:00:40. > :00:43.Afternoon, folks, welcome to the Daily Politics.
:00:44. > :00:47.Hospitals in England will have to publish details of their staffing
:00:48. > :00:52.levels from next year, as the Health Secretary makes a series of changes
:00:53. > :00:54.to improve patient care. The SNP says independence would
:00:55. > :00:58.boost Scotland's economy. We'll talk to the Scottish Finance Minister
:00:59. > :01:02.John Swinney. Should companies be forced to have
:01:03. > :01:06.more women on their boards? We'll debate a plan being discussed by
:01:07. > :01:10.MEPs which would set a target of 40%.
:01:11. > :01:19.And, we'll have the latest on the crack-smoking Toronto mayor who
:01:20. > :01:24.refuses to step down. Everybody has skeletons in their closet. Mine have
:01:25. > :01:32.been exposed. If the council wants to strip me of all my powers, do
:01:33. > :01:35.whatever they want to do. It would never happen here, of
:01:36. > :01:41.course! All that in the next hour. With us
:01:42. > :01:43.for the whole programme today is the radio presenter, Conservative
:01:44. > :01:44.blogger and political publisher Iain Dale. Welcome back to the Daily
:01:45. > :01:48.Politics. Let's start with the latest on the
:01:49. > :01:50.Canadian mayor who has admitted to smoking crack cocaine. Yesterday,
:01:51. > :01:54.members of Toronto City Council voted to strip Rob Ford of most of
:01:55. > :01:58.his official powers because he's refused to resign. And he's showing
:01:59. > :02:01.no signs of going quietly. He's declared war on the city council,
:02:02. > :02:08.and took to the airwaves last night on his own TV show.
:02:09. > :02:12.Everybody has skeletons in their closet. Mine have been exposed. I
:02:13. > :02:18.can't speak for anyone else but if the council was to strip me of all
:02:19. > :02:23.my powers, do what they ever -- do what ever they want to do. They have
:02:24. > :02:29.their rights. I think it is wrong, it is illegal. But the people will
:02:30. > :02:34.have their say on October the 27th. A return on every phone call in my
:02:35. > :02:39.office. I will continue to go to people front door to serve them.
:02:40. > :02:44.He is really fighting to stay on. Where does this end?
:02:45. > :02:50.If he was in this country, he would have gone weeks ago. Because of what
:02:51. > :02:56.he did. These are not minor transgressions. Watching that film,
:02:57. > :03:01.I thought, is that the head of the Co-op bank? There is a remarkable
:03:02. > :03:07.physical similarity. We have a fairly colourful London
:03:08. > :03:12.Mayor, can you imagine if he got up to those shenanigans? It does seem
:03:13. > :03:14.remarkable he is still there. He doesn't see the writing on the
:03:15. > :03:20.wall. Do you think the case he is making
:03:21. > :03:27.that people can have their say, he is an elected official, he has
:03:28. > :03:30.admitted what he has done. But now, he is clean.
:03:31. > :03:35.Perhaps he should put himself up for re-election. He might actually win,
:03:36. > :03:40.he still has a remarkable level of support among the people. He wants
:03:41. > :03:48.to come across as a man of the people.
:03:49. > :03:50.What you think of the idea that he would like to run for prime
:03:51. > :03:55.minister. We think of Canada as a boring
:03:56. > :04:00.country! One of our reporters said, for the
:04:01. > :04:02.quiet, genteel city of Toronto, this is a shock, they have never seen
:04:03. > :04:08.anything like it. I interviewed a Toronto radio
:04:09. > :04:17.journalist. He asked if this was big news in England. He was surprised by
:04:18. > :04:21.it. Word is surprised by him? A maverick personality. This has come
:04:22. > :04:27.out in the last few months. Has it taken the city by surprise, they did
:04:28. > :04:33.not know their city mayor. He is a larger than life character.
:04:34. > :04:35.Mavericks do well in elections, we know that from London. But he should
:04:36. > :04:39.go. It's time for our daily quiz.
:04:40. > :04:43.According to one well-informed columnist, Ed Miliband's team have a
:04:44. > :04:48.nickname for Ed Balls's team. So what are they known as?
:04:49. > :04:52.Is it: The bandits? The cowboys? The pirates?
:04:53. > :04:59.The clowns? At the end of the show, Iain will
:05:00. > :05:03.give us the correct answer. I'm sure you know. You reckon?
:05:04. > :05:08.The report of the Francis Inquiry into the failings at Mid
:05:09. > :05:11.Staffordshire NHS Trust, was published in February this year. In
:05:12. > :05:15.March, the government set out its initial response. Today, the Health
:05:16. > :05:18.Secretary Jeremy Hunt is making a further statement to Parliament,
:05:19. > :05:23.which will explain what the government plans to do in response
:05:24. > :05:27.to Francis's 290 recommendations. The aim is to bring about a radical
:05:28. > :05:31.change in the culture of care in England's hospitals, as well as
:05:32. > :05:35.making reforms to how they are run. At the weekend, Mr Hunt talked about
:05:36. > :05:38.creating a new criminal offence of' "wilful neglect" for medics, which
:05:39. > :05:41.would be punishable by a jail term. But the BMA, which represents
:05:42. > :05:50.doctors, warned that it could create a "climate of fear", and discourage
:05:51. > :05:54.whistle-blowers. There will also be a new duty on doctors and nurses to
:05:55. > :05:57.report "near misses" when patients have been put at risk.
:05:58. > :06:01.But perhaps the biggest change will be on staff levels. Francis found
:06:02. > :06:03.that a "chronic shortage of staff, particularly nursing staff, was
:06:04. > :06:10.largely responsible for the substandard care" at Stafford
:06:11. > :06:13.Hospital. So, from April, hospitals in England will have to publish
:06:14. > :06:18.staffing levels on a monthly basis, on a publicly available website.
:06:19. > :06:21.This morning, the Chief Nursing Officer from NHS England, Jane
:06:22. > :06:29.Cummings, explained how that might work.
:06:30. > :06:32.What we want people to do is to use evidence to determine what the
:06:33. > :06:37.staffing should be on a ward by ward basis. And to talk about that
:06:38. > :06:41.publicly, to publish whether they are meeting those staffing levels.
:06:42. > :06:47.If they are not, to describe what they are doing about it. The key is
:06:48. > :06:51.making sure we give patients and their relatives and carers the
:06:52. > :06:55.confidence we are able to provide safe care.
:06:56. > :06:58.With us is Janet Davies from the Royal College of Nursing. And, in
:06:59. > :08:02.Salford, Jennie Forcett from the pressure group Patients First.
:08:03. > :08:08.Is it a good idea We know more than one qualified
:08:09. > :08:16.nurse for eight patients, more than that is dangerous. Within that
:08:17. > :08:22.land, sometimes less, it depends on the patient. The important thing is
:08:23. > :08:26.it needs to be based on evidence. It depends on the speciality and tap
:08:27. > :08:33.the patient. Do you agree, would you like to see
:08:34. > :08:37.those ratios put in place? One nurse to eight patients,
:08:38. > :08:44.evidence shows that is where patient care starts to become compromised.
:08:45. > :08:49.You have to look at the dependency. That can change from day, to
:08:50. > :08:55.night-time, depending if you are caring for the elderly who have
:08:56. > :09:00.greater needs, in maintaining their care needs, or paediatrics. Also,
:09:01. > :09:06.you are looking at patients who have high dependency because of their
:09:07. > :09:17.illness. Patients on intensive care, it needs to be properly looked at. I
:09:18. > :09:23.believe that the government have now asked the experts to look at this.
:09:24. > :09:27.How many nurses will we need? We need to work out how many is
:09:28. > :09:34.right for each hospital ward first. We can't give a total number for
:09:35. > :09:40.England. We are short staffed. It is also the vacancies. This puts the
:09:41. > :09:45.attention of the trust board and managers on to what matters. The c/o
:09:46. > :09:57.the patients, resources, nursing numbers, to ensure that care is safe
:09:58. > :10:03.and beyond safe -- the care of the patients.
:10:04. > :10:09.It is interesting to hear that it is one nurse to eight patients which is
:10:10. > :10:13.worth caring starts to become unsafe. Labour says there are 6000
:10:14. > :10:17.fewer nurses than when they were in power.
:10:18. > :10:26.We know that posts have been lost. On top of that, the vacancies that
:10:27. > :10:31.are currently in England are about 20,000. We are very short of
:10:32. > :10:37.nurses. It will go some way to redressing the balance, but we need
:10:38. > :10:41.high recruitment of nurses. There need to be 20,000 more nurses
:10:42. > :10:49.according to the Royal College of Nursing. 20,000 vacancies, posts
:10:50. > :10:53.which are already there but not filled.
:10:54. > :10:59.The Francis Report did talk about chronic shortages in some areas in
:11:00. > :11:04.the health service. And a culture in hospitals. Will more nurses
:11:05. > :11:10.necessarily deliver it transformed culture of caring in hospitals?
:11:11. > :11:15.You mentioned earlier on about the duty of staff to report near
:11:16. > :11:22.misses. That is already embedded within the NHS, that has been around
:11:23. > :11:27.for many years. However, staff fear that if they raise concerns, then
:11:28. > :11:38.they will be targeted. And so they remain silent. And, we have had many
:11:39. > :11:44.nurses and doctors who have come to Patients first who have raised
:11:45. > :11:47.concerns about patient safety. And have suffered significantly, boast
:11:48. > :11:55.them and their career, and their families. We feel it is critical
:11:56. > :12:02.that, in order for the government to truly understand the culture that is
:12:03. > :12:07.within the NHS, is to look at cases, whistle-blowing cases where
:12:08. > :12:13.staff have been stopped from working.
:12:14. > :12:22.Iain Dale, will this encourage people to mop -- come forward?
:12:23. > :12:28.You would hope it would. This is partly about numbers, and the
:12:29. > :12:32.standard of compassion of care. There have been too many stories
:12:33. > :12:38.about the lack of compassion shown by some nursing staff. It is also
:12:39. > :12:43.about continuity of care. My mother was in hospital three weeks last
:12:44. > :12:49.year, she died at the end of it. At the end of each week, there were
:12:50. > :12:57.never the same nurses. In three weeks, she saw over 100 nurses.
:12:58. > :13:02.It is sadly not about numbers only. Numbers are the basis. Then we can
:13:03. > :13:07.do some of the other things. Because we don't have the right numbers of
:13:08. > :13:12.staff, we seek agency and temporary staff. A different person every
:13:13. > :13:18.day. If you have a really good team that is constant, you have a chance
:13:19. > :13:24.of really getting the care right, a better attitude. The ward sister is
:13:25. > :13:28.there to manage care and communicate. It's not just about
:13:29. > :13:34.numbers. But you have situations. I remember
:13:35. > :13:38.our experience, it is difficult to make complaints because you worry. A
:13:39. > :13:42.mother asked me not to complain because she was worried the staff
:13:43. > :13:48.would take it out on her. That is a worrying attitude. We say
:13:49. > :13:55.to nurses, that should never be the case. When people complain to the
:13:56. > :14:00.nurses, they really want to make it better. There is that fear, because
:14:01. > :14:05.you are vulnerable as a patient, at the mercy of everything going on.
:14:06. > :14:11.You are not well, in your pyjamas, invulnerable situation.
:14:12. > :14:18.The doctors may understand but are powerless.
:14:19. > :14:25.It is about how we put power back so that care can be provided. We can
:14:26. > :14:30.never defend poor care where it is wilful. Quite often, we don't have
:14:31. > :14:36.the resources or people, and it is difficult to provide compassionate
:14:37. > :14:41.care. Do you think, with the publication
:14:42. > :14:46.of staffing levels, hospital by hospital, we will seek hospitals
:14:47. > :14:53.fall below the expected standards? There have to be the financials
:14:54. > :14:58.resources to meet that demand. It will be critical. It is not just
:14:59. > :15:02.reporting numbers. It is how many registered nurses are on the ward.
:15:03. > :15:07.If you are going to include non-qualified staff in those
:15:08. > :15:13.numbers, that is not really a true reflection. We have concentrated on
:15:14. > :15:16.numbers. These skill mix is critical, making sure you have the
:15:17. > :15:19.people with the right skills to deliver safe, compassionate care in
:15:20. > :15:36.a timely manner. So says a campaign group hoping to
:15:37. > :15:39.stop politicians dithering about infrastructure decisions. Boris
:15:40. > :15:45.Johnson recently reiterated his support for more airport capacity at
:15:46. > :15:49.a speech to the CBI. I welcome the recent statement that we need more
:15:50. > :15:53.runway space in the south-east of this country. Its progress. But we
:15:54. > :15:57.need to go further and to accept there's no point in adding runway
:15:58. > :16:04.space at airports where it will not be used. We already have capacity at
:16:05. > :16:13.Gatwick. We have spare capacity at Stansted. But what is needed is a
:16:14. > :16:20.hub capacity. Adam Fleming is outside Parliament with a more. I'm
:16:21. > :16:25.joined by two people who got -- have got very strong views on this. They
:16:26. > :16:32.are John Allen, the chair of Dixons Medi retailer, who is part of this
:16:33. > :16:43.campaign group, and Nick Faraday, from the campaign group, Airport
:16:44. > :16:52.Watch. The UK needs more airport capacity, particularly hub capacity,
:16:53. > :16:58.to support economic growth. We need politicians to read the report and
:16:59. > :17:04.make a decision and get on with it. Were not taking a view on what the
:17:05. > :17:09.solution should be, simply that the politicians should address it and
:17:10. > :17:12.show some leadership. We have talked about the committee chaired by
:17:13. > :17:19.Howard Davies looking at the long-term issue. He is not going to
:17:20. > :17:21.report until 2015, after the election. Is that to report until
:17:22. > :17:25.2015, after the election. Is that too far in the future for you? It
:17:26. > :17:30.would be better if it were soon, and when he gives the -- but when he
:17:31. > :17:36.gives his report, I think that is still soon enough. Whatever decision
:17:37. > :17:41.is taken, it will take some years to implement. The sooner we start, the
:17:42. > :17:47.sooner we finished. 2014 would be better than 2015. But 2015 is better
:17:48. > :17:50.than nothing. If we don't do anything, if the country parks the
:17:51. > :17:58.issue, what is the worst case scenario? We will lose a share of
:17:59. > :18:04.trade. We will lose a share of inward investment. We will lose a
:18:05. > :18:09.share of tourism. All others are important to the economy. This is a
:18:10. > :18:17.broader issue than just business. We need is a port a growing
:18:18. > :18:21.population. -- we need to support. We may go through the town of years
:18:22. > :18:30.in future that we have seen in the recent past. So, next, you are
:18:31. > :18:32.putting the economy at risk. No, we're not. You have just heard
:18:33. > :18:38.aren't unfounded assertions about how we need more airport capacity to
:18:39. > :18:42.grow the economy. There is no evidence that shortage of airport
:18:43. > :18:46.capacity is harming the economy at the moment. There is no evidence
:18:47. > :18:52.that it will, for a long time, even by 2030. There will still be spare
:18:53. > :18:57.capacity at some of London's airports. There is no immediate
:18:58. > :19:01.problem. Therefore, the politicians will be advised not to be panicked
:19:02. > :19:05.or urged into action or decisions on the basis of just assertions and
:19:06. > :19:17.hype about a shortage of their cup -- airport capacity. They said to be
:19:18. > :19:24.an 80% increase by 2030. National Grid there is said to be. -- there
:19:25. > :19:31.is said to be an 80% increase by 2030. We have authoritative
:19:32. > :19:41.forecasts up to 2050. Issues they would be virtually no shortage until
:19:42. > :19:53.2050. -- it shows. I would rather not trust chomping -- something from
:19:54. > :19:59.a campaign trip. That argument overlooks the importance of hubs. If
:20:00. > :20:05.every runway was used to capacity, there will be more capacity. That is
:20:06. > :20:08.not what travellers want. The travellers can go more conveniently
:20:09. > :20:12.through Amsterdam or Paris, they will do. Surprise surprise, our
:20:13. > :20:20.capacity will cope because people will be going elsewhere. It is
:20:21. > :20:25.equally an assertion that we don't need additional capacity. I travel
:20:26. > :20:28.on business and I see what is happening in the rest of the world.
:20:29. > :20:32.I see that we are in danger of losing a share. This is an
:20:33. > :20:36.enhancement about the future, not now. But the decisions need to be
:20:37. > :20:41.made soon if we are going to be ready when capacity crunch arrives.
:20:42. > :20:45.I know your organisation doesn't have a view of the future option
:20:46. > :20:51.that you should plan for, but do you have a personal view? I am content
:20:52. > :20:55.to wait for the report. The commission are going to study this
:20:56. > :20:59.objectively. They are going to address all the issues that need to
:21:00. > :21:03.be thought about. They will come up with a considered view. I am happy
:21:04. > :21:11.to wait, studied the conclusions and then come to a view once I have read
:21:12. > :21:14.what they have to say. I do not have an entrenched position. I know we
:21:15. > :21:18.need more capacity. How it is delivered, there are a number of
:21:19. > :21:23.ways. The important thing is that whatever the decision, politicians
:21:24. > :21:27.should make it an lead and stick with it. That is important for
:21:28. > :21:32.employment, among other things. We have a lot of young, unemployed
:21:33. > :21:40.people. The right investment is going to help that. It is not just
:21:41. > :21:45.an issue for the south-east. Nick, you can have the last word. Do you
:21:46. > :21:52.think the politicians are on your side or the side of businesses? It
:21:53. > :21:54.is a mixed bag. Some of the politicians around Heathrow are
:21:55. > :22:00.concerned about their constituents, the people who live around the
:22:01. > :22:03.impact of noise and air pollution. Those that are concerned with fraud
:22:04. > :22:08.issues are concerned about the impact of climate change. The
:22:09. > :22:12.government's own committee has pointed out that we can't simply
:22:13. > :22:16.expand aviation indefinitely and build new airports and runways if we
:22:17. > :22:19.are going to take climate change seriously. That has got to be looked
:22:20. > :22:26.at. The Davies commission is going to do that. The politicians will
:22:27. > :22:31.consider that. While I agree that it needs to be looked at and they care
:22:32. > :22:35.decision needs to be made, the decision isn't that we just go ahead
:22:36. > :22:45.and build new airports. In particular, we have just heard that
:22:46. > :22:49.the argument is going on to, we need a hub. Hubs are for people changing
:22:50. > :22:54.planes. That is not a fundamental requirement. We need sufficient
:22:55. > :22:59.capacity for people to fly to and from this country. There is no
:23:00. > :23:08.evidence we don't have it at the moment. There is another two years
:23:09. > :23:11.before a decision. That is the problem. There is still
:23:12. > :23:19.so much time, Iain Dale, before a decision is made. It is a massive
:23:20. > :23:22.political issue. That is the scandal. We're going to go into the
:23:23. > :23:29.next election not knowing what people think about airport capacity.
:23:30. > :23:36.20 years ago, in the halcyon days, they launched a report into capacity
:23:37. > :23:40.in the south-east. Nothing has happened since then. Leticia is all
:23:41. > :23:49.parties have let us down. It really is a scandal. -- politicians of all
:23:50. > :23:56.parties. What should the Conservatives say?
:23:57. > :24:00.They need to say, well, there is going to be an interim 40 in
:24:01. > :24:04.December, they need to give an indication of what their
:24:05. > :24:10.preferences. -- for an interim report in December. Somebody has got
:24:11. > :24:15.to make a decision. Otherwise we are going to become a second rate
:24:16. > :24:19.aviation power. Yesterday, the Institute for Fiscal
:24:20. > :24:23.Studies told us about the economic consequences of Scotland deciding to
:24:24. > :24:27.leave the union and they painted a gloomy picture. The IFS said an
:24:28. > :24:31.independent Scotland would need to raise taxes, cut spending, or both,
:24:32. > :24:36.to keep their public finances in check. Today the Scottish government
:24:37. > :24:40.has released its own paper offering a different view, surprise,
:24:41. > :24:44.surprise. Is that Scotland can afford independence if it is given
:24:45. > :24:48.control of economic policy. Let's talk now to Scotland's finance
:24:49. > :24:53.minister, John Swinney, who joins us from Dundee. Welcome to the
:24:54. > :24:57.programme. Can I start by asking you, the Scottish government is
:24:58. > :25:02.going to get more tax powers under the forthcoming act. Why, in your
:25:03. > :25:06.view, will that not be enough? For the simple reason that once we get
:25:07. > :25:12.all of the control that is vested in the Scotland act, which comes into
:25:13. > :25:16.force in 2015, we will have control over about 15% of taxes raised in
:25:17. > :25:20.Scotland. We don't think that is nearly enough, for the simple reason
:25:21. > :25:23.that if you take the current situation, Scottish economic
:25:24. > :25:26.performance is outclassing the rest of the UK but we don't get the
:25:27. > :25:31.revenue benefit of the fact that we are generating more economic
:25:32. > :25:37.activity and presiding over more economic activity than we were
:25:38. > :25:43.before. What the Scotland act brings is further taxation but not nearly
:25:44. > :25:47.the opportunity to create the economy we need to create to
:25:48. > :25:52.generate opportunities for our people. But economically, the IFS
:25:53. > :25:56.said an independent school and would face a fiscal gap of 2% of national
:25:57. > :26:02.income compared to just 0.8% for the UK. That is looking over the next 50
:26:03. > :26:07.years. That would require significant spending cuts or tax
:26:08. > :26:14.rises. You accept that? It is important to bear in mind that the
:26:15. > :26:17.context of the IFS report was that they were setting other proposition
:26:18. > :26:22.about Scotland continuing on the current structure. It was in
:26:23. > :26:25.projecting what could happen if some of the measures that we set up this
:26:26. > :26:33.morning were implemented by an independent government. The IFS
:26:34. > :26:37.analysis isn't a surprise. The analysis about the UK is that the UK
:26:38. > :26:42.will be Endeavour set for the next 50 years. What Scotland has got the
:26:43. > :26:46.opportunity to do mid-September is to get out of that situation and to
:26:47. > :26:58.start to take decisions ourselves. -- next September. Even on that
:26:59. > :27:02.basis, though, use API versus using a context that disadvantages
:27:03. > :27:09.Scotland, but actually that is not true. They said to me that you can
:27:10. > :27:13.make a difference and do things better. What is highly likely is
:27:14. > :27:18.that you could do in better things to growth to upset -- offset the
:27:19. > :27:23.challenges you are going to face. You could do things that would be
:27:24. > :27:28.more efficient and perhaps more money, more growth for Scotland. But
:27:29. > :27:30.it still wouldn't meet the gap because the oil revenues are
:27:31. > :27:39.diminishing and you have an ageing population. Scotland, on ageing
:27:40. > :27:45.populations, has a better dependency ratio than the rest of the UK until
:27:46. > :27:52.the 20 30s. We have got to make sure we take action to create the best
:27:53. > :27:56.conditions going forward. Some of the measures we set out today, for
:27:57. > :28:01.example we spoke about the measure to increase economic activity by
:28:02. > :28:05.better childcare services. If we increase the level of economic
:28:06. > :28:08.activity in Scotland by just 1%, it creates over 20,000 new jobs in
:28:09. > :28:14.Scotland, which contributes to our economic future. People have got to
:28:15. > :28:18.consider the depth of analysis we have set out today in the context of
:28:19. > :28:22.the current economic performance of Scotland, which has got better since
:28:23. > :28:31.Gollum was a devolved country because we have more control of the
:28:32. > :28:35.issues here. -- since Scotland. But you say it yourself, there are
:28:36. > :28:38.possibilities. These are projections that you are putting forward. The
:28:39. > :28:43.Scottish economy would have to perform unbelievably well in order
:28:44. > :28:50.to offset the disadvantages of those oil revenues diminishing over time.
:28:51. > :29:00.Do you say the FS is wrong? Are the figures wrong? There is a broader
:29:01. > :29:04.context. I understand that... Look at the comparison of the last 30
:29:05. > :29:08.years of small, independent European countries. Their growth rates have
:29:09. > :29:13.been about 0.6% higher than the rates in Scotland. If we took the
:29:14. > :29:19.same level of growth, the Scottish economy would be billions of pounds
:29:20. > :29:24.larger than today. What that says to me is that we are able to deliver a
:29:25. > :29:27.better economic future if we have the control of the economic levers
:29:28. > :29:32.that will put Scotland at an advantage. What we have demonstrated
:29:33. > :29:36.since devolution is that we can exercise control more effectively in
:29:37. > :29:42.Scotland. We have to do it across broader ranges of issues. Will you
:29:43. > :29:46.stick to your spending commitments, if Scotland goes independent? We
:29:47. > :29:53.will stick to our existing commitments. There is no facility
:29:54. > :29:57.for tax rises in Scotland. We need to improve economic performance of
:29:58. > :30:00.the country and get Scotland out of the austerity agenda that all of the
:30:01. > :30:05.UK parties seem to have signed up to. We believe there's a way to
:30:06. > :30:13.encourage growth in the economy. We have set out 200 pages and proposals
:30:14. > :30:16.today of how it can come about. It is funny how nobody shares your
:30:17. > :30:21.optimism, even the IFS, who said that under the most optimistic
:30:22. > :30:25.scenario, bringing our national debt would require a 6% reduction in
:30:26. > :30:35.total public spending, a rise of 9% on the basic rate of income tax, or
:30:36. > :30:39.a VAT rate of 28%. The IFS is projecting the analysis of the
:30:40. > :30:43.current arrangements. What I have saying is that if we have economic
:30:44. > :30:51.control and levers at our disposal, we can do things differently. If you
:30:52. > :30:56.look at the current performance just now, the Scottish economy is growing
:30:57. > :31:07.by 1.8%. The UK economy is growing by 1.3%. When we have got control,
:31:08. > :31:13.we can do things better. Corporation tax, where would you set it?
:31:14. > :31:17.We believe corporation tax in Scotland should be set at 3% lower
:31:18. > :31:25.than the rate in the rest of the UK, projected to be 18%. That would
:31:26. > :31:33.realise 27,000 jobs, new jobs creating new taxes, contributing new
:31:34. > :31:37.tax revenue. That's the expansionist agenda we want to take forward,
:31:38. > :31:43.rather than being tied to the austerity agenda of the UK
:31:44. > :31:47.government which has created further economic damage.
:31:48. > :31:52.Alistair Darling has said, why should voters in Scotland gamble on
:31:53. > :31:57.being potentially worse off than they are now? He says on the basis
:31:58. > :32:02.of the ISS reports, your strategy is in tatters.
:32:03. > :32:12.Alistair Darling is hardly a neutral commentator. Hardly a neutral
:32:13. > :32:15.observer. But why take the risk on this? It is a gamble, you said
:32:16. > :32:22.yourself, these are the possibilities.
:32:23. > :32:28.If Alistair Darling were standing here now, and was asked what the tax
:32:29. > :32:34.rate of the UK would be in future, he would not give you an answer.
:32:35. > :32:38.People in Scotland have to take an informed decision over whether they
:32:39. > :32:44.want to be in control of their affairs. My simple point is, based
:32:45. > :32:50.on the performance of the Scottish economy since devolution when we got
:32:51. > :32:53.some control, we have made a good job and improved long-term economic
:32:54. > :32:58.performance. If we have more economic levers, we can do much more
:32:59. > :33:02.to strengthen the Scottish economy and create real opportunities and
:33:03. > :33:08.tackle the damaging inequality that exists within the UK.
:33:09. > :33:14.John Swinney, will you stay with us to answer some questions by
:33:15. > :33:19.viewers? One of the issues is, should Scotland vote yes in the
:33:20. > :33:26.referendum and what would happen to Scottish Parliamentary seats?
:33:27. > :33:32.Scottish Parliamentary seats would still be contested in 2015. Scotland
:33:33. > :33:41.will still be part of the UK in 2015. We envisage the transition
:33:42. > :33:47.being completed in 2016. Does Scotland take on any UK debt,
:33:48. > :33:53.and how much? There are two ways you could
:33:54. > :33:59.consider this. One is on a population basis. So, they do take
:34:00. > :34:13.on the debt? I think, clearly, we would take on a proportion of the
:34:14. > :34:21.debt and a proportion of the assets. We can discuss this on a per capita
:34:22. > :34:25.basis. Or on a historic basis. On both of these measures, Scotland is
:34:26. > :34:29.in a strong position. Why can't Scots in England have a
:34:30. > :34:35.vote on independence? This is a very difficult issue. We
:34:36. > :34:40.want to look at it carefully. I quite understand the fact many
:34:41. > :34:46.people from Scotland live in England, may be temporarily. It is
:34:47. > :34:51.very difficult to establish a reliable franchise base for
:34:52. > :34:57.eligibility to vote. What we opted to do and what has been agreed is
:34:58. > :35:03.that we should take forward the franchise is used for electing the
:35:04. > :35:08.Scottish Parliament and the people eligible will be those eligible to
:35:09. > :35:11.vote in the referendum. Thank you for answering those
:35:12. > :35:15.questions in Dundee. These days, politicians argue how we
:35:16. > :35:19.protect it, who has the right to see it, and how it can help govern. So,
:35:20. > :35:26.it was only a matter of time before data became a tool for elections.
:35:27. > :35:30.2015 looks like being the first really digital election. And, as
:35:31. > :35:33.Giles has been finding out, thanks to some big American influence, in
:35:34. > :35:36.all parties' campaigns, data about us is fast becoming king.
:35:37. > :35:38.The sight of our politicians out glad-handing provokes three
:35:39. > :35:42.thoughts. One, oh, hell, it's election time.
:35:43. > :35:44.Two, they've been doing it the same way for years.
:35:45. > :35:53.Or, three, will it ever change? The answer to that is yes. For 2015,
:35:54. > :35:58.it has. What is fascinating is it will be a
:35:59. > :36:02.macro level campaign about big economic questions, living
:36:03. > :36:11.standards. And terribly micro, very localised and targeted.
:36:12. > :36:18.We can move from Mondeo man, Worcester woman, clumps of people.
:36:19. > :36:21.And work out which individuals in each seat are interested in hearing
:36:22. > :36:26.from us. Parties discuss campaigns in terms
:36:27. > :36:31.of an air war. Broadcasting message policy on media platforms. And
:36:32. > :36:34.ground war. Campaigning on the doorstep and in communities
:36:35. > :36:39.face-to-face. Both are crucial. But there may be a new front on the data
:36:40. > :36:44.war. The Conservatives have divided the
:36:45. > :36:52.lecture into eight tribes. Anxious, aspirational, disaffected, and each
:36:53. > :36:55.group will be targeted with personalised campaign literature and
:36:56. > :37:00.information. Data is allowing parties to not just
:37:01. > :37:03.target types of people, but understand which individuals in
:37:04. > :37:06.which seats are the ones which will make the biggest difference.
:37:07. > :37:10.The upshot is, instead of a mass mails hot, you could find your own
:37:11. > :37:13.bespoke message In those places where the seat may be decided on a
:37:14. > :37:19.narrow majority. You, yes, you, may have become very special, whether
:37:20. > :37:23.you like that or not! Research is based not just on what
:37:24. > :37:30.people say about particular policies, it is about their values
:37:31. > :37:33.and attitudes. MPs are being told to ask questions, do you think the
:37:34. > :37:37.future will be better for your children than for you? More
:37:38. > :37:43.promotional stuff rather than just information.
:37:44. > :37:47.Labour are countering in a slightly different way, because they do have
:37:48. > :37:49.a ground war advantage. They have more members, and are using them in
:37:50. > :37:53.community campaigning action, cleaning up public spaces, hosting
:37:54. > :38:02.soup kitchens. It could be an edge. Their best results were in seats
:38:03. > :38:06.with community building. The Labour Party will spread that out across
:38:07. > :38:10.the country. So, it is better at bringing people into the party by
:38:11. > :38:13.making sure they can contribute their time usefully. That gives the
:38:14. > :38:17.Labour Party a bigger volunteer force.
:38:18. > :38:20.It's the Americans who are blame for all this Both the Tories and Labour
:38:21. > :38:27.have Obama campaign veterans recruited. 2015 is looking like our
:38:28. > :38:31.social media election. What the parties have all worked out
:38:32. > :38:35.is people are far more likely to listen to their friends advising
:38:36. > :38:39.them to vote in a particular way than to listen to some random
:38:40. > :38:43.politician turning up on the doorstep. They are hoping to harness
:38:44. > :38:47.this power of Facebook and Twitter to encourage their existing
:38:48. > :38:48.supporters to get people to vote who are not necessarily already
:38:49. > :38:54.supporting them. But there's a warning to disciples
:38:55. > :38:58.of data. It is a national mission that
:38:59. > :39:02.ultimately will drive most of the change in the vote. If you focus on
:39:03. > :39:04.each little part you miss the big picture.
:39:05. > :39:05.And that means any new techniques will campaign hand-in-hand with the
:39:06. > :39:11.old. Giles Dilnot reporting.
:39:12. > :39:15.Iain Dale is still with me. Is this going to be the digital
:39:16. > :39:18.campaign that everyone will remember? It will be about Facebook
:39:19. > :39:25.and Twitter? I sat here four years ago, and that
:39:26. > :39:30.question was put to me. The last election was about the television
:39:31. > :39:35.election. The next election, depending on the debates, will
:39:36. > :39:40.probably also be the television election. The Internet will play an
:39:41. > :39:44.important part but I doubt it will be decided. E-mail is the most
:39:45. > :39:48.important thing. Of course the parties want to use Facebook and
:39:49. > :39:54.Twitter but you could be forgiven for asking if they are serious. The
:39:55. > :40:00.Conservatives launched a new website last week, one of the most dire I
:40:01. > :40:04.have seen. It is exclusive, cold, not interactive, it does everything
:40:05. > :40:09.a political website should not do. The other parties aren't that much
:40:10. > :40:16.better. Although they are slightly more welcoming. They have a long way
:40:17. > :40:21.to go. The Tory election guru says you can't fatten the pig on market
:40:22. > :40:23.day. You can't get into Internet campaigning if you months before the
:40:24. > :40:32.election. But the parties say it is under way.
:40:33. > :40:38.There are some MPs who have been helped by Twitter. It is the idea of
:40:39. > :40:44.personally tailoring politics I am intrigued by. They will cut through
:40:45. > :40:47.the geographical divide on constituencies and personally target
:40:48. > :40:54.people in conversations. This has been going on for years. In
:40:55. > :41:01.1997, I was running a campaign for the Tories and we used direct mail,
:41:02. > :41:07.that was a major innovation. That is now by e-mail. MPs have the value of
:41:08. > :41:14.incumbency. Grant Schapps, he has 23,000 e-mail addresses which he
:41:15. > :41:20.e-mails every week. Of course it will help. Most MPs have maybe if
:41:21. > :41:24.you hundreds. Their task is to build up their e-mail database.
:41:25. > :41:39.Central office will be going for the marginal seats. Tories have the
:41:40. > :41:44.40-40 strategy, keeping 40, targeting 40 marginal seats.
:41:45. > :41:47.Labour do not have as much money. Will they be thinking, this is a
:41:48. > :41:52.cheaper and effective way of targeting?
:41:53. > :41:58.All parties will be thinking that. There is a maximum each party can
:41:59. > :42:00.spend. Never ship is dying out, particularly for the Tories, they
:42:01. > :42:06.don't have the activists on the ground.
:42:07. > :42:09.Will that hand the Labour Party and advantage? Their membership is going
:42:10. > :42:19.up slightly, and they are slightly younger. The Lib Dems, their
:42:20. > :42:23.membership has halved. UKIP, they will mount in much stronger campaign
:42:24. > :42:27.because them ever ship has gone up. I don't see the next election being
:42:28. > :42:30.that much different from the last one in terms of what the parties are
:42:31. > :42:34.doing. Interesting.
:42:35. > :42:37.Should government force companies to increase the number of women on
:42:38. > :42:41.their boards? The EU Commission thinks so and, today, members of the
:42:42. > :42:47.European Parliament are debating the idea of a 40% target. Let's talk
:42:48. > :42:50.about this now with the Labour MEP Mary Honeyball. And Marina
:42:51. > :42:56.Yannakoudakis for the Conservatives. They both join me now from
:42:57. > :42:59.Strasbourg. Welcome to the programme. Mary
:43:00. > :43:05.Honeyball, would it be compulsory for companies to have 40% of women
:43:06. > :43:10.on their board? It will be, this is legislation. We are debating it this
:43:11. > :43:13.afternoon and boating tomorrow. Assuming it goes through the
:43:14. > :43:20.European Parliament, it will have to go through a process, go to the
:43:21. > :43:27.Council of ministers with intense negotiations. Should it go through,
:43:28. > :43:34.then it will be legislated. How would it be enforced?
:43:35. > :43:38.There are provisions in the report for sanctions which each member
:43:39. > :43:41.state will apply. It will be up to the member states to apply the
:43:42. > :43:47.sanctions but the report suggests what they are. That is something
:43:48. > :43:53.Labour MEPs are taking issue with. We think some sanctions in the
:43:54. > :43:58.report are too strong. There is 1's action which talks about liquidating
:43:59. > :44:03.companies if they do not agree. If they do not implement the demands.
:44:04. > :44:08.We will be voting against that. Marina, you are opposed to it in
:44:09. > :44:17.principle. The figures haven't improved much. The UK's -- the UK
:44:18. > :44:22.stands at ten best out of 20 member states.
:44:23. > :44:30.It is never going to be good enough, we have to keep working at it. We
:44:31. > :44:36.need more women, greater diversity. How we do it is where we differ. I
:44:37. > :44:45.think this report, this directive, will be using, it is dealing with
:44:46. > :44:49.the symptoms and not dealing with the actual problem. That is why we
:44:50. > :44:55.need to look further, looks at pathway, how to get women ready to
:44:56. > :45:02.go into boards, to make sure more women want to go into boards. A
:45:03. > :45:07.survey yesterday by a recruitment agency said that women do want to go
:45:08. > :45:14.on board but only 6% want compulsory quotas.
:45:15. > :45:20.Figures have worked in other countries. Norway has seen an
:45:21. > :45:25.increase from 9% up to 40% in under a decade. You can't reach those
:45:26. > :45:33.figures without quotas. It has indeed. It has seen 40% in
:45:34. > :45:37.nonexecutive positions. It has seen no increase in executive positions.
:45:38. > :45:43.It has seen no increase in other levels of business. The 40% they
:45:44. > :45:50.have, one woman holds 90 posts! I wonder what sort of women they are
:45:51. > :46:00.putting in, with what quotas. She is wrong to say that Norway has not had
:46:01. > :46:06.an increase in executive directors. They have gone up. It has been up by
:46:07. > :46:11.3%. I agree with Marina that we need to make sure women are ready, that
:46:12. > :46:16.they can go on boards, that they want to, that they have the training
:46:17. > :46:19.and experience. But they are not mutually exclusive. Creditors does
:46:20. > :46:24.not mean you don't take those measures. Of course we need to make
:46:25. > :46:29.sure women can do the job. I firmly believe women can become
:46:30. > :46:33.nonexecutive directors. There are enough good women out there. They
:46:34. > :46:38.are just as good as men. That is what we should be doing, encouraging
:46:39. > :46:44.them, not just catapulting them or creating posts. They need to get
:46:45. > :46:49.there on merit. If you just have a quota, a random quote, you are
:46:50. > :46:56.encouraging tokenism, on cue? You are going to have women who aren't
:46:57. > :46:59.experienced enough. I don't believe you will. There are women who are
:47:00. > :47:05.experienced enough. The Commissioner who has been piloting this through
:47:06. > :47:09.the commission has been out to business schools around Europe, and
:47:10. > :47:15.she has one in who are ready to do these jobs. We know the -- she has
:47:16. > :47:19.women who are ready to do these jobs. We know the women are out
:47:20. > :47:25.there. There are, at the moment, enough. Women are just as good at
:47:26. > :47:30.this as men. There is a good business case for having women on
:47:31. > :47:35.boards. Fiona Wolf has made this point often, that diversity on
:47:36. > :47:42.company boards has improved performance. There are good business
:47:43. > :47:48.reasons for doing this. Let's look at the business reaction. Germany
:47:49. > :47:53.has agreed a women's quota. They will be required to have at least
:47:54. > :47:58.30% of women on supervisory boards. Clearly, they don't think it's bad
:47:59. > :48:02.for business. You are right, Germany did just announced that. What I am
:48:03. > :48:07.saying is that it is not up to the EU. It Germany would like to do it,
:48:08. > :48:11.it is up to the member state. They will be having problems, though. I
:48:12. > :48:15.believe they have said they don't know how they will enforce it, and
:48:16. > :48:19.they are saying that if they have these 30% seat and they are not
:48:20. > :48:23.full, they will keep them empty. How good that will be for business, I
:48:24. > :48:27.don't know. The point is, the EU is coming up with a piece of
:48:28. > :48:34.legislation that is one size fits all. Really, we need to let member
:48:35. > :48:45.states decide. Stay with us. What do you think about this idea? Marina's
:48:46. > :48:48.first point is crucial. If the British government or political
:48:49. > :48:53.party was to have that policy, fair enough. I think Mary is also right,
:48:54. > :48:59.many companies are missing out on talent by not promoting women to
:49:00. > :49:05.boards. Are the women there, though, in the first place? If not now, then
:49:06. > :49:12.they will be in five or ten years. This is something that in time will
:49:13. > :49:19.correct itself. Very slowly, though. Maybe, but in FTSE 100 companies,
:49:20. > :49:24.the number of women has shot up. What about that point, but why
:49:25. > :49:35.should the EU force this on member states? Firstly I would like to say
:49:36. > :49:42.that the number has gone up on FTSE 100 boards. It has gone by 9% in two
:49:43. > :49:45.years. It is still slow. That is in the UK where we are making a big
:49:46. > :49:49.effort. There are many countries in the EU who are nowhere near that.
:49:50. > :49:55.This is a legislation to bring everybody up to a similar level.
:49:56. > :49:59.That is the's role in it. If member states are better, some are ahead of
:50:00. > :50:05.the EU, that is good. That is what we would like to see. We want more
:50:06. > :50:07.parity and more equality. That is so that all member states can take
:50:08. > :50:17.advantage of the talent of women out there. Thank you. As we have already
:50:18. > :50:21.discussed today, whether Scotland votes for independence next year or
:50:22. > :50:28.not, war powers will be handed to Edinburgh because of new legislation
:50:29. > :50:31.passed last year and Westminster. -- more powers. Earlier this year,
:50:32. > :50:34.David Cameron announced the world 's semi would get more power over
:50:35. > :50:42.things like stamp duty and income tax. -- the Welsh Assembly. Where
:50:43. > :50:46.does this leave England? Eddie Bone leads the campaign for owning this
:50:47. > :50:49.Parliament. We have also been joined by Barry Sheerman, who backs the
:50:50. > :50:55.idea of regional assemblies across England. Make your case, then.
:50:56. > :51:03.England was left out in 1998 by the Blair government. It didn't register
:51:04. > :51:05.that England was a country. They gave devolution to Wales and
:51:06. > :51:11.Scotland without knowing the full consequences. What we are arguing
:51:12. > :51:18.for is that the people of England deserve a First Minister, fairness,
:51:19. > :51:22.and equality. Presently, not one of the main political parties and even
:51:23. > :51:29.produces a manifesto on English policies. Because devolution is
:51:30. > :51:34.growing, there are clear policy divides in health, the NHS, and
:51:35. > :51:37.within education. We need to see the people of England having a voice,
:51:38. > :51:45.and a First Minister. What is wrong with that, Barry Sheerman? We have a
:51:46. > :51:49.British Parliament that is biased towards England. 53 million people
:51:50. > :51:55.in this country live in England, and only 10 million in the other
:51:56. > :52:01.devolved assemblies. We have power for England in a very interesting
:52:02. > :52:07.way. I'm not a nationalist. I don't mind the fact that we have to talk
:52:08. > :52:16.about English nationalism. I don't want that to become a rallying cry.
:52:17. > :52:25.Isn't it true that England dominates? It makes our campaign
:52:26. > :52:29.easier because it puts it on to the political agenda. We have to make
:52:30. > :52:32.sure the system is fair. Barry is encouraging one-way. It is not an
:52:33. > :52:41.English parliament, it is a UK Parliament. -- Barry is incorrect in
:52:42. > :52:47.one way. Health and education are very separate. We need a First
:52:48. > :52:51.Minister, he has to accept that, and there are clear divisions now
:52:52. > :52:55.between England, Scotland and Wales. There is such a thing as positive
:52:56. > :53:05.national, the same as in Scotland and Wales. If there was a democratic
:53:06. > :53:08.upsurge for this. . . I would support it. All of the polling I
:53:09. > :53:16.have seen as shown indifference about this. People are happy with
:53:17. > :53:26.the status quo. I'd share a group of MPs. -- I chair a group of MPs. All
:53:27. > :53:29.we see in the regions is one strong region, London and the south-east,
:53:30. > :53:37.dominating the conversation. That is wrong. Who would be your First
:53:38. > :53:49.Minister? That is for the people of England to decide. He stuck in this
:53:50. > :54:00.issue of regionalism. There is no support for that. It is nice to see
:54:01. > :54:12.you, Iain Dale. I have only ever met you on Twitter! There is not a great
:54:13. > :54:20.demand for this. Oh, there is. The Parliament use Jess will be
:54:21. > :54:24.dominated by Boris. -- you suggest. It will be dominated by the South,
:54:25. > :54:30.wouldn't it? It would be dominated by England, which is the point Eddie
:54:31. > :54:34.makes. England deserves its own parliament, I have been sympathetic
:54:35. > :54:40.to that idea. Barry is wrong about the polling. But it depends on when
:54:41. > :54:45.they do the polling. If there is a major Scottish issue, we support
:54:46. > :54:48.finding less Parliament rises. It doesn't have to be bureaucratic, it
:54:49. > :54:57.doesn't have to have a separate building. -- the support for an
:54:58. > :55:04.English Parliament rises. This has been going on for years. I remember
:55:05. > :55:09.going to a group of yours in 2003. Nothing has changed since then. You
:55:10. > :55:19.haven't with a figurehead. I do agree. We have an event tomorrow. We
:55:20. > :55:24.are finding that a number of MPs are expressing concern. We are all aware
:55:25. > :55:31.that the status quo cannot exist any more. There is quite a bit of
:55:32. > :55:38.support for this in all parties. I don't know if Barry would agree, but
:55:39. > :55:43.it is below the surface. But there is a difference between caring
:55:44. > :55:57.passionately about England... Yellow Matt Frei I do, thank you. -- I do,
:55:58. > :56:05.thank you. English nationalism doesn't have to be a negative thing.
:56:06. > :56:12.When the England flag was associated with the BNP, that was negative. It
:56:13. > :56:18.is no longer the case. I have seen no traction for another layer...
:56:19. > :56:25.Would it lead to the break-up of the union? We are looking at crisis
:56:26. > :56:28.point. The first is the Scottish referendum. If Scotland votes yes,
:56:29. > :56:32.it would mean the dissolution of the UK. The agreement was with the
:56:33. > :56:39.Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland. England needs to have
:56:40. > :56:42.people negotiating on their behalf. We have just seen John Swinney
:56:43. > :56:50.talking about, would they take the debt. We need people to represent
:56:51. > :56:55.England. That is the Prime Minister's job. How would a
:56:56. > :57:00.relationship between the First Minister and the Prime Minister
:57:01. > :57:09.work? We are looking at clearly defined areas. And politicians
:57:10. > :57:14.always stick to those! We are seeing growth of a Welsh identity on home
:57:15. > :57:18.policies. There are clear differences between a federal system
:57:19. > :57:28.of UK policies, which would be foreign policy, defence, etc, and
:57:29. > :57:33.actual national issues. You would like to see the end of the UK
:57:34. > :57:38.Parliament? You are saying you would like to have four separate
:57:39. > :57:48.governments. The rationale of you are committed to breaking England
:57:49. > :57:54.are completely. -- your rationale, you are committed to breaking
:57:55. > :58:01.England down completely. There is no doubt that an incoming Labour
:58:02. > :58:07.government could look at what the Coalition have created in terms of
:58:08. > :58:12.their local economic partnerships. They could easily be democratised.
:58:13. > :58:21.City regions could be the way forward. Don't underestimate that
:58:22. > :58:25.there is emphasis on democracy but not on English nationalism. We have
:58:26. > :58:30.to finish there. There is just time to find out the answer to our quiz.
:58:31. > :58:41.The question was, how do Ed Miliband's team refer to Ed Balls'
:58:42. > :58:47.team, according to the newspaper? All four could apply. I wouldn't say
:58:48. > :58:50.that. And it's? No, Pirates! That is all today. Thanks to all of my
:58:51. > :58:55.guests. Goodbye.