14/09/2016 Politics Scotland

Hello and welcome to Politics Scotland.

Coming up on the programme this afternoon:

How will Scotland trade with the European Union following Brexit?

And John Swinney is probed about the legal

And here at Westminster - more questions, but not

necessarily answers, on exactly what Brexit will mean.

This afternoon, Nicola Sturgeon faced questions from MSPs on Europe.

She said it's misguided to think Brexit will be fine

and that she remains profoundly concerned about the impact on

Our poltiical editor Brian Taylor has been

following events and joins us from the Scottish Parliament.

What is happening? Thank you. Basically, three parliaments but one

topic, Brexit. We will be hearing later about the position at

Westminster. The Parliamentary leader asked me by Minister about

the aspects of Brexit, the financial institutions and he asked her to

confirm it would be an objective of Britain to Remain as a member of the

European single market. Membership, once again as last week, the Prime

Minister declined to use those precise terms. She just said in

general terms Britain would seek the best outcome. In the European

Parliament, we had the commission president dealing with the prospect

of the European union without Britain and dealing, as it would

imagine, with two in an upbeat way. Last year, he said there was not

enough Europe in the. The objective of greater integration could be

achieved in the absence of Britain, he suggested. He talked about the

single market and said the could not be membership of the single market

without accepting the transfer of Labour. He said he could Named

Persons you could not have the ala carte single market. Holyrood will

begin to debate the issue of the European Union and Scotland's place

within that. We will hear from the Minister dealing with negotiations

on behalf of the Scottish Government. He is due to meet David

Davis, the Brexit minister in the UK Government tomorrow. What we're

trying to do is set the parameters. The Scottish Government wants to

embed itself into the European committee and intervals negotiation

proceedings. She does not want to be window and just consulted and patted

upon the head. She once an actual role in formulating Britain's

position and accepting after article 50 is triggered, it will be

negotiation and Scotland needs to be in on the ground floor. Nicholas

Sturridge and said it was gobsmacking that there had not been

a position advanced ready by the UK Government. -- Nicola Sturgeon. She

said when she was doing the referendum on UK Independence she

was expected to have plans from a to Z and now the UK Government does not

have a plan. WHILST SEEKING A POSITION ON THE UK GOVERNMENT

NEGOTIATIONS, the starting point was not Independence but if those

negotiations failed to produce a result in Scotland's interest, it

would be wrong to keep the option of independence referendum of the

table. The national roll-out of the scheme

which assigns a "state guardian" to every child in Scotland,

has been delayed for a year after the Supreme Court branded

elements of it unlawful. The Education Secretary John Swinney

told a Holyrood Committee this morning he could not provide

guarantees that pilots of the controversial Named Person

policy had kept within the law. Our local government correspondent

Jamie McIvor has more. Well, of course the question

on named person is really whether the practicalities

of the scheme will actually be different to those

which were originally envisaged. To remind you, the scheme should

have come into effect by now. The government hopes to have it up

and running by next August after what they say will be a

period of intense engagement. There is obviously the

question of how the government deals with the concerns

of the Supreme Court Mr Swinney said he was confident

local authorities had not fallen foul of data sharing, although he

accepted he could not guarantee they had kept within the law. There is

also the issue of whether the practicalities will change. Labour

would like to see 16 and 17-year-olds taken out.

The party that actually opposes the scheme in principle

Their education spokeswoman Liz Smith questioned John Swinney.

When it comes to the overall arching aim of this policy that the supreme

court said it was benign and legitimate. He also is a com it does

not require any current policy change. Surely that cannot be

correct when one aspect of the policy has been ruled unlawful. I

think the point Liz Smith misses out on that question is the fact we are

putting all of these provisions into statute as new provisions. The point

I was trying to get across in the statement last Thursday is that

essentially the Government is advancing a new legal framework,

which this policy is to be delivered. That requires to be

compatible with both the requirements and the test that the

Supreme Court applied to this particular legislation. It is that

legal framework that has to be compatible. John Swinney has been

busy, hasn't he? Yesterday he was talking about education. Tell us

about that. This consultation will be very interesting.

The government sees it all as being about empowering head teachers -

devolving as much power to schools as possible.

There will also be regional boards designed to help schools

across different areas work together.

But the big question is just what role councils might actually be

They'll have to make the case for every practical power over

One question yesterday was whether schools would be able

Well, one person put it to me that the question might well be

what council control they'd actually be opting out of in practice once

This could be a significant moment in the turf war between central

But I think people in education will be more concerned

about the practicalities here, not about the turf

My guest today is Andy Maciver, director of the PR agency

Message Matters, and former head of communications

Both these issues, some questions. The Named Persons, I am not

understanding this. If it has been ruled to be unlawful and of John

Swinney is saying he cannot guarantee the way the pilots have

been operated over the past year is lawful, he also seems to be seeing

there is not a need for much change. I think he was seeing the pilots

were operated successfully by local authorities and the problem with

that was data protection. He seems to be saying that the legislation

will be new. When this scheme gets rolled out nationwide, it will be

new legislation and therefore that legislation will be compliant with

everything in is to be compliant... They will have to change it, want a

bid to take account of what the supreme court says? He has accepted

that before. I don't think he accepted it in the answer to Liz

Smith, but he has done before. The legal aspects of this will be ironed

out. If they want this scheme to go ahead, clearly they will have to

iron out any aspects. The bigger danger and is the perception of the

hope policy. It is a difficult policy for the SNP mac. It is one of

the policies and which public are against. They are not under much

pressure from opposition, are they? Labour are still in favour of it.

Labour's current position is that it should not extend up to

18-year-olds. They want to limit it to 16-year-olds instead. That is

hardly tackling the point of principle... The only opposition to

it as from the Tories. I think from the Tories point of view, the onto

an issue here. This is something that could go on for years and years

and could be an election issue next time around. We are the only party

that have the opposition to it. The SNP's own voters are against this

policy as well. They say that has not been expressed properly and the

media have not handled it properly. They have a big job to do to turn

around. I am not understanding this education stuff. John Swinney says

the consultation, big changes. When I read about what the changes are, I

cannot actually work anything out. I do not think much has been said yet.

We have had two small statements, in terms of education over the last

week. The Nicholas Durden programme for Government and yesterday's

statement, neither of which said a great deal. -- Nicola Sturgeon. They

are going to make big changes in education and they say this is one

big policy where they can make a massive change. I think they have

something planned in that respect. It is very interesting at the moment

because, as you know, over the past decade or more, education is, we

need more money, we need more money. The SNP are thinking about this

different way, aren't they? The hour thinking about London and perhaps

the ruling out selection but that does not mean they could not import

some ideas. They have ruled out selection in academies and that is

because they did not want to be seen doing anything like England is

doing. What John Swinney announced yesterday, removing authority

control, is a huge step. It will be difficult to do that and they will

have to take on local authorities and teaching unions, who will oppose

it all. It is going to take a lot of courage and a lot of blood cult will

to make a big difference in education. -- courage. Not enough

information yesterday to see whether they are going to do that or take

all the steps that are required. Passing powers to headteachers is

what we do in Europe. It is important for them, they have staked

their reputation on it. It cannot be waffle. The note we are struggling

here. It is not doing well and the 08. We will be back with you in a

moment. The issue of the European Union

will take centre stage Mike Russell, the minister charged

with making the Scottish case in negotiations,

will urge political rivals to agree that Scotland must not be

"dragged from the single market". Let's cross over to

the debating chamber. I think Mike Russell is on his feet.

The shared aim of every member in this chamber and our country. I

would like to echo how welcome for the report, which makes a valuable

contribution and rightly prioritises access to the single market and

reassurance for European nationals here. The key player in the

engagement of the UK with Europe once observed that success of

Butcombe offers requires the ability to get a good nights sleep with a

key sense of history. -- political office. I do think the history of

the post-war engagement with Europe is instructive. Written stood aside

when the nations that were divided came together and envisaged a

comment future in the 1950s. When confronted by steady British

decline, we changed our minds in the 1960s and vetoed applications to

join on two occasions. We were concerned that the UK had, what he

described, as deep seated hostility to European engagement. He was

talking about experience cost that deep-seated hostility drove the

Leave campaign this year and still drives some of the hardest

Brexiteers. In the 1970s was the. The UK had decided to deny itself

and as people, end Heath's words, the opportunity available to us in a

wider and more prosperous stage. Leaving, as he feared we might, so

many aspects affecting our daily lives to be settled outside. The

question for us in this chamber today is therefore a very clear, how

do we stop that happening? How do we avoid the damage that will be caused

for a Brexit we did not vote for and do not believe it will improve our

nation. On the 28th... We did not vote for it... We participated in

that vote as members of the United Kingdom.

I am sure he is delighted with from the Tories. There is a basic

difference between he and I on our understanding of nationhood. I

understand that the people of Scotland are sovereign, they have

the right to be sovereign, they should be heard. On the 20th of

June... On the 28th of June, this Parliament entrusted the Scottish

Parliament with a mandate which gave practical effect for the Democratic

will of the people of Scotland. All options must include independence to

protect Aaron -- relationship with the EU, our place in the single

market and the benefits that flow from that. Since then, the Scottish

Government has sought clarity from the Prime Minister and her new

secretary for exiting the EU on how they will engage with the Scottish

Government. I will come back to that later. I want to take the

opportunity to reiterate this government's commitment to

delivering on the mandate and invite this Parliament to continue to

engage in all efforts to do so. That process is well underway. Her

government has reassured business, and ensured that EU nationals who

have chosen to make Scotland their home continue to feel welcome. In

July the 1st Minister outlined five vital national interests which must

underpin the actions of the government as we move forward. The

Democratic interest, the economic interest, the maintenance of social

protection, the principle of solidarity and the ability to

exercise influence on decision-making. As we go forward

according to the mandate set for us by the Scottish people and by this

Parliament, we must continuously examine how those interests will be

affected by and make the best protected within all the options

that are open to us. Of course. The mandate given to us by our votes

here in the Scottish Government, he quotes emphatically not a vote for a

second referendum on independence. It seems to have changed since that

thought. I would advise the Member to listen

to Nick Clegg, who said yesterday he would have voted for independence!

He is out of tune even with his own party. In July, the First Minister

outlined five major interest. As we go forward according to the mandate

set for us by the Scottish people and the Parliament, we will

continuously examine how those interests will be affected by and

might be best protected within the options which are open to us. All of

the options. To provide the best advice from a wide range of

experience and expertise, the First Minister established a standing

Council of experts which has met twice. The new Cabinet subcommittee

will meet for the first time next week. All Scottish ministers have

been fully committed to working on the result of the referendum. The

Deputy First Minister provided reassurance to EU students. The

Minister for further education is working with the University of

Scotland. Roseanna Cunningham has met with a wide range of

environmental spokespersons who have spoken about the key role of EU

membership in tackling environmental issues.

Right, some good news on the economy.

Unemployment has fallen, both in Scotland and across the UK.

In fact, the rate in Scotland is now lower than the UK rate.

Except, wasn't Brexit supposed to lead to economic disaster?

Our economics editor Douglas Fraser is here.

Give us the numbers. These are the monthly figures, which

cover May, June and July. Those seeking work in Scotland is down by

29,000 to 130,000. The other point rate is at 4.7%, pretty healthy.

There is always a healthy number of people moving between jobs. The

number is lower than the 4.9% figure for the UK as a whole for

unemployment. There was clearly a gap opening up, and it has moved to

Scotland's advantage. UK unemployment falling as well, but

most of it was accounted for by what was happening in Scotland. This

covers three months over the Brexit referendum, June 23. This covers

May, June and July. It is too early to say, it is no real guide to the

impact of the Brexit vote on the labour market. We are not quite

clear how it is going to feed through, and we won't be for quite a

few months to come. If there were two have been a sudden impact you

might have expected to see it in the claimant count. Not a great deal of

change in that can't. These figures are obviously welcomed by the

political leadership of Scotland's different governments, but Brexit is

what is concerning the Scottish Government in particular. The

effects that they fear in future job numbers. Keith Brown was a visiting

standard life in Edinburgh when we caught up with him.

We see from different places concerns about future investment

levels, confidence. As these figures demonstrate, we have been building

up to a very positive and resilient economy in terms of employment.

Those things do represent a danger, it is not inevitable, it is down to

us to make sure that we mitigate any effect of Brexit. We would be in a

better position if we did not have the uncertainty which wrecks it

represents. There has been a debate going on

about whether the quite bad performance of the Scottish economy

until these figures was just to do with the problems in the oil

industry or whether other factors were involved? This might indicate

it is just the oil industry? It is unclear. Economists felt that

something else was happening beyond Oil Gas UK the sole clinician as

to why Scotland were doing relatively badly. The reasons for

what we have seen, one of them coming from the Office for National

Statistics which gathers these figures, there may have been a

statistical quirk earlier this year that made them look relatively bad,

the trend they reckon is fairly flat. There is no central pattern

from breaking down and drilling down into these figures. Construction UK

wide looks pretty strong and is getting better from an employment

point of view. One explanation may be that this is not just a question

of unemployed people finding jobs. If you look at the number of people

who are considered to be economic league in active, -- economic league

in active. If you are looking after children or elderly parents or

whatever. Also students can't is in active -- count as inactive. The

number of them has risen to roughly the same level as unemployment.

The point being, because unemployed figures are surveys, if I count

myself as being economic league inactive, nothing much has changed?

People are making decisions for lots of perfectly and good reasons. But

they are counting themselves out of the workforce, and that can have an

effect on the economy, students also, that has an effect on the

economy as well. But it is unclear what is happening with the jobs

market at the moment. A lot of other indicators that we're getting,

surveys, are completely contradictory. We have had two about

Scotland already this week which are pointing in completely different

directions as to the level of confidence that recruiters have.

Thank you, Douglas. Let's pick up on today's top stories

with a quartet of MSPs at Holyrood. I'm joined by James Dornan

from the SNP, the Conservative Liz Smith, Rhoda Grant

from Labour and John Finnie First of all, Brexit, James Dornan.

I'm a bit unclear listening to make Russell exactly what it is you're

trying to achieve here. We are trying to achieve two things,

to ensure that the UK Government recognises the devolved competencies

of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. But the more important

thing is we want to make sure that we continue to be part of the common

market. But the various attempts by Nicola

Sturgeon and others to convince European leaders that in some ways

Scotland could have a different deal from the rest of the UK on Brexit

have achieved what, precisely? They have made sure that people

remember that Scotland is here as a nation on its own, it is not just

part of the UK. You haven't achieved any

commitments. At this stage we are still part of

the UK, we are still fighting to make sure the rest of the UK

recognises that there is a particular need for Scotland's voice

to be heard. When you are not suggesting what Nicola Sturgeon

should have said is, Scotland voted to stay in, never mind. She is

fighting for the people of Scotland. I am asking whether there have been

any commitments made by anyone in Europe, either that Scotland can

stay in the UK and have a different deal with Europe than the rest of

the UK, or that an independent Scotland would be welcomed with open

arms into the single market? There has been quite a lot of noise to

suggest that Scotland would be welcome into the European market.

The issue now is that everything is being looked at, every option is

being investigated by Scotland. We are trying to find, no matter the

circumstances, the best deal for Scotland. That is the job of the

Scottish Government and that is what we are doing to the best of our

abilities. Louis Smith, there you are. What do

you make of this? Has the Scottish Government achieved anything

concrete so far? The most important thing is we do get a good deal for

Scotland but within the United Kingdom. The prime Minster has been

crystal clear that the Scottish Government will be fully consulted

on the negotiations that have to take place, and that is quite right.

This is a decision for the UK, and we have to be absolutely clear that

all of the devolved sections of the UK are involved in that process.

But he would not approve of the Scottish Government or the Welsh or

Northern Ireland government having some sort of veto, even in the sense

that Theresa May cannot agree on something unless she gets the

approval of the other governments? This decision was taken by the whole

of the UK, we have to respect that decision. Clearly there were

differences within that decision, and we have to listen to the people

on both sides so that we do get the best deal for Scotland, and also

Scotland within the United Kingdom. Rhoda Grant, what does Labour make

of all this? We respect how the Scottish people voted in both

referendums, they want to be part of the UK and also want to be part of

Europe. We would hope that every storm is uncovered to see -- should

Nicola Sturgeon be able to veto anything Theresa May once?

I would like to share with us what she has done. It is very difficult

to support her if she will not tell us what she is doing. It seems to me

that she is talking up an independence referendum but not

clearly showing what she is trying to do to get what the Scottish

people want within a UK settlement, which is what they voted for just

over a year ago. We need to make sure the Scottish people get both

things as far as we can possibly do that within the settlement we have.

We want her to share that information with us so we can

continue to support her doing that. John Finnie, is there anything else

the Scottish Government can do? They do not have a strong hand in this,

do they? I think the strong hand the Scottish Government have is that

they will be positive about the future of Scotland in Europe. There

is a bit of a phoney war ongoing. We do need to secure the best possible

deal for Scotland. We hope that continues to be our maximum

involvement in Europe. That remains to be seen, never mind all of the

questions asked of the previous referendum. There has been nothing

from the UK Government. Early days, and it is important people engage in

a positive way. That is what seeing from the First Minister.

There has been no plan A. Theresa May and the rest of the government

work at by surprise when the result went the way it did, they had no

plans to move forward on it. Theresa May was a reluctant remainder. This

government should have had some plans for what would have happened

no matter what the result was. There has been nothing, I spoke earlier on

about devolved competencies. What happens if the impact of the Brexit

decision is going to impact on devolved competencies? The

Conservatives and Labour supporters. But that is not what trees may have

said. She has been adamant that all the departments will be involved in

the negotiations. What that would suggest is there is

some manner of veto available to the other side. If they are going to be

involved in negotiations they have to be allowed to say no.

There are at least two life legal proceedings going on, is that is the

case the question of a legislative consent motion comes under way.

We're running out of time, I want to get the opinion of all of you on

something else, which is this Named Persons statement John Swinney is

greatly making. Liz Smith, this is a big issue. Where you satisfied with

what John Swinney had to say? Not really, because there is a

process that, over many months now, this policy has lost the trust of

the people in Scotland. There are many concerns that the case laws are

so significant that it is very difficult for them to deliver that

policy in the way it is intended. And with the Supreme Court ruling,

one Section of that policy, the data-sharing aspects, has been ruled

unlawful, as have the situations... Can I just ask you this, do you

think it would be possible to implement the Named Persons

legislation in anything like its original form if those data-sharing

element are taken away? It cannot be in its original form.

As a substantial policy? No, because the Supreme Court has

made the ruling that that Section of the young people's act is unlawful,

so it cannot go ahead in the way it was originally intended.

How is it going to differ? The data sharing part of it will be

made legal. They will change it around. It wasn't so much what they

were doing, it was the fact they had not done it properly. They change

the law to make the regulations and it will go on in a similar fashion

as it was before. I had to laugh when Liz said that she did not think

that John and said the questions and the lack of trust. There is a lack

of trust because there has been a concerted campaign to muddy the name

of the Named Persons. Named Persons is clearly a good policy and it is

going to protect children. I think we should get behind it. Briefly,

Labour and some of the leading figures are against this policy but

you seem to be in favour of it. We are in favour of anything that

protects children. A policy designed to protect children, this Government

has made such a hash of it. You think it's a great policy, they just

have not implemented it well? The way they have drawn this legislation

and it is interesting to see it has fallen foul and they are going to

change it. It seems a strange way of listening to what people are saying.

There are real concerns and they have to address those concerns to

build confidence. If this policy does not have the confidence of the

public, of course it will not work. Just to be clear, as it stands now,

Labour supports it has no confidence in it? Which? We expect... As it

stands now? It needs to change to address the concerns people have.

All right, there has to be a policy via that protects children who are

not flagged up to the initial channels. John Finney, briefly. Good

as from the same part of the world as me and the Highlands have

implemented this policy for a number of years. It was not well hampered

handled. We support the Named Persons. Thank you very much indeed

for that. And now to this week's

Prime Ministers Questions, where exchanges were dominated

by the issue of grammar schools. The Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn,

pressed Theresa May, on why her government

wanted to expand a system, which his evidence suggested,

let children down But she disagreed, saying

the attainment gap in grammar Mr Speaker, I asked the Prime

Minister she could name any experts that could help her in this policy

and she was not able to. Can I caught one expert at her? John is a

teacher. -- quote. He wrote to me and said the education and teachers

have made strides forward to improve the quality of the curriculum. Why

not find all schools properly and let us do the job? The evidence of

the effects of selection is bliss, in Kent, which has a grammar school

system, 27% of pupils on free school meals get five good GCSEs, compared

with 45% in London. We are all for spreading good practice, but why

does the Prime Minister went to expand the system that can only let

children down? Can I say to the right Honourable gentleman that he

needs to stop casting his mind back to the 1950s. What we will be doing

is ensuring that we are able to provide good school places for the

one and a quarter million children who are in schools that are failing,

and adequate or need improvement. When we look at the impact of

grammar schools and you look at attainment for disadvantaged and

non-disadvantaged children, the attainment gap in grammar schools is

virtually zero, which it is not in other schools. It is opportunity for

young people to go were their talents will take them. I know the

right honourable gentleman believes in equality of outcome. I believe in

equality of opportunity. He believes in levelling down, we believe in

levelling up. Last week the Prime Minister was unwilling or unable to

give assurances about Remain in the single European market. Today, she

has been unwilling or unable to give assurances to the financial sector.

Meanwhile, millions of people from across the United Kingdom depend on

freedom of movement across the United to admit European union for

pleasure and work. The face the prospect of having to apply and pay

for abusers. As the Prime Minister in favour of protecting free Visa

travel? There was a clear message from the British people at the time

of the referendum vote that they wanted to see an end of free

movement as it operated, they wanted to see control of the movement of

people from the European Union into the UK and that is what we will

deliver. Nine-year-old Mohammed is one of child refugees alone in

Syria. His family fled the country, believing he was dead and now live

in Midlothian. He has been identified as alive but has now been

kidnapped, badly beaten and left for dead before being found it again. He

now lives in fear of daily attacks or sexual violence and assault.

Would-be Prime Minister agreed to meet with me to the Government can

take to reunite Mohammed with his devastated family and give him the

support over, his ordeal. Obviously, I am not aware of the details of the

individual case. The Home Secretary has heard him and if he would like

to write to him with the details. There are rules that allow family

reunion to take place. We are, as a country, has committed to take a

number of children who are vulnerable and potentially bindable

from sexual violence from the region around Syria, to ensure we can

resettle them around the UK. My home is my friend the Home Secretary will

look at the case. -- right honourable friend.

Well, what kind of reaction did that get from Westminster's politicians?

Our correspondent David Porter is on College Green

I don't want you doing your rain dance. It is a lovely day here at

Wes Mr -- Westminster. Prime Minister question Time, as we have

just heard there. Let's get some reaction to it. Iain Murray for

Labour. Jeremy Purvis for the Liberal Democrat. Ian Stewart, I

will begin with you first. We keep being told that Brexit means Brexit.

Is it now not time that your Government put some flesh on the

bone on that? That work is ongoing at the moment and in consultation

with the devolved governments. Theresa May has been quite clear we

are not going to provide a running commentary of this. The same way

that the Scottish Government negotiated the fiscal framework last

year, these are complex negotiations. We will not provide a

running commentary. We will get a sensible trade agreement with

Europe. Also, this is an important point, we start scoping out new

opportunities for this country. We are already looking at scoping trade

arrangements with Australia, Mexico and many other countries. We have to

look forward. You are now working in the new international treaty

parliament. I am sure were never used it to businessmen, they say,

give us a clue about your thinking. We need this type of information.

The future of our trading agreement with the European union is, we need

to be doing... We have to start exporting more. This country exports

27% of its GDP. The European average is 48. That is not good enough. That

is what we have to get back on the agenda and prove our export

performance. -- improve. Was Liam Fox right to describe UK businessmen

as fat and lazy and more interested in golf? I think if you read the

full context on his remarks, he was making that very important point. We

have not been exporting enough as a country. Only 11% of UK countries

actually export. Our prosperity as a country is based on as trading in

the past and we have to get back to that tradition. Iain Murray, Dubai

that argument that, quite reasonably, the Government cannot

give us too much information? -- do you buy? The reason they cannot give

us a running commentary is that they have nothing to comment on. Nobody

knows what Brexit means. Ian Stewart says quite reasonably that we need

to be a better trading and exporting nation, at the same time, this

Government has cut is from our biggest trading partner. There are

big issues here. The Government cannot take or keep the UK in the

single market without doing something about immigration. There

is a big problem there. How are they going to get round this? That is the

big question everyone will be and skiing. I agree we need to be more

positive. If we are coming out of the European Union, let's look at

the opportunities and make the best of a bad situation. The Government

have no idea what they are doing and cannot square the difficult circles

of single market, access to the EU, immigration and how much they pay

that. A lot of people would say, if your party leader had done more and

got the Labour vote out, we would not be where we are today. The

Labour vote did come out but some parts of the country voted to Leave

the European Union because they have concerns about immigration and how

their communities are being run by this Conservative Government. We

tried hard to put a positive slant on why we should stay in the

European Union. All of the positive stuff was dismissed as

scaremongering. That is an echo of 2014 independence referendum. We

need the best possible deal for the UK. Make sure Scotland's position is

protected. Making sure, crucially, Scotland stays within the United

Kingdom. That is what people voted for. Mike Russell from your party in

Scotland and representing the Scottish Government is down holding

talks tomorrow with David Davis. What are the nature of the

discussions you want to see? I went to see him and good luck to Mike. To

get more information from the UK Government. We have just heard from

Ian and the Conservative Party that Liam Fox wants to talk about trade

deals. We do not even have the basics of whether we will be part of

the single market. That is the basic. We're not talking about the

minutiae of this. That is a big information. I am hoping Mike

Russell will be more successful than we have been in parliament trying to

pry out these bigger details. Think about the impact on universities,

environment, a whole range of areas we have not heard anything about. We

have heard a lot of rhetoric from your Government and Edinburgh. Is it

reasonable to be able to dot the eyes and cross the Tees? This is not

about doing that. Thiss these are big substantial issues. EU nationals

and trying to give business more confidence. A lot more leadership

from the Scottish Government to did not have powers over our

relationship than the Government to actually has those powers. Your

party is on record as being the most pro-European party. We are not with

your party wants to be now. From your point of view, the Liberal

Democrat point of view, does the UK means the best of what you would

make is a bad job? We do not know where we are going. Three months

after the referendum, nothing from the Government at all. Even setting

terms of where we would like to be. I think the people of the country,

Scotland in particular, are blind to actually where we're going to go.

That is why many have argued that what ever comes out of the

negotiations, when and if article 50 is activated, that should be put to

the people for a referendum. I think that is justified. We are getting a

running commentary it does that David Davies and Liam Fox have been

designed from Downing Street. The running commentary is the personal

views of the Ministers that we should be relying upon. Even in my

place, we have had a letter from a minister asking our opinions about

where we should be going per Brexit. Not a briefing from the Minister.

One of the big differences is that we had, from the Treasury, the top

areas of where they are going to be a discussion and there was

parliamentary scrutiny about that. Nothing is happening from the

Government about that. If we think we're going to be a vacuum for the

next couple of years, I think the parliament and the people will

become and rightly so. Finally, you believe before any deal

on Brexit is ratified that there needs to be a second referendum or a

general election? If there is a general election

first, that will give us a strong signal. But the Brexit eel will have

to be ratified by the British people -- deal. If there is any

backtracking on NHS funding access to the single market, all the things

that were promised, is not going to be guaranteed by the deal, then the

people of this country should have the opportunity of ratifying this

deal. Everybody, thank you very much for

joining me. Some information, the unsolicited and from the --

intervention we had there, we at 2.8 that Tottenham are playing Monaco

tonight. And other football teams are

available. Thanks, David. Let's go back briefly to the Named Persons

issue. You think this is a difficult one for the Scottish Government.

I do. It is unusual for the Scottish Government, the SNP, to be on the

wrong side of public opinion. They are on the wrong side of SNP opinion

on Named Persons. Their own supporters seem to be against it.

They are doing a lot of blaming of pressure groups and the media and so

on, that is part of politics. Liz Smith says it cannot be the same

legislation because some of it has been knocked down. James Dornan and

John Swinney appeared to be seen, it will be much the same apart from a

few technical things. Who's right? They might be saying the same thing.

Liz Smith was saying the legislation as a whole cannot go forward because

one part of it has been removed by the Supreme Court. James Dornan was

saying we will fix that bit and the rest will follow. It will get the

point where the legislation goes forward. The bigger issue is that it

shows no sign of being any more popular. There are big question

marks as to the effectiveness of it. Could you work out what Labour's

policy is supposed to be? I struggled with that. The problem

with Labour is that ideologically it agrees with the SNP on lots of

things. As the SNP agreed with Labour on lots of things when Labour

were in power. That has been the problem with them.

You detect a subtle shift in the Scottish Government's position on

Europe. Yes, it's position has changed

significantly. After the referendum the position was we want to be in

Europe. It has now moved to single market access. The pro-independence

polling has not shifted by anything like what they expected it to since

the Brexit vote. We're pretty much 50-50 on independence, give or take.

The expected at this point in the game they would be seeing numbers

like 62% in favour because of breakfast -- exit. -- 60%.

Thank you very much for being with us this afternoon, Andy.

Join us for First Minister's Questions tomorrow

We'll be back at the same time next Wednesday.