11/01/2017 Politics Scotland

Good afternoon and welcome to the programme.

There was a feisty exchange at Holyrood

as the Finance Secretary defended his tax plans for Scotland.

And here at Westminster, could the political crisis in Northern Ireland

mean the triggering of Article 50 has to be postponed?

At Holyrood, the Finance Secretary Derek Mackay

has faced questions from MSPs over his tax plans.

Mr Mackay needs support from at least one other party

to get his budget through Parliament.

Let's speak to our political editor, Brian Taylor.

Does he have a deal? Not at the moment, he doesn't. He has to get a

deal on two elements. First of all, he has to get the budget three. At

stage three in the chamber behind me here. Before that, there's a

separate vote on the tax proposals. Holyrood now controlling income tax

rates and bands. He has to get that through as well. There isn't a deal

on that either. Let's recall briefly what the proposals are on income

tax. They want to freeze the standard rate. On the upper rate for

higher earners, the' proposing to increase the rate that kicks in. A

tax cut for those on higher earnings. The SNP says that goes too

far. Derek Mackay only wants to increase it in line with inflation.

Today, the Tories said it was wrong, people in Scotland would end up

paying more. Look at this exchange with Patrick Harvie who questioned

why there was a giveaway at all for those on higher earnings? Why are

you doing the maximum set out as something worth considering in your

manifesto? In line with inflation, we'll take tax decisions year to

year. That's a position we've put across at the moment. Why? That's

the figure in line with inflation. It feels like the right thing to do

in a balance way? Why? Why? It feels like it is in balance. Mr Harvie has

a different view on the structure of income tax. We feel it sits within

our manifesto. Sits with people is fair and gives certainty at this

time. What's your theory? I suspect you have one. Do you think this

makes a deal with the Greens less likely? It make it problematic at

the moment. There are two separate votes. One on the tax, a resolution

on the rates. The rate of tax to be levied. Thennage only then there is

a vote on the budget. You hear Patrick Harvie saying he is looking

and pressing for concessions on tax. You hear in response, Derek Mackay

making reference to the manifesto, a reminder a manifesto which drew the

SNP a rather larger share of the vote and of the MSPs than the

greens. They are not a majority. The SNP are taking the view large

parties have rights too. They believe they're entitled to put

forward their detailed proposals on tax. Derek Mackay is not for budging

on tax. If there are concessions, he wants them to be on areas of

interest and concerns to the Greens and the Liberal Democrats. He's

begin up on Labour. To wins the Greens over, he wants to give them

something on spending. Patrick Harvie's pushing and holding out for

something on tax. This could be very difficult indeed. I think

ultimately, there will be a deal. The final sanction in a further

election. Voters tend not to like elections, unnecessary elections.

They particularly tend not to reward the party that has created that

unnecessary election. What about the Liberal Democrats? The Liberal

Democrats are on the finance committee today. Very much in

discussion with the SNP behind the scenes. One element of this, people

on the SNP side, remember the 2007-11 Parliament, in 2009 they

thought they had a deal with the greens only for that to fall apart

at the last moment. They remember that. They don't trust from first

principles the greens, that's probably going too far. They are

Leary of the Greens because of that. They need to get a deal with

someone. Abstention or active support from another party or the

tax plan does not go through and the budget falls.

The SNP says the UK Government will have to postpone the triggering of

Article 50 if the political crisis in Northern Ireland is not solved.

Ministers in London have acknowledged a new election

is "highly likely" after Sinn Fein withdrew from a power-sharing

Our Westminster Correspondent, David Porter, joins me now.

David, bring us up to date on this. Gordon, this is to some extent an

example of the law of unintended consequences and how something that

happens in one of the devolved administrations potentially can

affect other parts of the UK on that massively important issue of Brexit.

It was an issue which was raised today quite fairly by the SNP at

Prime Minister's Questions. Theresa May, when she came into Downing

Street as Prime Minister said we know Brexit means Brexit but she

also wanted full negotiations with the devolved administrations. If, as

looks likely in Northern Ireland, there will not be a formal

administration and they may well be in an election period, what is the

knock-on effect for negotiating with all the devolved administrations to

get a position on Brexit and triggering of Article 50 to formally

begin the Brexit negotiations. It was raised at Prime Minister's

Question Time by the SNP leader down here at Westminster with Theresa

May. Here's a flavour of their exchange. Mr Speaker, the Prime

Minister's indicated she wants to take the views of the elected

representatives and the devolved institutions on Brexit seriously.

So, it stands to reason, then, that if there is no Northern Irish

assembly and no Northern Irish executive for much of the time

before the March timetable she has set before invoking Article 50, she

will be unable to properly discuss, and find agreement on the complex

issues during this time period? In these circumstances, will the Prime

Minister postpone invoking Article 50... Will she postpone Article 50

or will she just plough on regardless? It's about ensuring, as

he says, we want to ensure we do hear the views from all parts of the

UK. That's why we have established the J MC European committee

specifically to take the views and the J MC plenary which is also

meeting more frequently than previously. I'm clear, first of all,

we want to ensure within this period of seven days we can find a

resolution to the political situation in Northern Ireland so we

can continue to see the Assembly Government continuing. But, I'm also

clear in the discussions we have, it will be possible, it is still the

case that ministers are in place and there are executives in place that

we are still able to take the views of the Northern Ireland people.

Where does this go, David? In theory, presumably, if we go back to

direct rule in Northern Ireland, the Government in London simply, as it

were, negotiates the Northern Ireland bits of this on behalf of

Northern Ireland? That is potentially what could happen. There

is a political agenda here. Angus Robertson and the SNP would be happy

if Article 50 was never triggered. They want Scotland and the rest of

the UK remain in Europe. What happens if there is no agreement in

Northern Ireland and Northern Ireland is going through elections,

who speaks on behalf of Northern Ireland? It was noticeable there

that Theresa May was choosing her words very carefully saying

ministers were still in place, there were civil servants in place so the

process could continue. It is certainly going on at the moment,

there are talks today in London... I'm curious, David, what was the

reaction from the Government benches and the Labour benches to that

question from Angus Robertson? Was it that they said interesting point

or this is just you trying to find an excuse for putting the triggering

of Article 50 off? It was more the former saying you've actually got a

valid point here. Perhaps there are some on the Labour benches who would

not have been terribly happy it had been raised by the SNP. That is more

to do with the tribal loyalties between Labour and the SNP. There is

a feeling it is a question that has to be raised. But when a question is

raised people have to come up with answers. Theresa May's made it plain

that she sees her timetable for triggering Article 50 by the end of

March, she doesn't see anything that will scupper that at the moment. It

does add another dimension to what is going on in Belfast at the moment

and the talks this there will be over Stormont. Also, it adds another

dimension to the Brexit negotiations, particularly involving

the devolved administrations. No-one say it was going to be easy.ant it

ain't! Thanks David. We'll speak to you later.

I'm joined by the former Shadow Scottish Secretary, Margaret Curran.

David's point is a good one. Because of the complexity of the structure

of the UK these days not to mention Europe, no-one would have predicted

the situation in Ireland we're in? As he said, it's not easy. There's

no straight lines coming out of the Brexit negotiations at all. It is a

reasonable question Angus Robertson raised. First of all, will an

election with the result? There will be rest Is stance to that in

Northern Ireland. I harbour a guess, there's no magic solution there.

But, it's yet another dimension on the complexities of Brexit. One gets

a sense, I mean, if we take away the particular situation arising from

Martin McGuinness's resignation, there seemed to be a willingness on

the part of both, of Europe, of the Government of Ireland and of the

Government of the UK to make sure there was an open border between the

north and south because of the peace agreement? That may get raised again

in all this discussion. The other point David raised about this in

terms of relationship to Brexit and Article 50, I think it is very

difficult to try to undermine a referendum result. We went through

all this in Scotland. We guaranteed we'd respect a referendum result. It

is very hard to use anything just to look as if you're completely

undermining and create difficulties for implementing that result. You

think Labour should be pretty unambiguously saying we're going to

leave the European Union. We might argue with might want to keep parts

of the single market but you think Labour should be saying... To be

fair, I've not been uncritical of the Labour leadership in some of

this, or I have been critical of them. It is put out clearly in the

Bloomberg speech, yes, you have to respect the result of the

referendum. That is the democratic and proper thing to do. But that

doesn't give the Government a blank cheque. They have been very lax in

terms of bringing forward any debate, talking about any of the

negotiating decisions, engaging with Parliament about that. Angus

Robertson says Parliament should be involved in this discussion. When

you think through the various perm tagses and implications. Parliament

has to be involved in that. I don't think, I think it doesn't respect

the debate, the complexity of that debate as their excuse to undermine

the result. The Government may not themselves know exactly what it is

they want to negotiate or what their plan is. In a sense... That's part

of the problem we have. Given no-one expected the Brexit vote. OK, it is

six months ago, it is not unreasonable for them not to be

fully decided on what they're doing? It is a Liberal Democrating the mat

criticism to say the party that held the referendum in the first place,

the party, with a good number of their members wanted to happen, now

leading Cabinet members arguing for it, seem pretty clueless as to what

the real implications are, to the extent they can't tell elected

people what it is. You're missing something out, the Prime Minister,

David Cameron and the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the majority of

the members of the Government at the time said, these people want to

leave the European Union don't really know what they want.

Innocentless, it is incumbent on the Government, if you hold a

referendum, to stand by the result. It is a pretty damning indictment on

all members of that party who took it to the people without working

through the implications of this. We are in a very interesting position

as has been highlighted in the UK Parliament, one of the implications

of this is the impact it could have for a situation like Northern

Ireland. Some of the economic implications but also political

implications for the progress that's been made in Northern Ireland. That

is thrown up. When you are making these proposals and taking forward a

referendum, you need to be very clear about what you're playing

around with here. We need to move on. What's your betting on who Derek

Mackay does a deal with on his budget. Greens or Liberal Democrats?

Greens. Today, in the Parliament, the

Scottish Government is leading the debate about their

International Development Strategy. Although overseas aid

is reserved to Westminster, the Scottish Government offers

a voluntary contribution. It was a programme which was first

developed to help Malawi. The new strategy

will now extend the plan to include Zambia, Rwanda

and Pakistan. This year, the funding is due to

rise from ?9 million to ?10 million. It is easier to get things done, to

achieve greater value for money and bring about culturally sensitive

development guided by practical needs on the ground. We believe it

is a new model for development that is unique in world terms. This model

has enabled Scots to achieve a disproportionately large impact in

partnership with Mullally and individuals in organisations. --

Malawi. I am grateful. As the co-convenor of the cross-party group

I'm well aware of the work that civic society in Scotland does to

provide the foundations. There is concern that some of the core

funding has not been clarified. I wonder what he can offer to assure

the groups of future funding so they can continue to carry out that

excellent work? The member points to network groups within Scotland, and

of course the funding decisions have not yet been made but will be made

soon and the groups concerned will not need to wait aurally long for

those decisions. We brought energy access to over 80,000 people in

Malawi, in rural areas. We've established standards for education

there, education Scotland are working closely with the Scottish

Government and partners having developed a memorandum of

understanding in Malawi, and we've helped quadruple the annual number

of medical graduates from Malawi's only public medical school. We've

provided the Scottish Charity Mary's Meals with money to feed tens of

thousands of pupils across Mullally. I would like to congratulate their

founder on being awarded the Livingstone medal by the Scottish

geographical Society. He received this in recognition of his

contribution to feeding over 1 million children in Malawi and

thousands more in other countries. I agree with what he's said. I wonder

if he would agree that we both need to do the longer term investment in

enabling other countries but also shorter term things, such as the

meals he has been referring to? The member is right, this is the

challenge, making sure we respond to the immediate need, and the fact the

countries we are working in have ambitions like any other people in

any other country. They will be in a future position to be more

self-sufficient than they already are. That does not take away from

the urgent need to help now. I want to conclude with my comment about

Malawi. Although what we do there is for the sake of Malawi, are

partnership has created real benefits for Scottish people as

well. I am delighted to announce funding for the Blantyre to Blantyre

clinical research project. We are linking clinicians with those in

Mullally so we can study the increasing incidence. The results of

this will continue to research the Glasgow effect and studies of the

health of the Scottish population. The former Scottish Justice

Secretary has warned the SNP faces to win a new referendum

on Scottish independence. Kenny MacAskill said the

circumstances surrounding IndyRef2 are arguably less favourable

and more complicated than in 2014. Well, Mr MacAskill joins us this

afternoon from Edinburgh. You've been writing various things

about this, why have you got a donor on an independence referendum? I

don't think this is the time for it. But there are precursors, it does

not mean it cannot be one or the circumstances could not change

again. As you were discussing, a disastrous exit from the EU may make

it not only necessary but far more beneficial economically. But if you

look at things in the cold light of the verses where they were in

September 2014I think things are harder which is why I've always

cautioned this to not be the optimum time for a referendum. You also

think it should not be over the issue of Europe? There are two

factors, many of those who voted yes were also leave voters. There is

anecdotal and no doubt settle logical evidence for that. --

polling evidence. That could complicate matters. Secondly, we

don't know what the European Union is going to be like. The problem was

it set the tectonic plates shifting and we don't know what is green to

happen in the Netherlands and France, and the EU of 2017 will be a

fastly different place and it could be wiser to go for independence. You

seem to be saying you should not have an independence referendum over

the issue of the Brexit votes but also are seeing if there is another

one it should not be for Scotland in Europe. Firstly, I think there will

be another independence referendum, just not when. It could be that this

is the precursor to it if the negotiations are calamitous and the

scenario facing the UK and Scotland is grievous because of the terms,

then it may be that is the direction to go in. But you don't know what

position will be vis-a-vis the European Union and there may be

arguments that you should seek independence to change your own

direction. But the nub of it at the moment is I don't think it is the

time to be going for a referendum, I think it is harder than before but

does not mean it cannot be won. If I were Nicola Sturgeon I would be

saying, thank you for nothing. What you said undermines her strategy,

you are trying to dissociate the two things entirely. That needs to be

done, I think the independence scenario painted in 2014 was

predicated on there being no change in social, political, economic

unions. There are changes in Central and Eastern Europe that I find quite

unpalatable, there may be changes in Western Europe that are not to be

supported. The point of the Scottish Government, the only leveraged they

have as they see it in trying to get a deal over Brexit is to threaten

another referendum and now you're seeing, not only should they not be

doing that but if there is another referendum it should have nothing to

do with Europe. I'm appearing as a commentator, as you yourself are.

I'm not a member of the SNP Government or speaking on their

behalf. I've laid out matters as I see it and also as a critical

friend. I've countenanced those calling for a referendum that this

is not the time and I think the opinion polls bear that out. I think

the First Minister is doing the right job in seeking to leverage as

much as she can, she does have and is correct to put it on the table, I

just don't believe this is the time to trigger it. Of course, you can

say anything you like. You don't need to take responsibility for the

SNP Government. I'm just trying to draw out the point you're making,

which is so different from what Nicola Sturgeon is saying. Given

that so much was put on the idea of Scotland in Europe, could you think

the Scottish Nationalists have any realistic prospect of winning an

independence referendum if they said, you did not want to be outside

the European Union, we are going to be outside Britain and outside the

European Union. Long before I was a member of the SNP Government, I was

in the SNP when we changed the policy, quite controversially, to

being independence within the European Union. But things have

moved on. We don't know what the European Union is going to be like,

we don't know what the global situation is going to be because

Brexit is being followed by Donald Trump. So all I am cautioning is

independence is what the SNP stands for. The European Union can be a

double-edged sword, as we know when a significant percentage of the SNP

membership is not in favour of it. And they could be leverage a ring --

leverage in certain things. I've got Margaret Curran and I'm sure she

will say people are scared of independence and leaving the

European Union and scared of Donald Trump and that might help opposition

to independence for Scotland and she will jibe at you that you really

think the same, what is your reply to her before she says it? I think

it's a very scary world, the status quo that we knew and accepted, the

European Union, the relationship between Europe and America, they are

threatened by what has happened in the last six months or so. Anybody

who is a clear is either blessed with powers the rest of us don't

have because most of us did not see those things coming in mainstream

politics and I put my hand up to that. I would like to see where the

world is heading. There are some things we've always got to keep as a

North Star and I think Scotland being an independent nation is that.

How you achieve it may need to attack with the wind as it changes

and below. Thank you very much. Margaret Curran, you're still here

to say what I said you were going to say. He's done a service, because I

think it is time. He has been honest about the debate that is internal in

the SNP, and I think it is good he has brought it to a wider stage...

You do not, you just think it is good because he has contradicted

Nicola Sturgeon. I get frustrated because you only hear one view from

political party. Nobody could Labour of that! If we ever have another

referendum then I think people will be asking much more searching

questions about it. I don't think people will ever take the words of

political leaders saying they will sort it out later, just that it will

add up. Kenny MacAskill's idea, you'd effectively be running a yes

to independence campaign that was against Europe and against the UK,

it is 20 years since the SNP have been invested in Scotland in Europe,

it's a pretty big break. It is a huge break, you referenced that when

you said you would be asking Scots to leave, we would be out of Britain

and out of Europe and I think that puts us in a very vulnerable

position and I think small countries want to develop partnerships, work

with other people, and if we had no natural way of doing that it would

raise questions but fundamentally it is as Kenny MacAskill has said

himself, the economic questions have not been resolved and become more

challenging if we are out of Europe as well. There are big issues for

the SNP to face. What he touched on which is important is the First

Minister continually linking the issue of independence to Brexit is

quite frustrating, because she is talking more about Brexit than

education or health which is frustrating, you cannot always make

that link. You have strayed onto Kezia Dugdale's stump speech. Let's

speak to some MSPs at Holyrood. Your hands are in your pockets. Are

you relaxed you've done a deal with the Scottish Government over the

budget? Sorry to the so informal, Gordon! There's ongoing discussion

between the political parties about the budget, as there always is.

There's not any deal that's been done. If you listened to the

discussion between myself and Derek Mackay, the financial secretary, in

committee today, there's a big difference between the Green and SNP

approach, particularly on the need for more progressive taxation. I

hope Derek Mackay's willing to give some ground on that, recognising he

doesn't represent a majority Government anymore. And that a

standstill tax policy is really very disappointing for the very many

people who campaigned long and hard for the ability to have more

progressive taxation in Scotland. To close the gap between rich and poor.

The point Brian Taylor made earlier, because there are separate votes in

the budget and the tax proposals, he was assuming you'd do a deal on the

budget or might, he said the fact you objected to the tax proposals,

and you have to vote for them or abstain, as matters stand, unless

there are changes on taxes, you won't vote for the SNP on the tax

issue? The discussion does have to be about all aspects of this, the

taxation and spending side. The rate resolution, the sangle band on

thresh holds has to happen before the final stage on the budget. I

hope all these discussions are tied up and the Government gives some

ground to build consensus and some majority support for what they're

putting forward rather than pretending the SNP manifesto in

budget form has majority support. We're taking the same approach as we

always have, whether it was a Labour/Liberal Democrat coalition or

SNP and minority Government, we'll challenge and be constructive where

we can about and we'll always push the Government who whichever

political flavour to do more of the good stuff, less of the bad stuff.

Ash Denham, I think that was, the rough translation of that is we want

to do a deal, please do one. Will you? I think the Government have

been clear. We are a minority Government. This is an hoes tireic

time for the Scottish Government. The budget will not be a spending

budget but one that has to raise money as well. We've put forward

what we think is a very stable, there's not an awful lot of change

in there. For you personally, is the tax thing a bottom line? The point

Patrick Harvie was making in that exchange we saw earlier, he wanted

to see less inflation indexing of the higher rate. Is that something

that the SNP could even consider compromising on? The budget, they

took the decision, the First Minister and Cabinet Secretary, that

we didn't think it was a good idea to raise the additional rate higher

at this point. We need stability. We're in a very difficult economic

situation at the moment. There is some analysis which suggested only

5% of those additional rate taxpayers were to leave Scotland,

that policy would actually raise no more revenue at all. So, I think we

have to look at this carefully. The Scottish Government is open to

listening to the other parties. I think that will be an ongoing

process over the next fee weeks. Pauline McNeill, I presume Labour

would rather burn in hell than support the SNP budget. Am I right

in thinking that? No, I think you're wrong. We might be remote at the

moment from reaching any kind of consensus, the issue for Labour is

?327 million worth of cuts is something we could not vote for in

the budget. We'd like to see more recognition from the SNP that the

impact of this on public services this year will be quite severe on

the NHS, social services and so on. So are you saying if they Rowed back

a bit, you'd support their budget? We would be much closer to where we

want to be. I suppose we are closer to Patrick Harvie's position than

Ash Denham's position in that we think we've tax raising powers and

some of them should be used. We've heard today Derek Mackay saying

they're prepared to use the top rate of tax only if the Tories use it in

the UK. Then they would consider it. I think they need to make their mind

up where they want to be on this. Certainly where we'd like to be,

that would be some extra revenue and provide a balance between stability

that the country needs. But we cannot put up with any more cuts to

our public services. Murdo Fraser, a rough translation is Labour won't

support the budget unless Nicola sturgeon supports the Labour

manifesto. Is that your position for Conservative support? We can't

support a budget that makes Scotland the most highly taxed part of the

UK. The reason that's important this year because for the first time

around half of the money the Scottish Government has to has to be

raised within Scotland. It is the performance of the Scottish economy

which will determine the overall total available to spend on public

services. We know the Scottish economy is under-performing in terms

of the GDP growth and unemployment. Anything that hampers our ability to

go grow the economy means we get less money. The problem with Labour

and the Greens calling for higher taxes, that doesn't necessarily mean

more revenue. If those higher taxes depress economic activity you drive

away investment and have less money. Very sympathy with the argument Ash

Denham has with the higher additional rate. A higher rate in

Scotland compared to theest of the UK would be disastrous for the

Scottish publish revenues. We'd drive people away. Let's just

quickly talk about Brexit, Murdo Fraser. Just let me ask you this,

what would you like to see in terms of Brexit? Would you in favour of a

so-called hard Brexit or like Britain to still have some

somebodying says to the single market and what do you think that

would mean? People throw around terms like hard Brexit and soft

Brexit without knowing what these mean. You can't be a member of the

single market if you're not a member of the EU. We've taken a decision as

a country to leave the EU. We can't be members of the single market if

that concept has any meaning. We need to have the maximum possible

access to the single market. We can do that without being EU members.

That's about how we negotiate the best possible deal for Scottish and

British businesses. For individuals too. That's always about the

negotiation bit. Just to be clear on this, you can understand many

people, including myself, get very confused about this. When you say we

can't be members of the single market, we can't take part in the

system anymore, which means Trading Standards and descriptions of

products are laid down at a European level and we can't be part of the

customs union, is that what you're saying? There are ways of doing

this. Being members of the a Norwegian-style deal. You're

effectively in the single market. Bound by its rules but you've no say

over how these rules are constructed. You don't want that?

You pay into institutions as Norway are doing. You don't have any

influes own it. That is not a desirable outcome. It is far better

to be out with the EU but we have the maximum possible access to the

single market. That's all about creating a negotiation and trade

agreement with the EU rather than being part of the EU. Ash Denham,

what's your interpretation of the question I asked Murdo Fraser? It is

interesting the Tories have rowed back significantly from the comments

in July after the referendum where she was quite firm. She said it was

a priority for her to maintain membership, not access, of the

single market. That seems to have dissolved in the wind now. The First

Minister has been very clear. We see a hard Brexit. That is being outside

the single market as being a massive threat to Scotland, to our economy.

It could cost us up to 80,000 jobs. In that sense, we are looking at

every option. We've put forward our proposals which was Scotland's place

in Europe. What if Murdo Fraser's right, that you simply can't leave

the European Union while staying in the single market. It simply isn't

possible. That's his argument? You can be a member of the EEA, the

European economic area, as he mentioned, like Norway is to give

you membership of the sing the market. You'd be happy for Britain

to be paying in billions of pounds to that withouting in any control of

the decisions that are made? We think a soft Brexit would clearly be

better. It is a question of degree. Hard Brexit will cost the most in

terms of jobs and the hardest impact on the economy which could take a

long time to recover from. We see membership of the single market or

soft Brexit as being the least worst option. We're in a difficult place

at the moment. In terms of Scotland, we see the potential for a

differentiated option. Where Scotland remain in the EEA and

England could be out of the EU. They have a mandate for that in Scotland

it is different. To respect the democratic issues of Scotland we

need to look at these options. It would be good if we could explore

these options for Scotland to stay in the single market and protect

jobs. Pauline McNeill, Labour's position depends on the last speech

Jeremy Corbyn made which contradict dicts the one he made before it. For

example, on Labour's free movement is unclear? I can't speak for UK

Labour only Scottish Labour, being in favour of being part of the

single market and getting the best possible deal for Scotland. What

Corbyn said yesterday was it's all a negotiation. We all have to

compromise to get the best deal for the UK and Scotland. What's

unnerving, and it's getting serious now, today, we've had warnings from

the banking sector about the seriousness of a hard Brexit and the

Scottish business sector about profit warnings. Companies concerned

we've no certainty in this. That's the most important thing good

forward, as soon as possible, the UK Government need to give us some

certainty over where we'll end up. Patrick Harvie, I'm curious as to

what you make of this, Murdo Fraser says you could have a Norway deal.

Other than that, you can't stay in the single market unless you're in

the EU. The SNP say they would apparently be prepared to have some

sort of Norway-style deal where Britain or Scotland is in E FTA,

we've lost Patrick? Margaret, let's get your take on that. We'll go back

to the Parliamentarians if we can. Are you any clearer on Brexit than

you ever were? I thought you were going to ask me about Jeremy Corbyn!

Sorry! Anyway, go on. I was concerned when you saw the interview

with the Prime Minister at the weekend indicating that perhaps she

was willing to trade membership of the free market for free movement

and wants restrictions in free movement, that was more important to

her. The importance of having this proper challenge. You will be

disappointed if I didn't ask you about Jeremy Corbyn. He had his big

relaunch yesterday. It fell completely flat? It is

disappointing, shall we say. He has not engauged for voters to

understand. Hang on, we've Patrick Harvie back. I was going to ask you

what you made of this business as an observer of it. Can we stay? ... The

SNP saying can we have a Norway-style deal. Britain or

Scotland paying in without having any control. Murdo Fraser saying if

you don't do that you can't be in the sings single market. Leaving the

EU means leaving it. If I understand Murdo correctly, he was arguing, it

is politically unable to be outside of the EU. The challenge I have for

anyone who takes about access to the single market, whether it is the

Conservative, coach coach or anyone else, access for whom? For the most

part they're talking about businesses trading in the singsle

market. A single market is only a single market, worthy of the name,

if people are also free to decide where they'll sell their labour. If

people are not free but capital is free, that's a recipe for even

deeper labour exploitation than we see today. That would be

unacceptable. The Scottish greens as well as our colleagues in the greens

in England and Wales will stand up for the value of free movement.

That's a right we didn't surrender in the referendum in June. We'll

stand up for that. Thank you to all the rest of you. We'll have to leave

it there. And now to the first Prime

Minister's Questions of the new year, where the focus

fell firmly on the NHS. The Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn

used all six of his questions to press Theresa May

on the pressures facing it. He said the Red Cross had described

the 485 people waiting over 12 hours on hospital trolleys in England last

week, as a "humanitarian crisis." Theresa May dismissed the

description of the situation in the NHS, as "irresponsible"

and "overblown". 1.8 million people had to wait

longer than four hours last year in accident and emergency departments.

The Prime Minister might not like what the Red Cross said but on the

same day the British Medical Association said conditions in

hospitals across the country are reaching a dangerous level.

It has been said the NHS is underfunded and overstretched. If

she will not listen to the Red Cross, who will she listen to? The

government has put extra funding into the NHS, the fact we're seeing

this, more people being treated under four hours every day in the

NHS because of the government putting in extra funding and the

hard work of medical professionals in an NHS like this, it is not just

a question of targets in relation to the health service, we continue to

have a commitment as the Health Secretary has made clear to the

four-hour target, it is a question of making sure that people are

provided with the appropriate care for them and the best possible care

for them in their circumstances. Many banks are accelerating the

closure of local branches with adverse effect on vulnerable and

older people and the high street. The Royal Bank of Scotland is

closing down branches across Scotland including Juniper Green and

Chester in my constituency. Locals are facing exorbitant bank charges

for the privilege of doing that. We'll Prime Minister meet with me to

discuss how can realise a situation where banking across the UK services

customers and the real economy. This is an issue that banks themselves

need to consider and there are many ways they are doing that. I will

certainly look at that issue. Sir Ivan Rogers said people may need to

deliver messages to the government they will find disagreeable so here

is one. A lack of priority for the single market is putting jobs in

Scotland and the economy at risk. That means her government is as big

a threat to the union as the SNP. Her government is not worthy of the

trust of Scots let alone their blind trust so will the Prime Minister

take the opportunity to apologise for threatening the union and give a

solemn promise to every single person in this country that they

will not be a penny worse off after Brexit? The honourable gentleman

will be very well aware that I want to see the best possible deal for

the UK. When we enter the negotiations, obviously that is one

of the things I want to see. Unlike the downplaying that he does about

the approach we are taking, I have to say it is this government that is

ambitious for the opportunities that are available to this country once

we leave the European Union. I'm not going to say it is blowing a gale

but it looks like it might be. It is looking threatening. Let me

introduce you to the panel. Ian Murray and Kirsty Blackman and

Alistair Carmichael. David Morris from the Conservatives. David, at

Prime Minister's Questions we had Angus Robertson raising a point,

Northern Ireland, what does that mean for Brexit and the triggering

of article 50? This is uncharted waters. There is legislation in

place to compensate for what is going on here. Hopefully the

countries will come together for the sake of Northern Ireland and sort

this issue out. What would happen after that, there would be an

election, who knows? It is interesting, if you don't have a

functioning administration in Northern Ireland, they cannot be

consulted, can you go ahead and trigger it? As a member of the

Brexit select committee I am hearing again and again what will happen, we

need to get on doing it for the economic interests because this

uncertainty is enormously damaging. It is incumbent on us to say to

those politicians who are part of the administration in Belfast, this

is another level of responsibility for you. The reason we've come to

where we are in Northern Ireland is this basic lack of trust between the

parties and transparency in the government. This is another reason

why you've got to get your act together because it is not just

affecting Northern Ireland but the whole of the UK. It is particularly

bad for the economy of Northern Ireland. If things go wrong in

Northern Ireland and we have a situation where we need new

elections does that mean the triggering of Article 50 has to be

delayed? We hope that will happen and parties in Northern Ireland will

get round the table and sort it out but I don't think you can have

meaningful consultation with Northern Ireland and their

representatives without having a government in place and without

having elections coming up so I don't think article 50 should be

triggered if things do not sort themselves out. This is the law of

unintended consequences. Despite everything we've been thinking,

nobody anticipated it could be Northern Ireland that could cause

real problems. That is the point the Labour Party made when we had the

debate on this issue. You cannot factor in events, the German

elections could also dictate the process. There is a much wider issue

about the people of Northern Ireland, holding Stormont together,

making sure the past can be dealt with. I agree with Alistair

Carmichael, they need to sort this out. Article 50 will be the least of

their problems if they cannot get this together. One of your

colleagues will appear before the Lord and he suggested after Brexit

European nationals could be charged to work in this country, companies

sponsoring them could be levied with a fee of ?1000 for European

nationals to work in the UK. What do you make of that? I'm not aware of

that particular point but I'm sure that the grown-ups amongst us would

like, if there is any immigration, not an open door policy like we've

got now, would there be a tariff? I don't know. At the end of the day

depending on what language is used and how Brexit progresses I'm sure

that we will be in the European club of some sort. The fact is, we're

leaving the European Union but not Europe. You've got a different take

on this? It just gets worse. Every week we are here and we want to hear

more from the government, we say we need to hear more from the

government, when we eventually hear from them it is clearly half baked,

not supported by any evidence and if anything, makes the situation worse.

There is a massive vacuum into which he politically has been dropped. The

person who needs to take control and give direction and tell the country

to tell Parliament what she intends to achieve, if not how she will

achieve it, is Theresa May. It is her lack of leadership and strategy

leaving us in this dreadful position. You may not agree with the

policy but if you decided you were to leave the European club there is

a logic you can make the rules as to who does and does not work here and

whether you want to charge them for that privilege. We want to remain

members of the single market and cannot do that without accepting

free movement. I think having the Tallis is pretty ridiculous because

if you think about small business owners, how are they going to afford

to pay this money to have people come and work on their farms,

fishing boats, any of these small enterprises? This is a ridiculous

pack to take and I agree it is another half baked proposal. There

is no plan for Brexit. They have taken back control of the car but

they are driving it from the passenger seat, they have no

coherence or consistency. What they don't have a plan and they are

flailing around with half baked ideas, they are pushing the union

further apart and nobody will forgive the Conservative Party if

this gamble splits the United Kingdom apart. Health has dominated

PMQs and is dominating politics down so. Fully aware that it is a

devolved issue but, David Morris and, is it one of those things that

whether we live in England, Wales or Northern Ireland we need cross-party

agreement and the commission on how we deal with health and social care?

Looking at what has been said in the chamber, the Prime Minister has

accepted there are problems with the health service. We've all known

that. However it is how we manage it from them. We always have a spike in

winter but this time there has been more concerned from the public.

Brief answers on that from the three of you. Let's not be too smug, the

same demographics providing a challenge in England had the same in

Scotland. Accident and emergency targets I missed. We need the same

approach, the cross-party consensus approach that I was pleased to see

the perimeter take on. We have the same challenges and we are working

to beat them. We've made huge changes in the NHS. Health boards

are about reducing those charges. We're working on it far faster than

England. Reporting Scotland said it was the worst state of the NHS since

devolution. By the time Andy Burnham had walked out of the room, the

Conservatives produced a thing called the death tax. There needs to

be trust that the parties will take this forward with good faith. And

sure we will come back to the spot the clock has beaten us. Back to the

studio. Margaret Curran are still here. What do you make of the

discussions about Brexit? Murdo Fraser was arguing you cannot be in

the single market if you're not in the European Union. The SNP idea

that part of it could stay in the single market but it would mean we

pay into the European Union. Do you find any of these possible? I do

think paying into something and have no control is a substantial argument

but we need to have negotiations. Other options were we could have a

degree of control and still be part of the single market because

obviously by all the economic indicators... You like the option? I

would like to know the other options, whether you have some

degree of control. Obviously being members of the single market matters

enormously. All the indicators... Your economic prospects going

forward. Jeremy Corbyn said something interesting, about

migration. I have a sense that we need to develop a fairer migration

system and make the case for that because I don't think it has cut

through the migration that benefits us, some communities have an unfair

burden but there are ways. On a fair and equitable basis I would be in

favour of it but we're not far enough down the road in discussion.

We do not want to collude with any idea that it is not for the benefit

of the British people. That is it, join us tomorrow for First

Minister's Questions. That is it for now, we will be back next Wednesday.

Goodbye. For two centuries,

it has told Scotland's stories. The Scotsman is one of the most

prestigious names in the Now the people behind the headlines

tell the incredible story of the paper itself.

It could get quite hairy. This was real

seat-of-the-pants stuff. I went down to the newsroom,

opened the door and I thought, "I've come home."

You're actually recording history. It's not going to be a newspaper

that disappears - no way.