12/09/2012 Politics Scotland

Scotland. Coming up - unemployment here is up for the first time in

six months, and it is now above the UK average. Why does Alex Salmond

want to keep royals secrets even more secret? And here at

Westminster, the Prime Minister issues an apology to the families

of those who died in the Hillsborough disaster. He says more

could and should have been done to save lives.

But first, unemployment in Scotland has increased for the first time in

six months. The number of people who are out of work rose between

May and July. Our business correspondent, David Henderson,

joins me now, as does our political commentator for the afternoon,

Angus Macleod, of the Times in Scotland. These figures are from

made to July this year. They show a rise in unemployment of 4,000 in

Scotland. The headline rate is now 223,000 people without a job. This

is the first time we have seen such an increase in six months. We saw a

relatively steady, Gentle fall in unemployment over recent months. At

the same time, this month, unemployment in the UK as a whole

actually fell by about 7,000, to stand at just over 2.5 million. So,

it takes the rate in Scotland above the UK average. We are standing at

around 8.2%. The UK rate is 8.1%. What can you read into these

figures? We probably should not be surprised that we are seeing an

increase in unemployment, because there has been a lot of data

showing that the economy is relatively weak. We have seen

virtually no growth in the economy since the early part of 2010. We

saw a weak economic survey from the Bank of Scotland earlier in the

week. We saw very poor retail sales figures just today. Having said

that, there are some who are surprised that unemployment has not

actually risen more in recent months. The unemployment rate, as I

was saying, has been pretty steady in recent times, rather than peaks

and troughs. One of the main reasons for that, I think, is that

instead of people simply being employed or unemployed, you have

this grey area, where people are working on short-term contracts,

self employed, working part-time, they would like to work full-time

but they cannot - you might call it under-employment, rather than

unemployment. A lot of that is masking these figures, a lot of

people working less than they might like, not being able to get a full-

time job. Angus Macleod, I suppose, some predictable reaction from the

government in Westminster and in Scotland. Absolutely. The ping-pong

between the two governments will go on as long as the situation gets

even worse than it already is. There are a couple of things to say.

David referred to a lot of the data which is coming out. We have had

the data about high street sales, which were pretty abysmal in August.

Even more important, I thought, were some data we got a couple of

weeks ago about the few people who are actually setting up their own

companies a now in Scotland. That, compared with the best of the UK,

is pretty weak as well. All round, it is a pretty desperate situation.

Thank you very much. The economy is also dominating business in

Holyrood this week. The main debate in the chamber, which now takes

place on a Tuesday, looked at sustainable development. According

to the Finance Secretary, John Swinney, more construction is what

is needed to get the economy back on track.

In July, output figures for the first quarter of 2012 showed that

whilst the fall in growth has not been as severe as that in the rest

of the United Kingdom, the Scottish economy did return to a technical

recession, following two consecutive quarters of declining

output. The fall was driven entirely by the performance of just

one sector, construction. Output in the production and service sectors,

which account for 90% of Scottish economic output, continued to

expand. Had we been able to maintain support and investment in

construction, recession could have been avoided. It is the figures for

the construction industry which show just how economically damaging

the Chancellor's decision to reduce Scotland's capital budget has been.

If we look back at the economic circumstances of 2008 to 2010, when

the government was able to expand its capital investment programme,

we are able to see a discernible and positive benefit of that on the

performance of the Scottish economy. And clearly, the reductions in

capital budgets at this stage are having an effect. Scotland's

performance economically has been disappointing, but it demonstrates

a degree of resilience, when compared to the rest of the United

Kingdom, where output declined by a much larger 0.7% over the same two

quarters. Throughout this economic downturn, we have sought to pursue

a different approach, one of investing in the economy, in

households and supporting capital infrastructure. The refusal of the

United Kingdom government to change position is now severely your

bidding our ability to pursue that approach. -- severely limiting our

ability to pursue that approach. While I recognise that growth is

being affected by the uncertainty in the euro area, it is nonetheless

clear that the fiscal approach of the United Kingdom government is

not working. Other European economies... Of course. I am great

full. Can we just be clear about one point. John Swinney calls for

the UK government to increase capital spending, but is it not the

case that what he is calling for his greater borrowing? We are in

fact, as the Deputy First Minister helpfully points out, getting more

borrowing, because revenues are falling. I will come on to that.

But there is a judgment to be arrived at, which is a fine

judgment, I except, but one which has to be arrived at, between

whether or not the austerity measures of themselves are creating

a deeper economic problem from which to recover, or the scenario

which this government in Scotland supports, which is to sustain

investment in capital projects to enable us to then stimulate the

economy and to generate those tax revenues that will in fact improve

the situation. To address directly the point which Mr Fraser has

raised with me, overall, government borrowing in the United Kingdom is

�9.3 billion higher than at the same time last year, and the

current estimates are that borrowing will overshoot the

forecast. So, the likelihood of having more borrowing simply to

deal with the implications of austerity appears to me to be a

pretty likely scenario. This appears to be a government with no

real sense of purpose or direction, other than of course towards the

referendum. It is certainly not a programme which convinces many that

it is designed to address the main difficulties facing families across

Scotland - joblessness and the cost of living - nor the economic

problems facing businesses and services. On the other hand, the

promotion of the referendum, the promotion of responsibility for

constitutional affairs to the supposedly number one minister, has

meant the consequent demotion of responsibility for capital

expenditure and economic investment. As a decision, that is the

political equivalent of rubbing salt into the wound. I'm not sure

if it is ironic, but it is certainly galling, insensitive, and

reflects a skewed sense of our country's priorities. We will have

more on the economy during the programme. We can go no to speak to

our political correspondent, Raymond Buchanan, at Holyrood. One

other story in the news today, the European Commission would seem to

be trying to clarify remarks made by one of its spokes people, who

indicated that an independent Scotland would not automatically be

part of the EU. This is one of the great debates running up to the

referendum which the SNP want to have by 2014. The Scottish

Government's position is that they would have automatic membership,

but others have questioned that and sought clarity on the matter. It is

important not just for people in Scotland, but also in other parts

of Europe. The question to the spokesman yesterday was because 1.5

million people were on the streets of Barcelona, and they of course

have their own issues when it comes to part of Spain wanting to have

greater autonomy. It is a very live issue in Europe, and Jose Manuel

Barroso has been speaking about it in the last couple of hours. He

says he will not speculate on succession issues, saying it is not

part of his job. But he does so that any new state would have to

apply to become a member of the European Union, the question being

whether Scotland would be viewed as a new state or not. This is what

Alex Salmond had to say. European Commission states its

policy on parliamentary answers, they do not change these at press

conferences. The commission policy is unchanged. Our determination in

terms of the Scottish Government, we are part of the European Union,

and we intend to stay part of the European Union. Of course there

will be negotiations, but these negotiations, on things like

representation, will take place within the context of the European

Union - of that there is no doubt whatsoever. Is this politically

difficult for the SNP? Potentially, certainly. Their opponents are

making hay with this particular issue, saying that the certainty of

the SNP government has been called into question. But it is important

to stress that the commission seems to be trying to clarify its role,

not speculating directly on what might happen in the case of

Scotland. But the issue will not go away, it will be one of the big

questions ahead of that independence referendum. Moving

from Brussels to Buckingham Palace, another controversy this lunchtime,

the row about the secrecy of the correspondence between members of

the Royal Family and the Scottish Government - can you tell us more

about it? About a decade ago, this place made a big play about the

fact that it had passed changes allowing greater freedom of

information with regards to asking questions of people in authority.

Well, that has now been called into question, because the Scottish

Government planned to have an absolute exception, meaning any

communications from senior members of the royal household would be

exempt from being released under freedom of information legislation.

That has been described by the Information Commissioner in

Scotland as a retrograde step. The government represented justified it,

saying it was strange to have a situation where correspondence

between Chaplow and the Queen would be absolutely protected, whereas

correspondence between the First Minister and the Queen could be

subject to release as part of freedom information laws. That is

one of the debate going on at the I am joined in the studio once

again by our political correspondent, Angus Macleod. This

EU Raul is proving a bit difficult for the SNP, isn't it? What I was

really interested in was the clip of the First Minister. Correct me

if I am wrong, but I'm sure I heard him say that an independent

Scotland would have to negotiate. For why many, that's perhaps the

first time that the First Minister has admitted that. Of course, an

independent Scotland would have to negotiate, but having said that, I

think there is another myth around this whole issue, that if Scotland

became independent, that there would be some massive gap between

it becoming independent and joining the EU. In fact, I think history

has shown, recent history, that these negotiations, which the First

Minister referred to, could be done in pretty speedy time. You might

perhaps have a cup of two years. Some people might find that too

long, but it seems to me that the cat is out of the bag a little bit

on this. I think there is no genuine recognition that

negotiations would have to be undertaken. The original SNP

argument was that we are a member state at the moment, and if the UK

breaks up, then of course, the rest of the UK should have to have these

negotiations as well, not just Scotland. Highly debatable. If one

part of a member state decides to secede, why should the remaining

part of that state be penalised in any way? But the other thing, the

word which has disappeared from the SNP rhetoric on this, is the word

automatic. I think now there is general recognition that there will

not be automatic membership for an independent Scotland. By of course,

what the First Minister should really do is that if he does have

legal advice on this issue, and publish it. Don Cowie will be put

in this question to a clutch of MSPs shortly, and we will also be

speaking to them about the economy. It is such a crucial issue. Of

course. Actually, a lot of people say, quite rightly, that

independence or remaining part of the UK will hinge on the economic

arguments. There is a very important date coming up, December

5th, when George Osborne stands up to make his Autumn Statement. It

could be one of the most important autumn statements since the Second

World War. I will explain what I mean. John Swinney was absolutely

right, the Chancellor is failing dismally to meet his deficit

reduction targets, and he is now faced with a crunch decision - does

he abandon these targets, or does he maintain the targets and embark

on even more public spending cuts? If he does that, I think there will

be despair in every government department and in a very devolved

Is there uncertainty on the Tory benches about George Osborne? He

survived the reshuffle. David Cameron would have said that the

whole economic strategy it and thinking since 20 tend would have

been wrong and no Prime Minister would admit that. -- since 2010.

Thanks very much for now. Let's go back to Holyrood now and

speak to John Mason from the SNP, who's a member of the Finance

Committee, Labour's Finance Spokesman, Ken Macintosh, and Murdo

Fraser, the Scottish Conservatives' Finance Spokesman. Let's focus on

the employment statistics. Good afternoon. First, to you John Mason.

Unemployment is worse than the rest of the UK and the SNP government to

credit when it was a bit better. Who is taking the rap for the rise

in unemployment now? It depends which figures you look at because

the employment figures look better. Also, if you look at female

employment, both the employment and -- is higher and unemployment is

lower than the rest of the UK. If there is good news for Scotland

There also challenges ahead. One of those is that young folk are being

offered jobs that are flexible and part time. It is not good for the

work force, is it? It is better to do a job than no job, but the key

thing is that Westminster has been told repeatedly to invest in

capital expenditure. They repeatedly will not listen so I am

sure that John Swinney will do a lot of good things in next week's

Budget but the Westminster government holds a lot of the

strings. As Murdo Fraser pointed out, it it means greater borrowing.

He but the Westminster of government is borrowing already

more than they intended. This surely it would be better for that

are going to capital expenditure rather than day-to-day costs.

Fraser, the UK government is borrowing more so why can't the

Scottish government get some of that for capital spending?

don't pour paraffin on the flames to put a fire out. There were a

reckless levels of borrowing by the previous Labour government and the

answer is not to borrow more. There are a number of things government

can do to try to deal with the problem that affects the UK economy

and the Scottish economy and the whole of the Western world. I'm

sure the Chancellor is looking at some of those measures, not least

the supply side of things to liberalise the labour market as in

Germany. That might help the economy. Let us not kid ourselves

that there are easy answers. What was clear from the debate yet the

day was the SNP government has just won silver bullet, borrowing more

money and spending on capital but I'm not convinced it is that simple.

You criticise the Scottish government and go on about saying

there's focus is purely independent but the blame probably false fairly

and squarely on your doorstep for massively increasing borrowing up

to 2010. There are an number of problems and no easy fixes, but I

suggest that, as voters and taxpayers, we expect both

governments to do what they can. In Scotland, last year we had a

finance minister who said it was a Budget for jobs and growth. He we

are with unemployment worse than across the UK and it was confirmed

last month that we are in double dip recession in Scotland. We are

not getting a Budget for jobs and growth. I am not surprised. The

finance minister is going back to Westminster constantly asking for

more money rather than accepting he has cut money from his own budget.

We lost 12,000 builders last year in Scotland and we have a finance

minister who cut housing. I don't get how that was a Budget for jobs

and growth. I want to turn to another issue. John Mason, the

issue of the EU commissioner, the spokesman, who indicated that

Scotland would not automatically be part of the EU. That is something

the SNP had been asserting, although as the clip mention,

they're maybe negotiations for Scotland to enter into the EU. Do

you think there will have to be negotiations now. And to enter into

the EU? We will not need to enter it because we are in the European

Union. So you assert! For Scotland and the UK there would be

negotiations. For example, how many MEPs to have. Scotland is more part

of the mainstream of Europe than the rest of the UK. We are more

positive about Europe. If you ask most European's if they would

rather have Scotland than the UK, they would rather have Scotland.

This is now falling it into their category that nobody is quite clear

about whether Scotland will will not be a member of the EU. It

applies to a lot of other areas when it comes to independence.

is full of uncertainty. You can't tell me what corporation tax or

national insurance will be next year. We have to negotiate many

things that get discussed year by year. When we get to that stage,

the EU will be interested... When Scotland has made a vote. But life

is about negotiations. We do it as a party, an individual and as a

country. Labour are taking great delight with what is coming out of

Brussels at the moment, but nobody knows what will happen post-

independence are there is no point in crowing. We are not crowing.

Life is full of uncertainties and they are entirely of the SNP's

making. They are pushing for independence but, yet again, John

made an assertion that they are set a case and not argue or prove it.

The European Commission spokesman made it clear that Scotland would

have to negotiate its way back into the EU if we leave the UK. All the

SNP can do is shoot the messenger, as they all we do. When the CBI

criticised them last year, all of a sudden they are a body that is not

worth listening to. They create uncertainty amongst the Scottish

people, amongst bidders and it is something to be extremely anxious

about. -- are amongst business. you think the Prime Minister got

the Foreign Office to give the ambassador in Brussels in contact

with the commissioner and told him to stay out of internal politics?

It is an interesting intervention. I don't think that the EU

Commission and the UK Government's relations are so good that there

would be influence from David Cameron. This is the first time a

spokesman has set out so definitively that Scotland would

not automatically be part of the EU. If somebody says, of course we are.

It is not necessarily the case. There is an easy answer and that is

that Alexander Salmond tells us he has legal advice. Why does he not

show as? Why is the spending tens of thousands of pounds on Scottish

taxpayers' money that could be spent creating jobs trying to

protect that legal advice from public scrutiny? He should come up

with the goods. Gentlemen, thank you all very much for joining me.

Now, the Scottish Government has been consulting on what they're

calling the greatest transfer of powers since devolution. They say

there are radical ideas, including the urban right to buy. The debate

on the proposed Community Empowerement Bill is going on.

Firstly... The introduction implies the purpose of the bill is to

achieve sustainable economic growth. That is not an objective that we

would disagree with necessarily, but we think it is crucial that we

need to make sure that inequalities across communities are addressed in

this bill. There are powerful points about that. It is important

philosophically because without it there is nothing to guide difficult

decisions to be taken and the bill could inadvertently lead to the

widening of inequalities by favouring those who already have

the capacity to take action to be successful. It goes to the heart of

how we identify communities. Communities of interest or

geographical communities and that is why we will argue for the

principles of social justice and equality to underpin the ambitions

of this bill. Many public services exist because we believe, as a

society, that the provision of services and the exercise of rights

can be delivered and shaped in a more cost effective and

comprehensive way through elective action. We think public services

are important and evolving from Logan authorities in favour of

local resources, land or buildings, the test will have to take place at

a local level as well. That is why the other omission from this

exercise is a reference to the role of councillors. The paper talks

about that, but in the Government's own consultation, it would have

been better to reflect the fact that local councillors reflect the

aspirations of local communities and they're offer and key players

or champions of local communities to generate support for initiatives

and make a better use of resources - whether it is asking outside

resources to bring in resources or whether it is asking councils to

unlock resources. There will these to be properly acknowledged because

they have a legitimacy from the democratic electoral process. They

have to weigh up individual ambitions against a wider

collective ambition. This needs to be explored further. One key area

that flows from the discussion, it is a lesson that needs to be learnt

from the Royal ambitions and the Right to Buy agenda, disadvantaged

areas do not automatically have a range of expertise needed in

developing community it assets. Developing this is Keith. It leads

to a point about linkages and crossovers between existing land

reform legislation and this bill. It is something that ministers need

to reflect on as you go through the consultation process. I would like

to see a clarification on what the word -- role of the Land Reform

Group is. They need to be a joined- up between rural land reform and

right to buy and urban land reform and right to buy. We saw it with

the initial land reform legislation and we saw it as unfinished

business. Communities are sometimes referred to as rural or seen as an

urban and we need to make sure there is a joined-up in terms of

ground rules. It is a potentially radical element of the bill - one

area I would like to see fleshed out is the issue of access to

privately owned land. It is not really fleshed out in this

consultation. Again, I think the Minister is giving himself more

time and I would like to see what he thinks the ground rules should

be because it is a potentially radical element of the bill in the

context of urban communities, but you do not get any sense from the

consultation of what the Scottish government's intention is. The tiny

the trust and the Scottish Sports Association suggest a Register of

assets as a key to get things moving. Let us hear more from Angus

MacLeod from the times. That was live from the chamber. Angus, on

11th September 1997, the referendum was held to set up that Parliament

and 15 years passes pretty quickly. I'm young enough to remember! Yes,

everyone reflects on the 15 years and I suppose the important

question is was it worth while? It is not perfect and will change

quite soon, but I think perhaps the biggest change in how the Scottish

Parliament and devolution has been perceived is probably what I would

call a taxi driver test. I mean that I well remember in the years

before Holyrood, how taxi-drivers went off on one, if you see what I

mean, when the subject of the parliament was raised. They hated

it and it reflected a general view in Scotland. So many alleged

mistakes were being made. But now you ask people what they think of

the Parliament and there is a much more benevolent view towards it. It

is part of the landscape of Scotland and, I suppose, that in

itself is an achievement. No one would suggest seriously to get rid

of it. It will change with the Scotland Act and it could she --

change even further. A referendum on independence in 2014. The

Independent Secretary will meet for talks tomorrow. What were they

discuss -- discuss? Both governments are now inching towards

a government on how the referendum will be conducted and I think it is

a safe bet that most people agree there will be one. I hear that the

first minister and the Scottish serious about a second question,

but I am not sure I accept that. By going on about a second question,

they have actually put themselves in a position of appearing to have

lost out if we end up with a one question referendum, as I think

they will. It is a matter of how the Scottish government gets out

from under the whole question of a second question. That will... We

will see the outcome when the negotiations are concluded, but I

would thing by mid-October we will Thanks for the moment. Down to

Westminster now, and Prime Minister's Questions, where David

Cameron was forced to defend his government's record on unemployment,

particularly when it comes to the number of women out of work. Let's

have a look at some of the highlights. The number of women who

have lost their jobs under the Government's cuts has been twice

the number of the number of men. The statistics out today show that

the number of female redundancies is rising over the last few months.

In addition, of course, we now have nine government departments with

not a single woman minister. I know the Prime Minister likes to think

of himself as butch, he told us so last week in this very House, but

what has the Prime Minister got against women? First of all, what I

would say is, the unemployment figures today actually have a

number of a very encouraging figures in them, including the fact

that women's employment, the number of women in employment is actually

up 128,000 this quarter, and that is up 250,000 more women in work

than at the time of the last election, which is encouraging.

Obviously, the way that we have treated public sector pay, and the

public sector pay freeze, protecting low-paid people, that

has actually helped women. But do we need to do more to help women

into work, to help with child care and to help encourage more women

into politics? Yes. The fall in unemployment is welcome. But all of

us will be concerned by the number of people out of work for more than

a year, which stands at 904,000, its highest level for 17 years.

Does he agree with me that this is a particularly troubling statistics,

because the longer someone is out of work, the harder it is for them

to get back into it, and the more damage that is done to them, their

families and indeed to the economy. High absolutely agree with him

about the dangers and the threat of long-term employment. It is worth

putting the full figures before the House. Unemployment is down by

7,000, employment is up by 236,000 over the quarter. It is significant,

because it is it is a figure, and also, the claimant count, the

number of people claiming unemployment benefit, was down

15,000 in August. When you look at the private sector jobs number,

which is vital when you think that we need to rebalance the economy,

there are more than one million net new private sector jobs over the

last two years. He is absolutely right that the long-term

unemployment figure is disturbing. That is what the work programme is

designed to deal with. Last week's reshuffle was clearly a painful

experience for many, but can the Prime Minister advise asked why he

recommended knighthoods for five of his redundant male ministers, but

there was nothing like a dame offer for his sacked female ministers?

take the view that when people come into public life and work hard, in

opposition and in government, and make a contribution, then that is

something we should recognise. It should not only be permanent

secretaries that receive these honours, we should also be prepared

to honour ministers who work hard and serve their country. Our Armed

Forces are always willing to do what we ask of them without

complaint, but there will be a detrimental impact on training, to

plummet opportunities and development, if we ask them to keep

this country going in the face of strikes. Is this not another reason

why those unions should think again? She makes a very good point.

I hope these trade unions, who are meeting and discussing this

appalling idea of a general strike, think again, and think of the

economy, rather than their own selfish interests. The Prime

Minister has apologised on behalf of the government and the country

to the families of the victims of the Hillsborough disaster. He was

making a statement in the House of Commons ahead of the publication of

an independent report into the tragedy. 96 Liverpool fans died

after being crushed during an FA Cup semi-final at the home of

Sheffield Wednesday in 1989. new evidence which we are presented

with today makes clear in my view that these families have suffered a

double injustice. The injustice of the appalling events, the failure

of the state to protect their loved ones and the indefensible wait to

get to the truth and then the injustice of the denigration of the

deceased, that they were somehow at fault for their own deaths. So, on

behalf of the Government, and indeed our country, I am profoundly

sorry that this double injustice has been left uncorrected for so

long. Let's stay at Westminster and join our correspondent David Porter.

A heartfelt apology from the Prime Minister, which almost mirrors the

one from 2010, the Bloody Sunday apology. Yes, that was another

dramatic day in the House of Commons. This was pretty dramatic

stuff, at 12:30pm, when the Prime Minister got up and agreed with

what is a devastating report by this independent group of people

who have been looking into Hillsborough. Essentially, David

Cameron was saying that not only should the emergency services have

done more to try to save lives at Hillsborough but that the emergency

services, in the form of South Yorkshire police primarily, then

blamed the Liverpool fans for the majority of those 96 deaths. He

said it was only right that they should be an apology. I think MPs

were surprised at the degree to which the Prime Minister was

forthright, and I think they appreciated the tone he took. Bear

in mind that this has been going on for 23 years. Many people in

Liverpool feel that they have never really had the information that

they wanted. I think today they will feel that they have got a lot

more information. Just one example from the report - David Cameron

said that of 164 statements made by officers of South Yorkshire Police,

it appears that 116 of those statements in some way had been

altered to take out criticism of South Yorkshire police. The Prime

Minister said the Attorney-General would now be considering the

evidence to perhaps decide whether a High Court application ought to

be made to set aside the verdict at the original inquest. An emotional

day here at Westminster, particularly for MPs in the north-

west of England, and a day when the Prime Minister has come out very

frankly and apologised for what a previous administration, indeed

previous administrations, had done. The mood was a bit different in

PMQs. The unemployment figures are looking a bit better, but the Prime

Minister said he still felt the long-term figures disturbing.

in the UK, unemployment has come down, although in Scotland, as we

know, it is going back up again. The Prime Minister is clear that

whatever else he does, whatever initiatives you may do, it is the

economy that he and his coalition government are going to be judged

on. He came into power saying they were going to reduce the debt and

get the economy back on to an even keel. He knows as long as

unemployment remains high, there will be a very real problem for him

trying to sell a good story on the economy. Looking at another story

which is breaking from the House of Commons this afternoon, the West

Coast Main Line franchise, and the new Transport Secretary, Patrick

McLoughlan, has some news on that. Yes, he has been appearing before

the transport select committee this afternoon. He was asked at the

beginning of the hearing what he thought about the controversy over

the West Coast Main Line. He has given every indication that he

believes the contract the Government has negotiated with

first group, to take over from Virgin, is OK. He says he sees no

reason not to proceed with that, and that is exactly what he intends

to do. MPs will get a chance to debate the matter early next week

in the House of Commons. As far as Patrick McLoughlan is concerned, he

sees everything as being above board, despite the legal action

launched by Virgin Trains. He says he intends to go ahead and sign the

contract when he can. In future, the West Coast Main Line will be

run by a FirstGroup, and not Virgin Trains. And Richard Branson was

appearing before the committee on Monday. Yes, and he said the award

of the contract was, in his words, preposterous. He said due diligence

had not been done. As far as he was concerned, he said Virgin were

fighting it hard because it is a highly profitable railway. It has

produced huge profits for them since they have been running it in

1997. They genuinely believe that as the contract is framed, that

First will not be able to pay the rent, if you like, back to the

government, that they have said they will be able to. First Group

maintain they will be able to do that. But this is a crucial part of

Great Britain's railway structure. Whoever gets it right can earn a

lot of money. If they get it wrong, they could be real problems for

everybody concerned.. Let's get some final thoughts in

this programme in the company of this afternoon's political

commentator, Angus Macleod. It was interesting, the way that Mr

Cameron made that heartfelt apology to the families of the victims of

Hillsborough. Is he trying to clear up the mistakes of the

establishment in the past? I think Prime Minister's sometimes have a

duty to do this. -- Prime Ministers. So I sometimes hear about, why do

Prime Ministers always apologise? But in the case of Bloody Sunday,

and Hillsborough, there is now clear evidence that the truth at

the time did not come out. Certainly if you look at the

substantial body of evidence, referred to by David Porter, you

have to use the term tampering, with some of the statements that

were made at the time, then you have to say that the Prime Minister

was duty bound to do so. Can I just say one other thing - sometimes

there are tragedies like Hillsborough from which emerged

good things. If you look at how football crowds are conducted now,

I suppose really, that has been down to the terrible tragedy of

Hills Road, and, around the same time, the fire at Bradford City. --

the tragedy of Hillsborough. So, we have moved on, but we have not left

it entirely in the past. The Prime Minister today was absolutely right

to do what he did. Is the apology inspired by the coalition

government, or is it just the timing? It depends on the colour of

the -- I don't think it depends on the colour of the government, it

depends when the report comes into the public domain. David Cameron

today had absolutely no choice but to say what he did, and I think he

did it with some grace. Let's finish on a lighter note, Andy

Murray's spectacular victory in the US Open. Of course, MPs have been

congratulating him in the House of Commons, and there has been an

interesting debate once again about Scottish versus British, and the

question of identity. Yes, and if you listen to many of the SNP

people who have been asked to comment on this, they have avoided

the issue. They have not started saying, he is Scottish. I got the

distinct impression yesterday, at the height of the euphoria, that

this whole argument had thankfully disappeared. Hopefully it is in the

past. There is the man himself, I think that was an argument they

were trying to get out from a couple of politicians on BBC Radio

2 yesterday, but they were not playing the game. They were not,

and congratulations both to the SNP politicians, who refused to be

drawn into a trap. That's all we have got time for this week.