02/04/2014 Politics Scotland

Hello and welcome to Politics Scotland. Coming up on the

programme: A massive rise in voter registration ahead of the

referendum, but the Electoral Commission says there's still work

to do to sign up younger people. Our live debate in the chamber today

- the Liberal Democrats call for a reform of stop and search powers

used by the police. And here at Westminster, MPs are

discussing plans to freeze energy prices, as the row over the sale of

the Royal Mail rumbles on. More on all those stories coming up

and we'll have analysis from our political commentator for the

afternoon, Hamish Macdonell. First let's head straight to Parliament

for more on that stop and search debate. As the MSPs have to head to

the chamber shortly, Glenn Campbell is standing by with some guests.

Hello and welcome to Holyrood for Wednesday afternoon's business in

the Chamber which, as you have indicated, is dominated by a Liberal

Democrat debate on the use of stop and search, a policing tactic which,

for some, is controversial. Let's discuss that with our Wednesday

political panel. Starting off with Liam McArthur, who is the Liberal

Democrat MSP. Why have you brought this debate today? What we have seen

is a dramatic rise in the use of stop and search, not just those

under statutory provisions, which essentially on the basis of some

suspicion of wrongdoing, but so-called voluntary stop and search

which is being used extensively where those who are stopped and

searched are not aware, made aware of the reasons for it. What is your

approach? What we have seen is that this appears to be unregulated. The

concerns have been raised by the Human Rights Commissioner to that

effect. What we are seeing is in the face of that dramatic rise

suggestions that somehow this is linked to a fall in crime, but no

evidence to suggest that is the case. I think what we need to see is

those elements of stop and search more tightly regulated so there is a

cause for it and that the recording of those incidents happens in a far

more detailed fashion. Police Scotland said in the first ten

months of the new nationwide force they conducted more than 500,000 of

these services and 70%-plus were conducted on the consensual basis,

without any reasonable suspicion. That is something that police in

England cannot do, Margaret Mitchell. Why should police in

Scotland be allowed to do so? It is concerned there were four times as

many stop and searchs in Scotland than there are in England. I think

this is an excellent tool for the police to have, if used

proportionately. It can be very useful for confiscating weapons,

knives, drugs, alcohol, stolen property. The evidence is concerning

on two fronts: The Chief Constable himself has said that the figures

are made up. There are huge numbers being conducted on a basis where

consent is required when people aren't informed they have the right

to refuse. Young people are being targeted so there is a real danger

this is counterproductive and there is no relation between deterrent

stop and searchs and a reduction in crime. The motion today highlights

these concerns. Sandra White, in 2010, more than 500 of these

searches were carried out on youngsters aged ten and under. Are

you comfortable with that? We have to look at the facts and the

figures. Crime is at a 39-year low. 60% reduction in the crimes

committed by people carrying offensive weapons. I think Liam

should look to his own party also. His past Justice Minister said the

stop and search was very effective. We have to look at that also. I

think you mentioned yourself, 70% were carried out conseence yully. --

consensually. Margaret has said it is a good thing. Margaret has said

people don't necessarily know that they can say that they don't want to

be searched? We also have to look at the fact there is going to be a

review going on... Police authorities are looking at that?

Yes. That is the proper way to go about it. Is that not the proper way

rather than having a debate about it and making sensationalism? Graeme

Pearson, you have a background in this area and, presumably, deployed

officers to carry out searches in statutory and non-statutory basis? I

have done it myself. Is it being used appropriately? That is what we

don't know. The Chief Constable has acknowledged that not all searches

have been properly recorded and he thinks some have been made up. The

General Secretary to the Federation representing those officers who do

the searches says that there is no way that 500,000 people have been

searched. We need to find out what is going on, who is approving it,

are we satisfied it is being done properly and is it proportionate? We

don't know. What is your view, though, from the information and the

evidence that has been presented, what is your view? Well, it seems if

you have a 39-year low in crime, you have 500,000 fewer young people in

Scotland than were here 20 years ago. That seems to be

disproportionate to the requirement. What I would like to know is has

Police Scotland looked at the way they enforce the issue of stop and

search? Are they satisfied it's being done properly? We don't have

the answer to that. There is also a protective element in this also. I

have been out with the police in Glasgow, stop and search of some

young people found alcohol on them. These people weren't prosecuted.

They were taken home to their parents. 70% of people... We are

looking at a review. Don't all talk at once. What confuses me about the

statistics is that we have one in five searches resulting in a

positive detection, be that alcohol or an offensive weapon, or something

else that they shouldn't have. Yes. The police say these searches are

carried out on an evidence-led basis. If that is the case, why is

the hit rate so low? You are talking about reported. 70% of that is

consensual. I'm talking about kids who have been searched... I'm

talking about all the searches in total. The hit rate is one in five.

The police say they are deploying an evidence-led approach. How can that

be the case? I would assume the review would look into that. The

Scottish police - let me finish - the Scottish Police Federation are

the proper authority to do that. I would assume that the review will

look into that. We have seen this is being completely unregulated. We

have seen an explosion in the number of stop and searchs that are not

regulated in a way that is happening south of the border. Sandra says...

Why does that matter? If we have got a crime level that is the lowest for

30-odd years? Crime is coming down south of the border as well. Not to

that extent. You don't know that either? We don't have the evidence

to prove that. At the same time, what we have is something that is

completely unregulated. To be honest, there is always going to be

a balance to be struck here. You will come up with something. We need

to have this better regulated. Margaret Mitchell, this is a tactic

which is associated particularly with Strathclyde, but now seems to

be being used all over Scotland. Is this tactic equally appropriate in

Dingwall as in Glasgow? Clearly not. There is some great resentment from

the rank-and-file that they are being asked to do that. These

numbers are going to this, they are being made up, either officers are

being asked to target and their complaint is... The police have said

that there is no targeting? But the rank-and-file officers are telling

us that isn't necessarily the case. They deeply resent taking time away

from preventative policing to - and proactive policing... If you find

weapons... Alienates young people who are stopped for no apparent

reason when there is no link between the deterrent stop and searchs...

Surely a 60% reduction in crimes involving offensive weapons, is that

not something that is good to protect the public? Let's look at

their part in this. Why can't the police prove it? I'm sure the review

will bring that out. I'm sure the review will bring that out. We have

talked about communities being made safe. We are all agreed, communities

are being made safe. I want to ask the former policeman finally, do you

think it is time to stop these voluntary or consensual searches in

Scotland should the police always have reasonable suspicion? I don't

think it is time to stop that element of it. What I do know is the

Chief Constable is already warning that crime is on the rise. So, stop

and search and crime stats aren't necessarily connected. Thank you all

very much. I better let you get into the Chamber for the debate. Sandra

White was indicated there is a review of this policy, the use of

this policy across Scotland, by the new Scottish Police Authority which

takes an overview of the work of Police Scotland and its Chief

Constable. STUDIO: Thank you very much.

Let's speak now to our political commentator for the afternoon,

Hamish Macdonell. Good afternoon. Thank you for joining me. Looking at

the stop and search issue, the sheer number of these stops and searches,

incredible, more than 500,000? I think if you look at the numbers,

anybody would look at them and think what is going on here. 520,000 stop

and searchs in eight months. That is about 2,000 a day. Now, I think

everybody appreciates that there is not the whole of the population that

is being targeted here. There will be a small number, mainly young

people, that the police are targeting. Some of these figures may

be made up. If three-quarters of them are true, that is a very big

number. I think the Liberal Democrats have done very well to

raise this issue in the Parliament and bring it up to the political

agenda and say, look, what is going on? Why are they spending so much

time on this? This was coming up at Conference. They have highlighted

this in their debate. Why are they spending so much time on this

particular issue? This is old-fashioned liberalism. This is

the party going back to its liberal roots where they have concern for

the issue of civil liberties. There is a very important issue here which

is that if you have weapons that the police can use to cut crime, that's

fine. But there is a balance between those powers and infringing on civil

liberties, particularly if some people are being targeted again and

again when they don't know the law and don't know they can say no. OK.

This is a big policy issue. Let's take a minute to look at the

referendum situation. Not a good week for the "no" campaign.

Interesting intervention today from the Department of Economics at

Glasgow University today? Yes, we seem to be obsessed on this issue of

the currency. The issue of the currency is going to dominate right

the way through into September. There have been all sorts of stories

of Tory Ministers saying this and that and perhaps going against the

official line. There's been reports of splits and Lib Dems having a go

at Labour and all that sort of thing. It's not been very good for

Better Together. Today, we had this Professor saying he thinks that a

currency union between an independent Scotland and the rest of

the UK would not only work but would be in the best interests of both

parties. That, again, tends to cast doubt on the UK Government's firm

line that it wouldn't work. OK. Thank you very much. Back with you

later. Let's head to the chamber now for

the live debate we mentioned earlier - the Lib Dems calling for a change

to stop and search laws. The use of stop and search has risen many times

over. Since the formation of Police Scotland, this increase has been

extended. A Liberal Democrat Freedom of Information Request uncovered an

unprecedented surge in the use of the tactic in every other region. A

516% increase year on year in Fife during the first four months of

Police Scotland. So, why does this warrant the attentions of this

Parliament? Why should we worry about the pervasive deployment of

this tactic throughout Scotland if, as the Police and Justice Secretary

claim, it is keeping young people safe? It should worry us because

there is no legal basis for three-quarters of the searches

conducted in Scotland. All of those that are non-statutory. The power to

search an individual without legal cause has been appropriated by the

police without due parliamentary scrutiny or approval. I think that

is intolerable and immature democracy.

In the absence of codification, police are performing searches with

no suspicion. There is no requirement to tell people they have

a right to refuse and without this any consent acquired is surely ill

informed. It is to all intents and purposes a command based on

exploiting the power gap between the officer and other subjects. No

authority has been able to explain to me how the 500 children under ten

who were stopped and searched are qualified to give consent. Of the

dozens children aged seven or younger that are being searched. The

police do not record any details if a search is unsuccessful as occurs

four out of five times. Nor does the subject given a written reference of

the search. Such procedures have letter Alan Miller describing the

practice as largely unregulated and I accountable. It renders challenge

to the Human Rights Act that it is the lawful and properly documented.

Discrepancies between how the tactic is employed around Scotland means

there are disparities in access to legal safeguards. The extensive use

of non-statutory powers up at Strathclyde means three quarters of

those searched in 2010 were told little or nothing about why they

were being subjected to the procedure. Conversely, 90% of the

searches in the Northern region where statutory and subjects were

given more information. Presiding Officer, we are readily told about

those that and stop and search that crime is at a record low, but there

is no robust evidence showing a link between this and the increased

prevalence of this tactic. Drops in serious assaults and weapon carrying

predated the growth in stop and search. England and Wales boast a

similar record low in crime achieved with only a quarter of the stop and

searches per person compared to Scotland as a whole. The Justice

Secretary also tells us that because only a small number of complaints

have been received, we can safely assume everything is fine. Instead,

I fear this is because people don't know and aunt told their rights,

they don't know about police got in's complete and review process. --

Police Scotland. I think it will reveal a great deal about those that

are targeted, young people who are disengaged. Young people whose

concerns are too often not heard. Young people whose views of the

police in absence of any perceptible form of redress may be tainted by

such experiences. The Scottish Centre for crime and Justice

research's recent study made compelling reading. It concluded

that disproportionate use of stop and search against young people is

out of kilter with offending patterns and the welfare approach to

juvenile justice. Voter registration in Scotland is

the highest it has ever been as households sign up to have their say

in the referendum. With just under six months until polling day, an

estimated 4.1 million people are now on the electoral roll. And around

76% of 16 and 17-year-olds have also added their names to those eligible

to vote. Our referendum correspondent Laura Bicker reports.

The piece of paper being handed around this classroom is vital if

these pupils want a say in September. It seems here they do.

Young people can change the election. It our future. Instead of

us watching our future been decided I had doubts over 18, it gives us a

bit of a chance. -- adults. Around three quarters of 17 and

18-year-olds have signed up to vote. Some believe it is not enough. Any

procedure that is designed to ensure that all of those who are eligible

to vote are indeed and franchised and can exercise their vote if they

want to, only getting 75% is frankly not enough. So far around 4.1

million voters have registered in Scotland, that is an increase of

60,000. That means there are still around 400,000 missing from the

register. Still work to do, and these Glasgow Caledonian University

students illustrates why. Are you registered? Yes. I don't think you

are sure about that, are you? You know. Is it important Western Mark

Yes. Will you get around to registering? And quite busy.

Uniquely registered at an address. My own house? This looks as if it

comes as news two you can stop September is a tricky time for

students. Some are aware that they are needed

to register at an address. Don't leave it until the last minute, you

have until September to register your vote if you want to have a say

on Scotland's future. I'm now joined by Andy O'Neill from

the Electoral Commission. He's in our Edinburgh studio. First of all,

or what is behind the increase in registration, do you think? The

figures were published today indicate that 4.1 million people and

our registered on the local Government register and there is

approximately 92,000 young people register. As to why the increase of

around 57,000 has occurred, I don't actually have the answer. I think

what you have two note is that last year there was an increase in

turnout, there was an increase in the population. One assumes that

people that have not been registered to date will want to take part, so

they will get themselves register. We see young people signing up

there, what else is to be done to get young people to sign up? I agree

with what was said in your piece there, I don't think anyone would

agree that 750 -- three quarters of those registered is enough and and

we need to ensure that people who are eligible can register by the

deadline. The commission itself will be running a campaign, we are

working with the local electoral registration offices to do

activities locally to ensure that people are aware of how to register.

We are working with education to make sure that young people become

registered. You mentioned in your piece that students, we are working

with the academic registrar is to ensure that students who are

first-time students or returning students are aware they have to be

registered by the second and then they need to figure out where they

are on the 18th and make appropriate arrangements. Indeed, you touch on

the next point, you have all these people on the electoral roll,

however they turn out to vote on the day itself? Postal voting, the

deadline is the 3rd of September. For students, a daughter of mine is

going to university in September, and she will be in exactly this

position. She won't be in university until about 18th of September, she

will need to register in the family home on the second and then choose

how to vote by the 18. She could do a proxy vote give a proxy votes to

someone else or use a postal vote. But you have to be conscious of

where you are on the second, the registration deadline, and where you

will be on the 18th if URA students. We will be making sure that people

who are talking to students, be that the universities or the electoral

registration offices, to make sure that they get the message to the

students that it is crucial that they understand where they are on

the second which is the registration deadline and where they will be on

the 18th. Are we seeing a change in Scottish politics here? Do you think

more people will turn out to vote in future elections because more people

are registering just now? The last turnout was pretty poor, under 50%.

We hope so. We spend our lives encouraging people to take part in

elections. We hope it is a trend that manifested itself on the 18th

and continues. OK, thank you very much.

Let's speak to Hamish. First of all, it is interesting that

young people are signing up to vote, and he was speaking there, do

you think that it might still have an impact on how the vote goes? Very

much so. When you look back at when the SNP proposed that 16 and

17-year-olds get the vote, there is a suspicion that they were doing it

because young people are more likely to vote yes, but don't think there

is any evidence for that. All of the polls we have seen show that 16 and

17 euros tend to be even more cautious, perhaps, than their

parents. They will have an effect. -- 70-year-olds. It is difficult to

say which way to go. I was talking with Andy thereabouts turnout and

people turning out and voting what kind of figures might we be looking

at? Turnout has been so poor in the past. I like to think we will look

at a healthy turnout. The last elections were down around 50%,

European elections even lower, Westminster election seem to be a

bit higher. I would like to think that this could be 75, even 80%,

because it has galvanised the public opinion in Scotland. People know

that this is something very important and I think that people

know it is important because people realise their vote counts. Every

single vote as the same weight, whereas in other elections sometimes

they don't. A galvanised public. How do you think the campaigns do on the

ground? We have talked about how poorly do Better Together campaign

have done recently in how the momentum appears to be with a Yes

campaign. I think the Yes campaign has done better. If you go to any

town or village around Scotland, Rhode Island and Highlands, you

generally find that there will be a yes campaign meeting. People go to

hear what is going on and they have more public meetings. They appear to

be doing very well at that local campaigning, at that local

grassroots level, and I think that is what we are seeing reflected in

the polls. Some strategists speak about the air war, what is happening

on the airwaves, and the ground war, those meetings you are talking

about. Are we seeing differences in the two campaigns? If you're being

blunt about this, you would say that the no campaign has won the air war

until now and the yes campaign won the ground war.

Thank you. Back to the chamber now and more on

the debate on stop and search. Willie Rennie has been speaking, but

let's hear now from the Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill.

Mr Rennie as the First Minister and said your question, it is not just

detecting those that would perpetrate and harm other

individuals. It is also about protecting those who want to go

about their community safely, who don't want to be prisoners in their

own home. We know they those most likely to perpetrate an offence are

young men with a knife. Most likely to be a victim a young men and they

welcome the fact that Scotland is a safer place and that stop and search

plays a role in that. That is why crime is at a low, that is why fear

of crime is down, that is why people are feeling safer on our streets and

in our communities. The recent survey shows that 72% of people feel

safe walking alone after dark. Compared, Mr Rennie, 266% in 2008.

The real point is that people welcome this approach. I was in

Greenock speaking to young people about our campaign, many I spoke to

understand that education and the prevention tactics combined to make

our cities safer. They welcomed the stop and search. But it is not just

me. The Chief Executive of Children's Scotland, Police

Scotland's record means they are well placed to understand how to get

young people on board. The professor of criminal -- criminology echoed

that. Even the former Liberal Democrat justice spokesman Robert

Brown acknowledge the impact that stop and search has when he said the

single thing that deters people from criminal behaviour is the likelihood

of being caught. The stop and searches carried out by Strathclyde

police have been very effective. The former Tory MSP Bill Aitken said if

one in 12 searches is positive, then that is a crime that has been

detected or a knife that has been taken off someone. These searches

save lives. In response to a knife attack, he said police must use

their stop and search powers. I do not know what has changed for the

Tories since we have moved from one in 12 to a success rate of 20%. The

Chief Constable has responsibility to ensure the use of stop and search

procedures are found in a piece of legislation and undertaken on a

voluntary basis and used carefully and appropriately. I believe he

does. Police Scotland are making our communities safer, stop and search

is a part of that. Mr Pearson, up to five minutes.

Thank you. I moved to support the amendment in my name which I

understand because of their pre-emptive amendment from the

Government is unlikely to achieve a vote at the end of the day. To that

extent, I am disappointed. What the Cabinet secretary forgot to quote in

his lead was that there is an effective oversight that this

amendment seeks to pass comment on. I have to congratulate the Cabinet

Secretary as I think it takes a fair amount of effort to regenerate anger

within the Liberal Democratic party and the motion seems to reflect

anger in the way it is set out. To that extent, I require to amend it.

There is nothing in what I have today criticises the staff involved

in stop searches. Nor do we criticise the support staff who

provide the intelligence which leads to many of these positive searches.

Indeed, Police Scotland is the latest in a long line of

organisations that have released the streets of Scotland, going back to

1799. That policing was always maintained with the consent of the

public. At a time when we have 1000 additional police officers on our

streets and in our offices, we have over 500,000 fewer younger people

under the age of 25 in Scotland compared to a couple of decades ago.

A significant comment about a low in crime, it is logical that stop

searches are maintained at a level four times higher that -- than that

in England and Wales. The question that I raise is not about police

tactics, which I think we recognise is an effective tactic when probably

used, it is about the policy endorsement of these tactics and

strategies. Where was the Scottish police authority in deciding that

they agreed with the tactic and there was a debate at that level in

relation to a huge rise in stop searches? Did the cabinet secretary

knew ahead of time -- know ahead of time that the authority agreed such

a tactic and had he assessed from his own viewpoint the impact that

might have on police and public relations ships?

And you can watch the rest of that debate live or on demand at BBC

Scotland's Democracy Live website - that's bbc.co.uk/democracylive.

The Prime Minister has described yesterday's incident in which a

pupil died at an Edinburgh school when a wall collapsed as an

"absolutely shocking accident". David Cameron also took questions on

the Royal Mail sell-off from the Labour leader, Ed Miliband.

Can the Prime Minister tell the House, what is his excuse for the

Royal Mail fiasco? What I would say about the Royal Mail is that

taxpayers benefitted from selling the business for ?2 billion. That,

of course, is ?2 billion that the party opposite never achieved

because they were never able to sell the business. This is what his own

side are saying. The Member for Northampton South said yesterday,

"It was a debacle, unethical and immoral." He sold the shares for

?3.30. What are they trading at now? When the right honourable gentleman

was sitting in the Cabinet, this business lost half a billion pounds.

It is now in the private sector, it is making profits. It is paying

taxes and working hard for our country. There are over 14,000

people who work for the Post Office, delivering letters, delivering

parcels, who own shares in the business that they work for. He

can't answer the question. He sold at ?3.30 and this morning, the price

was ?5.63. It is basic maths, Mr Speaker. Not so much the Wolf of

Wall Street, more the Dunce of Downing Street! If Royal Mail was

sold at today's price, how much more would the taxpayer have made? I will

take a lecture from almost anyone in the country about the sale of Royal

Mail, but not from the two Muppets who advised the last Chancellor! 35

years ago, the SNP and the Tories united to bring down a Labour

Government and bring in Margaret Thatcher. Today, the SNP and the

Tories a united on the side of tax cuts for big business, united on the

side of the energy companies and united against a 50p tax. Doesn't

this demonstrate that what people across the UK need is not separation

between Scotland and England, but liberation from right-wing Tory

economics? He has provided a very useful public service, which he has

reminded me of one useful thing that the SNP have done in their history,

which was to get rid of that dreadful Labour Government that

nationalised British industry and made such a mess. Where I don't

agree with him - I agree on one important thing, in spite of his

views - I do agree that the United Kingdom is much better off together.

The Liberton High School community was left devastated just before

Christmas when 14-year-old pupil Jamie Skinner died whilst playing

football. That heartbreak returned yesterday with the sad death of

Keane Wallis-Bennett when a fabricated wall collapsed on her.

I'm sure the Prime Minister andhe whole House would wish to send their

condolences to the head teacher, the staff and pupils, her friends and

her family? I think the whole House would agree with what the honourable

gentleman said. This was a shocking accident that people will have seen

across the country and their hearts will go out to the family and all

those involved in the school. Clearly, the lesson also have to be

learnt to make sure accidents like this can't happen again.

Let's stay at Westminster and head to College Green. Our correspondent,

David Porter, is standing by there. Over to you, David.

Thank you. As we have just heard there, quite a range of issues being

dealt with at Prime Minister's Question Time today, ending with

those comments about the accident at the Edinburgh school yesterday. No

shortage of comments to talk with our guests. I'm joined by Jeremy

Purvis from the Liberal Democrats. Let me start with you. The Royal

Mail, a Commons Committee said your Coalition Government have sold it

and sold it on the cheap? The National Audit Office report - we

will be learning lessons from it. But the key point that they stressed

was that the Government was cautious. In the circumstances of

the last few years, the degree of caution is no bad thing. Ultimately,

the taxpayer is ?2 billion better off. Royal Mail pensioners are now

secure knowing there is no longer a pension deficit. Royal Mail is in a

security footing going forward. It is no longer making losses. Overall,

there is a very clear plan for the future of the Royal Mail now.

Ultimately, in the long-term, this will be viewed to be successful. In

a time of austerity, essentially an accounting body has said the UK

Government lost potentially up to ?1 billion in a time of austerity. It

is very difficult to sell that to the public? I read all of the pages

of the NAO report. It is very clear that they have indicated that it is

because of the period of austerity with over 500 potential investors

that the Government had canvassed that there was caution, there was

the threat of industrial action and the degree of caution was recognised

by the NAO. The net result of that is that it's been successful and the

Government delivered it through and the NAO in the report said the

taxpayers are protected and the taxpayer is ?2 billion better off on

a situation where the Hooper Report was not activated but it should have

been. Your Party Leader saw a political open goal and went for it

today. Yet, your own party wanted to sell off Royal Mail? It's not true.

Jonathan Ashworth made that clear today. The Prime Minister was

completely wrong to suggest... I'm not saying about the last manifesto.

Previous Labour administrations, Lord Mandelson had wanted to put a

large part of the Royal Mail into private ownership? We never

supported the full privatisation of the Royal Mail. We always stood on

the side of both the workers and the Royal Mail. The key point - the

taxpayer is not ?2 billion better off. It is at least ?750 million

worse off as a result of the decision taken by this Government, a

Government that rushed to privatise, without looking at what was in the

best interests of Royal Mail, the workers, the taxpayer and the best

interests of the customers. That is not something we should celebrate.

It is something that the Government should apologise for. If there was a

Labour Government returned in 2015, what would you do? Would you say,

"We are in the state we are in, there is nothing we can do about

it." ? We do have to make decisions about the future of this country. We

are not in that position. We would make our decisions based upon what

is right at the time. Right for Royal Mail, but also right in the

economic circumstances. What is clear, if we had been in Government

now, we wouldn't have done this and also, the taxpayer wouldn't have

lost out in such a huge way. What would the situation be in an

independent Scotland? Could an SNP administration re-nationalise Royal

Mail? Absolutely. We will do that because that is what the Scottish

people want. 79% of Members of Parliament opposed it. Now, it is

not just the fact that the public have lost so much money, it is the

fact that it is the city spivs who have made a killing out of what's

happened here. It's been a fire sale and it will be right that this goes

back into the public's hand. That is what we will achieve when Scotland

becomes an independent country. That would cost? Well, it will cost. We

are determined to deliver this. It will require negotiations with the

Westminster Government. They know, we made it clear that it was our

intention to bring it back into public hands. There is no indication

of how much it would cost, there is no indication of what you would do

with the remainder of the shares that's in the public hands, there is

no indication from the SNP what you would do with the pension fund. The

pensioners are protected because of this package that was put forward.

There is no indication of how you would do that? You have a failing

Government that was sold on the cheap. At the same time, you have

the Nationalists trying to make a referendum issue. We don't want the

break-up of the Royal Mail. That has an impact on customers in Wales,

Scotland, England and Northern Ireland. OK. That ends, if you had

the break-up of the Royal Mail. This is not a referendum issue. This is

not an independence issue. What it is is a failing Government issue. It

is what the Scottish people want and that is what we will deliver. To

take a lesson from the Liberals, the people of Scotland will be observing

this with horror. We made a commitment to this that it will come

back into public hands. That is what we will achieve. We made sure that

Royal Mail has got a secure future, no longer ?500 million losses every

year. We made sure the postal network in Scotland is protected. So

we have none of the closures programme. This is a protection for

the pensioners, for the customers and also for the Royal Mail. It is

only under threat... A final word? It is a false fight and it is a

false choice. The answer isn't independence. The answer isn't

independence. Of course it is. This is what is right for the taxpayer

and right for customers. Breaking up Royal Mail is not the answer. We

will have to leave it there. Thank you very much. Andrew, as I think

you get a flavour of one of those debates in which people feel very

strongly about the Royal Mail. STUDIO: Thank you.

A final word from Hamish now. We have another debate tonight, Nick

Clegg and Nigel Farage, taking to the stage once again, to be in or

out in Europe. There was a general consensus that Nigel Farage did

rather well last week? There was. These are strange debates. We are

still some way away from the European elections. There's a lot of

political interest in these debates. There was a feeling that Nigel

Farage had won, but I would be cautious in the sense that I think

that he has the more populist messages so those messages are much

easier to get across than perhaps the more nuanced arguments. I think

if you take that on balance, they were probably fairly equal. Again,

there is a lot of interest tonight and suggestions that Nick Clegg will

have to come out fighting with a bit more tough, bit more belligerent and

emotional about it. Whatever happens, this is a good debate for

the two men, for Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage? They are getting so

much publicity over it and David Cameron and Ed Miliband are nowhere

to be seen on this one? Yeah. When we talk about winners and losers,

there is an argument to say the biggest loser of tonight will be

David Cameron. He has his Deputy Prime Minister in the spotlight,

managing to build-up his profile, and there is a huge amount of

publicity that's been given to Nigel Farage and UKIP. I think in the

interests of all the main parties, to try and keep them on the

sidelines which clearly hasn't happened. Let's touch on Conference

season. We have had the three pro-union parties, the SNP start a

week on Friday. That will be some conference, won't it? This is the

last big gathering that the SNP will manage to get in Conference mode

before the referendum. We might be forgiven for replacing the word

"conference" with the word "rally". It will be a huge pro-independence

rally, massive fund-raising effort, every single speech will be designed

to get the activists out there into the grassroots to try and build-up

the vote. Conference, possibly, rally certainly. In a word, this is

April now, so next month we will have the Conservatives reporting

back on their devolution proposals? Yes, this is the - this is what the

Unionist parties feel hope will kill off the debate by saying if you vote

no, we will deliver more powers for the Parliament. They will say that

is what the people of Scotland want. The Conservatives hope if they put

their plans out there, that will push more people towards the "no"

camp. Thank you very much for being with us during the course of the

afternoon. That's all we have time for this

week. We're back in two weeks' time as Parliament is off for the Easter

holidays. You can catch up with all the debates on the BBC Democracy

Live website. From all of us, we will see you in two weeks' time.

Thanks for your company. Bye for now.

Some businessmen have turned failing companies around.

Some have steered massive global firms.