:00:00. > :00:00.The women whose financial plans are in tatters because of changes
:00:00. > :00:26.Should the Government find an extra ?8 billion to bail them out?
:00:27. > :00:34.The SNP urges the Government to compensate women who've lost out
:00:35. > :00:42.We hear from Westminster's youngest MP.
:00:43. > :00:44.As new homes are built to deal with the housing shortage,
:00:45. > :00:47.what about the pressure on local healthcare?
:00:48. > :00:49.And, no more branch office of London?
:00:50. > :00:59.Scottish Labour gets new powers over policy and people.
:01:00. > :01:04.Equality for women in the workplace means it's only fair
:01:05. > :01:07.that they should have to work as long as men before qualifying
:01:08. > :01:13.Changes brought in in 2011, though, mean the retirement age
:01:14. > :01:16.for women will rise faster than previously expected,
:01:17. > :01:22.Almost 250,000 women in Scotland alone are affected.
:01:23. > :01:26.Now the SNP is urging the UK Government to spend ?8 billion to go
:01:27. > :01:33.In a moment, we'll hear from Mhairi Black, who's been
:01:34. > :01:38.championing the cause of women caught up in the change.
:01:39. > :01:40.But first, we asked the former Pensions Minister Ros Altmann
:01:41. > :01:45.what she thought of the SNP's proposal.
:01:46. > :01:52.Well, I am pleased to see that the SNP is still looking at ways in
:01:53. > :01:56.which we can try and help some of the women who have been affected by
:01:57. > :02:02.this relatively short notice change in state pension age and who didn't
:02:03. > :02:10.know about it. I think the issue for me is that an ?8 billion cost is
:02:11. > :02:15.difficult to imagine actually being agreed anywhere across Government.
:02:16. > :02:22.The figure is enormous. I had hoped that we might be able to help at
:02:23. > :02:26.least some of the women affected and especially those who are facing real
:02:27. > :02:31.hardship as a result of this change, they didn't know about it, the
:02:32. > :02:35.Government clearly didn't do enough to tell them properly about what was
:02:36. > :02:38.coming. Why is ?8 billion such a difficult figure to sell to the
:02:39. > :02:46.Government or to the public in general? All I can tell you is that
:02:47. > :02:52.I tried really, really hard to get any money at all, to at least help
:02:53. > :02:56.some of the women who were worst affected and even at much, much
:02:57. > :03:00.lower figures than that to help some of the women and indeed I think it
:03:01. > :03:05.is also important to say that men's state pension age is going up and I
:03:06. > :03:08.wanted to find a way to help men statement if they were suffering
:03:09. > :03:13.hardship as a result of the change coming but the Government was
:03:14. > :03:18.completely unwilling to do anything at all whatsoever to spend any extra
:03:19. > :03:23.money on this state pension age issue. So, from a position where I
:03:24. > :03:29.can tell you that I was trying to find much, much less than ?8 billion
:03:30. > :03:32.and there was an absolute roadblock and no chance, to imagine they will
:03:33. > :03:36.suddenly say we are going to spend ?8 billion is very difficult.
:03:37. > :03:38.Well, we invited the Pensions Minister, Richard Harrington,
:03:39. > :03:41.on to tonight's programme, but he was unavailable.
:03:42. > :03:57.However, his department gave us this statement.
:03:58. > :04:01.Well, shortly before we came on air I spoke to the SNP's Mhairi Black,
:04:02. > :04:04.Westminster's youngest MP, who has been campaigning
:04:05. > :04:14.for the women affected by these changes to retirement age.
:04:15. > :04:20.We heard the former pensions Minister there. She gress about the
:04:21. > :04:24.hardship that some women face, that they didn't get enough information
:04:25. > :04:29.soon enough but she thinks ?8 billion is a non-starter, it's not
:04:30. > :04:33.going to happen. I think for a start when you listen to what Ros Altman
:04:34. > :04:36.said there, she's changed her tune from a couple of months ago when I
:04:37. > :04:42.was sitting in committee with her and she was saying there was nothing
:04:43. > :04:45.we can do whatsoever. So I find the flip-flopping opinion quite hard to
:04:46. > :04:49.stomach. But I think when you look at the figure of ?8 billion we are
:04:50. > :04:53.talking about ?8 billion over five years. This is a one-time cost, this
:04:54. > :04:57.isn't something that's going to spiral for generations. So, when you
:04:58. > :05:02.look that in the context of what the UK Government has spent money on
:05:03. > :05:06.since the first time this issue was brought to the House, we have spent
:05:07. > :05:09.a blank cheque on nuclear weapons, air strikes in Syria and the very
:05:10. > :05:13.building that Ros was standing in front of there, we heard that we are
:05:14. > :05:16.prepared to do it up for ?7 billion. It seems that the Government can
:05:17. > :05:20.find money when it suits them but not when it comes to pensions. Do
:05:21. > :05:26.you think you are being realistic in asking for this? She said she asked
:05:27. > :05:31.for much less and was met with a roadblock? Entirely. What is
:05:32. > :05:34.unreasonable is to expect women to be paying in national insurance for
:05:35. > :05:41.all their working lives and then at the last Mintel them, by the way,
:05:42. > :05:45.you are not getting a pension. -- at the last minute tell them by the way
:05:46. > :05:48.you are not getting a pension. Tough, that's unreasonable. So I
:05:49. > :05:52.think it's perfectly do-able the proposal that is we have put forward
:05:53. > :05:58.to say ?8 billion over five years, I think that'sed a kwat. Well, the
:05:59. > :06:03.Department for Work and Pensions are actually querying the calculations
:06:04. > :06:06.in the report. They're saying it is seriously underestimating the cost
:06:07. > :06:09.and they say it would be more like ?14 billion. I wish I had the same
:06:10. > :06:14.maths when it came to other spending costs! They're saying they're
:06:15. > :06:18.modelling is comprehensive. This report we have done, we have spent
:06:19. > :06:22.months piling into this, Howard who wrote the report has done phenomenal
:06:23. > :06:26.work, phenomenal drafts on it. I think the very fact that we are able
:06:27. > :06:32.to produce something and effectively we have done the Government's job
:06:33. > :06:36.for them. This is the onus put on the SNP to roll up our cleefs and we
:06:37. > :06:40.are going to look into things. -- our sleeves and we are going to look
:06:41. > :06:43.into things. The Government would be daft to say they're underestimating
:06:44. > :06:47.it, they need to at least look at it. The Government has already made
:06:48. > :06:51.concessions, it's given an extra six months' worth of pension to women
:06:52. > :06:57.affected Atsu cost of over ?1 billion. -- at a cost of over ?1
:06:58. > :07:01.brl. Should it be spending billions more of taxpayers' money on this?
:07:02. > :07:05.It's taxpayers that are looking for their pensions. I think what you
:07:06. > :07:10.have to do is look at this in the context of how this problem arose.
:07:11. > :07:13.This started in 1995 when consecutive governments didn't tell
:07:14. > :07:18.women that their pension age was taking a huge leap. Women did not
:07:19. > :07:23.know about this. Where the fault of this Government is, is that in 2011
:07:24. > :07:26.they said we are going to steamroll another rise and of course this is
:07:27. > :07:31.just a massive double whammy for many women. This idea that six
:07:32. > :07:34.months is enough is just completely unrealistic. It's about realising
:07:35. > :07:39.the situation that women are in. When you make a big change like
:07:40. > :07:44.this, this is all about making pensions sustainable, somebody's
:07:45. > :07:47.going to have to lose out as we heard Baroness Altman saying men are
:07:48. > :07:54.facing hardship, as well, it's unavoidable? I don't think so. There
:07:55. > :07:58.I would say why? Why should someone always have to lose out? You need to
:07:59. > :08:02.remember this is a group of women who have lived their entire lives in
:08:03. > :08:05.an unequal society. Many of these women didn't have the opportunities
:08:06. > :08:10.and the different chances that men did. They didn't have the same
:08:11. > :08:15.standard of pay. At this very last hurdle yet another thing is going
:08:16. > :08:20.against them. And again to point back to the 1995 Act, men, their
:08:21. > :08:26.retirement age through the 2011 act was going from 65 to 66. For many
:08:27. > :08:29.women it was from 60 to 66. It's taking in realistically what the
:08:30. > :08:33.difference is. The Government's making it pretty clear tonight that
:08:34. > :08:38.they're not going to budge on this. If they don't, what then? If they
:08:39. > :08:42.don't, I think it says more about them. I find it quite astounding
:08:43. > :08:46.that a Government can say, you know what, doing up a building is more
:08:47. > :08:49.important to us than making sure that people have their pensions. I
:08:50. > :08:53.think they're completely underestimating time and time again
:08:54. > :08:56.just how many women this is affecting and how drastically it's
:08:57. > :08:59.affecting many women's lives. Would you support them in legal action?
:09:00. > :09:02.Well, I am not a lawyer, but if that's the route people have to go
:09:03. > :09:07.down, why not? Because they've been paying in. I tell you this, the
:09:08. > :09:13.other thing is that this isn't just about one group of women. This is
:09:14. > :09:16.about pensions overall. Why should people happy pay into national
:09:17. > :09:20.insurance if this Government makes clear that any future Government can
:09:21. > :09:23.say, sorry you are not getting your pension at any age, where is the
:09:24. > :09:26.incentive there? Thank you for coming in.
:09:27. > :09:30.There was yet another warning this week that Scotland faces a crisis
:09:31. > :09:33.in the family doctor service, with a predicted shortfall
:09:34. > :09:39.Now the Royal College of General Practioners says
:09:40. > :09:44.new housing schemes built without any thought about the impact
:09:45. > :09:47.on local medical centres could just add to the pressure and jeopardise
:09:48. > :09:49.the quality of patient care they offer.
:09:50. > :09:50.We'll debate the politics in a moment.
:09:51. > :10:05.New houses need infrastructure, gas, electricity, water and sewage. But
:10:06. > :10:09.the people who live in them need shops, schools, and family doctors.
:10:10. > :10:13.To developers and planners take that as seriously as they should? There
:10:14. > :10:18.is new houses going up. We expect the projection is for the population
:10:19. > :10:22.to grow by about 8,000 over the next three or four years. We have also
:10:23. > :10:26.seen new care homes go up and a project for a new nursing home. They
:10:27. > :10:30.all require to be serviced by general practice. Do you get any
:10:31. > :10:34.sense that the planners and developers think about the impact on
:10:35. > :10:38.GPs' practices when they give a go-ahead to do schemes? They don't.
:10:39. > :10:42.A minimum level they expect to put buildings up and expect local
:10:43. > :10:44.practices to absorb the increasing population without any consideration
:10:45. > :10:49.of the existing service or pressure that it's already under.
:10:50. > :10:54.Now there is concern patient care could be put at risk if the impact
:10:55. > :10:59.on health services isn't taken into account when planning decisions are
:11:00. > :11:03.made. Any additional pressure on services that are being delivered
:11:04. > :11:06.challenges the quality of care that we are able to provide so that
:11:07. > :11:10.clearly has implications for patients and we are very concerned,
:11:11. > :11:15.obviously, that we are able to maintain the quality and safety of
:11:16. > :11:17.patient care. The Royal College of General Practitioners wants house
:11:18. > :11:21.builders and planning authorities to have to take the impact of new
:11:22. > :11:26.developments on family doctors into account. But they say the Health
:11:27. > :11:31.Authorities don't always help. It's a two-way street. There needs to be
:11:32. > :11:35.a greater transparency in terms of the capacity of existing doctors
:11:36. > :11:39.surgeries and the ideas behind how services are going to develop from
:11:40. > :11:42.the NHS boards. That's not always as transparent as perhaps it could be
:11:43. > :11:46.that allow plansers to think about how they can plan. We are trying to
:11:47. > :11:49.encourage more engagement in the service and the planning system,
:11:50. > :11:52.much more upfront engagement where people can hear about what's going
:11:53. > :11:55.on and contribute and influence things, as well. The Scottish
:11:56. > :12:00.Government says local authorities can put conditions on new
:12:01. > :12:03.developments, including making builders pay for social
:12:04. > :12:06.infrastructure. I think every development that our members build
:12:07. > :12:11.will have planning obligations on them. It might be building a new
:12:12. > :12:14.primary school, community facilities, it's usually a long
:12:15. > :12:18.shopping list and we are beginning to see health centres and GP
:12:19. > :12:21.practices added to that list. However, even even if a developer
:12:22. > :12:26.builds a new surgery we are not responsible for put ago doctor in
:12:27. > :12:33.there. But the GPs say the current system isn't fit for purpose. In my
:12:34. > :12:37.experience it doesn't work at all. My understanding from the Scottish
:12:38. > :12:42.Government policy on planning, it doesn't actually specify or mandate
:12:43. > :12:50.that due attention is given to healthcare services. So unless there
:12:51. > :12:53.is a process that actually ensures consultation with healthcare
:12:54. > :12:57.services then that isn't going to work and certainly in my experience
:12:58. > :13:01.that does not happen. The planning system in Scotland is currently
:13:02. > :13:05.under review. So how do we make it work better? I want us to all
:13:06. > :13:08.recognise from the outset that this expanding population that we have in
:13:09. > :13:13.Scotland is going to require services. Yes, they require houses
:13:14. > :13:16.but they need to educate children. They need community facilities and
:13:17. > :13:20.obviously they need GP practices, as well. Local and central Government
:13:21. > :13:23.need to work together with the NHS and the private building industry to
:13:24. > :13:24.make sure we are delivering new communities, not just housing
:13:25. > :13:27.estates. Joining me now is
:13:28. > :13:29.the SNP's Ivan McKee. And in Edinburgh is
:13:30. > :13:44.the Conservative's Public Health Miles Briggs, first of all, the
:13:45. > :13:48.picture painted in that report of a lack of planning when these
:13:49. > :13:55.developments are proposed, is that a picture you recognise where you are?
:13:56. > :14:01.Yes, it is. Especially in terms of where we are seeing huge expansion
:14:02. > :14:04.and not being kept in toe with the services we require. The Government,
:14:05. > :14:08.both Scottish Government and local Government, have made a pig's
:14:09. > :14:13.breakfast of this. We need to see a joined up approach to put in place
:14:14. > :14:17.services like GPs and local schools ahead of housing building actually
:14:18. > :14:21.developed because we are seeing across Scotland many communities
:14:22. > :14:24.built with maybe 10,000 houses and schools and GP surgeries
:14:25. > :14:28.overcapacity. So, I really welcome the fact that the Royal College have
:14:29. > :14:30.started this debate and with the review taking place it's really
:14:31. > :14:33.important that we start to see how we get this right for the country.
:14:34. > :14:35.So you are laying the blame for this firmly at the door of the Scottish
:14:36. > :14:46.Government and local Government? Yes, at the end of the day they draw
:14:47. > :14:49.up the plans and signed off to see whether developments will take
:14:50. > :14:53.place. It is getting that writing each community. In the past it is
:14:54. > :14:57.fair that we haven't got that right. -- getting that right in each
:14:58. > :15:02.community. We have seen 10,000 homes developed without expanding a
:15:03. > :15:06.medical centre there. This took place recently because of the
:15:07. > :15:10.Conservatives campaigning for a medical centre to be doubled in size
:15:11. > :15:13.to actually meet the plans of the local population. We need to think
:15:14. > :15:18.beyond this and actually look towards how we are going to fund our
:15:19. > :15:21.public services so that we have healthy and happy communities across
:15:22. > :15:26.Scotland which are provided for properly. Ivan, obviously everybody
:15:27. > :15:31.welcomes new housing developments, there is a housing shortage and we
:15:32. > :15:39.need new homes. But where is the joined up thinking in all of this?
:15:40. > :15:42.Well, you are absolutely right, the houses need to be built, and it is a
:15:43. > :15:45.great success of the SNP government. We built 30,000 affordable houses in
:15:46. > :15:49.the last Parliament and we will have 50,000 more affordable homes in this
:15:50. > :15:54.Parliament. Why aren't these services being provided for? The
:15:55. > :15:57.services should be there as well. The local authorities who do these
:15:58. > :16:03.plans figure out what services they need. Often they build the houses
:16:04. > :16:08.and there could be more thought that. Those decisions are made at a
:16:09. > :16:14.local level the local authorities. The example, it is the SNP
:16:15. > :16:19.government who have put the money up to upgrade the health centre. The
:16:20. > :16:22.extra houses are being built there. Couldn't the Scottish Government
:16:23. > :16:27.make this an obligation with local authorities? With the planning
:16:28. > :16:33.review that is taking place now, we will see what comes out of that. It
:16:34. > :16:36.is the local authorities who make these decisions, if the SNP get
:16:37. > :16:43.involved in that than people like Miles will complain that we are too
:16:44. > :16:47.centralist. Miles Briggs, that is a fair point, you would accuse them of
:16:48. > :16:51.meddling too much, surely this is a local decision? We need to get this
:16:52. > :16:55.right, that is what we really need to work towards. It has been quite
:16:56. > :16:59.clear that we haven't been over the past ten years. I hope this review
:17:00. > :17:02.of planning will give us an opportunity. Local government, the
:17:03. > :17:07.end of the day, put together plans which will need the Scottish
:17:08. > :17:12.Government to sign off on. Do you want them to be obliged to take this
:17:13. > :17:15.into consideration? I think they should, especially new-build
:17:16. > :17:18.developments, a lot of these are actually private-sector development
:17:19. > :17:22.and they aren't actually coordinating public services, be
:17:23. > :17:26.that expansion of the local primary school, all the local medical sand.
:17:27. > :17:31.These things should be taken into account early on. Actually, joint
:17:32. > :17:34.resources put in place to fund them. In many cases, resources or handed
:17:35. > :17:39.over to the Council for these services, but they don't go towards
:17:40. > :17:43.building important services which are needed. We need to see a joined
:17:44. > :17:47.up approach to be able to make sure that the houses we are putting up in
:17:48. > :17:53.Scotland and the services that families will need. Of course, Ivan,
:17:54. > :17:57.this is against the backdrop of a shortage of family doctors already.
:17:58. > :18:00.This is only putting more pressure on GPs' practices. It is pretty
:18:01. > :18:07.urgent that this gets sorted out, isn't it? Yes, we need more GPs.
:18:08. > :18:11.Scotland is in a much better position than the rest of the UK. We
:18:12. > :18:16.have increased the number of GPs by 7% all the time we have been in
:18:17. > :18:20.government, we have increased the number of doctors by 25% and are
:18:21. > :18:24.taking steps at the moment to reduce more doctors into the GP side of the
:18:25. > :18:30.activity, and also to work with other professionals -- to introduce
:18:31. > :18:33.more doctors. There is a lot of work going on in the background, and we
:18:34. > :18:37.are in a much better position in Scotland than in the rest of the UK.
:18:38. > :18:41.Look at the housing situation, it is one of the best thing that you can
:18:42. > :18:46.do to the health of the population to give them new homes. A lot of the
:18:47. > :18:51.house-builder is to relieve the pressure on overcrowding. Those
:18:52. > :18:55.people are moving into their homes. Just briefly, Miles, when you look
:18:56. > :18:59.at the UK situation, Scotland is actually in a better position than
:19:00. > :19:04.the rest of the UK, both in terms of GPs and the housing profession. I
:19:05. > :19:09.don't think that Ivan was in the debate on health in the Parliament.
:19:10. > :19:15.We were discussing the fact that by Scotland 2020 we will have a
:19:16. > :19:18.shortage of GPs. I'm not quite sure if Ivan wanted to listen to some of
:19:19. > :19:23.the arguments which Atchley we are hearing in the chamber, and as peas
:19:24. > :19:28.were coming with different issues from across Scotland -- MSPs were
:19:29. > :19:34.coming with different issues to show that our health system is in crisis
:19:35. > :19:37.point. The Government but ?500 million into the health service over
:19:38. > :19:39.the last five years. We will have to leave it there for this evening,
:19:40. > :19:41.gentlemen. Thank you. Now, could this spell the end
:19:42. > :19:44.to the London branch office image? Scottish Labour is set to get more
:19:45. > :19:47.power over policy and people - making it more distinct
:19:48. > :19:49.from the UK party. A series of reforms were confirmed
:19:50. > :19:52.by the party's executive last night, and will go to the party's
:19:53. > :19:54.conference for final approval. Here's our Political
:19:55. > :20:06.Correspondent, Nick Eardley. Few resignations in recent Scottish
:20:07. > :20:11.political history have been more damning. Johann Lamont's claims that
:20:12. > :20:16.Scottish Labour was seen as a branch office was evidence that the party
:20:17. > :20:21.was subservient to London. It has been trying to get away from that
:20:22. > :20:26.perception ever since. And now its new leader thinks she has found a
:20:27. > :20:30.solution. I'm delighted that we will put this before the Labour Party
:20:31. > :20:34.members at conference next week. It is a very strong plan to make the
:20:35. > :20:39.Scottish Labour Party to an autonomous body. Neighbour has
:20:40. > :20:42.always fitted neatly together. What is changing? London currently have a
:20:43. > :20:47.say on who the Scottish party puts forward for Westminster. There are
:20:48. > :20:52.many who believe that as a matter for Scottish Labour. The changes
:20:53. > :20:56.also give the party north of the board of the chance to set its
:20:57. > :20:59.policy on known issues, that includes the parts that Westminster
:21:00. > :21:06.controls. The changes could be significant. After some fear there
:21:07. > :21:09.is an attempt to select some MPs who do not support Jeremy Corbyn,
:21:10. > :21:12.Scotland will make its own decisions. They could also mean that
:21:13. > :21:17.the Scottish party has different policies from the UK party. When it
:21:18. > :21:21.comes to the UK general election manifesto, how would they bridge the
:21:22. > :21:27.gap? Of course there will be a process where every part of our
:21:28. > :21:31.Labour Party will come together in one room. You cannot miss the
:21:32. > :21:36.significance of this, we will be able to determine all of our own
:21:37. > :21:40.pause in Scotland. Leaving last night's meeting of Labour executive,
:21:41. > :21:47.she has won like a personal seat of Scotland, which will be appointed by
:21:48. > :21:49.her. That has raised eyebrows. She is demanding a democratically
:21:50. > :21:54.elected representative who is accountable to us. This person will
:21:55. > :21:58.not be. The reforms themselves, though, are broadly welcomed. The
:21:59. > :22:02.SNP have dominated the last few years simply because they have been
:22:03. > :22:05.the voice of Scotland, the party of Scotland. Being the more
:22:06. > :22:10.independently the party in Scotland, we can start to get the mantle back.
:22:11. > :22:15.-- independently the party. Will these changes solve the puzzle of
:22:16. > :22:16.where the balance of power lies? Scottish Labour believe this could
:22:17. > :22:19.be the last piece of the jigsaw. With me now to discuss that,
:22:20. > :22:23.and other news of the day, are writer and commentator
:22:24. > :22:25.Gerry Hassan, and the former editor of the Times in Scotland,
:22:26. > :22:33.Magnus Linklater. Welcome to both of you this evening.
:22:34. > :22:41.So, Gerry, what you make of this move by Kezia Dugdale? It has been a
:22:42. > :22:45.very gradual move, for example of Labour's furniture in Scotland.
:22:46. > :22:48.Every time that this has happened, it has been a place where we are
:22:49. > :22:53.comfortable and everything has changed. Although there is a couple
:22:54. > :22:58.of significant things, they have policy control overall reserved
:22:59. > :23:01.issues, Trident etc. It is still not a fully autonomous Scottish Labour
:23:02. > :23:06.Party, basically because they don't want it and they can't afford it. So
:23:07. > :23:10.still, despite a little bit of movement, it is still going to be a
:23:11. > :23:14.branch office and London Labour hung around them, and those are heavy
:23:15. > :23:18.things to hang around Labour's neck that really hurt them. They hurt
:23:19. > :23:30.them so bad, it is one of the reasons they are where they are. And
:23:31. > :23:32.this isn't really an answer to that. Rob, does it sound like real
:23:33. > :23:35.autonomy to you, Magnus? It is a move towards that, and I think it is
:23:36. > :23:38.a move they have to make. It probably needs a go further. Kezia
:23:39. > :23:40.Dugdale is a bit of a dilemma. Scottish Labour depends, it still
:23:41. > :23:44.depends, on funding from the UK party. I mean, I don't know what
:23:45. > :23:48.Scottish Labour finances are Mike. But I imagine they are not very
:23:49. > :23:54.great at the moment. And they caught really afford to detach themselves
:23:55. > :23:57.completely. -- brake really afford. As Gerry says, it sounds like they
:23:58. > :24:02.are still tied to be a prince brings, so to speak. Do you think we
:24:03. > :24:11.have seen rock bottom. Trust Labour? -- aprons brings. So many
:24:12. > :24:16.predictions are now wrong. There on a downward curve, it looks like next
:24:17. > :24:23.year will be very difficult with the local elections. The last two
:24:24. > :24:28.council elections. Kezia Dugdale faces several problems. One of them
:24:29. > :24:32.is she has supporters and resources to draw on in Scotland, but people
:24:33. > :24:36.are on the bridge of the ship. People are actually voting to get
:24:37. > :24:40.rid of her and turn the party in a different direction and used next
:24:41. > :24:45.year's election. When you have infighting and not much resources,
:24:46. > :24:50.that ship has got more to sink. We have had a real dilemma. On Saturday
:24:51. > :24:55.I think we get the results of the Labour leadership. And Kezia Dugdale
:24:56. > :25:00.has supported Alan Smith, who is almost certainly going to lose, I
:25:01. > :25:03.would say. And so she will have a leader, Jeremy Corbyn, who she has
:25:04. > :25:07.not supported. And he's going to take the Labour Party in England at
:25:08. > :25:12.any rate further and further to the left. Kezia Dugdale I think is
:25:13. > :25:15.trying to pull the Labour Party in Scotland just a little bit towards
:25:16. > :25:20.the middle ground. So that is another headache she has got. And we
:25:21. > :25:27.heard the woman from Momentum in the piece saying, you know, this is not
:25:28. > :25:31.democratic, appointing a Scottish representative to the NEC. Are there
:25:32. > :25:38.more problems storing up here? There are. Corbyn's agenda has written off
:25:39. > :25:43.Scotland because of the few MPs. There is no positive Corbyn agenda.
:25:44. > :25:48.Those sort of people have joined the SNP. Also, the democracy issue is
:25:49. > :25:52.wider. Scottish Labour was not a party of democracy, it is a party of
:25:53. > :25:56.doing deals and be establishment. They have got to recognise that SMB
:25:57. > :26:01.use the establishment. And they come with a more populist, instinctual
:26:02. > :26:05.agenda, that says that things are not right in Scotland. It is a
:26:06. > :26:08.series of muddled messages and nobody is paying attention to these
:26:09. > :26:13.sort of things, people have got better sort of things to do. Labour
:26:14. > :26:18.doesn't stand for those things. More autonomy, this time in broadcasting.
:26:19. > :26:26.We have heard a lot about the Scottish six. But today we have
:26:27. > :26:30.heard that the SNP are to announce a Scottish seven. Are they storing a
:26:31. > :26:34.march on the BBC? I think so. It is an interesting idea, it will make
:26:35. > :26:41.the BBC set up and think thing. It is on something called STV too. I
:26:42. > :26:46.haven't watched it myself. It must be quite a minority audience. So
:26:47. > :26:53.what impact it will make, I don't know. And I think the key thing for
:26:54. > :26:57.it and for a possible Scottish six is how much is going to be funded.
:26:58. > :27:03.Because the quality of the programme will dictate whether it gets an
:27:04. > :27:08.audience. And these are not cheap. So whether Scottish seven, which
:27:09. > :27:14.will be up against Channel 4 News, very well funded, highly successful
:27:15. > :27:17.programme, you know, we will see. We haven't really heard any detail
:27:18. > :27:22.about what the programme is going to be like. But what is your hunch,
:27:23. > :27:27.given what we know? I once watched something on STV too, I know that.
:27:28. > :27:33.These are very, very small channels. It is not windowdressing, cheeky by
:27:34. > :27:38.STV. It could be a proper programme. We need a Scottish six on the BBC,
:27:39. > :27:42.these have been going 20 years. Scottish broadcasting is about
:27:43. > :27:46.quality, it is also about news and current affairs. STV do some drama
:27:47. > :27:50.25 years ago when they had money, they haven't done drama from that
:27:51. > :27:55.period. Magnus used to edit the Scotsman. You would happily
:27:56. > :27:59.incorporate UK and international news from a Scottish perspective.
:28:00. > :28:04.You can wonder sometimes why people get their knickers in such a twist
:28:05. > :28:08.about doing it on television. I think that is absolutely fair. I
:28:09. > :28:13.think what has happened since the days I edited the Scotsman, which
:28:14. > :28:17.was a very, long time ago, is that the choice now facing viewers is
:28:18. > :28:23.enormous compared to what it was then. So that carving out an
:28:24. > :28:28.audience for a Scottish seven is going to be much more difficult than
:28:29. > :28:31.perhaps it was 20 or 30 years ago. Of course what this has done today
:28:32. > :28:35.is just shine a light on what some people might see is dithering at the
:28:36. > :28:40.BBC about this decision, how long can it take to make a decision like
:28:41. > :28:44.this? When you wait 20 years for something, the problem that we have
:28:45. > :28:47.is that it is 20 years behind, then it will not seem innovative. You
:28:48. > :28:54.wanted to be a multimedia platform world, digital, the way people
:28:55. > :28:58.consume media. BBC Scotland, and the BBC are going to have to change. You
:28:59. > :29:02.cannot even upon is BBC Scotland as it is now, we're going to have to
:29:03. > :29:06.change it much, much more, innovation. We have waited all those
:29:07. > :29:11.years. Mind you, the BBC can watch this and learn from it. Maybe they
:29:12. > :29:15.are quite happy just to see STV trying it out. There will have to
:29:16. > :29:18.leave it. Magnus and Gerry, thank you for coming in.
:29:19. > :29:22.Graeme's here tomorrow night, usual time.