Debate Scotland 2016

The Scottish education system used to be the envy of the world.

But as the BBC Scotland documentary Educating Sir Tom

showed this evening, he believes it's now failing

Our politicians all say they will close this attainment gap.

Tonight, they will face questions from an invited audience

containing pupils, teachers, parents and educational academics.

the Scottish Government's Education Secretary,

Angela Constance, and she's joined by three other

Willie Rennie is here for the Liberal Democrats.

And Ruth Davidson for the Scottish Conservatives.

Let's get started straight away with our first question,

and it comes from Nuala McBride, who's an S5 pupil at

St Ninian's High School in East Renfreshwire.

What would you like to ask the panel?

How will you ensure quality of opportunity for all young

We know this is a problem, the gap between children from all and high

income households starts early. By age 12 to 14 pupils from better off

areas are more than twice as likely as those from deprived areas to do

well in numeracy. Angela Constance, you are in charge. How will you

ensure equality of opportunity? It is important we take a system is

wide approach. This Government has done more than any other Government

to expand massively early learning and childcare and that is crucial to

give children the best start to their education. It is also

important that we have the right evidence and the right information

about children's progress. We have introduced The National improvement

framework which is about gathering the evidence to ensure that we

remain focused on closing the attainment gap. You have had eight

years to do this. Why is it still so wide? It is important to remember we

have a good education system in Scotland, attainment is improvement

and we are actually improving the attainment gap. But we all know

there is more work to be done and we need to pick up the pace in

particular areas and the faster improvement. One area of really good

innovation in Scotland's education system is developing the young

workforce agenda. We know that young people will read school better

qualified than ever before and that nearly 92% of young people will

leave school and going to a positive destination, either work, continued

education, or to an apprenticeship. That is something to be really proud

of. But we want to make sure that all children get every chance to

succeed, so we are taking a broad view of attainment. Hires and

advanced Highers, which are at a record high - they are very

important, but so are wider qualifications that relate to his

skills for life and skills for work. We have a good education system and

we are determined to make it a great education system for every child in

Scotland. We have started to lay those foundations but we will

definitely be doing much more. Willie Rennie, you are shaking her

head there. I think Angela is deluded. Scotland's once proud

education system is slipping down the international ranking. We have

got standards not matching the best in the world. We have to recognise

that after eight, nine years in Government, Angela's Government is

not succeeding the weight she says. We should be investing in nursery

education much more than we are, getting to rolled into nursery

education. Also at pupil premium. That has been successful donor

sites. Less successful in secondary schools. Yes, I'd has not fared down

into the secondary school call reject. But it is already making a

great impact. Those are the two things I think we should be doing to

close the attainment gap and give equality of opportunity for every

body. Kezia Dugdale, what is the difference between what Labour is

proposing and what the Lib Dems are proposing? I share a Angela's

ambition to give every child the best start in May. It is hard to see

how you can do that after cutting ?500 million of local council

budgets across the country making teacher's jobs harder. Labour's

policy is a fair starts fund, getting additional money into

schools, the way we would raise that additional money is introducing a

50p top rate of tax. We would ask that the 70,000 people in Scotland

to another ?150,000 a year would pay more tax. We would ring fence that

money and give it in the form of grants of ?1000 power entitled

people directly to the headteacher, empowering the head teacher to make

those decisions. So the SNP are saying they will spend more money

but it does not need more tax. Why does your proposal need more tax? We

have to recognise if we want to give kids the best possible chance, offer

a full curriculum, evidence is demonstrating that students in

Scotland are studying fewer subjects and having to make choices much

earlier in their careers. That is not good for the future of our

economy. There are schools in Scotland now that cannot even put on

three sciences. How are we going to get all those great jobs for the

future if our pupils are leaving school without the sciences that

they need? Education is not just a social policy, it is also economic

policy, and the sooner we realise that the better. We will come back

to the audience in a moment, particularly the idea of extra tax

to pay for this. But Ruth Davidson, the other parties are pledging to

spend more money on closing the attainment gap. With the

Conservatives spend more? Absolutely. But we are not asking

people on ?12,000 a year to stump up the extra tax. I don't want people

on low paid jobs to pay for the SNP's legacy in Government. There

was 200 bill money spent on a computer system that doesn't work.

Only 80% of the money spent on schools actually goes... We want to

see more of the money make it through the school gate. 20% of it

doesn't. Some of it is being used well, some of it is not. We also

think we have to be honest about what is happening in Scotland. The

Scottish budget has gone up 3% in the last three years, but the money

that has gone the council has gone down by 2%. That the funding choice

that the SNP Government has made, and it should be honest about that

choice. It should be honest about the choice it has made to cut

152,000 bases in our apologies, because in tertiary education, we

believe there should be a rebalancing between universities and

colleges and not sacrifice our college sector for the shibboleth of

university fees. Any thoughts from the audience? More money to spend on

the problem, is that the solution? Would you pay more tax? In terms of

how college students are funded, some students are funded by a

discretionary budgets rather than higher education students who are

funded by the student awards agency for Scotland alone. This year that

funds is ?2.45 million short. I have a bit of difficulty understanding

how we are seeing these are the opportunities we are giving to the

most vulnerable learners, but actually the funding isn't there to

provide the money they need right now for shouldn't studying in our

colleges right now. I have difficulty understanding how they

are supposed to sustain their qualification when we know that only

six 29% of -- six to 9% are leading with both occasions. Literacy and

numeracy levels are dropping, and we need to invest in skills, because

schools are facing absolute budget cuts. Local authorities are telling

you that and you boring them. When you see invest, you mean schools,

teachers? Give money to the headteacher is to decide how to

spend that money. I am a deputy headteacher. I can see what is

happening in skills. We are one of these coasting schools who in the

last ten years have increased our five Highers from 32% to 56%. We are

doing very well by all our young people. We are closing the gap and

I'm interested in the attainment fund which seems to be going to

various places that are not closing the gap. There is an expertise in

the school and I think we should be asking headteachers, asking teachers

in the school, how are you doing that? But nobody does. Interesting

talking about the attainment fund, I think the Scottish Government has

done a good job of that, please to say they have doubled it. But I

think instead of giving it to a VCR per areas, they should be making

sure the money follows virtual drink. -- follows poor children. The

money does not follow the pupils that need it. It is a bit broad

brush. You can do this in a way that it follows the people. Willie Rennie

causes people premium. There are other names, but it will elsewhere,

and it could work in Scotland. -- it works elsewhere. Why not have the

money follow the child, Angela? We know there is a strong link between

deprivation and low attainment. Initially what we have done with the

attainment Scotland fund is focused on the schools and the communities

with the largest proportions of children from deprived backgrounds.

But the majority of children in poverty go to schools in areas not

categorised as deprived. As of now the Scottish attainment challenge

will reach more than half of Scotland's Perez children. As a

result of the announcement by John Swinney last week to double the

attainment Scotland fund, we will be able to extend the reach of that

fund. -- Scotland's Perez the children. We will be looking at how

to combat the link between rural poverty and they're pretty --

deprivation. Every one of the opposition parties here tonight by

some shape or form are emulating a pupil premium system that was

introduced south of the border that has not worked. The evidence is not

there. The National audit committee at best said it was mixed. We know

there are schools in England to have massive concentrations of England

from the most impoverished baggers were spending per pupil has

decreased. We will go with what is tried and tested. We will of course

create space for innovation. We have an opportunity to do that now with

an increase in the attainment Scotland fund. I have to say we have

an Education Secretary here that has just admitted there is an issue here

in Scotland on her watch with children from poorer backgrounds.

She is seeing if they go to schools in more affluent areas, it doesn't

matter. They understand there is an issue, but they will try to is hit

about 45%, so the rest don't matter. That is not good enough. Let me

bring Willie Rennie in here. Angela is ignoring the evidence from the

Sutton trust, Ofsted and the National Audit Office. All CD pupil

premium is either working or has potential. -- they all say that it

is working. It has got to be spent wisely. Of course, and it has to be

additional support for tuition, homework, support and equipment and

so on. It cannot just be part of the mainstream budget. That is why we

are proposing 1p on income tax for education. We think that will make a

big impact together. Angela said there is no evidence it works. She

has absolutely no evidence that her attainment fund is working at all.

So how can she publish one scheme and then leap to another scheme she

has no evidence to support? Some of you want the money to follow the

child but what about young people who experienced more casement moves

than any other children quiz-macro myself, I had 30 placement moves.

I'm about to experience my 50th. How do you propose we have the funding

for the children? For looked after young people, their attainment in

education may have at but compared to the general population, it's just

not good enough. There are a whole heap of things we need to do. We

need a cultural attitude change. I heard the ministers say there, it's

about what is tried and tested, and we had the First Minister 's sake,

what matters is what works. Look at Wales. That is where ideas come from

and where our idea of a fair start fund is rooted in. He is right to

say to Angela, only a third of local councils get attainment money, 1500

schools don't. What I'm arguing for is more additional resources that

was good at the headteacher, less than in Wales, headteachers have a

list of options they can choose to spend that money on, it can't just

get into bureaucracy, it goes to targeted schemes that are programmed

to raise attainment standards in schools and works. They have seen

attainment close by 10%. Significant progress. If what matters is what

works, Labour and Wells is producing results. What did you think of the

answer to your question? I think that you said, Angela, you spent

?500 million on trying to close the attainment gap. When you compare

that to the ?160 billion you are spending on Trident, I don't see how

it bears any comparison. I am opposed to Trident and my party is

opposed to the renewal of Tridentine I stand by Wales, not bombs. Thank

you very much. Unfortunately, it is the UK Government that makes

decisions about the renewal of Trident. I wish that wasn't the case

but that's the weight is for the time being.

Let's move on the next questions from Caitlin Gallagher,

who is a pupil at Notre Dame High School in Glasgow.

Do you feel that the recurring budget cuts to education

have a detrimental impact

Absolutely. Half of what councils do is education so took up ?500 million

from councils will directly impact on the quality of teaching and

learning in schools, therefore it will have a colossal impact on

schools. John Swinney dismisses it and says it will have no impact. He

says the cuts from Westminster are evil and dramatic and will be passed

on to local authorities. But they will have a colossal impact. It will

be on teachers, on classroom assistants, equipment and supplies

in schools, all of those will be impacted upon and that is why we say

there should be a big investment in education. We have talked about

nursery education, the pupil premium. There should be a repairing

the budget to schools to make sure we invest property. And you would

like that funded on an extra penny on income tax? How many of you think

you would be willing to pay an extra money if you knew it would be based

in education? A fair number of you. The vast majority, I would say.

Perhaps you are taking the wrong view here by resisting. If it could

be assured that it would be spent on education, perhaps people would be

willing to pay for it. The SNP is not opposed to the taxation system.

I am not opposed to people on my income or anybody on this panel are

paying more income taxes but as the daughter of parents who worked on

low income occupations, I am opposed to the poor paying twice for Tory

austerity and the poorest of those on the lowest incomes being

penalised through taxation to pay for services. But if it was targeted

education for disadvantaged families, they would get the benefit

of this, wouldn't they? There is a debate about how progressive income

taxes. Our propositions for the powers that are coming our way in

terms of the increased financial powers of the Scottish Parliament,

we will do that through our manifesto, what we are saying is we

are not in favour of an increase in taxation for the poorest paid. The

average salary in Scotland is ?27,000. When you look at the work

done by the child poverty action group, it costs working parents

money to send their children to school, whether it is school

dinners, school trips, school uniforms, and while this government

has protected school clothing grants, while we have extended the

universal reach of free school meals, there are hard-working

families who are counting every penny, and that is what I am opposed

to, the poor being penalised twice for Tory austerity. But the broader

point about local government funding, the Scottish Government

have had our budget slashed by the Conservatives. The local government

settlement is not without its challenges but once you count

additional money, it's less than 1%. ?4.6 billion is spent on education

in Scotland. It is actually increasing and local authorities

this year plan to spend more on education. This government have

identified money. One of the first things I did was to ensure that we

invested money to protect teacher numbers which is imperative. These

cuts have been handed down by Westminster. You don't believe in

increasing tax. She said she has protected teacher numbers. There

were 4000 fewer teachers now than when her party came to government.

If we will have a nice debate, we have to be honest about where we

stand, and that includes will be standard terms of money. In the last

three years, the Scottish budget has gone up by 3% and the Scottish

Government has reduced money to councils by just under 2%. They have

made that choice to cut council budgets, they have decided to

devalue councils. There is also the issue... So these cuts are handed

down by a Conservative government at Westminster. The budget to the

Scottish Government has gone up by 3%. The Scottish Government has cut

the budget to councils by 1.9% in that same period. So the council

budget has gone down by their budget has gone up. You can pass on that

extra money to councils. But what I have also said, more of the money

needs to go directly to the schools. We have discussed the attainment

fund. But also, only 80% of the money there is spent given to

councils for education, funding, actually goes through the school

gate. Some of that I am sure I spend very well by local councils on other

issues, may be centralised purchases, but more that money could

go to headteachers because they know exactly what their children need.

What Tom Hunter said in the film is one size does not fit all. People

are best no other leaders within school campuses, headteachers,

senior management and teachers. Do you agree? I want to go back to the

point about tax. What would that mean if we put a penny in income

tax? ?180 extra a year. Not an insignificant amount of money. Each

day, 40p. That is what we would ask teachers to pay. The price of not

doing that is 4000 fewer teachers, classroom assistants coming out of

classrooms, breakfast club is disappearing, community centres

closed at weekends, not having enough money to buy books, the

photocopying budget gone, no supply teachers, devastation of the

education provision in Scotland. It doesn't have to be this way.

Scottish Government figures show spending on education was ?1.6

billion last year, and increased in the year before. The Scottish

Government have a separate body which looks at how we perform our

public services and they produced statistics that showed that the

amount of money were spent on primary school pupils has gone down

by ?561 per pupil of the last five years. But you don't object to those

figures? We need to look at the trend of five years. Every single

year for the past five years, the amount of money that local councils

and had to spend on education has decreased. Last year, ?20 million in

the year before that, ?147 million. A cut is a cousin pupils are feeling

it, staff are feeling it, it has got to stop. You have acknowledged that

you are increasing the tax rate which may raise nothing so how will

you fund the fair star fund? It's based on a 50p tax rate which will

raise ?70 -110 million. That was before HM C made it harder to do

with their tax liabilities to the United Kingdom. The Labour Party

would use that to invest in education. None of the other parties

are prepared to start up and say, if we need to grow our economy by

investing in skills and education of our people, we have to pay for it.

This is than progressive way to do it in the right thing to do. You are

a socialist and I don't understand why you don't back it. I am keen to

bring in the audience here. Lady over here. All the evidence tells us

that if we want an education system that is world-class, we have to pay

for it. Countries like Finland, which are regularly held up as good

comparisons, pay a lot of money in income tax and other taxes to

sustain an education system like what we want so we can't get it for

nothing. Young man over there with his hand up. If you are planning on

investing, how can you do that without raising any more money? You

talked about Westminster cutting your money and using money, but it

seems like the money will not appear from nowhere. I understand you off

to Oxford? Congratulations! The first one from your school to do

that? Fantastic. You know you are talking about. What helped you? My

school is really special. My headmaster walked really hard. He

worked really hard to push our team up. We were in the documentary and

we were shown as an example of how we have deprivation but can still

have high attainment. A lot of it is individual aspiration. Culture is

important. That is presumably quite difficult to build. Leadership was

talked about a lot in the documentary this evening but how do

you built a network of fantastic leaders? I don't want to embarrass

you any further than your pupils already have! They speak highly of

your leadership. But how can that be replicated across Scotland? Finland

told us exactly how to do this. The number one thing people want to be

is to be a teacher in Finland, more so than any other career. Why? It's

the lifestyle it gives them, they get a decent wage, lots of time to

develop their own skills, they collaborate with other teachers, it

is a career like it used to be in Scotland. Teachers in Finland also

have a tonne it to make decisions about how learning should be

progressed. They are not hampered in the way many teachers would construe

the situation here. In Finland, it is also done three municipalities.

You don't have to take the score out of public authority control, you can

do it to the council system if you trust teachers to do what they do

best. I don't want to in barrister young man sitting to my left but I

would like to say that one of the groups he forgot to mention was his

parents. In Scotland, we have got a great group of parents and they are

underutilised and in primary school and in early education, the parents

are more welcome. I have got three secondary age children. I might as

well not exist, really. They don't want me on to score but the score

does not mean the school either and that is an underutilised group of

people who could help schools. That is what makes the difference between

schools that are costing and schools are not coasting, they go out and

find the other partners and use them.

You are not his mum, by any chance? Know, but I would be proud to be.

What I think in a cross in the documentary was innovation. Trying

things out - they might fail, but they might succeed. That kind of

innovation and risk approach is the right one to take. We want to give

power to teachers. Rather than the strangling of public sector workers

we often get in this country now. We spend years training them and then

we tell them exactly what to do. I think we should allow them to use

the skills and expertise they have developed through their training.

Let's take another question from our audience, this time

from Megan Beattie, who works for the Social

What would you like to ask the panel?

Do you think that a free school created by a private school would

help bridge the attainment gap? We like things that work. We have

looked at three schools, academies, different models. I am not

particularly fast about private schools -- not particularly bothered

about private schools taking on comprehensive skills. What we are

seeing downside is that private schools are closing in some areas

because comprehensive schools are so good, there is no reason to go. I

think that is great. I want people to not have to pay to get the best

education, I want everyone to have the best education. The issue comes

back to this ideal leadership, freedom, responsibility. I have

Assad First Minister's Questions several times for the First Minister

to consider -- I have asked the First Minister, there is a school

where the teachers and pupils want to take it on and run themselves.

Jordanhill School is outside of local authority control. It now

costs ?10,000 more to buy a house in the catchment area because it is so

good. These things can work in Scotland. But we have an ideology

that says no, councils must run every school. I think that is wrong.

I think we should try, whether it is academies, free schools. I am not

wedded to it being private schools. I think charities could do it, we

have seen that work elsewhere. One other thing I would say,

irrespective of the structure of the school, you can have peer to peer

leadership as well. That involves headteachers that have turned

schools around, helping headteachers in other skills. Hearing of skills

that are struggling with schools that are succeeding. -- peering up

schools that are struggling with those are succeeding. How do we get

the leaders of tomorrow if the teachers of the day never want that

job? There is one other thing as well. A scheme mentioned in the

documentary called teach first takes the brightest and best graduates

from university and set them free in schools over two years to teach

while the try to learn about teaching as well. We don't do it in

Scotland, but we do in the rest of the UK. Last year 100 of the best

Scottish graduate went to teach first downside. They are working in

underprivileged schools in England. They will not come back to Scotland.

-- went down south. I spoke to ... Sir Tom Hunter showed that it

worked. Ruth Davison said teach first works. Why not try it? There

is a difference between looking at evidence and the evidence base for

your interventions and having room for innovation that does not include

experimenting. Is teach first an experiment? I was going to talk

about free skills. Looking at the evidence is reading -- in Sweden,

which has had a damning report. The evidence down south is shaky. There

are many academy schools that would not give such a positive

presentation. What we know about what works is quality teaching. That

is why I have worked so hard to invest in teachers and to protect

teacher numbers since I have been in this position. Teachers need to be

professionally qualified, professionally trained teachers. The

Government has met on more than one occasion with teach first, scheme

and that was devised as a result of the difficulties in inner-city

schools in London. We say to them, come with a model that meets the

needs and the challenges of education in Scotland but also

recognises that we have registered teachers, professionally qualified

teachers, and that is very important to the standard of education in this

country. Attainment is rising and we are closing the attainment gap, but

of course there is more to do. The teaching union is opposed to Teach

First, and opposed to academies. Are you afraid to challenge the unions

on this? Not at all. There are many things the union and I agree on.

Teachers having professional qualifications would be one. There

have been aspects of the national improvement framework that we have

had a difference perspective. It is important as a Government that we

work collaboratively with the teaching workforce and support them

to do what they can to support our children. There are very few parents

out there who would be supportive of unqualified teachers in their

schools. That cannot be a way forward. Of course we can enrich a

child's experience by that broader community experience and a school

needs to be at the heart of the community, and yes, curriculum for

excellence was about more professional freedom and innovation.

The challenge we have now is that we are at a watershed moment for

curriculum for excellence and it needs to reach its still ambition.

We will not reach the full ambition for the curriculum, schools or

children by having unqualified teachers in our schools. Despite the

fact that Teach First works down south, in America? Kezia Dugdale,

would you consider Teach First on academies or you ideological oppose?

It is not about being ideological oppose. There is no evidence to show

that it works. Although my parents were teachers and I am a bit

offended by the idea you could throw an unqualified teacher into a

classroom after weeks of training and expect them to get on with it. I

think we have got a really high value of education in Scotland. It

is something I'm very proud of. We taken very seriously. If we want the

best possible graduates to go on to be teachers, we have to make careers

in teaching what people want to do. We have two PR teachers better, give

them more opportunities to learn skills on the job, create space for

them to collaborate with each other. -- we have to pay our teachers

better. Chris's rationale for everything is to return to the

market, turn to private solutions to fix things. -- Ruth's rationale.

Looking at Finland, one of the best education systems in the world, has

proven that if you invest in teachers and let them get on with

the things they need to do, you will get the results we want to see. Lady

in the middle row? The thing with Teach First that I find challenging

is a focus on academic rigour and not necessarily a focus on the

academic Leigh Pastoral care of the child. I don't understand how we

cannot talk about -- the experience of six weeks of training completely

contrasts with doing a bachelor of education. 80% of their training is

being done in concert with being in schools. Willie Rennie? Castle view

and Saint Andrews had succeeded. They are achieving greater results

without Teach First because we are investing in the quality of teachers

in schools. That is why they are making a difference. Leadership,

innovation is what we should be focused on rather than diddling

around with governance arrangements that the governments seem obsessed

with. There is no evidence that it would work. I believe there is a

teacher in the audience who used to teach at a free school? From your

own experience, did it make a difference? Did it literally set you

free other teacher? I have to say not at all. All that it achieves

were even more unrealistic expectations on the teachers. I feel

that given the private background of the academies that are taken over,

they fail to appreciate the workload, the day-to-day

expectations placed on a teacher. It reached the point where if you were

seen leaving the school any time before 8pm, that was a failing on

your part and you were not working hard enough. That was really the

message that was driven towards us. Results did not improve in the five

years that that school had been an academy, and in fact 12 of my

ex-colleagues are being made redundant this summer. So I feel

quite strongly against the idea of our schools going down the Academy

route. I wonder if that is something that everyone here would agree with.

Does the governors of your school make a difference, do you think?

Very little difference, to be honest. I think some things I would

want recognised in the debate - what makes an Andrews successful was the

quality of teachers in Saint Andrews. I am a KI got a chance to

lead a teaching -- I am lucky that I got to lead the teaching team I do.

You have to focus on the quality of teachers. It won't do if we don't

get the very best people, train them well and give them freedom to do

what they are there to do. How do you get the best people? We have a

very rigorous recruitment process and we look for certain qualities,

one of which is an understanding of what makes great learning. One is

aspirations for young people and the evidence says that the aspirations

of individual teachers is directly proportionate to the aspirations of

the young people in front of them. We look for aspirations, teachers

who understand how you get the best out of young people in terms of how

you cure for them, how you support them. Those are all part of our

regiments. -- recruitment. One thing the curriculum for excellence has

not done as teach teachers how to teach. It has given a framework

within which headteachers can work with teachers to decide what are the

most effective ways of taking forward teaching and learning. That

is what we have got to keep doing. My worry about the budget, and I

think it is a new art in the budget that might be missed. Yes, we are

keeping teacher numbers are, what part of the price we pay for that is

teachers spending more time doing things that teachers should not do

because the people who used to do them are not there any more. -- we

are keeping numbers up. Would free schools help, do you think, Megan?

No. I think the problem is that private schools are funded by the

parents of the children there and they invest in their children's'

education. I am not saying that parents from deprived backers don't

invest. I think the thing the lady brought up about involving parents

on the same level as told in is very important. As well as keeping up

teaching standards, there is a problem of facilities in schools. I

visit schools regularly in my job and I see pupils sharing for

textbooks between three science classes. That is not acceptable. We

have fantastic teachers but we don't have the resources to back them up

and bring these fantastic children that I work with wit the Social

Mobility Foundation into higher education. Lady in the blue? Are

part of the debate has been touched on about investing in families to

make sure they are not living in grinding poverty and have the time

and resources to invest in their children. That is about investing in

employment, social security, also removing some of the financial

barriers to schools such as the cost of uniform, cost of school trips,

pics etc. We are a boat out of time, but on that, do you think the

attainment gap can be close, Angela? Yes, with the right evidence and the

correct targeting of resources. Close rather than just narrowed,

Kevin? Absolutely, but it can just be a teachers problem. For society

as a whole. It can be closed but as the documentary said we have to

raise the threshold of all children. That is why we have to make the

investment in education with a penny on income tax. Yes, it can be close,

and the earlier bestride the better we will do. That is it for tonight.

Thank you very much to our panel, our audience for all the fantastic

contributions, and to you, the audience for watching.

I'll be back at the same time tomorrow night with Scotland 2016.