Browse content similar to 14/02/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics. | :00:37. | :00:37. | |
David Cameron says a manifesto shouldn't be a wish list, | :00:38. | :00:40. | |
He says he's been ticking off the commitments his manifesto made | :00:41. | :00:52. | |
Well, today, we launch our own manifesto tracker and we'll be | :00:53. | :00:56. | |
talking to the minister responsible for implementing it. | :00:57. | :00:58. | |
The Government wants to crack down on the gender pay gap. | :00:59. | :01:00. | |
But is it really as bad as everyone seems to make out? | :01:01. | :01:03. | |
We'll be talking to TUC General Secretary Frances O'Grady. | :01:04. | :01:06. | |
And we'll be asking, who's wooing who in the putative | :01:07. | :01:08. | |
Plans for land has a? There certainly are. Not involving you so | :01:09. | :01:22. | |
far. Coming up on Sunday | :01:23. | :01:23. | |
Politics Scotland: What are the outstanding obstacles | :01:24. | :01:25. | |
to an agreement over And with me, as always, | :01:26. | :01:27. | |
a match made in heaven. Nick Watt, Polly Toynbee | :01:28. | :01:39. | |
and Tim Shipman, who'll be tweeting | :01:40. | :01:41. | |
throughout the programme. First, this morning let's turn | :01:42. | :01:44. | |
to the situation in Syria. A nationwide "cessation | :01:45. | :01:51. | |
of hostilities" is due But, despite that agreement, | :01:52. | :01:55. | |
the prospects for peace The truce does not apply | :01:56. | :01:58. | |
to the battle against what Russia calls terrorist targets and means it | :01:59. | :02:01. | |
will continue its heavy bombing Meanwhile, Turkey has shelled | :02:02. | :02:04. | |
Kurdish positions in Northern Syria and the Turkish Foreign Minister has | :02:05. | :02:10. | |
said his country is pondering This morning, the Foreign Secretary | :02:11. | :02:13. | |
said Russia had to begin complying The situation in Aleppo | :02:14. | :02:18. | |
is extremely worrying, the Russians are | :02:19. | :02:23. | |
using carpet-bombing tactics, indiscriminate | :02:24. | :02:25. | |
bombing of civilian areas Yes, we demand that the Russians | :02:26. | :02:28. | |
comply with their obligations under international law and their | :02:29. | :02:35. | |
obligations under the UN Security Council resolutions | :02:36. | :02:38. | |
that they have signed up to. Nick, you get a feeling that given | :02:39. | :02:53. | |
this deal was signed in Munich, it it is living up to deal is signed in | :02:54. | :02:58. | |
Munich reputations. When we hear the Foreign Secretary saying we demand | :02:59. | :03:02. | |
Russian do something when they are creating facts on the ground and we | :03:03. | :03:06. | |
are not, that will have a hollow ring. Russia is now. President's | :03:07. | :03:14. | |
Asad air force. They have ensured that President Assad cannot lose | :03:15. | :03:18. | |
this war but he cannot also win it. They have the air force but no | :03:19. | :03:23. | |
forces on the ground. Now that President Assad cannot lose this war | :03:24. | :03:27. | |
has changed the dynamics. We can whistle in the wind as much as we | :03:28. | :03:31. | |
like but Russia is the reality and power. Sir Roderick Lyne, the former | :03:32. | :03:38. | |
UK ambassador to Moscow was on radio five this morning and he said we | :03:39. | :03:42. | |
should not get too carried away with quite how powerful Russia is, they | :03:43. | :03:45. | |
don't have troops on the ground, they have a faltering economy and | :03:46. | :03:49. | |
they are nervous about going into far because of the disaster of | :03:50. | :03:54. | |
Afghanistan 35 years ago. They do have some troops on the ground, they | :03:55. | :04:00. | |
have proxy forces on the ground from Hezbollah and the uranium National | :04:01. | :04:04. | |
Guard. Although they can't take back the whole of Syria, they will take | :04:05. | :04:09. | |
back enough of it -- Iranians National Guard. Making success in | :04:10. | :04:14. | |
the south, the border with Turkey, controlling the Mediterranean | :04:15. | :04:17. | |
coastline. When they have done that, they might be serious about peace | :04:18. | :04:20. | |
talks. Then they are stuck with it. It is not clear if Vladimir Putin | :04:21. | :04:26. | |
thinks beyond tomorrow. It is not clear what the long-term strategy | :04:27. | :04:31. | |
could do. It could be like the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, an | :04:32. | :04:35. | |
absolute disaster. President Assad is saying that they intend to take | :04:36. | :04:38. | |
over the whole of the country, entirely unrealistic. There will be | :04:39. | :04:44. | |
some sort of partition. What is happening is very frightening in the | :04:45. | :04:47. | |
sense that everybody is fighting a proxy war, the Iranians and Saudis. | :04:48. | :04:54. | |
The one thing that people keep saying is Barack Obama was so weak | :04:55. | :04:59. | |
that it is quite unclear what he could have done. Perhaps he could | :05:00. | :05:04. | |
have given Syria's weapons to the more moderate rebels. Hillary | :05:05. | :05:08. | |
Clinton wanted him to do that in July 2012. She put a plan together | :05:09. | :05:13. | |
along with the general and he turned it down. What would have happened is | :05:14. | :05:17. | |
that they would be shooting down Russian planes with American | :05:18. | :05:20. | |
weapons. Or Russia might not have gone to war. We don't know. | :05:21. | :05:25. | |
Everything has a dynamic to it. This dynamic is leaving the west pretty | :05:26. | :05:30. | |
much as onlookers. It is clear that at least in the short-term, Mr Putin | :05:31. | :05:34. | |
will get back enough ground for Assad to then say we have got rid of | :05:35. | :05:40. | |
a lot of these "Terrorists" because they are not Islamic state. It is | :05:41. | :05:45. | |
now asked versus Islamic State. Exactly, we sound like the mouse | :05:46. | :05:49. | |
that squeaked this morning. I disagree with Polly. One of the | :05:50. | :05:53. | |
great powers in the world has now got very involved in a situation and | :05:54. | :05:57. | |
the other hasn't. President Obama had options. He did not explore them | :05:58. | :06:03. | |
to any sort of extent that it put off the Russians. Britain is left on | :06:04. | :06:13. | |
the sidelines, waiting for a new US president, to get engaged in this | :06:14. | :06:16. | |
issue and do something proactive. What could have been done that would | :06:17. | :06:19. | |
have been any use at all? Either useless or worse than useless, stuck | :06:20. | :06:22. | |
us in there... He did say he had chemical weapons and it was an | :06:23. | :06:27. | |
important red Line. And he let them cross the red line. He totally | :06:28. | :06:31. | |
ignored it. What would you have done that would have been useful? You | :06:32. | :06:35. | |
could have set up a humanitarian safe haven and protected it with | :06:36. | :06:39. | |
force and armed the rebels to deter the Russians and make it a situation | :06:40. | :06:45. | |
where Assad could not continue. We now have a situation where Assad is | :06:46. | :06:49. | |
now a fact of life, he is not going anywhere. There is not much you can | :06:50. | :06:53. | |
do without you were serious involvement. I am glad we touched on | :06:54. | :06:57. | |
Syria, it is an important developing story. | :06:58. | :06:58. | |
Now, what's black and white and not read all over? | :06:59. | :07:01. | |
Even if you did read it, would you be able to remember | :07:02. | :07:06. | |
all the promises and whether the Government had delivered them? | :07:07. | :07:08. | |
which charts the progress of the pledges | :07:09. | :07:15. | |
Sort of like a blue virtual Edstone, or maybe not! | :07:16. | :07:24. | |
Over the next four years, we'll be monitoring the Government's | :07:25. | :07:26. | |
progress on all of the commitments the Conservatives made ahead | :07:27. | :07:29. | |
of the 2015 general election in their manifesto, and a few big | :07:30. | :07:33. | |
promises they made during the campaign. | :07:34. | :07:43. | |
So, we've identified 161 pledges, and loaded them into our Manifesto | :07:44. | :07:45. | |
We've grouped them into categories covering all the major areas | :07:46. | :07:51. | |
of Government policy, from the constitution | :07:52. | :07:53. | |
And we've given each of the promises a colour rating. | :07:54. | :08:00. | |
Red signalling little or no progress so far. | :08:01. | :08:06. | |
Amber when the Government has made some progress. | :08:07. | :08:08. | |
Let's start by looking at the Conservative commitments | :08:09. | :08:14. | |
As you can see they've made at least some progress on all of them. | :08:15. | :08:24. | |
Easily the party's biggest promise here was to hold a referendum | :08:25. | :08:27. | |
on Britain's membership of the EU by December 2017. | :08:28. | :08:32. | |
We've marked that amber, to show that some progress | :08:33. | :08:34. | |
The bill setting the vote has passed through Parliament and it's looking | :08:35. | :08:41. | |
likely the poll will be held this year. | :08:42. | :08:45. | |
The cornerstone of the Conservative election campaign last May was how | :08:46. | :08:47. | |
they would handle the economy, and as you can see, that's | :08:48. | :08:53. | |
where we've found the greatest number of promises. | :08:54. | :08:59. | |
Let's look at one of the policies they identified | :09:00. | :09:02. | |
as part of their plan to eliminate the deficit. | :09:03. | :09:06. | |
That was to reduce the welfare bill by ?12 billion. | :09:07. | :09:10. | |
Again, we've given that an amber rating. | :09:11. | :09:13. | |
The savings were outlined in the Chancellor's Autumn Statement | :09:14. | :09:15. | |
But it's too early to say if they'll all be achieved. | :09:16. | :09:24. | |
When it comes to the constitution, the Government's made some progress | :09:25. | :09:32. | |
But it promised to scrap the Human Rights Act, and replace it | :09:33. | :09:35. | |
That gets a red rating, as although there have been reports | :09:36. | :09:41. | |
something is in the pipeline, as yet there is no sign | :09:42. | :09:43. | |
of the legislation required to introduce it. | :09:44. | :09:50. | |
Some manifesto commitments have already been delivered in full. | :09:51. | :09:54. | |
Like the introduction of English votes for English laws to give | :09:55. | :09:56. | |
English MPs a veto over laws that only affect England. | :09:57. | :10:05. | |
Other changes promised in the manifesto are less well known. | :10:06. | :10:08. | |
Like the promise to recover ?500 million from migrants | :10:09. | :10:10. | |
and overseas visitors who use the NHS by the middle | :10:11. | :10:12. | |
We will give that amber, because some new charges have | :10:13. | :10:21. | |
already been introduced, and the Department of Health | :10:22. | :10:23. | |
Let's add on the rest of the promises in each | :10:24. | :10:30. | |
of the policy areas and have a look at how the government | :10:31. | :10:33. | |
Taken together, of the 161 Conservative election commitments, | :10:34. | :10:41. | |
we think ten are red, 111 are amber, and 40 are green. | :10:42. | :10:50. | |
We'll be returning to the manifesto tracker every few months, | :10:51. | :10:52. | |
but in the meantime you can find the full data on the politics | :10:53. | :10:56. | |
And with us now the Cabinet Office Minister and Paymaster General, | :10:57. | :11:07. | |
Matt Hancock, he oversees the implementation | :11:08. | :11:09. | |
Welcome to the programme, do you regard this manifesto as a contract | :11:10. | :11:19. | |
with the British people and do you intend to intimate it all? It is | :11:20. | :11:23. | |
certainly the commitments on which we were elected. We take it | :11:24. | :11:28. | |
incredibly seriously -- goals to implement it. That is the goal. We | :11:29. | :11:33. | |
have got about a quarter delivered, we have had less than a year. In | :11:34. | :11:38. | |
fact, I really welcome this scrutiny and this project you have been on. | :11:39. | :11:42. | |
We will implement and publish our own plans and make sure that each | :11:43. | :11:48. | |
individual manifesto commitment has an individual minister responsible | :11:49. | :11:51. | |
for delivering it. And publish that. We will nationalise you and this | :11:52. | :11:58. | |
process. You will nationalise us? We can't afford you, probably, but we | :11:59. | :12:02. | |
will do this as a government. Let's see if you still want to do that at | :12:03. | :12:06. | |
the end of this interview. Your manifesto promised to scrap Labour's | :12:07. | :12:09. | |
Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights, and | :12:10. | :12:11. | |
Human Rights Act and replace it with abolition Bill would be drafted | :12:12. | :12:14. | |
within the first hundred days after the election. It didn't happen. Why? | :12:15. | :12:20. | |
The work is in progress. Internally, we will publish it. Why have you not | :12:21. | :12:25. | |
kept to the timetable? The timetable of the whole manifesto is to deliver | :12:26. | :12:29. | |
within the parliament. You said this would be done, the draft bill within | :12:30. | :12:33. | |
the first 100 days. Clearly, we will deliver against the commitment. I | :12:34. | :12:39. | |
thought it was a bit harsh to call that read, I would call that Amber. | :12:40. | :12:45. | |
It is not delivered yet. We called it red because the justice minister, | :12:46. | :12:49. | |
Mr Bove, said the consultation had been delayed yet again. The question | :12:50. | :12:53. | |
is what we deliver over the five-year parliament. -- Mr Gove. We | :12:54. | :12:59. | |
are less than a year in and we have got one quarter delivered and that | :13:00. | :13:01. | |
is one where there is work in progress but we are committed to | :13:02. | :13:04. | |
doing it. The manifesto promised to make the UK's Supreme Court "The | :13:05. | :13:11. | |
ultimate arbiter of human rights in the UK". That will not happen. This | :13:12. | :13:15. | |
is all part of the same package which we have committed to | :13:16. | :13:21. | |
delivering. We are less than a year in and we have a few years to go. | :13:22. | :13:25. | |
Whatever the package, the Supreme Court will not be "The ultimate | :13:26. | :13:30. | |
arbiter" on human rights, will it? That is part of the proposed | :13:31. | :13:35. | |
package, as part of the replacement of the Human Rights Act. We will get | :13:36. | :13:40. | |
to that. There is a bigger picture, which is making sure that we deliver | :13:41. | :13:46. | |
on the overall set of commitments in the manifesto where we are making | :13:47. | :13:50. | |
good progress. But, you can enhance the role of the Cyprian Court on | :13:51. | :13:53. | |
human rights, I understand that. Maybe the British Bill of Rights | :13:54. | :13:57. | |
will do their -- Supreme Court. But at the end of the day, the European | :13:58. | :14:01. | |
Court of Human Rights is the ultimate arbiter. That is the | :14:02. | :14:05. | |
factual legal situation. It all depends on the changes that you | :14:06. | :14:09. | |
make. We will bring forward a package of changes to be able to | :14:10. | :14:12. | |
deliver against these commitments in the Parliament. Mr Gove says we are | :14:13. | :14:18. | |
not planning to derogate from the European Court of Human Rights. | :14:19. | :14:21. | |
Let's see what happens when we published the proposals on this | :14:22. | :14:24. | |
particular package. Immigration, probably your biggest fail, I would | :14:25. | :14:29. | |
suggest. The 2050 manifesto repeated the pledge in the 2010 manifesto to | :14:30. | :14:33. | |
get annual net migration down to tens of thousands -- 2015. After | :14:34. | :14:38. | |
five years, far from getting it down, net migration reached a record | :14:39. | :14:44. | |
336,000 last year, that is a spectacular failure. Clearly, this | :14:45. | :14:51. | |
is a commitment. To get immigration down to tens of thousands, that | :14:52. | :14:55. | |
remains the goal. But we haven't yet reached it. Presumably you did not | :14:56. | :15:02. | |
call that green. No. It is red. That the commitment remains because we | :15:03. | :15:06. | |
think it is reasonable to control immigration in this country, so that | :15:07. | :15:10. | |
while some immigration can be very good for the economy and more | :15:11. | :15:13. | |
broadly, actually it has got to be done at a reasonable level. | :15:14. | :15:18. | |
It's not just that you didn't get it down enough, it's actually risen | :15:19. | :15:23. | |
since you came to power. Why would you promise what you have failed | :15:24. | :15:27. | |
dismally to deliver again? I think it is a reasonable goal. Clearly we | :15:28. | :15:33. | |
put it in the manifesto for a reason, to get immigration down. And | :15:34. | :15:41. | |
we are less than a year into the Parliament and we've got four years | :15:42. | :15:45. | |
to go. Is it a goal or a pledge? Do you pledge to the British people | :15:46. | :15:49. | |
today that net migration will be down to the tens of thousands by | :15:50. | :15:55. | |
2020? Well I pledge to fulfil what was in the manifesto on which I and | :15:56. | :15:58. | |
every other Conservative MPs was elected. Well that pledge was to get | :15:59. | :16:04. | |
it down to the tens of thousands. It was meant to be in the tens of | :16:05. | :16:10. | |
thousands by 2015, it is 346,000, is there a pledge that it will be down | :16:11. | :16:14. | |
to the tens of thousands by 2020? There is a whole series of actions | :16:15. | :16:19. | |
that we are taking, not least the EU renegotiation to try to tackle | :16:20. | :16:24. | |
immigration and make sure that it's brought down to a reasonable level. | :16:25. | :16:28. | |
Again there is a broader point, of the 160 odd commitments that you are | :16:29. | :16:33. | |
measuring, delivering an accord of them, of course some are quicker | :16:34. | :16:36. | |
than others to deliver on, it's fair to say. But the whole point of | :16:37. | :16:40. | |
having the manifesto and tracking it as we are doing is to make sure we | :16:41. | :16:45. | |
know where we are up to. Lets come onto the European negotiations, that | :16:46. | :16:52. | |
was in the manifesto. The manifesto promised several key things in the | :16:53. | :16:56. | |
renegotiation, a four-year ban on EU migrants claiming in work benefits, | :16:57. | :17:02. | |
a new residency requirement for social housing, and no child benefit | :17:03. | :17:06. | |
for EU migrants if their children live abroad. The draft deal contains | :17:07. | :17:12. | |
none of these things. Well, firstly, as you say, the centrepiece of our | :17:13. | :17:18. | |
European policy was to have the referendum, and we will be having | :17:19. | :17:22. | |
the referendum. Although you call that Amber it is certainly going to | :17:23. | :17:25. | |
happen. I understand that but none of the things you said we would get | :17:26. | :17:28. | |
to vote on in this referendum have been delivered. We then sat out -- | :17:29. | :17:39. | |
set out what we wanted to negotiate and that negotiation is not | :17:40. | :17:41. | |
complete. We have a lot of work to do this week to get the best | :17:42. | :17:45. | |
possible deal we can. I hope we will have a good deal and be able to vote | :17:46. | :17:49. | |
to stay in a reformed Europe. There is a version of the ban on EU | :17:50. | :17:55. | |
migrants benefits, there is not no child benefits, now there will be 28 | :17:56. | :18:00. | |
different child benefits that Britain will pay but there is no | :18:01. | :18:04. | |
mention of residency requirement for social housing, no mention of that | :18:05. | :18:09. | |
in the deal, so that has gone? Look, we don't know the outcome of this | :18:10. | :18:12. | |
negotiation until the end of this week. There is a week of hard work | :18:13. | :18:17. | |
to get the deal. But there is a bigger picture here. Social housing | :18:18. | :18:22. | |
is not on the agenda? Let's see what we get in this deal over the next | :18:23. | :18:28. | |
week. But there's a bigger point here, which is that we said we'd | :18:29. | :18:33. | |
have the renegotiation, lots and lots of people said you are never | :18:34. | :18:35. | |
going to get these things on the table. A question of in work | :18:36. | :18:41. | |
benefits, child benefit, we were told you couldn't even put that on | :18:42. | :18:45. | |
the agenda. The discussion in Europe this week is exactly how far we go | :18:46. | :18:49. | |
on those. People said that we couldn't deliver anything in this | :18:50. | :18:52. | |
space and we've managed to deliver already the draft deal, and we will | :18:53. | :18:57. | |
see where we end up. But not what was in the manifesto. We will see | :18:58. | :19:00. | |
where we end up at the end of this week. We will indeed. Not | :19:01. | :19:05. | |
necessarily next week but in the weeks ahead we will be coming back | :19:06. | :19:08. | |
to go through this. Onto the economy, you put in place a charter | :19:09. | :19:12. | |
for budget responsibility which commits you to running a surplus, a | :19:13. | :19:13. | |
legal obligation as well as a commits you to running a surplus, a | :19:14. | :19:19. | |
policy. The in situ for fiscal studies says that will require tax | :19:20. | :19:22. | |
rises or spending cuts as yet unannounced, do you agree? Not in | :19:23. | :19:27. | |
the latest financial forecast put out by the office for budget | :19:28. | :19:30. | |
responsible to who independently advise on these, and we have a | :19:31. | :19:33. | |
budget in just over a month's time so we will see what the figures say, | :19:34. | :19:38. | |
then. Clearly in the latest forecast from the government, yes, we have | :19:39. | :19:45. | |
that surplus. You have not hit a surplus. We have hit it in the | :19:46. | :19:52. | |
forecast. And they change. They do, as the economy changes. On that | :19:53. | :19:56. | |
economic front there was an awful lot in the manifesto on that, it is | :19:57. | :19:59. | |
all about economic security, generating jobs, in the same way | :20:00. | :20:03. | |
that the national Security ones were all about national security. And | :20:04. | :20:07. | |
those were the two elements at the heart of this manifesto that we were | :20:08. | :20:12. | |
elected on. I would say that we are delivering very strongly on both. In | :20:13. | :20:15. | |
terms of the big picture of what you are getting from the message that we | :20:16. | :20:19. | |
said we were going to deliver. Let me come down to the smaller but | :20:20. | :20:23. | |
still very important picture. You have a legal obligation to reach a | :20:24. | :20:28. | |
surplus by 2020. If, to reach that surplus, you had to raise taxes, | :20:29. | :20:32. | |
would you? Look, much as I'd love to, I'm not going to set out tax | :20:33. | :20:37. | |
policy on Sunday morning. To meet the legal obligation, if it required | :20:38. | :20:43. | |
tax increases, would there be tax increases? We've set out the plans | :20:44. | :20:47. | |
and the plans hit a surplus. We did that in the Autumn Statement in | :20:48. | :20:52. | |
November. Clearly the economy changes all the time, | :20:53. | :20:55. | |
internationally, people have seen falls in the stock market in the | :20:56. | :21:01. | |
last few months. But we will have a budget in more than a month's time. | :21:02. | :21:06. | |
But I voted to have that surplus and that is clearly what we will set out | :21:07. | :21:10. | |
to do. You promised a lower tax society. Yes. Yet on the forecast, | :21:11. | :21:16. | |
the overall tax burden is rising as a percentage of GDP and on the | :21:17. | :21:22. | |
forecast, not the buoyancy but extra tax that you have introduced will be | :21:23. | :21:26. | |
?50 billion higher. So you have previous on this, you could raise | :21:27. | :21:28. | |
taxes again because you already have? Clearly there are some areas | :21:29. | :21:32. | |
where we have tightened things up, especially on tax avoidance. We took | :21:33. | :21:37. | |
an extra ?5 billion from tax avoidance measures. And what about | :21:38. | :21:45. | |
the billions in addition to that? We have reduced the tax burden | :21:46. | :21:49. | |
especially on people in lower wage jobs, they are going to get the | :21:50. | :21:52. | |
national minimum wage but we are well on the way to the manifesto | :21:53. | :21:55. | |
commitment of making sure you don't have to pay any income taxed until | :21:56. | :22:01. | |
you make ?12,500. We have made progress but there is more to do. | :22:02. | :22:06. | |
The manifesto talks about reducing the tax relief on pension | :22:07. | :22:08. | |
contributions for people earning more than ?150,000, people on 45%, | :22:09. | :22:17. | |
the highest income tax band, you are going to cut tax relief on their | :22:18. | :22:21. | |
pension contributions. If you were to also cut the tax relief of those | :22:22. | :22:26. | |
on the 40% rate, that would be breaching the manifesto? There we've | :22:27. | :22:33. | |
done what we said we would do in the manifesto. We've followed the | :22:34. | :22:37. | |
manifesto clearly in terms of the commitment that it made. Outside the | :22:38. | :22:41. | |
manifesto there's always going to be other things that you do. On pension | :22:42. | :22:46. | |
tax review were explicit that it would be those in the 45% wouldn't | :22:47. | :22:51. | |
get it, you didn't mention any other bracket, the imprecation is that | :22:52. | :22:55. | |
it's only the 45%. If you took away tax relief from the 40% taxpayers | :22:56. | :23:00. | |
that would be broken manifesto commitment? That's not how I see it, | :23:01. | :23:04. | |
you can add things to the manifesto. Look at the whole reform programme a | :23:05. | :23:09. | |
massive reform programme which was not in our manifesto because we've | :23:10. | :23:13. | |
built it up as a proposal since then. Likewise the Prime | :23:14. | :23:16. | |
Ministerspeech on social mobility and an tackling an just inequalities | :23:17. | :23:23. | |
-- an just inequalities. We've done a huge amount of that on the autumn. | :23:24. | :23:30. | |
Delivering on the manifesto commitments is absolutely essential. | :23:31. | :23:36. | |
But it is not the only thing you do in government because you respond to | :23:37. | :23:40. | |
events. But the purpose of this interview is to hold your manifesto | :23:41. | :23:43. | |
to account. Hunting, when will you give Parliament the chance to repeal | :23:44. | :23:48. | |
the hunting act. We are committed to doing that. When? In this | :23:49. | :23:53. | |
Parliament. We looked at doing it early on. You dropped that. We | :23:54. | :23:57. | |
decided not to do it then, but we are committed to its. You set a | :23:58. | :24:03. | |
target of ?1 trillion of exports by 2020, most forecasters including | :24:04. | :24:09. | |
your own oh BR say you will be at least ?350 billion short. Can we | :24:10. | :24:13. | |
agree that you will not hit that target? It's fair to say that it is | :24:14. | :24:18. | |
stretching target, but it remains our target, our aspiration. But you | :24:19. | :24:23. | |
will miss it. There is an awful lot of work going into achieving it. | :24:24. | :24:31. | |
Thank you for that, come back and we will see the progress in the months | :24:32. | :24:32. | |
ahead. Look forward to it. And remember if you want to see how | :24:33. | :24:34. | |
the government is doing in detail our manifesto tracker | :24:35. | :24:37. | |
is available for you to peruse On Friday, new measures to tackle | :24:38. | :24:39. | |
the pay gap between genders From 2018, companies with more | :24:40. | :24:47. | |
than 250 employees will have to publish the differences in salary | :24:48. | :24:57. | |
between men and women. Businesses failing to address | :24:58. | :24:59. | |
the problem will be named Here's what Women and Equalities | :25:00. | :25:01. | |
Minister Nicky Morgan had to say. Transparency about the gender pay | :25:02. | :25:06. | |
gap in companies and public sector organisations is going to be very | :25:07. | :25:09. | |
important in driving behaviour. So we are going to require | :25:10. | :25:15. | |
companies, under the regulations, companies of over 250 employees, | :25:16. | :25:18. | |
to publish their gender pay gap We, as a government, will then | :25:19. | :25:21. | |
compile those league tables. It will be two fold, one, | :25:22. | :25:30. | |
companies will hopefully, and we expect from | :25:31. | :25:32. | |
the response we have, to think a lot harder about where | :25:33. | :25:36. | |
women are in their workforce. How they are distributed, | :25:37. | :25:39. | |
what they are being paid. But it will also drive | :25:40. | :25:41. | |
applications to work in certain organisations because I think women | :25:42. | :25:43. | |
will look and see what is the gender pay gap in this organisation | :25:44. | :25:47. | |
and is this somewhere And with us now, General Secretary | :25:48. | :25:49. | |
of the TUC, Frances O'Grady. Welcome back. We know there is a | :25:50. | :25:59. | |
gender pay gap. In some age groups, not all, but still in some age | :26:00. | :26:03. | |
groups. Where is the evidence that it is a result of dissemination, of | :26:04. | :26:08. | |
employers not paying properly, as opposed to lifestyle and choices? We | :26:09. | :26:14. | |
still do have this pretty crazy situation where women have Giroud | :26:15. | :26:22. | |
and 80p for everyone pound that men do across the economy. -- where | :26:23. | :26:26. | |
women earn 80p for every pound that men do. This is a welcome step, this | :26:27. | :26:30. | |
initiative, but it is a very small step. It is about reporting, not | :26:31. | :26:35. | |
about telling us why this is going on, not coming up with actions to | :26:36. | :26:39. | |
deal with it. When you dig down from the headline figure, and you have | :26:40. | :26:43. | |
just used one, you begin to see some quite deep-seated cultural issues, | :26:44. | :26:47. | |
not just a matter of economics. The labour market study shows that men | :26:48. | :26:51. | |
tend to work in occupations that pay more, that's been a historic thing. | :26:52. | :26:56. | |
And women in jobs that pay less. For example men in construction, women | :26:57. | :27:00. | |
in retail. Men in computer programming, women in nursing. That | :27:01. | :27:03. | |
is one of the explanations for the page gap. There is certainly still | :27:04. | :27:10. | |
big job separation, but one of the questions we must ask is, is it case | :27:11. | :27:14. | |
of equal values? People paying for the work of equal value. It is | :27:15. | :27:22. | |
illegal to pay anybody less than a man is getting or vice versa, equal | :27:23. | :27:29. | |
pay for equal jobs. For example, why is looking after children considered | :27:30. | :27:34. | |
to be less valuable than mending a car? The problem is, in order for | :27:35. | :27:37. | |
women to prove it, they've got to be able to take employment tribunal | :27:38. | :27:40. | |
claims, and of course we've seen this government introduce very | :27:41. | :27:44. | |
significant fees that have massively reduced the number of women being | :27:45. | :27:50. | |
able to take pay and six dissemination claims. Is on the | :27:51. | :27:54. | |
gender pay gap really a generational matter, and it might be resolving | :27:55. | :27:58. | |
itself? I'd like to show you this chart, here, which looks at | :27:59. | :28:02. | |
different age groups. For women aged 40 to 49, there is a gap, it's | :28:03. | :28:07. | |
coming down but there is still a substantial gap. For younger women | :28:08. | :28:12. | |
in the 22 to 29, there is no pay gap, indeed there is some evidence | :28:13. | :28:16. | |
now that the gender pay gap is the other way among younger people than | :28:17. | :28:23. | |
it is amongst men. What I think it shows you is that the real problem | :28:24. | :28:27. | |
kicks in when women have babies. Yes. That's when women are much more | :28:28. | :28:32. | |
likely to work part-time, much more likely to need nurseries, and as we | :28:33. | :28:36. | |
get older and we are looking after elderly parents, too. Elder care as | :28:37. | :28:42. | |
well. Some of those public service cuts are hitting our sure start | :28:43. | :28:45. | |
centres and care for the elderly. I think you hit on something, there. | :28:46. | :28:49. | |
You can begin to see the return of the gender pay gap as women hit | :28:50. | :28:55. | |
their late 20s or early 30s, because the average age that women have | :28:56. | :29:01. | |
their first child is 28 and a half. So that suggests that the policy | :29:02. | :29:04. | |
response will have to be quite sophisticated to get rid of a later | :29:05. | :29:07. | |
developing pay gap. Stopping cuts on this is would help but also helping | :29:08. | :29:13. | |
dads as well. A lot of men nowadays want to be more involved with their | :29:14. | :29:16. | |
children but they need more paid paternity to be able to do that. I | :29:17. | :29:22. | |
want to show you another chart that suggests there are developers. This | :29:23. | :29:27. | |
shows you a figure that is not widely known, there are now every | :29:28. | :29:33. | |
year 100,000 more women applying for university than men. 100,000 more. | :29:34. | :29:40. | |
Women from poor backgrounds are 50% more likely to go to university than | :29:41. | :29:43. | |
men. Women now take most of the first in medicine and law, two | :29:44. | :29:47. | |
professions that are pretty well paid. Again, isn't this sense that, | :29:48. | :29:54. | |
even in the later years, now, the gender pay gap could begin to | :29:55. | :29:56. | |
resolve itself? I really hope so the TUC analysis | :29:57. | :30:04. | |
shows that at this rate of change it would take another 45 years. No, I | :30:05. | :30:11. | |
looked at these figures. Frances O'Grady, you took one year of the | :30:12. | :30:15. | |
pay gap, which strode it came down by 0.2%. Dodt which showed. If you | :30:16. | :30:23. | |
had taken the last ten years it still takes too long but it is not | :30:24. | :30:27. | |
47 years, that was a propaganda figure. You can't do a trend on one | :30:28. | :30:32. | |
year. Most people agree we need bold action to change it. Given we have | :30:33. | :30:37. | |
agreed that it is a complicated picture and now becomes an issue | :30:38. | :30:40. | |
primarily for women who have taken time off and then go back into the | :30:41. | :30:45. | |
workforce again, get me one thing that the government could do that | :30:46. | :30:50. | |
would stop this gender pay gap re-emerging in their 30s and 40s? | :30:51. | :30:55. | |
Stop cuts to nurseries. Provide a proper system of care for old | :30:56. | :31:00. | |
people, that allows women and men to combine those caring | :31:01. | :31:02. | |
responsibilities with a responsible job. That is what would really | :31:03. | :31:08. | |
make... I can see how it would help. It is about progression and people | :31:09. | :31:12. | |
feeling they can go for that promotion or training course that | :31:13. | :31:12. | |
would get them a better job. It is a lot better than the | :31:13. | :32:39. | |
boardroom and a lot better than many sat around the Cabinet table. Take | :32:40. | :32:48. | |
the NASUWT, 74% female membership, only 30% women of full-time | :32:49. | :32:56. | |
officers, only 35 are on the TUC delegation, only 20 are on the NEC. | :32:57. | :33:02. | |
Led by Ormond general secretary. For the first time in history, it is | :33:03. | :33:09. | |
50/50 -- a woman general secretary. And the TUC has its first. I'm | :33:10. | :33:18. | |
delighted to say. She loves unions. It has just won 11:30am. You are | :33:19. | :33:23. | |
watching the Sunday Politics. We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who | :33:24. | :33:26. | |
Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland. | :33:27. | :33:30. | |
Another week, another round of fiscal framework talks. | :33:31. | :33:34. | |
Are the Treasury and the Scottish Government inching their way | :33:35. | :33:37. | |
towards agreement or is there an insurmountable gulf? | :33:38. | :33:42. | |
All parties agreed that an independent body should produce | :33:43. | :33:45. | |
the official economic forecasts for the Scottish Government. | :33:46. | :33:48. | |
So why did Holyrood's Finance Committee vote against it this week? | :33:49. | :33:54. | |
The Tories are campaigning to be the second-largest party at Holyrood | :33:55. | :33:57. | |
after the elections, but how important is the Ruth Davidson brand | :33:58. | :34:01. | |
The next round of talks on the fiscal framework begins | :34:02. | :34:10. | |
Despite neither of the principal players being willing to talk | :34:11. | :34:14. | |
about it, there's been no shortage of official letters released | :34:15. | :34:16. | |
But have they shed any light on the issues at stake | :34:17. | :34:20. | |
I'm joined from London by David Phillips, who's a senior | :34:21. | :34:27. | |
research economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies. | :34:28. | :34:35. | |
He wrote a paper with David Bell, the Scottish economist, going | :34:36. | :34:39. | |
through some of the details with this. Having looked at the paper, | :34:40. | :34:46. | |
and it's shrunk from the various tables and equations, the first | :34:47. | :34:49. | |
thing that struck me about it is, actually, when you look at how any | :34:50. | :34:53. | |
system could work, it is much more complicated than the politicians are | :34:54. | :34:57. | |
letting on. I think you're right there. It's a very complicated | :34:58. | :35:03. | |
picture and that's because of the no debt principles and the taxpayer | :35:04. | :35:06. | |
principles in the Smith commission's report. So the issue at stake is | :35:07. | :35:10. | |
that there are these two principles that the agreement has to try to | :35:11. | :35:16. | |
satisfy. The first is the principle which says that Scotland should | :35:17. | :35:18. | |
neither gain nor lose from the decision to devolve the tax would | :35:19. | :35:22. | |
evolve the spending power. That's the first principle. And there's | :35:23. | :35:28. | |
another no detriment principle, called the taxpayer fairness | :35:29. | :35:29. | |
principle, which says that Scotland should neither win or lose when tax | :35:30. | :35:33. | |
rates are changed in the rest of the UK. You might think those are both | :35:34. | :35:37. | |
very sensible principles and I agree, they sound like the building | :35:38. | :35:41. | |
blocks of a fair system, but it turns out that with the Barnett | :35:42. | :35:46. | |
formula in place, you can't design a system which simultaneously | :35:47. | :35:48. | |
satisfies both those principles and is simple and transparent. Let's | :35:49. | :35:53. | |
just take one of the political issues. Obviously from the British | :35:54. | :35:58. | |
government's point of view, they don't want a situation where, should | :35:59. | :36:04. | |
they raise income tax, for example, to pay for schools and hospitals in | :36:05. | :36:11. | |
England, and there's no rise in income tax in Scotland, that somehow | :36:12. | :36:16. | |
the money raised would leap into Scotland's public spending. MPs | :36:17. | :36:19. | |
would stand up and say it was completely ridiculous and unfair. | :36:20. | :36:23. | |
The so-called levels deduction principle, which you discussed in | :36:24. | :36:26. | |
your paper and which Greg Hands, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, | :36:27. | :36:30. | |
seems to be promoting, appears to be the only way of avoiding that | :36:31. | :36:35. | |
happening. Yes, so what this levels deduction method does... It says | :36:36. | :36:39. | |
that when tax rates change in England, you increase the block | :36:40. | :36:45. | |
grant adjustment and take off the block grant by the equivalent to | :36:46. | :36:51. | |
Scotland's population share of that. So if it was 10 billion in England, | :36:52. | :36:55. | |
the Scottish population is 10% so you take 1 billion more off the | :36:56. | :37:00. | |
block grant. The reason that satisfies the taxpayer fairness | :37:01. | :37:02. | |
principle you mentioned is that that is exactly symmetric with the way | :37:03. | :37:05. | |
the Barnett formula works on the spending side. The Scottish | :37:06. | :37:11. | |
Government's position is that that is a detriment to Scotland because | :37:12. | :37:13. | |
that would require Scottish levels to go up more quickly in percentage | :37:14. | :37:17. | |
terms, because they start lower, to keep up with that form of | :37:18. | :37:20. | |
adjustment. So it's really about balancing these two principles. Just | :37:21. | :37:25. | |
to give an illustration of the problems here, the levels deduction | :37:26. | :37:30. | |
method politically gets you off that problem, that people say, look, this | :37:31. | :37:35. | |
is ridiculous that taxes go up in England to pay for Scottish spending | :37:36. | :37:39. | |
but taxes don't go up in Scotland but the downside, according to your | :37:40. | :37:43. | |
paper, is that should Scotland's population not grow as fast as | :37:44. | :37:47. | |
England's, Scotland's budget appears to be clobbered in the medium-term. | :37:48. | :37:52. | |
There are two issues. Scotland is it by two factors under this method. | :37:53. | :37:57. | |
First of all the population difference. Scottish populations | :37:58. | :38:00. | |
tend to go up less quickly than in the UK and this method doesn't take | :38:01. | :38:06. | |
that into account. Also, the method doesn't take into account the fact | :38:07. | :38:09. | |
that Scottish revenues start of less per capita. Income tax revenues in | :38:10. | :38:15. | |
Scotland are about 89% of the same amount per person of the rest of the | :38:16. | :38:19. | |
UK. That's some thing the Scottish Government need to say, this is not | :38:20. | :38:24. | |
consistent with the idea of no detriment. We see new proposals from | :38:25. | :38:27. | |
the Scottish Government and the UK government in the last week that try | :38:28. | :38:30. | |
to inch towards an agreement and compromise on some of these | :38:31. | :38:34. | |
principles. The point is, to some extent there is a clash of right | :38:35. | :38:37. | |
against right. It is personally reasonable for the British | :38:38. | :38:40. | |
government to say, we can't ever situation where taxes go up in | :38:41. | :38:43. | |
England and end up paying for things in Scotland but are not paying for | :38:44. | :38:48. | |
their but the Scottish Government is quite reasonable to say, we can't | :38:49. | :38:52. | |
take full responsibility if Scotland's population doesn't grow | :38:53. | :38:55. | |
as fast in England because we don't have any control over immigration | :38:56. | :38:59. | |
policy. I think you are right. There are two principles which are both | :39:00. | :39:04. | |
reasonable and the situation now is that they are trying to come to an | :39:05. | :39:09. | |
agreement which tries to compromise on certain elements. The Scottish | :39:10. | :39:14. | |
Government has said, we will use our method for the day to day increases | :39:15. | :39:21. | |
in revenues. That satisfies the no detriment principle. That means that | :39:22. | :39:24. | |
Scotland would lose out from population growth and from starting | :39:25. | :39:29. | |
off with lower revenues. But we will use the level method for the tax | :39:30. | :39:33. | |
rate changes. The difficulty there is, there are two methods working at | :39:34. | :39:36. | |
the same time so it could be quite complicated. How do you know what | :39:37. | :39:40. | |
part of the change in revenues is to do with the rate changes and what | :39:41. | :39:44. | |
part is to do with economic growth, especially when there can be | :39:45. | :39:47. | |
affected of tax policy changes on behaviour and growth? But is that | :39:48. | :39:54. | |
fudge which you've just described... Is it at least a workable forge? It | :39:55. | :40:00. | |
depends on to what extent they'd want to make it as accurate a fudge | :40:01. | :40:06. | |
as possible. You could do it with a good approximation if you took been | :40:07. | :40:10. | |
no behavioural response estimates of policy change but those can be very | :40:11. | :40:14. | |
different to the real effects. So on the 50p tax rate, that would raise | :40:15. | :40:18. | |
lots of money if there was no behavioural response but the | :40:19. | :40:23. | |
difference is very little once people respond. So you need to have | :40:24. | :40:26. | |
some really big assumptions or leave a lot of effects out. I think that | :40:27. | :40:31. | |
could potentially work if there is goodwill on both sides but if there | :40:32. | :40:34. | |
is an goodwill, it could lead to scope for argument and slow | :40:35. | :40:38. | |
unravelling of the system as it becomes unworkable because of trying | :40:39. | :40:41. | |
to debate and argue about each of tax policy changes. Something that | :40:42. | :40:46. | |
hasn't been talked about very much is that presumably there would have | :40:47. | :40:50. | |
to be provision for some special transfers under certain conditions. | :40:51. | :40:53. | |
Let me give you an example. I've tried to make this as controversial | :40:54. | :40:59. | |
as possible. Let's say the British government says, we want to pay for | :41:00. | :41:02. | |
Trident and are going to put income tax up by 1p, but a a bit Scotland. | :41:03. | :41:08. | |
They will say, Scotland gets the benefit of Trident as much as much | :41:09. | :41:10. | |
as England does so the Scottish Government will have to make some | :41:11. | :41:13. | |
sort of sub mention of money to make up for the fact that taxes have not | :41:14. | :41:17. | |
gone up in Scotland to pay for that. There would have to be a provision | :41:18. | :41:21. | |
for that and if you want an explosive one, there you have it. | :41:22. | :41:27. | |
Indeed. Actually, both the methods chosen by the Scottish Government, | :41:28. | :41:30. | |
the per capita indexation method and the levels deduction method proposed | :41:31. | :41:35. | |
by the UK government, would both deliver that kind of transfer | :41:36. | :41:40. | |
automatically. What would happen is tax revenues would go up in the rest | :41:41. | :41:43. | |
of the UK, there for the block grant adjustment would go up, and both | :41:44. | :41:48. | |
methods, although by somewhat different amounts, and that would be | :41:49. | :41:50. | |
Scotland's contribution to paying for things UK wide. It could be | :41:51. | :41:56. | |
Trident or it could be increases in the state pension, which go to both | :41:57. | :42:02. | |
Scotland and the rest of the UK. Just briefly, because we will have | :42:03. | :42:06. | |
to leave this, under the method... We talked about the levels | :42:07. | :42:10. | |
distribution which Greg Hands is now arguing for but as I understand it, | :42:11. | :42:15. | |
under the method, the per capita method, that the Scottish Government | :42:16. | :42:18. | |
is arguing for, you would have a risk that taxes raised in England | :42:19. | :42:22. | |
would have a over spending in Scotland without any concomitant | :42:23. | :42:26. | |
rises in Scotland. You would have that risk indeed. You have that risk | :42:27. | :42:30. | |
both from tax increases in the rest of the UK, when they put up the tax | :42:31. | :42:35. | |
rate, but also, over time, as tax revenues go up. Greg Hands has said | :42:36. | :42:40. | |
a proportion of those extra tax revenues in England and Wales would | :42:41. | :42:42. | |
be transferred to Scotland. That's true but that goes on at the moment | :42:43. | :42:48. | |
under the Barnett formula and without taxes devolved and the | :42:49. | :42:50. | |
Scottish Government has been saying that it thinks that should continue | :42:51. | :42:54. | |
and the no detriment principles are satisfied. Greg Hands has come back | :42:55. | :42:58. | |
with a modified version of the levels deduction method, which moves | :42:59. | :43:04. | |
a long way in that direction. The method he proposes is to adjust the | :43:05. | :43:08. | |
level deduction method two, in effect, continue to give these | :43:09. | :43:11. | |
additional transfers in income tax to Scotland. The key issue they're | :43:12. | :43:15. | |
now debating about, it seems, is what happens to population growth | :43:16. | :43:19. | |
and what happens to taxes other than income tax, like stamp duty. | :43:20. | :43:23. | |
Potentially, they solve the issues on income tax and then move on to | :43:24. | :43:26. | |
population growth and what happens to stamp duty, landfill tax, air | :43:27. | :43:30. | |
passenger duty and taxes like that. We have to leave it there. Thank you | :43:31. | :43:32. | |
very much. Listening to that in Aberdeen | :43:33. | :43:35. | |
is the SNP MP Kirsty Blackman, who sits on the Scottish | :43:36. | :43:38. | |
Affairs Select Committee. If Greg Hands's proposal is amended | :43:39. | :43:45. | |
in the way that David Phillips has just suggested he has amended it, | :43:46. | :43:49. | |
that sounds fairly reasonable, doesn't it? Not exactly. What the UK | :43:50. | :43:56. | |
government are now suggesting is doing a method of Dutch and that | :43:57. | :44:00. | |
involves taking ?7 billion away from Scotland and the May going to give | :44:01. | :44:05. | |
us 4.5 billion back over ten years. But we have still got a funding | :44:06. | :44:09. | |
formula that is unfair to Scotland and doesn't fulfil the Smith | :44:10. | :44:13. | |
commission. The point is, you would presumably accent it would be an | :44:14. | :44:16. | |
should taxes raised in England somehow leak income tax into | :44:17. | :44:22. | |
spending in Scotland and that seems to be the problem with what the | :44:23. | :44:25. | |
Scottish Government was suggesting originally. I think the key argument | :44:26. | :44:30. | |
here is talking about what we've got a mandate for. So what is the UK | :44:31. | :44:35. | |
government have a mandate for here? The UK government has a mandate to | :44:36. | :44:38. | |
preserve Barnett because that's what it said in its manifesto. My point | :44:39. | :44:44. | |
about leaking taxes... Surely just because you are a Scottish | :44:45. | :44:46. | |
nationalist doesn't mean you have to abandon a British sense of fair | :44:47. | :44:50. | |
play. It just wouldn't be fair play if taxes went up in England than | :44:51. | :44:54. | |
some of that spending ended up being spent in Scotland, even though taxes | :44:55. | :44:56. | |
haven't gone up in Scotland. That's just not fair. But what nobody has | :44:57. | :45:02. | |
here is a mandate to overrule the Barnett formula so what we are | :45:03. | :45:05. | |
trying to do is the Scottish Government are putting forward the | :45:06. | :45:08. | |
per capita deduction system, which is the closest method to Barnett. It | :45:09. | :45:12. | |
manages to integrate Scotland from the fact that we got lower | :45:13. | :45:17. | |
population growth. Nobody is talking about overruling Barnett. We're | :45:18. | :45:19. | |
talking about what should be deducted from the money that comes | :45:20. | :45:22. | |
to Scotland under the Barnett formula in order to compensate... | :45:23. | :45:28. | |
But that's what the method does. What the levels deduction method | :45:29. | :45:31. | |
does is it systematically reduces the block grant that is provided to | :45:32. | :45:35. | |
Scotland, so what it is doing is overruling Barnett by the back door, | :45:36. | :45:41. | |
if you like. Do explain. What do you mean, exactly? The levels deduction | :45:42. | :45:45. | |
method means that Scotland has to grow its population faster in | :45:46. | :45:50. | |
proportional terms than the rest of the UK population. As you just heard | :45:51. | :45:56. | |
David Phillips explaining, the advantage of that is that should | :45:57. | :45:59. | |
income tax go up in England but not in Scotland, the advantage of the | :46:00. | :46:02. | |
levels deduction method is it simply puts the Barnett formula up and | :46:03. | :46:08. | |
Scotland gets extra money because of the tax increases in England, and | :46:09. | :46:11. | |
takes it back again through the deduction, so there for their is no | :46:12. | :46:14. | |
unfair increase in Scottish spending. That's the point. But what | :46:15. | :46:18. | |
the levels deduction method does is it produces in Scotland's budget | :46:19. | :46:25. | |
without Scotland having to make any detrimental decisions without the | :46:26. | :46:26. | |
Scottish Government having to make any bad decisions. It looks like you | :46:27. | :46:33. | |
don't want to take any... I can understand the argument that | :46:34. | :46:37. | |
Scotland has no control over immigration and there for if the | :46:38. | :46:39. | |
population grows here at a lesser rate than in England, all the | :46:40. | :46:45. | |
responsibility for that should not fall on the Scottish budget. But | :46:46. | :46:49. | |
surely at least some of it should. The whole point about more | :46:50. | :46:52. | |
devolution of powers is that Scotland does take responsibility | :46:53. | :46:55. | |
for things that can attract people to come and live here. The Scottish | :46:56. | :47:00. | |
Government at the Scottish Parliament should have | :47:01. | :47:01. | |
responsibility for all of those areas with which they have the | :47:02. | :47:05. | |
powers to deal with. So they should take the risks and they should take | :47:06. | :47:08. | |
the benefits of policy decisions that they make on things that are | :47:09. | :47:13. | |
devolved. On things that are reserved, the policy is not a policy | :47:14. | :47:17. | |
we would have chosen, there for the UK government has to bear the risks | :47:18. | :47:24. | |
of that. Are you saying that nothing the Scottish Government can do with | :47:25. | :47:28. | |
all these extra powers it has will have any influence on the Scottish | :47:29. | :47:33. | |
population at all? I'm saying that there are things that we can do and | :47:34. | :47:38. | |
things that we can currently do that will work to increase the Scottish | :47:39. | :47:41. | |
population but in terms of the Scottish population in comparison to | :47:42. | :47:44. | |
the population of the rest of the UK, it is very difficult and a | :47:45. | :47:51. | |
professor and David Bell who work before the Scottish affairs | :47:52. | :47:53. | |
committee, they both said Scotland doesn't have the leverage to grow | :47:54. | :47:55. | |
its population. The professor pointed out that Scotland's | :47:56. | :48:01. | |
population in terms of the rest of the UK population, which is what we | :48:02. | :48:04. | |
are talking about, Scotland's population has not grown at a faster | :48:05. | :48:08. | |
rate than the rest of the UK since the act of union. If the SNP walks | :48:09. | :48:13. | |
away from this, as it has threatened to do, would you be comfortable | :48:14. | :48:18. | |
facing your electorate and saying, look, we were offered control over | :48:19. | :48:21. | |
half Scotland's budget and we said no? I don't think the new devolution | :48:22. | :48:29. | |
can come at any cost. I don't think that the Scottish Parliament should | :48:30. | :48:33. | |
sign up to a deal that is going to systematically reduce the block | :48:34. | :48:35. | |
grant for Scotland and systematically reduced the amount of | :48:36. | :48:39. | |
money. ?3.5 billion over ten years is not pennies. It is quite a lot of | :48:40. | :48:45. | |
money. One of the things we've committed to doing is we are going | :48:46. | :48:49. | |
to publish a manifesto commitment on what we would do with these devolved | :48:50. | :48:53. | |
powers. It is not in anyway about hiding. We are going to be upfront | :48:54. | :48:56. | |
and honest about what we would do if these powers were devolved. But you | :48:57. | :49:00. | |
would be happy to walk away from it, is that what you are saying? We | :49:01. | :49:05. | |
wouldn't be happy. We should point out that your estimates of what | :49:06. | :49:11. | |
would be gained or lost under various systems over ten years are | :49:12. | :49:17. | |
simply estimates, so you'd be saying, we've done estimates on what | :49:18. | :49:21. | |
will happen in 10-years' time and because we don't like what would | :49:22. | :49:24. | |
happen in 10-years' time, we refused to take more powers to the Scottish | :49:25. | :49:26. | |
Parliament now. Open the course of ten years, not in | :49:27. | :49:36. | |
ten years' time will stop it could be less, it could be more. I think | :49:37. | :49:41. | |
the electorate understand that. People are saying, yes, | :49:42. | :49:45. | |
absolutely... Are they? Your political opponents are murmuring | :49:46. | :49:52. | |
that actually, you want to delay this because you don't want to have | :49:53. | :49:57. | |
the next election fall on your record of running Scotland. You'd | :49:58. | :50:03. | |
rather turn it into a constitutional Barney so you can say you are hard | :50:04. | :50:08. | |
done by by London. All this is quite intentional on the part of the SNP. | :50:09. | :50:15. | |
It is absolutely not intentional. It does not advantage the SNP in any | :50:16. | :50:22. | |
way. We will still publish policies so people can argue about whether or | :50:23. | :50:29. | |
not they think that our policies, and the Scottish Government has an | :50:30. | :50:32. | |
excellent record and we will fight this election on it. Thank you very | :50:33. | :50:36. | |
Well, one thing all sides do agree on is the need to strengthen | :50:37. | :50:40. | |
Or at least they did agree on it until this week, | :50:41. | :50:44. | |
when the Finance Secretary was accused of killing off proposals | :50:45. | :50:46. | |
to give an independent body greater powers to scrutinise | :50:47. | :50:48. | |
that the fiscal commission should produce official economic forecasts, | :50:49. | :50:54. | |
But this week SNP MSPs overturned their previous stance | :50:55. | :50:57. | |
Well, we did ask for a member of the Finance Committee to come on, | :50:58. | :51:02. | |
So joining me now is the MSP James Dornan and Labour MSP | :51:03. | :51:07. | |
Can you explain to us why an idea that the SNP is thought was | :51:08. | :51:21. | |
brilliant in a few months ago is no rubbish? I think you are | :51:22. | :51:26. | |
exaggerating both sides of it. At stage one we suggested these moves | :51:27. | :51:30. | |
but then when the Cabinet Secretary and explain the complexities and | :51:31. | :51:33. | |
what the outcomes would be if we went along with those, they agreed | :51:34. | :51:37. | |
on the Scottish Government position. This is a case of when the evidence | :51:38. | :51:43. | |
changes, so does my view. Let me read you what Kenny Gibson, the | :51:44. | :51:48. | |
finance Chase said. We are calling for the build to be changed to give | :51:49. | :51:55. | |
it responsibility for producing the official forecast. Will the new | :51:56. | :52:00. | |
commission have that responsibility? It doesn't look like it. 120 out of | :52:01. | :52:06. | |
23 countries that have a similar system, only three of them have | :52:07. | :52:13. | |
these powers. What we are saying is the Scottish Government position | :52:14. | :52:15. | |
will be in keeping with the international one. The old BR is one | :52:16. | :52:25. | |
of my Reagan policies. Hang on. Let me just get this very precise point. | :52:26. | :52:30. | |
In the UK Parliament, a motion is put forward to say that George | :52:31. | :52:38. | |
Osborne should set the economic forecasts and not OBR. The | :52:39. | :52:43. | |
Westminster government has nothing to do with me. I thought you were | :52:44. | :52:49. | |
the main opposition party. I am in the Scottish Government will stop I | :52:50. | :52:52. | |
am here to talk about the Scottish Government position on this. We | :52:53. | :52:57. | |
should not be using OBR is the perfect example. We have had | :52:58. | :53:01. | |
previous politicians saying that the OBR was just another part of the | :53:02. | :53:05. | |
Conservative government. So you are against the OBR? They collect | :53:06. | :53:11. | |
information from government officials, so you could quite | :53:12. | :53:15. | |
drizzly, the HRC said what happened was there was no change, it used to | :53:16. | :53:19. | |
be that officials collected it and gave it to the government and now | :53:20. | :53:23. | |
they give it to be BR. It's the exact same information. Can you | :53:24. | :53:31. | |
explain to us why it is a bad idea for a commission which is | :53:32. | :53:34. | |
independent of the government to set the official forecast? It should be | :53:35. | :53:40. | |
the government's responsibility. If you have the Scottish risk of | :53:41. | :53:43. | |
commission doing that, who are they going to be held responsible by? It | :53:44. | :53:47. | |
should surely be the government of the day. So the British government | :53:48. | :53:52. | |
cannot hold George Osborne responsible for his own budget? Its | :53:53. | :53:59. | |
OBR. What happens is they put forward a forecast, but the Scottish | :54:00. | :54:03. | |
Government would be in keeping with the rest of Europe, and the rest of | :54:04. | :54:12. | |
the countries. So what about that. I'm afraid the Scottish Government | :54:13. | :54:17. | |
have got it badly wrong. Two years ago, I think, they produced a report | :54:18. | :54:20. | |
on the back of an enquiry saying they wanted a strong fiscal | :54:21. | :54:25. | |
commission. The stage one report was literally a couple of weeks ago, and | :54:26. | :54:28. | |
in that time they've changed their mind. The only conclusion people can | :54:29. | :54:34. | |
draw is that they've been got at. We need, because we've got power was | :54:35. | :54:38. | |
coming to us, we have new powers now and have more coming in the future, | :54:39. | :54:42. | |
a substantial power over taxation and welfare. We need a robust fiscal | :54:43. | :54:48. | |
commission to scrutinise our public finances. Actually, we're asking it | :54:49. | :54:52. | |
to do more than that. It's not just forecasting. What the SNP voted down | :54:53. | :54:56. | |
last week was looking at the long-term sustainability of public | :54:57. | :54:59. | |
finances and the Scottish Government... But he says its OBR | :55:00. | :55:08. | |
who are the operation? It's not. Other countries have bodies that do | :55:09. | :55:12. | |
this job, who looked at the finances. In Scotland we don't have | :55:13. | :55:17. | |
that capacity. It is critical that any fiscal commission is not just | :55:18. | :55:20. | |
independent but seem to be independent. At the moment, that's | :55:21. | :55:25. | |
not the case. We had an opportunity, not just to scrutinise government | :55:26. | :55:30. | |
finances, but finances for the future. The SNP denied it. You | :55:31. | :55:35. | |
accept that the SNP members were arguing for the opposite position to | :55:36. | :55:39. | |
you you said they were technical reasons they changed their mind. | :55:40. | :55:44. | |
What I said was that when the Deputy first minute explain the | :55:45. | :55:46. | |
complexities and the possibility that they would be a lack of | :55:47. | :55:51. | |
independence from it if it was... What are these complexities? First | :55:52. | :55:57. | |
of all it would be outside the financial memorandum. If government | :55:58. | :56:03. | |
officials collected information it would be given to the Scottish | :56:04. | :56:07. | |
fiscal commission, exactly the same information the same people would be | :56:08. | :56:11. | |
given to the government just now. Where is the requirement for them to | :56:12. | :56:16. | |
do this? That is nonsense! The fiscal commission would be able to | :56:17. | :56:20. | |
collect information from wherever. They could commission people to do | :56:21. | :56:25. | |
so. They would be nothing there. They can still hold the government | :56:26. | :56:30. | |
to account. Do you know what happens now? What happens now is there is a | :56:31. | :56:34. | |
degree of challenge and scrutiny that has the commission working with | :56:35. | :56:37. | |
the government producing reports that the government sees in advance, | :56:38. | :56:44. | |
having some have described it as cosy conversations. I wouldn't go | :56:45. | :56:50. | |
that far but I do think that lack of independence, that lack of scrutiny, | :56:51. | :56:54. | |
is a problem for us as we proceed. We need something robust. We don't | :56:55. | :56:58. | |
want a laptop which is what the SNP want to give us. We need a | :56:59. | :57:03. | |
commission with teeth. I don't understand why you think OBR is a | :57:04. | :57:11. | |
bad idea. I still don't understand what these complexities are to stop | :57:12. | :57:15. | |
that happening here. Despite the fact that Jackie seems to think that | :57:16. | :57:20. | |
OBR is a good thing, it is only two years ago that Alistair Darling said | :57:21. | :57:24. | |
it was part of the Westminster government. We need a completely | :57:25. | :57:28. | |
independent Scottish fiscal commission that can give an | :57:29. | :57:31. | |
alternative forecast and hold someone to account. What you want, | :57:32. | :57:36. | |
you wanted to be almost like part of the government. It should be... What | :57:37. | :57:42. | |
is it that the SNP didn't understand before that they understand having | :57:43. | :57:48. | |
been enlightened by John Swinney? John Swinney went in front of the | :57:49. | :57:52. | |
committee and explained the possible costs that would be involved in it | :57:53. | :57:58. | |
on the dangers of it as part of that whole system. I was that the finance | :57:59. | :58:03. | |
committee. That is just nonsense! I have to say. Oh dear. We are talking | :58:04. | :58:11. | |
about the future of the nation's finances. This is a new low in SNP | :58:12. | :58:14. | |
politics. I think we have to leave it there. | :58:15. | :58:17. | |
Thank you very much indeed. It's become a truism | :58:18. | :58:19. | |
of this Scottish election that the interesting thing is who's | :58:20. | :58:20. | |
going to come second - The Tory revival, if there is one, | :58:21. | :58:23. | |
is down in part to Labour's difficulties, but is also | :58:24. | :58:27. | |
being credited to the leadership She's young, from a blue collar | :58:28. | :58:29. | |
background, and seems to be helping the party connect with voters | :58:30. | :58:33. | |
who would never have thought That'll be underlined this week | :58:34. | :58:36. | |
as the Conservative leader in Scotland sends out | :58:37. | :58:39. | |
600,000 letters to voters, Preparing to hit the streets in the | :58:40. | :58:55. | |
West end of Glasgow with a Conservative message, which oddly, | :58:56. | :58:59. | |
seems to be about their leader. We were seen to be the party of people | :59:00. | :59:03. | |
with money that came from a certain background. I didn't go to | :59:04. | :59:08. | |
university. I went to college for a couple of years, we need to | :59:09. | :59:12. | |
represent the people of Scotland and under Ruth Davidson that is what we | :59:13. | :59:17. | |
are doing. We bring all sorts of Conservatives into the fold to | :59:18. | :59:20. | |
represent everyone in Scotland. Ruth is leading from the front. You | :59:21. | :59:25. | |
only have to watch chain Holyrood to see that she is the only opposition | :59:26. | :59:28. | |
leader who is holding the SNP to account. | :59:29. | :59:35. | |
So how has Ruth Davidson managed to park her tank on the opposition 's | :59:36. | :59:39. | |
lawn? She is energetic, she does well in | :59:40. | :59:44. | |
debates and high tariff shows like question Time. She is popular and | :59:45. | :59:49. | |
shall do well in this campaign. But there are other factors, one is the | :59:50. | :59:53. | |
Labour Party situation, moderate Labour voters who are still voting | :59:54. | :59:58. | |
Labour, there aren't many of them left, but Jeremy Corbyn will put | :59:59. | :00:02. | |
them off and cows you don't do's tax rises would put them off. It is | :00:03. | :00:08. | |
possible they will go to the Tory party. | :00:09. | :00:14. | |
But haven't the Tories been here before, led by a powerful | :00:15. | :00:17. | |
charismatic woman who somehow seems much more popular than the party | :00:18. | :00:24. | |
itself we had a situation five years ago in terms of individual | :00:25. | :00:28. | |
popularity, but the Tories did not output the Labour Party. We need to | :00:29. | :00:34. | |
be cautious about this, the leader is popular, but the party is not as | :00:35. | :00:38. | |
popular as the leader is. That can play against them. It has done in | :00:39. | :00:43. | |
the past. Some argue that the Conservatives only look good at the | :00:44. | :00:47. | |
moment because labour in Scotland is falling so fast and so far. If that | :00:48. | :00:56. | |
were the case Labour's polling is would-be brewer, but we are seeing | :00:57. | :01:00. | |
not just a building on the support we have always known we had in | :01:01. | :01:04. | |
Scotland, but people responding positively to this combination of | :01:05. | :01:08. | |
vibrant, dynamic leadership from Ruth and a clarity of political and | :01:09. | :01:16. | |
policy position. Voters, if they want anything, it's clarity. If I | :01:17. | :01:20. | |
support these people, what will they do? With the Conservatives that | :01:21. | :01:26. | |
question is answered. Become a's elections watch what a quirk of the | :01:27. | :01:28. | |
system which could benefit the Conservatives. The SNP will win | :01:29. | :01:35. | |
every constituency bar two or three, what that means is the SNP will not | :01:36. | :01:39. | |
win a lot of regional seats. Those seats have got to go to somebody. | :01:40. | :01:45. | |
There are 56 of them up for grabs. The Greens have got a good chance of | :01:46. | :01:49. | |
getting some of them if they can persuade SNP voters to switch to | :01:50. | :01:53. | |
green in the vote, but if they can't the Greens are not likely to do all | :01:54. | :01:58. | |
that well. Votes will stay with the SNP and the main beneficiaries are | :01:59. | :02:02. | |
likely to be the Conservative Party. They are likely to get more seats on | :02:03. | :02:08. | |
the same butcher as they had before. There were other people giving out | :02:09. | :02:12. | |
leaflets in Glasgow, gospel tracts, it's not yet clear if the | :02:13. | :02:15. | |
Conservatives will be relying on divine intervention. | :02:16. | :02:17. | |
Joining me from our Edinburgh studio is the Conservatives' Environment, | :02:18. | :02:20. | |
Fishing and External Affairs Spokesperson Jamie McGrigor, | :02:21. | :02:21. | |
who is standing down at the May election. | :02:22. | :02:26. | |
You're standing down, Jamie, so you can stand back from it a bit, do the | :02:27. | :02:35. | |
Tories have any chance of being the main opposition party? I think they | :02:36. | :02:40. | |
will be. Ruth Davidson has been a breath of fresh air. What has been | :02:41. | :02:47. | |
said about her is very true, showing to people what can be offered, and | :02:48. | :02:55. | |
also, one of the main Unionist parties, and people want a home if | :02:56. | :03:00. | |
they don't want separation. The danger with this is that we are | :03:01. | :03:05. | |
hearing so much now about how Ruth Davidson and her Conservative Party | :03:06. | :03:09. | |
will become the main opposition party in Scotland that if it doesn't | :03:10. | :03:18. | |
happen she could have a problem? We are going to see an improvement in | :03:19. | :03:22. | |
the Conservative vote anyway. I am sure of that. I don't think she will | :03:23. | :03:27. | |
have a problem because she is so dynamic and will go forward. She's | :03:28. | :03:32. | |
going forward all the time. One of our main groups of voters, the most | :03:33. | :03:38. | |
powerful groups of voters are the 18 to 25-year-olds. I think it's all to | :03:39. | :03:42. | |
play for. I look forward to the future for the Conservative Party in | :03:43. | :03:47. | |
Scotland, it's a Scottish party and she's made it a more Scottish party. | :03:48. | :03:52. | |
We are, after all, the only party with a link to the old parliament | :03:53. | :03:58. | |
before the act of union. The only problem with this rosy story is the | :03:59. | :04:03. | |
evidence to back it up. You're sharing the general election went | :04:04. | :04:07. | |
down. In the general election? But recent | :04:08. | :04:12. | |
polls show we are pulling about 20%, I remember when I first got off the | :04:13. | :04:18. | |
boat in Stornoway as a candidate for the Western Isles back in 1997, I | :04:19. | :04:22. | |
said I was a Conservative candidate and someone said URA Rabbani | :04:23. | :04:27. | |
cornflake. I can tell you now, I'd love to go to that same Labour man | :04:28. | :04:32. | |
and tell him that Labour are pulling less than the Conservatives. | :04:33. | :04:43. | |
Give us your view about what the Tories should say about tax. You've | :04:44. | :04:48. | |
had this idea of a middle band, a 30p rate of tax. Do you think that | :04:49. | :04:52. | |
is a good idea? The details of it will have to be worked out but one | :04:53. | :04:56. | |
thing is for sure. We are against tax rises, which is what Labour | :04:57. | :05:01. | |
once, and we would like to see... We would like to have the powers to do | :05:02. | :05:05. | |
things and, if possible, the power to lower tax at some point. Do you | :05:06. | :05:09. | |
think you should go to the election campaign saying, we will put your | :05:10. | :05:13. | |
taxes down, in the same way Labour are going to the campaign saying | :05:14. | :05:17. | |
they will put them up? I think we should go into the campaign saying | :05:18. | :05:21. | |
that when we ever get to power, we will look at the tax situation then | :05:22. | :05:25. | |
but the one thing we do not want is tax rises at this point. That would | :05:26. | :05:30. | |
make people in Scotland worse off than they are in England. I'm sure | :05:31. | :05:34. | |
I'm right in saying that you've been an MP since it was set up. Yes, in | :05:35. | :05:38. | |
the Scottish Parliament, yes, I have. Looking back on it, hasn't | :05:39. | :05:43. | |
lived up all lived down to your expectations? It's been very | :05:44. | :05:47. | |
exciting for me. It's been something I've enjoyed enormously and I've | :05:48. | :05:56. | |
learned a great deal. And I think that it will go forward and it is | :05:57. | :05:59. | |
getting better all the time but what we do need is to get rid of this | :06:00. | :06:04. | |
massive SNP majority which is blocking everything. We will have to | :06:05. | :06:08. | |
leave it there. Thank you very much. Time to review the past week | :06:09. | :06:11. | |
and look ahead to what's coming up I'm joined by the political | :06:12. | :06:14. | |
commentator Hamish Macdonell and by the former SNP special | :06:15. | :06:22. | |
advisor Ewan Crawford. Hamish, you've been furiously | :06:23. | :06:30. | |
scribbling equations as we were talking about the fiscal framework. | :06:31. | :06:35. | |
What do you make of this fairly incompressible talk? I would like to | :06:36. | :06:40. | |
say that I think we are heading towards a deal. That seems to be the | :06:41. | :06:43. | |
impression because the UK government do appear to have changed a bit the | :06:44. | :06:49. | |
way that they have approached the key discussions over the levels for | :06:50. | :06:53. | |
Miller and so on. The Scottish Government appears to be moving a | :06:54. | :06:57. | |
little bit towards them. But we only have ten days to go and we have | :06:58. | :07:01. | |
these discussions... We don't. We've got as long as you want. Do we? I | :07:02. | :07:07. | |
don't think we do because if we do not get a resolution before the 23rd | :07:08. | :07:11. | |
of February, the Scottish Parliament will not have the time to approve it | :07:12. | :07:14. | |
and if it doesn't approve it, there are very, very big question marks | :07:15. | :07:17. | |
over the legitimacy of the Scotland bill in Westminster. What do you | :07:18. | :07:24. | |
think of this? I kind of disagree. I read Greg Hands' article this | :07:25. | :07:27. | |
morning and I was a bit more pessimistic about the deal but | :07:28. | :07:33. | |
clearly there are probably legitimate political interests on | :07:34. | :07:35. | |
both sides, both the Scottish side of the UK side, and there are | :07:36. | :07:41. | |
separate constituencies. He seemed to concede that, that the Scottish | :07:42. | :07:44. | |
Government does have a legitimate interest in saying, it's not fair | :07:45. | :07:47. | |
that you have to take the full effects of population growth but at | :07:48. | :07:52. | |
the same time the British government obviously has to say, you can't have | :07:53. | :07:55. | |
tax increases in England but not in Scotland to spilling over into | :07:56. | :07:59. | |
Scotland. In terms of the technicalities, the IFF doesn't | :08:00. | :08:02. | |
believe you can come up with a method of reducing the block grant | :08:03. | :08:04. | |
that is committed web of consistent with the Smith commission. What I | :08:05. | :08:11. | |
detected from the Chief Secretary to the Treasury's article was almost a | :08:12. | :08:13. | |
rerun of some of the arguments the Conservatives used during the | :08:14. | :08:16. | |
general election, when they appealed to people in England to say, there | :08:17. | :08:20. | |
is this terrible threat from the SNP and they want to take your taxes. I | :08:21. | :08:25. | |
was surprised by just how explicit the Chief Secretary to the Treasury | :08:26. | :08:28. | |
was in that, which is not really, to me, the kind of thing that makes you | :08:29. | :08:32. | |
think they are moving toward the deal. There is a point here. I can | :08:33. | :08:38. | |
ask you to about this because you are not politicians. The politicians | :08:39. | :08:41. | |
all have to keep the Barnett formula because they are committed to it but | :08:42. | :08:45. | |
that's what's causing the problem. If you did something like what the | :08:46. | :08:48. | |
Liberal Democrat peer Jeremy Purvis was suggesting, say there is no | :08:49. | :08:52. | |
rush, have a conference... Much more sensible. There was an imbalance. | :08:53. | :08:57. | |
They're trying to make a compromise while saying at the start that the | :08:58. | :09:00. | |
Barnett formula can't be changed or adjusted. There are many better ways | :09:01. | :09:04. | |
that this could have been approached but we are where we are and the two | :09:05. | :09:08. | |
sides are still far apart. One of the problems is that there seems to | :09:09. | :09:13. | |
be a level of mistrust on both sides, but both sides are now | :09:14. | :09:17. | |
leaking to the press about allsorts of things. These are supposed to be | :09:18. | :09:22. | |
secret talks. You can read each letter in the newspaper. To be fair, | :09:23. | :09:28. | |
for the first couple of months the UK government sat back and didn't | :09:29. | :09:31. | |
look anything but over the last few weeks, they've got quite annoyed by | :09:32. | :09:34. | |
some of the things appearing in the press and have started leaking, too. | :09:35. | :09:37. | |
That generates even further a sense of mistrust which is not going to | :09:38. | :09:42. | |
help with a deal. With your academic hat on, rather than your SNP hat on, | :09:43. | :09:47. | |
it would be sensible if you could have trust between the Scottish | :09:48. | :09:49. | |
Government on the British government, wouldn't it, to have a | :09:50. | :09:56. | |
quasi-federal deal, let's talk about it and not have a timetable. We | :09:57. | :10:00. | |
don't have to sorted out before the elections. Let me take my academic | :10:01. | :10:06. | |
hat off and put my slight SNP hat back on. I'm no longer fully in the | :10:07. | :10:11. | |
SNP but I certainly don't work the Scottish Government. But when I did | :10:12. | :10:14. | |
work of the Scottish Government in the run-up to the referendum, one of | :10:15. | :10:17. | |
the big beers, if something was going to happen after a no vote was | :10:18. | :10:22. | |
a reopening of the Barnett formula. The Conservative Party doesn't like | :10:23. | :10:26. | |
it and perhaps what we are seeing is some attempt to open that up. They | :10:27. | :10:32. | |
wouldn't like that because what they would here is a chorus saying, it | :10:33. | :10:36. | |
needs reassessment and I might disagree with it but there is at | :10:37. | :10:42. | |
least a possibility that it would say public spending in Scotland is | :10:43. | :10:47. | |
about the UK. Maybe it has to be a bit higher but not that much. We've | :10:48. | :10:51. | |
traditionally raised a lot more taxpayer had done the UK as well. | :10:52. | :10:56. | |
And you mention acquires I federal system. The point is, you have so | :10:57. | :11:02. | |
much political economic culture in one part of the UK which inevitably | :11:03. | :11:06. | |
disadvantages the rest of the UK. All right. Tories - could they be | :11:07. | :11:12. | |
heading for a fall? Only heading for a fall if you start from a position | :11:13. | :11:16. | |
of height. They keep saying they are going to be second. I think they | :11:17. | :11:21. | |
have to talk up their chances to an extent because they are almost a | :11:22. | :11:24. | |
level pegging in some of the polls with Labour, there is nothing wrong | :11:25. | :11:27. | |
with talking up their chances, particularly as the Labour vote is | :11:28. | :11:31. | |
to be haemorrhaging. Maybe it will get some of the Tartan Tories back | :11:32. | :11:36. | |
to vote for them. Enough of them. Let's have a drink, shall we? There | :11:37. | :11:40. | |
we are. We can get the tray out without spilling it. Let's sing our | :11:41. | :11:46. | |
sorrows in the beer. This, I should explain to people,... Is this | :11:47. | :11:53. | |
because we've been talking about the risk of framework? This is a beer | :11:54. | :11:58. | |
which is named after the leader of the Scottish Greens. What do you | :11:59. | :12:05. | |
think? I was going to say that if it is a green project, it is probably | :12:06. | :12:10. | |
very expensive and slightly over subsidised, but... I would say it's | :12:11. | :12:17. | |
got taste, it's got flavour. If it lasts beyond election, who knows? | :12:18. | :12:23. | |
I'm no expert on beer. I could degenerate into a political cliche | :12:24. | :12:26. | |
and say the Greens after the Liberal Democrat vote and their four | :12:27. | :12:30. | |
sandals, beer, real ale and all that type of stuff. I suppose Patrick | :12:31. | :12:34. | |
Harvie had a very good referendum. A bit of public that he is not going | :12:35. | :12:39. | |
to do any harm. Has this happened before? I don't remember a beer | :12:40. | :12:42. | |
coming out the was named after a leader of a political party. I | :12:43. | :12:47. | |
certainly... There have been quite a few publicity stunts but they | :12:48. | :12:49. | |
normally don't tend to involve alcohol, that's true. What else | :12:50. | :12:54. | |
could we have? And just tried to think. We could have pot noodles and | :12:55. | :13:02. | |
things like that. I think it is slightly odd, in a situation where | :13:03. | :13:05. | |
everybody is talking about the perils of Scotland's drink culture | :13:06. | :13:08. | |
that you actually have a leader who is prepared to go out there and have | :13:09. | :13:11. | |
a beer named after him. I think it is quite refreshing. What do you | :13:12. | :13:19. | |
reckon? Is it all right? I think it's OK. Perhaps a little in the | :13:20. | :13:22. | |
morning to be taking a huge judgment on a particular BA you have just | :13:23. | :13:27. | |
tested. It's better than I expected. It's a little cloudy so it perhaps | :13:28. | :13:30. | |
lead suspend a little longer in the bottle but it's good. I notice you | :13:31. | :13:36. | |
haven't taken any. I'll have the rest of the bottle later! It is made | :13:37. | :13:42. | |
by a microbrewery in Glasgow, we should point out. | :13:43. | :13:46. | |
That's all we have time for this week. Thanks to our guests today and | :13:47. | :13:51. | |
we will be back next week. Goodbye. | :13:52. | :13:56. |