25/10/2016 Scotland 2016

Political turbulence on the radar as a new runway gets

the green light from the Westminster Government.

The Scottish Government welcomes plans to expand Heathrow.

Good news for business, but what about the environment?

And the world has come to Edinburgh to discuss how to improve life

It's just six years since climate change campaigners were proclaiming

plans for a third runway at Heathrow "dead and buried"

when David Cameron firmly ruled it out.

Fast forward to today's furious pledges to see his successor

Theresa May in court over her government's approval

The decision has already prompted one Conservative MP to resign and -

with her small parliamentary majority - it looks like

there'll be trouble ahead for the Prime Minister.

In a moment, we'll discuss the implications of all this

for Scotland, but first, here's Andrew Black.

A typical day in the skies over southern England, 3000 flights of

six runways. That is now set to increase after the UK Government

gave the go-ahead to a third runway at Heathrow. Ministers said the

benefits would be huge. We believe the expansion of Heathrow airport

and the North West runway scheme, in accommodation with a significant

package of supporting measures on the scale recommended by the

Airports Commission, offers the greatest level of benefit to

passengers, business and to help us deliver the broadest possible

benefit to the whole of the United Kingdom. But the announcement

immediately caused a split in the UK Cabinet. I do think that building a

third runway slap bang in the middle of the western suburbs of the

greatest city on Earth is not the right thing to do. No other world

city would dream of subjecting so many hundreds of thousands of people

to more noise pollution in the way that the third runway would. And

what I worry about is that down the line, if and when a third runway

were to be built, but I don't think it would be, but suppose it would

be, it would be an overwhelming, to build a fourth runway. --

overwhelming clamour. Some local residents agree. My home will be 54

pieces from the new boundary fence. It will be impossible to live there.

I will be included in the 4500 homes that will be a terrible place to

live. The people deserve a quality of life. It is not about money. They

deserve a quality of life and there are serious health issues with

living under flight paths. 460 schools will be under flight paths.

But when it comes to another Heathrow runway, the Scottish

Government wants it done as soon as possible. As things stand, because

of the delays we have had, you seeing fellow development in Western

Europe, in Holland and in Istanbul, that is the first to the UK. If we

are to have those airports becoming the hub airport, that would be

damaging to the environment and to jobs in Scotland. So my plea to the

UK Government is to get on and do it as soon as possible. But bosses at

Edinburgh airport reckoner runway will never be built. Instead, they

want Scottish ministers to honour their pledge to cut air passenger

duty. The biggest opportunity up here is that the Government follows

through on that promise because that is holding us back selling to

Chinese, American or European hairlines, we are still quite

uncompetitive in tax terms. If we get that amounts we will put

Heathrow on the back burner and wait until it falls over and make the

point that Edinburgh and Scotland is a great place to connect. But

Heathrow managers are confident the new runway will be built, including

the possibility of a legal challenge, they expect it to be open

in 2025. Well, I've been speaking

to our Environment Correspondent, Kevin Keane, for his take

on today's announcement. This seems to be good news for

business. Surely it cannot be good for the environment? Well, indeed.

And there is nobody within this who will make any other claim than to

say that more aeroplanes in the sky, more aeroplanes taking off and

landing at Heathrow, will result in more greenhouse gas emissions. And

that simply a fact. What we have been hearing about today and during

the lead up to this from Heathrow and others is about some of the

offsetting measures, the big concern is a densely populated area around

Heathrow is the amount of air pollution, ground level pollution,

the amount that people in the immediate vicinity or on the

property of Heathrow might breathe in. The reassurance that has been

given is that this can be done, say some experts in the long term,

without there being any increase in those pollution emissions. The way

they say that will be done is by offsetting it, so for example,

having fewer diesel cars in the area, there is a bit of a prediction

that in the next ten years, there will be a significant shift from

diesel and petrol cars into electric vehicles. Perhaps they might even

have some kind of a zone within those areas, again, something that

has been rolled out in different cities, to prevent the most

polluting cars from entering that area around Heathrow. So that is,

for example, one of the offsetting measures that will be carried out

say Heathrow Airport, to reduce the amount of that ground level

pollution in a city that is already one of the most polluted in Europe.

But if there are going to be many more flights in and out of Scotland,

how does that square with the Scottish Government's environmental

commitments? Yes, because transport is a huge, huge area for governments

and the Scottish Government to have to tackle over the next ten to 15

years, to try to get those emissions down. A lot of the achievements that

have been registered from the Scottish Government's perspective

certainly over the last few years has been from the colonising the

energy sector, so shutting down coal-fired power stations, and we

are kind of around a limit of where we can deal with that, to try to

achieve more. So to achieve any new target, we are really going to have

to, and the Scottish Government will have to, look at other areas like

agriculture, unlike transport, and like heating of homes. But transport

is that key issue. I think what governments will say is that they

will have to look at this in the round, much like you talk about

offsetting increases in emissions from aeroplanes at Heathrow airport.

There will be talk of increasing the amount of vehicles that are taken

off the road, for example, emitting vehicles, so that might be more

electric cars. There is already a commitment for there to be

Scotland's first low emissions zone in a city summer in Scotland by the

end of next year. And other measures that are being undertaken as well to

try to achieve that. So it is all about it being in the round, but an

acceptance that if, as is pretty much inevitable by the looks of it,

unless there is any great change over the coming years in terms of

emissions from aeroplanes, as though the targets for other areas of

transportation will have to be much, much higher to meet some of those

targets. So it is going to be difficult for the Scottish

Government to reach its ambitious targets? It is going to be very

difficult and they say that themselves. But on the early part of

next year, there is a plan going to be rolled out in terms of how they

will in very great detail go about trying to achieve that. But the

environment groups and most people concerned say they are setting

themselves very ambitious and difficult targets, and indeed,

because they are difficult, they will be difficult to achieve.

Well, there's been a clamour of voices today,

talking about the economic impact of the new runway.

To tell us what it means for Scotland, I'm joined

by Stuart McIntyre from Strathclyde University's

Good evening. Thank you for coming in. Is there any doubt that this is

good for business in Scotland? Well, I think to the extent to which it is

going to be good is going to be driven by the extent to which it

increases our connection with the well, something like 70% of the UK's

long haul flights depart from Heathrow so with the announcement

today means that we have greater connectivity to the world, I think

that is good. Of course, you can have connectivity, but if you do not

have competition, that can erode the advantage of that, you know,

competition in the airline market, that can erode the advantage of

conductivity. So there are two Mac sites to this in terms of what is

going to determine the overall impact ultimately on connectivity

and productivity. Just to explain in practical terms, how exactly would

an extra runway in London bring money into the Scottish economy? Who

will benefit most? There are two things, one is the direct

construction activity and both in terms of Scottish companies being

involved and potentially through the supply change, what we got indirect

effects, you can have the increase in activity stemming from that kind

of activity, the extent to which that aggregates up to a sizeable

impact, is going to depend on the competitors of Scottish firms, but

the longer term, and it is worth bearing in mind what we're looking

at here is an additional runway, and effects for the 25, 30, 40 years

beyond that. Really, what is critical is connectivity and thus,

if its impact on productivity. So, while there is the immediate

construction costs and the benefit to Scottish firms of engaging in

that, there is also I think the much more important longer term

invocations of improving our connectivity to the world and

increasing productivity both in Scotland and across the UK. A lot of

these projections are far in the future and some of the songs talked

about are very large, ?61 billion over six years. -- sums. Any idea

what proportion of that we could expect to go back to Scotland? What

the independent airport commission was, it did some work to look at the

economic impacts of both the new runway at Gatwick and the extension

and the new runway at Heathrow. That broke down those aggregate economic

effects into three regions. London and the South East, the rest of

England and the rest of the UK. Scotland, Wales and Northern

Ireland's economic benefit was aggregated together. In the Quito

new runway case, it came out about 66.5%. -- in the Heathrow. But

again, I go back to, these are long-term effects, and with thinking

about improvements in jobs and GDP in 2050, 2000 60. We heard Edinburgh

airport saying a much better way in the short and to bring economic

benefit to Scotland is for the Scottish Government doing them at

the cut in air passenger duty. How much benefit might that bring? It is

worth emphasising again, that is short-term. What the announcement

today is about is long-term, and long-term economic growth.

In the short term, yes, it is likely that the chief executive of

Edinburgh airport is right that it will reduce costs for airlines

wanting to fly in and out of Scottish airports. But one has gone

to weigh that against what your virginity will cost. You are

reducing that tax revenue. What the revenue will you try and increase?

What spending Review reduce? In order to be able to balance that

budget. It's not just a case of saying, OK, let's reduce air

passenger duty. It has consequences. They think any Government or any

party think about that kind of change is demonstrating world it

will make the requisite adjustment in the budget. Whether it be

reductions in spending or increases in taxation elsewhere. Thanks for

coming in. The First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon,

has opened an international conference on disability

with a pledge to "redouble efforts Inclusion - at work and beyond -

is the hot topic at this week's Rehabilitation International World

Congress in Edinburgh. It has welcomed 1000 delegates

from around the world. We'll hear the view

from Norway in a moment - Her Royal Highness, the Princess

Royal, delivering the opening speech could begin three days of debate.

One of the issues they will be the fifth -- will be discussing here

but what about other areas of life? The successful trio, for China and

the UK, with a reflection on the amount of investment made. What I

learned and what I take away from that is that if you invest in

disabled people in employment and education, independent living and

other areas of life, you will hit gold in those areas, too.

Gathered here are some of the top disability experts on the road.

They will be developing ideas that will influence

There are massive cultural disabilities around the world as to

how disability is approached, isn't there? Yes. How challenging is it?

Very. There is no data to look at. We have to look a different country

specifically. Developing countries face a lot more challenges than

others. You know that a lot of different countries have ratified

intervention with people with disabilities. They make a

difference. With 1 million people in Scotland with a mental-health

condition or disability, what can we learn from this week's conference?

What Edinburgh can learn is to take on board and look at what other

Having a forum like this, where you can have those conversations

with people just sat around a table, like we are now,

it is where you learn from each other, I think, more than anything.

I think we need to also change our social access

and our mentality around disability, because it is not just about having

a really accessible venue for accessible coding,

it is about staff having disability awareness training and having

the right attitude to treat disabled people with

For some will offer coming into Scottish Parliament, how can we use?

We already are. We are setting up dedicated disabled funds for

Scotland. We are looking to take away a lot of the indignities people

currently suffer when going through assessment reassessments to provide

more support for carers, helping those with disabilities fulfil their

potential is. There's a whole range of things we can do and I'm

determined that we will do them. 1000 delegates, 200 speakers from

different countries, will be here until Thursday to find a new way of

delivering services to an increasing disabled population.

Ian Hamilton reporting from the conference in Edinburgh.

We're joined now by the outgoing President

of Rehabilitation International, Jan Monsbakken, who says it's time

Good evening. Thank you. What exactly do you mean when you talk

about inclusion? I think broadly about inclusion. They need to build

an inclusive society to be able to include people with disability. You

have to have a totally inclusive approach to society. If not, you

will build up segregated support systems which, in the long run, will

not benefit the rights of people with disabilities. Norway is seen as

being a world leader in support of the board disabilities. Other things

you think we could learn from the way things are done in your country?

There is a couple of things that Norway is related at. We have... I

think maybe the most effective and most good assistant for distributing

assistive technology to people with disabilities, because it is

regulated by law that, if you are entitled to have assisted devices,

you will get delivery and it will be fast. In that respect, we are very

good. Of course, we also have three good economic support systems to

people that are not able to work. But I will not only mention what is

good in Norway. We are still not good enough to put people with

disabilities into the workforce. It is around 80 90,000 Norwegian people

with disabilities who would be happy to work but cannot do so. -- 80,000

- 90,000. Employers do not employ them. So, as one person in the film

just said, is it a change of mentality that is needed? Yes, we

really need to change mentality. We really need to look more about

things like a person's Resorts is and their abilities, rather than

disabilities. -- re-sources. People have so many re-sources that can be

put into force, no matter their disability. The society allows

people to use their abilities instead of excluding them by not

being accessible and not having the right attitude and the right

understanding of what people with disabilities can achieve in society.

You had our First Minister there in the film list a range of practical

measures that the Scottish Government intends to introduce to

help the disabled and their carers. The thing that is misguided? Should

there be a bit less support? In terms of welfare. Is that what you

are doing? Before we can build a totally inclusive society with

mainstream services and politics, you need to keep the support system.

Parallel to keeping a good support system, you also need to mainstream

and make sure people with disabilities can have the same

rights and the same opportunities to enter into workforces and take

higher education, to have good health care, to have access to

transport and to be a part of the society at large. Are there any

countries you can see around the world well you think they are

actually doing particularly well in administering then? -- in that

mainstream then. Coming from Norway and Scandinavia, I think we have

done really well. Politically, we are trying to build inclusive

societies. Not only for people with disabilities, but for women, people

with different sexuality is and all other sorts of excluded persons in

society. You need to make politics a policy which includes people,

instead of excluding and segregating them. How far do you think we need

to go globally before we do have this inclusive society that you're

talking about? I think we were on the right track. We have had a good

journey. We had a UN Convention on the rights of Persons with

disability, which was adapted into thousand and six. That's only ten

years ago. -- 2006. I think, around the world, we are in a better

situation than they were 20 or 30 years ago. We're making a change and

that takes time, of course. We need to be patient but, at the same time,

we also need to be a little bit aggressive when we seek about the

need to change a mentality, they need to change politics and the view

of disability. Jan Monsbakken in Edinburgh. Thank you.

Well, let's go back to tonight's top story, with our news reviewers,

Political Editor of Glasgow's Evening Times, Stewart Paterson,

and the Press Association's Lynsey Bews.

So, Boris Johnson said that a third runway will never be built. How much

political turbulence do you think that Theresa May? I think there is

quite a lot of the Bill and head for the Prime Minister but a lot of our

MPs are against this. A lot of Cabinet against this. If it comes to

a vote, she may find it difficult getting numbers to get this through

Parliament. Do you think she could be involved here? I think this will

be tremendously difficult for her. Many people have tried to sort this

out and have failed. I think the suggestion has been that there could

be this free vote were Conservative MPs, it is quite interesting. It

could impact Cabinet registrations down the line. It could be quite

embarrassing for the Tories. It leaves the reader may in a situation

where he will be relying on the S NP, most likely, to get this bill

through. -- SNP. Does that explain why the SNP came out in advance to

say they support this? Well, they have backed the expansion because

they think it's the best option for connecting Scottish airports to the

rest of the world. Why they can't do that from Scottish airports and

promote new routes from Scotland, I don't know. We used to have they

would develop and fun, they could be doing with something like that but

it is gone. There are several other airports that are not Heathrow that

could be promoted to the rest of the world, in support of Scotland. It is

no surprise that the SNP have backed Heathrow. They always have. They

would have no issue backing that in a parliamentary vote, because that

is their position. I just wonder how it came about that they came out in

advance, to nip in the bud any speculation and say that they would

push this through. It just a message to get on with it, to put it

forward. The Scottish Government have not been shy in saying how

economically beneficial they think this plan could be. For them, I

think the dead difficulty -- the difficulty comes when you speak to

Kevin Dean and he said they were questioned on the environmental

credentials because of this decision, because of something that

is happening down in the south of England and habitat as you reflect

on the Scottish at Holyrood, which is trying to put itself is a very

green Government? Will be a problem for the SNP? There is a

contradiction there. The SNP claim to have the leading climate change

targets at Holyrood but they are backing something that is going to

produce another 250,000 planes flying over Heathrow every single

year. I think it's too planes per second there. There was a problem

that will obviously increase air pollution. We are happy to do that

for some reason. At a time of economic uncertainty, isn't the

reason Claire why voters might shrug their shoulders and say, well, if it

brings more money to Scotland, then so be it -- clear. It is seen as

being a trade-off, really, isn't it goes when Brexit has brought it into

effect. We need this economic boost. There have been some interesting

discussions around with a Brexit really has been the kind of catalyst

for this. Is it just being used as an excuse to bring this proposal

forward? That is certainly be Government's position, the Scottish

Government's position, that it needed as an economic stimulus to

bring much needed economic boost to Scotland. We have already seen Zac

Goldsmith resigned. Will we see some Cabinet resignations of this? He has

possibly set a precedent. Maybe others then comes closer to a vote.

Maybe not resigning at this stage but, further down the line, if they

will vote against the Government and that is whether it is a free vote or

not. Particularly ministers. If they don't support the Government line,

they have to go. Do you think Boris Johnson maenad have received

through? -- might have to see it through? Well, there is a long way

to go but it puts them in a different position from backbenchers

when a vote against Governor and policy. Let's move onto other news.

The Scottish Government is to rant a pardon against homosexual men who

have been convicted of crimes that have been abolished. What do you

think of this? You don't need Alan Turing's brilliant mind to see how

this is happening and why it is happening now. It is keeping misery

on the Tories after they kicked out John Nicolson, -- John Nicolson's

bill. It should have been done before. I was going to say that,

should it have been done a long time ago? It could have been. It's funny,

we were talking about this earlier. I can commemorate time in this issue

has come up in a question at Holyrood or in a public petition at

Holyrood. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong about that,

but I just remember this issue really been on the agenda before.

Perhaps it is because there is possibly a small number of people

who will be affected by this in Scotland, because we were talking

about this again, the award being slightly different up here. It's

slightly less. The people having convictions of this. -- law. These

outdated offences. It is symbolic and that's why it has been so

broadly covered here. The equality fight here is different. Patrick

Harvie said he would like the Government to go even further and

issue a public apology. Do you think a pardon would like they are being

forgiven for something they did wrong? If he is asking the Scottish

Government to issue an apology, then he's as King the Scottish Government

to apologise for something the Westminster Government did. -- if he

is asking. The Scottish Government never said no. They should not be

apologising for law that was repealed 20 years before we had a

Scottish Parliament. Perhaps the UK Government has something to

apologise for, in that respect. Do you think that when governments

apologise for something that a previous Government did in history,

they are regarded as particularly meaningful? It depends on the issue.

On something people feel really strongly about, even when it is an

administration or a Government which hasn't actually done the wrong

doing. -- the wrong doing, when it is done, it is appreciated. That's

if it is a genuine apology. A pleasure talking to you both as

ever. Thank you for coming in. Graham's here with you

tomorrow night, usual time. So do please do join

him then, bye-bye.