08/12/2015 Scotland 2015

The blame game begins with calls for an inquiry into the closure

Commuters and businesses struggle on as MSPs demand answers

on maintenance of the Forth Road Bridge.

The Lords scrutinise the Scotland Bill and suggest Holyrood

gets it's own upper chamber, House of Lairds anyone?

And author Michel Faber tells us about winning prizes

For five full days now the Forth Road Bridge has stood empty

as the diversion routes surrounding it have clogged with cars.

Planning for the weeks ahead, extra seats on trains and buses have

been found, but businesses are already feeling the impact.

Meanwhile there's been calls for an inquiry into

It is looking slow southbound. Maybe 35 minutes to clear the stretch. As

commuters were being briefed this morning by BBC radio Scotland's

travel reports, the First Minister was being briefed at the transport

HQ. It has been stated that the flaw was not caused by a weakness in

funding. I understand what is going on and I want to say thank you to

the travelling public for the patients. This clap that has

resulted in the bridge being closed was on the scene and unforeseeable.

But that is not quelling the concern at Holyrood. We know that in 2007

transport Scotland peers needed on the bridge that were never carried

out. People have questions and they need answers that is why today I am

calling for a a Parliamentary enquiry. It was not predicted to

fail or crack in the way that it has. Because of the comprehensive

inspections and the daily and weekly inspections, it is that information

that leads our expert engineers to conclude that this sport has only

occurred in the last few weeks. Regulations are being relaxed so

diverted lorry drivers can try for an extra two hours a day. That seems

small compensation. It is a disaster for Scottish businesses because even

coming down from the north, you would come over the bridge and head

south, but they are coming down into congested areas, so it is affecting

everybody. But at least lorries are being given priority on the

diversion as the bridge stands idle. There has been a how small

businesses to keep busy. Small businesses use vans more than HGV

lorries. They are important, but the van traffic had to get through as

well. The effect on this more business is already being felt for

the -- been felt. This company has built up a clear on Tel bash MacBook

up the clientele that they rely on. It has probably scared of the

customers. They don't want to risk getting caught in traffic. I

normally have at least two potential customers come through the door

every day and talk to me, but I have not had any at all this week. And

there will be a great many more businesses wondering just when cars,

performance or otherwise, will be allowed back on this bridge.

A little earlier I spoke to the Transport Minister Derek McKay

and in Dundee Scottish Lib Dem leader Willie Rennie.

We heard from businesses there in the film that are badly affected. A

disaster one of them called it. Will there be any compensation for

businesses? The Deputy Prime Minister has convened meetings with

businesses to hear their concerns. The most important thing is to get

the bridge open as quickly as possible and we are certainly

working hard to do that. I understand that, but what about

compensation? Of these companies are losing a lot of money. Compensation

is on our list of concerns, but I am focused on getting the bridge open

as soon as possible. During this disruption, to give a priority to

HGV lorries, to get the transport of goods moving under what is a

difficult time. What about fans? We heard in the film that they would

benefit from these priority routes as well. We are adding to the number

of vehicles that can use the priority routes. Willie Rennie, do

you think enough is being done to help businesses here? No. Watch more

needs to be done. One of the issues we need to look at is lifting the

restrictions during the off-peak hours during the daytime on the

special HGV route. It is good to hear that light goods vehicles will

be allowed on that routes, but we need to allow traffic of all kinds

during the day because many businesses along that route are

having their businesses are strict it. They are losing something like

?600,000 a day because of the extra travel costs and the extra time on

the road. I think the least we can do is bend over backwards to make

sure we are doing all we possibly can to help them at this difficult

time. That is a fair point. He knows we are actively looking at that, to

lift that off-peak restriction of other vehicles to support business

at this time. That would be a very helpful intervention, but can also

make the point that if we had not taken the decision we had to close

the bridge to protect its structural integrity, I think the damage would

have been worse and it would have meant a longer closure to the bridge

which would have had a greater impact on the economy and commuters

in the area. That is move on to the maintenance of the bridge. There has

been a lot talked about today as to whether enough had been done

previously. You said the crack was unforeseeable. There were plans five

years ago to replace the whole section of the bridge where the

crack was found. Body to mistake that's that opportunity was not

taken? That was a decision by the operating committee at the time. One

expert advice, further strengthening works would be sufficient, but that

is separate and is not related to this the specific for that is called

the crack. Pap that were gone ahead, would not be cracked component had

been repaired as well? The other works would have strengthened the

brackets. But this would not have happened if the work had gone

ahead. If they had, we would have required a major closure and it

would have been disproportionate to the problem that was found at the

time. The problems identified then could have been addressed with

smaller work. This specific element was not predicted to crack in the

way that it has and just in terms of finance and maintenance budgets, the

Scottish Government has spent over ?108 million since 2007 on the

bridge in addition to the resources that were spent by the committee.

It's not about maintenance budgets or spending reviews, it is a

specific port that was not foreseen. It is being remedied and we will

have the bridge open as soon as possible. That is from engineers who

have proved myself and Willie Rennie. Do you accept those

assurances and it is not about budget cuts? There is a lot of

technical information available. I receive some of it this afternoon,

but what we do need, we come possibly avoid this, we need to have

a proper independent enquiry into this issue. Some have suggested a

Parliamentary enquiry. We cannot have this level of disruption in

Fife and beyond without an independent look at it. I heard the

briefings today and I saw and heard the explanations do this, but you

can't rely on me to make that assessment. We need some proper

independent engineers to look at this issue because this has been a

colossal disruption to the area, so we need that done independently.

There are two different areas of pressure at the moment. One is the

capital spend that had been reduced, but secondly was the desire

to minimise the disruption on the bridge in at Barnes of the Newbridge

being constructed. There is no doubt it was under considerable strain,

but there were trying to minimise traffic disruption. We need to

discover whether those decisions were right or wrong and whether

independent advice was available to make those assessments. Will there

be a Parliamentary enquiry? That will be a matter for the

Parliamentary authorities to determine. Transport Scotland will

be supportive... Do you accept there are some questions that need

answering? We are answering them through technical meetings. We are

more than happy to cooperate with any enquiry and answer any question

that is asked and I have outlined the government's position in a

statement to Parliament today. If people want more information, that

can be provided. What is important to understand is much of this has

been checked by independent engineers to verify what we have

been told and what we understand to be the case, but the priority right

now has two B to get the bridge fixed and get it opened as quickly

as possible. That has to be the priority and people should not be

distracted from that task. Understood. Willie Rennie? I accept

that last point. We need to get the bridge fixed and that alternative

transport arrangements are right, but Derek cannot possibly believe

that a technical briefing is sufficient. We need to have an

independent enquiry. I would like to hear him say that he would give his

absolute backing, in fact he would in courage the Parliamentary

authorities or sanction an independent enquiry. That will be

some assurance to the people in Fife who are going through this difficult

time. Will he give that commitment? It is for the Parliamentary

authorities to determine the nature of any enquiry. But will you give it

your backing? Of course, but our maximum efforts, as Willie Rennie

has seen today, it is getting the bridge fixed and getting it open,

was that the same time it again in the impact on the area, on commuters

and businesses. So you would back a Parliamentary enquiry? If Parliament

once to conduct an enquiry, of course I will participate. Right

efforts -- right now, all efforts should be focused on opening the

bridge and mitigating the impact, which we have done to a

comprehensive plan. Are you happy with that? I take it as a backing. I

think that is good and if that is the decision of the SNP and

Parliament, I will welcome it. Also, we need to look at the situation

going forward. It was unpredictable and unforeseen. What next will be

unpredictable and on the scene? What investments will happen? That is

what people in five will want to hear. That is a discussion for a

different time. Thank you both very much.

It's a massive constitutional clash between nationalists and unionists.

The archaic traditions of the United Kingdom has tonight seen

peers of the realm debating and voting on the Scotland Bill.

Outside of the neo-gothic chamber, the SNP are left railing

against what they see as out-dated, undemocratic practices.

Andrew Kerr has been watching proceedings at Westminster.

In this place they have been debating and legislating for

hundreds of years. The UK has been changing and up-to-date's business

in the House of Lords was the Scotland Bill. It is meant to fulfil

the show made by the pro-union leaders. All the noble Lords are not

happy with the Smith Commission. I understand that laws are made by

Parliament. I did not think they were made up of subcommittees of

appointed party politicians meeting in secret and then getting together

with the leaders of the parties who did not in anyway consult their

parties and that Parliament was then expected to rubber-stamp it. Lord

Forsyth also argued against the way the UK Government is legislating to

make the Scottish Parliament permanent.

In Parliament, when a London centred body speaks about Scotland, the

Scots perceive it as patronising, is not taking them seriously. That was

the underlying dynamic that led to such a close shave in the

referendum. And I speak as Unionists. Priests and peers, the

entire tradition and as the SNP who choose not to be represented here.

That an elected and accountable people somehow feel it is the right

and entitlements to get involved in Scottish public life, nobody voted

for these people and the woody key is all that much at what they have

got to say about some of these issues. We will observe this as the

pantomime titters. The SNP and the UK Government were agreed on one

thing. The idea of a Scottish senate was a nonstarter but he made the

case. It would be a check, a balance on the power of a 1-party state that

we currently have in Scotland, just as the House of Lords is a check or

a balance on the Government here. The peers have been going through

the amendments in the House of Lords which is just behind me here,

through that ornate arch. There will be more debate and discussion in

this place and then the Scottish Parliament House to approve the

principles of the Scotland Bill by the end of March in time for the

Holyrood election. A fairly tight timetable.

The Scottish and the UK Government have yet to agree a deal on the

financial rules underpinning the new powers, the so-called fiscal

framework. As the Lord spied on a reminder from an unlikely ally of

the SNP. The language used, the attitudes shown, some members of the

House only confirm the Scottish National Party that the English are

hostile to us and I would humbly ask that members of your logic's House

be more circumspect. The two forces battle it out, ancient and modern,

each trying to reach out to perhaps disillusioned voters.

Andrew Kerr reporting and he's at Westminster now.

There has been a lot of talk about scrutiny tonight.

Yes. Coming about because of the Amendment for that Scottish senate

to be established. That has now been withdrawn. But there was debate in

the House of Lords about scrutiny, the rule of the Scottish Government,

but to move away from their party political disputes there is a lot of

scrutiny going on here of the UK governments proposals. You see the

rule but a second chamber, to look through this line by line Amendment

and debate and discuss them in date and extensive detail. There was one

debate, a constitutional argument about the decision to include a

clause to ensure the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government

are made permanent. We heard Lord Forsyth criticising that. Ultimately

out here on the Dean the SNP were of course criticising what was going on

in there. Pete Wishart called at a pantomime. These debates and

discussions will continue but that will be interesting to see when we

get the Agreement on the fiscal framework, the Scottish Parliament

also has to agree to the Scotland Bill, but the House of Lords might

make more amendments. They may go back to the House of Commons and so

forth and so on. The tight timetable to get that all organised before the

Scottish Parliament rises for their elections in March. We will see what

happens and keep you updated. The writer Michel Faber is Dutch

by birth, Australian by upbringing and a Scottish writer

"by formation" which means he's eligible for prizes on account

of having lived here for 22 years. He recently won the Saltire Prize

for what he says is his last novel - Our arts correspondent

Pauline McLean went to meet him the Given that I am not a Scot and that

I feel all my life like such an alien anywhere it was like waves of

acceptance and love. People saying, yes, this is your home and we love

your work and we are here to celebrate that. And I was very

moved. But the happiness was tempered by the fact that my wife

Eva died last year and was not in that audience. Tell us about who you

ended up in Scotland in the first place. I have been here 22 years.

Eva did a typical Eva thing. She contacted people at random in

foreign phonebooks, saying, I am in a stew in English teacher and I am

going to be travelling around Europe and we July to meet me. And a number

of people responded throughout Europe. She also came to Scotland.

One of the people she met invited her to visit him on the farm where

he lived. She fell in love with this farm and decided she wanted to spend

the rest of her life there. And it inspired my novel Under The Skin

which is essentially set on that farm. It has a Scottish sense of

place. The sense of place is Eva's. I like the idea of a talented and

vision of the artist in a different medium, in this case Jonathan

Glazer, director, making something which is inspired, sparked, by

e-book, but which achieves something radically different and I think the

film did. Come to me. I wanted to write a

Victorian novel. I wrote a Victorian novel. I am proud of it. I did not

want to then be the person that writes the Victorian novels and that

is my franchise. I will pay her whatever makes her

happy. One of the reasons why I have decided to not write any more novels

is because I felt I have gone through the genres stop I have

touched on all of them. I have not written a crime novel. But then I am

fundamentally not interested in trying. It would feel a bit false. I

think I have done what I can in all the genres that I can do things in.

It is a stack of books and it is a stack of books and that is enough. I

knew when I began The Book of Strange New Things it would be the

last which Eva was not happy about. Then she was diagnosed with

incurable cancer. That made the book are very different thing from what

it looked as if it might be. It then became a book of farewell. The fact

that Eva died when I finish that book, it was virtually

simultaneous, it has underlined or confirmed the sense that that is the

end of an era. Convinced as I was that it was going to be the last

before she got sick I am even more convinced now that it will prove to

have been the last novel. But there are writing projects of other kinds

that I am hoping to finish. Here now to discuss some of the

day's news are the journalist Ruth Let us go back to the top story on

the Forth Road Bridge and all the fallout. How do you think the

Government has handled this? I listened to you talking to Willie

Rennie. He is right, we need to find out what might have prevented this

development. But I also think that the important thing now is to get

the traffic going, get the bridge mended, stop the hauliers losing

that huge amount of money. In a sense the Government had no choice

but to handle the weird has done. Calls on all sides for a

parliamentary inquiry. Is that a good idea? Absolutely. I am a

qualified engineer so I have a particular interest in this but

there is a broader political impact which is the SNP have been good at

giving people things for three, hoping people will never realise the

cost. Scrapping the tool, reducing in 2011 the budget by 65%, if

anybody thinks that has not had done impact on maintenance decisions,

that might, we do not know until you have an inquiry, that might have

prevented this happening. There are political implications for this.

There is political pain that the SNP makes deserve to suffer as a result.

We should remember that the tolls were scrapped on other bridges by

previous administration. Let us move on. The BBC is under

increasing pressure to drop Tyson Fury from the Sports Personality of

the Year award. The SNP's culture minister has written to the BBC

director general to ask for Tyson Fury to be dropped from the

competition. Through his right to free speech he

is entitled to any lunatic view that he wants. This is something

different. The issue is not just that he is homophobic, the issue is

that he is being lauded as a sports role model. That cannot be right.

The police are now investigating Tyson Fury for allegations of hate

crime against him. Do the BBC have any option here? We are clocking

100,000 people writing in to say they do not want. Tyson Fury seems

to want to become the Donald Trump petition boxing. The things he has

said are way off the reader scale even for boxers. He is a misogynist,

he has homophobic. If he were to win, I do not think he would, if he

were to when he is not a role model you would want your kids to emulate.

I do not think he would, if he were to when he is not a role model you

would want your kids to emulate. Particle opportunism to have our

bash at the BBC. The Sports Personality of the Year awards you

get on the list based on achievement. Objectively his

achievement is noteworthy. Whether he is a role model is what the

public vote will sure. We can safely assume the public will not fought

him as Sports Personality of the Year.

I do not see it as bashing the BBC. People have seen an unsavoury set of

comments made by what seems like an unsavoury manner they have reacted

to it. He is the boxing champion of the world. That is a notable

achievements to put you on the list. The public can then, quite

rightly, say your views are poorer and, you do not get my vote. But as

you from somebody else who has been causing offence, Republican

presidential hopeful Donald Trump who said Muslims should be banned

from entering the United States. The principle of Robert Gordon

University is considering a request to strip Donald Trump office

honourably degree. You have to look at areas that have

become radicalised in other places. They are not the same places. They

are places you do not want to go to. You do not want to take your family

there. You do not want to what to the streets. Even the police do not

want to what could the streets. Where is that? Paris. Look at the

radicalised areas, the Muslim areas of Paris. Where? It is all over the

place. It is all over the place. Take a trip to Paris and enjoy

yourself. Pretty inflammatory stuff. But his survey ratings have risen.

When you listen to him, every time they get asked a supplementary

question he has no answer. He is a light now. It is like having the pub

drunk on Question Time except that this person is sober. He is mildly

insane. One of his own Republican call runners called him and henge.

That is the most called into the thing you could say about him. Will

this harm his campaign? I hope so. Thank you both for coming in this

evening. Bullying among young Conservative

campaigners. Another day, another