:00:01. > :00:11.It is a useful lesson that Tony Hall brings from Covent Garden to
:00:11. > :00:14.
:00:14. > :00:18.the upper reaches of the BBC. We'll speak to the Education
:00:18. > :00:23.Secretary Mike Russell about their college funding row that has
:00:23. > :00:26.dominated Holyrood debate for a fortnight. Did he make an honest
:00:26. > :00:29.estate undefeated why did he not tell Parliament earlier?
:00:29. > :00:32.And a new prescription for Scotland's appalling health record
:00:33. > :00:37.for. Mike Russell is not given to humble
:00:37. > :00:47.this or contrition. He has had to show a lot will both over the last
:00:47. > :00:57.week. There have been calls for his resignation and for an apology. The
:00:57. > :00:57.
:00:57. > :01:04.first the Mr Assad to say sorry also.
:01:04. > :01:10.-- the First Minister has had to apologise also.
:01:10. > :01:14.The future of colleges has been in the news since last week. Their
:01:14. > :01:23.education secretary asked this manner to consider his position
:01:23. > :01:26.after he recorded the minister in a private meeting. He left his job
:01:26. > :01:30.saying he believed there was a danger that any difficulty that a
:01:30. > :01:35.rose for him could be transferred to the college and to the wider
:01:35. > :01:43.interests of colleges. It is that issue, the product issue
:01:43. > :01:46.of college funding, that will not go away. Last week at First
:01:46. > :01:50.Minister's Questions Alex Salmond told the chamber that this year
:01:50. > :02:00.colleges had received an increase in funding. But the figures were
:02:00. > :02:02.
:02:02. > :02:08.wrong. 545 million to 546 million is an increase. The Scottish
:02:08. > :02:15.government stood by the figures. Did you mislead Parliament? I did
:02:15. > :02:20.not. A 5:00pm an apology. A I take full responsibility for what I say
:02:20. > :02:28.in this chamber. I have taken this opportunity to correct the figure.
:02:28. > :02:35.The figure should had been 556. I apologise to the chamber for this
:02:35. > :02:41.error. Less than one week later after being pressed by Labour
:02:41. > :02:49.another apology. My apology is full and unReserve. It is to the whole
:02:49. > :02:54.chamber. It should not have happened. By First Minister's
:02:54. > :02:57.Questions this lunchtime the issue still have not gone away. Win in
:02:58. > :03:01.the last 18 months did John Swinney inform the First Minister that
:03:01. > :03:08.college funding was to be reduced this year and how often did he
:03:08. > :03:14.update him? The mistake for which I apologise last week was my mistake
:03:14. > :03:20.in terms of our briefing which I read out from which suggests that
:03:20. > :03:28.that college funding was increasing compared to last year. The table
:03:28. > :03:34.had forgotten to include 11 million additional funding. At this
:03:34. > :03:41.afternoon's debate on college funding came this. I'd do not claim
:03:41. > :03:48.to be a shrinking violet. I am committed to getting the best for
:03:48. > :03:52.students in all sectors. I am passionate about education, about
:03:52. > :04:02.working for others to share the same passion. Education changes
:04:02. > :04:03.
:04:03. > :04:06.light. It transforms prospects. It creates new world. Once again it is
:04:06. > :04:10.the wider issue at stake. There are concerns in the college sector
:04:10. > :04:16.about funding for the future, whether courses will survive,
:04:16. > :04:20.mergers, and what is best for the students. The resignation of the
:04:20. > :04:25.Education Secretary has been called for. Sorry has been said. Now will
:04:25. > :04:29.the real debate begin? A short while ago I spoke to Mike
:04:29. > :04:34.Russell. I asked him if back in 20th June said they would be no
:04:34. > :04:38.reduction in funding did he know the real figures? The it is not a
:04:38. > :04:43.question of knowing the real figures. The question is we
:04:43. > :04:48.understated the image we had spent by �11 million. I discovered that
:04:48. > :04:52.that was understated at the same time as the First Minister. I did
:04:52. > :04:58.as the First Minister a but. It was the right thing to do. We apologise.
:04:58. > :05:02.It was a genuine mistake. I apologise for that mistake. The
:05:02. > :05:06.figure be quoted was and �11 million less than we had spent.
:05:06. > :05:16.What we have been trying to do again and again is to increase that
:05:16. > :05:17.
:05:17. > :05:21.not know the true figure in June? The figure that I was working from
:05:21. > :05:25.a was �11 million less than we had spent. It is to do with any
:05:25. > :05:28.revisions. Because of be tried to add money into the Budget. We are
:05:28. > :05:32.engaged in a big programme of college reform. But needs to be
:05:32. > :05:35.done in the interests of Scotland's own people. It is difficult to do
:05:35. > :05:40.that when there is pressure on the Budget. Although the pressures are
:05:40. > :05:50.there, again and again I say to my officials and colleagues, can we
:05:50. > :05:59.find additional resources? We understated Africa by �11 million.
:05:59. > :06:04.-- we understated a figure. As I said when I apologise, we realised
:06:04. > :06:08.last Thursday that the figure had been understated by �11 million.
:06:08. > :06:14.The letter you wrote to their education committee was accurate
:06:14. > :06:19.letter. You yes it was. That was written in October. 18th October. I
:06:19. > :06:23.did but realised what I had said in June, and I do not read everything
:06:23. > :06:30.I say, I did not realise what I said in June was based on the
:06:30. > :06:33.uncorrected figure. These figures are perfectly clear. They are clear.
:06:33. > :06:38.The education committee had those figures. The questions me for more
:06:38. > :06:44.than one hour on those. Then Alex Salmond got them wrong again.
:06:44. > :06:49.said as I said there was a chart that at the wrong figure on it.
:06:49. > :06:55.This story is, you got the figures wrong because you were not aware
:06:55. > :07:03.extra had been added in. Alex Salmond got it wrong because he got
:07:03. > :07:07.a wrong briefing. You did not know these figures until when? Those
:07:07. > :07:12.figures I knew in October. I have been to this in the last week. I
:07:12. > :07:16.have made an apology for the figure I got wrong. The figure is wrong by
:07:16. > :07:21.�11 million. The important thing in this is that we are working very
:07:21. > :07:28.hard on a vision of what we want to do for the young people of Scotland.
:07:28. > :07:32.We are working hard to deliver that isn't. A I am still confused.
:07:32. > :07:35.are seeing you did not go you got the figures wrong when you got them
:07:35. > :07:41.wrong earlier in the year. You are seeing you only realise that
:07:41. > :07:44.discrepancy last week. Yet the letter you sent on their 18th
:07:44. > :07:48.October to the education committee has the correct figures. How could
:07:48. > :07:51.you not have known the correct figures when you send the letter to
:07:51. > :07:57.the education committee? The letter to the education committee is
:07:57. > :08:04.correct. You said you did not realise until last week. I did not
:08:04. > :08:08.say that. We could go on all night. I said that I made a mistake and
:08:08. > :08:11.the first person made a mistake and we apologise. In every other
:08:11. > :08:17.parliament in the world people would say that is good we have a
:08:17. > :08:21.knowledge the mistake. Then the last week I have been tied up in
:08:21. > :08:24.semantics. I've are not questioning your apology. I still do not
:08:24. > :08:28.understand your time light. It is important because when you are a
:08:28. > :08:37.minister and you get something wrong you are so close to go to
:08:37. > :08:41.Parliament and correct it. A indeed. You must have known as early as
:08:41. > :08:51.October that you had got the figure wrong in March, yet to make no
:08:51. > :08:56.attempt to correct it. Sorry on June the 28. I said the figures
:08:56. > :09:00.were not falling. That did not take account of the fact there was an
:09:00. > :09:05.additional �11 million at be had spent in the relevant here. When it
:09:05. > :09:11.was drawn to my attention that I had said that in June, and it was
:09:11. > :09:15.drawn to my attention masters to, I realise it was a mistake and I'd
:09:15. > :09:19.immediately apologised. The First Minister immediately apologised. I
:09:19. > :09:23.apologised again on Tuesday. We can talk about what you want to achieve
:09:23. > :09:30.in Scotland's economic sector and we can accept mistakes are made or
:09:30. > :09:34.we can spend an entire week talking about spending �11 million less
:09:34. > :09:39.than we had spent. I think we should talk about what they want to
:09:39. > :09:44.achieve and accept that mistakes do happen. Did the First Minister at
:09:44. > :09:49.any point suggest to you over the past week that you should resign?
:09:49. > :09:52.He did not. Did you at any point consider resigning if only to
:09:52. > :09:58.relieve the First Minister from an embarrassing position? Absolute the
:09:58. > :10:04.not. I am focused on, the First Minister has focused on getting
:10:04. > :10:09.through the process of college reform which is extremely important.
:10:09. > :10:14.Did I reckon a state? Desai did. But I apologise? Decided. What was
:10:14. > :10:20.a mistake? The mistake was I said... You have said that several times.
:10:20. > :10:24.As I understand the story you make this mistake in June, that you did
:10:24. > :10:28.know in October... It was drawn to my attention last Thursday. When
:10:28. > :10:32.you said a letter in October the figures were correct. The a were
:10:32. > :10:36.indeed. He did not realise the contradicted what you had said in
:10:36. > :10:40.June. A battle that was wrong to buy it in June. You were not
:10:40. > :10:47.culpable for not realising that the figure to sit in October
:10:47. > :10:54.contradicted what you cent in June. I think I understand that. That is
:10:54. > :11:00.what I did. That is what the First Minister did. This incessant
:11:00. > :11:07.running started not with their spat with the College of fear. With the
:11:07. > :11:17.benefit of hindsight I'd do not expect you to say that he was wrong
:11:17. > :11:20.in taking that meeting. I fully understand. One way of burying us
:11:20. > :11:24.and getting onto the subject you what to talk about would be if you
:11:24. > :11:34.see what the benefit of hindsight you over-reacted. I am not going to
:11:34. > :11:43.
:11:43. > :11:48.say that. This issue has been . I am not going to get involved in
:11:48. > :11:52.it again. I think be issue is that I am trying to deliver it for the
:11:52. > :11:57.young people of Scotland, to deliver the right things. We have
:11:57. > :12:01.been engaged in it for the last year. It is a sector that requires
:12:01. > :12:05.substantial reform. Although you can't sack him, even though you
:12:05. > :12:13.said you wanted to, according to him, the point is that you cannot
:12:13. > :12:17.be a chairman of the college if the Education Secretary has said in
:12:17. > :12:20.public that he has no confidence with you. Have you got the
:12:20. > :12:27.graciousness to say, "don't do that again but if you would like to go
:12:27. > :12:30.back to the college, you can". have no power to do that. If they
:12:30. > :12:35.choose to have him back, when you drop your insistence that you have
:12:35. > :12:39.no confidence? I regard that matter as closed. The issue that is not
:12:39. > :12:43.closed is making sure that we did have a college reforms. We have a
:12:43. > :12:47.very important sector which has a great deal for young people. We are
:12:47. > :12:51.working very hard to make sure it delivers employability and courses
:12:51. > :12:54.for employment. I and my colleagues have a strong vision of how that
:12:54. > :13:00.should be done and we have been working very productively in the
:13:00. > :13:05.sector. If you look at where we are now as opposed to a year ago corps
:13:05. > :13:10.we have moved massively forward and we have to, and will, continue.
:13:10. > :13:14.allegations have been noticed by Mr Ramsay that you are abrasive and
:13:14. > :13:19.intolerant of people who disagree with you. Is that a picture you
:13:19. > :13:22.recognise? No, it is not. You and I have known each other for over 20
:13:22. > :13:28.years. We have had many interesting discussions but I think those
:13:28. > :13:34.discussions, as all my can skeletons, -- discussions, are
:13:34. > :13:38.taken as good exchanges. Far be it for me to challenge your
:13:38. > :13:42.quintessential courtliness, but you know perfectly well but the way
:13:42. > :13:50.people present themselves in a television interview like this is
:13:50. > :13:54.not necessarily the way... I regard you as quickly, too. The reality of
:13:54. > :13:58.the situation is that, as I said in the chamber, I don't claim to be a
:13:58. > :14:03.shrinking violet or perfect. What I claim is to have a passion for
:14:03. > :14:05.delivering education. I have a passion for working on that with my
:14:05. > :14:10.colleagues and with everybody in the sector and I want to do that
:14:10. > :14:15.effectively. You will at least concede that you regret this whole
:14:15. > :14:18.thing has happened? I am really sorry this has happened. It has
:14:18. > :14:22.been a deflection from the really important issues. But I have to say
:14:22. > :14:26.that in the last week, the defection has come particularly
:14:26. > :14:28.from the Labour Party, who will not accept an apology. That is
:14:28. > :14:34.immensely regrettable because we should move forward with college
:14:34. > :14:37.reform. We have to leave it there. Thank you.
:14:37. > :14:42.If you live in Scotland, especially the west, you are going to die
:14:42. > :14:45.sooner than if you live elsewhere. Of the countries in the UK work
:14:45. > :14:50.assessed separately, life expectancy in Scotland would be the
:14:50. > :14:53.lowest in the EU. Scott and was overtaken in the second half of the
:14:53. > :15:00.20th century by France and Italy and, in recent years, even by
:15:00. > :15:02.Eastern Europe. -- Scotland was. We have had of the Glasgow effect but
:15:02. > :15:05.the new study shows that it may affect the rest of Scotland, too.
:15:05. > :15:11.There is clear evidence that we die younger than people in comparable
:15:11. > :15:16.areas. So there is a mystery here. It is not just, for example,
:15:16. > :15:22.smoking. Liverpool and Manchester have almost identical smoking rates
:15:22. > :15:25.but 12% more Glaswegians died of lung cancer. Even worse on the
:15:25. > :15:29.statistical comparisons with suicide, alcohol and drug-related
:15:29. > :15:36.deaths. For every 10 Citizens in Manchester and Liverpool could take
:15:36. > :15:42.their own lives, there are 16 in Glasgow. For every 100 Manchester
:15:42. > :15:45.or Liverpool deaths from alcohol- related illnesses, almost 230
:15:45. > :15:52.Glaswegians will die. And for drugs-related deaths, the Glasgow
:15:52. > :15:56.figure is almost 250. These excess deaths are relatively recent
:15:56. > :16:03.phenomenon. The difference seems to have been emerging over the past 40
:16:03. > :16:07.years. It is not just related to poverty. People in an affluent area
:16:07. > :16:13.of Glasgow have mortality statistics 15% worse than the
:16:13. > :16:17.equivalent neighbourhoods in Liverpool or Manchester.
:16:17. > :16:23.That comes from a newly published book called After Now with the
:16:23. > :16:26.subtitle "what next for a healthy Scotland?". I am joined by the
:16:26. > :16:32.book's author, Professor of Public Health at Glasgow University Phil
:16:32. > :16:38.Hanlon. You are well known for having identified the Glasgow
:16:38. > :16:42.affect - the fact that the extent of illnesses in Glasgow cannot be
:16:43. > :16:48.explained by things like social deprivation. There is an X factor.
:16:48. > :16:51.You seem to suggest that might now apply to the whole of Scotland.
:16:51. > :16:55.started by identifying it for the whole of Scotland and my colleague
:16:55. > :16:59.David Walsh did that three cities analysis that you have just
:16:59. > :17:04.reported. It is so powerful because these cities are so similar in
:17:04. > :17:07.terms of deprivation. Anything that Glasgow has in excess has to be
:17:07. > :17:11.attributed to someone be on deprivation. Understanding of
:17:11. > :17:19.deprivation is still a key driver of help. One of the interesting
:17:19. > :17:22.things is that there is a middle- class effect. If you live in an
:17:22. > :17:29.affluent area of Glasgow, you could die sooner than someone in an
:17:29. > :17:34.equivalent area of Manchester. In Scotland, we have have toxic
:17:34. > :17:39.combination of factors associated with late maternity because it is
:17:39. > :17:44.addictive behaviour. It is obesity, the level of inequality, loss of
:17:44. > :17:49.well-being. What I did not quite get, reading through the book, is
:17:49. > :17:53.that none of what you explain, to me, quite put the finger on why
:17:53. > :17:59.Scotland should be different. would have to concede at this stage
:17:59. > :18:03.we cannot be absolutely sure why that is but what we can point to is
:18:03. > :18:07.that the effect is a relatively recent, in the last three or four
:18:07. > :18:13.decades. What we have to look to is what has been going on in Scotland
:18:13. > :18:17.over that time. What we are seeing in that time is a rise of
:18:17. > :18:24.consumerism, greater inequality and other factors. The question we are
:18:24. > :18:28.asking is, is the combination of fact of... But all of those factors
:18:28. > :18:33.would be at play not just in England but in America. Yes, so
:18:33. > :18:37.they are not unique to Scotland but if we have to explain such a wide
:18:37. > :18:42.selection of causes of death and of ill health, you have to be the king
:18:42. > :18:49.at something pretty fundamental to the way we live our lives. And our
:18:49. > :18:52.inner lives, of policy, as well as our outer lives. We are arguing
:18:52. > :18:57.that there is something quite intrinsic about what has been going
:18:57. > :19:02.on in Scottish society in recent decades. This is a warning sign.
:19:02. > :19:06.You are actually dealing with issues bigger than health. Health
:19:06. > :19:09.is a warning light on the dashboard. You do not worry about a warning
:19:09. > :19:13.light but you worry about what is going on in the engine underneath
:19:13. > :19:18.that is causing the warning light a flash. The problem with your
:19:18. > :19:24.prescriptions is that they carry a lot of baggage. There Romany people
:19:24. > :19:30.who would say that they agree with you but they would not necessarily
:19:30. > :19:34.agree with your views on anything from the importance of population
:19:34. > :19:39.change to climate change, to consumerism. It is a pretty full
:19:39. > :19:43.political package you are selling. Yes, and I would accept that these
:19:43. > :19:47.are quite radical ideas. My difficulty is that I have been
:19:47. > :19:51.working with these problems now for a long time and they're all getting
:19:51. > :19:55.worse and continued to do so. The kind of approach that has solved
:19:55. > :19:59.problems in the past - infectious disease or even heart disease and
:19:59. > :20:03.cancer - clearly, these prescriptions are not working. That
:20:03. > :20:08.is why the challenge has to come to something more radical. People may
:20:08. > :20:11.not buy your whole thing but one of the points you are trying to make
:20:11. > :20:17.is that the powers-that-be delivering homilies to the
:20:17. > :20:21.population about not smoking and not drinking is just to
:20:21. > :20:26.misunderstand the problem. It is just not persuasive. The whole of
:20:26. > :20:31.the Western world lost self-control 30 years ago, causing the publicity
:20:31. > :20:35.epidemic. We have to the but the kind of society we have created. It
:20:35. > :20:41.is the whole population, more or less, so you need something quite
:20:41. > :20:48.profound. I often say that I have no particular prescriptions. Rather,
:20:48. > :20:51.I am looking to have a debate where we could ask what would work.