04/04/2016 Scotland 2016

From beavers to burials, the Scottish Government send out

press releases on every aspect of life, but not a ?10 billion trade

A row over Chinese whispers, why didn't the Scottish Government

We'll be asking the SNP as the opposition say

We cover the campaign every day, but what's brewing in voters' minds?

You tell us what you think about the big election issues.

And demonstrations on the streets of Iceland tonight, as the country

is plunged into scandal by the Panama Papers.

The Scottish Government's published an investment agreement

with a Chinese consortium potentially worth ?10 billion.

Good news, you might think, but the deal was signed on the

21st of March and wasn't officially announced by ministers at the time.

The details have only just emerged, sparking claims that the Government

It is February and the people of Glasgow are celebrating the start of

the Chinese New Year. Scotland and China are two countries with

long-standing cultural and trade links. But questions are being asked

about a major investment agreement signed by the Scottish Government

and the Chinese consortium. The agreement, which could be worth up

to ?10 billion, was signed in Edinburgh on the 21st of March by

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, Chinese investment group SinoFortone

and China Railway No. 3 Engineering Group, the world's largest

construction company. That day it was announced by SinoFortone on its

website. It was not until the 3rd of April when news of the deal emerged

in Scotland. The Scottish Government has now published a Memorandum of

Understanding about the deal, which commits both sides to work together

to develop a programme of potential projects for investment. But

opposition parties have said that the Scottish Government has embarked

on a risky strategy. The SNP over backwards about coming

forward on these things and it is a big ?10 billion agreement that has

been signed. We need to have a better understanding as to why they

kept it secret for so long. I have grave concerns about this memorandum

that the First Minister has signed with the Chinese company. I am

concerned as to why we only found out about it through the Chinese

private company's website and buy this was not explain to Parliament

and by the Scottish Government did not choose to publish it until it

was in the public domain. Nicola Sturgeon has said this is no

secret agreement. The SNP leader may well look forward to the day when

she can drink a toast to the formal deal, but for now she says things

are just being discussed. Opponents are frankly talking

nonsense. This is an agreement to look at where there is potential for

significant investment into Scotland. Frankly, if my political

opponents are seeing his First Minister I should not encourage

investment into Scotland, I think they are demonstrating that they are

not fit for the job. This is, admit concerns about the

UK's steel industry and questions about whether any Scots or Chinese

deal would lead. If the Chinese will invest in

infrastructure in Scotland, will it be British Steel or Chinese deal? We

need to know the answers to those questions. While thousands of jobs

hang in the balance? We want to see investment into our core industries

in Scotland and across the UK. In the quiet, hot heat of political

campaigning, the SNP has said it will continue to put Scotland on the

world stage. Opponents argue they have to go about doing that more

openly. Earlier, I spoke to Willie Rennie,

the Scottish Liberal Democrat leader, who was in our

Edinburgh studio. And here in the Glasgow

studio is Keith Brown, He's the Infrastructure Secretary

in the Scottish Government. Keith Brown, on Monday, March 21,

you received nine kilos from the Scottish Government ranging from

race equality, a ?1.8 million investment in the Aberdeen oil firm.

But nothing about a ?10 billion trade team agreement, why was that?

The last example you give was ?1.8 million of investment. There is no

investment attached to this agreement, this is a minute of

agreement to have further discussions to facilitate the

discussions. Of course, it could be lucrative for Scotland and great in

terms of jobs and communities and businesses, but there has been

nonresident of a project at this stage. It was published and we have

published the MOU and secondly we have agreed with the Chinese

partners that press release agreed by both parties to be aged, which it

was on that website. It has been published but there are no projects

for us to announce. The people of China Herald about

this deal because it went through the news agency there and was

published in the China Dearly, but nothing for the people of Scotland?

That is not true, it was published on the English language website,

they have companies and investments across the UK and are well-known to

governments and bodies here. They publish it on their website and

agreed that press the week -- press release with the Scottish

Government. If you put in Wales, five years of work before an

announcement in terms of the Port Talbot work.

But this is said to be published on the SinoFortone website. How many

people are looking at that, why where the Scottish media not

informed? I have firstly explained that the

minute of agreement has been published but also the fact that the

press release, and a press release issued under that circumstance, it

hardly put it out as a secret deal when it has been published in an

English language on a website. This is about a first Mr Koryak and

trying to attract business and industry to Scotland. I would have

thought not announcing something for which there is no project, I think

the opponents have this wrong. The First Minister in trying to attract

jobs to Scotland is doing the right thing.

Willie Rennie, what is wrong with the ?10 million deal for Scotland?

I think your questions are pertinent. Keith Brown is a modest

man but the SNP are not, they like to brag about anything they do. It

is quite furious that they have not announced this. They would usually

take every opportunity. But I want to get to the substance of this. I

want to understand what the deal is about, what are the terms? Is it

just finance or are their operations involved as well? What checks have

been done on these two companies? Do they have a good track record of

working in this area and has Keith Brown pursued this himself?

Let me put that back to you? We have the Memorandum of Understanding.

What is in it for China, what is the quid pro quo for China when it comes

to these deals? I know that Willie Rennie failed to

answer the question put to him, why it was bad news to Scotland for a

?10 million deal. It lays out the fact that any announcement or

project that is taken forward would have to be complied with both

Scottish Law and EU law. There is no quid pro quo given here. China

invest around the world and do so on a huge scale and there is no reason

why Scotland should not have that investment coming to Scotland,

whether that is for affordable housing or transport, but that has

not been specified, we are not at that stage yet. But it must be good

to be talking to people about this. My specific questions were, it is

about finance or operations? And secondly, have you personally

reviewed the performance of these two companies? Do they have a good

track record, that you know that before this agreement was saying?

Can you answer that, as it finance operations and have you reviewed the

track record of these two companies? I'm not that Willie Rennie has

refused to answer that question. Of course it is about finance. That

figure is in that agreement, ?10 billion. We are not at the stage of

discussing it. Whether it is a different party that is involved or

the Scottish Government are discussing particular projects, what

we have said and what the Chinese have said is that there is a

potential port of ?10 billion. I would have thought that any

responsible government and especially a First Minister

interested in selling Scotland would want to get access to that money for

the benefit of the general public. Keith Brown has pointed out, what is

wrong with the ?10 billion deal for Scotland?

In the right terms, that is a good thing, but I need to understand the

terms. He has not and had my question. Does he know as these two

countries -- companies have a good track record? That is fundamental to

this agreement and his inability to answer that question concerns me. As

you do that personally and do they have a good track record?

I am pleased that Willie Rennie has agreed that it could be a good thing

for Scotland, the ?10 billion investment in jobs. These companies

deal with companies that government and other companies around the UK.

They have a track record. We are not that this stage of actually

announcing a project here. Of course there is more to be done. It is a

good idea to have these discussions for Scotland to attract foreign

investment. Keith Brown, is it not embarrassing

that George Kerevan who is riding in the National today essentially

criticising Chinese imperialism? That is a little bit awkward.

He was talking about the massive investments that the UK Government

has asked China to undertake into strategic things like nuclear power

stations. This is not on the table for Scotland.

Keith Brown and Willie Rennie, thank you both for joining me. Thank you.

Scotland remains divided in attitudes to taxation,

according to a new poll for BBC Scotland.

The survey suggests support for increasing the very top rate

of tax but there's also apparent backing for keeping Scottish tax

We'll hear more from our political editor in a moment but, first,

This is the Edinburgh beer factory, craft brewery with a dozen staff,

they are small but ambitious. Because we have to market the

bear... Production started last summer, to succeed the need Scotland

to prosper. Tax and spending really matter. With Holyrood gaining new

powers, the question of tax is predominant in this election, should

people be prepared to pay more tax perhaps to fund services like

education, or should taxi be the same as it is across the rest of the

UK? What about the upper rate? Big questions. In our poll, respondents

were asked to rate policies from one up to ten, producing an average

score. First, the idea of increasing rates of income tax by 1p in the

pound. It is backed by the Lib Dems and Labour Party. On our poll it

rated 6.2. It was outpolled by the idea of keeping the Scottish rate of

income tax the same as in England. A plan backed by the Conservatives

rated at 6.5. Higher ranked still bores the idea of the Labour Party

of increasing the very top rate for those earning more than ?150,000

from 45p up to ?50. That hit 70 -- 7.3, relatively popular. Some

brewery staff are willing to pay more tax.

The fact we could prioritise free health care and education, but that

comes at a cost and if that means higher taxation, that is fine.

It is a penny, I do not think we both feel it, and for the funds that

they could raise and a good we could do, we should do it.

Some think it is simply wrong that people in Scotland should pay more.

I feel that we all worked very hard, it is a bit galling to think that I

could be working as hard and earning the same amount of money 60 miles

down the road in Berwick. Some fear the impact on people and

us, even though the Lib Dems and the Labour Party have said they would

protect those earning less than ?20,000.

I do not think that as a lot of money so if you are single mum or

something, someone who is in trouble, that might have an effect.

-- I still think that is a lot of money.

If the starting rate of tax increases, people in Scotland would

still end up paying more than in England, some believe. A New Zealand

rate band could help. How about that top rate tax plan? Opinion was

divided. I don't buy the idea that a higher

rate of income tax for higher earners will scare off those within

that bracket. The top rate of tax is irrelevant.

You do not pay as much money and there are about 70,000 April in

Scotland who are eligible. It will not solve any problem. I would be

putting up tax across the board. The SNP would leave Scottish tax

rates alone but would reverse most of the scheduled tax cuts for higher

earners by altering the threshold for the upper 40p rate. Those

details emerged after our survey questions were drafted. We did ask

about the general notion of keeping the higher tax threshold at the

current 2016 rate, even if it is raised elsewhere. That hit 5.3

around the midway point. The SNP have said that support for their

brew is strengthening as people realise it is aimed at higher

earners, while protecting the low paid. Back to the staff, the

generally wanted real delivery from public services even if they had to

pay more tax. If it was a higher rate of income

tax in Scotland, I want to see the benefit of that in terms of the

health environment, education, really across the range of areas

where they have actual control. On council tax, our survey suggests

folk fever higher charges for more expensive homes. Finally, welfare,

more money for those who care for people with disabilities was rated

6.4. Higher still, there were 7.3 support for the idea of doubling the

level of child care for three-year-olds and for deals. That

is an SNP policy, although other parties have childcare offers. Your

collection, your choice. Just before we came on air,

I caught up with our political editor Brian Taylor and began

by asking him about the higher 50p Respondents seemed keen for the rich

to pay a bit more. It's in survey the most popular in

open bunch. They are views on taxation and labour are pointing out

the fact from our survey. It is 7.3, it's not eight or nine, the figures

were used to seeing in previous opinion polls. Opinion was perhaps

more diverging and the same time it's great surprise if people are in

favour of a 50p top tax rate, there's a new 17,000 people in

Scotland who would face that rate. Perhaps you are seeing the majority

of the population saying, if I want X are spending, I want more taxes

and want them to pay. That is understandable from those responding

to the survey. Ten would be the top, when you look at the middle ranking,

the offers from the parties, there is no standout star. Really struck

by that across policies. Across taxation today, issues like council

tax, they are usually differentiated. There are

differences of course but they aren't hugely differentiated. They

tend to be five, six and seven. In previous opinion polls and previous

Scottish elections, you saw on occasion some policies that were

soaring favourites and some absolute no-no is from nine to one. This

tends to be a little bit of a lack of differentiation. Perhaps it's the

new powers, it's the response of these decisions, people making their

myself. I want other parties gauge that. It must be difficult for them

to see that. They've come up this policy but standout policy. They

have to know that the public are wearing these things very carefully.

This isn't a beauty contest, this isn't an exercise in match on breast

beating, these are public spending policies and above all taxation

policies that will have a impact on voters. On impact and businesses and

in those circumstances it is incumbent upon the parties to think

seriously about the impact of the policies they are announcing, it's

incumbent upon the voters is sure they will to choose carefully. And

council tax, a similar theme. Folk are quite happy for the rich person

next door to pay a bit more but not from their wallet. It

understandable. Lord make the virtuous but not yet, on Lord.

Landed on the guy down the road. With council tax the general

impression that if folk favour anything they favour the higher

banded homes facing the highest increases. You're looking at more

increases tomorrow. -- issues. Today was council tax and welfare,

tomorrow it's other policies, health, education, issues like

fracking, the ban on certain songs being sung at double grounds and

issues like the one that is their and a background in Scottish

politics, the Constitution. Independence. -- football grounds.

And just a reminder, tomorrow night's programme will be

another 2016 special debate on tax with a panel of politicians

answering questions from an invited audience.

That's at our normal time of 10:30pm on BBC Two.

Something is rotten in the state of Iceland.

That's what people are saying in Reykjavik tonight

following the leak of the Panama Papers.

The opposition in Iceland has called on the prime minister

Sigmundur Gunnlaugsson and his government to resign

after details of his family's financial affairs were revealed.

He's accused of hiding millions of dollars in the country's banks

Mr Gunnlaugsson says no rules were broken.

In our Edinburgh studio is the Icelandic journalist

Thank you for joining me. First of all, it's a political crisis in

Iceland tonight although the PM strenuously denies any wrongdoing.

The PM is behaving like he's behaved for the whole term. He lives in a

complete different reality than the rest of the country and we know that

his finance is kept outside the country. How will this pan out?

Watching the protesters, this is a serious political crisis. Icelanders

are angry. We want the Cabinet implode under the weight of its

corruption. -- watch the Cabinet implode. We watched as the world

Beard when our Prime Minister was exposed as a liar, a fraud and a

hypocrite. Obviously people are furious. This is a man who is a

demagogue, to put in a UK context he is like a mix of Nigel Farage on

steroids with a less funny Boris Johnson. What does this mean for

Iceland? In a way, national pride must have been dented when you see

the extent of the Panama Papers leak and Iceland. I'm sure for many

people this will dent their pride but I think most people will realise

eventually that this is how people that are healthy for us and we need

to look into these affairs. We cannot keep perpetuating this

utopian progressive image to the outside world while this sort of

stuff is going on. We have ten Cabinet ministers in Iceland, three

of them on offshore companies. That means that Iceland is properly one

of the most sure countries in the world. That is the view that Iceland

is a utopia, a perfect Nordic model. It has been proven that it is false.

Even now, I think most people are gobsmacked sing a Prime Minister

that has been revealed not only to have properties and wealth in tax

havens but also that interview that the world watched, he was filmed on

much the 11th, we watched and deny it since the 15th and now we realise

that there was a video of him lying to foreign journalists and Icelandic

journalists so obviously it's unbelievable. Thank you very much.

Let's now speak to Libby Brooks, the Guardian's Scotland

correspondent, and Kieran Andrews, the political editor of The Courier.

Let's pick up on the Panama Papers. Let's pick up on what the Icelandic

journalists were saying. At the crisis. It seems to be. Good for the

Icelandic people being out on the street. I don't notice anybody

out... Last, looks, anybody out on the streets of London complaining

about David Cameron's family. I suppose when you look at it to

broadly touted dodger the extent of how the have been hiding their

wealth and this is one law firm. Who'd have thought that Vladimir

Putin, the Icelandic primers minister and Lee are Al Masi would

be the poster boys for tax dodging and it's one tranche of documents

from one firm. This almost certainly was far, far wider than what we've

seen and some great journalism by the BBC, the guardian but they must

go much further than this. It's a big worry for how you think about

the money being lost for hospitals, schools, roads, it's been dodged so

people who have it can hold it. Public services will have lost out.

Absolutely. Big-time. This goes wider than the UK but it must be

embarrassing for David Cameron, George Osborne, put aside the fact

that Cameron's father has been named, they've been crowing about

their efforts to snare the tax dodgers, bring in money and give it

to charities and here we see the tip of the iceberg, we're nowhere near

the financial numbers we could be. We mentioned the organisation

investigating this, it shows the merits of funding investigative

journalism particularly when HM RC are asking to see the papers. I

think one of the interesting things about it as it shows how essential

data and data journalism has come to the way that we investigate issues.

When you... When you look at it, you had over 100 media organisations

looking at these documents. 11 million over three months. Extra

reason no leaked it and left it in the pub, unlike certain political

parties that shall remain nameless. I think journalism increasingly is

looking for people who are really specialised in dealing with these

huge tranches of information, picking their stories out of them.

Closer to home, the BBC poll. What did you make of that? In a way it's

a humorous way of looking at things. I want him to pay more but not me.

It puts a pain in the thought that Scots are more punk and passionate

or happy to pay more than the rest of the UK. The only area where we

want to put tax up according to the poll is at the top rate where most

Scots will never get to in their wildest dreams I never pay one June

?50,000 or more. What seeing here is people saying I want to pay the

same, likely to get better and the people who are no more to me to pay

more but not me. I don't want that cash out of my pay packet. I thought

it was interesting and council tax, people said they wanted people to

pay more if they had a big house. They didn't want everyone to pay

more even when it was specifically put to pay for children's education.

I think if you want a sign that we are not the great compassionate

socialist nation that was it. The respondent suggested that they

weren't particularly impressed by all the parties offers when it came

to the middle tax. They did say there was a sizeable group of people

who were saying that they were up for adding a penny and tax across

the board and that's both the Lib Dems and Labour, they have been

supporting that. I'll am not feeling quite as gloomy as you are. There

was over to that of hope for progressives. Let's pick up on the

top story, this Chinese memorandum of understanding, this agreement,

what do you make of it? Is it the cup, conspiracy? It's quite hard to

get a handle on it. It's curious. The Scottish Government aren't shy

in putting out press releases particularly when there potentially

a lot of good news there for them which from reading the memorandum

there seems to be. It's early stages and they were saying earlier nothing

has been signed and that's fine but you would've thought the potential

of up to ?10 million of investment would be the sort of thing you could

put out in a personal is. They haven't done that and it's very

unlike him. They haven't gained it out very well which is unlikely

softish government press machine. Although it's possibly worth

pointing out this time five years ago before the last Holyrood

election Alex Salmond also memorandum of understanding to bring

thousands of jobs to Dundee sport, perhaps his fingers are still burnt

from no jobs from that. What do you make of it? I've similarly. It's

curious. I do think it's not the time to be seen to be shaking hands

with China and there is such bad feeling across the country toward

the way that they have been dumping steel on the international market so

perhaps it's not surprising. On the plus side, it is saying that the

Scottish Government is internationally facing, outward

looking and we do need that amount of investment in the country. We

properly do need that investment. Absolutely. If the investment comes

as a great thing which is why it's confusing they decided it was worth

having is about. Thank you both through much.

Shelley's back with you tomorrow for that hour-long special

That's how powerful rock and roll was.

MUSIC: Wonderwall by Oasis

All these great memories and, you know, it absolutely shaped me.

It was something that you wanted to be part of.