02/11/2016 Scotland 2016

MSPs blow the full-time whistle on the law designed to tackle

MSPs support the repeal of the Offensive Behaviour

We'll debate whether the law is fit for purpose.

Young people underestimate by hundreds of thousands of pounds

how much to save for a comfortable retirement.

Is it time for a rethink on inheritance?

And one of the First Minister's advisers on Brexit thinks

we couldn't remain in the EU as the rest of the UK leaves.

But an independent Scotland could quickly get back in.

MSPs have voted to urge the Scottish Government to repeal

the controversial law aimed at tackling sectarianism

The Offensive Behaviour at Football Act came into force

in 2012 after the SNP used its majority in the last

Scottish Parliament to pass it despite a lack of support

This evening, after an ill-tempered debate at Holyrood,

a Scottish Conservative motion calling on SNP ministers to scrap

There are occasions where remedying behaviour through changes galore as

appropriate. On this occasion the view of legal practitioners is that

there are already adequate laws in place. Those can and should be used

to prosecute offensive behaviour rather than vilifying football and

hundreds of thousands of fans. Still many unanswered questions from

opposition parties around the potential issues of repealing this

legislation. They have to be addressed. It is more than just

attacking it can be used as well and we have to address and look at these

matters. I think to not do that would be reckless. Some of the

behaviour and some of the opposition today is bordering on reckless.

Today's vote is not binding for the Government, but James Kelly has

brought forward a member 's bill that aims to have the legislation

repealed. He joins me now along with the SNP James Dornan who is in our

Edinburgh studio. Good evening to both of you. So, James, is this the

end of the road for this legislation? That is not empty

decision for me to make. That is a decision for the Government to take.

For the parliament to take. To have a look what it thinks it mean to

come back to the parliament and see if there are some measures that need

to be taken. If you believe in... A receipt, surely it has to be

repealed. If you believe in democracy, then you have to go along

with the parliamentary system. The Parliamentary system does not mean

that it had to change anything. What the Government will do is it will

accept that the majority of the parliamentarians today voted against

it. I'm sure they will take that away. They will consider it very

carefully and then it back. I'm saying I'm not in a position to say

what the Scottish Government will do. Today's vote will not say that

the governor and have to change anything. I am glad that the

Government have to reflect because I really do think that legislation

really is now dead in the water. Completely dead. You mean it has to

be completely repealed? Yes, I think it needs to be totally repealed. It

is totally discredited. I think the debate today brought that up. How

there is friction between foot. Porters and police. How there is a

lack of certainty. -- football supporters. Today's vote reinforces

that. They need to come forward urgently and explain how they are

going to tackle the repealed. James Dornan, do you accept in the light

of this and all the opposition there has been to this act that actually

the original legislation was pretty poorly drafted? Gnome. It was

interesting to hear what James said that. He said that today's debate

highlighted that it had deteriorated. The only people who

accept that is opposition MPs. It is not that there is a string of the

public saying that. That is just what they would say. Quite a lot of

football fans have objected to this. Yes, there have also been a lot of

football fan to say they have supported this legislation. It is

not as clear-cut as James is trying to portray it as. Luke Garrett use

and people are happy with it but today it is about politics. Was not

about legislation, it was about politics. It was about other parties

seeing this as a way of beating the parliament. The issue that Michael

Madsen raised their is a really, really what important one. There is

nothing that any of the opposition member said today that shows how

beer going to deal with that, never mind how they are going to sell the

message and still take the sectarianism seriously when they are

repealing the act to deal with it. Is that not an important issue? I

think of James and listen to what I said in the chamber, the threat of

communications, there have only been three cases brought forward in the

last year. Clearly, prosecutors are looking at the legislation and

threatening communications and they are not confident in being able to

deal with that. That just reinforces the fact that this legislation is

not fit for purpose. What is it that you fundamentally object to hear? It

is a bad law. It is not working. The outcome see from that. Because it is

a bad law, there is confusion in the court system. We are seeing 50% of

the cases brought to the court are from young men under the age of 20.

Many have been brought into the criminal justice system for the

first time. I'm sure not even the SNP want to see that. We have seen a

lot of money. ?2 million on a police monitoring unit. I would prefer to

put that money in other areas of protecting social services at this

time. The outcomes of not... We're better scrapping this and not ...

The trusted and tried judicial systems are the ones that put us in

this situation the first place. They seem to think that we should set the

clock back four or five years. Then everything will be OK. The Merlot is

not OK at the time. There seems to be a complete wiping of memory here.

An executive officer got explosive materials through the post. A

well-known lawyer did as well. A football manager got bullets through

the post. They seem to have completely got that wiped from their

memory. This is all about having a go at the Government. People say it

is important to bring in legislation to deal with the Internet abuse that

was going on, the sectarian abuse that was going on on the Internet.

This is pure political opportunism and nothing else. Do you see a way

forward here that everyone can agree to across the parties? There is an

opportunity for the SNP here. I think if Michael Matheson

acknowledged the will of Parliament, I thought he made some good points

in this afternoon. About what you can achieve, you don't need

legislation for it. If we built a consensus, we can have a real

discussion about how you tackle sectarianism basing it around

working in legislation. How we improve behaviour around the

football. The SNP need to start talking to people, instead of just

repeating the lines that they think they are right. We must leave it

there. Thank you for coming into night.

We all know the baby boomers have lucked out when it comes

to a comfortable retirement, with their property gains

Not such good news for the younger generation.

Just today we learn the typical UK home now costs six times

So its perhaps little wonder many stick their head in the sand

A new report by asset managers, Brewin Dolphin suggests young people

aren't putting anywhere near enough cash to fund the retirement

Suzanne Allan's been taking a look a what's in their report.

Unlike this dress here, saving it seems has gone out of fashion.

Wealth is overwhelming concentrated with the older generation. Younger

people just aren't saving enough for their retirement. Any new report out

today it lays bare the stark reality of staving. -- saving. It says the

average 13 to 24-year-old once ?30,000 to live on retirement. Here

is what the reality bites. That leaves a ?550,000 shortfall in their

pension pot. There are some of us that put money aside. A quarter of

us don't save anything at all. I have really not thought about it, if

I'm honest with you. Probably when I get a better job I will be thinking

about that. It is tough to save money when you are not earning too

much. I am doing nursing. I'm waiting until I get into NHS bank

and an NHS -based play so I can start my pension now. Then I will be

in the same company, I won't have to keep switching. But what abrasive

right now is just in terms of just license, driving licence and car. It

is not just pension wise. I put away a good 100 or ?200 a month when I

get a job. Just now it is for rent. I do not want a pension. I will

invest in an acid portfolio and drove up. Take a step away from the

Government pension. I had a superannuation scheme. It is

relation to your salary. It seems if you have a high household income,

you are not immune either. If you earn between 70 and ?100,000 the gap

between what you put in and what you should be putting in is 30%. People

clearly know they are under saving, but according to the report, what is

striking is just how much they are underestimating this. Not so for the

over 65 is. They are sitting on an estimated housing wealth of around

one point three trillion pounds. We all ready here about the bank of mum

and dad, but it's as we will hear from them more and more. Will be

baby boomers begin last people to enjoy a good retirement?

Shortly before we came on air I spoke to Liz Alley from the wealth

management company that sponsored the report, Brewin Dolphin.

Is this pensions gap really as bad as your report suggests? The report

shows is that unless action is taking now, the working population

in Scotland faces a staggering gap of ?425,000 between their retirement

income expectations and the reality of what they're actually saving. In

contrast, the baby boomer generation is currently sitting on ?1.3

trillion worth of housing wealth. And they also have increasing final

salary pensions seems and the valuable triple lock. So, what we

are actually seeing is a crocodile jaw whitening effect between the

older generation and the younger generation. That all sounds very

scary. You are in the business of selling wealth management to people.

Do you realistic expect that most people could afford to save much

more than they are saving at the moment? Currently, the working

generation are in something of a perfect storm with sky-high rent,

very high property prices and still paying off student loans. So, I

think it is a very difficult situation for the working generation

at the moment. We do need to raise awareness of what they need in

retirement. When you look at the figures, you are suggesting a

30-year-old should be putting away near the ?800 a month for a pension.

As you say, there are so many other demands on people's cash at the

moment. Absolutely. That's a matter saving that we are suggesting is

actually based on a relatively modest income of ?26,000 per year.

So, we're not talking huge incomes are people need to save for. As a

result of this we have pulled together some solutions of how we

can help the older generations unlock some of their wealth and give

it to the younger generations. 79% of people in Scotland of the

older generation are saying they will leave their entire estate to

their family. Our suggestion is simple - unlock the wealth now and

leave it to your family whilst you are still alive. That we you can use

the benefit of the valuable junior icer allowance the government has

given all children up to the age of 18 and we can make pension

contributions to anybody from the age of zero upwards. What we are

saying is if you can afford it, as a baby boomer, start contributing

towards junior ISAs for your grandchildren so they have a life

event and so when it comes to paying for tuition fees were saving for a

house deposit there is already a lump sum waiting for them and start

putting money into pensions for them so they can start saving.

Is it fair to the baby boomers who have worked hard for their money,

who might be worried about their own financial security?

Absolutely. The first step we would have with any planning is secure

your own finances first. We wouldn't expect anybody to put themselves

into financial hardship to help others. Secure your own financial

lifetime first and get in a room with your family and work out what

best can be done. If we can start unlocking the wealth now for younger

generations. The next from coming up being mired in debt, which is the

situation we have at the moment for the working generation.

Unlocking some of this wealth, bypassing inheritance tax, that

brings in ?4.7 billion a year for the government at the moment and if

there was less coming in it would mean less was spent on public

services. Yes, Bert counteract that with the

fact if we are helping to solve some of the savings gap for the younger

generations, and means the government of the future needs to

put aside less to look after the generations as they retired at you

know, you have to wait up. Thanks very much for joining us. --

you have to weigh it up. Lord Kerr of Kinlochard is the man

who wrote Article 50, the procedure by which the UK

will leave the EU. He's a former head of the British

diplomatic service and is currently one of the First Minister's

advisers on Brexit. Lord Kerr thinks that all four

parliaments and assemblies in the UK should have input to

the Brexit process. But what does he think Scotland can

get out of it? He's been speaking to our political

correspondent, Glenn Campbell. It is something that affects

everybody in each component part of the United Kingdom so I think the

Scots are entitled to have a clearer insight into the preparation of the

government position and Theresa May has promised that. I don't think

it's going to be delivered. And into the conduct of the negotiations.

They are going to need what is going on in there, which ideas are flying

and which aren't, which alternatives ideas can be put forward.

Having a vote is not the same as having a veto?

Well, we will be negotiating as the UK. I don't believe the Scots could

have a separate negotiation with the rest of the European Union. I think

the institution would prevent that and maybe Spanish government and a

few other governments as well. I think there is no way to set up a

parallel negotiation between Scotland and the EU. What scope is

there for a flexible Brexit with different terms for Scotland or

indeed other parts of the UK? In one sense, a flexible Brexit is what we

are going to get. I would imagine that on issues like security, the

fight against terrorism, drugs and crime and so on, we the British

would want to stay as close as possible to the European Union. So I

don't think leaving means heading off as far away from the EU on

something as on other things. On some things we stay quite close.

Much more difficult question, the ones you asked me, is could you

envisage different degrees of closeness for different parts of the

UK. I don't know the answer to that. I mean, that requires a lot more

devolution than we have had so far. Is there a way, in your view, where

Scotland could remain in the EU single market even if the rest of

the UK was coming out? In my view, not. Sad though it is to

say that, I didn't think so. I think it is possible to imagine

differential arrangements for access to the single market for different

parts of the United Kingdom but membership of the single market

means floats to the Council for ministers, accepting the

jurisdiction of the College of Justice and it seems to me of the

British government had determined these things are not going to be

accepted, I can't see well we have a United Kingdom that Scots could

manage it. What difference could be

accommodated, in your view? Where power is devolved it is

possible to imagine the Scots being in an anteroom to the council in

Brussels rather closer to the action than the English might be on

particular subjects. If one touches on the delicate subject of fishing

it is possible to imagine the fisheries will be between the EU and

the United Kingdom, which has different arrangements for a

particular species of fish or fishing grounds and it would be the

Scots who would be speaking for certain ones. I don't see how the

Scots could get in a room with a vote if we no longer have any

members if Parliament or a seat in the council. I think cooperation

between Scotland and the EU, which is in many areas closer and warmer

down the years than co-operation between Whitehall and the EU, that

might survive with the Scots in the room outside.

And how seriously should Theresa May take Nicola Sturgeon's promise of a

second independence referendum if she doesn't get some of her away?

I don't know. During the 2014 referendum I was against

independence. And I still believe the risks to Scotland from the

break-up of the United Kingdom are even greater than the risks of the

damage to Scotland from the United Kingdom leaving the EU. I also think

that Scots can't choose between the two because I don't think they can

stay in the EU as the United Kingdom leaves. I think when Independent,

the Scots could apply and probably getting pretty quickly.

But you do think the European Union would want to find a way of allowing

Scotland to remain part of the EU if during the Brexit negotiations there

was a yes vote for independence? No, I don't. Because legally it

would be impossible under the present Treaty and nobody would want

to amend it so I don't think the Scots can stay in the English leave.

I think the Scots have to also go. I think the Scots could maintain a

closer relationship on some subject than the English if they choose. The

extent of devolution would determine which subjects. If the Scots had an

independence referendum then and voted for independence, they could

fairly quickly get back into the EU because most Scottish laws would

still be the laws of the European Union.

That was Lord Kerr speaking to our political correspondent

Glenn Campbell and there will be more from that interview online

from midnight and on Radio Scotland after seven tomorrow morning.

Watching here in the studio was the editor of Common Space

website Angela Haggerty, and the former Shadow Scottish

Just sticking with that. Nicola Sturgeon one Scotland to stay in the

single market even if the rest of the UK leave but you heard Lord Kerr

say he doesn't think that's possible, Angela.

Well, it is good to get another view and a few like that but I think we

are very much in the realms of deep speculation. We are in quite

unprecedented uncharted territory and nobody knows what will happen

next. I think the strength of positivity from Scotland towards the

EU is in the interests of the EU. Brexit isn't the only threat to the

EU project because they are facing threats across the EU. So where the

current situation doesn't leave a lot of room for legalities, the EU

might be able to find a way to change those things, should Scotland

want to stay within it. Interesting that Lord Kerr does

think an independent Scotland could get back in pretty quickly to the

EU. What do you make of that? I'm not

sure I caught all of that in fairness. What is interesting is his

statement of the current challenges Scotland faces in terms of

negotiating in the current position we are in. It is complex and

difficult, as Angela said. Also that Scotland would need to think about

our relationship with the rest of the UK as well as Europe because

obviously our biggest market... The arguments being used about why we

should be part of the single market and you are the same arguments we

should be using in terms of a relationship with the rest of the

UK, or greater perhaps. We spend about 65% of our trade is with the

rest of the UK so it really matters. I think it reinforces the fact

everything is up in the air and immediately a lot of people thought,

we don't want to leave Europe so our only option is an independent

Scotland. I think when the dust settled, I don't think that is for

Scotland at the moment at all. People are saying there are things

we really need to think through and I think people have taken the

message to heart. Scotland should be very strong I think in terms of as

Lord Kerr size, fisheries policy and things to lead on from that and they

are interesting discussions for the future.

Let's talk about the defeat over the Offensive Behaviour at Football Act.

Angela, for those not steeped in the story, what do you think is the

problem with the legislation? Critics of the legislation would say

that it is a civil liberties issue rather than a football issue. It's

potentially codes offensive speech which is open to interpretation and

it specifically targets football fans, which is in itself quite

unfair. Critics say it is just not workable and it won't challenge the

problems associated with sectarianism in Scotland and it may

actually worsened in terms of the relationship with the police. The

other side of that is in opinion polling it does show that the public

is onside with the government. So there is a real conflict between

what the way forward is in terms of tackling sectarianism.

Margaret, the vote isn't binding but I wonder what sort of view you think

voters will take if the will of Parliament isn't followed? Do you

think most voters care about this issue?

A certain amount of people do. Generally speaking people would say

if there is an issue with sectarianism, and we probably have

one in certain parts of Scotland, it has to be tackled. I think the

government got it wrong from the word go in that you should really

try to build up a cross-party consensus and that is the way to

deal with this. Reaching out at an early stage. Digging into it is

probably a mistake because they will have to review it. I think the

private members Bill and James Kelly will get support and instead of

cutting anti-sectarian projects, I think you need to tackle it that

prevention and education is probably as effective. It seemed like they

are just dealing with marginal issues and it isn't working.

Briefly, before we go. It is 80 years since a BBC television began

so here is a classic. You will have to destroy all living

matter. Now, I know nothing! I am from

Barcelona. I do love a bit of that. Do you

think old output stands the test of time?

It is striking how much of that is familiar to me. We are doing it in

all sorts of different ways but quality is quality and you need good

writing, you need to invest in it and get good production and I think

that demonstrates that. Not that Andy Paddy was good production but

you know what I mean. Do you think the UK make the best TV

any more? A good question because there is a

lot of competition from the US with very high profile programmes at the

moment but yes, it is still up there and I think if anything these days

it's almost as if we have too much choice. With the rise of things like

that fixed. I am still young enough to remember the days of

black-and-white TVs and getting signal with a coat hanger.

I'm afraid we have to park in there. Laura's here tomorrow

night, usual time. So do please join her then,

bye bye.