25/04/2012 Politics Scotland

Welcome to Politics Scotland. Coming up this afternoon: Trump the

Tycoon blows into Holyrood to castigate the Scottish Government's

policy on wind farms. Scotland, if you pursue this goal of these

monsters over Scotland, so got and will go broke. And here at

Westminster, questions about the government's economic competence

and political integrity on the day the economy goes back into

recession and the revelations over Donald Trump has said he was

"lured" into building a one billion pound golf resort in Scotland on

assurances that a nearby wind farm would not go ahead. I'm joined in

the studio now by our political commentator for this afternoon,

Professor John Curtice. Good afternoon. Good afternoon.

do thinks Alex Salmond might be concerned? Central to his vision of

how an independent Scotland will be successful, is the idea it will be

a renewable capital of the world. Part of that would beat Scotland's

reliance on wind power. Now we see one of those gentlemen who hitherto

has been quite supportive of Mr Salmond and bringing inward

investment into Scotland, the type Scotland would need to five

economic league, now turning around to say if you pursue this policy,

it will be economically damaging he says because people do not like the

sight of them. So there is no doubt that mixed are summoned will

doubtless want to brush this off but a well known businessman who

has been willing to invest in Scotland saying, this thing that is

central to your vision for an economic t successful Scotland is

the wrong path, is something politically of a problem. Do think

he he is helping to change the debate on wind farms, which had

often been put forward as a great saviour for Scotland? It he will

raise question-marks. There have been others and areas where the

idea of putting wind farm has been thought of as a unattractive. What

is also true and what makes this argument important is that what Mr

Trump is objecting to is the proposal for an offshore wind farm

relatively close to the golf course he has invested in. Some people

anticipate that whatever people thought about them on land, for

some it is the idea of having them across the hills of Scotland and

being unsightly, people may be left -- less concerned that having them

offshore. Insofar as perhaps there was some hope that offshore wind

might be more acceptable than onshore wind, Mr Trump has

indicated that is not necessarily the case. As we will see, it raises

questions for Alex Salmond and the former First Minister who Mr Trump

says made promises. Insofar as promises might have been made by a

previous administration, Mr Salmond would not consider him bound to

that. It was a concision - might decision of the Scottish government

to allow Mr Trump to go ahead with the golf course and it is a

decision the Scottish government will have to make as to whether the

proposal for the wind farm of that golf course is also going to go

ahead. To that extent, the decision to allow this to go ahead is in the

Scottish Government's in-tray and they cannot avoid it - a

politically difficult decision. So, Mr Trump gave evidence to the

energy committee at Holyrood this morning and here is a flavour of

what happened. The fact is that I built, and they

brought some magazines a long, I build what I said I was going to

built, and beyond, I have spent a tremendous amount of money get free

building what many are already considering bake greatest golf

course in the world. I don't want to see it destroyed by having it

11th monstrosities bill looming over it, literally one mile away.

It is actually land-based Because when you are talking about one mile,

you were talking about land-based. This is a test centre where they

put up all different types of windmills. At least if you took the

best looking one, of which there are none, and you put up 11

identical ones, but this will be all different ones. It is a

redundancy because it is done all over the place. By the way, many

countries decided they do not want wind because it does not work

without massive subsidies, it kills massive amounts of birds and

wildlife and there are lots of other reasons. It is an inefficient

form of energy that, when you need it most, you don't get it because

the windows and blowing when you need it most. For Scotland, almost

most important league, they are so unattractive, so noisy and

dangerous that, if Scotland does this, I think Scotland will be in

serious trouble. I think you will lose your tourism industry to

Ireland and lots of other places who are laughing at was Scotland is

doing.... You detail the concerns about the proposed offshore wind

farm developments in Aberdeen show. There are a number of Commons I

would like to draw to your attention. You say the Scottish

government has an obligation to honour its contract so and you go

on to say that Scotland, at the highest ministerial level,

encouraged me with a overwhelming promises, public statements and

various offers to support. Can I ask you what were these promises

that were made to you and when where they made and he made them?

When I first came to Scotland, my mother was born on the Isle of

Lewis so I know something about it, but when I first came to Scotland,

I had an option to buy this piece of land. I was going to buy it and

I hope there was going to be a big wind farm built off the almost 2000

acres of land we are talking about. I said, that is OK but I will not

build there. I spoke to Jack O'Connell at the time and there

were people talking about putting good tunes that I so cherish and we

now call the great tunes of Scotland that have got all these

great awards and we have been very careful environmentally, but we

were going to go. We said, OK we will not build here we will go

somewhere else and not by this land. We actually had a great piece of

land in Ireland and it wasn't my first choice but it was a great

piece of land. If you remember, there was a big fuss and I was

going to build in Ireland because of the fact the wind farm was going

to be built fairly near our course in Scotland. As Jack McConnell said,

it would not be built and his people were telling George or might

people that, it will not happen. They talked about the Ministry of

Defence not approving it because it had something to do with their

radar and the shipping lanes, because it is near Aberdeen. They

said it would not happen and then it totally disappeared. Based on

that, nothing in writing, I decided to go forward. In the meantime,

Alex Salmond, when I discussed it with him towards the beginning, he

pooh-poohed it and said, you have a Ministry of Defence problem and

shipping lane problems, I would not worry about that. I went forward

and have invested tens of millions of pounds, I have completed ahead

of the schedule, I have built something that is spectacular and

it will be great for Scotland her and for Aberdeen and for everything.

After I have invested this tremendous amount of money, all of

a sudden, this really obnoxious and ugly wind farm appears, which is

worse than a wind farm because they will have differed looking

windmills. It will look like a bad version of Disneyland. So, I felt

betrayed because I invested my money based on statements that were

made to me and then I get a letter from Alex Salmond a short time ago

on April 12th and in one of his parts of the letter, "as I

explained, the policies of one government do not bind its

successor" so what he is saying is if Jack told me that it was not

going to happen and people in the administration tell you that, they

are not bound by it. Lots of very smart people with a lot of money

are looking to invest in different parts of the world and when they

see how I have been treated, they will not invest in Scotland because

when you make a statement that, just because one administration

says something... It if Jack McConnell says to me and his

representatives say to us that it will not happen, and then it goes

away and then I'd build and invest all this money and then it re-

emerges, I do not think that is fair to an investor. It is clear it

is a matter of great importance that the development did not go

ahead. I told them I would build in Ireland. But the question is, if it

also important to you, why did do not seek something more than just a

verbal assurance? I didn't think it was necessary because they talked

about something that to do with the Ministry offence -- Ministry of

Defence. They also talked about the shipping lanes and that has always

been a big problem. The Ministry of Defence has recently come out

against the wind farm. So, I feel very good about that but I was told

a that a while ago. I did not think it was necessary. Alex Salmond

mentioned it in the same way. When they say the Ministry of Defence is

Dave -- against it, what do I need? So they yurt me in and I spend the

money and now I might regret it. -- they you'd me in. When you proposed

the development back in 2006, 2000 and salmon, we were in a different

economic time -- 2007. The economic circumstances are different today.

If you change your mind about the development, or you are looking for

is an excuse to withdraw and it is a face saving exercise. How do you

feel about that? The Times today quoted Alex Salmond who said we are

satisfied with what we have done. I have invested tens of millions of

pounds with no debt on the site. No mortgage, no financing, no nothing.

Unlike most other projects going down the Tube, I have invested tens

of millions of pounds into my close to 2000 acre site. I have created

something magnificent. Some people and myself considerate the best

golf course in the world and that is what I said we were going to do

because we had the canvas to do it. I'm looking forward to preceding

and I want to build a hotel and I want to build further. We are very

rich as an organisation and substantial but this is a small job

for me. It is important. My mother was born in Scotland and it is

important for me but it is not a big job. You know that as soon as

this horrendous idea of these 11 all different colours, different

styles and looks windmills... One other thing, now it is one mile

away. When I first got involved, they would 10 miles away and then

three miles away. Now it is one mile away. As this gentleman told

me a little while ago, one mile isn't really at sea, it is really

on land. This is the equivalent of a 70 storey building, 11 of them,

and each one different. There is not a man or woman sitting here who,

if they were on my position and they were enticed into making an

investment because of the beauty of the site and the views and all of

those things and then after I have spent my money they can and

announce this atrocious plan. I just have to tell you one other

thing, wind is not a good form of energy and it does not work without

subsidy. So I think this is just an observation I make as a businessman

who has done well. You have to be very careful because if the UK ever

takes away your subsidy, you have One final question, which is only

fair to put to you, and that is both Jack McConnell and the current

first minister, Mr Salmond, deny they gave you these assurances.

have heard that and I note Mr Salmond is denying other things

today not related to this. should we believe you? Because he

is denying other things today. He is denying everything. Obviously,

they even said I wanted windmills. Somebody said that. Who would want

them? I was always opposed to them. They asked me if I would write to -

- in appropriate areas. I believe Hydro for Scotland is great and you

should expand that. Wave technology is great and there should be

expanded. But I think you are going to destroy your coastlines. Jack

McConnell told me that Alex Salmond told me -- scoffed at the idea at a

dinner in York. By the way, this man was there. We had a dinner, we

talked hours, we talked about windmills. Who would believe we

would talk about windmills? When I originally bought this site, when I

heard when mills were going to be there, I would have built in

Ireland. I have never heard anyone complain that the Scottish

government... I would appreciate if you could give us an idea of

anything that your organisations have about how we might meet these

renewable targets to include the concerns you have around wind.

a practical standpoint, York C02 targets are absolutely ridiculous.

China is decimating the atmosphere, they are decimating what is going

on in the air. Your targets are less than 1%, if that. And yet

China, where you bite your unattractive industrial wind per

Bines, is decimating the atmosphere. Here you are destroying the

financial well-being of Scotland, destroying it, in order to meet

phoney and totally random at the Co 2 targets. You have a company that

is making carbines, and by the way, turn at a door making turn bines

and getting Scotland to pay them a lot of money, but China is

decimating the atmosphere and doing so much damage that there is

nothing that you can do at all to bring it back by your so-called

wind initiative. Renewable, again, fine. Wind, a fine, if it is in the

right location. For you to the setting targets when China and

other countries are decimating the atmosphere is very foolhardy.

have the biggest poll of all last year. The SNP campaigned strongly

during the campaign on a policy of delivering the equivalent of 100 %

Renault -- renewables. Surely you can agree that the overwhelming

vote for the current government is in support of that policy. It is

you who is out of touch with public opinion. Excuse me, that is because

the public was not given the fact by you or Alex Salmond. If he were

smart, he would stop this now because what is happening to

Scotland is going to be terrible. This is the same thinking that gave

you are my cry he where they let him out of prison... It is true.

This is the same thinking. He would be dead within two weeks. He was

seen running in the park last week. This is of topic. As far as jobs

are concerned, jobs are created the your industrial Turbo lines. I

don't use the word renewables could I feel strongly about certain

renewables... On the industrial turn Bines, jobs are being created

in other countries. Very few jobs are being created here. Any jobs

that are being created here are more than offset by it what you

will lose in your most in port -- important industry, which is

tourism. I feel very strongly about that. The few jobs you will create

will be offset to a much larger extent by the jobs you will lose in

terms of... One thing that happened last week, we did not really want

to get into it too much, but this is an appropriate time, we were

approved for a beautiful little staging area up front on the road

for a security house. Beautiful, elegant, we got nice compliments,

everything was good except for one thing: Flagpoles. They are one-

tenth the size of the windmills. The reason the flagpoles were not

approved was, I am quoting, an acceptable impact on the bridge

will amenity of the area. -- visual amenity. They are one-tenth the

size of the are deterred by his. With that being said, we have a

tremendous investment in this development and I would love to be

so -- proceed with it. I cannot proceed if the hotel will be

looking into industrial turbines, and no one else would if you were

in my position. If the job is terminated, I would immediately

precede with hotel. I have to tell you, my project is a much bigger

project, we are talking about �750 million when it is finished. My

project is a much bigger project than the other one which I heard

was �60 million. Then I see 200, I see different numbers, I don't

think they know what it is, if they want to build it. But I seek 60 and

I see 200, but my project is 750 potentially. I will start on the

hotel immediately if I hear that that horrendously located wind farm

will not be built. Let's speak to our political

correspondent in Holyrood now. Interesting what Mr Trump was

saying. What's keeping his intervention has achieved?

certainly created a good deal of controversy which is something that

Donald Trump specialises in, at least he is good at that as he is

at creating hotels and golf resorts around the world. There has also

been a lot of laughter today. This was perhaps a bit more Holly wood

than Holyrood. I have not seen one quite as busy and charged in all

the time I have been covering the Scottish Parliament. If I was to

pick out one of the lighter moments, it was when Donald Trump was a

challenge and asked, where is your evidence? And Donald Trump replied,

I am the evidence. Listening to that, it was amusing in some parts,

it was a circus, but how damaging the think it was bought Alex

Salmond whammy here of the dinner discussions? Donald Trump has

certainly made some serious allegations. He has declined not

one but two first ministers, saying he would not have gone ahead with

his golf resort if he had not had private assurances from both Jack

McConnell and Alex Salmond, both as first minister, but there would be

no wind development near his golf resort. Of course there is a

planning application for of short- term buy-ins which should be seen

from the many estate. Donald Trump says it that goes ahead, he will

not go ahead with his hotel development. Alex Salmond and Jack

McConnell have both strongly denied giving such assurances. Yet at a

dinner in New York or elsewhere. One of those who was at the

committee today asking the questions is the MS P Patrick

Harvey, co-leader of the Scottish Green Party. What did you make are

the allegations that Donald Trump made today? Most of Mr Trump's

evidence was pretty thin, pretty laughable from my point of the year.

But the allegation that has been made was Mr Trump saying one thing

and Lord McConnell and Mr Salmond saying another. I don't think we

are in a position to judge. There is clearly nothing enlightened. Is

something irresponsible was said at the level -- at 11:30pm after a

glass or two, some irresponsible small-talk that would be one thing,

but it would be quite wrong because a first minister cannot prejudice

the outcome of a future planning application in that way. It would

be entirely inappropriate to do so. Your point was that even if the

assurances had been given, Mr Trump is experienced enough and well

enough advised by lawyers to know that the assurances could not have

meant anything. Of course it could not amount to anything. He would

know about. In his written submission to the committee, he

said the Scottish government must honour its contract. There is no

way that a small tour conversation like this could be described as a

contract Evette it took place. I am perfectly prepared to believe that

no such obligation was given. wider attack was on the CO2 targets

we have in Scotland. He thinks they are rubbish and is not convinced

that climate change is man-made. He thinks wind turbines are ugly and

inefficient and will destroy the Scottish economy. I don't think he

is a particularly pretty either, but it is very difficult to have a

conversation at a serious level with anybody about energy policy

when they wholeheartedly reject that mainstream science. We have to

begin together. What do we wanted to achieve? Affordable, a reliable

supply and as close as we can get to zero car then. Renewables is the

only way to achieve that. Thank you very much. One of the other

remarkable features of the session today was that it seemed to die

together all the big controversy is of our time. We had mention of

adults are McGahey's release, the Leveson Inquiry, Rupert Murdoch, as

well as the debate on the referendum on independence, the

future of Rangers Football Club also got mention that the end. Mr

Trump said he might buy it! Leads to turn our attention to the

Leveson Inquiry. The got us -- the Scottish government has confirmed a

call was scheduled between the first minister Alex Salmond and the

UK culture secretary. But it said the conversation about News

Corporation's bid of four control of BSkyB did not alter many take

place. In an interview with our political correspondent, Mr Salmond

dismissed calls that there should be resignations over the issue.

There is a legal responsibility and the Sega two it is a... Labour

better go back to there are full This shows there is an

inappropriate level... This government will always argued on

behalf of jobs and investment. Secondly, any politician I have

ever known tries to get the press to support them. That is part of

their business and politics. That was first minister Alex

Salmond. Let's turn to Professor John Curtis from Strathclyde

University. Interest in what the first minister was saying. Is he

riding the storm well? In truth, it is not that big a storm for him.

There is a general problem. Any politician, p 8 Labour,

Conservative or nationalist, it does not look that the Lib Dems

have had close relations to Murdoch, but any politician who has had any

connection with Mr Murdoch within the relatively recent past is in

truth embarrassed ever since the phone hacking controversy blew up

back in the summer of last year. Mr Salmond is caught in the back of

that. If one goes through what was released yesterday in terms of Mr

Salmond, it looks as though he indicated willingness to talk to

the Culture Secretary, to express his view about the BSkyB bid. At

the end of the day, one might say the first minister is entitled to

try and contact the government to lobby in favour. More broadly, I

expect many people would expect the Scottish government to stand up for

what it regards to the Scottish interests. The argument is whether

or not to allow BSkyB to take over. The second thing, which some people

might regard as more distasteful, and which Mr Salmond has openly

admitted, is that he was courting the support of the Sun newspaper in

advance stop the Scottish election last year. That is clear from e-

mail messages. Mr Salmond was very keen. Mr Salmond is saying that

that is part of the game of politics, which is true, but I'm

not sure if it is the part that the public like. I don't know whether

It shows how Mr Salmond was to secured the support of these

international newspapers and in particular the sun? He clearly

regarded getting the backing of the press as crucial. Mr Murdoch in his

evidence this morning, has denied that the newspapers are that

influential and although the sun may have said once that it is what

won it, he has denied that is so. You may say that he would say that

but, in truth, all politicians preferred to have the press on

their side. To that extent, they are all courting it but whether all

politicians are up to concerned about courting the press, I so but

-- suspect that is also to as well but Alex Salmond was also keen in

the same way that the Labour Party was disappointed when the Sun

switched to the Conservatives in the general election. Let us turn

our attention to a hugely important subject, the UK economy. It is in a

double dip recession. There is no doubt that the UK government is

learning that it never rains but palls. Ever since the Budget that

George owes borne presented last month, there has been political

trouble -- George Osborne. The government has said their policies

were set up to avoid a double-dip recession. Some economists have

their doubts about the figures and they get revised periodically but

at the moment, Britain has met the criteria for recession in that we

have had to quarters for no growth. That is embarrassing at a time when

the Conservatives political standing is in trouble and the

public's doubts about the way the economy is being handled is being

seat in. To that extent, the argument that it is all Labour's

fault is no longer defending the government with regards to economic

back news. -- bad news. To Westminster and while the

economy was on the agenda, David Cameron was also forced to defend

the Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, following the revelations that the

levers an inquiry yesterday. -- the Leveson inquiry. Let us turn our

attention to the Culture Secretary. We now know that throughout the

time the Culture Secretary was supposed to be acting in an

impartial manner, he and his office were providing a constant flow of

confidential information to News Corporation about statements to be

made in this House in advance, his private discussions with the

regulators and his discussions with opposing parties. Having seen the

163 pages published yesterday, is the Prime Minister seriously trying

to tell us that the Secretary of State was acting as he should of

done in a transparent, impartial and fair manner? I said at the

inquiry. The terms of reference of the inquiry are agreed by the

leader of the Liberal Democrat Party and the leader of the Labour

Party. I believe that to step in and try and prejudge that inquiry

Let me be clear. Lord Justice Leveson has made that precise. This

morning. Let me read to the House what he has said. Perhaps the House

would like to listen. Let us hear what the Prime Minister has to say

and then the questioning can continue. Not Justice Leveson said

this morning that it is very important to hear every side of the

story before drawing conclusions. Then he said that although he has

seen requests all other inquiries and investigations and, of course I

do not seek to constrain Parliament, it seems to be that a better course

would be to allow the inquiry to proceed. Having set up this inquiry

and having agreed with this inquiry, he should listen to this inquiry.

Mr Speaker, Lord Justice Leveson is responsible for a lot of things but

he is not responsible for the integrity of the Prime Minister's

government. In case he has forgotten, that is his

responsibility as the Prime Minister. It beggars belief that

the Prime Minister can defend the Culture Secretary because he was

not judging this big, he was helping the bid. Two days before

the statement to the House on 25th January, the Culture Secretary's

office was not only colluding with News Corp to provide information in

advance, they were hatching a plan to ensure, "it would be a game over

for the opposition" to the bait. Does the Prime Minister really

believes that is how a judge and his advisers are supposed to act?

The Leader of the Opposition clearly doesn't think that what

Lord Leveson this morning said matters. Let me remind him what he

said yesterday. He said this, "I think that it is right that the

Leveson inquiry takes its course." He went on. "it is important that

it is to the bottom of what Labour did, they Conservatives did and

that we get to the bottom of that". In the morning, he set out is very

clear position but in the afternoon, he cannot resist the party

political bandwagon. Totally, totally, totally... I said the

Prime Minister must be heard, and now the Leader of the Opposition

must be heard. Both will be heard however long it takes. Totally

pathetic answers. He is the Prime Minister. If he cannot defend the

conduct of his own ministers, his ministers should be out the door.

He should fire them. He doesn't even try to defend the Secretary of

State and what he did. The Secretary of State told this House

on 3rd March in answer to a question and I quote, "today we are

publishing all the consultation document, all the submissions we

received, all the exchanges between my department and News Corporation",

but he did not. 160 Freepages have now emerged. The Prime Minister

does not defend him over giving confidential information to one

party in the case, he doesn't defend him over collusion, is he

really going to defend him about not being straight with this House

of Commons? Let me make absolutely Clare -- Clear that the Culture

Secretary has my full support... short time ago, Harriet Harman

accused Jeremy Hunt of backing News Corp's bid to take over BSkyB

instead of backing -- looking at it objectively. Let us stay in London

and speak to David Porter who is standing by at portcullis House.

Thanks for joining me. A lot of talk of tycoons today. Here we have

Mr Trump in Scotland and Mr Murdoch appearing before the Leveson

inquiry in London? Yes, no shortage of drama and good, hard news

stories at Westminster and the environment today. I have two

guests with me and no shortage of topics to talk about. I am joined

by Margaret come and, the shadow Scottish Secretary, -- Magaret

Curran. The opposition were unable to put a representative for wood.

Before we go on, There are some very important economic news

stories today and presumably something you will be discouraged

by. Officially the UK is in recession. Yes, depressing news

with a direct consequence of the Tory Government's failure to tackle

the economic problems we face and particularly experienced --

particularly relevant for young unemployed and women unemployed.

The government has to change course and the Scottish government has to

step up and do more more effectively to help families who

are desperate the study -- struggling. Is it time for the

government to repay up its economic strategy? Yes. We have been warning

about a double dip recession since 2010. Now we have won driven by a

fall in construction output which is why we have been calling for

direct capital investment which is the most effective way to grow the

economy. This government has not listened and now ordinary people

are paying the price. The Coalition government has always argued that

you have to get the deficit down before you can start on the economy.

When people like their BBC and the venture capitalist organisations...

They should listen. We need to get the construction sector moving

again and jobs back into the economy and out of this recession

in double-quick time. This medicine is killing the patient. Margaret

Curran, the Coalition says that if your party had not left Britain in

such a bad set date, week would not be where we are now. This crisis

was made in Wall Street not Downing Street. Borrowing has now increased

by �160 billion so it is a failing strategy and the people who are

suffering are ordinary hard-working families. It is time the government

changed course. The talk down here is very much an of what is

happening at the Leveson inquiry and the evidence by the to Murdochs.

Are we seeing from what we have heard, AC change in the way

politicians and the media interact with each other? These are seismic

events in Scotland and Westminster. It is deeply depression for someone

like me to see a Tory minister and answer his critics and we see Alex

Salmond refusing to do that in Scotland and not be accountable. At

least Alex -- Jeremy Hunt did that. We know about the exchanges of e-

mails. He said he never made the call but we need to know what he

intended to say but was only called off because Jeremy Hunt made the

announcement the next day. We need to know the extent of lobbying and

collusion in Alex Salmond's of this and why he is using the office of

the first minister to be a lobbying agent for Murdoch. Therefore, your

first minister in Scotland has questions to answer as well. This

is crass opportunism. Let us understand the facts. This is a

decision on the takeover of BSkyB. There is nothing the Scottish

government could offer. Why did you offer? The decision was taken out

of the House of Vince Cable. Jeremy Hunt expected... No representations

were made to him either. But if a large investor wanted to talk to

the Scottish government, they are entitled to do so and the Scottish

government is entitled to have those discussions. The problem

Labour has is that they are so desperate to pin anything on Alex

Salmond, they are losing sight of the fact it is the right thing to

do to protect new investment and the thousands of jobs in Scotland.

That is not adequate. No one is saying the first minister shouldn't

fight to protect jobs but he should not do inappropriate lobbying on

behalf of one organisation as serious questions still pertain to

that. Why did he think it was proper for him to phone Vince Cable

on as he suggested he would do and also Jeremy Hunt are to lobby for

one side. Why did he do that? Can I ask you, do not think Alex Salmond

should come to make his statement? Would that not have been fitting?

It is right and proper that the Scottish government explains in

full today exactly the circumstances that no lobbying was

made to Vince Cable or Jeremy Hunt and that the proper discussion with

major investors... De except that Alex Salmond is accountable to the

Scottish Parliament and that it has the right to have answers? Why

should the Scottish Parliament get less than Westminster gets? There

is no collusion. Yes there is. We are not getting information from

Alex Salmond that Parliament is getting from Jeremy Hunt. There are

a couple of e-mails which mention We have first minister's questions

tomorrow. Half-an-hour is not enough. Surely ms appeased have the

right to question Alex Salmond? On that principle, is that right?

he is able to construct a sensible... We are not independent

yet. Margaret, don't harangued... Quick question to both of you.

can seem be a motion that this issue raised is. Very briefly,

first of all, Margaret, I'll be going to be in a new frame? Do we

need more transparency, do we need to know more about the relationship

between the press and politicians? The first principle of that is

accountability to Parliament, but ultimately accountability to the

people we represent. When the Leveson Inquiry is finished and the

work is produced, there will be a great number of recommendations,

many of which will be eminently sensible. Most will be implemented?

Mate -- quickly, I suspect. A thank you for joining me. Thank you for

what we can only describe as a spirited discussion. That gives you

some indication of the strength of feeling about this issue in

Westminster. Earlier we covered Donald Trump,

Mount -- Donald Trump's session with the parliamentary committee.

Let's cross to our Edinburgh studio now. Good afternoon and thank you

for joining us, it is in. We have been watching the evidence says and

there. I saw you in evidence behind Mr Trump, and we saw some of the

protests outside when he arrived. The think it helps or hinders your

organisation to have such a controversial figure as Mr Trump

involved in the debate was marked I think it is helping us a lot.

has really raised the profile bought all the communities who feel

persecuted by this issue across Scotland. I know you feel very

strongly about this, but he not think that what Mr Trump says could

be regarded as may be rather overblown, that wind farms were

destroyed Tote -- tourism? He has a very valid point. When councils and

the Scottish government are allowing wind farms to beat sighted

ever closer to national parks and places like the part in air show

that there is a real danger to tourism. We have been it hearing

from people in the committee that the wind farms were actually

increasing tourism. I think that is the case in at Whiteleys, which is

a very big wind farm south of Glasgow. They have created a good

tourist attraction that. It is a great place for people to go

jogging and see the wind turbines, but I don't think that in the wild

lands over Scott lined -- Scotland where people go for peace but they

want to find a visitor centre. It is like putting Alton Towers over

Scotland. The feeling was very much in evidence by the two opposing

parties outside Parliament there. We have pictures of that. Mr Trump

says Scollan will go broke if the UK with draws the wind farm subsidy.

Is that true? What about Mr Sam and talks about, the re

industrialisation has gone and? Scotland has never been an

industrial nation. The central belt may have had quite a lot of

industries and a bit around the cities, but Scotland is famous for

its wild plants and its beautiful scenery. People come to Scotland

for the tourism industry and expect to experience that. I really don't

agree with tit Brodie at all. thank you very much for talking to

Let's head to Holyrood and get reaction from there. Done well

Senate from the SNP, the deputy convener, and Lewis Madonna from

Labour. Good afternoon and thank you for joining us. Mr Fraser, D B

Mr Trump's appearance was a good? There was a lot of heat and colour.

I think Mr Trump does have a fair points to make and he does

represent many people who share his concerns in the community. He does

represent a lot of people in rural Scotland with legitimate issues. Of

course there is a danger when you invite someone like him, because of

his celebrity status, but that has the issue, but what his appearance

in Parliament has done is brought a lot of wider public interest in the

whole debate, not just around wind power, but around renewable energy.

I don't think that is a bad thing that we are engaged in the wider

public on a very important political decision that we are

taking for our country's future. chairman of the committee, what do

you think the killer line was? Was Mr Trump, did he Mail Alex Salmond,

all was that not the case? Mr Trump was very clear in his view that the

assurances were given to him up by Mr Salmond, and by Mr McConnell. It

is fair to say both Mr McConnell and Mr Salmond denied that. It is

not a matter for myself for other committee members to act as judge

and jury on that. But there is an interesting panel there be to eat -

- parallel between what is happening in London with the

Leveson Inquiry and what is being exposed in Mr Salmond's dealings

with Mr Murdoch. Perhaps Mr Salmond needs to choose his friends more

carefully in the picture. Is there a lesson for Mr Salmond when it

comes to getting involved with big tycoons, whether that be Mr Murdoch

or Mr Trump? The issue in terms of Mr Trump, and the same issue with

Mr Murdoch, the first minister is there to represent Scotland and its

interests are. In terms of the Leveson Inquiry and the issues that

came out today, in terms of the dealings with Mr Murdoch, the first

minister was looking to protect the interests of Scottish workers. As

we heard earlier, 6,800 workers are based in Scotland and work for

BSkyB. If the first minister did not go in up to speak to BSkyB and

Rupert Murdoch about protecting and securing the jobs and trying to

grow the jobs, he would be accused by the opposition of failing to

protect Scottish interests. The opposition have to be very careful

what they are asking for. They say the first minister has denied the

opportunity to speak to multi- millionaires, high-profile

businessman, to protect Scottish interest, or do we leave them alone

and let the Investment go elsewhere? We have to be very

careful because what the first Minister was doing with both dental

man was trying to protect the investment that we have already got

in Scotland and further commitments to invest in the future. We are

looking at taking forward the issues. The first minister of

Scotland is entitled to speak in whether he feels would be relevant

to secure and increase investment in Scotland. It is rather a plague

on all your houses when it comes to this conflated issue. The former

First Minister Jack McConnell was brought up, his promises to Mr

Trump, and of course they have been talking about Labour's in bald man

People realise the decisions were made when Alex Salmond was first

minister. Donald Trump was talking today about the assurances that

Alex Salmond gave him. There is confusion about two different

issues, namely the proper responsibility of all polisher

since to protect jobs in the economy with improper use of

political office and power to lobby on behalf of a commercial

organisation. If John Wilson is confusing that, I can only take it

that Alex Salmond confuses it too. The evidence is there that Alex

Salmond has said things, been reported to say things, to Rupert

Murdoch and on promises. He should not have used the office of first

minister to make them. Thank you to everyone for joining me.

Back to the Leveson Inquiry and in the last few minutes, the News

Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch has been giving evidence. He has

been responding to questions on his support for the SNP.

Why did you support Mr Salmond's party? Well, it is a little

emotional, but I am attracted by the idea. I am not convinced and so

I said we should stay neutral on the big issue of.

That was Rupert Murdoch. Let's have some final thoughts in the company

of Professor John Curtis. John has been -- John, it has been a day at

tycoon's north and south of the border! It shows how difficult it

is for politicians to tread that tight rope. Indeed. It is one of

our contributors, sometimes politicians have to be careful

about the friends they keep. But when you make it friend of someone,

you sometimes do not realise until afterwards that it was unwise. It

is interesting to hear what Mr Murdoch said. He is sufficiently

sympathetic to the idea of an independent Scotland. He said he

remains to be convinced. There is a great consistency because he is

also someone who is not that keen on the due -- the European Union.

To some degree at least, some of the arguments that what happens to

Europe, some people say it Europe should not meddle in our affairs.

The arguments are a similar that the SNP used about London not

meddling in Scottish affairs. Some might understand why Mr Murdoch

Let's try and tie up these issues now. We have got the Scottish local

government elections next week and the Mail elections in London as

well. Mr Cameron will not be happy at this misery on these already bad

few weeks. The Conservatives are now in electoral trouble for the

first time since they came to power. This has happened at a very bad

time. The trip is the Conservatives never had I prospect north of the

border. They are not hoping to do much more than hang on to what they

have. The south of the border, they will lose seats, but they helped to

extend those losses. They have reason to believe that Boris

Johnson would beat Ken Livingstone. He may still do so, but the most

recent poll that came out yesterday paid his lead back to two points.

There must now be a concern that with the Labour Party within an

eight-point lead in Westminster opinion polls, maybe even Boris

Johnson's chances of returning mayor of Westminster are challenged.

There will not be any silver lining to what may be a disappointing set

of results for the Conservatives. Just a few weeks ago, people were

saying, will these be good enough for Mr Miliband to stem further Pep

-- further speculation about his Alternatively, if that does not

happen, will the contrast between what might be another disappointing

form north of the border... Beetroot this with a little more

than a week to go, we have very little idea what will play out.

councils to look out for? The won the SNP wants to focus on his

Glasgow. It will be extremely difficult for them to win. They are

not putting in the high quality campaign they need. Look for places

like Dundee and Perth. Given we have poor representation, most

councils will still be a honk and it will be negotiations afterwards

rather than votes on Thursday that will be crucial in determining who

runs Scottish local authorities. Thank you very much.

That is all we have time for. I will be back next week at the same