15/03/2012

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:16. > :00:20.Hope we are in St Andrews tonight. Welcome to Question Time. On our

:00:20. > :00:25.panel tonight, the new leader of the Scottish Conservatives, Ruth

:00:25. > :00:29.Davidson. The Labour MP Frank Field, asked in Tony Blair's days to think

:00:29. > :00:34.the unthinkable on welfare. Also from the Scottish parliament, a

:00:34. > :00:37.rising star of the SNP, Humza Yousaf. The leader of the Scottish

:00:37. > :00:41.Liberal Democrats, Willie Rennie, standing in at short notice for

:00:41. > :00:51.Charles Kennedy, who missed his flight this evening. And the

:00:51. > :01:00.

:01:00. > :01:07.journalist and broadcaster Janet Our first question is from Stephen,

:01:07. > :01:11.please. What should good Osborne announce in the Budget that was

:01:11. > :01:15.significantly decreased long-term unemployment? -- George Osborne.

:01:15. > :01:21.Ruth, what do you think? A will not speculate on what will be in the

:01:21. > :01:23.Budget. Come on! But I think we can recognise the amount of work the

:01:23. > :01:28.coalition is doing to get the economy back on track and create

:01:28. > :01:32.jobs. We have seen the youth contracts to try and incentivise

:01:32. > :01:37.business is taking on new people. I would like to see that accelerated.

:01:37. > :01:43.We have seen people who are already in employment, particularly low-

:01:43. > :01:47.paid employment, work to increase their income. For example, lifting

:01:47. > :01:54.100,000 Scots out of the tax bracket, raising the tax bracket to

:01:54. > :01:57.�10,000. Will that be done next week? I would like to see it

:01:57. > :02:03.accelerated ahead of the timetable for the whole of Parliament. But I

:02:03. > :02:08.am not about to tell any secrets. Do you know any secrets? I have

:02:08. > :02:12.regular conversations with Number 10. Do you know what is in the

:02:12. > :02:17.Budget, but you are not prepared to tell us? I am not saying that. But

:02:17. > :02:21.I have put my tuppence worth in for Scotland. Humza Yousaf, what would

:02:22. > :02:26.you like? We have asked for three things. The Gentleman is right to

:02:26. > :02:31.highlight unemployment as the biggest crisis so the Government is

:02:31. > :02:37.facing. Capital expenditure is one way to grow employment and get out

:02:37. > :02:44.of the rut we are in. For every �100 million of capital expenditure,

:02:44. > :02:48.we are supporting 1400 jobs. The Scottish government has 36 projects

:02:49. > :02:52.ready for construction. Depending on Westminster? Absolutely, so we

:02:52. > :02:57.want to see the finance coming through so that we can support

:02:57. > :03:01.those jobs. On top of that, if you run a small or medium-sized

:03:01. > :03:06.business, you are not getting the lending from these publicly-owned

:03:06. > :03:10.banks. That is a disgrace. We have taxpayer owned banks who are not

:03:10. > :03:14.lending to help businesses grow jobs. George Osborne needs to get a

:03:14. > :03:18.grip. Don't the banks have to make up their own minds about who they

:03:18. > :03:23.lend to, or should the Government insist that they lend willy-nilly?

:03:23. > :03:27.It is just wrong that we have banks that are owned by taxpayers and the

:03:27. > :03:29.public that are busy building up their balance used instead of

:03:29. > :03:34.helping small and medium-sized businesses increase and take on

:03:34. > :03:39.people and get us out of the unemployment rut. George Osborne

:03:39. > :03:48.should absolutely not abolish the 50 pence tax. That is that wrong

:03:48. > :03:52.priority for the situation we are in. A frank Field, do go along with

:03:52. > :03:58.the Scottish National Party assessment? Not totally. There are

:03:58. > :04:04.two things which George Osborne should do in the Budget. The most

:04:04. > :04:08.important move he could make to increase employment would be to

:04:08. > :04:12.give a National Insurance holiday for employers taking on new people.

:04:12. > :04:17.While of course, some would fiddle at the margin and so on, I can't

:04:17. > :04:22.think of any other simple move that would most increase employment

:04:22. > :04:27.prospects for people in our countries that face a grim future.

:04:27. > :04:34.So it if you take on a new worker, you don't pay national insurance

:04:34. > :04:37.for a year? Not the way she wants? We are already doing that for the

:04:37. > :04:42.first 10 employees of new businesses for the first two years.

:04:42. > :04:51.National Insurance is being looked at. But most jobs will not come

:04:51. > :04:56.from new businesses. The second thing he should do - we have a real

:04:56. > :04:59.problem, particularly in areas like mine, where people have done 13

:04:59. > :05:08.years in school and find it difficult to present themselves

:05:08. > :05:11.properly for a job. Labour's job programme was, I think it took us a

:05:11. > :05:17.long time to get there, but it was the best thing we did. We gave

:05:17. > :05:20.people who would not otherwise be looked at by employers the chance -

:05:20. > :05:25.we said simple things, like just turning up on time, being clean and

:05:25. > :05:30.tidy. Has that been scrapped by the coalition government, is that what

:05:30. > :05:33.you are saying? That Direct scheme has been scrapped to pay for the

:05:33. > :05:38.Great Work programme. But if we focus on the question rather than

:05:38. > :05:42.parading our prejudices, we go for the national insurance cut and

:05:42. > :05:46.boost business confidence. And we make sure those who find it hardest

:05:46. > :05:50.to fit into jobs when they are there, that we boost their

:05:50. > :05:54.confidence. Janet Street-Porter, what would you do if you were

:05:54. > :05:58.Chancellor? I would look at youth unemployment and the fact that

:05:58. > :06:01.there are over 1 million young people unemployed. I would also

:06:01. > :06:06.consider the fact that across Europe, youth unemployment is

:06:06. > :06:12.equally high. Because we are in the EU, young people from other EU

:06:12. > :06:16.countries are coming here, and have every right to take jobs, whether

:06:16. > :06:24.we like it or not. I agree with Frank. We have to ensure that when

:06:24. > :06:28.our young people leave secondary education, they are better prepared

:06:28. > :06:33.to work and more employable and literate. That means absolutely

:06:33. > :06:40.pouring a huge amount of resources into further education. We need

:06:40. > :06:46.more teachers and better targeted classes. We need to ease people

:06:46. > :06:50.into employment. If we don't target these million kids who are

:06:50. > :06:53.unemployed, we will have civil unrest. How do they get jobs if

:06:53. > :06:56.there is no work? They are not getting jobs because better

:06:56. > :07:01.qualified young people are coming in. But Humza Yousaf says they are

:07:01. > :07:05.not getting jobs because banks are not lending money. Frank Field it

:07:05. > :07:10.says it because nationally showers is too expensive. We are talking

:07:10. > :07:14.about minimum-wage jobs, cleaning jobs, service industry jobs, jobs

:07:14. > :07:18.where this country has a lot of work available. You want young

:07:18. > :07:21.people to take those? I want their minds are to be changed so that

:07:21. > :07:28.they are going into it. At the moment, they are mostly

:07:28. > :07:32.unemployable. I agree with Janet that we should be getting people

:07:32. > :07:36.into these jobs. But the problem is that young people today think they

:07:36. > :07:40.deserve more and expect more, and they are unwilling to get into the

:07:40. > :07:45.jobs that are out there. That needs to be addressed. When you talk to

:07:45. > :07:50.young people who come into this country looking for work from

:07:50. > :07:55.Estonia or Mafia or Spain, they are willing to do anything -- when they

:07:55. > :08:02.come from that via or Spain. That is because the unemployment is so

:08:02. > :08:05.phenomenal back home. Willie Rennie, what do you think should be

:08:05. > :08:10.announced in the Budget that would help solve the long-term

:08:10. > :08:14.unemployment? It is clear that there are no simple answers to this.

:08:14. > :08:18.A lot of it is treading the fine line between spending enough to

:08:18. > :08:22.stimulate the economy, but not spending too much to unsettle the

:08:22. > :08:30.market. When you unsettle the markets, the cost of borrowing goes

:08:30. > :08:34.up. So we end up having to spend less. By one of the things we are

:08:34. > :08:38.doing it is implementing the UK youth contract from April, which is

:08:38. > :08:42.worth �1 billion. That will bring more apprenticeships and

:08:42. > :08:46.incentivise businesses to employ more people. It will also bring

:08:46. > :08:50.wage subsidies. Those are the things we should be doing. But it

:08:50. > :08:53.is not enough, because it is tough. Do you think George Osborne is

:08:53. > :09:01.doing the right things, or do you agree with Vince Cable that the

:09:01. > :09:06.Government has not set out a proper strategy? There are always vigorous

:09:06. > :09:12.debates within government. But who is right? For they have come to an

:09:12. > :09:15.agreement between the two of them. But Vince Cable says one thing and

:09:15. > :09:22.George Osborne says another. They share a view that the Government is

:09:22. > :09:26.on the right track. If I could come back in, the original question was

:09:26. > :09:29.about long-term unemployment. We have to recognise where we have

:09:29. > :09:34.come from. Under the last Labour government, 5 million people across

:09:34. > :09:38.the UK never had a job for those 13 years. These are people who are

:09:38. > :09:43.long way from the labour market. Frank talk about the work programme.

:09:43. > :09:48.That is designed to help those furthest from the jobs market back

:09:48. > :09:52.in. It gives specific support to the agencies helping them, and it

:09:53. > :09:56.makes sure it is not putting people into a six-week posting a minimum

:09:56. > :09:59.wage job. The payments to the agencies that are helping those

:10:00. > :10:04.long-term unemployed, people who may have drug addiction problems or

:10:04. > :10:08.have come out of prison, are staggered payments. You get part of

:10:08. > :10:11.the payment when somebody access as a job. You get further when they

:10:11. > :10:20.are there for six months and then more when they are there for two

:10:21. > :10:25.years. The man up there? Is it a case of managing young people's

:10:25. > :10:29.expectations? 30 or 40 years ago, you started at the bottom and work

:10:29. > :10:34.your way up to the top. But now, there is an image of going straight

:10:34. > :10:44.to the top. Is that not unrealistic? Is there any evidence

:10:44. > :10:44.

:10:44. > :10:50.that people are refusing to take jobs for that reason? Two people

:10:50. > :10:57.have just said so. I count myself as a young person. Well, you have a

:10:57. > :11:02.nice job. No disrespect to the gentleman, but every person says,

:11:03. > :11:06.back in my day, we did this and that. From the young people I talk

:11:06. > :11:11.to, I have gone into a lot of high schools, like a number of the

:11:11. > :11:16.members here, and they have a drive that I have not seen before and a

:11:16. > :11:23.willingness to get their sleeves rolled up. But in terms of David

:11:23. > :11:27.Cameron and George Osborne and the Budget next week, we have seen that

:11:27. > :11:33.Obama and David Cameron have been the best of pals, with their arms

:11:33. > :11:37.around each other, by nature a hot dogs. Get to the point. The point

:11:37. > :11:41.is that it would be good for David Cameron to take a leaf out of

:11:41. > :11:45.Obama's book that the way to start the economy is through a stimulus

:11:45. > :11:53.package, not too deep, swingeing, fast cuts that hit the most

:11:53. > :11:58.disadvantaged. Frank? Clearly, lots of people don't have a job because

:11:58. > :12:05.they can't find one. But there are others which Janet spoke of about

:12:05. > :12:09.their attitude. On Friday, I read a report from Janet's paper about

:12:09. > :12:12.three young people who had never had jobs. I was talking about

:12:12. > :12:16.getting them a job. One of them said, we are not prepared to get

:12:16. > :12:21.out of bed unless we get �300 a week. I said, but you can't read or

:12:21. > :12:25.write. Who will give you a job for that kind of money? And they said,

:12:25. > :12:29.get serious. We will not entertain a job unless it pays �300 a week.

:12:29. > :12:33.So I said, you should take a job. To which I heard the worst thing I

:12:33. > :12:37.have ever heard in my political life. This young guy leaned across

:12:37. > :12:42.the table, screwed up his face and said, so you would make us take

:12:42. > :12:45.immigrant jobs, would you? And I said, you bet I would. This whole

:12:45. > :12:49.attitude, that somehow we have this extraordinary number of young

:12:49. > :12:55.people coming into the country and wanting to work, and we have still

:12:55. > :12:59.to learn the lesson from that. Janet spoke about the obvious fact

:12:59. > :13:03.that while many people are desperately searching for work, at

:13:03. > :13:13.the same time there are others who consider that some jobs are beneath

:13:13. > :13:13.

:13:13. > :13:20.them. I will go on to another question from Jon Stewart. Would

:13:20. > :13:23.Scotland be financially better off as an independent nation? This is

:13:23. > :13:27.not a question about the Scottish economy, but it is a reference to

:13:27. > :13:33.what seems to be a key issue, judging by the polls, which is that

:13:33. > :13:37.if you tell people in Scotland that they will be �500 better off, 65%

:13:37. > :13:45.of them will say they will vote for independence. If you say they will

:13:45. > :13:48.be �500 worse off, 65% of them vote against. It seems to be a matter of

:13:48. > :13:58.whether independence makes you richer or poorer. And nothing else.

:13:58. > :13:58.

:13:58. > :14:02.Independence is a lot more about the economy. In the economic

:14:02. > :14:05.climate we are in, it is incredibly important. The question was about

:14:05. > :14:10.whether Scotland would be better off as an independent country. I

:14:10. > :14:18.firmly believe it would be. The Government's own expenditure

:14:18. > :14:22.Revenue statistics showed that we give the Treasury 9.6%, while we

:14:22. > :14:27.are 8.4% of the population. But do you agree it is the crunch point of

:14:27. > :14:30.the Ottoman full independence, that whenever we get at the referendum

:14:30. > :14:35.on Scottish independence will be arguing about how much more will be

:14:35. > :14:41.in the pocket? It is undoubtedly an important part of why I believe in

:14:41. > :14:46.independence. If it is not to do with flag-waving, haggis eating,

:14:46. > :14:50.Braveheart nationalism. These are things that I quite like doing!

:14:50. > :14:55.Incidentally, sometimes at the same time. But the independence that we

:14:55. > :14:59.crave is to have those economic powers. The independence that we

:14:59. > :15:02.crave is to create jobs and wealth. That at its most simple and most

:15:02. > :15:05.basic, the reason I believe in independence is because the

:15:05. > :15:09.decisions made about Scotland and in Scotland should be made by those

:15:09. > :15:13.that care most about the interests of Scotland. That is the people of

:15:13. > :15:20.Scotland. Economics is important but it is about so much more than

:15:20. > :15:24.that. The I think if independence is just based on a bank balance,

:15:24. > :15:27.that is the wrong reason for independence. I thought you wanted

:15:27. > :15:33.independence because your life would come to a natural end unless

:15:33. > :15:37.you had it. Everybody's life comes to a natural end. I thought it was

:15:37. > :15:43.because you were culturally so strong, so proud that you had to be

:15:43. > :15:47.independent, otherwise life was not worth living. I think you will have

:15:47. > :15:51.independence but it will cost a lot of money. Will you have a border,

:15:51. > :16:01.your own money, your own stamps? How are we going to split the

:16:01. > :16:05.defence budget? I was reading Stephanie Flanders' on the BBC, and

:16:05. > :16:10.I did not think that you did. The way I read it was that Scotland

:16:10. > :16:15.actually costs England money. You have quoted your own figures.

:16:15. > :16:20.UK Government's figures, actually. I have just read Stephanie Flanders,

:16:20. > :16:26.who begs to differ. But I think, should Government be based on

:16:26. > :16:35.money? If you are independent, is did going to cost a fortune?

:16:35. > :16:38.can't answer that, it is a rhetorical question. Of the problem

:16:38. > :16:42.with Humza Yousaf is that he does not know whether we will be better

:16:42. > :16:45.off. That is an assertion that Scotland would be better off but we

:16:45. > :16:51.do not have the evidence to prove it. The problem is that we would

:16:51. > :16:55.have much more risk. The rough and this move would be difficult.

:16:55. > :17:01.do you make of this Social attitudes survey that says it is

:17:01. > :17:04.the clinching point? Purely money. Much of it is money. We can hear

:17:04. > :17:09.from the audience whether they think money is at the heart of it.

:17:09. > :17:12.There are 40% who would stay in the Union no matter what and about 35%

:17:12. > :17:14.who would go Independent no matter what but there is a bulk of people

:17:15. > :17:18.in the middle who would be swayed by whether Scotland will be better

:17:18. > :17:24.off. It is not just about themselves but about the nation as

:17:24. > :17:29.well. Is the issue is around money, surely now is not the time to have

:17:29. > :17:36.this debate, in a recession? Precisely the best time is now to

:17:36. > :17:40.have this debate. If anything, the economic leaders would be better to

:17:40. > :17:43.have now, so regardless of what you wanted to do with them, it would be

:17:43. > :17:51.to our advantage to have them so we could take ourselves out of the

:17:51. > :17:54.mess that we are in. With the suggestion that Britain might lose

:17:54. > :17:58.its Triple A credit rating, how would an independent Scotland have

:17:58. > :18:06.a good credit rating, with the history of RBS being its biggest

:18:06. > :18:10.bank? Briefly, if you would. There are two companies that have come

:18:10. > :18:14.out and expressed doubt in the UK's credit rating, but it is worth

:18:14. > :18:18.knowing that two-thirds of the countries with a Triple A credit

:18:18. > :18:23.rating, two-thirds of them have a population of under 10 million. Not

:18:23. > :18:27.only that, but with a one trillion pound oil asset base, we would be

:18:27. > :18:33.able to preserve that AAA status. You are concerned about the effect

:18:33. > :18:39.on England. I certainly am, but I am incredibly depressed by the

:18:39. > :18:43.question and the support that it is getting. I thought this was a great

:18:43. > :18:46.debate about the nature and destiny of nations and of mankind. The idea

:18:46. > :18:53.that it is all going to be determined on whether you have a

:18:53. > :18:57.few quid better off in your pocket or not, is deeply depressing. There

:18:57. > :19:02.are clearly lessons that England needs to learn from this whole

:19:02. > :19:06.experiment that you have had and made a success of, devolution. But

:19:06. > :19:11.your devolution success has had a consequence on us in England, in

:19:11. > :19:16.that it has affected our bearing and our status, and how we think we

:19:16. > :19:21.should actually conduct ourselves in the world. I was very much

:19:21. > :19:27.hoping that the debate that you will have at some stage on whether

:19:27. > :19:34.you wish to go independent or not, would be a debate which looked at

:19:34. > :19:37.your experiences from devolution, looked at how it had affected up to

:19:38. > :19:40.that point and maybe beyond, where your hope for the friendly

:19:40. > :19:47.neighbours. What were the consequences on them? And whether

:19:47. > :19:54.in fact both countries will be stronger by dividing, or weaker.

:19:54. > :19:58.What do you think? I think we would be weaker. I fear the debate may go

:19:58. > :20:02.in such a way that the reaction in England is such that we would

:20:02. > :20:09.welcome that the measure of devolution which you have had.

:20:09. > :20:13.Certainly, I raised this question in the House. It is a legitimate

:20:13. > :20:17.issue to raise the Scottish question, but it is not yet so much

:20:17. > :20:21.a legitimate question to raise the English question. The English

:20:21. > :20:26.question being, if Scotland is self-governing, his England self-

:20:26. > :20:29.governing if Scottish MPs vote in Westminster? It is the rate --

:20:29. > :20:32.naive to think that the first tranche of devolution was the end

:20:32. > :20:36.of the journey, both for you, necessarily, and certainly a

:20:36. > :20:42.journey which we could not begin in England. I would welcome a debate

:20:42. > :20:47.which was not just about the money, but that somehow drew upon our own

:20:47. > :20:57.cultures and histories and tried to think about our place in the world,

:20:57. > :20:58.

:20:58. > :21:03.and made a decision on that. The reason why the debate has been

:21:03. > :21:06.shifted on to the economics on whether it would be better if you

:21:06. > :21:11.had �500 is because the scaremongering Unionist parties and

:21:11. > :21:13.the media are shifting onto that terrain. The reason why Scotland's

:21:13. > :21:16.young people support independence is because we could be a

:21:16. > :21:20.progressive beacon in Europe and the world with a fully funded

:21:20. > :21:23.health service, fully funded education and the progressive

:21:23. > :21:28.foreign policy which does not indulge in imperialist war and

:21:28. > :21:33.illegal wars abroad. Is there evidence that an overwhelming

:21:33. > :21:37.majority of people under 21 in Scotland support this? Young people

:21:37. > :21:42.in Scotland are more prone to support independence. Which is why

:21:42. > :21:46.you want to give the vote to 16 year-olds. Absolutely. I think

:21:46. > :21:50.young people under the age of 18 have the right to vote.

:21:50. > :21:55.Do you think that 16 year-olds and 17 year olds are responsible enough

:21:55. > :21:59.to vote in a referendum? I think what is interesting is that what is

:21:59. > :22:04.being proposed is not that all 16 and 17 year olds should vote in the

:22:05. > :22:06.referendum, it is that some 16 and three quarter year-olds and some 17

:22:07. > :22:11.year-olds whose parents have registered them on the electoral

:22:11. > :22:15.roll have a vote in the referendum. I think there is a debate about

:22:15. > :22:19.where we put the voting age in this country, but you do not shift the

:22:19. > :22:21.goalposts for one referendum. Certainly not if you are saying the

:22:21. > :22:24.mandate you have for holding the referendum is from the

:22:24. > :22:28.parliamentary result in May last year. I would suggest the mandate

:22:28. > :22:35.comes from the franchise from that election, which was people who live

:22:35. > :22:38.in Scotland, including you citizens, over the age of 18. This is a great

:22:38. > :22:42.question which is going to affect Scotland, England and Wales. To

:22:42. > :22:46.think we have jumped from whether people will be better off to seeing

:22:46. > :22:49.whether we should fix the voting age to get a result, the whole

:22:50. > :22:53.thing, I am just shocked by you as an audience, those of you who have

:22:53. > :22:57.been speaking up like this. I thought I would be on the defensive

:22:57. > :23:01.as an English person and that you would actually try to charge -- to

:23:01. > :23:05.charm me about the values of independence. You are just

:23:05. > :23:11.scrabbling around on the floor. Does anybody want to charm Frank

:23:11. > :23:15.Field with the idea of independence? He keeps harping on

:23:15. > :23:21.about England, England, England. Surely it is Scotsman separating

:23:21. > :23:24.from the United Kingdom, not from England. -- Scotland.

:23:25. > :23:31.If you allow 17 year olds to join the armed forces they should have

:23:31. > :23:35.the right to vote for the country they are going to be fighting for.

:23:35. > :23:39.I would agree with that. If you are old enough to pay tax and be

:23:39. > :23:45.married, you are old enough to vote. What about the point that Frank

:23:45. > :23:50.Field is making, that he expected to be charmed? For me, it is about

:23:50. > :23:53.hundreds of years of history. I think the point was made at the

:23:53. > :23:57.back that it is not about Scotland separating from England but

:23:57. > :24:05.Scotland separating from the United Kingdom.

:24:05. > :24:08.Sorry to disappoint Frank, but some people have strong opinions for and

:24:08. > :24:12.against independence. For a lot of people, it is culturally

:24:12. > :24:17.comfortable in the UK and I think for them the main thing is family,

:24:17. > :24:23.friends and their career and lifestyles. I think the extra �500

:24:23. > :24:29.does not surprise me in any way that it would be a deciding issue.

:24:29. > :24:34.Ruth, you did not speak at great length about this. But I can.

:24:34. > :24:40.sure you could speak for the rest of the programme! But on this issue

:24:40. > :24:43.of whether England will need some sort of response, or ought to have

:24:43. > :24:47.a response to Scottish devolution in terms of its own destiny, what

:24:47. > :24:51.do you say about that, or do you not care because it is an English

:24:51. > :24:55.issue? I have to say, I care more about the constitutional debate

:24:55. > :24:59.that is happening in Scotland. I think there is a lot more we want

:24:59. > :25:03.to talk about in Scotland about the substance of that debate. At the

:25:03. > :25:06.moment, debate has been restricted to the referendum, the question of

:25:06. > :25:10.the franchise and who should oversee it. We need to talk about

:25:10. > :25:15.what the guts of a separate state would be like, as opposed to where

:25:15. > :25:20.we are in the United Kingdom. wait for the SNP to put up ideas

:25:20. > :25:25.and knock them down? -- will you wait? Hopefully the two governments

:25:25. > :25:29.can work together towards a fair and legal referendum. And then we

:25:29. > :25:33.can move on to the substantive issues. But to bring up what Frank

:25:33. > :25:36.has been talking about, there is a grandly titled Commission for the

:25:36. > :25:40.consequences of devolution which has been set up by the UK

:25:40. > :25:45.Government, which is more colloquially known as the West

:25:45. > :25:48.Lothian question Commission, to look at that point about where

:25:48. > :25:51.England has English only legislation, because it is

:25:51. > :25:54.legislation that is devolved to Scotland, Wales and Northern

:25:54. > :25:59.Ireland, but people from Wales and Northern Ireland and Scotland can

:25:59. > :26:02.vote on it in the House of Commons. The West Lothian question is not a

:26:02. > :26:08.new anomaly. It has been around for a very long time and it is being

:26:08. > :26:13.looked at, to find out if there is a way to solve it. I wanted to come

:26:13. > :26:17.back on the voting age. I agree with the gentleman at the back is

:26:17. > :26:20.said that 16 and 17 year-olds not only joined the Army, can consent

:26:20. > :26:26.to marriage and having children, but somebody said are they

:26:26. > :26:29.responsible enough to vote? I knock on a lot of doors. I will show you

:26:29. > :26:35.some 30 year olds and 14-year-olds who are not responsible and should

:26:35. > :26:38.not be voting. -- 40. What gets to me the most about this issue, we

:26:38. > :26:43.have had this principle for 15 years, plus, and I have not seen

:26:43. > :26:48.any evidence to show that 16 and 17 year-olds are more likely to vote

:26:48. > :26:56.for independence. I think they will ask questions about it, too.

:26:56. > :27:01.you sure? Are you sure you are not going for it because you think...

:27:01. > :27:06.What I do not like to see is that parties that voted for it in the AV

:27:06. > :27:11.referendum who now dodge and dive and duck. And now they do not want

:27:11. > :27:14.votes for 16 and 17 year olds. That is hypocrisy, the Groucho Marx

:27:14. > :27:21.school of politics - these are my principles, and if you don't like

:27:21. > :27:25.them, I have others. Presumably you would go for votes for 16 year-olds.

:27:25. > :27:29.Can I address Frank's point? I think it is important to raise the

:27:29. > :27:32.level of this debate. To me, Britain is one of the most

:27:32. > :27:37.centralised states in the world and we need to decentralise it. That is

:27:37. > :27:40.why we favour home rule. Not independence, but home rule, where

:27:40. > :27:44.Scotland would be able to raise, through its Parliament, the money

:27:44. > :27:49.that it spends, so you could make decisions in Scotland but still

:27:50. > :27:53.remain a partner within the UK. The characteristics of Scots is about

:27:53. > :27:57.outward-looking, neighbourliness, community. Those are the

:27:57. > :28:01.characteristics of Scots. Separation is not that. My new

:28:01. > :28:07.partnership and to stay in the UK. England will not suddenly disappear

:28:07. > :28:10.if we go independent, it will still be there. But what Frank has said

:28:10. > :28:14.is that you're going to have a referendum in Scotland that will

:28:14. > :28:18.have a profound effect in England. It is almost as if we need to have

:28:18. > :28:22.a referendum in England about what the English think about this at the

:28:22. > :28:28.same time, because actually it is uncharted territory. The English

:28:28. > :28:33.could say, we will not let Scotland go? Frank has raised the important

:28:33. > :28:38.point that you cannot just separate two countries. We go on to another

:28:38. > :28:44.question from Phil Wishart. Up in a recent poll, nearly three-quarters

:28:44. > :28:49.of people said that the conflict in Afghanistan is unwinnable. Is the

:28:49. > :28:54.accelerated exit policy an admission of defeat? We have a lot

:28:54. > :28:57.of questions about Afghanistan. Is the exit strategy in effect an

:28:57. > :29:07.admission of defeat, given that three quarters of people say that

:29:07. > :29:11.the conflict is unwinnable? Janet. The exit strategy, I would say, is

:29:11. > :29:21.an admission of defeat in a war that is unwinnable, a war that we

:29:21. > :29:21.

:29:21. > :29:26.should not really have gone into. It is a war in a country which has

:29:26. > :29:34.tribalism and strong religious beliefs. And I cannot see how

:29:34. > :29:39.anything we would have done would have changed the two opposing sides.

:29:39. > :29:44.If you look at when the British Army was in Northern Ireland, how

:29:44. > :29:50.long did that take? 30 years. And then the people of Northern Ireland

:29:50. > :30:00.had themselves to want peace. You cannot Tommy that the people in

:30:00. > :30:03.

:30:03. > :30:06.So the talk about withdrawing being a success is rhetoric? It is

:30:06. > :30:12.rhetoric, and all the soldiers that have died in Afghanistan have given

:30:12. > :30:17.their lives for a war that is actually unwinnable and

:30:17. > :30:27.unfathomable, in my view. If you want to comment on this at home,

:30:27. > :30:39.

:30:39. > :30:43.Ruth Davidson, the question is, is it an admission of defeat because

:30:43. > :30:48.we now say it is unwinnable? don't think it is. If you look at

:30:48. > :30:53.when we talked about the draw down of British forces, which has been

:30:53. > :30:57.talked about for some months now, we also have to look at how that is

:30:57. > :31:01.being phased in. We are at a stage where what we want to see as the

:31:01. > :31:07.endgame in Afghanistan is a stable state where Afghans take charge of

:31:07. > :31:11.their own security. At the moment, British troops are in central

:31:11. > :31:18.Helmand Province. They are training Afghan soldiers to look after that

:31:18. > :31:21.area. The Isa fish -- ISAF troops across the country are training a

:31:21. > :31:25.hundred and 45,000 Afghans to take control of their nation. Hamid

:31:25. > :31:29.Karzai has said they are close to the point at which they can take

:31:29. > :31:34.over, and it is time for the troops to go. And the Taliban have

:31:34. > :31:39.suspended negotiations. There is a lot of talk about how to deal with

:31:39. > :31:44.the Taliban in Afghanistan. In terms of where we have taken

:31:44. > :31:53.ourselves in that country, we have seen great improvements. What do

:31:53. > :31:56.you think of people saying -- three-quarters of people say the

:31:56. > :32:00.conflict is unwinnable? He speak to any female who has had schooling

:32:00. > :32:07.that they would never have had under the Taliban, they would be

:32:07. > :32:12.pleased. Is that winning a war, going to school? I do not think

:32:12. > :32:19.wars are won in opinion polls. the Taliban have already said women

:32:19. > :32:23.have to stay at home. If we allow the two sides to reach a settlement,

:32:23. > :32:29.the Taliban will withdraw all those rights. Let's hear from the

:32:29. > :32:36.audience. The woman at the back? do not think any country that has

:32:36. > :32:40.gone into Afghanistan to fight has ever won. Afghanistan always wins.

:32:40. > :32:46.So you think NATO should not have gone in at all and tried to chase

:32:46. > :32:53.Al-Qaeda out? Or did they stay too long? Perhaps you could do a quick

:32:53. > :32:57.for a, but you can't do anything else.

:32:57. > :33:00.There is rightly a lot of regret about Afghanistan, but what are we

:33:00. > :33:05.doing to learn from our experiences and issues like Libya, to avoid

:33:05. > :33:09.doing this again? What do you think the experience in Afghanistan is, a

:33:09. > :33:13.victory or a failure? I do not want to talk about victory or failure

:33:13. > :33:19.ten years after the war started. What do we do in the future to stop

:33:19. > :33:23.this kind of thing? How do you mean, this kind of thing? Well, for

:33:23. > :33:29.example, Libya was a completely different operation. We do not have

:33:29. > :33:32.enough knowledge with the people in these regions. South Frank Field?

:33:33. > :33:38.This is the only questions are far where I feel restrained in giving

:33:38. > :33:43.an answer. I supported the then government going into Afghanistan.

:33:43. > :33:48.Since then, so while not being central, I think we should be

:33:48. > :33:54.mindful that there has been a loss of 400 lives of British troops and

:33:54. > :34:01.5000 British troops have been badly mutilated. And while of course,

:34:01. > :34:11.policy should not be decided just on them, how we now stage our exit,

:34:11. > :34:13.

:34:13. > :34:18.we should bear them in mind. And the language that we use, we should

:34:18. > :34:22.be mindful of them. I agree with the young gentleman at the front.

:34:22. > :34:27.There are lessons to be learnt from this, but there are lessons that

:34:27. > :34:31.should have been learnt from when we went into Iraq. I thought part

:34:31. > :34:39.of our going into Afghanistan, and the lady at the back was right, no

:34:39. > :34:44.country can claim to have beaten the inhabitants of Afghanistan. But

:34:44. > :34:48.we would also have a military programme and a political programme.

:34:48. > :34:51.It is Janet's point that the political programme from day one

:34:51. > :34:59.should have been to try to split the Taliban and get some of them on

:34:59. > :35:04.our side. If we genuinely thought this military intervention was at

:35:04. > :35:09.against terror and breaking up the terrorism training camps, it is

:35:09. > :35:15.clear that we picked the wrong country. It is Pakistan where most

:35:15. > :35:22.of this takes place, not Afghanistan. Once you name a date,

:35:22. > :35:26.however you try and dress it up, you change the politics in the

:35:26. > :35:33.country is. You try to bring about a political settlement by force.

:35:33. > :35:36.You are against the withdrawal in 2014? I think it is foolish to make

:35:36. > :35:42.those sort of statements for political reasons. But once you

:35:42. > :35:47.have made them, you change the politics. The debate then comes

:35:47. > :35:52.back Mack becomes not whether we keep to that date or whether we

:35:52. > :35:57.withdraw troops more quickly. woman in white? I think this issue

:35:57. > :36:01.of learning lessons is important, especially as regards the lives

:36:01. > :36:07.that have been lost. Surely we need to learn not to invade countries in

:36:07. > :36:12.a fit of vengeance without any due regard for history, without regard

:36:12. > :36:20.for what winning would even look like? And without regard for what

:36:20. > :36:24.happens. The man over there? As a serving army officer, I believe

:36:24. > :36:32.that whatever happens with the lessons that have to be learnt, we

:36:32. > :36:36.should not forget the 400 and for service personnel and those who

:36:37. > :36:42.have lost their lives and the 5000 who have been injured. Although

:36:42. > :36:45.fighting troops are being withdrawn in 2014, we will still maintain a

:36:45. > :36:50.presence within the Afghan National Army and the Afghan national police.

:36:50. > :36:55.I think that will go on for many more years to come. Do you have a

:36:55. > :36:59.view about whether the withdrawal in 2014 is an admission of defeat,

:36:59. > :37:03.and do you agree with people who say it is an unwinnable war?

:37:03. > :37:08.Conventional wars such as World War I and World War II, you could

:37:08. > :37:11.define the notion of defeat and victory. With an unconventional war,

:37:11. > :37:18.whenever you are fighting insurgents, you cannot define

:37:18. > :37:22.defeat and victory in terms of, we have won this or lost that. We will

:37:22. > :37:25.leave and look at the statistics and look at how much freedom the

:37:25. > :37:35.Afghan people have got, and how much development they have got, and

:37:35. > :37:36.

:37:36. > :37:41.that is how we will measure the success or failure of the mission.

:37:42. > :37:47.Before we leave you, have used it in Afghanistan? I have not, because

:37:47. > :37:53.I am the joined the Army two years ago. But you would expect to?

:37:53. > :37:58.I have colleagues who are out there at the minute. Humza Yousaf?

:37:58. > :38:01.Gentleman speaks well. But the reason why this is an admission of

:38:01. > :38:06.defeat is not because this is a sacrifice of our brave men and

:38:06. > :38:10.women, it is because politicians have moved the goalposts. I was 16

:38:10. > :38:15.when we went into Afghanistan. But I remember then that the issue was

:38:15. > :38:19.to go and get Bin Laden, dismantle the Al-Qaeda network and the

:38:19. > :38:23.Taliban and get out. Now we have been twice as long in Afghanistan

:38:23. > :38:28.as we were involved in World War I. We have lost the battle of hearts

:38:28. > :38:32.and minds with the latest atrocity, the urination on the bodies of

:38:32. > :38:39.insurgents and the inadvertent burning of the Korans. We are

:38:39. > :38:44.putting our servicemen and women in danger. All of us have to reflect,

:38:44. > :38:52.as politicians on this panel and as a wider society, when did war

:38:52. > :38:56.become the first resort as opposed to the last? Were you against the

:38:56. > :39:01.invasion of Afghanistan? I was not against the invasion of Afghanistan,

:39:01. > :39:04.because the mission was defined as going in, finding Bin Laden and

:39:04. > :39:08.dismantling Al-Qaeda. It has now become an occupation. As the lady

:39:08. > :39:12.said at the back, no country has ever occupied Afghanistan. The

:39:12. > :39:16.British Empire, at the peak of its powers, could not occupy

:39:16. > :39:20.Afghanistan. The Soviet army could not occupied Afghanistan. Alexander

:39:20. > :39:24.the Great could not occupy Afghanistan. How on earth could we

:39:24. > :39:28.think we could occupy Afghanistan? A member of my family is a serving

:39:28. > :39:33.officer and has done five tours of duty in Afghanistan. He is fluent

:39:33. > :39:38.in Pashtun and has met various tribal elders. Over his five tours

:39:38. > :39:43.of duty, he said he finds that every time he goes back and speaks,

:39:43. > :39:48.sometimes to the same elders, they have stepped back. No progress has

:39:48. > :39:55.been made. Each time he goes back? There is a regression, rather than

:39:55. > :39:59.a progression. Willie Rennie? need to take a deep breath. At

:40:00. > :40:04.times, when soldiers died in conflict, we all feel for them and

:40:04. > :40:08.their families. We need to be careful that we do not make long-

:40:08. > :40:13.term decisions in these periods of stress. I would urge people to look

:40:13. > :40:18.at what we went into, the conditions we were faced with, the

:40:18. > :40:22.attack on 9/11. The response was to go into Afghanistan. Even Humza

:40:22. > :40:27.Yousaf agrees that it was right at the time. What do you do after

:40:27. > :40:32.that? We have caught Bin Laden, only recently. The Taliban have

:40:32. > :40:36.been active, so it is about bringing relative stability. We are

:40:36. > :40:40.talking about a judiciary, so that you have the rule of law. You are

:40:40. > :40:43.talking about the police and the military. We are training the

:40:43. > :40:49.police and military, and we are setting up the systems of law and

:40:49. > :40:52.order. It takes a long time, and it does go to and through. Sometimes

:40:53. > :40:57.you go back as well as forward. I have been to Afghanistan and

:40:57. > :41:02.Pakistan. It is a tinderbox. Frankie is right. It is actually

:41:02. > :41:06.about Pakistan as much as Afghanistan. If we were to withdraw

:41:06. > :41:10.in a rush, we would be betraying the people who have died out there

:41:11. > :41:19.and their families. We need to take the long view. But in the beginning,

:41:19. > :41:23.we went to fight the war on terror. But they are not in Afghanistan now.

:41:23. > :41:28.But what do you leave behind? not for us to rebuild countries

:41:28. > :41:33.around the world that do not conform. There is a consensus that

:41:33. > :41:39.we were right to go in and hunt down Al-Qaeda. When do you leave?

:41:39. > :41:49.Do you leave it unstable, or do you have a responsibility? But you did

:41:49. > :41:51.

:41:51. > :41:56.not have an end date. Statice why we are keeping troops over their.

:41:56. > :42:00.Let me go back to the lady who was shaking her head when Willie was

:42:00. > :42:04.talking. The politicians do not always listen to the men on the

:42:04. > :42:09.ground. I do not necessarily mean the squaddies, who do a fabulous

:42:09. > :42:13.job, but the serving officers who have served more than one toff.

:42:13. > :42:20.They really do know. You say things go forward and back. After ten

:42:20. > :42:25.years, we should be making progress, not regressing. We will go on to

:42:25. > :42:33.another question now. Let me go on to one from Joseph

:42:33. > :42:39.Lumbasi, please. Was Donald Trump justified in warning the First

:42:39. > :42:45.Minister not to be "Mad Alex" over wind power? Barmoor Trump, the

:42:45. > :42:49.famous multi-billionaire, who is building golf courses - Mac Donald

:42:49. > :42:54.Trump suddenly rounded on the SNP and Alex Salmond about a proposal

:42:54. > :43:00.to build wind turbines. Everywhere in the UK is either threatened or

:43:00. > :43:06.welcoming wind turbines. He says he will not build his hotel until the

:43:06. > :43:12.whole thing is called off. What do you make of this? Janet Street-

:43:12. > :43:21.Porter, are you in favour of wind turbines? I was thrilled that

:43:22. > :43:27.Donald Trump might stop building that hotel. Fantastic news. I hate

:43:27. > :43:31.wind turbines. I have walked from Edinburgh to London for a series

:43:32. > :43:36.for the BBC years ago. And I walked right across England and Wales. The

:43:36. > :43:41.noise when you walk near a wind turbine that is in a beautiful area

:43:41. > :43:47.of outstanding natural beauty, you can hear them miles away. The

:43:47. > :43:50.disturbance from these things is awful. If they are offshore, if

:43:50. > :43:55.having one offshore means that Donald Trump will not build his

:43:55. > :44:00.golf course and resort, I would put up with one. But I have a house in

:44:00. > :44:04.Kent, and along the coast of Kent, there is issued wind farm in the

:44:04. > :44:10.Thames estuary. There are plans to put up more. It is not just about

:44:10. > :44:16.having the wind farms offshore, it is when you bring the electricity

:44:16. > :44:19.back on land. You have these huge sub-stations the size of several

:44:19. > :44:24.football pitches. And they are building them in areas of

:44:24. > :44:30.outstanding natural beauty. They are as big a blot on the landscape

:44:30. > :44:36.as the wind farm. When you read of wind farms breaking in high winds,

:44:36. > :44:46.and the government still has to pay for them, I cannot believe that

:44:46. > :44:48.

:44:48. > :44:53.something as ugly as a wind farm is The Scottish National Party's as

:44:53. > :45:03.100% of Scotland's electricity can be produced by them and they will

:45:03. > :45:07.provide 60,000 jobs, according to your manifesto. 16,000 jobs. 60,000.

:45:07. > :45:12.That is what your manifesto said. Maybe you want to change the

:45:12. > :45:17.manifesto. I cannot change it after we got such a strong endorsement.

:45:17. > :45:27.Then you have to stick with the policy. Going back to that question,

:45:27. > :45:28.

:45:28. > :45:32.I quite like wind farms. You have youth on your side! The opposition

:45:32. > :45:37.always say that Donald Trump is the best friend of Alex Salmond. He

:45:37. > :45:43.called him Mad Alex this week. With friends like that, you don't really

:45:44. > :45:47.need enemies, I suppose. What have you got against Donald Trump?

:45:47. > :45:51.not care a hoot what he thinks is best for Scotland. I would rather

:45:51. > :45:57.do what is best for the interest of the people here. We have a

:45:57. > :46:01.fantastic run 0 -- resource with renewable energy. 25% of Europe's

:46:01. > :46:06.green energy in Scotland. There is a fantastic resource. We have to

:46:06. > :46:11.invest in it. If we want a second bite of the cherry, we want to do

:46:11. > :46:16.any renewables revolution, we have to invest heavily in that. What is

:46:16. > :46:21.this 300 jobs there was talk about? They say it is 300 jobs and it

:46:21. > :46:25.rolls over for every wind farm. There have been hundreds of

:46:25. > :46:31.millions of pounds invested already in renewable technology. The First

:46:31. > :46:36.Minister was over in Qatar, Dubai, Abu Dhabi, where he signed a deal

:46:36. > :46:42.with Master city, one of the only foreign governments to sign such a

:46:42. > :46:46.deal. We are investing in renewable technologies. The reason people

:46:46. > :46:53.come to Scotland is because you have fantastic scenery and you are

:46:53. > :46:57.going to stick... Not if you have offshore wind farms. Willie Rennie.

:46:57. > :47:01.Both are you in favour of this? Some complain that it is not just

:47:01. > :47:05.those that are out at sea, but those that give landlords large

:47:05. > :47:10.rent for putting them in beautiful places. We should not forget the

:47:10. > :47:14.challenge we have. This is all about climate change. I suppose I

:47:14. > :47:18.disagree with Humza Yousaf in one respect, it is not just about jobs.

:47:18. > :47:23.It is about protecting the future of the climate. You are not

:47:23. > :47:27.disagreeing, just adding an argument to support his. We are

:47:27. > :47:31.trying to persuade people, because a lot of people do not like wind

:47:31. > :47:34.farms. If we sell it on the basis of jobs, rather than future

:47:34. > :47:38.generations and energy needs, I do not think we get the message across

:47:38. > :47:45.about how crucial it is. Do you believe 100% of electricity in

:47:45. > :47:48.Scotland can be produced by 2020? Yes. What you say to Janet Street-

:47:48. > :47:55.Porter's point that they are noisy and ugly and they will drive Donald

:47:55. > :48:00.Trump a way? I am a hill runner. I run underneath wind turbines, and I

:48:00. > :48:07.think there is nothing more beautiful of and more powerful...

:48:07. > :48:11.Than the sight of you running under it! I don't think my wife agrees.

:48:11. > :48:15.Personally, I find it disgraceful that you would worry about your

:48:15. > :48:19.view of the landscape when you are looking at renewable energy to

:48:19. > :48:22.provide for generations and generations. Right now, we are

:48:23. > :48:28.destroying our planet all around us and I think it is disgusting that

:48:28. > :48:32.you would worry about what something looks like. I worry about

:48:32. > :48:36.the landscape because you can never replace it. Once you have destroyed

:48:36. > :48:39.it and desecrated it, you cannot make it back again. I think

:48:39. > :48:42.technology will improve and there will be a better way of creating

:48:42. > :48:50.renewable energy than sticking up these ugly things that snap off

:48:50. > :48:54.when the wind is too strong. think wind turbines and wind energy

:48:54. > :48:57.should be part of a mixed energy solution. I do not believe we

:48:57. > :49:02.should have an obsession with any single type of energy. We have a

:49:02. > :49:07.rich array of sources in this country including oil and gas,

:49:07. > :49:11.hydro schemes in Scotland. We used to lead the way in hydro schemes.

:49:11. > :49:15.My problem with the preoccupation with wind farms is that it seems to

:49:15. > :49:19.ride roughshod over local people's views and consultation seems to be

:49:19. > :49:22.stacked against local communities. There should be genuine

:49:22. > :49:26.consultation. I also have an issue with the planning laws in this

:49:26. > :49:29.country, where a council can save a large scale wind developments

:49:29. > :49:34.should not go ahead and yet have the decision called in by the

:49:34. > :49:38.Scottish government to be overruled. So, are you with Donald Trump when

:49:39. > :49:43.he says Alex Salmond will be known as Mad Alex, the man who destroyed

:49:44. > :49:49.Scotland. I have never been with Donald Trump, nor will I ever be. I

:49:49. > :49:54.do not find him an appealing character. His Alex Salmond Mad

:49:54. > :49:57.Alex? I do not agree with him escalating the language. If we are

:49:57. > :50:01.talking about the Scottish government's policy of exporting

:50:01. > :50:06.energy to England and other parts of the UK, we already have a

:50:06. > :50:09.contracted agreement for that. 9% of energy goes to England. But the

:50:09. > :50:17.contract states that it cannot come from wind energy, it has to come

:50:17. > :50:25.from nuclear, because there is no base load for wind energy. I am

:50:25. > :50:29.doing a bit of a list. Well, don't. Round it off. There is a role for

:50:29. > :50:39.wind energy in Scotland but it should not be at the exclusion of a

:50:39. > :50:40.

:50:40. > :50:44.mixed energy policy that takes into account local people's views.

:50:44. > :50:48.one is serious about saving the planet, we will not do it by wind

:50:48. > :50:53.farms. The one single thing that we can do to make a difference would

:50:53. > :50:59.be to protect our rain forests. But there are no votes in that so none

:50:59. > :51:06.of you are much interested in it and we will continue, apart from

:51:06. > :51:10.some valiant efforts to destroy our rain forests and our future society.

:51:10. > :51:16.What I object to about his passion, this extraordinary zeal about wind

:51:16. > :51:21.farms, is that nobody talks, this is a rich person's policy imposed

:51:21. > :51:27.on poorer constituents. They pay enormously above the odds for the

:51:27. > :51:31.green energy that so many of you - I must say it is only younger

:51:31. > :51:36.people clapped in the audience - think that it is actually the next

:51:36. > :51:40.thing to sliced bread. If we were serious about saving the planet we

:51:40. > :51:44.would get serious about the rainforests. If we were serious

:51:44. > :51:49.about producing power which did not have all of the disadvantages that

:51:49. > :51:55.Janet spoke of and the costs to my constituents, we would be much more

:51:55. > :52:05.seriously engaged with trying to ensure that our next round of

:52:05. > :52:05.

:52:05. > :52:09.nuclear power stations are safer than the last. We have got five

:52:09. > :52:17.minutes left. I want to go on to another question from David

:52:17. > :52:25.Thompson. In light of the proposed minimum price for alcohol, why do

:52:25. > :52:29.the majority have to suffer because of an irresponsible minority?

:52:29. > :52:33.seems to be a contentious policy for a minimum price for alcohol,

:52:33. > :52:39.which was started in Scotland and now seems to be picked up by the UK

:52:40. > :52:45.Government as well. Winnie really, are you in favour of it? -- or

:52:45. > :52:49.Willie Rennie. The UK's relationship with alcohol is

:52:49. > :52:52.extremely unhealthy. The place -- the price has plummeted over the

:52:52. > :52:59.last 30 years and consumption has shot up. If you speak to the

:52:59. > :53:03.experts, they tell you... Sorry to interrupt, but according to

:53:03. > :53:07.National Statistics, the average consumption has fallen by 20% over

:53:07. > :53:15.the last five years. If you look over the last 30 years, it has

:53:15. > :53:19.risen 22%. It is statistics! Over the long term, it has shot up.

:53:19. > :53:22.There is a close correlation between consumption and harm. I

:53:22. > :53:27.meet far too many people whose lives are blighted by alcohol. We

:53:27. > :53:33.have got to do something. But only the cheapest alcohol. What about

:53:33. > :53:37.those who binge on expensive alcohol. The minimum price will put

:53:37. > :53:42.up the base price, so you will not have bargain-basement prices.

:53:42. > :53:46.those who can afford it will drink as much as they want? The students

:53:46. > :53:51.will not be able to afford to drink and everybody else will. You can do

:53:51. > :54:01.nothing, or you can introduce the measures that are proven to work.

:54:01. > :54:02.

:54:02. > :54:06.Janet Street-Porter. I agree with the minimum price for alcohol and I

:54:06. > :54:12.would like to see it adopted in England as well. David Cameron has

:54:12. > :54:17.said that he is in favour of it. But I fear that in England the

:54:17. > :54:21.drinks lobby is so powerful and has such sway over the House of Commons

:54:21. > :54:26.that it is quite a long way off. thought they had agreed to do it

:54:26. > :54:32.from April. They have not, they are still discussing it. It has been

:54:32. > :54:36.discussed for ages. The fact is, the minimum price, having a minimum

:54:36. > :54:40.price per unit of alcohol, the people who are going to profit from

:54:40. > :54:46.this are the supermarkets. That is going to definitely affect small

:54:46. > :54:52.shops and businesses. And the new profits will go to the supermarkets.

:54:52. > :54:56.I don't understand why the tax on alcohol was not staggered.

:54:56. > :54:59.evidence is to the contrary. It says that what it will do is it

:54:59. > :55:09.will stop the supermarkets using alcohol as a loss-leader to attract

:55:09. > :55:10.

:55:10. > :55:14.people into the store. The question was about who has to pay. At the

:55:14. > :55:19.moment, everybody is paying because of the relationship we have with

:55:19. > :55:24.alcohol. In Scotland we pay �700 million a year on alcohol-related

:55:24. > :55:28.conditions in the NHS. Escalate that across the UK and that is tens

:55:28. > :55:32.of billions of pounds being spent dealing with this problem. There

:55:32. > :55:37.are many ways in which we can read calibrate our relationship with

:55:37. > :55:41.alcohol. Price has a part to play. We are sceptical that minimum

:55:41. > :55:45.pricing is going to be a silver bullet, but we voted in the

:55:45. > :55:52.Scottish Parliament to give it the best chance to succeed and to

:55:52. > :55:56.measure the effects, to see if it works. This is almost an experiment.

:55:56. > :56:01.We want to give it a chance to work but we want to be able to analyse

:56:01. > :56:05.to make sure that it does. I am in favour of devising ways in which we

:56:05. > :56:10.can claw back the extra profits that the supermarkets make on this.

:56:10. > :56:16.I also want to underscore how important this is. It is not just

:56:16. > :56:22.some idea thought up by politicians. Drink, on the scale and some people

:56:22. > :56:27.consume it, destroys many young lives. There does not seem to be an

:56:27. > :56:30.urgency in the debate. Alcohol has far overtaken drugs in my

:56:30. > :56:37.constituency as the evil that rots from the inside and kills people

:56:37. > :56:42.off. It is the most terrible thing to behold. And maybe we have not

:56:42. > :56:48.got all of the right answers yet, but not to be acting, when we know

:56:49. > :56:57.how evil drink can be on so many people, is a negligence beyond

:56:57. > :57:01.belief. I agree. I think there is a huge problem, especially in the

:57:01. > :57:05.youth, their relationship to alcohol. I think it is also an

:57:05. > :57:10.educational thing. I think raising the price will go so far but I

:57:10. > :57:14.think the issue is a lot more fundamental. You are in favour of

:57:14. > :57:22.raising the minimum price? It could help but I don't think that is the

:57:22. > :57:26.real issue. I think it is more of an educational issue. The lady here

:57:26. > :57:28.is right. It is not designed to be a magic bullet but the Scottish

:57:28. > :57:34.Parliament and Scottish politics is at its best when parties come

:57:34. > :57:38.together and unite on an issue. 129 lives lost each year on average.

:57:38. > :57:42.This will potentially save 50 lives. It is a matter of disgrace and

:57:42. > :57:46.hypocrisy that we have a Labour Party member here who supports it,

:57:46. > :57:50.but his Scottish Labour colleagues did not vote for it because it was

:57:50. > :57:54.proposed by the SNP. It has been said that if the SNP were to invent

:57:54. > :57:58.the light bulb, at the Scottish Labour Party would condemn it as

:57:58. > :58:08.being an anti- candle device. thought you said we should come

:58:08. > :58:11.

:58:11. > :58:15.together on this. I think the hypocrisy... We have not got

:58:15. > :58:25.Scottish Labour here. We have Birkenhead Labour. They are

:58:25. > :58:25.

:58:25. > :58:30.embarrassed. No, we have Frank On the panel in Grimsby next week,

:58:30. > :58:33.Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, after the Budget, Chuka Umunna for

:58:34. > :58:39.Labour, and David Davies for the Conservatives. The week after that

:58:39. > :58:49.we are in Portsmouth. If you want to come to the programme get in

:58:49. > :58:53.

:58:53. > :58:56.Thank you to all the panellists for coming here. Thank you, Willie

:58:56. > :59:01.Rennie, particularly, for coming up the last minute. It must have been