07/06/2012 Question Time

Tonight we've come to Inverness, and welcome to Question Time.

On our panel in the Highlands the former leader of the Liberal

Democrats, Charles Kennedy, the leader of the Labour Party in

Scotland, Johann Lamont, the former Conservative Secretary of State for

Scotland, Michael Forsyth, Daily Mail columnist Melanie Phillips, a

member of Alex Salmond's SNP cabinet, Alex Neil, and the actor

Alan Cumming. APPLAUSE Welcome to you all on the panel.

There are six of you, so if you could not speak for too long in

reply to questions, everybody will get a chance as well as our

audience here, who are bursting to ask you things. The first question

is from Matthew Davies. Have the Jubilee celebrations made us all

feel more British, and damaged the campaign for independence? A good

question. Charles Kennedy? Yes, I think they've certainly engendered

more of a feeling of Britishness. I don't think that necessarily feeds

through to damaging the campaign over Scottish independence. We are

not going to decide that one for, what, two years plus, but I did

think it was interesting, although within Scotland, I've been

travelling around a lot this past week, there's a more visibly more

subdued royal presence or Jubilee presence, bunting, Union Jacks,

flags and the rest of it. Two things struck me as interesting

looking at the London scenes on the weekend, on the days when you could

see it clearly! All the people in the Mall, lots of Union Jacks but

lots of Scottish presence as well. If you look at the sales of the UK

newspaper titles within Scotland, particularly after Sunday's

flotilla and the rest of it, they were significantly up compared with

the normal sale within Scotland. So that means a lots of Scots were

buying them for the Jubilee editions they were producing.

There's been a greater sense in Scotland. I don't think it is

running at the rate that it is south of the border and in two

years time, well, I think it is not really worth gazing into that

crystal ball behind the question is the idea that independence for

Scotland and the concept of Britishness are opposed to each

other. You don't think that's right? I don't, but I'm a

federalist. What would I put on my tombstone to describe myself? I

would put a Highlander first, a Scot second, UK citizenship third,

and I'm comfortable being one who always embraces the most unpopular

of causes, big a citizen of the European Union. I don't find a

contradiction in that sense of multi-layered identity and I don't

think most Scots do. I don't think the English should either for that

matter. APPLAUSE Alan Cumming? I think that there's a sort of a

smokescreen about this whole issue about what it means to be British

in terms of the independence question, because after

independence, and I do support it and I hope that it happens, after

that we'll still be British. We'll still be a part of the British

Isles. I'm Scottish and I'm British. I'm still going to be Scottish and

British after independence. The notion of Britishness is a symbol.

This weekend people have felt good being here, celebrating the Queen

and all she does. I don't think that's what the independence

movement is about. It is about taking political power from

Westminster and bring it back to Scotland so that people in Scotland

can rule themselves. You, sair, you are shaking your head. I disagree

entirely on that point. There's a certain amount of xenophobia

involved in Alex Salmond's plans. absolutely disagree with you.

thing chat has shot himself in the foot more than that is the launch,

where he wheeled out a lot of Hollywood stars, yourself included,

who don't pay tax in this country. First of all I do pay tax in this

country. I'm a resident of this country. I was born in Scotland, my

family livers here, I work here. All of that aside I'm a human being

with an opinion. David Cameron and Nick Clegg, they can't vote in the

referendum but they still have strong opinions about it don't

they? Absolutely. APPLAUSE OK. Michael Forsyth? First of all I

thought the weekend was absolutely terrific. I thought, I thought the

Prince of Wales summed it up brilliantly when he said it made us

all proud to be British. Looking down the Mall at all these Union

Flags I thought, is this the last time we are going to see red, white

and blue on the Mall. That is what's at stake. The idea that you

can still be British and break up Britain is ridiculous. I think in

answer to the question, I think you have to make a distinction between

nationalism and patriotism. Patriotism was on display big time

this weekend. I think all of us were very much the better for it.

APPLAUSE In certain parts of Glasgow, it

certainly wouldn't have been appropriate to put the Union Jack

and bunting up to celebrate being British. So from that point of view,

the Scottish people I'm sure there's a lot of them did celebrate

the Jubilee, but they didn't get bank holiday Monday off, so they

had to work on Monday as well. It really wasn't much of a holiday or

a Jubilee celebration for some Scottish people. OK. At Tesco in

and this is Tesco Town basically, you couldn't buy any Union Jack

buntsing in the large oness or others in the ding wall area.

Inverness was a bunting-free zone was it? Yes. In Edinburgh the

council was giving away bunting. This whole issue isn't about

bunting or even flags. Flag rgs sim bols. It is great to celebrate and

everyone likes having a party and going on the streets and talking to

your neighbours. That is great, but that isn't what the independence

issue is about. We are not talking about the independence issue.

said this would be the last time we would see the Union Jack on the

Mall. That's true. You think everyone is going to throw their

Union Jacks away? Of course, Scotland will be an independent

country. You think the people in the United Kingdom will throw their

Union Jacks away? I thought the celebrations were great fun. You

see people waving flags but it is not serious. It is people enjoying

themselves. The idea that that will determine whether we separate

ourselves from the rest of the United Kingdom is not true. What it

said to me was folk across the whole of the United Kingdom has an

awful lot in common. We have a common history. We are not one

against the other. It is not this idea that people are trying to do

the Scots down. It was very much a sense of we are having a party, we

all do it much the same way and it was good. But the political debate,

the argument about the choice people will have will be about much

more serious issues. The key issue is you can't pretend both, this is

the most exciting and important thing which happens in 300 years

when we get the vote and that nothing will change. It can't be

both of these at the same time. Melanie Phillips? The question is

the the celebration make people feel more British and therefore

damage the campaign for independence. Is that a link you

would make, that the two are incompatible? I would make that

link, yes. I think that the Jubilee celebrations were probably Alex

Salmond's worst nightmare. People coming together in a spirit of joy

and harmony to celebrate their country. As a shared experience.

The thing about being British, why people were so ecstatic that

weekend, is so many years patriotism has been a dirty word,

particularly when it comes to England. Scottish, Welsh and Irish

patriotism or nationalism is fine but English patriotism is not. But

put that to one side. People came together to support and endorse the

Queen in that way because people understand that what the Queen

stands for is unity not division. What the Queen stands for is we can

all come together and celebrate what we have in common. It seems to

me that independence is the ultimate go divisive activity. I

fully understand Scotland is a proud nation with a specific and

discredit and distinct history and law and culture. We are all the

richer for it. What Scotland has brought to the table historically

in the United Kingdom has enriched the United Kingdom. If Scotland

were to leave, in my view, the United Kingdom would be infinitely

the poorer. But I'm very interested to hear Alan Cumming say that

Scotland would still be British after independence. The United

Kingdom would remain. It would remain the United Kingdom but of

England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Great Britain is England and

Scotland. A number of people in the audience I want to bring in. Let me

bring many our SNP representative here tonight, Alex Neil. I totally

disagree with Melanie. First of all the Queen is the Queen of 16

countries, including for example Australia. The fact that the

Australian Prime Minister and Australia celebrated the Jubilee

doesn't make them feel more or less British. They were just celebrating

the Jubilee and 60 years of service the Jubilee and 60 years of service

by the Queen. They were never part of the United Kingdom. The second

point is the union of the crowns was 1603, 104 years before the

union of theer Parliaments. What independence is about is the

dissolution of the union of the Parliaments not the dissolution of

the union of the crowns. APPLAUSE $$TRANSMIT. And when Scotland

becomes independent, hopefully in 2016 The day after independence the

Queen will be the Queen of Scots, as she has always been, as well as

the Queen of England, and the Queen of Australia and the Queen of New

Zealand. Let me say this. It's a very comparable situation we would

find ourselves in this an independent Scotland to the Swedes

and the Norwegians for example, both of which have monarchies, find

themselves in. And that is they are Swedish and feel sweefrpblt they

are Norwegian and feel Norwegian. But they are also Scandinavian and

feel Scandinavian. After independence we will be Scottish,

self-governing Scotland, but we will also have a British dimension

as well. I think Charles Kennedy is right - you can feel, in my case

I'm an Ayrshire man, I'm a Scot and I feel British and European as well.

There is no contradiction whatsoever. Why make such an effort

then? Why has the date slipped from 2014 to 2016? The referendum is in

2014 but Independence Day will be 2016. I want to pick up on the

point about xenophobia. It is dangerous, people get mixed up, I'm

pro-independence, and people get mixed up with people who wish to be

pro-independent seem to hate the English. It is not the case. It is

not about hating anybody but wishing to make our own decisions

in Scotland for the Scottish people. APPLAUSE The man in the pink shirt.

It is plain here that the people have come out strongly it is not

the politicians but the monarchy. The monarchy looked brilliant at

the weekend. They bathed in glory while quite frankly the politicians

looked a bit silly sometimes. APPLAUSE And Sir? The comment about

xenophobia I find quite insulting. This has been used as a scare

tactic for many years. The people of Scotland have grown up. They

understand Scotland is not a xenophobic country. It is one of

the most welcoming countries in the world and will continue to be so. I

want to make a point about what Michael Forsyth said about it was

the last opportunities to see the red, white and blue flags

fluttering down the Mall. The Queen will continue as head of state in

Scotland. Can you explain why the blue will come out of the flag?

Perhaps I can deal with that. The first thing is the launch of the

campaign for independence you had people there who want to get rid of

the monarchy. You had people who wanted to get rid of the monarchy.

Many of the leading nationalists have a history of republicanism.

This is all just a cover. On the flag, the Union Flag is made up op

the flags of the constituent parts of the United Kingdom. You can't

argue you are going to break up Britain and have a separate

Scotland and still have the Union Flag. I used it as an analogy to

explain what the consequences are. My experience of the Royal Family

and dealing with the Royal Family is they will move heaven and earth

to maintain a united King. How can they do that if they are non-

The Royal Family are a unifying force in our country and if

Scotland votes to be independent, I'm sure the Royal Family will

continue to play a part, just as they play a part in Canada and

other countries. But it's Fame Academy chous to argue that we'll

still have Britain and the United Kingdom and the result will be a

very considerable loss -- factuous. I don't understand it... Perhaps

that's because you live in America! APPLAUSE

Michael, we grew up very near each other in Scotland. And you are a US

citizen. I'm a British citizen as well. And US. What's the big deal?

I am a joint citizen. Why can't I understand... Xenophobia, ladies

and gentlemen. People have been on about nationalism. We have Sean

Connery, a tax exile, Alan who will do anything to get Scotland

independent except live here and actually put up with the

consequences. Well, you know what... The man at the back there?

unfortunate aspect about this referendum is the snch NP want us

to talk about the grand scheme of nation. What's important is

speaking about people, communities and talking about the issues that

really matter to the individual -- SNP. You, Sir, with the spectacles

and beard? The SNP seem to be treating the independence argument

as a matter of pick 'n' mix, that's one point. The second some point,

that if Alex Salmond really wants to win this independence, he should

be encouraging the English people to be allowed to vote.

English people? What, in England? Which English people? All of the

English people who are... England? Fed up with the SNP

whinging and would be glad to see the back of... You want the

whole...? No, I don't. Oh, I see, but you think he should. The lady

there? I'm somebody who hasn't made up my mind which way I would vote,

but hearing the panel tonight makes me even more confused than I was

beforehand because different situations are being described and

it's very confusing. Welcome to the referendum!

The debate is not about flags, I don't think the unifying force is

the fact that the people chose to work in partnership. The analogy

that Alec draws with Australia and New Zealand is not real, it's a

choice and partnership. We will decide, we decide the society we

want to live in, what is about our aspiration for the care of our

elderly and what we want for our churn. The idea that sometimes is

there is that somehow the rest of the United Kingdom who want to do

us down, they do that. Alec, very briefly? We want political

independence but the SNP's always said the social union with the rest

of Britain remains and part of the social union is the monarchy, part

of the social union is the relationship and the free travel

between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom, all of which

remains. We are a social union, but that doesn't stop us from being

politically independent and running our own country. Let's move on.

Now a question from Patrick Chamier-Tripp? Is it fair that

welloff pensioners should get free bus passes and the winter fuel

allowance? This is the battle reported in Cabinet between the

Prime Minister and Iain Duncan Smith about whether better off

pensioners should go on getting free bus passes, winter fuel

allowance and other things. Michael Forsyth? Jiez yes I think it is and

you have to think about how kld work if you didn't have that, it

would have to be means tested and you would have to fill in forms 24-

pages long. The thing is that people worry about the cost of

heating, they don't turn on the fire, they worry about the cost. So

I think the heating allowance is a very Ben official thing. The idea

that we are going to save a whole load of money by taking away

people's bus passes, if they are wealthy and have their own cars,

they are probably driving around in cars and not using the buses and

the marginal cost of them being on the bus, at particular times of day,

will be very little. So I don't believe in means testing, I think

the great advantage of universal benefits is that you can avoid

means testing. After all, we are talking about people who've paid

tax and national insurance all the days of their lives, so I don't

actually agree, unusually for me, with the reported comments of those

in the Conservative Party. David Cameron and Osborne say it will

save them �6 billion a year. That's what the Chancellor says? He says

that, I don't know how you would work out how much you would save on

the frae travel, but I don't think at this moment when people are

finding their fuel bills going up, partly because of the Government's

Green Agenda, that it's the right time to take away the benefits.

Charles Kennedy? Are you with Nick Clegg on this and think it's a good

idea? Yes and listening to Michael, we go back to 1983 together in the

House of Commons, and we've slightly on this one passed like

ships in the night. A move to the right. I think you have become far

too Liberal for your own good actually! It does seem to me that

there's an intellectual incoherence about a position whereby in

Scotland, and I'm all in favour of all those in need in Scotland of

receiving free prescriptions for example, and that's different from

the policy south of the border. But I don't think I should be receiving

free prescriptions. I think that's absolutely ludicrous on my level of

income. Michael says the marginal saving on this one is such that

well... But you are not a pensioner? No, not yet. But I'm not

Peter Pan either. What I would say is that I do think Governments,

whether UK or indeed in years to come in Scotland, are going to have

the bite the bullet, that we cannot just carry on with universal

coverage which by definition in an ageing society which despite all

the present problems is a lot more affluent than it was 20, 30, 40, 50

years ago, progressively so, that they can be applied willy-nilly and

by definition reach people who don't need them but give

insufficient to people who really are in need. But it's a political

judgment that's been made here and I think it's a short-term one that

Governments of all political persuasion have made down the

generations and I think it's a mistake.

You, Sir? This current Government are

chizling away at the benefits system with all sorts of silly

savings around the margins. Yet they're not telling the people how

much they do not pay out and at the last figures I heard, as I work in

the charitable sector, it's �49 billion annually in unclaimed

benefits, mostly to elderly people. If they want to sort this problem

out, they want to start giving compulsory benefit checks to all

people. Then you would be spending much more money? A damn fortune. It

would probably bankrupt the country, then they would have something to

complain about. At the moment, they are chiselling away with Nickells

and dimes on bus passes, prescriptions and all sorts of

silly things that don't really mean anything and are just a political

slogan. You, Sir? If Iain Duncan Smith wishes to save money, he

could have saved the taxpayer over �20 billion odd if he hadn't got

involved in Afghanistan and the loss of life of innocent people and

plus the fact of Iraq. I would like to remind Mr Forsyth, Her Majesty

the Queen approached this coalition Government not so long ago to ask

them if she could get the old age heating allowance off the old age

pensioners to get the palace's up. I don't know anything about that.

Johann Lamont, what is your view? think there is a false debate going

on between means testing or not. Some things need to be targeted.

The SNP Government when they came in stopped free central heating and

the argument was universal provision. Yes you did change the

provision. That's just not true. Before we do this tit-for-tat, can

we talk about the big issue, the whole of the UK should have means

tested benefits. You need to target need for some benefits. A free bus

pass will reach people of lower incomes because they are less

likely to have a car. The same thing applies to heating allowance

because they are less likely to have properly heated homes, but

there are some benefits which appear, for example, you have a

free service given, but you have to ask then where is the cost coming.

People get winter fuel allowance automatically. I get it. You get it.

No, you don't! Ouch! I knew there was a flaw in

the argument somewhere! You are just pushing your luck!

The point I was trying to make is that people make a false debate

between you're either in favour of means testing or you're not. It

depends what the particular issue is. Free bus pass seems to liberate

a lot of older people in poorer communities and is easier and cheap

tore do universally. Other benefits should be targeted because the cost

of making them free are disproportionately borne by those

on low income. You penalise people who've saved all their lives and I

think that's unfair. The woman in purple in the third row from the

back? Who certainly doesn't get a free bus pass! I don't, no! In my

area, whether you get a free bus pass, whether you are old, young or

whatever, I think what's most important for us is that we have a

bus service. At the moment we have nothing, so that's been taken away,

so, you know, it doesn't mean anything anyway.

APPLAUSE Melanie Phillips? I think this

proposal to take free bus passes away from "welloff pensioners" is

really mean spirited and very dangerous. It's not as if the bus

pass is given to pensioners on account of their presumed poverty.

The bus pass is given to pensioners on account of the fact that they

are elderly and, as a society, we think they are afforded some

respect and some special privileges on the account of the fact that

they are elderly. If you say that the well-off should not get free

bus passes, that applies to the whole of the welfare state. I was

very interested to hear our Charles Kennedy here arguing for the

destruction of the entire welfare state because if you take away free

bus passes... That's slightly exaggerating what I said, Melanie.

You may not think that is what you said but it's actually what you did

say. If you take away free bus passes on the grounds that people

are so well-off they shouldn't have them, you take away all benefits on

the basis that people shouldn't have them because they are well-off.

I think the welfare state, there's a lot wrong with it, it should be

fundamentally recast to be more about responsibilities so I endorse

a lot of what Iain Duncan Smith is doing. But nevertheless, if we have

a welfare state, if you start excluding people from it on account

of the fact they reach some notional income level which

excludes them, then you start having a divided society. Child

benefit, were you against taking that away? On principle I'm against

it completely because it's an incentive for mass fatherlessness

because that's another issue. If you are going to have it, it should

be available to everybody. It's very difficult to believe that you

qualify for the winter fuel allowance. Thank you! Can't

remember when you get it. How old do you have to be? 65. 60. 55 I

think! The Bank of England estimates that even today this

Government is subsidising the banks to the tune of �11 billion a year

and it's a disgrace that they're thinking of taking away the

benefits from pensioners and still paying the banks �11 billion a year

taking the money from the banks and giving - take the money from the

banks and give it to the pensioner. The second point is this, and I'll

break the habit of a lifetime and agree with Michael Forsyth, it's

absolutely right that people who've worked all their days and paid into

a company pension scheme or super an waition scheme get penalised by

not getting the fuel allowance or bus pass because they've saved for

retirement. It's a disincentive to save and iblg these people should

be as entitled to the winter fuel allowance and the bus pass as

My mum gets the winter fuel allowance and she has a bigger

disposable income than I have - a single parent with three young

children. I could arguably do with that money more than she could,

however I'm in a fortunate position that I don't need it, but there are

other single parents who could do with that more than a lot of

elderly people in society. I'm not saying you should take it away from

all elderly people but there are other people who are more needy.

You could take it away from your mother significance significance.

Yes, but she -- You could take it away from your mother. Yes, but she

would kill me for saying that. There's a bigger question here,

that the last Budget that this is stemming from seems to me, the

biggest deal of it was letting a lot of rich people get richer, and

we are talking about bus passes and fuel allowances. That's such small

change when you consider the amount of money that a lot of very wealthy

people in this country don't have to pay out any more and put back

into the system. That's what we should be thinking about. APPLAUSE

The man in the checked shirt. I think the whole issue here is

about raising or saving �6 billion. I think the Chancellor might make a

start by having a public inquiry on the finances of football clubs.

Glasgow Rangers appear to be getting away with �40 million or

�50 million of unpaid tax. Presumably other clubs are going to

run up similar amounts and never pay them. You on the right.

elderly people, the winter fuel allowance, quite a lot of them say

we don't need it. You could make it an option for them to say, do you

need it? They could say yes or no. Social services for the most

vulnerable ones could say yes, they desperately need this. I don't

understand why it is such a difficult question. I wanted, since

Melanie was flattering me by claiming to know my own mind better

than I know myself, which may not be claiming a lot, if you say the

logic of my argument leads the destruction of the welfare state,

the logic of your argument, no child benefit at all, that would be

the end of the welfare state. Nonsense. We had a welfare state

before child benefit. Joe Hallwood please. Is it the job of the

Germans to save the eurozone? euro land. Who would like to start

on this? Melanie Phillips Frau Merkel desperately wants to saver

euro land, as we all see. I don't think euro land can or should be

saved. In my view, the real cause of what we are seeing is the

fundamental incompatibility of the whole EU project. It tried to yoke

together disparate nations with disparate economies on the fiction

that they can all unite in a single currency without political union.

And pretending that this whole thing ant about political union at

the end of the day, which in my view is fundamentally anti-

democratic. I always thought that was the ultimate aim of the EU, to

create one single state. I always thought it was very anti-democratic.

I always thought the single currency, the euro and the whole

project was so fundamentally flawed, because you cannot bring together

all these nations in one project like this. The thing was bound to

collapse. Do you want to see it collapse? And if it does collapse

What effect will it have on our economy? If it collapses, which I

think it will, the effect on everyone unfortunately is going to

be absolutely awful. There are ways of doing this I think or managing

this better, which certainly our Government doesn't seem to be

agreeing with what I'm about to say, which is that people, that the

countries that are in such sifts - Greece, Spain, possibly Italy - the

reason they are in difficulties is they can't rescue their own

economies. The reason they can't rescue their own economies is

because they are completely stuck because of the rules of the euro.

In other words, what they have to do to rescue their economies is to

come out of the euro. I'm not saying that this is going to be

painless. Clearly we are between a rock and a hard place here.

Everyone alternative is going to be bad. But you don't want to see the

Germans come to the rescue at this stage of the eurozone? If by coming

to the rescue it means the Germans have to bail out countries which

have hit the buffers, then first of all Germany can't do that. It

doesn't have the money to do that. And secondly it will simply stave

off the day of final reckoning. If countries are living beyond their

means, if they are behaving in ways which are economically and fiscally

totally imprudent, ultimately they have to take control of themselves

and behave in a responsible way. If they are bailed out they will never

do that. Thank you. The man in the middle. It does occur to me that

the Germans are very reluctant for any change to hangs because they do

very nicely thank you out of the situation that the way it is, as

everybody, as the lady is saying, stuck. What do you think their

instincts is? Protectionism. Johann? I think the frightening

thing is despite the fact that there are experts here and there,

nobody really nose what's going to happen. That sense of chaos, of

things being out of control, that people made decisions round the

euro as a political project without thinking through what the economic

consequences were does make us wary for the future. I hope that in this

we understand that the centre of this, across Europe, there are

ordinary farm lis bearing a very heavy price for decisions that were

not at their hand to make. I think whatever they do across the

eurozone it should be across the leaderships in every country. They

should be mindful that people are bearing that cost, bearing a very

heavy cost, they didn't make the decision and it may be that Germany

may want to act in one way or. They must all come together to find a

solution because of the consequences. So you do endorse

what the German Chancellor said on Germany television that we need a

political union first and foremost. Do you endorse that as an ambition

and is that the way to save the eurozone in your view? As I've said

I think the focus must be on the consequences for individual

economies across Europe. All of the old certainties about how things

were supposed to work need to be put to one side and people need to

come together and understand if they don't work together, we will

see devastation across Europe. woman on the left. I don't think

that Germany should be responsible for the euro land, I really don't

that I that the United Kingdom should have to put our hands in our

pockets to bail out the euro, as we are not a part of it. Do you think

there's a danger of that happening? Yes I do. There's a huge danger of

that happening with the International Monetary Fund.

the woman there? A precondition of entering Europe as a new country is

to accept the euro in times been does that mean an independent

Scotland is going to become part of the peg? Is this going to happen in

future? Michael Forsyth? You are absolutely right. There's a period

of time that you can adjust to it. I can't get my head round the

concept of independence, where some other Central Bank and some other

central Government sets your interest rates. I think the point

made by Melanie explains exactly how this euro experiment is going

to end in disaster and cannot be made to work. I remember years ago

when I was in front line politics Nicholas Ridley being forced to

resign from our Government because he had given an interview to the

Spectator when he described the euro as a German react. The Germans

through the euro have been able to have a competitive exchange rate,

which has enabled them to sell their BMWs and the Greeks and

Italians and others have had a very uncompetitive exchange rate and

their standard of living is being crushed. If they continue with this

project, this euro is going to destroy the prospects for our young

people across Europe. It is going to create social division, and the

Germans are never going to agree to pick up the tab. 20 years ago there

was a campaign run run by the SNP in Scotland. They said Scotland is

paying the price of high interest rates for the overheating economy

in south-east England. I found it difficult to deal with, because

they were absolutely right. With monetary union in the United

Kingdom it is hard to set interest rates to cover the United Kingdom

with all our integrated fivements you cannot do it for countries as

diverse as Cyprus, Germany and Spain. We have a political class

who've hung their hats on the euro and they are prepared to do

anything rather than admit they were wrong and go back to what we

signed up for - a free trade area, not a country called Europe. The

supreme irony for us in Scotland is the party which talks about

independence in Europe could shackle us to the kind of

disastrous position that the Greeks see themselves in now. We have to

find a reverse gear and get out of this. There is no way the Germans

are going take this forward. I don't agree with the Prime Minister

when he says we need to take the action with a euro. That would be

disastrous for Europe, disastrous for our markets and our young

people, who have so much idealism as Europe as an open market.

APPLAUSE Apart from the fact that I agree that Europe shows that

economic unity doesn't work without political unity and for

independence that's a bit dodgy, but the question hasn't been

answered. Something has to happen. Cameron and Obama both said today

that something's got to happen, and quickly. If it is not the job of

the Germans it has to be the job of someone to save the euro, otherwise

it has such huge repercussions on the world economy. Do you want to

answer his point? Absolutely. Will whether you are for or against

political union we are now in a crisis situation and urgent action

is needed not in six months' time, nine months' time, the urgent

action is needed now and there needs to be a strategic action

taken by the yorns. Are they going to -- by the Europeans. Are they

going to bail out the Greeks and the Portuguese and others are allow

them to leave the euro? There's a flaw in the euro because

productivity in Greece is 30% lower than than in Germany. That's why we

are in the position we are in today with the euro. There are two ways

to solve it. You either completely are in this together in euro land

and help each other in a financial way out of it. Or you allow the

Greeks and potentially the Portugal ease, even the Italians, possiblyly

the Spaniards to leave the euro. Either way, the key point is a

decision has to be made. They cannot put this decision off much

longer. The minute we know the election result in Greece I believe

the markets will go wild. Is it the job of the Germans, as the

questioner put it, to save the eurozone? I think they have a big

role to play in saving the eurozone, as by far they are the strongest

economy. Are they going to allow Greece and the others to falter and

leave the eurozone, which has got huge implications for everybody, or

bail them out, which has huge implications for everybody. This

dithering, and it is neither one thing nor the other, is the worst

of all possible worlds. We need leadership. That's what we need -

leadership. Alan Cumming? You know, it is a mess. It is a

total mess. I think the world's economy has been a total mess since

2007. It seems to me this whole thing, we talk about who should

take responsibility for it when actually the real reason we are in

this mess is because a lot of bankers were gambling with our

country's money, with our own money, and a lot of greedy bankers got us

into this. They weren't regulated by our Governments and that has to

happen. All these countries in Europe have to have much stricter

regulations on the financial sector and hopefully we'll never get into

this mess again. APPLAUSE The woman in purple. I agree with a lot of

what Alan said, but lot of the problems in Greece existed in the

country 10-15 years ago and I don't think it can be blamed on the

banking system. It it was culture of the country before it joined the

euro. Maybe Germany has some blame to take for allowing them to join

in the first place. The Germans probably have a memory of the 1930s

of taking wheelbarrows of money to buy bread. I would think the UK

Government is a bit rich in actually giving advice, given the

mess they've made in the last 50 years. We could go back to Harold

Wilson, to Ted Heath and the three- day week, bringing in the IMF,

Maggie's 5 million. We've got Tony and Gordon were going to make

everything better and it got decidedly worse. We've got the

Muppets now, so... APPLAUSE It is very serious. We actually

need to all get together and work together to get something done.

Charles Kennedy? Politically I've never been described as a Muppet

before. Mea culpa politically, and I was still serving as President of

the European movement in the UK which is all party and non-party,

I've always taken the view, as have many others, that if you have a

single European market, which we do, and Britain and Michael was in

Government, the frontline politician, as he earlier described

himself, should just note for the history books after he stopped

being a frontline politician, he went on to become a banker. What

else could I do? He's got a bit of mea culpa about him too. I took the

view that the logic and inevitability of the single

European market was that if you really want it to operate, you need

a single means of exchange, a Single Currency. I think where the

politics got it wrong and this has now been borne out in the most

graphic way and the points that have been made, the last gentleman

contributed were absolutely correct. To satisfy understandable German

sensitivities about the wreckage that they'd gone through

financially in previous generations, then a blind eye was turned to them

for certain countries and currencys to make it all one great

conglomerate. Which country broke the rules first? Germany followed

by France? I'm talking about the rules which were then to

accommodate, as your Chief Executive was saying at the time,

Ken Clarke... But the borrowing, the first country to break the

rules were the Germans, then the French. You can't just blame this

all on the Greeks and Italians? Sfrpblgts I'm not, but if there's

to be a solution, the Germans, this is the point I was going to make

urbgs have to be part of that solution because there can't be a

solution by definition unless they are. How you win that argument in

domestic German politics, well, no wonder the current Chancellor is

remaining as, to mix my language, as Sochi vochy as she can.

Something may not give, it may just collapse, the economy may get worse

and everybody here will suffer. It's possible it may, in due course,

through a painful process, you may end up with a smaller, in terms of

the number of participants, a smaller eurozone. But our capacity

to influence is limited because... Major impact in the UK. If the

graecks exit the euro, UK production, GDP goes down between

2-4%. A huge drop -- Greeks. I want to go on to a question about the

domestic economy and the Budget. We have talked about changes to

pensioners and all that, but this one will affect everybody. Jennifer

Gracie has the question? How can a 3p increase in fuel duty be

justified when rural businesses and families are already struggling to

keep moving? This is the increase in fuel prices that the

Chancellor's imposing in August. How can you justify it when rural

businesses and families are struggling to keep moving? I think

it costs something like between �30 and �40 per year. Michael Forsyth?

Oh, God. Don't say that, answer the question. The state is spending 50%

of our GDP, too much. We are living beyond our means. We talk about

reducing the deficit. When we talk about that, we are talking about

actually cutting the rate at which the debt is increasing. In five

years' time, our national debt will have gone up from 1 trillion to 1.5

trillion, so we are living beyond our means and we are taxing too

highly and that is why we are not getting growth. The businesses, the

small businesses simply haven't got the money. To my mind, putting up

fuel duty, it all adds, puts up prices in shops, puts up the cost

of going to work, it's not a sensible basis on which to proceed,

so I very much hope that the Chancellor will think of not going

ahead with that proposal. Johann Lamont? Why, when we had a

Chancellor, he was always called La-Mont and you are called Lament,

which is the Scottish pronunciation. Why is that? Why did you have a

Scot called Lamont who was a Tory then, I don't know!? Let's two back

to the question bs, are you in favour of it? The Chancellor has a

record of thinking again, so we maybe have some optimism and the

message is, when making budget decisions, you almost have to test

him against proper sense of consequences. Maybe this is a way

of balancing a budget, but if they are a direct consequence for rural

communities and businesses, it would affect growth and so on so

you have a real problem. Our position has been that we don't

have a budget for growth at all. Despite the fact that David

Cameron's prepared to lecture the rest of Europe about the need for

growth, he himself in his own Budget's caused major problems, so

I think that the test is what are the consequences of, and they need

to be listening to rural businesses in the same way as in the Western

Isles for example, the decision of the SNP to withdraw for businesses

there is having impacts on the rural communities. You need to

think about the choices there. had questions about fuel. So I

would like to hear about anybody who wants to talk about that?

lady's done very well to avoid the question there, if I may say so.

The fact is, if Labour would have been in power, petrol would be much

more now than it will be even if Osborne puts the 3p on.

Melanie Phillips? Well, I think that the increase in fuel duty is

absolute madness for the reasons that have been already said. I mean,

the country needs desperately to become more competitive and this is

another way of ensuring that doesn't happen. But to my way of

thinking, what makes it even more ludicrous is that it's kind of got

a halo of justification around it, this fuel duty on the basis that we

all know that petrol is evil because we all know that we have to

bring down our carbon emissions. This country is making its own, to

put it mildly, noose for its own neck by an absolutely suicidal

environmental policy which commits us to reduce carbon emissions in

the cause of which the hard-pressed British public is being hammered by

fuel duty, all in pursuit of a theory of man-made global warming

which is itself a total sham. Nothing to do with the Treasury or

any of that? The Treasury is simply trying to raise money by whatever

means it can and thinks it can get away with it on the basis that it

can appeal to green sensibilities which are bogus. The man in the

very back row in blue? Do you think the areas like the

Highlands should be exempt from tax? And fuel duty? That would be a

lovely scenario, I don't think it's going to happen, although this part

of the country, alone with the -- along with the Scilly Isles are

experiencing or just started recently, a reduction in petrol

praises and this has been all but wiped out by what's been happening

at the pump the very week it was introduced, but we are trying out a

pilot scheme which some of us have lobbied for for years. The 3p will

more or less rub it out. Absolutely point taken and these are some of

the arguments raging in and out of the coalition. This was day facto

for many years in other European member states. The Treasury,

Conservative and Labour, wouldn't touch or embrace it because civil

servants at a European level just as UK and Scottish level hate

variations from the norm. We've actually broken through that

barrier, so I think the Government of Westminster deserve credit. But

at the very time that we've broken through it, albeit in a pilot

scheme, and let's see how it works and let's hope we can extend it to

the mainland in due course, that's been thrown out of kilter by the

other rises that are now due to go through, hence the big campaign and

the fact that many of us, whilst sympathetic to the economic plight

that the Government finds itself in and nonetheless trying to make a

rational argument for looking for other ways of attracting income.

Where would you go for it if you were Chancellor? I'm very glad I'm

not the Chancellor, I'm very glad to say. It's not a flippant answer.

Some of the richest people in this country are private equity people.

They are paid through a mechanism called carry, so huge sums of money.

They are paying tax at a rate of less than 10% in some cases, less

than that. There are areas where the Government can go for revenue.

Personally I think the tax burden is too high and we need to reduce

it in order to get growth and I believe that given the opportunity,

the private sector will take advantage of that. But there are

areas and people turning their businesses from limited liability

companies into partnerships in order to avoid national insurance.

But the Tory manifesto followed the SNP example which said if the

international price of oil goes up, taxation should go down to

stabilise fuel prices and if the reverse happens, you do the same so

you have stable fuel prices. This should be the next U-turn and they

should keep to the manifesto promise to introduce the fuel

regulator that would actually stabilise fuel prices and it's not

just the price of fuel, the Air Passenger Duty increases can also

destroy many aspects of tourism in Scotland as well. Let's stick with

petrol. The man in the pink shirt there. You, Sir? Many parts of the

economy in the Highlands, especially are tourism based. With

this height on fuel costs, they are going to be at a huge disadvantage.

Therefore, the UK export invisible exports will suffer. We need a

growth agenda very, very fast. Especially in the rural economy.

The 3p? It's one thing that could help, including a reduction in VAT

for hospitality. All right. I'll come to you in a

moment. Alan Cumming, then you up there? This is another example of

how the Cameron Clegg combo is out of touch with different parts of

the country. Up here, where people live in rural areas who need and

rely on their cars, fuel is of paramount importance. I'm also, if

I may say, reeling from Melanie's comment that all the green issues

are bogus. No, really? Yes! What the hell?! I mean, I think there's

a point that we need to embrace all the other forms of energy and not

rely on petrol. So I guess I am agreeing with you in a miniscule

way. Also in Scotland we have 25% of Europe's wind and tidal power at

our disposal that we can invest in. That's money we should be able to

have the opportunity to invest in that. Also, Johann, if I may say as

the non-political person at the table, I find it... You are a

political person? You... Not a paid one. Not an elected political

person. Not an elected political person or a right-wing writer for a

right-wing rag. You will have to be brief. I find it crazy, or weird

that Johann's bashing on about David Cameron and this issue and

yet you're endorsing David Cameron by not voting for independence.

We'll leave that. It's a false choice between the Tories. It's

another choice, it's a Labour choice right across the United

Kingdom. I think you could save a lot of money by councils who have

pointless projects like the Edinburgh trams for example, by

asking the people do they need this, do they want it and you would save

a fortune on anything. That Holyrood building, I'm sorry, you

could have kitted it out from Ikea with a fraction of the cost. It's

unbelievable the amount of money that gets wasted. Is Edinburgh

going to ever have trams do you think? No. We have to stop. Our

time is up. Sorry to those who've still got your hands up but there

we go. We are going to be in stock on on tease next week on the

Thursday when the Prime Minister appears before Leveson. They may

provoke something, we don't know, but he's meant to be there for most

of the day. The week after that, we'll be in West Brom. If you would

like to come to Stockton-on-Tees or West Brom, to question the panel or