Alex Salmond arrives to take part in a live television debate with Alistair Darling at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland in Glasgow earlier today. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Alex Salmond vs. Alistair Darling: live blog

The Scottish First Minister and the Better Together chair go head-to-head in Scottish independence debate.

22:00pm As I expected, the viewers are giving it to Darling. A post-debate Guardian/ICM poll puts the Better Together chair ahead by 56 per cent to 44 per cent. That's almost identical to the No campaign's current poll lead. 

21:44pm Salmond calls for a vote for "ambition over fear" and says independence would allow Scotland to turn its "prosperous economy into a just society". No one can govern Scotland better than the Scottish people themselves. "This is our moment," he ends, "let's seize it". 

21:41pm Closing statements now. Darling warns that "if we vote to leave, there is no going back", adding that Scotland can have "the best of both worlds": a stronger Scottish parliament and the Union. He denounces the "guesswork, blind faith and crossed fingers" of the Yes campaign. 

21:37pm The debate moves onto pensions. Darling says that Scotland's rapidly ageing population means it would need higher immigration to sustain the current system. 

21:31pm Darling says it is up to the Scottish parliament which services are free and that public spending could remain higher than the UK average. Salmond says Scotland cannot continue to bear "hand-me-down cuts" from Westminster, highlighting the cost of scrapping the bedroom tax. 

21:27pm In response to an audience question, Salmond insists that an independent Scotland could maintain free higher education and free prescriptions. But Darling rightly responds that it would become illegal under EU law for the government to deny free university education to non-Scottish students from the rest of the UK. 

21:26pm Salmond denounces Darling and his predecessors as Chancellor for failing to set up a sovereign wealth fund for oil. 

21:21pm On austerity, Darling says that his 2009 Budget "did more redistribution to people with lower incomes than any other in a generation."

21:14pm Darling says the UK cannot be expected to underwrite a banking system that is 12 times the size of Scotland's GDP. Salmond hits back by noting that Darling was charge of financial regulation "when the banks went bust". He adds that the rest of the UK government would never allow RBS to go under. 

21:13pm After repeated criticisms from the audience, Salmond refers them to "page four of our Fiscal Commission report". He'll have to do better than that. 

21:08pm Another audience member to Salmond: "You haven't given us a straight answer ... What is your plan B? We need more than 'it'll be alright on the night'". 

21:06pm The first question, from a No voter, without a currency union would Scotland use the pound without the permission or is there a contingency plan? Salmond replies that he wants what's best for Scotland, Darling says a monetary union requires a political union and a fiscal union. 

21:01pm Before the second half, they've just cut to the spin room again. With his forensic questions on the currency, Darling had the best of that round, with Salmond's attacks rather esoteric by comparison. Audience questions are next. 

20:56pm Salmond repeatedly presses Darling on whether he agress with David Cameron that Scotland could be a "successful independent country". Darling replies that he has never said that Scotland couldn't go it alone, but that the risks aren't worth it. 

Salmond repeatedly mentions Cameron's name, desperately trying to tie Darling to the Prime Minister who shunned a debate with him. 

20:52pm Salmond asks why some of Darling's allies in the No campaign, such as Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, support EU withdrawal. Darling replies that parties will take different positions on that issue, joking that he and Salmond could find themselves on the same side. The biggest danger for Scotland at present is leaving the UK, he says. Salmond replies that independence is the only way for Scotland to avoid the threat of EU withdrawal. 

20:50pm Darling ridicules Salmond's belief that Scotland would easily win EU membership: "The one thing you can't accuse the EU of is moving at speed". 

20:48pm It's Salmond's turn now. He asks Darling why the No campaign refers to itself as "Project Fear". It doesn't, replies Darling. 

20:45pm The debate moves onto public spending. "We have to end austerity," says Salmond. When Darling replies by pointing to the large deficit Scotland would face, Salmond responds by reminding him that the UK's deficit reached 11 per cent when Darling was Chancellor. 

20:42pm Darling: "So plan B is to scrabble around using somebody else's currency. That's not independence, that's foolishness of the first order." Salmond replies by referring to the report in the Guardian earlier this year that a senior UK minister believes Scotland would be offered a currency union if it voted for independence. 

20:39pm Darling runs through the alternative options: would Scotland adopt the euro (which, as he notes, Salmond used to favour)? Would it create a new currency? Salmond says Scotland will keep the pound as that's "best for Scotland and for the rest of the UK". 

Darling responds: "but you won't have a central bank ... you can't seriously be saying this. Scotland can't uses somebody else's currency." 

20:36pm Boos from the audience as Salmond refuses to answer Darling's repeated question: "what is your plan B?"

20:33pm Darling rightly points out that Salmond's stance would leave Scotland with no lender of last resort (the Bank of England at present). 

20:32pm After an ad break, the debate is back. Darling and Salmond now have 12 minutes each to cross-examine their opponent. 

Darling starts by challenging Salmond over the currency: what's his plan B if he doesn't get a monetary union? Salmond says an independent Scotland would continue to use the pound without permission (rather like Panama uses the dollar).  

20:25pm After much searching, I've managed to find a working stream at http://zattoo.com/watch/stv

Highlights to folow. They've just cut to the "spin room".

20:06pm The demand for the debate appears to overwhelmed the STV player, which immediately crashed at 8pm. I'm trying to find somewhere else to listen to it, but for now this only further proves why it should have been televised. 

19:47pm After months of waiting, Alistair Darling and Alex Salmond are finally going head-to-head in debate. The encounter isn't being televised outside of Scotland, but non-Scottish viewers can watch it live on the STV player. I'll be live blogging the highlights from 8pm. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

Donald Tusk is merely calling out Tory hypocrisy on Brexit

And the President of the European Council has the upper hand. 

The pair of numbers that have driven the discussion about our future relationship with the EU since the referendum have been 48 to 52. 

"The majority have spoken", cry the Leavers. "It’s time to tell the EU what we want and get out." However, even as they push for triggering the process early next year, the President of the European Council Donald Tusk’s reply to a letter from Tory MPs, where he blamed British voters for the uncertain futures of expats, is a long overdue reminder that another pair of numbers will, from now on, dominate proceedings.

27 to 1.

For all the media speculation around Brexit in the past few months, over what kind of deal the government will decide to be seek from any future relationship, it is incredible just how little time and thought has been given to the fact that once Article 50 is triggered, we will effectively be negotiating with 27 other partners, not just one.

Of course some countries hold more sway than others, due to their relative economic strength and population, but one of the great equalising achievements of the EU is that all of its member states have a voice. We need look no further than the last minute objections from just one federal entity within Belgium last month over CETA, the huge EU-Canada trade deal, to be reminded how difficult and important it is to build consensus.

Yet the Tories are failing spectacularly to understand this.

During his short trip to Strasbourg last week, David Davis at best ignored, and at worse angered, many of the people he will have to get on-side to secure a deal. Although he did meet Michel Barnier, the senior negotiator for the European Commission, and Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s representative at the future talks, he did not meet any representatives from the key Socialist Group in the European Parliament, nor the Parliament’s President, nor the Chair of its Constitutional Committee which will advise the Parliament on whether to ratify any future Brexit deal.

In parallel, Boris Johnson, to nobody’s surprise any more, continues to blunder from one debacle to the next, the most recent of which was to insult the Italians with glib remarks about prosecco sales.

On his side, Liam Fox caused astonishment by claiming that the EU would have to pay compensation to third countries across the world with which it has trade deals, to compensate them for Britain no longer being part of the EU with which they had signed their agreements!

And now, Theresa May has been embarrassingly rebuffed in her clumsy attempt to strike an early deal directly with Angela Merkel over the future residential status of EU citizens living and working in Britain and UK citizens in Europe. 

When May was campaigning to be Conservative party leader and thus PM, to appeal to the anti-european Tories, she argued that the future status of EU citizens would have to be part of the ongoing negotiations with the EU. Why then, four months later, are Tory MPs so quick to complain and call foul when Merkel and Tusk take the same position as May held in July? 

Because Theresa May has reversed her position. Our EU partners’ position remains the same - no negotiations before Article 50 is triggered and Britain sets out its stall. Merkel has said she can’t and won’t strike a pre-emptive deal.  In any case, she cannot make agreements on behalf of France,Netherlands and Austria, all of who have their own imminent elections to consider, let alone any other EU member. 

The hypocrisy of Tory MPs calling on the European Commission and national governments to end "the anxiety and uncertainty for UK and EU citizens living in one another's territories", while at the same time having caused and fuelled that same anxiety and uncertainty, has been called out by Tusk. 

With such an astounding level of Tory hypocrisy, incompetence and inconsistency, is it any wonder that our future negotiating partners are rapidly losing any residual goodwill towards the UK?

It is beholden on Theresa May’s government to start showing some awareness of the scale of the enormous task ahead, if the UK is to have any hope of striking a Brexit deal that is anything less than disastrous for Britain. The way they are handling this relatively simple issue does not augur well for the far more complex issues, involving difficult choices for Britain, that are looming on the horizon.

Richard Corbett is the Labour MEP for Yorkshire & Humber.