ANY QUOTES USED MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO MURNAGHAN, SKY NEWS

DERMOT MURNAGHAN: Now then, the US President Barack Obama has warned of ‘consequences’ if the Syrian regime fails to deliver on a framework deal to destroy its chemical weapons. So can President Assad be trusted to deliver and what role could Britain play if he ultimately faces consequences? We’re speaking now to the former Lib Dem leader, Sir Ming Campbell, up at the Lib Dem conference in Glasgow, good to talk to you Sir Ming. Are you heartened by what’s emerged from Geneva in those talks between Sergei Lavrov and John Kerry, there’s still a long way to go isn’t there?

SIR MING CAMPBELL: Indeed, it’s very ambitious and some of the deadlines, for example the need to declare all weapons by next week, these are pretty tight. I’m surprised that Barack Obama has left open the possibility, I put it that way because of course the Russians are not on board for it, the possibility of a Resolution of the United Nations Security Council authorising the use of force but like all these deals, ambitious in concept, you have got to be sure you are effective in implementation.

DM: On that, getting ultimately the use of force into some kind of Resolution, is that something you would support? If we had been through this long route now, diplomacy would have really been given a chance, if Assad really does fail to deliver he really would have to face consequences.

SIR MC: The problem about that is that that issue which you’ve just describe might only surface in the middle of next year and things might be rather different but I can’t help thinking that Putin would not have committed himself to the extent he has unless he had some kind of assurances from Assad. Of course remember, Putin has been guarding Assad’s back at the United Nations, continuing to supply sophisticated weapons. Assad is very much a client of Putin’s patronage and therefore Putin is in a very powerful position to ensure the bargain is kept, we’ll have to rely on him for that but remember, the Russian’s attitude to these things is always are they being treated with respect and these pictures of Lavrov and John Kerry smiling, shaking hands, these Mr Putin will regard as a great reward for this initiative.

DM: It’s interesting you mention that because that’s the way it’s being characterised isn’t it internationally as this tussle between a superpower and a former superpower and what we lose track of, what we lose sight of, is the suffering of the Syrian people. Even if this succeeds, will it do anything to improve their lot? Presumably Assad is still free to kill them with conventional weapons.

SIR MC: Even as we are speaking, conventional weapons are being used and people are being killed or wounded or forced to flee into neighbouring countries like Jordan and they are suffering, particularly those who have been refugees, it is a matter about which we should all feel very, very guilty because although people are divided on the notion of using military action, surely no one could be divided on the issue of doing everything we can to alleviate the suffering of so many people and indeed helping to preserve the stability of countries like Jordan, whose whole infrastructure is under enormous pressure because of the presence of so many refugees.

DM: A quite couple of questions on other issues, while you’re there Sir Ming. The Lib Dem conference is …

SIR MC: I was pretty certain you couldn’t resist the temptation.

DM: Well, you know, the poll rating has been flatlining, to steal a phrase from elsewhere, for a very long time. A general election is getting closer, do you think the Lib Dems can recover?

SIR MC: I don’t think one can expect some dramatic recovery overnight but as we get closer to the general election, it seems to me that the Liberal Democrats will be providing an entirely sensible alternative to a Conservative party that looks like it is turning back into itself and a Labour party which simply doesn’t seem to be ready to measure up to the obligations and the challenges of government. I am in no doubt from the atmosphere here, I mean people are positive. They are not complacent in any sense whatsoever but remember, everyone always mentions it, Eastleigh – that shows what can be done where you have got real commitment and you’ve got a long history, as we have there, of effective local government. That’s why people here are optimistic but as I say, they are not complacent.

DM: And one poll rating you must be pleased about, talking about the Scottish Independence Referendum as it stands at the moment, the no campaign leading by a street, we’ve got Nicola Sturgeon coming on next, would your message be to her, well don’t bother, you’re going to lose?

SIR MC: No, I wouldn’t say that because those of us who believe that Scotland is better as part of the United Kingdom are optimistic that we’ll win the referendum in a year’s time but we’re not complacent about that, there’s a long way to go. This campaign has been running pretty well since 2010 or 2012 so we have to make sure that we make the arguments, that we make them clearly and concisely, that there is no effort at emotion because this is a decision that could have an enormous impact on the people of Scotland for many, many years to come. It’s a decision that needs rational argument and as far as I’m concerned, the no campaign has got an obligation to provide that argument.

DM: Okay, we’re going to hear some of those counter arguments right now. Sir Ming, thank you very much indeed, great to talk to you as ever. Sir Ming Campbell there, at the Lib Dem conference in Glasgow.