09/10/2012 Newsnight Scotland

Tonight on Newsnight Scotland: It's a deal - well, almost. David

Cameron and Alex Salmond are set to dot the Is and cross the Ts on a

referendum agreement on Monday. We'll be live with the latest from

Westminster. And it's all to do with spin, nifty

footwork and quick changes of direction. Not Scottish country

dancing - the great debate on universal benefits. John Swinney

Good evening. It's emerged at Westminster tonight that a deal's

been done between the UK and Scottish governments over the

independence referendum. David Cameron and Alex Salmond will now

meet in Edinburgh on Monday to sign off the deal. Our political

correspondent Tim Reid joins us now from Westminster. What is

happening? They have been expecting some kind

of agreement to be reached before David Cameron and Alex Salmond need

to sign of the referendum deal. There have been retracted their

decisions between not just minister but also officials. They have been

putting together a package of measures which we understand is

being very close to a deal on a referendum. They have been

difficulties along the way but we understand that a Alex Salmond and

David Cameron will sign of this off in the coming days. Nicola Sturgeon

and Michael Moore have met, two weeks ago, where they had a final

set of negotiations. Today, they had a discussion by telephone and

have agreed the basis of that referendum deal. It does... There

are some difficulties. They still have to negotiate the electoral

commission's role and for funding for the referendum but it seems

there will be one question and a Scottish government has got its way,

it seems, for 16 and 17 year-olds to be allowed to fade.

There seems to be a different tone coming from a the Conservative

conference, this is a just -- this is just a deal and the formalities

remain. They are more cautious appear. The tone seems more

measured. It the official statement we have

from both governments force that they had been, again, good and

substantial progress which is what we've had at each of the meetings

between Michael Moore and Nicola Sturgeon. David Montale today said

a deal had been reached. The Scottish government has said it

hasn't been reached but I think they are talking about minor things

and not the major deal itself which we fully expect to be signed on

Monday. So, now we know. The referendum

process has been agreed and ahead of us is two years of debate on

policy, things like health, welfare, defence and, crucially, public

spending. Indeed, for the last two weeks, the debate on spending

priorities and universal benefits has rivalled the constitution as

the big issue in Scottish politics. We'll be hearing the thoughts of

the Finance Secretary John Swinney on that in a moment. But first,

Catriona Renton on a fortnight of Today, we've been told Scottish

country dancing cannot bring universal benefits. It's free, good

for your mind and good for your body. It demands nifty footwork and

at times, quick changes in direction. Well, Labour's Joe 1 --

Joanne Lamont to go for a fortnight ago and although some thought she

lost her footing, she started the debate on such things as a free bus

passes, free prescriptions, free tuition fees and the council tax

freeze. We have a free prescriptions and so one but in our

communities, we know schools are under pressure, hospitals are under

pressure, families are under pressure because they cannot get

care for elderly people. That is unsustainable. Do so, has the tune

changed? There has been a fair bit of to-ing and fro-ing about what

this all means. We will protect the council tax freeze, free education,

bus passes and elderly care, and health care free at the point of

need. The we delivered many universal benefits. And different

stance of the debate are all out of step with each other. -- sides.

wonder autobus �9,000 tuition fees... And then the debate went

up-tempo, resembling a bad tempered situation. She was deeply wrong to

talk about is something for nothing society. That is exactly the

language of the Tory party of 20 years ago. Who is paying the price

for the benefits we are all getting currently from his spending

choices? Unlike these dancers, we are used to politicians preferred

the be stomping on top of each other but then the former Auditor

General of Scotland what's to him. The affordability of some of this

has to be questioned. We do need to Revisited and every pound that goes

on free services for bus passes, for well-off older people, is it

and it is not there to do other things. The Scottish Conservative

leader says steps must be taken. don't particularly believe that

most people across Scotland want to get free aspirin when they see

people with rare cancers are not getting the drugs that you can get

elsewhere and the rest of the country. I think what is

encouraging is that we are at the start of the debate. In politics,

timing is everything. Tonight, with it confirmed that a referendum deal

is all but done, prepare to take your partners. But will the dance

be a Highland Scottish or a Britannia to step?

Just before we came on air, I spoke to the Finance Secretary, John

Swinney about his spending policies and priorities. But first, I got

his reaction to this evening's news from Wesminster that a referendum

deal between both government is all but done. What the Secretary of

State for Scotland agreed with Nicola Sturgeon this afternoon was

some substantial progress being made between our two governments.

Some further ground had to be covered before we could reach final

agreement. I think undoubtedly, as they stick and today said, progress

has been made but there is still some way to go to get to find a

position on that. It has to be reached before the Prime Minister

and First Minister can come to an agreement on this question.

have you given up on the idea of a second question? The government has

always made clear that we preferred to have a single question on

whether Scott and should become an independent country. But we also

recognised, and we've made this clear throughout our discussions on

this question, that people in Scotland wanted to consider other

options to strengthen the powers of the parliament, particularly in

relation to financial powers within the United Kingdom. That is a

question we consulted upon, when we discussed with various elements of

civic life within Scotland. It has been an important of the

discussions that we have been taking fought with the UK

government. Throughout all this, our preference has been for to have

a single question. OK. On this whole issue of public service

reform, do you think Lamont was wrong to go for a public debate

about universal benefits? There is always a debate to be had about the

sustainability of the public finances and am engaged in that

debate on a regular basis. I formulate proposals on an annual

basis to put to Parliament, which essentially tests that very

question about sustainability of the public finances. Where Lamont

is wrong, is to advance that debate but not put forward some solutions.

It is terribly easy to say, we should have this debate and have an

honest debate and all the rest of it, but not to put any choices or

preferences for it, or any idea about how you might make the

finances sustainable is a wholly wrong approach to take. It is not

the approach the Scottish government takes because we've put

forward since 2007 / 2080 a balanced budget which makes

financial provision for the scissors of Scotland. You're making

your own choices in doing that. That's absolutely mad point. I'm

making my choice is on an annual basis. For there to be an honest

debate from the Labour Party, the Labour Party should also advance

their choices and so far, I have been unable to see... Well, they

have not made any choices. They said we should have a debate. They

contribute nothing to the process. What was the basis for you decided

not to challenge any of the universal benefits that are under

your control and use them to fund, for example, more money for further

education, where there are 80,000 fewer students than there were two

years ago? If you take a further education college provision, the

government committed to maintaining full-time equivalent student

numbers at about 116,000 places. That is exactly what we have done.

In our choices in relation to universal services, and a universal

benefits are -- benefits, there is a strong argument in relation to

the agenda the Government takes forward on to but to spend. For

example, personal care for the elderly ensures that War Of Our

elderly citizens can be supported in their own homes, where they get

the best situation to have their care delivered. If they want not to

be able to get that service, but had to have in hospital cot --,, it

And ensure economists are telling you that in a time like this, the

best thing the Government can do to promote economic growth, which you

say is your top priority, is to get as many young people into education

as possible. Yet each used to maintain a free bus passes for the

over-sixties, free prescriptions for the Ultra Rich, and that is the

choice but somehow that is more important than putting money into

further education colleges so they do not have to cut the number of

students by 80,000 and could have all the part time about his --

jeans that they used to have. you are not following the point

that I just made. The Government has put in place the funding to

ensure that the commitments that were given have been delivered by

the Scottish Government. That has been a continuous part of the

support that you go into further education colleges. You're not

denying there are 80,000 fewer students. What I am saying is that

the commitment we put in place to guarantee continuity of full-time

equivalent students numbers is exactly what the Government...

is bureaucracy speak. Your own Government -- I doubt your own

Government and say it is a good thing that there is 80,000 students

-- fewer students. The point is that become -- maintained our

commitments to make sure that and that it -- adequate number of

student places were offered its throughout Scotland. Throughout the

education system, a strong contribution of entrants into the

further education system able to contribute to our economy. What the

Government has got to do the strike a balance between... Just to get

this clear, you were saying that a cut of 80,000 students is adequate?

I am seeing that the commitments to put in place to support a

continuous number of full time equivalent places is what the

Government thinks is correct and appropriate as a contribution to

the Scottish economy. So 80,000 fewer is correct? We are contained

-- we have maintained our commitment to student numbers. We

have put in place a whole load of other interventions to support

people getting into the economy, such as more modern apprenticeships.

The guarantee of an opportunity for all. The employer at recruitment

initiative. These are all it -- all measures designed to get young

people into the economy and to give them the opportunities that they

should at. One of his choice you haven't made is that its flagship

policy for why you want independence is that you want to

cut business taxes in Scotland. Why had he not cut business taxes?

course we have cut business taxes. You could business rates up.

have a business tax regime that delivers reliefs to the value of

�500 million per annum. But you promised for independence is not to

have more relief for business tax, it is to cut it. Why do you not you

-- use the powers you have got? Revenues from non-domestic rates

have risen since you froze council tax. The Government's commitment on

business rates is to make sure that Scotland has the most competitive

rate of business rates and the most impressive rate its regime in the

United Kingdom, and that is what we had done. We have cut his as rates.

We have cut them for 65,000 small businesses in Scotland. So why have

council tax revenue risen? For a whole variety of reasons. There is

an inflation adjustment to be made. The Government has put in place

cuts in business rates which have delivered a �500 million relief

package in every single year of the five years of this business rates

in the evaluation period. All these factors contribute to Scotland

having the most competitive regime on business rates in the United

Kingdom. Crawford Beveridge in his report that you commissioned, he

agreed with John Lamont that things like tuition fees and concessionary

travel and all the rest of it had to be looked at. Why was he wrong

as well? He gave us a range of different options that we could

take forward to make the public finances sustainable. They covered

officiously, were paid constraint,... He suggested banning

at council tax freeze. It suggested more options for reducing public

expenditure it than we are required to take. So we took the various

options that we thought should be implemented, such as the reduction

of number of public bodies. Such as the efficiency agenda. We

implemented all those provisions to make the public finances

sustainable. Thank you very much. I am joined now by Professor John

Kerchers of Strathclyde University. Do you have any polling evidence

about this? We have some polling evidence about whether or not

people support universal benefits and certainly it is not the case

that people in Scotland are necessarily as enthusiastic about

universal benefits as some commentators have been implying of

the last two weeks. If ET the issue of three personal care, one of

those secretary Scottish policies. Around 55 % or so of people are in

favour of this. Around 40 % however think that actually some people

should take -- a according to their means. Tuition fees, which even at

the back of Dougall -- at the beginning of devolution were never

as unpopular as most people think, there are more people in Scotland -

- the number of people in Scotland to think that no student should pay

tuition fees is down to 20 %. 20 %? Only 20 % say that no student

at all should have to pay tuition fees. The vast majority of people

say that some students should have to pay according to their means.

Obviously, it depends and the level. There is other appalling evidence

that came out before the election which suggests that 9,000 tuition

fees where indeed an acceptable to the Scottish population, on the

other hand, the idea of a �4,000 fee might well be acceptable. The

truth is, we're not as wedded to the idea of universal benefits as

we might think. The risk that she has taken in raising this issue is

not quite as big as some people imagine. What but some of the other

things, like bus passes? Last time this was asked, free bus passes

were relatively popular, around 77 % in favour. On the other hand, if

you asked people, should no one have to pay for a prescription that

it can afford to pay for it? Again, or respect -- split around 50-50 on

this issue. We're pretty much divided. What one needs to realise

here is that the truth is that politicians balls on the left and

the right are divided on this issue. There are some politicians on the

left who feel that you should charge those who are better off for

some kind of services, otherwise it is a subsidy to them, there are

some on the left who say it is essential to a common citizenship.

This exactly reflect public opinion. It is not the case that people that

you might regard as being on the left have any clear consistent view

on this, they are divided as much as anyone else. Do people actually

vote on this? That again is also by no means clear. I have heard many

people say that one of the reasons why the SNP won their first

election is because of their commitment to not have tuition fees

any more. The truth is, if you look at people's attitudes at the time

on tuition fees, and look at how they voted, actually have the

people who were in favour of tuition fees have voted for a party

that did not want them and the other half voted for a party that

was consistent with their views. The truth is that on these issues,

it is not clear what people's attitudes -- that people's

attitudes have been reflected in the votes. There for, there needs

to be a measure of caution about assuming that this debate, but

people's attitudes to whether there should have a should not be charges

for some services, is necessarily going to be all that crucial in