26/10/2016 Politics Scotland

Hello and welcome to Politics Scotland.

Coming up on the programme this afternoon.

Fishery leaders are holding talks with Government Ministers over

the implications of Brexit for their industry.

At Holyrood, Mike Russell will update the Scottish Parliament this

And here at Westminster, MPs are treated to the philosophical

thoughts of one Baldrick over Brexit.

Aapparently, it's all to do with a 'cunning plan'.

Fishing industry leaders in Scotland say they're encouraged by talks

they've held this morning in London with the UK Government

on the opportunities and challenges presented by Brexit.

The organisation, which campaigned for a Leave vote in June's

referendum, says control over British waters will bring

huge potential benefits to Scottish fishing.

Our political correspondent David Porter is at Westminster.

What has been happening, David? Gordon, fishing is one of those

industries which for many people in Scotland is iconic. They care very

much about what happens to the industry even though it does not

employ anything like the numbers it used to, especially the North East

of Scotland. People care very much about how the industry is doing. It

is no secret that for many years, the fishing industry has been quite

antagonistic about the way it feels it is treated by the EU, it feels

Scottish fishermen have been short-changed by the deal from the

Common Fisheries Policy. They campaigned and advocated leaving the

EU in the referendum and they were very pleased by the result. Since

then, they have been holding a series of meetings with meetings

than what Dashwood ministers in London and Scotland and today was

the latest round of those talks with ministers in London and they met the

environment Secretary Andrea Leadsom and the fishing Minister George

Eustis. They believe that Brexit, however it is negotiated, is better

than the situation they have at the moment. They believe that it will

give a situation whereby they can repatriate some of the powers over

is pushing back to the UK and they say that will be a good thing. In

their words, as far as they are concerned, they said they now have a

sea of opportunity for fishermen in Scotland.

Everybody understands the size of that prize, there is a great deal of

work to be done, especially in the production of a fitful Herbers

Management system. And also in the negotiating process. But we have a

very strong hand that is completely understood, of course, by the

Secretary of State. And we are now asking both governments for oils and

Scottish fishing, both relevant governments, to work together on

this because this is one of the best patches of maritime real estate in

the world. Their views, David, presumably more

welcome in Westminster than in Edinburgh? They will be hoping to

get some sort of deal with the Scottish government as well. Yes,

and you are right that the focus of attention this afternoon moves to

Edinburgh. They have got on it and after the meeting in London and they

are speaking to Mike Russell, the Brexit Minister in Scotland. They

say to some extent they are getting a hearing from both government and

they are pleased and they are hearing the signals. But this is the

easy part, they can go in and said this is what they would like, we do

not know what is on the table, negotiations have not begun. It will

get a lot more difficult when the UK has to negotiate with the other 27

EU countries. At the moment, the fishermen say what they want but

whether they will get that remains to be seen.

Keep asking in the sunshine, we will return to you later.

And the First Minister also met business leaders in Edinburgh this

morning to discuss the implications of Brexit on the Scottish economy.

Our political editor, Brian Taylor, has more.

What is the plan here? To get some sort of Alliance together? Yes, you

are right, a coalition was the word the First Minister used. She is

looking to persuade and cajole the UK government and the First Minister

-- in the first instance to see UK membership of the Common Market if

that is not feasible to allow a flexible Brexit, whereby Scotland

could maintain either membership or access to the European single

market. From the initial position of maintaining Scotland in the EU, it

is now focusing down on this question of single market axis. What

the First Minister was doing in addressing the business leaders were

saying that they could get on board with that campaign and from a Team

Scotland approach. In essence, she was urging their backing in

persuading the UK government. I think there is a real opportunity

to present to the UK government a unified Scottish position and all

Scotland coalition of support for the single market. And all Scotland

coalition of politicians, businesses, universities and a range

of others to resist a hard Brexit. I presume the Scottish government is

making some mileage from this talk of a special deal for the city of

London, the car industry, maybe Northern Ireland, why not us, I

presume? I think they are very much and these straws in the wind. The

one with perhaps the most substance would be Northern Ireland because of

the attempt to prevent their being a hard border between Ireland and

Northern Ireland because the absence of that hard border is absolutely a

key factor in the divine -- in the Good Friday Agreement and the peace

settlement generally. I think the building upon that, the Scottish

argument would be if there can be some form of flexibility for

Northern Ireland and so the Scotland there could be. Nicola Sturgeon is

looking for membership and access to the single market and that is a big

thing and it would have two factors. There has to be more power is

transferred from the UK government to enable Scotland to reach what

would be in effect an international deal, and to obey the rules of that

international deal on matters like health and safety and immigration.

Secondly, there would have to be talks in parallel with the European

organisations if we did in association with the EU itself, to

achieve that access full Scotland to the European single market. There

two talks, brands of negotiation, in parallel, is a big ask and the focus

must be probably on persuading the UK to recognise the case for some

sort of flexibility for Scotland. And he very much. -- thank you.

In the studio today, we have Moray Macdonald, former Director

of the Scottish Conservatives and now a PR executive

What do you make of this? It is strange, it could be we are waiting

to see what is definite and it could be this is just a lot of blowing off

steam, which do you think it is? That is a fair bit of blowing off

steam. We did not hear anything new from Nicola Sturgeon today, she

gathered a large group of business people together in Edinburgh. I

think what we saw was very much her trying to build up a Scottish

coalition in favour of her having, in favour of Scotland having a

strong and unified approach to the UK government. I guess what she

wants out of this. For the fishermen to go away? Strangely, the fishermen

is good and bad for her. In terms of fisheries, it is completely

dissolved -- completely devolved Scotland and has been a strange that

they do not get to represent the interests of Scottish fishermen in

the EU when their quota talks for example. It does seem bizarre Age UK

fisheries Minister represent Scotland. I was half joking. She

would presumably prefer it if the fishermen were on board with

everybody saying Brexit is a bad thing but you are right, this could

be huge new powers over not just fisheries but farming, coming to

Nicola Sturgeon's government. Yes, and that is one thing Nicole and her

government is very aware of. They wish Brexit was not happening and

they are campaigning to make it not happen, she is aware Brexit will

happen one way or another and part of the deal is to make sure Scotland

gets as much out of that as possible. There are a lot of obvious

ones like fisheries and agriculture, currently done at European level and

under devolution, those powers should go back to the Scottish

Parliament, but it is not guaranteed. It is interesting to

mention that because this is presented as all-or-nothing. Either

Scotland stays in the single market Nicola Sturgeon has an independence

referendum. But there is a lot of room in between that we were

probably see with places like Northern Ireland where the British

Government can say you can have a bit of this and the other and make

trial of immigration or whatever, without it being Scotland stays in

the single market as a headline and without it being a very bad deal for

Nicola Sturgeon. Yes, even under her worst-case scenario, a very hard

Brexit and no independence referendum, the Scottish Parliament

still gets a lot of powers, or should under most people's thoughts.

There is potential for further powers on that even without

independence, for example on some elements of immigration. You can see

why the UK government might allow student visas to be dealt with in

Scotland. For special circumstances. Don't go away, we will be back with

you later. Well, today, the Presiding Officer

of the Scottish Parliament has announced he's setting up

an independent commission Well, in the chamber this afternoon,

Mike Russell, the Scottish Minister for UK Negotiations on Europe,

is making a Ministerial Statement to update the Scottish Parliament

on actions which have been taken Reassuring our fellow EU citizens

about their future right to continue working here remains of vital

importance, Tory rhetoric balances their future against that of UK

citizens living in Europe, equally uncertain about their prospects.

Using human beings as bargaining chips cannot ever be justified. The

UK should take the lead and end this uncertainty now. The impact on EU

nationals living in the UK is just one of many problems the Brexit

voters created, all of which have been compounded by the reaction and

in action and confusion of the Conservative government at

Westminster. Our approach in contrast is to look for consensus,

establish clear priorities. And to propose solutions to those problems

in keeping with the democratic mandate that we have. A triple

mandate arising from the election in 2016, the vote on June 23rd and the

vote of this Parliament on June 20 eight. Since my appointment, I

pursued that mandate at every opportunity and I have met twice

with the UK breaks etc take David Davis and most recently on Friday,

along with the Secretary of State and colleagues have met with

Treasury ministers and the trade Secretary. I have been to Cardiff to

identify common ground with my Welsh counterpart and met with

representatives of the London Mayor and we have been engaged with the

Northern Ireland Executive. I have engage with Willie Rennie and

Patrick Rennie and look forward to meeting Kezia Dugdale and Ruth

Davidson. We had been pressing hard for the mechanism to deliver the

forum Altman and promised by the Prime Minister. The joint

ministerial committee met finally on Monday and the First Minister and I

with our counterparts in the devolved administrations attended

the meeting in Downing Street cared by the Prime Minister. It considered

the means by which a devolved administration could and should

engage with the UK government on the development of a negotiating

position for our future relationship with the European Union. This was a

long and overdue meeting but unfortunately it was in large part

hugely frustrating. In line with the wishes of this Parliament, the First

Minister set out Scotland's key interest in protecting our place in

the single market, continuing freedom of movement and protecting

the social and employment rights. She also pressed, with colleagues,

for more information on high-level negotiating stance of the UK

government and some indication of how it would take forward engagement

with the 27 remaining EU members. We know no more about the UK

government's approach now than we did and when we went into Downing

Street. We do not know whether the UK, it is in favour of membership of

the single market or the customs union by what relationship it and

that suits between the UK and the EU after Brexit and how and when these

decisions will be made. The session will meet more frequently with

another meeting promised for the New Year before the triggering of

Article 50. In context, the last meeting before this week was in

2014. It was agreed a subcommittee be

established. That will need for the first time early next month.

Following the proposal from the First Minister, agreement was

reached that a detailed work schedule will be established. This

timetable mix must ensure that issues are discussed in sufficient

time to inform the European subcommittees decision. Scottish

Government will take part in as many meetings as necessary in order to

ensure that is the case. I shall speak to David Davis later today

about these issues. Let me make it clear to Parliament, the Scottish

Parliament and the people of Scotland must be equal partners in

this multinational United Kingdom. We will not be simply a consul tea

or a stakeholder. Is not what the Parliament or the country asked us

to do. Is a huge amount of work to do to satisfy the Prime Minister's

on requirement for a UK approach and objective for negotiations before

she triggers article 50. Welsh First Minister said that time is against

us. There are only 18 weeks between the first meeting and the UK

Government's self-imposed march deadline. 126 days. We cannot afford

to lose a single one of them, given the vital importance of the task. At

task ensuring the UK and Scotland does not drive off the hard Brexit

Cliff. Monday made it clear there are no coherent UK plans at present.

But I has to be a Scottish plan, ideally want good for the UK as

well. Alongside our efforts to influence the United Kingdom to

adopt a soft Brexit with continued membership of the single market, we

will bring forward our own proposals to protect the interests of

Scotland, by the end of this year. A key part of those proposals will be

ways in which we can maintain access to the single market, even of the

rest of the UK leads. I have noted recent comments which suggest a

consensus position on the key issue of immigration may be possible. We

will continue to seek advice from the standing council to seek

agreement on this and other key issues. I remain open to proposals

from all other main parties. This Parliament gave ministers a mandate

to engage with other European nations and institutions to ensure

Scotland's voices heard. First Minister attended the Arctic Circle

assembly. The Cabinet set to culture and tourism has met with the

Taoiseach, the Ireland Foreign Secretary, as well as French,

Italian and Maltese ministers. We have met with the chief and deputy

chief ministers from Gibraltar. Fiona Hyslop and I visited Brussels

last week. We spent time the Scottish MEPs, as well as

negotiators from the European Parliament. The views of this

Parliament remain crucial to establishing the principles behind

our approach. My Cabinet colleagues and I have taken part in useful

debates. There will be a debate on the environment tomorrow. Members

will know the Scottish Government was elected with a clear mandate,

that the Scottish parliament should have the right to hold an

independence referendum if there was a significant and material change,

such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our well. That is a

direct quote from the manifesto on which we stood and one. We are now

faced with that spin -- specific scenario. We said we would prepare

the required legislation to enable a new referendum to be held, if it

became clear this was the only best way to protect our interests. Last

Thursday, we published a consultation of a draft Referendum

Bill. The draft Referendum Bill will be ready for publication should it

be in the opinion of the government the right way to proceed. The people

of Scotland voted to remain in the EU, an inescapable fact. Recognised

by every party in this chamber. We have sought and will continue to

seek to work with every party, to ensure the Democratic, economic and

social advantages of our engagement with an connection to Europe

continue to benefit us as a nation. There is much we can do together. We

can continue to seek answers from the UK Government on the most basic

of questions. We can continue to bring forward solutions to the

problems created by the Brexit fought. We can continue to assert

our right to be treated as an equal partner and we can, and we must,

come together to form an all Scotland Coalition to protect our

place in the single market, regardless of our views on the

constitution. And we can resolve to ensure the best outcome for Scotland

and all the people who live here. All of them, including those who

come from elsewhere. Thank you. Now, the Scottish Government is to

grant an automatic pardon to men who were convicted of same-sex

offences before laws Private sexual acts between adult

men were decriminalised in England and Wales in 1967,

but the law in Scotland was not Yesterday, the Justice Secretary,

Michael Matheson, told MSPs there would be an "automatic formal

pardon" for men convicted There are people in Scotland who

have criminal convictions for same-sex sexual activity, which is

no lawful. And we must right this wrong. Over the summer, I instructed

officials to look at the necessary steps that would need to be taken in

Scotland to correct this injustice. I can therefore advise Parliament

that we will introduce an automatic pardon for people convicted, so that

they know they are absolved filly of that conviction. We want to address

the injustice that people experienced simply because of their

sexual orientation. In circumstances that are now illegal. And the

granting of an automatic pardon is one way of achieving this.

Separately, it is the case that information on these convictions is

held on records maintained by Police Scotland and we have engaged with

Police Scotland over the summer to seek views on steps that can be

taken to write these historic wrongs. I have therefore instructed

my officials working in partnership with Police Scotland to determine

the practical steps required to establish a scheme that will allow

men convicted for actions that are now illegal to have those

convictions disregarded. This scheme will ensure that convictions for

activities that are now lawful are removed from central conviction

records. Where an offence is disregarded, a person will be

treated as not having been convicted of that offence. And so it would not

appear on, for example, disclosure checks. I know that Parliament will

want to work together to resolve these important issues. That is a

hugely welcome announcement. Nothing short of a historic moment for

Scotland to be a more equal and respectful country. The Minister

will be aware there are many men across the UK who have been

prosecuted, convicted and in some cases imprisonment, for being who

they are and who they love. Pardon is the very least the government of

the day can do. I hope he will forgive me for three quick

questions. Can the Minister confirmed this will be a blanket

pardon, for any gay or bisexual man who has been convicted of a crime

that no longer a crime? Can the Minister confirmed no legislation is

required for such a pardon and those affected need not apply to be

pardoned? Finally, the Scottish Government is not responsible for

these laws or prosecutions, convictions are that gay men faced,

but they could issue a formal apology which will go a long way

from many people and recognise they should never have accepted liability

for this in the first place. From many men, an apology is as important

as a pardon. And apology demonstrates they should never have

been convicted for a crime in the first place. It will be an automatic

pardon for those offences where individuals were convicted for

offences now lawful. We need a system in place to recognise... It

will take place on an automatic basis, for those who were convicted

for crimes which are now lawful. For the provision of an automatic

pardon, we will require legislation and which to do so. We will seek to

bring forward legislation at an early date in this Parliament. Over

the course of the next year at the very least, to make sure we make

progress on this matter swiftly. We will seek to make progress on

that as quickly as possible. I fully acknowledge the issue about the

writing of the wrongs for those who were convicted, some of whom were

imprisoned as a result of offences which they were convicted of and

which are now lawful. I think the issue of an apology is an

appropriate measure that government should give consideration to. In my

view, that would be best dealt with in a collective way when we look at

bringing forward further legislation. I will give that

serious consideration as including that in a package of measures.

I'm now joined by Andrew Tickell, Law lecturer at Glasgow's

Just a legal point, this regard that we heard Michael Matheson talking

about, that is a technical and legal term. What does it mean? Disregard

is more important than a pardon. If you're pardoned in law, it is the

penalty that is set aside, the prison term you might have faced. It

is not of much use. Disregard is important because that will take

these historic sexual offences off of peoples criminal records. It is

relieved that rather than the more charged language of pardon which

will be more important for men convicted under these offences. It

is a legal way of saying not just you are forgiven for these offences,

but you should never have been convicted of these offences in the

first place and indeed they are not offences. A pardon is an exercise of

Mercy. You're only merciful if they are guilty. Pardoning or set aside

the punishment. For many men who were convicted of this, they don't

want mercy, they want justice. A pardon in and of itself will not do

that. The need to be disregarded and taken out of the whole disclosure

process of a criminal record being retained. When the British

Government said they were sympathetic to this, but they trot

out a proposed bill from John Nicholson, the SNP MP, their

argument was that you can't have a blanket disregard because it could

end up with people who have been convicted of things which are still

offences. Michael Matheson is saying that will not happen. Is that

because there is the law is different in England than it is in

Scotland? It is difficult to follow Michael Matheson's point. You still

have a criminal record if you are pardoned of an offence. Unless you

get it is applied, it doesn't really are too much practical difference.

This is practically problematic because these old criminal

common-law offences didn't make any reference to consensual sex. The old

crime of suddenly or gross indecency didn't care whether men were

consenting or not consenting to sex, they were just recorded as one

issue. If the only record you have the case is the conviction or not

for a charge of suddenly, it is very hard on the basis of that to

discriminate between a loving couple charged with suddenly. This can

happen right now. It was brought in in England in terms of the Coalition

agreement of 2010. If the Home Secretary judges on the fact is,

looking at some evidence insofar as that has been retained, that it is

not somebody under 16 involved in that act and was a consensual set of

circumstances, but it is very difficult to distinguish between

harmless things. From what you have described as it being case by case,

and should it be discovered to be a case which is now lawful, in what

case is a problematic? It is not automatic. It is difficult to

discriminate between these two cases. The argument from John Nichol

and Westminster was that why should men who have been victims of an

injustice have to go through the embarrassment of proving to the Home

Secretary that there is was a case that was consensual. But there are

big practical difficulties. The Westminster Government can be

accused of lots of things, but the idea that there are not practical

differences discriminating between wrongdoers and those wrongly

persecuted by the law is difficult to do in practice. This is not

something they can just do and that is the end of it. Could be problems

down the line? Definitely. It will not be straightforward. Thank you.

Now let's speak to some MSPs at Holyrood.

I'm joined by: Ben Macpherson, from the SNP.

And Liam McArthur, from the Scottish Liberal Democrats.

Let's talk about Brexit. Is this situation really any different now

than it was a week ago? Of course, there were discussions on Monday and

that was an interesting moment where we found out the level of engagement

to the UK Government were prepared to have with the devolved

administrations, including the Scottish Government. There was a

clear outcome that the engagement was then. There is an interesting

development this morning about the First Minister calling for Scottish

society and business to get behind determination to stay in the single

market and is to be collaborative and constructive in making sure we

can stand up for Scotland's interests in this very challenging

time. But nothing has changed, in terms of any further understanding

of what Brexit involves or indeed any progress of the Scottish

Government's declared ambition to stay in the single market. Nothing

has really changed, has it? Of course, the developments of Brexit

will be revealed by the UK Government soon and they have set

that deadline before March 2017 for it happen. As with the rest of the

country, we are still waiting to see what Brexit will mean and it would

be good of the UK Government could come forward with more detail. The

Scottish Government since June 24 when the First Minister stud outside

Bute house had made their position clear, and the SNP has made our

position clear that we determined to protect Scotland's best interests,

doing all we can to argue against a hard Brexit and make sure it does

not jump off the hard Brexit Cliff and is to keep Scotland in the

single market and that will happen in due course. And a referendum bill

if it is needed. Monica, from what I have heard about Labour talking

about you back everything he has just said. Scottish Labour has been

a clear on this that we do support the Scottish Government's efforts to

go out to Europe, to try and show Scotland is still open for business.

No, the effort is to stay in the single market, do you support that?

Yes, we do. All right, up to what point? Well, Kezia Dugdale set out

five guiding principles ahead of Nicola Sturgeon's visit to Downing

Street at the weekend. Scottish Labour basically reflects the

majority of people in Scotland who want to stay as part of the UK

single market, and also maintain an alliance with Europe. We do not want

to separate from either of these markets. I understand that, but

Labour, you have done research of your own? Do you think it would be

possible to stay in the single market while the rest of the UK

left? We are fully behind the Scottish Government is taking behind

these constructive talks forward and we do not know, as Ben said, what

Brexit means and that is a matter for the Tories in Westminster to

explain to the country. So what will happen, or could happen, it might

turn out to be impossible for Scotland to stay in the single

market while the UK believes, at which point the SNP will say, we

want a referendum. And Labour will say, you cannot have that, that is

not what we meant. And you will end up looking silly. I don't think

there is anything silly about the situation the country in. What we

see in the light of the decision from June is that our economy has

been in turmoil, that is the mess the Tories have created. That is not

the point I was making. Liam McArthur, presumably there is the

same danger for you that the Liberal Democrats back everything Nicola

Sturgeon is doing until she says, I'm going to have an independence

referendum. And you say, no, we did not mean that. It is interesting

that show gave to the referendum result, the First Minister called

upon Parliament to unite in support of our efforts to stand up for

Scotland's interests and we had no difficult -- difficulty in lending

our support. She made it clear this will the SNP's desire to pursue

independence. And over the summer, we saw a succession of speeches and

statements making it very clear... But my point is that you go along

with Nicola Sturgeon until the point at which she which she says she

wants a referendum, and you balk at it, you will look silly. I do not

think that is the case. There is a clear desire among people in

Scotland. And to maintain its relationships with the European

Union, we have no difficulty supporting that and have been one of

the most supportive and long-standing records on that issue.

But it cannot be viewed as being in the interests of Scotland...

Jackson? Look, given everything that Ruth Davidson has ever said about

Europe and everything David Mundell has said about Europe, presumably

you would like to declare it you are 100% behind Nicola Sturgeon? There

is no such thing as membership of the single market, there is

membership of the European Union and if you are a European Union member

state, you are a member of the single market. The UK has voted to

leave the European Union so we want to negotiate the best possible

access to the single market and I support that. I find that up from

Nicola Sturgeon putting together a coalition for anything rather hollow

given is a coalition of people in Scotland who do not want another

referendum and she is ignoring that. Let's not get into that discussion

about what the word membership means. I am sorry, it is key because

people keep using this word membership as if it is a legal term,

it is not. But what is key is that in the single market, rules and

regulations drawn up by the European Union are immediately applicable

across areas that are part of the single market, that is what Nicola

Sturgeon wants to keep. And given that the David Mundell and Ruth

Davidson were both wildly enthusiastic about such things on

the referendum, they presumably would like to keep that as well and

so would you? I wanted to remember that I wanted to remain a member of

the European Union but I respect that by a majority of a million in a

UK wide referendum, the UK voted to leave. Now I want the best possible

deal. And as part of the UK. That should include the greatest possible

access to the single market that we can obtain and it includes far more

and beyond that as well. Monica, the other issue that has been going on

today is fishing. What is Labour's view? Do you think all powers over

fishing and agriculture should be devolved to the Scottish Parliament

when we leave the EU? We have set out as a guiding principle a

repatriation of powers from Europe to Scotland and of course we support

more powers going to the Scottish Parliament. Does that include full

powers over fisheries and agriculture? I am not the expert on

Scottish Labour's fisheries and agriculture position. My position is

on equalities, but the detail will be looked at by my colleagues.

Labour, you must be an expert on fisheries and agriculture from

Orkney! One of my many strings to my bow! You would like repatriation of

powers? The debate predates the referendum in June and I have long

been an advocate for a more regionalised management of fisheries

and it makes most sense you manage the fishery in the North Sea the

same way as the Mediterranean. But you have to respect the fact that

the fishery in the North Sea has a number of states bordering it and

you would have to work closely and collaboratively with Norway and the

other states with an interest. It is in the interests of farming and

fishing. Ben, although you don't agree with the -- with a word to the

fishermen say about Brexit, presumably you would like to see

yourselves and the Scottish Government having control over all

fishery and agricultural policy? I think fishermen voted in different

ways in the referendum and we don't know what votes webcast in the

polling booths. I appreciate there is some Euroscepticism. Their

leaders say it is fantastic. More powers we bring to the Scottish

Parliament, the better policy we can make for Scotland and that has been

clear since the start of devolution. Just to be clear, you would expect

or you would want to have four powers over fisheries and

agriculture given to the Scottish Government and not shared with the

UK Government? We need to analyse that proposition beyond what has

been said today and look at it in real detail and statements will

follow in terms of where we believe the best policy arrangements and

sharing of power could be made on that. There is a shared arrangement

at the moment with the EU and across the UK, and I think we will see how

that position develops. I am rather surprised you are not saying as an

SNP member, of course we want all powers over fishery and farming, you

do not seem to be saying that, you seem to be saying, wait and see how

this develops, very complicated. I am not saying that at all, I am

saying that in the medium to long-term, of course the SNP's

ambition to have all powers controlled by the Scottish

Parliament given I represent an urban seat, I am not a specialist

myself in the areas of fishing and agriculture, but I think developing

on from today's statement, we will see how that process develops. We

had been arguing we need to be more centralised in the management but

the problems the Scottish Government got into over fishing quotas and

trying to put a saltire on it, when the ownership of the fleet and the

way in which quotas move backwards and forwards across the Borders but

that was not a logical proposition to take and we need to be careful

how we tread with best. Thank you, all for joining us this afternoon.

He is back bowl either that, or Andrew has had a quick shave? I am

surprised the SNP have not had to say they want control over

everything. He's not a fisheries expert for the SNP. But if you are

in the SNP, you just want control! I would expect him to say that. And

from the point of view of the SNP, it makes most sense fisheries policy

is decided by the UK Government and it should be devolved to Scotland. I

think the boys were MacArthur was making it is perhaps that is partly

what Ben has in his mind, legal issues and international agreements

-- I think the point lead at MacArthur was making. Much of that

would be done between the UK Government and Spain being the

obvious one. And Norway, the North Sea, we have boundaries that have to

be worked upon and international agreements. It will be interesting

to see, how does the UK Government deal with those situations? The

dream, presumably, would be that Scotland, in a way that Iceland

became known for in the past, could pioneer a new way that a certain

fish stocks, but critics would save the fishing industry is unlikely to

do that. But they might. That presumably would be the next ideal

to have. Because you are not constrained by the Common Fisheries

Policy. Yes, this is an issue where if Scotland is given the powers over

fisheries, it could do an awful lot more than they are able to do now.

They could be innovative and get different deals. Under a Brexit

situation and in the EU, not a what is going to change, apart from the

fact it will be a Scottish Minister dealing with EU quotas rather than a

UK Minister. On the Brexit issue more widely, again from that

conversation, I am not sure we are any further forward in understanding

what any of this means. I am afraid it is probably going to be a

relatively boring time in terms of things changing and talked about

over the next month's. But we will have a lot of noise about it. This

afternoon, we had a statement announced at short notice from Mike

Russell and I wondered if they would say anything. No, nothing new at all

except he went to Downing Street and he heard nothing. To be fair, he

would say he went to Downing Street and he was told nothing. Absolutely

and that plays into their hands, the SNP want to demonstrate the UK

Government is stalling, they have no idea what they are doing and what

Brexit means. Scottish, does not know what they are doing either, in

reality. Thank you, we will return to you later.

And now to this week's Prime Minister's Questions,

The Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn, used four out of his six questions

to press Theresa May, on giving clarity over her

plans to exit the EU, against what he described

Mr Speaker, on Monday, the Prime Minister said the customs union was

not a binary choice. I cannot think of anything other than a boundary

choice is whether you have a border or you don't have a border, there is

not a third way on that one. On Monday, her friend the honourable

member for Broxtowe expressed concern of the automotive and

aerospace industries, while the British banking Association said its

members opposed quivering over the relocate button. Every day the Prime

Minister did this over this chaotic Brexit, employers delay investment

and the rumours circulate about relocation. This cannot carry on

until March of next year. When is the Prime Minister going to come up

with a plan? A customs union and a border are

different issues. That shows why it is important that it is this party

which is in government and not his. I have been clearer. We want to

trade freely with the single European market. I want this country

to be a global leader in free trade. The Labour Party is against free

trade. I want to introduce control on free movement. So we have an end

of free movement. The Labour wants to continue with free movement. I

want to deliver on the will of the British people, he is trying to

frustrate the will of the British people. One of the biggest

humanitarian catastrophes of our time is in Syria, specifically in

Aleppo, we expect a ceasefire to end shortly and an onslaught to begin.

Will the Prime Minister tell us what efforts the UK is currently

undertaking to support a peaceful resolution to the conflict, but also

to deal with those who are exacerbating the situation? It is

important to approach this in a number of tracks. We are involved,

the Foreign Secretary has been involved in discussions with the

United States Secretary of State John Kerry about these issues. I

raised the issues of Russian actions in Syria at the European Union

Council last week. It was only on the agenda because the UK raise

that. The EU agreed that should the atrocities continue then we will

look at all available options for taking action to put pressure on

Russia to stop their indiscriminate bombing of innocent civilians. Legal

air-quality limits around Heathrow have been breached. Noise pollution

over Twickenham has increased. Can the Prime Minister explain how a

third runway can be delivered and comply with pollution, legal

requirements? Does she agree, environmentally, Heathrow is not

good enough and cannot not possibly be bigger and better? The government

worked very closely at this issue of air quality and environmental impact

of all three schemes proposed by the Airports Commission. We took extra

time to look at those. We wanted to look at the air-quality issues. The

evidence shows that air-quality standards can be met by all three of

the schemes. My honourable friend raises an issue that is about more

than airports. The question of air quality is also about road

transport. That is why we are looking to what we are going for

air-quality. I am pleased to see we are doing so well in the provision

of electric vehicles. Let's cross to our correspondent

David Porter at Westminster now, to get some reaction from this

week's line-up of MPs. I don't want you talking about the

weather in case it starts raining. Brexit and Heathrow were discussed

at Westminster. Let me introduce you to my guests. From Labour, the

Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and the SNP. Four months on from

Brexit, these two each year will see the UK Government doesn't have a

plan? The government does have a plan and that is to respect the

wishes of the British electorate. Goals are to come out of the

European Union and to control migration from the EU into the

United Kingdom. It wasn't the position I wanted. I respect the

fact that the people of South Leicestershire and the people of the

whole of the United Kingdom collectively voted to come out of

the EU. The Prime Minister is right. Royal prerogative power will

determine how the government negotiates the detail of the terms

and conditions for our country exiting the EU. Our job as

parliamentarians is to make sure we get the best deal. I would urge the

Scottish Government to work with Theresa May in her administration to

make sure we get the best terms and conditions for the people of

Scotland and the need the whole of the United Kingdom. Your party

leader quoted baldric today saying there was a cunning plan and the

cunning plan was no plan? The government were not prepared for

Brexit. First Minister is correct to talk about a broad Coalition of

parties to come together to oppose a hard Brexit. I hope the First

Minister will allow other parties to build a broad Coalition of people

who do not want a hard Brexit. We have heard from various

manufacturing agencies that we need access to the single market and we

need some sort of free movement of people to fill workforce gaps. These

things need to be resolves. The Prime Minister is playing a very

strange game by not revealing what would be the negotiating position. I

think it is a dangerous game and it is disingenuous to the British

public not to say what the negotiating position would be.

They say they cannot give a running commentary because they don't know

what the negotiations are. There is not even outline as to what is the

end package they are hoping to see with to access to the single market.

It seems as if Theresa May Mach two, compared to what she was saying to

the City of London bankers before the referendum, is that there will

be no part of the single market, which is what she was saying would

be damaging for the British economy. Analysis from a couple of months ago

I think still stands and what will ultimately be damaging for the UK

economy, I think we don't even have the outline for it. If we take the

Conservatives to their word, it will be six months before Parliament is

even going to have a resolution about the opportunity after the

Queen's speech to look at this on a legislative basis. I don't think it

is any constructive way forward and ultimately I think the position is

unravelling. The First Minister was speaking to Theresa May and

basically saying, give us a more prominent seat at the negotiating

table. Theresa May has said, you will be consulted, but you will not

make the final decision. That is for me as a UK Prime Minister. There is

logic in that, isn't? 62% of Scotland voted to remain in the EU.

I was pleased to hear Ian mention a Coalition of people taking forward

Scotland's interests. That Coalition will work in the best interests of

Scotland to protect its place in the single market and in the world.

Let's move on to the question of Heathrow, perhaps more generally

infrastructure. This seems to be a feeling now, Heathrow apart, the UK

post Brexit needs more infrastructure spending and that

spending has got to provide us with infrastructure which is more robust.

We have Crossrail almost complete. HS2 is further down the line.

Heathrow, the Prime Minister has later cards on the table and made

clear the government's position, which is to support the expansion of

Heathrow Airport. For my constituents in South

Leicestershire, I have do consider them, we have an international hub

in Heathrow and it makes sense therefore to expand that hub.

However, I am consulting with constituents before I make a final

decision on this matter. Once I do, I will be glad to report to you. As

far as infrastructure is concerned, everyone wants better connections

but no one wants an airport runway in the back garden. That is true,

but I think your initial question was, having a post Brexit

infrastructure plan in the UK to boost productivity in the UK. We

have been calling for that since 2008. The previous Prime Minister

and Chancellor said no. Rather than using historically low interest

rates to invest in the future. Heathrow from a Scottish perspective

is pretty much a no-brainer. We have to make sure environmental issues

and capacity issues are dealt with. But don't undermine the growth of

the economy in Scotland in terms of direct routes from Glasgow,

Edinburgh and Aberdeen to other parts of the world.

I simply don't know what their position is. Theresa May seems to

have rubbished the northern powerhouse the previous Chancellor

had argued for on this same manifesto. Local government is

getting mad across England because it doesn't really know what is going

on. Heathrow is the wrong decision. It is bad for air-quality, bad for

overall British equality, sacking resource into the south-east of

England when it needs to be spread across the UK. I think the SNP have

sold out by reversing their position. Expansion at Heathrow

means potentially 16,000 new jobs across Scotland, a logistics are

being looked at airport. I am surprised that... We will leave it

there are. I'm sure we will return to that. Thank you for your time.

Back to you. Let's get some final

thoughts from Moray. Ken Macintosh today outlined a

series of proposals to reform the way the Scottish parliament works.

This was something Tricia Marwick, his predecessor, tried and failed to

do and got very frustrated about. What is he trying to do? This is

very much part of his manifesto when he put his name forward to become

Presiding Officer. He wants to update the parliament. Is a bit of a

concern, particularly with the last term majority SNP government that it

was too easy for them to get anything through. The committees

were held up as being the way to scrutinise the government when it

was set up. A lot of people would acknowledge that has not happened.

People say that has not happened but actually Westminster's committee

system is much better at holding the government to account and having MPs

prepared to challenge ministers from their own party than the Scottish

system. I think that is true. Is a job to be done in terms of making

sure the structure is right, but there also is a job to be done by

individual MSP is as well. If you look at Westminster, MPs are a lot

more independent or committees and they will challenge the government

from an independent point of view. One argument is the division between

committees which scrutinise and select committees which can have

generalised enquiries into doesn't exist here are. Part of the argument

is that MSP is being forced to do too much by doing those things

simultaneously. Some people would argue there are not enough MSP is to

do that. I'm not convinced that is the case. The number of committees

and people on them is probably enough. We need to be in a position

where ministers are making sure they have everything in our role and also

one occasion committees can write legislation apart. It is about the

committee system in Parliament questioning Scottish Civic Society.

At Westminster level, Philip Green goes through a tough time in

Parliamentary committees. Lots of companies on a regular basis. We

don't see the Scottish Parliament intervening in that kind of way. A

bit broader and sharper in their questions towards ministers? Thingy

to have a more independent mind, look at what are the issues are

affecting Scottish society, where are the areas the government needs

to be pushed on and asked more questions. If the government isn't

asked questions, it just ploughs on with what it is doing. Thank you.

Join us for First Minister's Questions tomorrow