27/01/2016 Scotland 2016

Scotland's councils are warned they face unprecedented sanctions if they

Deadlock over budget cuts, councils stand to lose millions more

A penny for education, how will the Lib Dems' big idea go

And will new marine conservation plans cost fishermen their jobs?

Relations between some of Scotland's councils and the Scottish Government

are at rock bottom after what has been described as a draconian budget

deal. Councils have been given extra time to consider the offer but face

tough financial penalties if they choose to reject it and break the

council tax freeze. Scotland's biggest local authority, Glasgow,

needs to make ?133 million of cuts over the next two years. But even a

huge hike in council tax of 20% would raise just ?37 million pounds

after government penalties were deducted. The leader of Glasgow City

Council Frank McAveety is with me now.

Explain what penalties you would face if you decided to try and

mitigate the spending cuts you need to make by breaking the council tax

freeze. The absurdity we now have in local government funding is that

even if we wanted to increase the council tax we would have to put it

up by a substantial sum even to meet the penalty that we would have for

putting it out so in this mad bind where the idea of local politicians

making decisions based for the localities is not even being

considered but on top of that we have had the unprecedented letter

today issued to local authorities said if we don't meet their criteria

for accepting the deal there will be even more punitive penalties and an

approximate assessment from the would-be 40 million extra would have

to be taken from Glasgow's budget if we don't sign up and that is

unacceptable in Scottish Parliament in this day and age with this level

of democratic electric politicians being told what to do by others. You

would lose the money for integrated social care and the money for pupil

teacher ratios. We are two banisters, the first madness is if

we don't sign up to the deal we automatically would lose and social

care money and teacher numbers and money for the council tax freeze.

Even if we make genuine efforts to try and address those things we

finance minister is also telling us they would still be punitive if we

don't fulfil those obligations. This is miles away from what we are told

seven or eight years ago of parity between Scottish local government

and local government and the idea that we are in partnership. It's not

partnership on one side of the partnership is holding a gun to our

heads. The Scottish Government was elected on a policy of maintaining a

council tax freeze for the whole of the parliament so they're delivering

on that policy. A lot of atrocities were committed to a council tax

freeze. Glasgow has committed ourselves to the five-year council

tax freeze. And Scottish Labour supported. The debate is an easily

properly funded and the slow the bait about that but the second is it

should be made locally and that's what's missing from the debate is

that where is the democratic mechanism? There any other things

that concerned about is the last few days but fundamentally the situation

we are in where many sit services are facing budget reductions which

will impact people's lives. We got go on like this and the finance

minister needs to listen to what local government is saying. Tough

times what everybody, will you not have to change the way you do things

that the council? We have been changing for years, we even

accounted for 2% reduction in our budget, with embassies and expected

4% plus cut in our budget and local government has taken a larger share

of budget reductions than the Scottish Government has received

from the UK Government so we can't hide behind this. It's tough times!

When not daft, we know it's tough but give us time and that is what

local government is saying and the finance minister is not listening.

You when slapped 20% and council tax bills in Glasgow but there is

another option, you could refuse to set a budget. We need to discuss

that along with colleagues in Scottish local government. You're

not ruling it out. We shouldn't rule anything out because we are at an

unprecedented level in the way in which the Scottish Government is

treating local government and in terms of the increase suggestions

and so one even if we wanted to we need to put up such A-levels are

even the cuts. In the last three months alone, Ivan covered 30

million more cuts to Glasgow than I was aware of so that's 30 million

more than people of Glasgow have to find the next two years. That money

and services and people will be victims in that. You have been given

extra time by the Scottish Government to consider this deal but

where do you think it will" should mark the finance minister delayed

his announcement in Parliament before Christmas so there has been a

delay. We have said were not happy with the proposals and were in

discussions with local government but he won't even talk to those for

councils that are part of the Scottish local government

partnership. 27% of Scottish population. This is how daft it has

become and the finance minister bears the responsible to. Thank you.

Politicians are often criticised for failing to come up with big

ideas but ahead of May's Scottish Parliament election the main parties

have set their sights on improving education.

They've even been honest about how some of it will be paid for -

So what exactly do each of the parties want to do

and will their policies prove to be vote winners?

In just a few months, the Scottish election will be upon us. All the

All the parties will be asking for your vote and this time

For some time, our politicians have been talking about how to close

what's known as the attainment gap, that's the difference between how

well kids from the most and least deprived areas do at school.

As the May election approaches, we now have a better idea of how

Today, the Liberal Democrats set out their stall.

They want to put up income tax rates by 1p, which they say will raise

?475 million to support children from more deprived backgrounds.

Announcing the policy, party leader Willie Rennie says

things can be done much better than they are at the moment.

The SNP are imposing disproportionate cuts and and

schools. They are failing to deliver and university education is we need

that extra investment. It is an urgent investment that is needed

right now and we have this bold offer to have a transformation

affect on education. Labour's Fair Start fund would see

primary schools get ?1,000 for every child from a deprived background,

paid for by increasing the top rate of tax to 50p for those

earning more than ?150,000. And the Conservatives also

want to target individual pupils. They say the Scottish government's

?100 million fund which targets pupils in the most deprived local

authority areas needs to be made available to anyone

across Scotland who needs it. And what about the SNP

government itself? On top of that ?100 million fund,

ministers also want to drive up attainment with plans

for standardised testing in schools. But there are no tax rises

on the horizon for the SNP, which today attacked

the Liberal Democrats proposals. The blunt instrument they are using

it effectively going to affect poor households in Scotland and that is

the worry. Talking about trying to... The poorest families of the

ones having problems and they have less money in their pocket is not

going to make it any easier for them to get over the challenge.

The question now is - will committing to a tax rise really

win them a pass mark from the voters?

In our Edinburgh studio I am now joined by Willie Rennie, the

Are you on to a winner? You think Scottish voters will vote for a tax

hike? The priority is to invest in education in Scotland. They have

seen disproportionate cuts to our colleges with 152,000 places lost.

We've seen a big impact on school budgets with ?500 million worth of

cuts to councils. We have also seen the nursery and spank chimp --

nursery expansion programme cut. There is no point putting forward a

proposal if people won't go for it. If their appetite for it? We have.

What we have shown is that extra penny investment world liver ?475

million worth of investment. It is a big return to make a transformation

effect on education in Scotland and it protects those on the lowest

incomes because Liberal Democrats in government for four years of five

years in Westminster cut taxes for those on low and middle incomes.

That means it is possible to make this change without hitting those

people on low incomes that George Adams has been talking about. People

still are quite modest incomes are dead pay this extra penny the same

as the very wealthy. It's a very small increase. Somebody and median

wages of around 21 or ?22,000 will actually pay far far less than

somebody and ?60,000. Summary and ?60,000 will pay 30 times more than

the person on a median wage. Voters will go for this, then? The most

important priority is investing in education so we can keep that

transformational effect. Unless people vote rate than you could say

anything. If you look back to the 90s and early 2000 is, we had a

policy of a penny on tax for education and other important time

for investing in education and that was proven popular for the Liberal

Democrats at that time because it was jargon, hype the cake to,

investigated in a particular area, voters could see what they were

getting in return for the penny. If we are asking people for paying more

money they want to know where it will go. What about the return

because the people premium has been running for a few years in England

but the evidence is patchy, that some schools still have a long way

to go in closing the attainment gap. In primary schools between 2011 and

2014, the attainment gap dropped by 4.7% which is significant and has

been praised by stared and the National Audit Office. The Sutton

trust report said some schools have closed the gap but many still have a

long way to go. This long-term project but it is a transformational

project. The Sutton trust recommends PB people premium be continued

because they have so much confidence in it. I think that is a great mark

of confidence for this policy but that combined with nursery education

expansion, a reparation for the college cuts to reverse the cuts

imposed on places by the SNP but also the schools cuts which are

coming to. That is a big package so voters will see a return on their

investment which will be a good return and I think will not just be

good for the kids who will benefit from it but also from the economy

cars we can fill those skills shortages, the skill gaps that are

desperately needed to be filled, industry is crying out for that,

they want this a good investment and so do we.

MSPs have rejected an attempt to stop planned environmental

Outside Holyrood, there were angry protests by west coast fishermen

who say the Scottish Government's plans for a network of marine

protected areas will wipe out scallop dredging

Our environment correspondent David Miller has more.

Storm bound in the harbour and skipper James is checking his nets.

A fourth-generation fishermen, James has been in the industry for 26

years now. He fears for the future. He is worried about a new marine

protected area south of the Isle of Arran just a few miles away across

the waters of the Firth of Clyde. The governance on advisers didn't

even recommend it was needed to be such an area. The recommendations of

that they came out with which had been over consulted for four years

did not go to the lengths that the Minister has. The area that has been

proposed could equate to 50% of my business, 50% decrease in landings.

50% decrease in earnings. The Clyde fishermen 's Association has been

the forefront of all conservation measures in the Clyde for years, 30

years. 30 years ago, they brought other weekend ban to conserve

stocks, we've had cod recovery zones, areas shut, we are not

against conservation. Protesters travelled to the Scottish Parliament

from Ayrshire, Argyll and Lochaber. At one stage a smoke canister was

lit before being quickly extinguished following a well-placed

kick from a police officer here to ensure the demonstration didn't get

out of hand. Supporters of the new conservation measures were also at

the Parliament that they were heavily outnumbered. This has proved

to be an increasingly bitter and divisive debate with strong views

being expressed on both sides and today it's is Holyrood rule affairs

committee which is found itself at the centre of the storm.

You have a chance that to indicate whether you intend to press or

withdraw your motion. Thank you. I am honorary president. The committee

rejected a plea from Conservative MSP Jamie McGregor to scrap the

planned fishing restrictions after hearing from Cabinet Secretary

Richard Lochhead. The fishing sector is one of many voices in the debate.

I also have to listen to other parts of the fishing industry, as well as

many other sectors with an interest in this debate, and people living in

the communities in the west of Scotland. Mr Lochhead also

highlighted concerns that some people in fishing communities have

been silenced, left afraid to speak out. This is a passionate debate.

Many have spoken to me who have said they are too scared to speak out

publicly or make their views known. That is a sad state of affairs.

Campaigners who back marine protected areas claimed the support

of krill fishermen and anglers. The 70% reduction in commercial fishing

since 1984, we have seen in the Clyde a 90% reduction in angling. We

feel we will start to increase the problem and the resilience of the

fishing industry. The fight over the future of Scotland's sees is far

from over. Expect to hear much more on the marine protected area debate

in the months and perhaps years ahead.

I am now joined by Bertie Armstrong, Chief Executive of the Scottish

Fishermen's Federation, from our Aberdeen studio and in Edinburgh is

Calum Duncan, who is the Head of Conservation Scotland from the

Bertie Armstrong, you say you are not against marine protected areas

in principle, so why, in the Firth of Clyde? And opportunity is being

thrown away here. I am saddened by the Cabinet Secretary's comments. We

are not against Marine protected areas and never have been. We are

for properly evidenced measures of management. The Scottish

Government's own nature adviser made recommendations on how to meet the

conservation requirements. Those have been grossly overreached to the

point of ignoring the minister's other statutory requirement, which

is the principle of sustainable use of the sea. Scotland's iconic

seafood cannot be displayed by the Cabinet Secretary in a visit to

Paris, and then for him to do this gratuitously to the industry. There

is no need to do this. The advice was not to do this and was for much

lighter touch measures. Calum Duncan, the minister has grossly

overreached? We think the measures are proportionate, given the context

of ecological decline across Scotland's sees and in the Clyde. I

would like to emphasise that this debate does not need to be

polarised. We all want healthy seas going forward. We think the measures

in many instances were as expected and in others, there were

compromises. South Aaron was mentioned. There are lots of

opportunities going forward. These marine protected areas also provide

new ground for other forms of fishing, no impact forms such as

hand diving, which can deliver benefits as well. But it is

important to point out that rigorous economic analysis has shown the

modest impact of this. We support the measures the government have put

in place to help support those fisheries in transition. Broadly,

the package of fisheries in transition. Broadly,

we have done in other areas. The creation of mphs for the protection

of features. They are not a catchall. You heard one of the

fishermen describing the other things going on in the Clyde to

recover the area. There was a 50% things going on in the Clyde to

proposed for South Arran, which the committee overwhelmingly voted in

favour of the Marine conservation order for Arran, they would still

allow scallop dredging of 81% of the scallop grounds in the Clyde. We are

not talking about replacing dredging with hand diving. I am afraid out of

time. We have to leave it there. I am sure we will come back to this

subject. Thanks you for joining us. The Prime Minister has dropped

a heavy hint that the UK government will announce further financial aid

to help the North Sea oil Speaking at Prime Minister's

questions, David Cameron said extra help had been given to the industry

and that he would be travelling to Aberdeen tomorow when a further

announcement would be made. The North Sea oil and gas industry,

on which many people in my Waveney constituency are dependent for their

livelihoods, is facing serious challenges. The government has taken

steps to address the situation, but more is required if the industry is

first to survive, and then to thrive . Will my right honourable friend

assure me that he recognises the seriousness of the situation, and he

will do all he can to get the industry through these difficult

times? My honourable friend is right to raise this. I do recognise the

seriousness of the situation. The oil price decline is the longer

sting 20 years and nearly the steepest, which causes real

difficulties for the North Sea. We can see the effects in the east of

England and across Scotland, particularly in Aberdeen, and in

other parts of the country. I am determined that we build a bridge to

the future for all those involved in the North Sea. We will help the

sector export its world-class expertise. We will help the economy

is diversify. We have announced 1.3 billion of support last year for the

North Sea. I will go to Aberdeen tomorrow, where we will say more on

what we can do to help this vital industry at this vital time.

Joining me now to discuss some of today's news is Zara Kitson, who is

a candidate for the Scottish Greens, and Simon Pia, the former Scottish

The Prime Minister will be in Aberdeen tomorrow. What do you think

we can expect from his visit? I think we can expect more of the

same. Communities are suffering already, and it is high time we had

David Cameron and our other political leaders taking the issue

of the decline of North Sea oil seriously. For one, it is a fossil

fuel and it is coming to an end, which we have known for a long time.

We should not be bringing it out of the ground, because it is leading to

irreversible climate change. But in the here and now, they need help.

They do need help, and that help needs to come through diversifying

the industry and investing in infrastructure and transferring the

skills so that we are not just pouring more money into a dead-end

economy that will do nothing for the communities in the long term or in

the short term. It is just going to fail Scotland and the UK. Is it a

dead-end economy, Simon, managing the decline? I don't think it is as

simple as that. I did not see Cameron rushing off to Port Talbot

or Linux with Tata Steel, but there is obviously big political pressure.

And oil is important for the UK economy and has been for the last 30

or 40 years. But it is interesting that David Mundell is going to

Mozambique next month. I have a friend who went to the Gulf of

Mexico to work on plugging the big BP oil leak. So there are these

skills, but they have been caught on the hop. I don't know what will be

produced out of a hat. He is under pressure from the Scottish

Government, because they have already put in their pitch to give

tax breaks to the oil industry. But this goes right against Osborne's

noninterventionist policies on the economy. You could argue that this

government is even more Thatcherite than Margaret Thatcher.

Let's stick with Prime Minister's Questions. Cameron raised a few

questions with his choice of words. The Shadow Chancellor is pointing.

The idea that those two right honourable gentleman would stand up

to anyone in this regard is laughable. Look at their record over

the last week. They met the unions and gave them flying pickets. They

met the Argentinians and gave them the Falkland Islands. They met a

bunch of migrants in Calais and said they could all come to Britain. The

only people they never stand up for the

British people and hard-working taxpayers. What did you make of his

choice of words? I thought it was disgusting. "A Bunch of migrants"

totally trivialises the humanitarian crisis and it is devaluing human

beings. We are talking about children and families fleeing

violence and they need a place to call their home. A bunch of migrants

is totally disrespectful. Today's holocaust Memorial Day. For a Prime

Minister to come out with that kind of language regardless of whether it

was a distraction tactic, is irrelevant. Was it deliberate? If it

was, that is even more disgusting. Well talking about people's lives

here. People need to come together to solve this cross party. It is

good that we have that kind of support in the Scottish Parliament,

because we don't see that kind of rhetoric. It was not a well played

card, regardless of whether he meant to play or not. It wasn't

off-the-cuff. Anybody who has worked in politics and political speech

writing, it goes back to oratory. This goes back to Cicero, the power

of three, and all the great political figures from Church of the

Obama use that trope. He mentioned first that he met the unions, the

limit Argentina, then he met a bunch of immigrants and said they could

come to Britain. That was scripted. I think Alex Salmond commented on

it. And Alex Salmond if somebody who, they all work hard on PMQs Tom

and that was not a mistake. But it is interesting. I think he was

pressing certain buttons with the Tory right. I believe he is also one

of the most cynical politicians. I tweeted about him yesterday, saying

before this that Cameron's Toryism is short-term, shallow, cynical and

elitist. And it will ensure the end of the union not just with Scotland,

but probably Europe. The mask slip to. He has a touch of the Flashman

bully. He looked a bit rattled. Did you think so? Yes. He did. It is

good that he looked rattled, because he needs to be rattled. It was good

that Jeremy Corbyn challenged him on other things such as Google tax and

the multinationals, because people are angry across the country. That

is what opposition leaders are there to do, hold our government to

account. We have to leave it there. Thank you to both of you for coming

in. That's it for tonight. Thanks for

watching. I'm back same time