13/03/2016 Sunday Politics Scotland

Morning, folks, and welcome to the Sunday Politics.

begins a new drive urging Scots to support what she calls

"the beautiful dream" of independence.

Tough talk from George Osborne ahead of his Budget on Wednesday.

The Chancellor wants us to live within our means.

Fighting talk too, from the man in his shadow.

John McDonnell wants to revive Labour's economic credibility.

And does Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party have a problem

Labour students at Oxford are already being investigated

and now party students at another university will also face scrutiny.

And coming up on Sunday Politics Scotland:

We'll have more from the SNP's conference, where Nicola Sturgeon's

been making her pitch to continue as First Minister and launching

And with me three Fleet Street journos, living the dream.

Nick Watt, Julia Harley-Brewer and Tim Shipman.

For the rest of us, it is a bit of a nightmare!

So, four months ago, George Osborne sounded upbeat

Writing in the Sun on Sunday, ahead of Wednesday's Budget,

the Chancellor says the world is facing its most uncertain period

He says Britain has to act now, rather than pay later,

Let's listen to the Chancellor on the Marr Show a little earlier.

I think the world is a much more difficult and dangerous place.

My message in this Budget is that the world is a more

uncertain place than at any time since the financial crisis.

We need to act now so we don't pay later.

That is why we need to find additional savings,

equivalent to 50p in every ?100 the Government spends by the end

We have got to live within our means to stay secure.

That is the way we make Britain fit for the future.

That was the Chancellor earlier this morning. What did we learn? He is

preparing the ground for a very difficult budget. Why is he talking

about the difficult global economic circumstances? We have a significant

slowdown in China but it helps him in the EU referendum campaign. Why

risk leaving the EU when it is difficult economic circumstances? It

helps him with a budget. You need to expend why he was talking in the

July budget, the Autumn Statement, targeting a 10 billion budget

surplus by 2020 and now he will be talking back calories and ?18

billion hole in the size of the economy. Will he be able to meet

that surplus? He needs an alibi for that. All the global headwinds,

problems in the emerging markets, the slowdown in China, the Eurozone

struggling to be overwhelmed. We knew that back in July. Nothing has

changed. The thing about George Osborne is he is a politician. It is

always about politics. It is not ideal, coming into local elections,

London mayoral elections, to be giving a load of cuts to public

services and possibly tax rises. The reality is he is always looking at

the long game and he does always play a brilliant politicians long

game. He is looking to 2020 and does not care. He also plays a bad shot

game. Will it be a difficult budget or will it be a steady issues

budget? What is striking about back in this morning, at least half of it

was about the European Union and not the budget. The rest of it was about

the Tory leadership and him taking potshots at Boris Johnson. The

subtext of this budget is it has been a difficult and dangerous time

for George Osborne and his teacher. He sat there and said, I am not

going to sit in this chair and mumble away. Who could he be talking

about there? We were told week ago that the subtext of the budget would

be the dangers of Brexit and the Tory leadership. It is not the

subtext, it is the text. There is hardly anything in it in terms of

big stuff. Steady as she goes. Can we just have another shout out for

the brilliant headline, genius political strategist clears up mess

made by genius political strategist. He may be nursing a little rabbit to

surprise as always! Now, if a certain referendum had

gone a bit differently, Scotland, would be an independent

country in just over ten days' time. Those wanting to leave the UK didn't

win that argument in 2014 but that hasn't dented the fortunes

of the SNP, who are riding high It's the party's Spring Conference

in Glasgow this weekend, and we're joined now

from there by the First Minister Good morning. A pleasure to be with

you, Andrew. Had the referendum gone your way, we would be ten days from

independents. You will be taking a massive and unsustainable ?15

billion budget deficit, 10% of Scottish GDP. What would you be

doing to get that down? We would deal with it in the same way the UK

dealt with its deficit in 2009/ when they had 2.2% of the GDP. -- 2009/

2010. They will be building on the underlying fundamental strengths of

the Scottish economy. Our this goal position has been broadly similar to

the rest of the UK and, in some years, better than the rest of the

UK. Onshore revenues are growing at a faster rate than the fall in

offshore revenues. We have higher employment and faster productivity

growth. The economy is fundamentally strong and that would have been a

very good basis on which to become an independent country. Did you not

oppose most efforts of the British government to get the deficit down?

I opposed many measures that George Osborne has taken. I do not say we

should not try to get the deficit down. I have opposed and continue to

oppose the speed at which it is happening in the way in which it is

happening but no one would deny that countries want to get their fiscal

positions into a more stable condition and the UK is in right

now. The point I'm making is the Scottish economy is fundamentally

strong economy. Much of what I have said illustrates that point. Let's

look at some of the things you have said. You have said most countries

have deficits. Can you name another at Fat economy 80s after the

financial crash that has a budget deficit of 10% of GDP. You do not

look at just one year full if I go back to that -- two 2008, 2009, it

was double that of Scotland. Our this goal position has been stronger

but is not right now because of the particular issues. Is it not the

case that Scotland's deficit now is the highest in the European Union?

That is true, isn't it? In the year we had figures published in this

past week, we have a very difficult and challenging set of figures. It

is the highest. No country, whether the UK, Scotland or another EU

country, makes judgments about that this good strength of that country

on the strength of one year's goes. The point I am making is over the

past ten years, our fiscal position has been broadly similar to the UK

and coming summer beiges, has been significantly better. If you project

forward to the next five years, the future is much more important than

the past, onshore revenues are likely to Bath the outstrip the

decline in offshore revenues. -- basked in the outstrip. The North

Sea contains difficulties for those working in the North Sea and

economies on the North East of Scotland. The economy of Scotland is

fundamentally strong. Let's look at more than one year. You have said it

is a snapshot. Without oil revenues, and there are no oil revenues now,

without the revenues, Scotland has run a persistent budget deficit of

over 10% every year for 13 years. You have a systemic deficit problem.

Why should you not look at oil revenues? Oil revenues are there and

have been contributing to the Treasury to the tune of ?300

billion. They are not there now. Without them you have run a

persistent budget deficit and have done for 13 years. I accept it is

the future that matters more than the past. If you look at the

projections for the next five years, our onshore revenues, remember more

than 90% of the Scottish economy comes from onshore and not offshore.

If you look five years ahead, onshore revenues are projected to

grow in the region of ?14 billion. That is many times before in

offshore revenues in that period. I am not denying the challenge of

North Sea and other countries. Norway is facing exactly the same

challenge. Because they are better prepared for it and have Stuart did

oil resources better, Norway, in the last couple of weeks true down on

its massive oil fund. The powers that independence would have given

as and we did not vote yes, we have had -- we would have had ability to

draw down on that faster. Why are onshore revenues growing less

strongly in Scotland than the rest of the UK? That is a long-standing

issue. One issue at the heart of that is growth in the heart of

London. We are seeing a narrowing in some of the long-standing gap there

has been between aspects of the Scottish economy and the UK economy.

If we take productivity, for a long time Scotland lags significantly

behind the rest of the UK. Over the past years we have close that gap is

it that can leave. We still lag behind our European competitors and

that is a problem. I am not standing here denying the challenges that the

Scottish economy has. In the same way you have been talking about the

Chancellor's budget and the same way the UK economy has challenges and

across the European Union, they have challenges. There are real strength

is in the Scottish economy. The real question should be how we build on

and accents are the big strengths. Revenues per person in Scotland

where ?10,700 in the years 2011, 20 12. They are now ?10,000, 700 ( even

with the growth in revenues. The offshore has offset that. We still

have a fundamental deficit problem. I am not denying we have a deficit.

The UK has a deficit. Take revenues per head of population, which is

what you decided to me there. In the most recent year, our revenues per

head of population are broadly similar to the UK. In every one of

the past 35 years, revenues per head of population have been higher than

the rest of the UK. I accept we have a challenge in the North Sea. I

accept that like all oil-producing countries, we have challenges about

how we transition away from oil and gas over the years to come, though

there is a great deal of attention in the North Sea. These are

challenges we should embrace and challenges we should be working out

how we face up to and address. Scotland is doing that and we'll do

that on the basis of fundamental strengths in our economy. -- will do

that. Scotland pays per capita about the same as the UK average. I am

talking about the current year. What I am saying is, you cannot judge the

economy in one year. It is similar in one year in 34 of the past 35

years and has been higher. That is the point I am making. The reason

you are running a deficit, per capita spending is so much higher

than in Scotland it is ?1400 higher public spending per person.

Westminster that is that build it is the difference between tax revenues

and what you spend. -- fits that bill. It is a deficit. The UK is in

deficit in Scotland is in deficit. It is twice as big! In 2008, 2009,

the UK deficit was twice as big as Scotland it will vary from year to

year. In terms of the point about per capita spending, there are very

good reasons why someone who knows Scotland well, we have a country

where one in five of the population lives in a row and remote community.

I was Health Secretary for five years. It cost more to deliver

health services on an island or rural community than it does in

Glasgow. Westminster pays for that, it makes up the difference. If you

are independent you would either have to raise taxes or cut spending.

What would it be? By how much would you raise taxes and cut spending? We

set a budget in devolved Scotland every year. We make choices,

sometimes these are tough choices. If Scotland were independent, we

would do that as well. The point I am making, the economy of an

independent Scotland would face challenges like other economies do.

We're in a fundamentally strong position. Employment is higher than

any other UK nation. Productivity is growing faster. We have a number of

key strengths in the economy. One of the challenges is how we build on

these strengths and get our economy growing faster. We have a number of

world leading sectors in our economy.

The fact is your deficit was ?15 billion, moving with oil revenues at

2 billion last year. This year oil revenues are reckoned to be at zero

so your budget deficit would get even worse. Two cut your deficit to

anything like acceptable levels you would have to increase tax to 16% or

cut spending by 14% or a combination of the two, what would it be? We

would deal with the deficit in the same way the UK is dealing with the

deficit and dealt in the deficit -- with the deficit in 2009/ ten. We

would be in the same position as many other countries but we would be

in a position where we have got a fundamentally strong economy. I wish

Scotland have voted yes in 2014, if it had done we would have spent the

last almost two years preparing for Scotland becoming independent. In a

negotiation around independence, there would have been discussions

about assets, liability, the share of defence spending, so that's what

would have been the case if we voted for independence. Looking ahead, we

have a strong economy and the challenge is how we grow it even

faster. You accept surely that you wouldn't be allowed to join the

European Union with a 10% deficit, you would have to agree to Brussels

programme, correct? We are getting into some ridiculous territory here

and one of the most ridiculous arguments. Scotland wouldn't have

been out of the EU, we wouldn't have been in the position of an accession

state. It is a bit rich for anybody, given where we are right now, with

the prospect of being taken out of the EU ahead of us, for

scaremongering about the prospects of that. With two weeks to go until

independence, instead of increases in public spending which you

announced yesterday... They didn't vote yes. But if it had been, you

would have been looking at the list of hospitals and schools to close,

you would be the austerity party, that's what you would have to do.

That's ridiculous. Countries the world over have deficits and deal

with them. We would also have been taking on the greater powers to grow

our economy, particularly our own short economy. Italy and Greece had

10% deficit and you know the austerity they had to go through. I

think this argument starts to tip over into being incredible, we start

to compare Scotland, with all of the strength of the Scottish economy, to

countries like Greece and Italy. I have spoken about the fundamental

strengths of our economy, not least the fact we have had the longest

period of economic growth since the devolution. You have said all of

that. Yes, we have challenges, but Scotland has a strong economy. Then

why do your revenues like you're spending by ?2400 per person? -- lag

your spending. We have a deficit like many other countries... Nobody

has a deficit like Scotland's. We have a particular issue because of

the fall in North Sea revenues. It is an indictment of Westminster

mismanagement that unlike Norway, we don't have a massive oil fund to

help deal with that. Westminster is paying for your deficit, Westminster

is paying for the difference for the rest of the deficit, would you like

to thank the rest of the people of the United Kingdom for making up for

the deficit you have got? Westminster has a deficit of its

own, it is ?1 trillion in debt. That is not the deficit, that is the

debt. That is why I said debt, I understand the difference between

deficit and debt, but it has accumulated debt of ?1 trillion, it

has an annual deficit just like Scotland and many other countries

do. It is actually 1.5 trillion, even worse than you think. I was

being kind to them, Andrew! You should be kind because they are

saving you quite a bit of money! Does Labour have a problem dealing

with allegations of anti-semitism? The party is worried enough to have

established an inquiry into the Labour Club

at Oxford University where there are accusations that

members used off-colour language And the Sunday Politics has been

told that the investigation will look at new claims

from another university. It comes after an activist

with controversial views was allowed back into the party then promptly

chucked out again last week. Does Jeremy Corbyn's support

for causes like the Palestinians or Stop The War mean he's not tough

enough when there are allegations It's seen that way by some

students at Oxford. Last month the vice-chair

of the Labour club there resigned, claiming some members had a problem

with Jews and used words like Zio, a nickname for Jewish people that

many find offensive. It's now being investigated

by the Labour peer Baroness Royle, who is also looking at the wider

issue of behaviour in We understand she's now

extended her investigation to include students

at the London School of Economics. This week, they have been electing

a new general secretary One of the candidates,

Rayhan Uddin, who's also in the Labour group,

has been criticised for some Facebook posts that emerged

during the campaign. In one, he talked about leading

Zionists wanting to take over the student union to make it right

wing and Zio again. Facebook post:

of language, writing in another He has been referred to Labour's

investigation into student politics by someone

who now works for an MP. We've seen the letter they wrote,

which said: Because it was an older generation

of activists that came up at Prime Minister's

Questions this week. I was completely appalled to see

yesterday that the Labour Party has readmitted someone to their party

who says, and I believe that the 9/11 suicide bombers,

and I quote, must never be condemned and belongs to an organisation that

says "we defend the Islamic State He was referring to Gerry Downing,

who had also blogged about what he called

the Jewish question, after being readmitted to the party

this week he was resuspended. He reckons it's really a battle

between different wings in Labour. You've said there is a conspiracy

of people out to get Jeremy Corbyn, Well, Dan Jarvis and these people

of course, obviously there's the whole Blairite wing of the party

and others, who have been absolutely disgusted at the membership

and the left-wing surge Whereas the Labour MP Wes Streeting

says there is a problem I think in certain parts

of the British left, there has always been a virulent

form of pretty bigoted politics, particularly in terms

of anti-Semitism, which has been There's also a mentality

which I think has been epitomised is simply not acceptable

in the modern Labour Party. Jeremy Corbyn's supporters,

like those in the grass roots campaign group Momentum,

say none of this is fair on him. Corbyn comes under the most

incredible level of attacks and one of the things that he's attacked

for is his long-standing commitment to anti-war, anti-imperialism,

peace in the Middle East. And I think that's where some

of this comes from. He does absolutely condemn

anti-Semitism, he has time There is not a shred

of anti-Semitism in his personal make-up, in his moral make-up

or in his political make-up. And as for Labour's investigation

into anti-Semitism among students, there's no time frame

for when it will report. Let's speak now to the Labour MP,

John Mann, who's chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group

against Anti-Semitism. He's in Berlin at an

Anti-Semitism Conference. Is there an anti-Semitism problem in

the Labour Party? Of course, that's why these issues have got attention.

It is not a big why these issues have got attention.

problem when it comes to racism needs to be dealt with. We have been

here before. I can recall 30 years ago when there were extremists

trying to ban Jewish ago when there were extremists

some of the universities, and we clamped down on them very hard then

and they weren't in the Labour Party but it is the same kind of people,

the same ideology. Some of that has crept into the Labour Party and it

needs to be removed. Why has it come back? People could write big

academic books on why it has re-surged but what we have seen in

history is that anti-Semitism never seems to go away. But why in the

Labour Party has come back? People have obviously chosen to dissociate

with the Labour Party in the growth of membership, some of those people

have attitudes that are very outdated and prejudiced. There is no

space for them in the Labour Party and the reason that is important is

because I am getting young Jewish activists posturing whether the

Labour Party is the place for them in terms of their support, their

vote and their activity, and we cannot tolerate a situation where

any part of society doesn't feel that a major political party like

the Labour Party is not the place for them, which is why prompt

effective action and vigilance on this is required, including from

Jeremy as the leader of the Labour Party. Is the Labour leader doing

enough? Or the fact he has talked about his friends, Hamas, Hezbollah,

and shared platforms with people who have been very hostile to Israel and

so on, is that a disadvantage? Is it encouraging anti-Semitism or is it

not relevant? I have met Jeremy recently to discuss anti-Semitism in

the Labour Party and it is clear to me that he does not tolerate or

support it but what he has to do is follow that free with actions and

ensure that others in the Labour Party follow it through with actions

because the kind of thing, the atmosphere that is being created in

Oxford University is not a one-off. This has been happening elsewhere as

well. While these can be seen as small incidents, if you are the

young Jewish person who is impacted by it, it is not small for you and

it is magnified in the universities, which are pretty tolerant places and

rightly so, if there is in tolerance to any particular group and to

Jewish students. We are not prepared to have that in the Labour Party,

there has got to be action, it has got to be led from the front and it

has got to be decisive action. There is no space for these people in the

Labour Party or is there space for people in any way excusing their

actions. But there is an inquiry into what has been going on at

Oxford, but is your party doing enough about this? Because I

understand these inquiries may be subsumed into a much bigger inquiry

into bullying and so on. What is your feeling? It is action by

results. If there is a decisive action, there will be an almighty

row which wouldn't be helpful but the idea that those of us who fought

over decades, challenging anti-Semitism and other forms of

racism, are going to accept other than the highest of standards in our

own party, well I can tell you it is going to happen. There are many of

us who will only accept absolutely the highest standards. We are not

prepared to tolerate any form of anti-Semitism or any excuse for it

in the Labour Party or anywhere else in society. But in our own party

absolutely not and therefore there has got to be action, words are not

good enough. Historically the Labour Party has done well from the Jewish

vote. The Jewish vote over time has tended to vote Labour. If this

anti-Semitism continues in your party, are you in danger of losing

the Jewish vote? We prepared a report ten years ago on a

cross-party basis that highlighted anti-Semitism in all of its aspects

including from the right but also what was described by some as the

new anti-Semitism on the left. It is not new but it had been dormant for

a long period of time. People have been accustomed to the Labour Party

and that part of the left being highly tolerant to everybody. That

has got to happen, you cannot have a progressive party of any substance

in politics if it allows any form of intolerance and therefore we are not

prepared to have second-class citizens, second-class form of

racism allowed in the Labour Party. Anti-Semitism has got to be

challenged, including anti-Semitism on the left, and so robustly and put

back in the dustbin again. That is my intention in the Labour Party. I

am looking forward to Jeremy and the National Executive being decisive,

removing the anti-Semites, going into where there is intolerance and

explaining what is anti-Semitism and why we are not prepared to have it

in our party. Thanks for joining us this morning.

Labour's Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell ran Jeremy Corbyn's

leadership campaign on a platform fighting not just austerity,

Now though, he wants to be the new voice of fiscal

responsibility, and says he's going to re-write

In a moment we'll be talking to John McDonnell's number two,

the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury.

But first let's hear what Mr McDonnell had to say

It is a wider ambition then just Labour's fiscal credibility.

I want to try to restore credibility to economic policy-making generally,

not just within the Labour Party but across politics too.

We have had too long, for example, the last six

years we have had fiscal rules which have not been met,

I am trying to encourage a better economic debate.

What I have said is quite clearly, when we go back into government,

we will eliminate the deficit, reduce debt, and will

ensure that is supervised independently by the Office

And Labour's Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Seema Malhotra,

Welcome to the Sunday Politics. You would balance current spending with

revenue and borrow to invest. How does that differ from Mr Brown and

Mr balls? You are right about there being two key parts to the new

fiscal credibility were all. In a sense, this builds on very much

where we have been before. It also responds to the criticisms that were

made of Jaws -- George Osborne's this school charter where he was

criticised for tying his own hands and not allowing for investment. --

fiscal charter. There are two key differences. It makes it more

explicit, that there should be independent voices. We have said we

want the OBR to be an independent voice around deficit reduction

targets, and also reporting directly to Parliament. The second area is

that we want to make sure there is the opportunity for investment and

also, if there are difficult times, like we had in 2009, when monetary

policy does not seem to be working, it gives an opportunity for fiscal

policy to work alongside. It builds on but has two key differences. Mr

Brown defended his rules as well when times got bad. It was described

as being austerity light. This must be as well? It has been developed

and the reason... It is not about austerity. It is a framework that

will allow us to make spending and tax decisions in the future. It

responds to the criticisms, the universal criticisms of George

Osborne's this dull charter. -- fiscal charter. It says we need to

invest for the future. I understand all that. Mr Brown and Mr Balls also

wanted to invest and that was criticised by the Shadow Chancellor

as austerity light. If that were austerity light, this is steroid to

-- night as well. We're in a situation where George Osborne is

blaming everyone but himself. -- this is austerity light as well.

George Osborne's Member of Parliament for the Tory Party has

said, what we have seen our warm words. He has talked about

investment and an export led strategy. This is built on debts,

household debt. How much is public investment? Around 30 billion, if

you take into account the difference in spending. It is 34 billion in

public spending at the moment. It should be much higher. How much more

should it be? It should be higher. There is no excuse for what George

Osborne has done. I am not asking about Mr Osborne. I am asking about

your policy. 34 billion at the moment, rising to 40 billion by 20

20. How much more would it be? It focuses on where it needs to be

regarding GDP. You need to have a good level of investment so you are

creating jobs for the future. What I am trying to work out is what this

creating jobs for the future. What I means in hard cash for investment,

how big would investment be under a Labour government? It is clear that

George Osborne has been cutting investment. It was around 3%, 3.5%,

and is now 1.4% in terms of infrastructure. If you want jobs of

the future coming through, if you want to turn around the situation

where young people... By how much more would public investment

increase under this formula? What we have said is you need to make sure

that we have a balance of where the economy needs investment so we can

that we have a balance of where the get tax receipts and growth for the

future. We had economists saying that George Osborne, if you talk

about fairness in the future... I am here to talk about the labour policy

and not that of George Osborne. Nor here to talk about the labour policy

has there been balanced growth. If you want a balanced budget, you need

to balance growth. Let's talk about labour. John McDonnell has talked

about the difference between short-term and long-term investment.

What is the difference? What we have said as she want to see investment

that will see us having a big stake in the future. If you want to look

at energy investment, you are talking out about -- about 20, 30

years. It is about supporting companies, entrepreneurs and

supporting the long-term growth for the country as well. If you're

talking about rail, roads and infrastructure, you will be aware, I

am sure, of the reports that showed recently we have fewer buses than

2010, our rolling stock and trains are in poor condition, people are

taking longer to get to work and the trains are more crowded. That should

be a wake-up call to George Osborne he is not working in the interests

of the British public and people are asking if the decisions are based on

political interest and not on the country's future. You would balance

current spending, day-to-day spending. At the moment there is a

deficit. What would you cut to balance current spending? There are

two things. The first is about spending decisions and the second

about tax receipts. We are arguing that if you want to see tax receipts

grow, George Osborne has seen them for in regard to productivity

growth. What would you cut? We would want to see that growth increases in

that you see an increase in tax receipts. You cannot spend if it is

not within your means. What would you cut? You cannot spend if it is

not within your means. What the announcement from the Labour Party

is about is how we earn our way in the world and survived in a

competitive economy. We will leave it there. Thank you very much.

Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.

Coming up on the programme: Nicola Sturgeon delights party

This summer, the SNP will embark on a new initiative to build support

for independence. Nicola Sturgeon delights party members with that

announcement at the SNP conference, but what exactly does it mean?

And as she nears the end of her time as Presiding Officer,

Tricia Marwick joins us to discuss how the workings

of the Scottish Parliament can be improved.

With the polls all showing the SNP are likely to win another majority

in May and with their triumph in the General Election

under their belt, it's hardly surprising the mood at the SNP

During Nicola Sturgeon's speech yesterday, delegates applauded

But their biggest cheers were for an issue where the party

Our reporter Andrew Black's been soaking up the atmosphere.

The SNP has now been in power since 2007. That is longer than any other

party at Holyrood. In just a few months' time, it will ask voters to

give it an unprecedented third term in office. At the moment, all the

indications are that is exactly what will happen. Now, given all this

celebration, you may well think the SNP membership, now at 115,000, is

all singing from the same hymn sheet. But not entirely, because a

lot of these new members have come to the conference wanting to have

their say and managing their expectations has been an issue for

the SNP leadership. And on that note, the very first delegate to

speak at the conference had a problem with the agenda. With some

exceptions, the overall tone of the motions is one of complacent

self-congratulation. It pains me to say this. This conference is

beginning to resemble the later party in the Tony Blair era. -- the

Labour Party. I am grateful to Malcolm from making some of those

points because we have heard them a number of times in recent years, and

particularly with regard to the agenda in front of us. But what is a

pre-election conference... Said agenda was duly approved and it was

on the conference. Outside, a small-scale storm was brewing.

Protesters called on the SNP Government to extend its temporary

ban on fracking to a permanent one, a move favoured by some grassroots

SNP members, although Scottish ministers say they are still

assessing the situation. But the big issue on which SNP supporters want

an answer is when might be another independence referendum. Nicola

Sturgeon announced a plan for that and they liked what they heard. Our

success will depend on the strength of our argument is and the clarity

of a revision. It will mean convincing the people of this

country that independence is right, not for yesterday's world, but for

the complex, challenging and increasingly interdependent world

that we live in today. And right also for the world that our children

will inherit and live in tomorrow. Making and winning in that case is

our challenge and our opportunity. That is why I can tell you today

that this summer, the SNP will embark on a new initiative to build

support for independence. APPLAUSE

Afterwords, Nicola Sturgeon's Deputy elaborated on the initiative. What I

want to signal is the willingness of the SNP to engage in an open

conversation with the people of Scotland, to understand their

concerns, to address those concerns and find ways of addressing those

issues. There were some policy announcements. More resources for

the NHS and education, and a commitment to delivering superfast

broadband to all of Scotland. And even though at this stage it is

unlikely the SNP will commit to a second referendum in its election

manifesto, Nicola Sturgeon has once again put independence at the

forefront of her party's ambition. And Andrew Black joins me now

from the SNP conference at the SECC. What are they doing today, Andrew?

In terms of the atmosphere here, and we are almost at the end of the

Scottish party conference Spring season. We have already had the

Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. In terms of the attendance and tone

of those first two, they seemed pretty lacklustre compared to the

SNP conference here, where thousands of delegates have attended. There

has been the odd grumble, but really, overall, the atmosphere has

been pretty upbeat. Yesterday, we had Nicola Sturgeon making that big

announcement on the new drive towards independence. Today, things

don't a different tone because first things first, there is a Holyrood

election to fight. John Swinney, the Deputy First Minister, will deliver

election to fight. John Swinney, the an election rally call to the

conference this afternoon. They will show off their new candidates for

the Holyrood election. It is a bit silly, the party itself would admit,

to start setting targets for the amount of seats they will win in the

election, but if you think back to the last election in Scotland, the

SNP won almost all the seats in Scotland. Labour were just left with

that one Westminster seat. I think it is pretty safe to say that going

into the selection, we are still seeing the SNP with a huge load of

popularity. They will certainly be hoping that they could when pretty

much every single Holyrood constituency in May. Thanks for

that. And I'm joined here in the studio

by the Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure,

Investment and Cities, As we saw, Nicola Sturgeon God by

far the biggest round of applause when she said there would be a new

initiative on independence. What is it? Before I answer that question, I

am the Member of Parliament for... it? Before I answer that question, I

am sorry. I did mean to ask it? Before I answer that question, I

about Dunblane. My apologies. I am the Member of Parliament for

Clackmannanshire and Dunblane and today is the 20th anniversary.

People in Dunblane, including the families, will have different ways

of dealing with this. Some will want to speak about it and some will be

quieter, but I think it is important that we remember and pursue a people

involved in the tragedy that we will never forget what happened on that

day back in 1986. You, presumably being there of the past period, is

it possible to recover from something like that?

it possible to recover from is very difficult for the families

to recover. They have got personal tragedy to deal with. But the town

itself has tragedy to deal with. But the town

never forget what happened, of course.

will never forget the individuals got

will never forget the individuals back to the conference. This

initiative, which got all the applause, what is it? You can get

the shape of it from what the First Minister said yesterday and what the

Deputy First Minister said. Minister said yesterday and what the

which concerned people in Scotland about

which concerned people in Scotland negatives and it is important we

listen negatives and it is important we

those who support independence but with those who

those who support independence but independence if those concerns can

be alleviated. That might mean that we have to change

be alleviated. That might mean that stances in response

be alleviated. That might mean that respect those who voted no and

rebuilding a case for independence. Stances on what? That is the purpose

of the engagement. We will see close engagement with the First Minister

herself. What do you think? Why prejudge that's some of the concerns

herself. What do you think? Why we have had have continued to be

herself. What do you think? Why expressed as concerns, some of

defence expressed as concerns, some of

engagement in order to find out. A very obvious when you mentioned

there is very obvious when you mentioned

has talked about how, in the eventuality that Britain forced

has talked about how, in the there will be pressure for another

referendum, which would presumably be in some months' time. If there is

one, which currency would you say we should be part of? The point I am

just making is that we understand the fact that there were concerns

people had and the purpose of what the First Minister said yesterday is

to talk to these people and find out those concerns. Sure, but as the SNP

leadership, you've had 14 months or something like that to think about

this. What currency... I mean, if Britain was to leave the EU and

Scotland is to have another independence referendum with a view

to steam in the EU and becoming independent, you presumably would

not be seen... Would you be saying that we should still have the pound

and that all the politicians in London were lying when they were

saying we couldn't? We have seen in the last week a statement to say

that it was perfectly possible that the SNP's proposition could have

been workable. But there are two very big Fs. If that is then

followed by a vote on independence very soon thereafter... Rather than

get into those hypotheticals, I think it is.... Hang on, this is a

campaign you would have to be running within a matter of months. I

have no way of knowing that. Nicola Sturgeon has said there would be

pressure for another independence referendum should this eventuality

arise. It is surely not unreasonable for myself and indeed for viewers to

think that currency thing didn't go very well for them last time. What

is their policy now? Our policy, as was explained during the campaign...

Just to be clear on this, is your policy still that Scotland would be

part of the sterling zone? You are asking what our policy might be in

the event of a future referendum. asking what our policy might be in

am asking what the policy is now. You have asked me and I am trying to

get a sentence out. The fact is, we You have asked me and I am trying to

do not face a referendum just now. What we are meant to do in the

course of anticipating a further referendum is to get the views of

people, especially those we failed to convince in the past. That

respect those who voted no. You asked about the last 14 months. We

have been getting on and governing this country. The opposition parties

have lined up to say forget about the referendum, forget about the

constitution and run the country. We have been doing that very

effectively. I do not understand. My question was is it still SNP policy

that an independent Scotland would There have been a number of comments

made. The policy was perfectly workable. We wanted to listen to

people which is what the First Minister said yesterday. In addition

to a very good track record in governing the country. We want to

move forward. This initiative, talking to people, what does that

mean? Coffee mornings, rallies? We will have more detail on that at the

manifesto launch. Of course it is talking to people, not just rallies,

we have to talk not just at people but to people. I would hope it is

not just outputting to people but we do that all the time and accumulate

intelligence. This would be a continuation of that with the very

clear focus. After the referendum on talking to those people that had

concerns about the referendum. Do you think there should be another

referendum within the next period of the Scottish Parliament? I said this

on the very morning of the referendum, it has got to be at the

point the people of Scotland see there should be one. All ratings is

one way to take the temperature. It could be because of a material

change in circumstances such as the one you recommended. Labour are

proposing is losing the top rate of tax in Scotland, back up to 50p, is

that a good idea? We will wait until we have our manifesto before we

decide what to do with the tax powers. We will not be imposing

further tax increases on those on the lower rungs and also not having

tax cuts for those on the higher levels of taxation. We will wait

until we have the manifesto before really a proposal then tens of tax.

until we have the manifesto before Will newly out the proposals in your

manifesto on what you will do with the new powers coming out under the

Scotland Bill? If we have not bought an agreement through the work of

sturgeon and Swinney through the fiscal framework we will not do that

as a reason to lay out we will be doing it because of the manifesto.

Let me give you one example. George Osborne intends to raise the

threshold at which you start paying 40p tax to 50,000. Is that something

you think should happen in Scotland? I tend not to go with what George

Osborne is reported to be going to do. That is why we will await

Osborne is reported to be going to proposals. Nicola Sturgeon said we

will await. He has already said that. He has said lots of things in

the past. It is only after we know the tax proposals in the budget we

can put forward the tax proposals we have an response. Would you be

comfortably raising? We might have to change tax allowances. That is

before tax calculations. Andrew Neil was talking about the budget deficit

Scotland might have in ten days' was talking about the budget deficit

time if they had become independent, was talking about the budget deficit

never sent of GDP. Nicola Sturgeon said on this programme before the

general election you borrow the money, it needs to borrow the money

but there's also desktop of if we money, it needs to borrow the money

were an independent Scotland we would do all these things which

would make the economy grow faster than the rest of the UK so we cut

that deficit, can you give me a single example of something you

would do? I can give you a number, you have had a substantial cut in

our programme in Scotland since 2010 and we have increased deployment,

the highest climate in the UK. You would have to grow this economy

faster than the UK, give me one example. We have increased

appointment and population is not falling. One of the ways you could

do that is APD, it proposal that is having a substantial impact on

do that is APD, it proposal that is economy. Cutting carbon capture or

renewables. Investing in infrastructure of course you can

grow the economy. Your answer to how to get over the deficit is we would

all more money? We have shown infrastructure projects without

increasing public sector borrowing, it is possible to do that, it is

what we have done and will continue to do.

The Chancellor has been sounding an ominous note ahead of his budget

on Wednesday, warning of further spending cuts.

Speaking on the Andrew Marr programme this morning,

George Osborne said he wanted to cut 50p from every ?100 spent

by the Government by the end of 2020.

I'm joined now from London by Robert Hutton

Presumably you heard what George Osborne had to see earlier on, what

do you make of it? It is a frightening world idea. That is his

message at the moment, the phrase cocktail of risks which we have been

hearing and I think we'll hear for a while longer. It is to try to get

around the fact is forecasts are not coming in. That is as even if you

months ago he hoped the wood. He has got to find another 18 billion more

or less from savings and tax rises and the best way to

or less from savings and tax rises the public, he seems to feel, is

or less from savings and tax rises about the

or less from savings and tax rises impression I got this morning that

he might impression I got this morning that

what you think? The problem he has got, normally the first proper

budget one year into got, normally the first proper

government is when you do all the painful and unpopular stuff

government is when you do all the basis you have then got three or

four years for the voters basis you have then got three or

about it. The problem he has this time as the European referendum with

it turns out Cameron and Osborne slightly misjudged where the

it turns out Cameron and Osborne Parliamentary party is. Half of the

Parliamentary party is on the other Parliamentary party is. Half of the

trying to buy them off to do that is a cut to the headline

rate of personal tax. to do that is a cut to the headline

will be a rabbit. We to do that is a cut to the headline

what the rabbit is back after half an hour of the budget he

what the rabbit is back after half something out

what the rabbit is back after half do with a rabbit with

what the rabbit is back after half flag attached to each year. One

thing being flag attached to each year. One

example he could ask the old BR to flag attached to each year. One

Brexit. I would not be surprised if there was

his prebudget debate today turned into an about Europe. That might

upset some of the dumpy Tories who into an about Europe. That might

feel that the government should stay out of this debate about the

nation's future. He would be upset that they use the OBR to do that. It

is that they use the OBR to do that. It

ask them? Is there an opportunity for Labour here as was mentioned in

Andrews programme earlier? It has been a swing among the economy and

in no warnings that monetary policy and quantitative easing might not be

enough to get it back on its feet. There should be a move

enough to get it back on its feet. economy. Labour can sort of say now

we are not just wild eyed left-wingers but the major

international organisations are now saying what we are saying? The

Labour Party over the last five years have seen a really good

sensible international economic argument that says these kinds of

incredibly low interest rates, startling growth, this is time for

the government to step in, billboards, build houses, spend

money, put people back to work. It billboards, build houses, spend

does not cost much as when interest rates are higher and you can

stimulate the economy that way. That is what was being said on Friday and

the problem is for Labour turning that sensible economic argument into

a widely should be in government and can you trust us kind of argument.

That is a much trickier problem. That, as it were, is about the whole

package. It is not enough just for Labour to say sensible things that

they can say look at all these economists who agree with us but

they have got to say to the public you can trust us, when I am tough

they have got to say to the public you can trust me and I really mean

it. Thank you for joining us this morning.

The Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament,

Tricia Marwick, is standing down as an MSP at the coming election.

But she believes work to improve how business is done at Holyrood needs

to continue, and among the possible reforms she suggests

Ms Marwick is the fourth Presiding Officer, but the first

woman to take on the role, which she's held since 2011.

Tricia Marwick is elected as Presiding Officer of the Scottish

Parliament. There is far too much shouting across the chamber. And the

marriage and civil partnership Scotland Bill is passed. Can I

suggest that members review the footage of First Minister's

Questions and consider whether they showed themselves and this

parliament in the best light? Before I

end First Minister's Questions, can I thank all of the party leaders for

their brevity today? You floated the idea, didn't you,

the second chamber in the Scottish Parliament but you also seem to

concede it is not going to happen? It was in response to a journalist

asking if they should be a second chamber and I said I have always

believed there should be a second chamber but I have also acknowledged

until you work out how that second chamber is working it is not going

to happen. Politicians will be going to the public saying we need more

politicians? I think if you argue for an increase in the number of

members in the Scottish Parliament or arguing for a second chamber, you

need to be very clear what those arguments are and be very sure you

have all-party support for them because if one party made such an

argument I imagine it would not go down well on the doorsteps. Do you

think there is a case for getting all the parties together and saying

we need a proper second chamber in the Scottish Parliament, let's

discuss how we do it and make a joint approach to the public and say

actually, folks, this is what we need? I think that is a matter for

the future. We need to continue to perform procedures and structures

within the Scottish Parliament itself. I would suggest that is the

number one priority. The problem is that the underlying problem is that

there was this hope in 1999 that the committee system of the Scottish

Parliament would be different from the House of Commons in London.

Actually, it has not really been. Arguably bodies like the Finance

committee in the House of Commons, the way it held ministers to account

during and after the financial crisis, have operated better than

anything that has happened in Holyrood? I think it was the desire

from the constitutional committee to do things different from

Westminster, we ended up with the system that was different from the

standing committees at Westminster. That presents problems because the

committees at Westminster you talk about that have been extremely

effective ID select committees -- have been the select committees and

do not have a legislative role as well so they of course can do more

in terms of interrogation, holding the government to account than a

midi of the Scottish Parliament that has two consider legislation, called

ministers to account, all their own enquiries and initiate the on

legislation. The reality of the situation is that since 1999 the

committees have never worked in the week the CSG envisaged that they

should. I think it is fair to say that the administration of those

committees by the CSG and others were seriously misplaced. Part of

the problem is the Scottish Parliament was not designed for a

party having a majority. It so happens your party have bought a

majority but in a way that is not the point. What has happened as the

perception of the public is that parties are just falling party

lines. We have talked about the houses of commons early in his term

but that has not really happened, we have not really had Labour people

standing up and criticising the previously but administration or the

SNP people standing up saying this is not good enough. I do not have a

party, I gave up my party in 2011. Your background! I think for

accuracy, I think you know the point I am making is that it is difficult

for the communities to do all of these things. That has been true

since 1999 as you rightly point out. If the government wants to get its

own legislation through. The point I'm making is that in Westminster

you have select committees where legislation is not dependent on it

so, of course, people can be a lot more critical.

Is it possible to have a similar system here? These committees are

not working. I have tried for the past five years to get all parties

to address the need for formal committees. That has not been a

battle but I have one. But I am confident that the time of committee

reform is yet to come and it will come because it needs to. Forget all

that. What are you going to do? I have not a clue. I have absolutely

no plans whatsoever. I hope that I will still have some sort of role in

public life. I am open to offers. I do not get a pension until I am 65.

You do not want to get involved in politics. You left the SNP because

you'd became Presiding Officer. But you do not want to rejoin? I do not

intend to stand for any elected office in the future. Once you have

been the Presiding Officer, everything else is second to that.

Anyone thinking of setting up grand public bodies should be listening

very closely to what you have just said. You are available. I would

hope that I have got some skills and qualities that people might find

attractive. Tricia Myrick, thank you very much indeed.

Time now to take a look at the week's big stories,

and what's coming up in the week ahead.

And I'm joined from the SNP conference by the press

Association's Lynsey Bews and by the political editor of the Career,

Kieran Andrews. Give us a bit of atmosphere. One of

the things John Swinney said yesterday was that he reckoned the

SNP conference was not just bigger than Labour, but bigger than all the

other party conferences combined. Well, there is rather be a bit of

truth in that. It is a massive venue here. It is packed. Fringe events

are overflowing. There really is a bit of buzz around here. That bars,

funnily enough, during the cluster Jim's speech yesterday came during a

mention of independence, not during the mention of three key domestic

policies. There is an segment and anticipation. -- there is

excitement. We mentioned a delegate getting up and criticising the party

for being too easy on itself with its agenda and harking back to Tony

Blair, which is practically heresy in these parts with the SNP.

Overall, though, the atmosphere has been quite good and positive. More

charged than the SNP's opponent conferences. Lynsey, as keirin said

there, the biggest applause was for the mention of independence. I do

not know if you heard the view we did with Keith Brown, but at the end

I was not sure if I was any I was at the beginning exactly what this

initiative is other than talking about independence. No, exactly.

Just when you thought that independence was off the agenda and

Nicola Sturgeon was perhaps concentrating more on the new powers

coming to Holyrood, and what she will do with those powers, she

announced this initiative for building the case again for

independence. As Keith Brown was failing to tell you, really, the SNP

has not really given us much detail about what this initiative will

involve. What we can garner from what Nicholas Turgeon said yesterday

is that this will be a different approach in terms of tone. -- from

what Nicola Sturgeon said yesterday. Maybe a move away from the very

antagonistic, polarising debate we had leading up to the 2014 fold.

Really, a bit of an omission from Nicola Sturgeon yesterday that there

are some serious, key issues that need to be addressed in the case for

independence before she can secure that yes vote. The problem is that

if this was really just code for some of our arguments were not very

convincing, we will come up with some new ones, that's not really

going to satisfy, is it, the people who were wildly cheering what they

thought was good to be some big new campaign? Yes, but I think Nicola

Sturgeon is really trying to tell her supporters that they need to

play the long game on this. Even if there is a Brexit and a second

referendum was put forward, there are still key issues which need to

be addressed which will not go away. The SNP will be challenged on these

be addressed which will not go away. again if there was to be a second

referendum. She is really laying the groundwork for a looking again at

some of those policy positions the SNP have taken. Clearly, there has

been a detailed postmortem of what went wrong in that independence

referendum of 2014. Nicola Sturgeon is recognising there are key issues

which need to be revisited and challenged. She said the SNP was

prepared to change some of its answers. Presumably, Kieran Andrews,

this is a bit of a challenge. The SNP are any great position with

thousands of new members. The challenge is keeping them. All this

talk about new benefits for children and all the rest, I am sure all the

delegates agree with that. They all agree with things like air passenger

duty. But it is not what gets them out of bed in the morning, is it? It

will not keep them excited. It certainly isn't. And it is not why

so many new members joined the SNP. Nicola Sturgeon is walking a bit of

a tightrope on this. She has to decide when she wants another

call another referendum is the mac call another referendum is the mac

-- independence referendum. If a second referendum is lost, then it

is off the table for a proper generation, not to the fuzzy version

we have had promised so far. But the longer she weaves it, the more she

risks antagonising those new members who joined to declare independence,

to fight for the yes cause, as it were. You can imagine that if Nicola

Sturgeon is not careful, little factions might begin to break off,

break away and show a little bit more of the descent we saw yesterday

morning over the coming years. It is a difficult one to play, balancing

political reality with the fervour of members and a new grassroots

members. Lynsey, on taxation and what they will do with new powers,

it is all terribly cautious. They say they will not release their

manifesto until they release their manifesto. Unless they have got

something hidden away, it is basically don't frighten the horses,

isn't it? It seems that way. Nicola Sturgeon said yesterday they would

be no change to the basic rate of tax. They are against the policy put

forward by Scottish Labour and by the Scottish Liberal Democrats. Also

kicking into... Taking a decision only 40p threshold and waiting to

see what George Osborne does with that in the budget. We already know

those plans for the top rate, sorry, for the 40p rate of tax. John

Swinney did tell us that if the fiscal framework was agreed, we

would get more detail on the SNP's new tax plans by mid-March. I am

sorry, I do not mean to cut a cross but we're running out of time.

Lynsey Bews and Kieran Andrews, but we're running out of time.

thank you both for joining us. Now, before we go, as part

of our Holyrood election coverage, BBC Scotland has announced two

televised Scottish leaders debates. The first takes place on the 24th

of March in Glasgow. If you'd like to apply to be

part of the audience, you can find the details on our BBC

Scotland news website. I'll be back at the

same time next week. What will he say this time about

the state of the British economy, and what will that mean for you

and your family's finances? Join me, Huw Edwards, for

live coverage and expert analysis.