21/11/2013 Newsnight Scotland

this. An audit of all contracts is ongoing.

Tonight on Newsnight Scotland, it has been a week dominated by

arguments on how the economy might look in 50 years, but are we missing

the fact that it is changing right now, and very much for the better?

Could a strong recovery change the independence debate, and which side

stands to gain? Also tonight: A new look for the

banks of the Clyde. The least on urban planner thinks we are missing

a trick. Good evening. Public ring this year

looks to be less than was forecast at the time of the budget in March,

and the proceeds of stamp duty, the tax on buying houses, are soaring.

The OECD now expects the economy to grow by almost 2.5% last year, much

more than most European economies. So are the good times back, and do

we need to rethink the independence debate?

Politicians love to promise jam tomorrow. If they can give us jam

today as well, so much the better. So when the think tank the Institute

for Fiscal Studies published its report this week, both sides in the

independence debate looked for evidence to back their beliefs. And

of course, the issue of the report came up at Holyrood today. It

suggests that the United Kingdom will be in deficit for every one of

the next 50 years. And that indicates that UK Governments will

have to raise taxation or reduce expenditure to reach that

sustainable position, that is what the model tells you. If the First

Minister is to be believed, we won't just be a new country after

independence. He will invent a new arithmetic. All alone as the First

Minister, sticking his fingers in his years with an economic plan with

more holes in it than a string vest. Now it seems that some underlying

assumptions about what the future will be like are already out of

date. The Office for National Statistics says the UK Government's

tax take is going up, so borrowing is going down, assign perhaps that

the recovery is under way, and there is more evidence from the business

organisation the CBI. It says order books are looking the best they have

in nearly 20 years, with good results from exporters and output

growing strongly, too. The deficit has come down by a third already in

this Parliament. But I think these figures are a reminder that it is

not just going to be something that happens automatically as the economy

grows. We're going to have to continue to make difficult policy

choices to get our deficit down. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, George

Osborne, delivers his Autumn statement in two weeks, and it looks

as though he may have more money to play with than anyone could have

predicted. But what will he be willing to loosen in terms of the

new sub austerities? If we start feeling flush again, perhaps we will

be willing to take a punt on an unknown future. The trouble is, what

voters really want is to have our cake and eat it. Even the wiliest of

politicians can't deliver that. I am joined now from Edinburgh by

George Carrigan, and from Manchester by John McLaren. Is this the new big

thing? After all the years of recession, there are some pretty

good signs that they could be quite a strong recovery in Britain. There

are a number of good signs, and there have been to a three quarters

of good growth, but that happened in the last two of three years. I think

probably the underlying sign from retail sales and service are better.

What is still puzzling is why this growth is coming about where it is

coming from. Nobody particularly predicted it at the beginning of

this year and everybody has always said it should be investment in

exports that will lead the charge back. Business investment is still

at its lowest point since the recession, and exports are not doing

anything dramatic either. But from the point of view of most people,

the economists might think it is an unbalanced recovery, but an

unbalanced recovery is better than no recovery? It is better than no

recovery if it comes to fruition. But the problem is, is this just

another false recovery, and people get their hopes up and actually some

of the more fundamental things that still have to be done will be put

off. That is the worry. Consuming and construction has boosted the

figures a lot, and that is not necessarily where it should come

from. It is difficult to see what has changed in the fundamentals. And

what is your take on this? I agree with John. I don't think anything is

fixed in the economy. Next year we are on course to have them against

trade deficit of any industrial nation. George Osborne has cooked up

a mini housing boom, that is why he has got more stamp duty money. So we

could be back to the good old days of an unsustainable boom. He has

managed to get a bit more money coming through the Treasury doors,

and he still managed to borrow more in three years than Gordon Brown's

Labour did in 13 years. If people start to feel better off, and there

are signs that they are feeling that the end might be in sight, how does

that affect the political debate that is going on up here? We

spending time debating and ISS report which looks like it was out

of date before it even left the press stop all we are doing is going

back to a position maybe 18 months ago. Things got worse. They weren't

looking good and then they got worse, and now they have got better.

So it is not a huge change in what is happening. But in terms of who is

going to benefit, that is difficult to say. Even down south, it is

difficult to say whether Labour or the Tories would benefit from it.

People could concentrate on GDP or living standards, which are still

expected to decline. Bringing it back up to Scotland, it is very

difficult to say at the minute whether a slight rebooting of the

economy will make people more confident of voting yes, or whether

we are still in an overall scenario that looks pretty doom laden and

they would be swayed away from it. George Kerevan, should we see quite

strong economic growth, or at least sufficient for the Coalition

Government to present it as strong economic growth, how do you think

that that affects the independence debate? There are lots of chess

pieces on the board. There is some kind of history of correlation

between economic confidence and being willing to support

independence. Given the crisis we have had in the economy for five

years, I don't have that kind of confidence will return enough by

next September to change things. On the other hand, if the economy

improves enough to make it likely that Osborne and Cameron might win

the 2015 election, that may make a lot of Scots think, why stick with

the union? Both of those forces are at work.

John, the other side of this, people don't feel like living standards are

rising, and that is what Labour are trying to target.

Yes, and they are expected to keep falling for another couple of years.

There are two crises here. One is the crisis that happened in 2007.

But there was an underlying traces before that, slow growth, bad

growth, financial services and construction, and that underlying

lack of dynamism in the world economy, as well as in the UK and

Scottish economy, that has still to be addressed. What growth rates are

looking at in the future? Watch the Bulls expectations be? -- what

should people's expectations be? We have to leave it there. Thank you

both very much. For more than 30 years Glasgow has

worked at rebuilding the river bank. The building we are

broadcasting from is evidence of that. But some people claim that the

process has been poorly thought out. A lack of cafes, restaurants, to his

visitors. The city council say the job is unfinished.

With 800 years of history, Glasgow today takes a look at tomorrow, as

the corporation puts on an exhibition in Kelvin Hall,

foreshadowing the proposed new inner core of the city.

Back in the late 1940s there was a plan to reshape Glasgow bio-blitz

rating and starting again. Thankfully, it did not happen. -- I

obliterate in it. But that is not to say that there have not been major

changes in the city. Since the 1980s, critics have said that the

city has not exploited one of its biggest assets. That is here, on the

Clyde. To be fair, there has been plenty of development. Behind me is

the exhibition centre and the new hydro. Behind the camera man, the

science Museum, and were I work, at the BBC. But some believe that these

buildings are all disjointed and a lack of cafes, walkways, and bars,

does not make the Clyde and attractive place to visit.

It is like landing from an aeroplane. The BBC here, the

trans-museum there, but the connections, the walking, that is

what has been forgotten. The river is an idea has been kept in mind,

but the actual riverfront, for normal people to go to, that has

been forgotten. City leaders do not agree with the

criticism. They say that given the city's industrial heritage, the

Riverfront has come a long way. It is an ongoing process. I cannot

stress enough that the city has been moving forward in employment,

strategy, all the things we are now looking at in the city centre.

Throughout a recession. Certainly, I believe that the Camelot pavilions

will come up again. A developer is looking at that. -- it has planning

permission in principle. Brroomielaw pavillions. We will transform three

kilometres of a lovely walk and cycle path in the West End.

The main complaints are around a lack of joined up thinking and

political leadership. It is a lack of strong vision, a lack of focus,

and leadership. Somebody has to take charge. Say that, in two years, we

will have a pleasant river, and a walk. It is not a lot of money but

it is important. The architectural community agreed

that the city has come a long way, but still has a long way to go to

exploit one of its biggest assets, the waterfront. Lots of

international cities use thereof is more imaginatively than Glasgow. --

use their rivers. Beautiful plaza is, opening out onto the river, bars

and restaurants, cafes, that would be ideal. Even though we are a

northern European city and on occasion it is called, for much of

the year that could be a tremendous amenity.

It is not just Glasgow that has had to rethink its relationship with the

Clyde. There are seven other local authorities along its length.

Planners say that it really is a long-term project. As much as 40

years in some cases, given the scale of land that has still to be

developed. For many people living along its banks, they have almost

forgotten the river is there. Some people are just seeing the river for

the first time. Buildings that blocked their views have now been

taken away and the areas are more open to the river. The opportunity

now exists to encourage people to come down and use those kind of

areas. Glasgow leaders say that it is a work in progress and they have

big plans for the Riverfront. But the end of the present developments,

are the future developments that we have got on the plants. -- planned.

Jobs, office space, and I want to see 23,000 or thereabouts new houses

down by the river. Is that not appropriate? Glasgow City Council

will have to get a move on. If not, they could lose on the work made so

far by not capitalising. Lots of cities try to hold onto the young

creative people. Universities, local Scottish people, foreign students,

young, dynamic, creative people. They have the choice to live

anywhere. What they choose is a high quality of life, they want to live

in a city they can enjoy walking around. If you don't offer this they

will go away. Clearly the River Clyde is not the river it once was.

They stopped dredging it many years ago. The challenge for the City

Council is to make the river into a new 21st-century attraction, not

based around heavy industry but commerce and entertainment. Critics

say they still have some way still to go.

Tomorrow's front pages: that is all have time for. We will

be back next week. Night.