02/05/2012 Politics Scotland

Welcome to Politics Scotland. Coming up: Live coverage of First

Minister's questions. And preparations are under way for

going to the polls tomorrow in the local council elections.

And in Westminster, the fall-out is continuing over the phone hacking

scandal and the role of the Murdochs, particularly in light of

this hugely critical report by MPs. Alex Salmond is set to take more

tough questions on his connections with Rupert Murdoch and his media

empire. First Minister's Questions has been moved to this afternoon

instead of its usual Thursday slot because Parliament is not sitting

because of the local council elections tomorrow. I am joined by

a Lorraine Davidson from the Times. Alex Salmond will take questions on

Rupert Murdoch. Our I don't think we need a crystal ball for that!

That is a safe assumption because the opposition sense that this is a

difficult situation for him because of his close relationship with

Rupert Murdoch, which used to be a great bonus to Alex Salmond because

it got him that newspaper's endorsement for the election. It

made him look like a global player on the serious stage as well. --

serious player on the global stage. It is not looking good in light of

the revelations that have come out in light of the Murdochs since.

Labour MPs said that Rupert Murdoch was not fit to run a media empire.

The Tories disagreed. There will probably be a motion to the House

of Commons about that. Could we see the SNP MPs voting with the

Conservatives? Is that issue about what the SNP are going to do at

Westminster - are they going to side with the Tories? And there is

also the issue about the fact that we have now had the announcement

that at first minister in Scotland, Jack McConnell, had his phone had.

Alex Salmond's parliamentary aide had her phone hacked. Will Alex

Salmond sit back and allow roared Levison to examine these issues in

the fullness that they should be examined to -- Lord Levison. That

is something that has not come to the fore this far. There are also

implications for the Tommy Sheridan case. Will Alex Salmon suddenly be

terribly happy to allow these things just to be looked at in

London, which it appears from this statement yesterday he is, and what

all the opposition make of that? This is a very important issue. The

public really do want to get to the bottom of it. They want to know who

was responsible for this, how far up the chain it went, what was the

extent of the cover-up, who was responsible for the cover-up. The

way that politicians have dealt with this over 24 hours is

detracting from the main points of this report. Tom Watson jeopardised

getting consensus around that report because he was so desperate

to write his headline about Murdoch not being fit that he lost the

Tories, and then in Scotland we have got the SNP claiming this is

somehow all Labour's fault - that Jack McConnell and Alex Salmond's

aid got their phone hacked. But yet they were having their own

relationship with Murdoch in Scotland. I don't think any of the

political parties are coming out terribly well. The be MSPs are

taking their seats and are about to begin. It was pretty fiery last

week with Johann Lamont putting questions to Alex Salmond. It will

probably be fiery again today. Yes, because I think Johann Lamont

feels she is a step removed from this and because the Scottish

Labour Party is now autonomous, she feels Gordon Brown is some distant

figure, Tony Blair is even more distant - nothing to do with her.

Let's cross live to the chamber. Here we are in the chamber once

again. What I have said is that is

something that should be judged by the relevant authorities. They are

Ofcom, in terms of broadcasting, and the Leveson Inquiry. Doing what

the Labour Party did yesterday on a committee of the House of Commons

has served only to split the committee on political lines. I

don't think that was advisable. It is a statement of fact - the

committee was split on political lines when it was meant be unified

in terms of pursuing an inquiry. That is exactly what happened,

which is why... I note, incidentally, that the Labour

leadership in London says that these are matters which should be

judged by Ofcom and B Leveson Inquiry. Johann Lamont. Presumably

the first minister is content to be on the same side as the Tories in

their view on Rupert Murdoch. I would also say I would have a bit

more respect for the first minister if he allowed his own backbenchers

to say what they thought in our Parliamentary committees. The first

minister has accused me of hypocrisy in the past in raising

this issue, so he has argued in that line several times. The

prospect of one person - especially Mr Murdoch - having more influence

over the media in the UK would be a matter of concern especially in

Scotland. Not my words but the words of the Deputy First Minister

Nicholas sturgeon when it Murdoch tried to take over ITV news. She

was right then. I agreed with her. What made her change her mind,

first minister? It can't have been when she found out about phone

hacking on an industrial scale. It could not have been when she found

out the phone of a murdered teenager had been hacked. Surely it

was not when she found out that Joan McAlpine's phone was tapped.

Or did she changed her mind when the first minister told her to, or

when he realised he was the last person left defending Rupert

Murdoch? Firstly, I probably... I condemn phone hacking, regardless

of who the victim is and regardless of who the perpetrators are. That

is my position and has been my consistent position. I would have

thought the most obvious explanation for the question that

Johann Lamont asked is that there are two different subjects. The

first was about ITV, Wed news Corp did not have a controlling stake

all major interest. The second is BSkyB, up when News Corporation had

a 39% stake already, where most people, including Ofcom, after the

assurances on Sky News, said the issue would not be one of plurality.

As for alliances with the Conservative Party, I have to say I

think Johann Lamont is on very weak ground. Not only do we have a

weekly attempt at building a grand alliance with the Conservative

Party in this Parliament. But when it came to the Budget, the Labour

Party decided to vote with the Conservatives and against

apprenticeship in Scotland. If the first minister was that concerned

about the money Dowling this year, he would not have soared to

rehabilitate him by inviting him to tea. -- Milly Dowler in the issue.

The reality is this - isn't it the truth that the first minister's

relationship with Rupert Murdoch is preventing any real scrutiny of

News International's activities in Scotland. When the phone hacking

scandal broke, the first minister claimed this was a London problem.

Well, this is now well and truly on the first minister's doorstep and

it is time there was a proper inquiry hearing Scotland that

investigates who else has been hacked above all extent of the

media influence over politicians and governments. A former First

Minister has been hacked, an aid to the current First Minister has been

hacked. As the first minister himself been hacked? And why is he

blocking a Scottish inquiry into the activities of his old friend

Rupert Murdoch? We can now get on to the nub of the issue and I think

it is time this chamber realise the full seriousness of what is

intending to be done in Scotland. We have a live police inquiry in

Scotland at the present moment. That inquiry is up to 40 officers

working with a huge commitment of resources by Strathclyde police. I

know that because of what happened in terms of in action in the past

in the negative -- Metropolitan Police, people are sceptical about

these matters. There is no reason to be sceptical about this inquiry

inquiry. If resources are being put into it and the expectation is that

it will pursue the evidence without fear or favour and come to

effective results. That means that there are implications for what

should be done elsewhere. A police inquiry means that any committee of

this Parliament could not impinge on information to that inquiry. Any

witness would have to be warned against incrimination. Anybody who

is subject to adverse publicity in a parliamentary inquiry could then

quote Article 6 of the European Convention and use that in a

defence in a future Quirinal increase. In other words, there

could be significant FX -- criminal inquiry. There could be a

significant chance that a criminal inquiry could be compromised. It is

vital that people in this chamber realise that now there is a real

police inquiry taking place in Scotland. Would that have happened

in 2005 when these issues were actually being carried through?

Even at the Leveson Inquiry, which is a judicial inquiry, asked to

bear in mind of the existence of a live up police inquiry. For example,

when her teeth Constable of Strathclyde appeared before

leathers and, he could not be questioned on all aspects being

concerned by the current police inquiry, which is exactly why we

are looking at every inch of issues that go beyond the criminal

investigations. I shall be delighted to go to a Everson and

account for my contacts with News International. I am not certain

that members of the Labour Party will have such a comfortable

experience. Johann Lamont. I do not even think the first minister

himself believed that, never mind his backbenchers. The fact of the

matter is, this is our great modern new Scottish parliament. We see a

Tory Cabinet Secretary board before the House of Commons. We see a Tory

Prime Minister brought before the House of Commons. We see a

parliamentary inquiry. But in the Scottish parliament... Order! Or

DEC! -- order! But the Scottish Parliament runs away from

accountability. Order! Order! things are not incompatible except

in the first minister's own ahead. Last year, the first minister told

us that people who live in Scotland are the best people to make

decisions about their own future. Of that there can be no doubt. Yet

he is content to rely on a judicial inquiry and a parliamentary

committee being run in London to determine the truth in Scotland. I

look forward to hearing the first minister answer a question under

oath. I look forward to hearing him answer a question! But there is

this question now - why does the First Minister Theatre

parliamentary investigation here in Scotland? -- earthier a

parliamentary investigation. This started with Rupert Murdoch trying

to take over BSkyB. It turns out he owns the SNP. First minister.

Order! Order! Johann Lamont gets a chance every week to ask me

questions. The fact that she does not make a good job of it is hardly

my responsibility. I have already tried to explain about this

inquiry's importance. Parliament can do exactly what it likes but

the police inquiry takes precedence in issues such as this. Can I try

to inform her about Levison? That is an inquiry established under the

enquiries at 2005. But Ms the Scottish government had to be

consulted. -- enquiries actor. Every member can see the

correspondence. That is why I will be going to Levison, in common with

other political leaders, able to account for all of my meetings. I

will account for every single one of the five meetings I have had

with Rupert Murdoch over the last five years. I am sure Gordon Brown

will be delighted to explain the 17 meetings he had. Or David Cameron

the 18 meetings over the last five years. Bat will be the

responsibility of every leading politician because Lord leathers

and, under oath, is looking at the relationships between press and

politicians. -- led the sun. Johann Lamont asked me why I believe that

the Labour Party is guilty of hypocrisy. She will give me two

explanations. -- let me give her two explanations. These things took

place on the Labour Party's watch. But Labour Party were in government

in London and Edinburgh. The idea that the harder you complain,

people will forget about 15 years of association with a News

International! People look at the Labour party and say humbug and

To ask the First Minister when he will meet the Prime Minister?

plans in the near future. We know the former First Minister was

hacked. His children were also, and his close Parliamentary aide was

hacked. But what the people of Scotland deserve to be told is

whether this First Minister has been hacked. His spokesman has

repeatedly said his boss will reveal all to the Leveson Inquiry.

But this First Minister reports to this Parliament. This is a big

opportunity. Dodging the question now, only to reveal all when he

takes the stand later, will look like media manipulation of the very

worst kind. Was he hacked and did not speak out to protect his new

best mate? Or did Rupert not bother hacking his phone because he was

already on speed dial? Scotland is watching, First Minister, were you

hack? As Ruth Davidson rightly says, I will be going to the Leveson

Inquiry and speaking specifically about a range of matters under oath

and that is where I will give my evidence, which is the right thing

to do. An inquiry which was set up on cross-party agreement on a

judicial basis. Ruth Davison referred to media manipulation of

the worst kind. And the two words that came to my mind were Andy

Coulson. Let's talk about enquiries then shall we? You want to speak at

the Leveson Inquiry. We have a First Minister who is willing to

speak at an English inquiry, but not hold one in Scotland. An

inquiry in England. Order. departure of the Culture, Media and

Sport Committee managed to hold an inquiry in Westminster. We need to

look deeper in Scotland than Leveson Inquiry allows. I call for

an inquiry in this Parliament, especially when the First

Minister's intervention appears to contravene his own making. In

particular, the First Minister must knock seek to influence through any

special access through the judiciary. The First Minister has

admitted he was seeking to influence him. There were desperate

calls between his office and that of the minister. Surely, when there

are questions... Order. There are questions as to whether a First

Minister of Scotland and may have acted in contravention to Scottish

law. A Parliamentary inquiry is the minimum to which we are entitled.

First Minister. I don't think you're back benchers believe that.

The First Minister of Scotland advocates jobs and investment for

jobs for Scotland at every opportunity. And the Leveson

Inquiry is not an English inquiry. If I had said it was an English

inquiry, I would have been accused of being a racist Roulston surely

she hasn't lost her belief in the United Kingdom? She does know it is

a cross-border inquiry. She knows and has read the in but the

Scottish Government tried to strengthen the terms of reference

to the inquiry. I'm sure she will be on the edge of her seat when I

give evidence next month. Can I say about the Conservative Party, the

Parliamentary committee at a Westminster had their inquiry as to

whether they will has led on previous occasions. -- misled. But

the Conservative Party have not grasped the essential points in all

of this. When the question was asked about the Prime Minister,

referring people to independent adjudication, they have an

independent adjudicators who has not once been asked to adjudicate

on anything. They pay an independent adjudicator on the

ministerial code and he has not been brought into action once. I

have referred myself five times. The fact every single one of them

get kicked out is neither here nor there. I have stood up to

examination better than her colleagues in Westminster.

What issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet?

Issues of importance to the people of Scotland. The First Minister is

responsible to this Parliament. Why won't he tell us whether his phone

has been hacked? Despite all of the excuses, we have heard the First

Minister man the barricades to protect Rupert Murdoch from a

Scottish inquiry. What has happened? A year ago, we would have

caught the inquiry a London based judge -- inquiry, with the judge

that has only been to Scotland for the festival. Now he says it is the

right place. When did he switched to being a Celtic Mouse in support

of all things English, of London courts, Trafalgar Square, Morris

dancing? Why can't the First Minister decide to back an inquiry

in Scotland. I am sure if I am called on to give a definition of

English nationality, I will do better than a Willie Rennie.

Leveson Inquiry was established in the inquiries Act 1005. It was set

up by an all-party agreement. If we care to look back at the date, it

or us when all parties decided it was the correct route of the

judicial inquiry. Even Gordon Brown said, as he was speaking to the

House of Commons, his deepest regret it was he did not set up a

judicial inquiry when he was in office because the Civil Service

told him not to his. But we subscribe to Leveson Inquiry as

being the way to go. Shouldn't we abide by that? When he reads the

Correspondent an input we had into the terms of reference and our

attempts to strengthen and broadened the terms of reference,

he will have every confidence the Leveson Inquiry will come up with

substantial recommendations. If I had taken a different course and

said last year, no, we are not to have the Leveson Inquiry, winner

set up our own Scottish judicial inquiry, every one of these benches

would have been bouncing up and down saying we were not prepared to

rise to the moment. I rose to the moment, maybe Willie Rennie will do

the same? It does not really add up. The SNP have a view on absolutely

everything. From the price of dog food, to the Americanisation of

Hallowe'en. I cannot understand why he won't stand up and be counted on

this? Order. He has traded with Rupert Murdoch, defended him on

phone hacking, stood up for him on BSkyB and now protecting him in

Scotland. Isn't it true, every time, never on the side of ordinary

people, never on the side of victims, but always on the side of

the rich and powerful? First Minister. I was just reflecting in

terms of being on the side of ordinary people. The interview

Willie Rennie conducted with Gary Robinson last week. He was asked,

would contact Vince Cable to ask about the economic investment deal

about the takeover bids. So you're saying it and was jailed Tolson?

Yes, says Willie Rennie and we have significant numbers of employees of

Skye in Scotland. Why is it not OK for the First Minister to do this?

The answer came because the Sun newspaper were not supporting the

Liberal Democrats. I have news for Willie Rennie - and neither is

anyone else. As usual... Order. Order. Selectively quoting. The

First Minister knows the reason he was backing BSkyB, the reason he

was put -- putting his interests above those of phone hacking

victims is because he wanted the support of the Sun newspaper. Why

can't he admits it? The 6,300 jobs, the 2000 jobs in Glasgow and

elsewhere which the Labour Party didn't even know about last week,

because that is the priority. Maybe that's the difference people might

reflect on tomorrow when the opposition parties, ours is jobs,

jobs, jobs. I'd like to ask the First Minister

what the Scottish Government's position is on the findings of the

report by the Jamie Reed Foundation, spiralling crisis of local

democracy in Scotland? It is a viable contribution to the debate

on local democracy there. We have tried a new partnership of local

Government over the last five years. The local Government minister has

led a reform of planning community. Most recently the partnership

approach led to the joint agreement, the hugely important joint

agreement between the governments of and someone else to protect jobs

in Scotland and cuts in the Council Tax Benefit. I thank him for his

answer and look forward to the details of the community

empowerment bill. Alongside them powering local democracy, it is

essential local Government works in partnership with the Government to

protect the vulnerable and protect the economy. Will he commit to

continuing that partnership approach after tomorrow's elections

and included Jimmy Reid Foundation's thoughts in his work?

I will, the partnership progress between councils and Government is

vital for Scotland's future. It will include 600 hours of the

National Education, and of course the vital concentration on family

budgets and the knowledge that council tax freeze will be worth

�1,200 to each average family over the eight years we intend to

implement that freeze. Can I declare an interest as a board

member of the Jimmy Reid foundations. Has the First Minister

managed to set up a Commission as asked for in the report looking

into democracy at local level? Well the insure it considers the

Democratic participation of women. So it does not result in greater

inequality. A number of these issues were touched on in the

Christie report as well as the report from the Jamie Reed

Foundation. I would be happy to meet Elaine Smith to talk about

these issues in more detail, to see the areas of the report which could

be prioritise and the ones that would have cross-party agreement in

the chamber. If she is willing I would be happy to progress things

The whole parliament will place on record that we utterly condemn the

brutal murder to which she refers. He was a man who devoted his life

to helping others. He was a nurse and highly experienced aid worker

who had saved a number of lies in his long service. -- lives. He had

friends across the planet and regularly travelled back to

Dumfries where he was well known and well loved. My sincere

condolences, and that of the whole chamber, go to his family and

friends, and particularly his fiancee and brother. He was

abducted on 5th January 1920 12. As the Cabinet Secretary for Justice

told the Cabinet on 26th January, there was a meeting with the

Cabinet Secretary for External Affairs on 19th January. The

International Committee of the Red Cross was in the loop. Their

efforts to secure the at the release of Mr Dale did not succeed.

The tragedy that we learned about this week ensued. I would like to

thank him for his reply and associate myself with his comment

about my former constituent. I do appreciate the need for discretion

regarding the information made publicly available by the Red Cross

about its attempting to secure Mr Dale's release and the continuing

need not to allow publicity to interfere with solving this middle

ground. I wonder, however, whether he is able to offer any comfort to

Mr Dale's family and friends about what actions were taken after 26th

January and if he has any information about who may have been

responsible for the abduction. I wonder also how we in Scotland can

assist with solving this crime. Has any consideration been given to

providing a reward for information leading to this successful

prosecution of the perpetrator? Cabinet Secretary has spoken as

recently as this morning and he confirmed that the FCO and the

international community and the Red Cross work tirelessly to secured Mr

Dale's release. In light of an atrocity and a tragedy, it is easy

to say things could have been done differently but we have no reason

to suppose, as the Scottish government, that the Foreign Office

did not act as they saw it in the best interests of Mr Dale in

allowing the International Committee of the Red Cross to take

the lead. There was also an assurance that Mr Dale's family was

kept fully informed through the FCO as arrangements were made for

recovering Mr Dale's body. They number of parts of that information

are confidential but that issue was raised and has been dealt with. In

terms of the responsibility, the responsibility that was claimed was

well publicised and publicly declared. We have no reason to

suppose that is not accurate. We will look carefully at any

contribution that we can make which would help the security of the

Scottish aid workers are working internationally. This is not, as

the member will be aware, the first tragedy we have had in recent

months of this kind. The impact on family and friends is deeply felt,

but meanwhile I think admiration and respect should be felt across

the Scottish Community to their citizens to put their lives on the

line. To ask the First Minister how many empty commercial properties

the Scottish government predicts will no longer be empty as a direct

consequence of the proposals in the local government finance unoccupied

Scotland Bill. A empty properties are blight on high streets across

Scotland. Proposed reform of the property rates will introduce an

incentive to bring these properties back into economic use to

regenerate high street. The projection is an �18 million

increase in the budget over two years. This is a limited additional

cost to business when compared to the �1 billion cost of the UK

Government's recent of VAT rise. Could I thank the First Minister

for that answer. Unfortunately, it had nothing to do with the question

I actually asked. Let me simplify it for the First Minister. How many

empty commercial properties will no longer be empty as a consequence of

his bill? As an answer, I know that Gavin Brown pays close attention to

the Small Business Federation, which have consistently argued that

this would be an incentive to bring properties back into active use. I

hope and believe that Gavin Brown will pay more attention to the

views of small business federations in future. There is an assumption

within the papers in terms of a number of premises which is 5,500,

but that is an interesting contrast. I am sorry to disappoint Gavin

Brown as he was chipping away merrily. I think we should contrast

than 5,000 figure with just looking at his own constituency in

Midlothian, where 10,800 premises are benefiting from the Small

Business Bonus introduced, maintained and championed by the

SNP government. That ends First Minister's Questions. We now move

on to the next item of business... That was first minister's questions

live from Holyrood, a change from its usual Thursday afternoon slot.

I am joined by Our political commentator form the afternoon,

Lorraine Davidson from the Times. That was pretty fiery! One of the

fiery just I can remember. Yes, on the final legal point Alex Salmond

has got a point because part of the problem yesterday with the

parliamentary report was that it was not able to address some of the

main figures in the phone hacking scandal - Andy Coulson, Rebekah

Brooks - because of the police inquiry. The problem Alex Salmond

has is that on the politics, he does that very badly, because who

would say that it was all right to allow it does to the Leveson

Inquiry to deal with this? The goal posts have changed and the point

where the Leveson terms of reference were agreed, we did not

understand until this week what the scale might be of the phone hacking

situation in Scotland, and it is a bit bizarre to have the Labour

Party - even the Tories and Lib Dems - trying to stand up for

Scotland in a way that the SNP do not seem to be doing on this

particular issue. So although he is right on the judicial stuff, he is

there to be a politician, but a lawyer, and I think he will be

aware that on the politics, the other parties are picking up and

running on this. Johann Lamont did a very good line in forensic

questioning but with Davids and narrowed it down to whether his

phone was tapped and I think it is going to lead a very sour taste. --

Ruth Davidson it narrowed it down. It will look like grandstanding his

day in London to reveal whether his day was asked -- pack to when he

has been asked that the specific question in a Scottish parliament.

-- hacked up. Scotland Act.

There was some Norman French in use in the House of Lords. The

translation is, "the Queen or wills it". It has become an Act of

Parliament. Our Westminster Correspondent met up with the

Scottish Secretary and asked what the Act means for Scotland. This is

a hugely significant day. The parliament but we created in the

late 1990s now gets a real financial powers and accountability.

And I am looking forward to working together with the Scottish

government to ensure we take those powers forward as quickly and

powerfully as we should. Do we are going to be devolving speed limits

and control over their guns and a drink-drive limit. Each of those

are areas where it is now over to the Scottish Blood of the month. --

government. A in practical details, those who do not follow the many

shy of politics, how will they see the change as a result. -- the

minutia eye. This Scottish government will be in a position

where it will come forward about how it wants to change Scotter

speed limits of that is what they seek to do. How they wish to

regulate the use of air guns and how they want to alter, if they do,

the drink-drive limits that affect us as we go about our business in

Scotland. Those are real powers in this Act which reflect the concerns

of everyday people going about their business in Scotland, and now

the Scottish government is empowered to change things as they

see fit. We are looking to them to come forward with ideas. It is

worth clarifying, isn't it - income tax rates in Scotland are not going

to change for a few years. financial powers in the Bill will

be introduced over time. In a couple of years, the taxes we pay

when we sell or buy houses will actually change. Stamp duty will be

abolished in Scotland and it will be up to the Scottish government to

bring forward a proposal about what they want to repay thank with. --

bat with. There is a lot of work we need to do with individuals and

companies to create a system of tax and I am committed ought to working

with the Scottish government to do that.

Some people would say that the Scot and that is all very well but is

out of date now because we are not just talking about more powers for

the Scottish parliament to but we are now talking about independence

and a referendum. -- of the Scotland Act. Since 1999, we have

had the Scottish parliament. As of today, we are in a position to pass

on Pallister that Parliament which make it more accountable for the

decisions it takes - not just about spending on our roads all schools

but how we make the money to pay for them. That is a huge step

forward. There is a major debate about independence. I am confident

that when we get to that point, Scotland will decide to stay within

the UK. These are real power has been implemented and it is

important we get on and work together to deliver them.

Let's stay in Westminster and speak to our correspondent there. It was

interesting to hear what Michael Moore was saying there, assuring

people that the new Act will still be relevant to their lives and is

still politically relevant despite the forthcoming referendum.

this is about Ed is to the Coalition government have had for

some time. The Prime Minister move things forward in January and then

be preferred referendum date was announced. We think that will be in

2014 but that is what the parties are arguing about at the moment.

The Scotland Act has now been said to be irrelevant. Ministers are

keen to say that that is not the case, that it is the case of

devolution moving forward and that in future the Scottish parliament

will have more responsibility for raising the money it spends. But

you all right - obviously now minds are turning to the next stage. That

is deciding and getting agreement on a date for the referendum and

whether there is going to be a single question or more than one

question, and deciding exactly who will vote. Talks, I imagine, will

get under way between the governments in London and Edinburgh

fairly shortly on that topic but there will be a lot of hard talking.

You have no MPs with you but yesterday was a fascinating day for

phone hacking as it has been fascinating for us in Scotland.

are seeing the fall-out in Scotland of what happened at Westminster

yesterday with a hugely critical report by the DCMS, committee. I

think what we underestimated was the anger from certain parts of

that committee saying that Rupert Murdoch was not a fit and proper

person to be in charge of that corporation. It was not a United

report and went down party lines. Labour and Liberal Democrats agreed,

and the Conservatives refused to endorse it. The committee has come

out with excruciating comments about the head of a major company

and a large employer in Scotland. They have also been hugely critical

about former members of News International staff, and all sorts

of inquiries could spring from this. The important thing is that the

politics of this are dumbing down south. Calls for Ofcom to speed up

its inquiry into BSkyB and whether News Corp are the right people to

be the majority shareholders. It is very large stakes and only today,

Ed Miliband has lent his weight to those calls for Ofcom to speed up

its inquiry. Thank you very much. We will see you at the state a bit

of Parliament next week. Let's head to Holyrood to speak to

Jackson Carlaw of the Scottish Conservatives, Stewart Maxwell, and

Labour's Sarah Boyack. Let's focus on the Scotland Act for a moment.

We will pick up on first minister's questions later. Sarah Boyack,

Michael Moore is adamant that this is still relevant to the general

public and politically, despite the I think it is. It is key in terms

of giving us more powers and the best of both worlds. The Scotland

Act strengthens the devolution settlement. It is a big move

forward. Ordinary people may be don't understand the detail, but

the implication in terms are massive and new powers for this

Parliament. Jim Gallagher, said there is scope in the current

legislation to devolve more powers. Do you want that? The key thing is

to recognise, what ever the history, all the parties together have

delivered to Scotland this Scotland at with additional powers and more

devolved responsibility. We have said there is no status quo option

any longer. In the event we successor League win the referendum

and stay in the United Kingdom and Unionist parties are willing to

discuss what further part -- powers are available to Scotland. Stuart

Maxwell, when were you introduce these powers? Many of the financial

powers won't be available off for the Scottish Government to use

until at least 2015 for 2016. Acting many of these powers will be

overtaken by events anyway. The drink-driving and the airgun issues,

the Government has said it wants to move forward as quickly as possible

and a consultative panel of experts has been set up to take the Lurgan

issued forward to make sure it is in the right way. -- air gun.

is Alex Salmond not telling us if his phone has been hacked and is

going to possibly tell the Leveson Inquiry? Why is he not telling

Parliament, but he might tell an inquiry in London? It is a judicial

inquiry covering the whole of the United Kingdom. All parties agreed

it was the proper process. Clearly, the First Minister has said he will

go to the Leveson Inquiry, and so all of the questions put to him

about all of the meetings he had with Rupert Murdoch, and make sure

the evidence is before that inquiry. But this Parliament has primacy

here? The judicial inquiry has been set up. Is it more important than

the Scottish Parliament? Of course not. The First Minister answered

questions put to him last week and this week. But inquiry has been

established to get to the bottom of these problems as is the inquiry by

Strathclyde Police, which is a live inquiry. We must allow all

political leaders to go to the Leveson Inquiry and put their

evidence on the record to what is a judicial inquiry into this area.

Sarah, nobody has covered themselves in glory when it comes

to this, when you think of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown's meeting

with the Rupert Murdoch? Politicians always engage in the

media. But News International has been exposed over the last couple

of years. Since the Milly Dowler phone hacking incident, we have

reached new depths of media coverage. Everyone is appalled,

with the exception of Alex Salmond. No one understands why he won't

answer a simple question - has his own phone been hacked? We don't

just have the Leveson Inquiry, yesterday we had the publication of

the report from our UK colleagues. We can debate the detail, but the

overall conclusions of that report were absolutely damning. There is a

Parliamentary interest. We have an emergency question, a statement to

Westminster. The Scottish Parliament has been deemed fit to

be given no answers, and we have to get the answers out of the First

Minister and they have to be dragged out of him. Your leader put

that very clearly to the First Minister, was your phone hacked?

Perhaps the Leveson Inquiry is the right place for these questions to

be answered? The fact he is putting himself before the Leveson Inquiry

does not preclude him from answering the question in the

Scottish Parliament. We see a First Minister dodging the issue. No

other party has covered themselves with glory, but only one other

party was pursuing and entertaining the Murdoch empire after the facts

and the trees had started to emerge and that was Alex Salmond and the

SNP. He it is an attempt to cover up years and years of frustrating

themselves at the hands of News International. We have to leave it

there. The lively debate, but let's move

on. For the 4th year running we are going to the polls. We have had a

European election, a General Election, its a Holyrood election

and now a council election. Jamie, we go to the polls tomorrow, what

kind of a voting system will we see in this? If it is the single

transferable vote. You simply number your candidates in order of

preference. You put a No 1 against your favoured candidate. And then

so on, voting for as many or as few candidates as you want. But the

essential message is to put a number next to the candidate.

there scope for confusion? When we think about all the various voting

systems people have to use? It can be a challenge for those of us who

do not follow politics closely. Although there will be information

at the polling stations tomorrow. If someone put a cross on their

paper by mistake, it would be adjudicated by the returning

officer and it would be counted as a No 1 for that particular

candidate. So in that sense, not so much scope for confusion. Were the

confusion comes in his parties are very keen where they have more than

one candidate it in wards, to remind voters to vote in a

particular way. It is getting that message across to voters, which

some think they are second vote is automatically for another party.

But that is not how the parties would like people to see it. When

might we start seeing the first results? The count will start on

Friday morning and we will probably see the results, but get a clear

picture which way things are herded round about lunchtime on Friday.

What are the key councils to look out for? Lookout for Glasgow, the

battle between Labour and the SNP. Edinburgh will be interesting, at

the SNP or Labour become the single biggest party there? Maybe the Lib

Dems will retain their current position. North Lanarkshire and

Aberdeen also interesting. Let us go back to Holyrood for

analysis of First Minister's Questions. Brian, a fiery session

at Holyrood? It was. I think Alex Salmond will be content with the

way he handled the questions. But the questions were put on very

vigorously... Almost a range of approaches, overlapping to some

extent, but Joanne Mahmut asking why there was not to be a Scottish

inquiry Andrew Staverton asking repeatedly if Alex Salmond had been

phone hacked and Willie Rennie asking if the entire thing was done

in return for support in the Sun newspaper. No this issue is not

going away, he is appearing at the Leveson Inquiry next month. It is

proving very politically tricky for him? He is appearing at the inquiry

on a scheduled bases alongside other politicians, including UK

politicians who will be appearing. He is being pursued on this because

of the connections there have been with News Corporation and in person

with Rupert Murdoch. Although Alex Salmond was at pains to point out,

not least the Prime Minister and his predecessor had had substantial

connections with Rupert Murdoch as well. The answer he gave on the

idea of a Scottish inquiry was that first of all there is a police

inquiry taking place by Strathclyde Police with 40 officers involved.

And also Leveson Inquiry was partly agreed by the Scottish Government.

He went beyond that St the Scottish inquiry would overlap with those

police investigations. I think the response from politicians

afterwards was, if that is the case, how can it be there has been an

inquiry by the select committee in the House of Commons? And it was

put to him, a year ago he was complaining about London judges and

courts and now Mr Salmon's almost sees that the Leveson Inquiry is

almost the place to be to talk about their own have been? It was a

well answered by Alex Salmond, in which to say events move on. He was

including Mr Salmond's own links to Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch

had been discussed throughout the leathers an inquiry. Mr Salmond

saying the inquiry is in place and is it spending its remit to include

Scotland. So it is reasonable to maintain that as the basis upon

which to find in the investigations. Politicians also we have not

covered ourselves in glory when it comes to dealing with Rupert

Murdoch? It is absolutely true. I was surprised to hear Bryce Davison

pursue the issue given she had not issued a statement last night on

the topic. It is difficult for the Prime Minister with Jeremy Hunt

being so closely involved. -- Ross Davidson. Leveson Inquiry is

looking into links between the press and politicians and the

police and other authorities more generally, and also the ethics of

the press in the wider sense. The programme is drawing to a close.

Nous and closing thoughts in the company of our political

commentator for the afternoon. We also go to the polls tomorrow for

the local Government elections. Exciting. But it has not been a

campaign that has enthused people? People will be waiting for the

results. In terms of the media, we have had to create excitement. We

have had to talk it up, talking about Glasgow and the key

battleground. I cannot help feel that just because of the voting

system, although Labour made do badly in Glasgow, the SNP may do

very well, because of the voting system. It is difficult for the SNP

to take Glasgow's. We have seen the mood music in recent weeks away

from them predicting any great surge in the city of Glasgow. They

had their local election launch in Stirling, I think that was a clue

as well. The problem with single transferable vote it you won't have

an electoral map way you can say one party is taking charge. It will

be fascinating in terms of the bigger picture, the referendum

coming up if the SNP can make further inroads and be in a

position where they have those bigger, stronger army in the run-up

to the referendum. Labour will be looking to make some kind of a

comeback, too showed they are a serious party of opposition. They

will be praying they don't lose Glasgow because that becomes the

headline. We have had the council tax freeze for five years, it was a

big thing people voted on. But some people must be thinking what is the

point in voting for local Government if you are not voting

for the finances? The council tax decision was taken by the Scottish

Government at Holyrood. Since devolution, the Scottish Parliament

has been focused and the point of local Government in terms of

everyday lives has been lost. Wrong the, because it is important in

terms of the services we get day today, but the focus has shifted.

People's attention has gone off local Government, again wrongly.

There is not an offering of difference between the ruling

parties. I think we will be very badly squeezed and the thing to

watch is where does their vote go? We have lost had the one member

link between the wards? It makes it difficult for people if they have

built up a relationship with their local councillor. I think Turner

will be something to look out for as well and the predictions are it

could go above 30%, because there is no election to come out for.

Thanks for your company this afternoon.

That's all we have time for but we are back at the same time next week