit, what slightly surprised me was that John Swinney said on the
:40:26. > :40:28.Sunday Politics a few months ago that there would be a range of
:40:29. > :40:31.measures by which they would be judged, not just on how the gap
:40:32. > :40:37.between attainment from pupils at a particular primary school, but on
:40:38. > :40:42.the overall figures of how many people from lower income backgrounds
:40:43. > :40:46.are getting into university. The point about this that we should
:40:47. > :40:51.emphasise is, it is a bit like how you change a Government deficit, it
:40:52. > :40:54.is a residual land is by nature difficult to target. Attainment gaps
:40:55. > :40:59.are a bit like that as well. You can boost performance in some schools,
:41:00. > :41:03.but measuring the gap, getting it down, is more difficult. That's
:41:04. > :41:07.right. They might be able to achieve one or two but will be achieve all
:41:08. > :41:12.of them? If you look at Labour over the last few months, any time there
:41:13. > :41:16.are any university figures that come out, Labour looks at them and says,
:41:17. > :41:21.look, the attainment gap for universities, for people getting in,
:41:22. > :41:24.is widening. The SNP Government may child it -- achieve it in primary
:41:25. > :41:30.and secondary schools, but if they do not achieve it at university
:41:31. > :41:34.level, they will be judged to have failed. The attainment gap may well
:41:35. > :41:40.close, but whether it closes enough on all areas by the next election,
:41:41. > :41:43.that is a big ask. Don't go away, Hamish.
:41:44. > :41:45.Now, to this week's Prime Minister's Questions where,
:41:46. > :41:47.as we've been hearing, Theresa May announced the UK
:41:48. > :41:49.Government's White Paper on Brexit would be published tomorrow.
:41:50. > :41:51.But Brexit was not Jeremy Corbyn's priority this week.
:41:52. > :41:54.He instead focused all his questions on the US president, Donald Trump.
:41:55. > :41:57.Among them, he asked the Prime Minister whether she had
:41:58. > :42:02.advance notice of the US president's travel ban when she visited him.
:42:03. > :42:08.Mr Speaker, Downing Street has not denied that the Prime Minister was
:42:09. > :42:13.told by the White House that the executive order on travel to the US
:42:14. > :42:18.was imminent, so let's be clear - was the Prime Minister told about
:42:19. > :42:25.the ban during her visit, and did she persuade -- try to persuade
:42:26. > :42:28.President Trump otherwise? First of all, on the policy that President
:42:29. > :42:38.Trump has introduced, this Government is clear that that policy
:42:39. > :42:41.is wrong. We wouldn't do it, as Home Secretary for six years, we never
:42:42. > :42:46.introduced such a policy. We believe it is divisive and wrong. If he is
:42:47. > :42:51.asking whether I had advance notice of the ban on refugees, the answer
:42:52. > :42:54.is no. If he is asking if I had advanced notice that the executive
:42:55. > :43:00.order could affect British citizens, the answer is no. If he's asking if
:43:01. > :43:04.I had advance notice of the travel restrictions, the answer is, we all
:43:05. > :43:10.did, because President Trump said he was going to do this in his election
:43:11. > :43:13.campaign. We on these benches very much welcome what the Prime Minister
:43:14. > :43:18.has had to say on all these issues, and we also welcome the intensifying
:43:19. > :43:22.of negotiations between the UK Government and the devolved
:43:23. > :43:27.administrations ahead of triggering Article 50. So, the Prime Minister
:43:28. > :43:31.has very helpfully explained that it is perfectly possible for parts of
:43:32. > :43:35.these islands to be in the single market without hard borders, with
:43:36. > :43:42.free movement of people, and at the same time, protect and enhance trade
:43:43. > :43:45.with one another. This is very, very welcome, Mr Speaker. So, will the
:43:46. > :43:50.Prime Minister give a commitment to work with the Irish Government and a
:43:51. > :43:54.commitment to work with the Scottish Government to deliver all of these
:43:55. > :44:01.things, or will we just have to get on with it ourselves? First of all,
:44:02. > :44:06.the Right Honourable gentleman is right that following the meeting of
:44:07. > :44:09.the JNC plenary session on Monday morning, we did agree to an
:44:10. > :44:15.intensification of discussion on issues related to the bringing back
:44:16. > :44:19.of powers from Brussels, and as to whether those powers should lie
:44:20. > :44:24.within the United Kingdom, and to intensify that in the run-up to the
:44:25. > :44:28.triggering of Article 50 and beyond. On the other question, I'm afraid,
:44:29. > :44:30.you know, he really should listen to the answer is given, because he is
:44:31. > :44:38.trying to imply something that isn't there. Yes... We are very clear that
:44:39. > :44:41.we want to see a frictionless border between Northern Ireland and the
:44:42. > :44:46.Republic of Ireland, but I'm also clear that one of our objectives of
:44:47. > :44:48.our negotiation is to see as frictionless a border as possible
:44:49. > :44:53.between the United Kingdom and the rest of the EU. And of course, if he
:44:54. > :44:56.is so worried about having a frictionless border between Scotland
:44:57. > :45:00.and countries in the EU, he shouldn't want to take Scotland out
:45:01. > :45:06.of the European Union by wanting to see yet independent. A few moments
:45:07. > :45:11.ago, the Prime Minister tried to claim credit for passing Stonewall's
:45:12. > :45:15.during Bill. She didn't. It pardons all gay men found guilty of crimes
:45:16. > :45:19.no longer on the statute book, so when will the Prime Minister
:45:20. > :45:30.followed the Scottish Government and pardon automatically be living as
:45:31. > :45:34.well as the dead? -- the living. It gives an opportunity for those alive
:45:35. > :45:43.to apply to the home efforts to apply to have their record expunged.
:45:44. > :45:46.My honourable friend the member for Pudsey and I have both in the
:45:47. > :45:49.chamber today encouraged people to come forward and make that
:45:50. > :45:52.application, and I think that is a message we should all give.
:45:53. > :45:54.Well, for reaction to that, here's our Westminster
:45:55. > :46:08.I have two MPs and two Lord's, first of all without any ado, let me
:46:09. > :46:19.introduce you to them, for the Liberal Democrats, Lord Purvis, to
:46:20. > :46:30.Labour Lord George Faulks, you will soon realise he is a Scot as well.
:46:31. > :46:36.Mark, referring to everything that went on in PMQ, was Theresa May to
:46:37. > :46:43.go to Washington so quickly, and to embrace the new Presidential team?
:46:44. > :46:44.Absolutely not. The Prime Minister was very very right, to go to
:46:45. > :46:55.Washington, at the earliest opportunity. We are talking about
:46:56. > :47:07.our closest allies. Not just in Nato but round the world. A country we
:47:08. > :47:08.have to maintain good relationship with to get things done. When the
:47:09. > :47:08.Prime Minister went there she made the case for Britain's interest.
:47:09. > :47:11.That was a good result. Are they right? This is a politics
:47:12. > :47:18.of protest again, the Prime Minister picked up on this, at PMQ. She
:47:19. > :47:21.highlighted to Jeremy Corbyn he is good at leading protest. This is
:47:22. > :47:25.about making sure the United Kingdom place in the world is secure, that
:47:26. > :47:28.the things that matter to us are heard in America, one powerful way
:47:29. > :47:31.to do that is by bringing the President here to London, to meet
:47:32. > :47:41.with his United Kingdom counterpart and to make sure that he is in no
:47:42. > :47:51.doubt as to the British values. Ian, if as part of the... If we have the
:47:52. > :47:54.relates ship we are supposed to have we should be saying to Donald Trump
:47:55. > :47:58.it is wrong. We should be saying yes we will talk with you, but it
:47:59. > :48:03.shouldn't be done on the basis of affording a state visit. That is
:48:04. > :48:08.wrong. Is it not inconceivable to withdraw thaw? Not at all. In the
:48:09. > :48:12.light of what has happened in the course of last few days, Donald
:48:13. > :48:20.Trump taking action against Muslims the way he has done, we have a
:48:21. > :48:21.responsibility to stand up and say that you are wrong, yes we will
:48:22. > :48:26.talk... But to afford him the privilege of a state visit is wholly
:48:27. > :48:33.wrong. So you engage with Donald Trump, but you don't afford him all
:48:34. > :48:38.the advantaged of a state visit? Yes I think Theresa May rushed in, fools
:48:39. > :48:47.rush in where angels fear to tread. I think history will show she has
:48:48. > :48:53.been far too, she has rushed in far too quickly normally Presidents wait
:48:54. > :48:56.for two or three or four years into their term of office before they are
:48:57. > :49:03.afforded a state visit. Boris Johnson said the Queen has already
:49:04. > :49:07.met Ceausescu and mug by. That says something he thinks that President
:49:08. > :49:12.Trump is is a bit like those dictator, and I think that is
:49:13. > :49:18.revealing. Let me return to the question. It is inconceivable you
:49:19. > :49:21.withdraw this, because that would take a diplomatic row and it would
:49:22. > :49:26.escalate it hugely? I still don't think there has been a time set for
:49:27. > :49:30.it. If we are looking for a reasonable outcome, I agree with
:49:31. > :49:42.George, the preponderance was too rushed. This had been agreed
:49:43. > :49:43.internally behind the scenes before she got on the plane to go to
:49:44. > :49:44.America. But I think what would be appropriate, is if we are to have
:49:45. > :49:47.the proper dialogue with the most powerful ally, it should be a
:49:48. > :50:19.government to Government #4re68. It should not be a state level visit.
:50:20. > :50:20.The times has not been agreed. We should have political dialogue. If
:50:21. > :50:20.the sum total of the visit was to get Trump to agree with his proposed
:50:21. > :50:36.Secretary of State for Defence, and state,
:50:37. > :50:44.that we will have tonight? Hugely significant. This is a very very
:50:45. > :50:49.defining moment in British political history and in Britain's relations
:50:50. > :51:08.with the EU, this is Parliament exercising its democratic will.
:51:09. > :51:09.Members of Parliament will vote as individuals in order to make it
:51:10. > :51:09.clear that the Government has the authority of the House of Commons to
:51:10. > :51:10.trigger article. Your party is voting against the
:51:11. > :51:11.trigger of Article 50. Your party does not want to be in this
:51:12. > :51:14.position. You are not going to win unless something extraordinary
:51:15. > :51:18.happens tonight, why don't you just accept the inevitable? I think what
:51:19. > :51:21.we have got is the Government in London being disrespectful to the
:51:22. > :51:25.Scottish Government, to the Government in Belfast and to the
:51:26. > :51:28.Government in Cardiff. Because we have a clearly nuanced position that
:51:29. > :51:32.we accept that England has voted to leave the European Union but there
:51:33. > :51:47.is no issue as far has the is concerned. We have a mandate on
:51:48. > :51:50.behalf of the Scottish people... A co-promice to reach a settlement and
:51:51. > :51:55.to rush this through against the interest of the Scottish people, I
:51:56. > :52:00.think demonstrates if the futility of what the Government is doing.
:52:01. > :52:03.That is the voice of the two MPs, to the two Lord's, when it comes to
:52:04. > :52:06.House of Lords how rough is the House of Lords going to play with
:52:07. > :52:10.the Government on this? It depends on what happens in the House of
:52:11. > :52:13.Commons later today and in the subsequent stages,er if some of
:52:14. > :52:17.these amendments get through. Brexit was supposed to be a return of
:52:18. > :52:23.Parliamentary democracy, here, to Westminster. And in fact, the MPs
:52:24. > :52:26.are not going to vote according to their own belief, conscience, their
:52:27. > :52:31.knowledge, understanding, they are going to be dictated to by a
:52:32. > :52:37.referendum which was only participated, only 37% of the people
:52:38. > :52:45.in that referendum voted in favour, 16 and 17-year-olds weren't allowed
:52:46. > :52:46.to vote, the European Union citizens in the United Kingdom weren't
:52:47. > :52:50.allowed to vote, and it was only an advisory referendum, yet in the so
:52:51. > :52:53.call Parliamentary democracy MPs are not willing to make up their own
:52:54. > :52:58.minds about what is right. We had one MP in my own party saying this
:52:59. > :53:03.is goes to be disastrous for Britain but I will Voe for it. That is no
:53:04. > :53:06.kind of Parliamentary demock Si is. It is the end of Parliamentary
:53:07. > :53:12.democracy if that is going to be the case. How rough are the Lords going
:53:13. > :53:16.to get do you think on this? We have a duty to acknowledge votes in the
:53:17. > :53:20.Commons but have our own voice, that is what the Government of the day,
:53:21. > :53:26.the Conservatives want us to have as a constitutional power. As a Liberal
:53:27. > :53:29.Democrat I will maintain the consistency of my party, that while
:53:30. > :53:33.acknowledging the decision was made by the people in the referendum, we
:53:34. > :53:36.also believe that the people should have the choice to say whether the
:53:37. > :53:41.deal is a good one or not. If that is not what is going to be on offer
:53:42. > :53:47.we will not support the triggering of it. Unless it has that insurance
:53:48. > :53:51.policy for the people, that they will have the right to decide the
:53:52. > :53:53.agreement will be good for them, and for generations to come, then I
:53:54. > :54:04.don't think we should be starting this process. It was, we had
:54:05. > :54:09.tributes to Tam Dalziel. To each of you briefly, how should we assess
:54:10. > :54:14.the political car reel of Tam? He left Parliament before I joined it,
:54:15. > :54:19.but one thing is leer, he has left a considerable legacy s today I hosted
:54:20. > :54:23.an Argentine delegation from the Senate and Congress and for them,
:54:24. > :54:29.many of them will remember him for a lot of his probing and tough
:54:30. > :54:36.questioning over the ins and outs of the sink of the general Belgrano.
:54:37. > :54:41.Tam was a feisty character, he was independent minded. Spoke up clearly
:54:42. > :54:45.to what he thought was important. Of course he did foresee that
:54:46. > :54:51.devolution would lead to Scottish independence, think he will be
:54:52. > :54:55.right. He was a great pantarian. I didn't agree with him on everything.
:54:56. > :55:00.He was in favour of Europe and I agree with him on that, he would
:55:01. > :55:05.have certainly not voted for Brexit and I am not going to. People will
:55:06. > :55:09.remember when he was a candidate for the Labour Party in the borders
:55:10. > :55:13.before he... I remember that. Most politicians like to provide the
:55:14. > :55:16.answers for anything but he will go down in history for asking the
:55:17. > :55:20.questioning we are still struggling to answer, we are failing to answer
:55:21. > :55:23.the question he set. I am grateful for your recollections there and for
:55:24. > :55:25.the discussion earlier on, Brexit and Donald Trump, now, back to you
:55:26. > :55:29.in the studio. A final word from my
:55:30. > :55:40.guest, the political We seem to have unimpassed it. Must
:55:41. > :55:48.be your forensic questioning. It was then't very forensic! He didn't try
:55:49. > :55:52.to deny it. Patrick Harvie has kind of rolled over. It tends to give the
:55:53. > :55:56.impression that The Greens are in the bag as far as the SNP are
:55:57. > :56:02.concerned. They have to give them something but The Greens do appear
:56:03. > :56:07.now ready to back the budget, give Nicola Sturgeon the votes she needs.
:56:08. > :56:10.For anyone watching you hasn't been closely, who have got enough of a
:56:11. > :56:15.life not to have been following this. The point is that The Greens
:56:16. > :56:20.were, until Patrick Harvie insisting taxes had to go up before, because
:56:21. > :56:23.there a vote on taxes the and the a vote on the spending. They said the
:56:24. > :56:28.taxes had to go up before they would agree to the budget and suddenly he
:56:29. > :56:35.is saying no, no, no, that is not necessarily at all. The The
:56:36. > :56:41.conundrum, Nicola Sturgeon has to get three votes from where. The
:56:42. > :56:45.Liberal Democrats wanted money for mental health and The Greens wanted
:56:46. > :56:49.to put up tabses. What Patrick has done is reign back from that. There
:56:50. > :56:50.will be a few greeny thins. I am sure.
:56:51. > :56:54.First Minister's Questions is tomorrow at midday.
:56:55. > :57:04.Oh, my goodness me, I don't like the look of that.
:57:05. > :57:07.The Robshaws are going back in time again...