16/09/2014 Scotland 2014

The NHS is back at the centre of the referendum debate tonight,

as secret documents seen by the BBC give the arguments a new twist.

Gordon Brown says the SNP are lying about the NHS,

while the SNP say they have protected the

on the day leaked documents suggest there is a large hole

in the Scottish Government's spending plans.

Also, The three UK party leaders have signed a vow pledging more

They are also promising to protect the Barnett formula as a means

of deciding how much money Scotland gets.

But Lord Barnett himself says its time the formula was scrapped.

That's what every political party always promises the voters.

But never has the future of health services,

how they are paid for and how they are delivered, been the subject

Gordon Brown today accused the SNP of lying about the NHS,

while the Yes campaign says it will be best protected if Scotland has

But the row comes on the same day that the BBC has

seen leaked documents that suggest there is a multi-million-pound hole

in the SNP government's spending plans for the NHS.

Here is our health correspondent Eleanor Bradford.

This confidential document was intended only for the eyes of NHS

chief executives and civil servants, and the language is stark.

It suggests plans to manage the pressure

on the NHS are being undermined by the Scottish government,

that policy commitments made by the SNP are "not fully funded" and that

some are "directly in conflict" with plans to transform care.

The result, according to this document, is a

funding gap of ?400-450 million over the next two years, representing

Opposition MPs have described the revelations as extraordinary,

Here is the Scottish National party planning to cut health service

spending in Scotland by 450 million, not telling us about it and denying

they have the power to do anything about it and trying to tell people

that they are trying to save the NHS. The truth is they have now

started to use the NHS as a battering ram for independence and

So, politics aside for a moment, what would a funding gap mean

Well, the paper says "The status quo is no longer an option".

And that "radical and urgent decisions need to be made".

In layman's terms, that could mean closure of some services,

including possibly A - a measure the SNP vowed to stop when it was

elected in 2007, reversing plans to close Monklands and Ayr hospitals.

So is that the kind of hard choice that will be back

Speaking to BBC Scotland tonight, Alex Salmond said they aren't

cutbacks but efficiency savings made necessary by Westminster.

All that money from their savings is reinvested in the health budget,

which is why it is increasing in real terms and will continue to do

so across this year and next year and the year after in terms of the

front line budget. What I'm pointing out is if you look at the bulk of

these cost pressures, they are changes to pensions from

Westminster, changes to national insurance from Westminster. Is it

really a case of efficiency savings?

It is sometimes difficult to make your way through the claim and

counterclaim. This document comes from the top and contains dramatic

language not normally seen in the boardroom and stark warnings and

criticises government policy. To me, that is not just business as usual

at normal efficiency savings. It can't be a coincidence that you

got sight of these papers just before the referendum.

The whistle-blower who passed these to said they were frustrated by the

yes campaign saying that cuts to the NHS were due to Westminster. I have

been contacted by many doctors today on both sides of the debate all

concerned about the NHS. We only have one full day of campaigning

left and many people will have already made up their minds.

In the studio we have the Cabinet Secretary for Health

and Wellbeing, Alex Neil, and the Scottish Labour Spokesperson

Thank you for coming in. The language in this document doesn't

sound like a case of efficiency savings. Gordon Brown is talking

rubbish in a whole range of things. He started the privatisation of the

NHS in England. It is very relevant indeed. He is talking mince. He says

this is secret. There is nothing secretive. When we approved the

budget in February, every health board put this information on their

websites. If Gordon Brown had known that, he could've gone and seen that

the information has been there months. These are not cost-cutting,

these are efficiency savings being reinvested in the health service and

the difference between us and south of the border is where we get

efficiency savings, we reinvest in the NHS. What Labour want us to do

is to take the Tory cuts and tax the Scottish people second time round to

make up for it. It's absurd. If it is simply efficiency savings then

why are senior health service managers talking about radical and

urgent decisions leading to be made? What they are saying is there

are a number of challenges facing every National Health Service and

reading needs to deal with it and that is why we are going to produce

a plan for 2020 all in next year. As the First Minister said, if you take

the pension increase, ?100 million of these pressures for example

because of the additional pension contributions we are being asked to

make for the Westminster government, that is going into the Treasury in

London. If we were independent, that money would stay in Scotland for

investment in the NHS. The irony is that the extra money we are in force

to give in pension contributions isn't going into NHS workers'

pensions. It is paying off the deficit that Gordon Brown, Alistair

Darling and George Osborne caused. I think that is absolute fantasy. What

we see in this week to document is clearly not just to talk about

efficiency savings. It looks more like a crisis document to me. We are

supposed to listen to him. He misled Parliament over what was happening

in his own backyard. He has misled the country by claiming that the NHS

will be privatised with a no vote. When was he going to tell us about

this? Brady, next week? I wouldn't trust him to open a box of

Elastoplast is never mind tell us the truth about the NHS. Gordon

Brown outright accused the SNP of lying. They are telling untruths.

The NHS was never mentioned in the first years of the campaign. Then

suddenly the NHS became the biggest issue. The NHS is now the biggest

issue because he has been rumbled big-time on this. Is it not

inconvenient that this has been leaked, even if it was for political

reasons, right in the middle of the NHS becoming the biggest thing in

your campaign? Some of these chief executives were people who wanted to

shut A departments. Labour were going to shut Monklands. This man

tried to get me sacked because I tried to keep up in a mental health

unit. I didn't mislead Parliament. Does this not prove that Scotland

has full control over the NHS and there is no reason to vote yes? The

Scotland act allows Westminster to overrule the Scottish Parliament on

anything and it had already has done, for example the waters of the

West of Scotland and renewable energy. Consequences of

privatisation and charges, they are speaking down south about charging

people ?25 for visiting the doctor. If this happens then it means the

funding by the NHS under the union goes down. That is a fact of life.

If public spending was down and then the amount of money coming to

Scotland goes down. If they are procuring in the private sector then

it is still money coming into the public. They're privatising to

reduce public funding. He is trying to take it away from the substance

of what the report is saying. Now we see the consequences in this

document. It is his responsibility and he has been caught out. This

sounds like a lot of arguments so far, both sides shouting and calling

each other liars. Who really should have control of the Scottish NHS? In

an independent Scotland we should take the money from getting rid of

Trident, ?50 million per year, we could put that into the health

service and public services. We could decide exactly how much is

spelt an NHS and not rely on a Tory government or a right-wing Labour

government such as the one led by Gordon Brown which cut public

services to ribbons. People at home should make their minds up based on

the facts and that is that we have control over the NHS in Scotland.

The problem is that Alec is not taking his responsibilities

seriously and he was not going to tell us that up his sleeve he has

half a billion of cuts. When was he going to tell us? Desires

responsibilities. He has been trying to hide it. Thank you both very

much. As soon as the pledge

from all three party leaders to guarantee more powers for the

Scottish Parliament was published on the front page of the Daily

Record it was quickly dismissed by That makes a change from describing

Better Together as Project Fear. But does it suggest a note of panic

in the Yes camp that a pledge of further devolution, however late

in the day, might just be enough to The countdown continues. This is

campaigning in a frenzy. And up to the wire. On the day the three main

Better Together parties published this. A foul to the people of

Scotland to deliver change. They vowed to keep the Barnett formula

and guarantee powers to raise revenue. They say categorically that

in no vote will deliver faster change. Is it offering no voters a

little bit of yes? One of the signatories went to Edinburgh today.

Ed Miliband this year. If we're used to about the yes campaign talking

about change then it is now the key argument of the no campaign as well.

A vote for no is not a vote for no change. It is a clear vote for

change and stronger powers for the Scottish parliament. Each party has

already set out their vision for more devolution. There is no more

talk of the status quo. We need change and we would all over it.

More powers to Scotland. Have fans of devo max come out victorious or

is this just a bride? Nicola Sturgeon was counting down to the

referendum at an engineering firm in Renfrew. Most people in Scotland

with that -- would refer to it as an attempted con. There's not a single

tangible power mentioned in what they're saying. They're asking

people to vote no in return for unspecified powers they did not

agree on and politicians south of the border are already saying they

would block them. Lord Barnett himself says the Barnett formula

should be scrapped. On the other hand it is being seen as a blueprint

for the rest of the UK. A great precedent has been set by Scotland

in getting clearer powers and I hope we will learn from that not just

south of the border but in Wales and Northern Ireland as well. The valve

sets out guarantees if Scotland votes no. But can we guarantee that

they will deliver? Two old hands

at this political game are here - the Labour peer Lord George Foulkes

and the SNP's Linda Fabiani. Much is being made of this. Yet the

plan still haven't been agreed. They are promising new powers and I doubt

very much you can tell me tonight what they are promising. Some of us

have argued for some time that we should provide people like Linda,

MSP' s with the ability to have fiscal responsibility. They will

have to raise the money they spend and they will have the power to do

it but they also have the responsibility. I am pleased we have

got this pledge from all three party leaders.

But they do not agree on how much the Scottish parliament should be

allowed to raise. The principle is beer. Everyone is saying that the

Scottish parliament should have the power to raise tax. They have had

the power for some time to raise income tax by 2p. They could do

that. They have never it. Soon able get more powers under the Calman

recommendations that have been fermented by Parliament. Now we have

got a pledge that they will get even more. They will have more powers to

raise the money so that they are responsible for the money they spend

and they can no longer blame Westminster and take the credit for

the money that they have spent. Are you worried that although it may

have come at the last minute the promise of more devolved powers is

what some people may have been looking for? I think it is quite

obviously a panic measure. When I was chair of the Scotland Bill

committee we push for powers beyond what was the. The same three parties

that are now promising wonderful things for Scotland systematically

refuse to even consider it, including the devolution of welfare

powers. It is interesting that George Fuchs is talking about having

tax-raising powers -- that George Foulkes. It seems to be a strange

way for the Labour Party to be going. Joining up with the Tories

and the Lib Dems because they suddenly realise that the people of

Scotland can see a better future. They will do anything to try and

scupper that. Just because the party leaders have made this pledge does

not mean that this will go through Westminster. A lot of Tory MPs have

taken flight at what is being promised. One today described it as

a bloodbath if David Cameron tried to get this through Westminster. We

are used to backbench MPs making these comments. They bought as well.

Only if they have voted with the Labour Party. If you get the Labour

Party and the Liberal Democrats supporting the Tory Government of

course you will get it through. Or after May it will be a Labour

Government introducing it. Each Government has pledged to introduce

it and will get the support of the other parties. That does sound like

a rock solid promise. There will be some movement on devolution. We do

not know what that pledge is. They have called it a value rather than a

pledge. It does not see what it is. They did not like what the SNP and

the Green Party put forward to link the last Scotland Bill. They did not

like the 80 of a third question on the ballot paper. The idea that that

can be very quickly put through, whatever letters, I think smacks of

desperation. Nick Clegg and David Cameron do not have to compromise.

They are on the same size. If you look at the Strathclyde proposals

and the proposals of the liberal Democrats... I think we will get an

Agreement. We have got to get these powers for the Scottish parliament

cracker. We will get them better and safer because we will not have this

but that they would get with separation. You can get more powers

to the Scottish parliament but stay within the United Kingdom, and all

the safety and security of staying within the United Kingdom. We know

what our currency and defence would be if we stay as part of the United

Kingdom. We get more powers to the Scottish Parliament, but the

security and safety of the United Kingdom. I know you do not want to

contemplate the possibility of a No vote, but with the SNP take part? A

pledge that we have always had is to do the best for Scotland. I believe

that the people of Scotland will get a bright future if they vote for

independence on Thursday. But when these people let us down yet again,

and it is not safe and secure if you are telling at a food bank in East

Kilbride, it will be the people of Scotland who would hold them to

account. Thankfully I think that will not happen. Linda Fabiani says

she will join in the devolution process in the event of a No vote.

With you do likewise in the event of a Yes vote. #

She is a genuine politician. I have said that we always work of what is

best for Scotland. Would you join Alex Salmond if it is a Yes vote? I

would do everything I can to advance a situation as far as the people of

Scotland is concerned. Now let's take a look

at how the referendum is headlining The New York Times reports on

Westminster 's renewed pledge to grab Scotland extensive new powers

if they stay within the union. There is a story on the battle

between negative and positive forecasts on the future of Scotland.

And our French publication sees it as yet another eccentricity from

across the Channel. With me, for the last time, this

side of the poll, is the journalist and political commentator for

the Sunday Herald, Iain Macwhirter, and the leading human rights lawyer

and pro unionist QC, Derek Ogg. To pick up on the vow that has been

made, there is a great deal of scepticism about whether Westminster

can or will deliver. Whoever the sub editor was who came up with the idea

of the vow as a headline should get a medal from Better Together. It

implies more than just what the words are. There is a spirit, is

sincere promise. If they broke that there would be political mayhem in

Scotland. A lot of people would say they could not tolerate that. They

have taken a fairly bold step by calling it a vow. It does have some

limited to it. I am not sure there is as much scepticism as some may

say. I am going to guess that you are sceptical. Yes. There is nothing

new in this other than the colour of the newspaper and which it is

expressed. Normally when people commits to do something tangible.

There is nothing beyond what Gordon Brown was talking about last week

which is essentially the proposal of 5p income tax. If they have come up

with an idea for a federal constitution which would give

Scotland the dominant economic powers, and a new federal

arrangement with the other elements of the United Kingdom, but makes

have carried some weight. It's did not do that. The excluded federalism

from the ballot paper. At the very last minute in a desperate panic

move they are seeing that we will give you the earth, sun and stars,

but we will not tell you what it is. There is no substance to it. There

are some new opinion polls out tonight. The first one is in The

Daily Mail. Yes is on 48, No is on 52. Another opinion poll mirrors

that. Is it in the bag, Derek Ogg? All the ups and downs of the

campaign, yet there is this resilience of 52% showing up. Unless

there is something radically wrong with the methodology that every

opinion poll is using, that is well within the margin of error. I think

the No campaign can feel comfortable. But this should not

feel proud of themselves. It has been a shocking campaign in some

ways. This has been diffusing kind of Gordon Brown. The opinion polls

are very tight. There is not much in it. But they are consistent. The Yes

campaign is not disappointed. The fieldwork has been conducted in the

last few days when the Prime Minister has said, we will give you

anything. It is surprising that it does not further in favour of the No

campaign. Some voters will think that they have humiliated David

Cameron and this should maybe accept that and get some change in the

future. That has not happened. An opinion poll shows a 6-point advance

for the Yes campaign. Well this translate into a victory on

Thursday? I do not know. Most Scots never wanted to leave the United

Kingdom in the first place. Every opinion poll for the last 30 years

has shown that Scots want more economic powers within the overall

wrapping of the native kingdom. It is quite extraordinary that this

campaign has managed to force so many Scots into voting out of

desperation or independence. One slightly different in -- one

slightly different survey, regarding the question of whether David

Cameron should resign? have to take responsibility if there

is a Yes vote? I do not think so. Is that the British that are saying

that? Yes. But there will be a political day of reckoning. There

has been speculation about the position of David Cameron. There are

some who will lay the blame more squarely at the door of Ed Miliband

because it would be Labour voters who would desert to court two. There

are 42% of Labour voters who are now contemplating voting Yes. That is

the reverse of what happened before. In 2007 the SNP managed to establish

a Government. Thank you for talking to us tonight.

That is all for now. We are back at the same time tomorrow night.

Goodbye.