09/03/2017: First Minister's Questions Politics Scotland

Hello there and one welcome to the Scottish parliament, here at

Holyrood. Loads of questions around on the budget, on oil. It won't be

the First Minister answering questions. Nicola Sturgeon is in the

UK attending a ceremony that those who served in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Let's cross to the Chamber. The precursor to First Minister's

Questions which will kick off shortly. What issues might come up

in the questions to be Deputy First Minister. Brian mentioned the issue

of a second independence referendum, the issue of the Westminster budget

which was presented to the House of Commons yesterday. Two of the Deputy

First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day.

The First Minister is in London today for the unveiling of a

memorial to commemorate those who have served in recent international

conflicts. She has asked that I answer questions on her behalf.

Later today I have a meeting regarding the programme for

Scotland. Does the Scottish Government the oil as a bonus or the

basis of the Scottish economy? Certainly I consider oil to be a big

bonus. It's certainly been a big bonus that the United Kingdom. It

has been ?300 billion worth of revenue for the United Kingdom and,

of course, I'm not the only person that thought it was a bonus. In 2014

the Prime Minister came to Aberdeen and he said that there would be a

?200 billion oil boom bonus for Scotland if Scotland voted no in the

referendum. What I would say to Ruth Davidson is yes, oil is a bonus and

it has propped up the United Kingdom economy for many years. Ruth

Davidson. The Devil defence minister is sticking to the line that oil is

a bonus are not the basis that the Scottish economy. It is the one that

will make every single person in Scotland ridge of four independents

in the way he tried to sell it just three years ago. Yet this week we

had Andrew Wilson, the head of the SNP growth commission finally

exposing the truth. He admitted we have oil baked into the numbers and

it was indeed a basis. In other words, the entire economic

perspectives on which the SNP based its entire case for independence was

bogus. A simple question, is Andrew Wilson right? I have explained to

Ruth Davidson already the importance of oil to the United Kingdom economy

and a huge bonus it has been to the UK over these 40 years. The Prime

Minister, he was in Scotland in 2014 saying there would be a massive oil

bonus for Scotland if we voted no. And of course there were other

promises made to Scotland if we voted no. The same day that the

Prime Minister suggested there would be a ?200 billion oil bonus, he said

to people in the north-east of Scotland, vote no and there will be

?1 billion carbon project. That has been cancelled, Presiding Officer.

Of course there was the other commitment of the No Campaign. Vote

no to stay in the European Union. Look how that worked out! Oil,

carbon capture, the No Campaign was shattered by these broken promises.

Ruth Davidson. The question was about John Swinney's were claims

being taken apart by his own side. No wonder that aspect is the one

aspect he did not want to talk about. Of course we all know what

has happened since the Deputy First Minister was talking about all of

our big bonuses. Oil receipts have absolutely collapsed and it's a

simple question people across Scotland have and the question is

this. Without those oil receipts can the Deputy First Minister point to

any independent analysis that shows that Scotland's economy would fare

better right now if we were outside the United Kingdom? I think what

people in Scotland would want to hear is more action to support the

North Sea oil and gas sector and that is what this government has

been arguing for, what the Finance Secretary has been arguing for. What

the UK Government has been doing is talking about possibly setting up a

talking shop which they talked about setting up a year ago, and it hasn't

even materialised yet. And we know why the Tories are not interested in

supporting the oil and gas sector. The spokes man Alec Burrnett let the

cat out of the bag. He argued they should be no measures taken to

support oil and gas in Scotland. Now we know that Mr Burrnett is a bit

poor and declaring his own interests, but he is certainly bad

at standing up for the interests of the North East of Scotland. So at a

time when the onshore productivity of Scotland is increasing at four

times the rate of the rest of the United Kingdom, which the Chancellor

cited in his budget statement yesterday, I think grounds for a

great deal of optimism about the strength of the Scottish economy. We

welcome the Chancellor's response to maximise recovery of the remaining

gas and oil reserves. It's no surprise the Scottish Government

don't because they do nothing for the north-east of Scotland. But

again, people at home will have noticed the Deputy First Minister

did not answer the question and it's a real shame that there is nobody on

the SNP front bench who is prepared to be as up front as Mr Wilson is on

the radio. This morning we had the First Minister Gunning for a

referendum on independence next year. She called it common sense.

I'll call it nonsense because most people in Scotland do not want it.

Most Scots don't want to go back to division and uncertainty of another

independence referendum. Most Scots thinks berry-macro think it's

dangerous to talk about another referendum which would damage the

economy further. That is common sense and why does the Deputy First

Minister not listen to that? On the substance of action to help the

North Sea gas and oil sector in the North East of Scotland, let me set

up three things the government has done in the recent past. The First

Minister launched a decommissioning fund to support the development of

the supply chain to support oil and gas decommissioning. We launched a

?12 million transition fund to support individuals to retain their

skills within the sector and thirdly, the energy jobs tiles. The

main vocalist and supports those affected by the downturn in the oil

and gas sector and will remain so in the years to come. That is the

concrete action we have taken to support the north-east of Scotland

and the oil and gas sector. It's interesting that Ruth Davidson moves

on to the question of the Constitution and no wonder because

it's being... It has been very topical today because today we have

seen an opinion poll published just before question Time which shows

support for the constitutional question on independence 50-50 in

Scotland. So what that says to me, and we shouldn't be at all surprised

by those numbers because that the people of Scotland being exposed to

the hard right politics of the party and the mess they are getting us

into over Europe and they want to decide their own future. Question

number two, Kezia Dugdale. What engagements does the Deputy First

Minister have planned for the rest of the week? Engagements to take

forward the programme for Scotland. John Swinney said the early years of

an independent Scotland are timed to coincide with a massive oil seed

boom. -- oilseed boom. Order. But yesterday the Office for Budget

Responsibility confirmed that North Sea oil and gas actually cost the

Treasury money last year. Camber Deputy First Minister tell us why do

the SNP tell the people of Scotland the about oil? Deputy First

Minister. Isn't it revealing that at the first available opportunity

they've come back together again. It's like... It's like they've never

had a moment apart! I would have thought after the calamity that

Kezia Dugdale led the Labour Party into in the 2016 election, she might

have learnt to have nothing to do with that lot over there. Kezia

Dugdale. Presiding Officer... Please, excuse me, can we have a

little bit of order please and slightly less applause. Kezia

Dugdale. Presiding Officer, the Deputy First Minister can shout and

scream and clap all he likes about better together alliances but he

cannot escape the reality of his own words and here are some more. It is

clear that future tax receipts from North Sea oil and gas will be

substantial and represents a significant resource for the people

of Scotland. And the reality is this. People in Scotland were given

false hope by the SNP based on a false perspective. They were told

that we could only build a fairer country with independence, but now

we know beyond all doubt that that just was not true. New analysis

published by Labour today reveals that the SNP... Excuse me. There is

too much noise in the Chamber today. Kezia Dugdale. They won't be

laughing when they realise it's based on their own numbers, their

own records. The SNP's estimate for oil revenues in what would have been

the first two years of an independent Scotland could be out as

as much as ?21 billion. In old money that is 21,000 million pounds. That

will deliver turbo-charged austerity and it would've made that there

nation all but impossible to build. Does the Deputy First Minister feel

any guilt about offering the people of Scotland such force hope? Deputy

First Minister. If we are going to pass around this Chamber accusations

about guilt, I think the Labour Party has got to think long and hard

about how they've enabled the Tory party to govern the United Kingdom

because of the awful stance in the referendum that ushered in a Tory

government that has taken us out of the European Union, punishing

vulnerable individuals and damaging the life chances of individuals. The

Tory budget is assessed by the Resolution Foundation to be

consigning people in this country to the lowest level of wage growth in

over 200 years. That is what the Labour Party are guilty of ushering

in for their stance in the referendum. In the midst of that

rants, the Trooper John Swinney can't escape from is that the

economic case for independence is well and truly bust and we all

remember... We all remember he is leaked paper. Order. Order. Excuse

me, were the Chamber please settle down. There are too many

interruptions, that is too much applause, too much shouting. Will

you please listen to the questions and listen to the answers. Kezia

Dugdale. Excuse me. Please. Kezia Dugdale. Thank you.

We all remember the leaked paper, that was the one where John Swinney

admitted privately that the sums didn't add up. The oil revenues were

volatile and that pensions would be at risk and independence. Nicola

Sturgeon has again today backed herself into a corner on the second

independence referendum. Maybe Deputy First Minister can apply some

common to help her get out of it. He has looked at the numbers. He knows

the case for independence lies in tatters, so why won't he scrapped

the plans for a second independence referendum? Deputy First Minister. I

Kizzire Dugdale that the Labour Party, if they want to progress,

have got to learn the lessons of the mistakes that they made in 2014. The

arguments, narrative and explanation that Kezia Dugdale has come up with

today have a line of attack that could have been delivered by Ruth

Davidson. It is almost as if Kezia Dugdale wondered -- wondered in and

listen to speeches by Ruth Davidson to deliver to this Parliament. I

have some helpful advice to the Labour Party. Get onto Scotland's

side, then you might progress. APPLAUSE

some constituency supplementary the first from Christine Grahame. First

Bus is pulling out of all errors in my constituency. I have written to

the transport minister and had a lengthy conversation with the

director of West Coast motors which will take over as the 25th of March.

A further meeting is pencilled in. There are 113 employees across that

these, and while I am hopeful that the changing provider will be good

news, can I ask what reassurance the Deputy First Minister can give to my

constituents, both employees and passengers about their jobs and the

rural bus service? I acknowledge the significance of the issue that

Christine Grahame raises. We are aware of the proposed of the sale of

First Bus to West Coast Motors. It will be a commercial transaction,

but we are engaging with the operators and the relevant local

authorities to understand the situation and further implications.

In the travelling public. -- further implications for staff and the

travelling public. The Minister for transport will be speaking with the

manager of First Scotland East and we will consult publicly in the

transport Bill later this year to address some of the issues raised.

The transport minister will be happy to have further discussions with

Christine Grahame and other members, if that would be helpful. Graham

Simpson. My constituents, Mrs Norma Henderson, requires an operation for

a very serious and worsening gynaecological condition. She's aged

61 and is the primary care for her disabled daughter. She first went to

see her GP in August. Since then, her treatment, if it can be called

that, has been woeful. She's had two provisional operation dates

cancelled. The 12 week Scottish NHS guarantee for treatment was reached

on February 13 without her having had an operation. She was then given

another provisional date for this month. That has been and gone. Would

we Deputy First Minister like to apologise to Mrs Henderson, and what

can he say to assure her that this ongoing disgrace will not continue?

First of all, I'd say to Mr Simpson and directly to Mrs Henderson as

well that the National Health Service and takes a huge volume of

clinical activity on a daily basis. Members of staff around the country

work extremely hard to put in place the services that are designed to

address the needs of patients and to support them. I recognise the

particular circumstances that Mr Simpson raises, because Mrs

Henderson is a primary care for her daughter. Obviously, we must do all

we can to try and supported her circumstances. We have seen data

published this week about the level of cancelled operations, which shows

that the level of cancelled operations for nonclinical reasons

is just 2.5%. 97.5% of all operations go ahead as planned. We

will look at the specific issues that Mr Simpson raises about this

case. If you would care to pass those to the Health Secretary,

though we looked at immediately to determine the circumstances. The

Health Secretary will be happy to meet with Mr Simpson to discuss any

analysis that come out of that. Staff at Heriot Watt University in

my constituency are concerned about the sudden announcement on Friday of

100 job losses. The university State of the move as a direct result of a

number of factors including post-Brexit uncertainty over

immigration and research grants leading to a sharp fall in

postgraduate applications. What assistance can be offered to my

constituency face an uncertain future? Presiding officer, I'm aware

of the issue and the Minister for higher education and science has

discussed these issues with the principal at Heriot Watt University.

As autonomous bodies, universities are responsible for their own

finances and staffing. However, I would expect the university to work

closely with staff and unions on this matter. It is vital that

student experience is not diminished. From my discussions

across the sector and with the Minister for higher education and

science, we are acutely aware of the unease within the higher education

sector about the implications of Brexit. Any member listening to the

concerns of the higher education sector could not fail to see and to

recognise those concerns. For the government's part, the Scottish

funding council has increased the resources available to Heriot Watt

University for the forthcoming academic year, and that is welcome.

But of course the University is wrestling with significant

uncertainty around the position on EU citizens. I would encourage the

United Kingdom government to provide clarity on the ability for citizens

across the EU and globe to study at one of Scotland's universities in

the future, and we hope further reassurance can be given by the

Chancellor to our excellent universities say they can maintain

the income that they draw from competitive EU research funds, which

are central to the strengthening of our university sector. I would like

to ask the Deputy First Minister and when the Cabinet will next meet? On

Tuesday. Given the volume in the chamber a few minutes ago as the

other political parties debated their shared desperate attachment to

the economic Subi fossil fuel industry, is the ball that people

might find it hard to believe that the parties are about to stand

together this afternoon to promote Earth hour, demonstrating a claimed

shared commitment to action on climate change. Yet over recent

meets, the government's draft climate plan has exposed serious

omissions and contradictions, defending a plan that does nothing

to improve bus use, and saying that car journeys are destined to go up

by 25%. The transport minister says that is only the worst case

scenario. The Environment Secretary is telling the chamber about a

compulsory cycle testing, and a fortnight later the Rauball

Secretary rights to committees to say that is not happening. --

compulsory soil testing. It has been admitted that there is no attempt to

build a credible economic case to cut aviation tax, but the rest of

the economy can allegedly make up for the rest of the omissions but

flying, even though the climate plan itself is utterly devoid of detail

on how this is to happen. The draft climate plan is barely half baked.

Isn't it clear that major changes are needed if we're going to ensure

that the ambitious choice of Scotland needs to make written into

the plan? First of all, the government committed to publish a

climate change plan in 2016-17, and the draft plan was published on the

19th of January. The detail that Mr Harvie has gone to demonstrate the

rigorous scrutiny that is exercised on the government by Parliamentary

committees. And so it should be. This issue should be properly tested

within committee. My experience on interacting with Parliamentary

committees is that we do have that rigorous interaction. The

government's climate change bill contains the country's plan. It

takes in a huge number of measures and interventions across government

to enable us to fulfil the target that we have set for ourselves. I

would remind Mr Harvey that the government has already earlier

achieved the 2020 target that we put in place for carbon emissions

reductions. That is something that I think we should all, as parliament,

be proud of. We legislated for the ambitious legislation a number of

years ago and we are now seeing that legislation fulfilled as a

consequence of the government's leadership and actions. There is a

processor Parliamentary scrutiny to be undertaken, but I would ask Mr

Harvie to consider the achievements made so far and to work with the

government on taken forward measures that would have a substantial effect

on reinforcing the targets in years to come. The low hanging fruit are

pretty thin on the branches. I would suspect that Parliament is going to

need to see far more consistency and detail from the government before

this climate plan passes. The four Parliamentary committees that have

produced reports on the plan due to publish tomorrow. But even looking

at the submitted evidence in the public domain, and by the questions

asked by MSPs, it's very clear that there is serious concern and that

changes to this draft plan will need to be equally serious. I will say

that the situation is not as bad as it is with the UK Government, even

if that is setting the bar pretty low. Climate change was the elephant

in the debating chamber yesterday during the budget statement. Not a

single mention of climate change by the challenger, neither on the

challenges we face more by the opportunities from the low-carbon

economy which the UK's government policies have done so much to

undermine. I regret that it may be said enough is not being done to

support the oil industry to extract fossil fuels that the world can't

afford to burn. Can we Deputy First Minister give us one commitment that

the extra capital funding that will be available will be committed to

low-carbon infrastructure to help break a reliance on fossil fuel

consumption and build up the new industries, and genuinely

sustainable jobs that the country will need in the post-oil era? I'm

very surprised to hear Mr Harvey thinking that my criticism of the

Chancellor might be limited to one issue. I have lots to criticise the

Chancellor for, and I certainly agree with his analysis that the

United Kingdom government has not done all it could have done to help

with advancing the agenda that this Parliament has been interested in

advancing. The First Minister was in the Western Isles on Monday and

reported to Cabinet on Tuesday about the frustration in the Western Isles

about the lack of progress that has been made despite selling efforts

over a number of years to support -- supported by many other members of

Parliament to secure a connector that would enable the renewable

potential of the Western Isles to be fully realised as a consequence. I'm

quite happy to balance our criticism to make sure those issues are

properly put on the record. We will work with the United Kingdom

government to try to advance. This is an area where if the

Conservatives have influence with the UK Government, they might be

able to help us to get progress. An interconnected opportunity that can

really transform the lives and attack fuel poverty in the Western

Isles. Mr Harvie asks me if I will commit the extra capital announced

by the United Kingdom government yesterday. I have to say, times have

changed. I no longer control the purse strings in the government. I

am now a supplicant when it comes to entering with trepidation the office

of the finance secretary to try to secure capital assistance. If it's

OK with Mr Harvey, I would properly respect the role of the finance

secretary who will make announcements on these questions to

Parliament in due course. But I do commit to putting in a good word

from Mr Harvie's objective. The Scotland report into the failed i6

project makes grim reading. It is another botched IT project which

should have been abandoned for sooner. True to form, the Scottish

Government's response was to enter another area of good practice

findings, but shamefully ignored the conclusion which the police officers

and staff continue to struggle with out of date, inefficient and poorly

integrated systems. Does the Deputy First Minister recognise the

difficulties being faced as a result of this IT shambles, and what

reassurance can he give officers and staff who faced the prospect of

using these one systems for years to come? The first thing I would say is

that I acknowledge the importance of the system redesign that has got to

be undertaken. That work has to be done and has to be done in an

orderly fashion to make sure that police services can have access to

high-quality information technology that can assist them in their work.

The Scottish police authority and police Scotland are committed to

doing that. The best thing for me to do in this respect in answering the

points made is to quote the auditor general for Scotland, who on the

radio this morning said that one of the positive things about this

particular project is that because of the strength of the contract that

Police Scotland had signed with Accent chav, they were able to

recover the ?11 million they had paid over to the contract, and also

an extra ?13.5 million to reflect staff time and payments made for

hardware and software. In cash terms, Police Scotland isn't out of

pocket. That is what the auditor general for Scotland said this

morning in a reflection on the fact that while this programme has not

been able to be taken to completion because of the scale of the

challenge between Police Scotland and the contract, the public purse

has not offered as a consequence of that. Police Scotland will not take

forward in the way that we would expect them, and organised approach

to make sure that we can have in place the systems that will enable

police officers to have access to modern IT in the period to come.

Would be substantial reduction in oil revenues, it is surely time for

a new oil and gas bulletin. The last one was due in 2015. The First

Minister promised me in June 2016 it would be soon. If the Scottish

Government was on performance related pay, they will get nothing.

Will the 21st Minister in a new bulletin is published before June

2017 and another year passes? If the Labour Party was on performance

related pay... They will be in negative equity! I can say to Jackie

Baillie the government has published a range of information on gas. We

publish a compendium of statistics last week on the 23rd of February. I

would encourage her to take reference of that particular

document which is a substantial compendium of statistical

information. Two of the Deputy First Minister what the response is from

the Scottish Government to the UK budget? The Chancellor's statement

confirmed that the Scottish Cup to -- Scottish cant... The Institute

for Fiscal Studies suggests austerity will continue into the

next the code. The budget supported no support for low income families

who are facing deep cuts to their incomes and who will bear the brunt

of the cost of Brexit. We will continue to do everything we can to

boost the economy, tackle inequality and provide high quality public

services, but yesterday's budget does little to support that aim.

Obviously we all welcome the additional ?350 million of funding,

albeit over three years, but does the Deputy First Minister agree that

we should not let that blind us to the hard reality that Scotland's

budget stands a cut as a result of a Tory government the Scottish people

did not vote for. A cup that will damage the economy, damage public

services and quality of life in Scotland. The Labour Party in

Scotland would prefer that Scotland took control of its own affairs. Mr

Crawford makes an important point. UK austerity is cutting the funding

available for Scottish public services. Moreover the UK austerity

measures are cutting their incomes of some of the most vulnerable

people in our society. The OBR forecast shows that average earnings

by 2021 will be below the level of 2001. It demonstrates that low

income households will see larger cuts to the incompetent virtually

everyone else apart from the very richest households as a direct

result of the UK Government was not policies over this Parliament. The

Chancellor's budget decisions will deliver a welcome additional ?145

million in extra bionic consequential is the next year.

Given that much of this consequential is arise from money

that the Chancellor is allocating to English councils to address business

rates rises, how much of the additional money will the Scottish

Government allocates two councils in the north-east of Scotland who want

to set up local rate relief schemes? Well, it is a bit of an odd question

because in both Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeen shire Council,

the Conservatives voted against business rates relief schemes. That

is the first odd point. Secondly, this morning the Conservatives have

been arguing for us that this is our opportunity because of the

consequential is to cancel the removal of the tax cuts for high

earners. That was Mr Fraser Cosme proposition. They asked that the

cheek by jowl, the two of them. The Conservatives are trying to spend

the same money twice, and we all know... Now we all know that the

Labour Party... Maybe it is something to do with when you sit

over there because that is what the Labour Party used asked me to do

when I was the finance minister and they were sitting there in second

place. They were asked me to spend the money twice. Now the Tories of

the second party and they are asking us to spend the same money twice.

The Finance Secretary will do as he is doing magnificently just now,

take decisions that will lead to wise investments for the future of

the Scottish economy. Question number five, Adam Tomkins. To the

Deputy First Minister for what reason life expectancy is no longer

rising in Scotland? Reducing health inequality is one of the biggest

challenges we face. There are wider economic issues and that's why the

government has invested ?296 million since 2013 to mitigate the harmful

effects of the UK Government's welfare reform. Between 2012 and

2015 life expectancy rates have been stagnant. The causes of Scottish

mortality are complex, multiple. The professor of geography at the

University of Oxford said over the weekend that austerity measures may

have contributed to the stolen life expectancy. I quote, I don't think

it has anything to do with the SNP government. The same thing would

have occurred if Labour had held power in Scotland. It is the fall in

funding due to the financial crash of 2008. The Deputy First Minister

will note that life expectancy levels in the East End of Glasgow

are lower than other affluent parts of the city. There has been an

opportunity to reduce health inequality in the neighbourhood that

hosted the games, but no targets were set. Compare this with the

borough is that hosted the Olympics which set themselves the explicit

target of narrowing the gap in male and female life expectancy between

East End and the rest of London. The did the First Minister not agree

that Glasgow should follow London's lead and what steps will be taken to

address this? I reiterate the point I made in my first answer that the

implications of austerity have increased the challenge that we face

in addressing long-term health inequalities that are present in

Scottish society and have been for all of my lifetime. The government

has taken a coordinated approach to tackling these issues by some of the

measures that are taken by Mr Brown in relation to the regeneration of

the East End of Glasgow. The work that Shona Robinson takes forward

with the health service to make sure we have an integrated service in

areas of multiple deprivation to address the whole needs of

individuals, not just the healthiest, but the whole wellness

agenda that is relevant and work that I'm forward the particular

measures such as people equity funds that target directly the approaches

that are required to support young people from deprived backgrounds to

achieve their potential within our educational system. Schools in the

East End of Glasgow are benefiting enormously and quite rightly from

those investments. Then we have the measures that Angela Constance takes

forward as part of the Social Security work to make sure we are

focusing on supporting the vulnerable in our society. I

reassure Mr Tomkins of the determination of government in

Scotland across all our responsibilities to make sure we

focus ending the income inequalities that have bedevilled so many

individuals in our society and make sure every individual can have the

opportunity to progress in our society despite the health

difficulties and the background that may have undermined it. Question

number six, Monica Lenin. To as the date the First Minister what is the

Scottish Government's response to the Samaritans report that there is

an increase in suicide in deprived areas. Any death by suicide is a

tragedy and the link between deprivation and suicide is well

known. We will take the recommendations into account. We

will develop a new suicide prevention strategy. Although

suicide rates are higher than average in Scotland in most deprived

areas, this inequality gap has narrowed over the last decade.

Scotland's suicide rates averages by 18% in the last two years and the

number of suicides in 2015 were the lowest in a single year since 1974.

Shortly before the publication of the Samaritans's report we heard

from the Minister for mental health in the Chamber just like we -- just

last week that evaluation is a central pillar of effective suicide

prevention strategies. Now that we have the report, will the Deputy

First Minister commit the government to an evaluation of the actions in

the previous strategy before the government embarks on the next one?

Monica Lenin raises a significant issue. We have two in policy terms

be very open to questioning whether particular interventions have been

successful, given the fact that we all recognise the importance and

necessity of making sure the measures we put in place are

effective in supporting individuals in these circumstances. If Monica

Lenin will forgive me, I won't give her a definitive answer today, but I

will ask the Health Secretary to look at the serious point she has

raised. I do give parliament the assurance that the government is

determined to take all measures we possibly can to support vulnerable

individuals in the circumstances. Two of the Deputy First Minister

what the Scottish Government's responses regarding the reports

regarding tackling sectarianism in Scotland. I would like to thank

Doctor Morrow for carrying out this report. I would also like to thank

everyone for their constructive contributions. It is clear from the

review that remains to be done and we all have a responsibility to meet

this challenge, we need to build on previous work. We have invested

money, included nine 3p to fight sectarianism. -- nine 3p.

Action of the churches mention that the concern and worried was that if

any changes were made to offensive behaviour and football, it chords

you seen as legitimising sectarianism. Does he share my

concern that we should not do anything that will legitimise

sectarianism? We must do absolutely nothing to legitimise sectarianism.

It is important that as Parliament considers these issues, the Minister

for community safety was here making a statement as the other week about

the steps the government is taking to commission a review into all of

our hate crime legislation to make sure it is fit for purpose as we go

forward, the approach that we are determined to take is to look for

alternatives and to see how the measures that are in the act can be

improved and in line with constructive views offered by the

quality net for -- network Stonewall and the Law Society of Scotland, the

independent review of hate crime legislation will include analysis of

the offensive behaviour act and that will set out the issues we have two

address in assuring we have legislation that is fit for the 21st

century in Scotland. I don't doubt the words bedevilled defence

Minister has offered in opposing sectarianism, but the government has

cut funding by ?2 million to initiatives that were fighting

sectarianism in our community. I think the government's flagship

policy has been the offensive behaviour at football act.

Unfortunately one of the policy outcomes of that act has to be

criminalised -- has been to criminalise young men. I don't think

that that is consistent with the Scottish Government Justice policy

and I don't think that was the intention when the government

brought forward the legislation. Wilbur Deputy First Minister take

the opportunity to rethink the approach to this legislation and

also the government's overall approach to tackling sectarianism?

The government has taken steps by the measures that we've taken

forward to commission the independent review to look at the

issues that are raised on sectarianism. I think that's an open

process which should be welcomed across Parliament. In relation to

the questions on finance, the commitments the government has made

on tackling sectarianism financially has resulted in the investment of

?12.5 million over the last five years. That's more than any other

government has ever done in the past. That's been a measure of the

commitment that we had to ensure that we tackle this issue and

tackled effectively by the support that's in place. I appreciate Mr

Kelly's strong views on this question. He acknowledges the

commitment that I make on this question and the points that he's

made. But I ask him to accept that the government is determined to

tackle these issues, but to tackle them in a way that addresses the

wider questions that have to be considered. Thank you, that

concludes First Minister's Questions STUDIO: There we have it.

Oil dominates, and issue arising from a BBC interview in which Andrew

Wilson was saying that oil was baked into the SNP's plans and presumed

they would have to be removed, given that it is declining. Another BBC

interview in which Nicola Sturgeon was asked about the timetable, she

suggested it could be a window roughly around Autumn 2018 although

she is absolutely not pinned down to the dates will stop of course, the

aftermath of the budget. I enjoy and is now by two colleagues. On the oil

question, John Swinney gave long answers and vigorous anthers. But he

didn't really answer the question about the decline in North the

revenue? He didn't, no. -- North Sea revenue. Since we have seen oil

prices crash since the peak they were prior to the referendum,

they've come down. They stabilised, but they're not showing any signs of

going back up to the heights that they were at a game. There's not

really anything John Swinney can do, hence the ducking the question. In

some ways, a magnificent performance. But, once again, he

turned around by saying it would be a bonus to the UK Government and a

bonus to the UK Treasury, but he didn't really address the point

being asked by his opponents. It was a virtuoso display of avoiding

answering the question. Clearly, it's a very embarrassing development

that the oil revenues have dried up. Just remember that in the years

prior to the 2014 independence referendum, oil revenues were coming

in at 4-6,000,000,000 per year. At the height, they were 11 billion per

year. Now they are practically zero. What's interesting, I thought, was

the way John Swinney is subtly changing the oil argument by saying

it was Scotland's oil. Certainly a grievance about today or yesterday,

it's about happy ?300 million was stolen by Westminster. He also

managed to point out that the Chancellor announced potential

actions for the North Sea, but not actual action. Yes, and potential

actions that indeed the UK Government has spoken about doing

before. The idea of using the tax system to encourage companies to get

more oil out of the ground. Of the later stages of the development?

Gas, and delay the decommissioning of the oil rigs. Patrick Harvie said

it is really the main parties, labour, the SNP and conservatives,

and their reliance on fossil fuels. And interesting intervention by

Patrick Harvie, he turned the debate around 90 degrees in some ways. John

Swinney said he would love to help, but he is now a supplicant, rather

than the finance secretary. But intriguing points raised by Patrick

Harvie. Yes, and raising real concerns about the impact on

climate, if we're going to be taking oil out of the ground, if the

government will go ahead batting air passenger duty on how will we

counted those with the ambitious climate change predictions? Pajic

Abbey is the only one celebrating the fact that revenues are

declining. -- good old Patrick Harvie is the only one celebrating.

It was not only the oil bonus, it was the renewable energy bonus. Do

you remember Alex and talking about us being the Saudi Arabia of

renewables? We don't hear so much about the great renewables bonus for

Scotland as we were a few years ago. Perhaps that is where John Swinney

told me about the carbon capture project disappearing as well. Let's

move on to the wider indie referendum. I think it was described

on the radio this morning as a political gut what. -- political

gavot. We have a further hint from Nicola Sturgeon, but only a hint,

that she is not ruling out autumn 2018. A huge wave of expectation is

being brought up. Nicola Sturgeon, if she doesn't get some kind of late

indication from Theresa May that Scotland will be allowed a

differentiated relationship... She's not going to get that, she knows

she's not going to get that. She's not even promising new powers for

the Scottish parliament any more, they have to go via Westminster.

She's getting absolutely nothing. She's been failing for long enough

now, nearly six months, but she's not bluffing about this. Eventually

someone had to call it. The UK Government has a big role here.

First of all, as Ian says, do they, don't make grants and wiggle room to

Scotland within the Brexit move? The other question is they would have to

grab a section 30 to allow a referendum to take place at. Here

are the speculation has been that they may grant permission for the

Scottish Government to hold an independence referendum, but is

forced the Scottish Government to halt it after Brexit has been

completed. -- but force the Scottish Government to hold it. That could be

another blow to the SNP's arguments for independence, rather than a

seamless transfer where Scotland could stay in Europe by voting for

independence. We might have two then reapply to join the club, as it

were. That is one of the arguments successfully used by the Better

Together campaigners in the first referendum.

What is your guests on when it may happen? On the spot? On the spot,

absolutely no idea. My guess is it should probably delay, but I am

almost invariably wrong about these kind of things. We have that opinion

poll today suggesting 50-50. You should have seen the way social

media was responding to John Swinney, his exercise in evasion.

They loved it. They're back in the Lions are breaking down -- they're

back in the line and breaking down Scotland. We will talk more about

the budget because we have the opportunity here to get word from

two of the major participants. Festival here from the finance

secretary at Holyrood, but first the chance exchequer. -- first we hear

from the finance secretary at Holyrood. Additional financing of

?350 million for the Scottish Government. 250...

HECKLING ?200 million for the Welsh government. And almost ?120 million

for an incoming Northern Ireland executive. Demonstrating, Mr Deputy

Speaker, once again that we are stronger together in this. I welcome

the additional resources, but it's a drop in the ocean. Welfare cuts

continue severity continues, and we will continue to push the UK

Government on what matters to Scotland, not least on the Brexit

challenge which were self-inflicted by this UK Government. Finance

ministers north and south of the border. You could see during the

exchanges, I think we saw the Scottish minister David Mundell

literally licking his lips at the prospect of 300 million coming north

of the border. But it was a cooler reception at question Time today

from John Swinney. It was. John Swinney served as finance secretary

for many a year and Alex Salmond. Limited consequential is, he talked

about Bruce Crawford, the convener of Holyrood's finance came in, and

talked about 2.9 billion being lost in Scotland's budget over a decade.

The UK Government disputes those figures, but that is how the

Scottish Government sees it, that their budget is being cut and there

may be getting a little bit back. But it doesn't make up for the

overall losses they have suffered. And intriguing exchange between the

SNP, John Swinney, and Conservative backbenchers on at the point of

where the Conservatives would allocate this money. It had been

suggested to abandon the SNP tax plan and then spend on business

rates relief. That's right. The opposition's prerogative to spend

money twice, they don't have two answer how the money... Spend early,

spend often. It is interesting and it is a foretaste of what will come

in the future. Come April, the Scottish Government gets its full

income tax raising powers on varying bands and rate. That will be a

momentous change in Scottish fiscal affairs and will throw attention

much more on what is done with the money up here, and further away from

what was happening in the UK budget. Let's take you to a wider issue

within the JK budget still causing trouble today - the increase in the

Treasury assurance. 60% will be better off, allegedly, because one

band of national insurance is scrapped altogether. 40% will

suffer. The Federation of Small Businesses in Scotland has published

a list of the towns that will suffer. Really turning into a big

row. It is there's a strong argument that self-employed people should pay

the same national insurance. As the Chancellor argues. That's the

argument he's basically baking. The reply to that is that they have many

areas that are less for served in the workplace, because they don't

get sick pay or holiday pay. A lot of them work for zero hours

contractors in the gig economy, if you like. What the Chancellor was

trying to do was close up what was perceived as a taxing import where

some self-employed people have been getting away with paying much less

tax by opting for self-employment. But it's completely backfired. It's

backfired really because they make this promise before the last general

election that they would not raise VAT or income tax, or national

insurance. They can't now say that they didn't mean that national

insurance, they only meant class for national insurance, or class one. It

just doesn't work. Apologies, we are running out of time. Thank you both

very much indeed for joining me to discuss questions to the Deputy

First Minister. I will be heading off to make sense of it for various

news programmes, and after that heading off to Perth for the Liberal

Democrat Conference. My eyes will be and Liberal Democrat matters with a

little view towards Friday night when Dundee face Edinburgh. From me,

goodbye.