:00:38. > :00:41.It's Sunday morning and this is the Sunday Politics.
:00:42. > :00:45.Theresa May unveils plans to build many more affordable homes
:00:46. > :00:48.in England, but with no price tag, timetable or building targets -
:00:49. > :00:54.Labour takes aim at the City with what it calls a Robin Hood Tax
:00:55. > :00:56.to fund public services, but will traders just
:00:57. > :01:00.Don't look at the polls - Jeremy Corbyn, at least,
:01:01. > :01:03.insists he can win this election - so which way will
:01:04. > :01:08.We'll hear from a focus group in Leeds.
:01:09. > :01:11.And on Sunday Politics Scotland, A good we'll be asking how we can
:01:12. > :01:12.best protect ourselves from future cyber attacks.
:01:13. > :01:14.And talking to the Scottish Greens' Patrick Harvie
:01:15. > :01:27.in the first of our leader interviews.
:01:28. > :01:30.And with me, our own scientifically selected focus group
:01:31. > :01:33.of political pundits - they're not so much
:01:34. > :01:35.undecided as clueless - Tom Newton Dunn, Isabel Oakeshott
:01:36. > :01:42.They'll be tweeting throughout the programme.
:01:43. > :01:44.So, we've got two new policies this morning.
:01:45. > :01:46.Labour say they will introduce a financial transaction tax
:01:47. > :01:48.if they win the general election and what they're calling
:01:49. > :01:51."the biggest crackdown on tax avoidance in the country's history".
:01:52. > :01:53.The Conservatives say they'll work with local authorities in England
:01:54. > :01:55.to build council houses with the right to buy.
:01:56. > :01:58.Theresa May says the policy "will help thousands of people
:01:59. > :02:05.get on the first rung of the housing ladder".
:02:06. > :02:13.Steve, what do you make of them? I have been conditioned after doing
:02:14. > :02:17.tax and spend debates in pre-election periods for many
:02:18. > :02:22.decades to treat policy is not as literal but as arguments. In other
:02:23. > :02:27.words if you look back to 2015 the Tory plan to wipe out the deficit
:02:28. > :02:30.was never going to happen and yet it framed and large event. In that
:02:31. > :02:35.sense the Robin Hood tax is a sensible move for Labour to make at
:02:36. > :02:39.this point because it is part of a narrative of reconfiguring taxation
:02:40. > :02:45.to be fair. Treating it as an argument rather than something that
:02:46. > :02:48.would happen in day one of Labour government is sensible. In terms of
:02:49. > :02:52.building houses Theresa May said right from the beginning when she
:02:53. > :02:55.was in Number Ten that there is a housing deficit in this country
:02:56. > :03:00.rather than the economic deficit George Osborne was focusing on, and
:03:01. > :03:03.this is an example of trying to get house-building going. It seems
:03:04. > :03:07.entirely sensible, not sure how it works with right to buy but again as
:03:08. > :03:17.framing of a 90 minute it makes sense. I disagree with Steve on one
:03:18. > :03:22.front which is how sensible Theresa May's policy is on the housing
:03:23. > :03:24.announcement. I think more broadly these two announcements have
:03:25. > :03:31.something in common which is that over the next 24 hours both will
:03:32. > :03:34.probably unravel in different ways. Ye of little faith! The Mayor of
:03:35. > :03:39.London has already said he doesn't agree with this, and when people see
:03:40. > :03:45.the actual impact of what looks like a populist tax will very potentially
:03:46. > :03:50.affect people's pensions, it might become a lot less popular. On the
:03:51. > :03:55.Tory housing plans, I think it is difficult to imagine how they are
:03:56. > :04:00.going to implement this huge, what looks like a huge land and property
:04:01. > :04:04.grab. Through compulsory purchase orders, which are not a simple
:04:05. > :04:08.instrument. They say they will change the law but really the idea
:04:09. > :04:12.of paying people below the market value for their assets is not
:04:13. > :04:19.something I can see sitting easily with Tory backbenchers or the Tories
:04:20. > :04:24.in the House of Lords. Tom. Both would appear superficially to be
:04:25. > :04:30.appealing to traditional left and traditional right bases. What is
:04:31. > :04:37.more Tory than right to buy, then councils sell on these houses, and
:04:38. > :04:42.Labour slapping a massive tax on the city. The Tories' plan, I would say
:04:43. > :04:46.look a bit deeper and all of the Tory narrative from the last six
:04:47. > :04:50.years which hasn't worked well is talking about the private sector
:04:51. > :04:56.increasing supply in the market. Now Mrs May is talking about the role
:04:57. > :05:01.for the state after all so this is the shift creeping in. On the Labour
:05:02. > :05:09.transaction tax, one of the most interesting things I heard in days
:05:10. > :05:12.was from Paul Mason, former BBC correspondent, now a cog in Easter
:05:13. > :05:17.extreme. On Newsnight he said don't worry about whether the Labour
:05:18. > :05:21.manifesto will add up, I'm promising it will, the bigger Tory attack line
:05:22. > :05:30.should be what on earth will be the macroeconomic effect of taking so
:05:31. > :05:31.much tax out of the system. Very well, we shall see. At least we have
:05:32. > :05:34.some policies to talk about. Now, on Tuesday Labour
:05:35. > :05:36.will launch its manifesto. But we've already got a pretty good
:05:37. > :05:39.idea of what's in it - that's because most of its contents
:05:40. > :05:41.were leaked to the media Labour has a variety of spending
:05:42. > :05:50.pledges including an extra ?6 billion a year for the NHS,
:05:51. > :05:53.an additional ?8 billion for social care over the lifetime
:05:54. > :05:55.of the next parliament, as well as a ?250 billion
:05:56. > :05:57.in infrastructure over The party will support the renewal
:05:58. > :06:06.of the Trident submarine system, about its use, and the party
:06:07. > :06:09.will hold a strategic defence and security review immediately
:06:10. > :06:12.after the election. In terms of immigration,
:06:13. > :06:14.Labour will seek "reasonable management of migration",
:06:15. > :06:16.but it will not make "false Elsewhere, university tuition
:06:17. > :06:22.fees will be abolished, and the public sector pay cap,
:06:23. > :06:25.which limits pay rises for public sector workers
:06:26. > :06:29.to 1%, will be scrapped. The party also aims to renationalise
:06:30. > :06:31.the railways, the Royal Mail and the National Grid,
:06:32. > :06:39.as well as creating at least one A senior Labour backbencher
:06:40. > :06:44.described it to the Sunday Politics as a manifesto for a leadership
:06:45. > :06:47.who don't "give a toss about the wider public",
:06:48. > :06:49.and several other Labour candidates told us they thought it
:06:50. > :06:51.had been deliberately leaked by the leadership,
:06:52. > :06:55.with one suggesting the leak was intended to "bounce
:06:56. > :06:57.the National Executive" And we're joined now from Salford
:06:58. > :07:06.by the Shadow Business Secretary, Welcome to the programme. The draft
:07:07. > :07:12.manifesto proposed to renationalise the number of industry. You will
:07:13. > :07:15.wait for the franchises to run out rather than buy them out at the
:07:16. > :07:21.moment so can you confirm the railways will not be wholly
:07:22. > :07:26.nationalised until 2030, after three Labour governments, and Jeremy
:07:27. > :07:30.Corbyn will be 80? I'm not going to comment on leaks, you will just have
:07:31. > :07:37.to be patient and wait to see what is in our manifesto. But you have
:07:38. > :07:41.already announced you will nationalise the railways, so tell me
:07:42. > :07:45.about it. We have discussed taking the franchises into public ownership
:07:46. > :07:50.as they expire, however the detail will be set out in the manifesto so
:07:51. > :07:55.I'm not prepared to go into detail until that policy is formally laid
:07:56. > :08:01.out on Tuesday. That doesn't sound very hopeful but let's carry on. You
:08:02. > :08:06.will also nationalise the National Grid, it has a market capitalisation
:08:07. > :08:11.of ?40 billion, why do you want to nationalise that? Again, I'm not
:08:12. > :08:15.going to speculate on leaks, you will just have to be patient. But
:08:16. > :08:21.you said you will nationalise the National Grid so tell's Y. The leaks
:08:22. > :08:26.have suggested but you will just have to wait and see what the final
:08:27. > :08:31.manifesto states on that one. So is it a waste of time me asking you how
:08:32. > :08:36.you will pay for something that costs 40 billion? Be patient, just
:08:37. > :08:41.couple of days to go, but what I would say is there is growing
:08:42. > :08:45.pressure from the public to reform the utilities sector. The
:08:46. > :08:50.Competition and Markets Authority stated in 2015 that bill payers were
:08:51. > :08:53.paying over till debt -- ?2 billion in excess of what they should be
:08:54. > :09:00.paying so there is a clear need for reform. The bills we get are from
:09:01. > :09:03.the energy companies, you are not going to nationalise them, you are
:09:04. > :09:08.going to nationalise the distribution company and I wondered
:09:09. > :09:13.what is the case for nationalising the distribution company? As I said,
:09:14. > :09:17.our full plans will be set out on Tuesday. In relation to the big six
:09:18. > :09:24.energy companies, we know in recent years they have been overcharging
:09:25. > :09:29.customers... There's no point in answering questions I am not asking.
:09:30. > :09:33.I am asking what is the case for nationalising the National Grid?
:09:34. > :09:37.There is a case for reforming the energy sector as a whole and that
:09:38. > :09:41.looks at the activities of the big six companies and it will look at
:09:42. > :09:46.other aspects too. You will have to be patient and wait until Tuesday.
:09:47. > :09:51.other aspects too. You will have to What about the Royal Mail? Again,
:09:52. > :09:55.you will have to wait until Tuesday. Why can't you just be honest with
:09:56. > :10:03.the British voter? We know you are going to do this and you have a duty
:10:04. > :10:09.to explain. I'm not even arguing whether it is right or wrong. The
:10:10. > :10:13.Royal Mail was sold off and we know it was sold under value and British
:10:14. > :10:17.taxpayers have a reason to feel aggrieved about that. There is a
:10:18. > :10:20.long-term strategy that would ensure the Royal Mail was classified as a
:10:21. > :10:26.key piece of infrastructure but the details of that will be set out in
:10:27. > :10:29.our manifesto because we want to ensure businesses and households
:10:30. > :10:34.ensure the best quality of service when it comes to their postal
:10:35. > :10:39.providers. You plan to borrow an extra 25 billion per year, John
:10:40. > :10:43.McDonnell has already announced this, on public investment, on top
:10:44. > :10:49.of the around 50 billion already being planned for investment. You
:10:50. > :10:56.will borrow it all so that means, if you can confirm, that many years
:10:57. > :11:03.after the crash by 2021, Labour government would still be borrowing
:11:04. > :11:09.75 billion a year. Is that correct? We have set out ?250 billion of
:11:10. > :11:13.capital investment, and ?250 billion for a national investment bank. Our
:11:14. > :11:17.financial and fiscal rules dictate we will leave the Government in a
:11:18. > :11:20.state of less debt than we found it at the start of the parliament so we
:11:21. > :11:27.won't increase the national debt at the end of our Parliamentary term.
:11:28. > :11:31.How can you do that if by 2021 you will still be borrowing around 75
:11:32. > :11:37.billion a year, which is more than we borrow at the moment? The 500
:11:38. > :11:42.billion figure is set out over a period of ten years, it's a figure
:11:43. > :11:45.that has been suggested by Peter Helm from Oxford University as a
:11:46. > :11:50.figure that is necessary to bring us in line with other industrial
:11:51. > :11:58.competitors. Similar figures have been suggested by groups such as the
:11:59. > :12:01.CBI. By the way I have not included all 500 billion, just the 250
:12:02. > :12:06.billion on public spending, not the extra money. You talk about the
:12:07. > :12:11.fiscal rules. The draft manifesto said you will leave debt as a
:12:12. > :12:18.proportion of trend GDP law at the end of each parliament, you have
:12:19. > :12:22.just said a version of that. What is trend GDP? In clear terms we will
:12:23. > :12:26.ensure the debt we acquire will be reduced by the end of the
:12:27. > :12:33.parliament. We won't leave the Government finances in a worse state
:12:34. > :12:37.than we found them. OK, but what is trend GDP? Our rule is we will
:12:38. > :12:42.ensure public sector net debt is less than we found it when we came
:12:43. > :12:50.to power in Government on June the 8th. But that is not what your draft
:12:51. > :12:53.manifesto says. I'm not going to comment on leaks, you are just going
:12:54. > :12:59.to have to wait until Tuesday to look at the fine detail and perhaps
:13:00. > :13:02.we will have another chat then. You have published your plans for
:13:03. > :13:06.corporation tax and you will increase it by a third and your
:13:07. > :13:11.predictions assumed that will get an extra 20 billion a year by the end
:13:12. > :13:15.of the parliament. But that assumes the companies don't change their
:13:16. > :13:20.behaviour, that they move money around, they leave the country or
:13:21. > :13:25.they generate smaller profits. Is that realistic? You are right to
:13:26. > :13:29.make that point and you will see when we set out our policies and
:13:30. > :13:35.costings in the manifesto that we haven't spent all of the tax take.
:13:36. > :13:37.We have allowed for different differentials and potential changes
:13:38. > :13:42.in market activity because that would be approved and direction to
:13:43. > :13:50.take. But corporation tax is allowed to be cut in France and the United
:13:51. > :13:53.States, it's only 12.5% in Dublin. Many companies based in Britain are
:13:54. > :13:58.already wondering whether they should relocate because of Brexit,
:13:59. > :14:03.if you increase this tax by a third couldn't that clinch it for a number
:14:04. > :14:08.of them? No, we will still be one of the lowest corporation tax rate in
:14:09. > :14:13.the G7. Let's look at what's important for business. Cutting
:14:14. > :14:17.corporation tax in itself doesn't improve productivity, or business
:14:18. > :14:20.investment and there's no suggestion cutting corporation tax in recent
:14:21. > :14:26.years has achieved that. Businesses need an investment in tools in
:14:27. > :14:31.things they need to thrive and prosper, they also need to reduce
:14:32. > :14:36.the burden at the lower end of the tax scale, before we get to the
:14:37. > :14:43.Prophet stage. One key example is business rates. We have made the
:14:44. > :14:46.proposal to government to in -- exclude machinery so businesses can
:14:47. > :14:53.invest and grow operations in the future but the Government refused.
:14:54. > :15:03.Corporation tax has been cut since 2010. When it was 28% it brought in
:15:04. > :15:09.?43 billion a year. Now it is down to 20%, it brought in ?55 billion a
:15:10. > :15:16.year. By cutting it in the last year, it brought in 21% more, so
:15:17. > :15:20.what is the problem? It might have brought in more money, but has it
:15:21. > :15:26.increased business investment in the long term. It is not just about
:15:27. > :15:30.cutting corporation tax, but it is on the ability of businesses to
:15:31. > :15:36.thrive and prosper. Business investment in the UK is below are
:15:37. > :15:42.industrial competitors. Wages are stagnating which doesn't indicate
:15:43. > :15:47.businesses are not doing well. Let me get it right, you are arguing if
:15:48. > :15:54.we increase business tax by a third, that will increase investment? I am
:15:55. > :16:02.not saying that. You just did. Know I didn't, I said reducing business
:16:03. > :16:05.tax isn't enough, you have to invest in the things businesses need to
:16:06. > :16:17.thrive and prosper. You have also got to lessen the burden on
:16:18. > :16:22.business. You have announced a financial transaction tax. Your own
:16:23. > :16:27.labour Mayor of London said he has vowed to fight it. He said I do not
:16:28. > :16:32.want a unilateral tax on business in our city, so why are you proceeding
:16:33. > :16:36.with it? This isn't a new initiative, there is a growing
:16:37. > :16:40.global pressure to make sure we have fairness in the financial sector.
:16:41. > :16:46.Ordinary British people are paying for our banking crisis they didn't
:16:47. > :16:51.cause. Another important point, stamp duty reserve tax was brought
:16:52. > :16:55.in in the 1600 and there have been little reforms. The sector has
:16:56. > :17:00.changed and we have do provide changes to the system for that
:17:01. > :17:04.change. High-frequency trading where we have a state of affairs where a
:17:05. > :17:09.lot of shares are traded on computers within milliseconds. We
:17:10. > :17:16.need a tax system that keeps up with that. What happens if they move the
:17:17. > :17:21.computers to another country? Emily Thornaby said this morning, other
:17:22. > :17:23.countries had already introduced a financial transaction tax, what
:17:24. > :17:32.other countries have done that? There are ten countries looking at
:17:33. > :17:39.introducing a transaction tax. Which ones have done it so far? They will
:17:40. > :17:43.be later announcing a final package, going through the finer detail at
:17:44. > :17:48.the moment. But the European Commission tried to get this done in
:17:49. > :17:53.2011 and it still hasn't happened in any of these countries. But you are
:17:54. > :17:58.going to go ahead unilaterally and risk these businesses, which
:17:59. > :18:02.generate a lot of money, moving to other jurisdictions. There is not a
:18:03. > :18:13.significant risk of that happening. The stamp duty reserve tax is levied
:18:14. > :18:18.at either where the person or company is domiciled or where the
:18:19. > :18:23.instrument is issued rather than worth the transaction takes place.
:18:24. > :18:26.This tax in itself is not enough to make people leave this country in
:18:27. > :18:30.terms of financial services because there is more to keep these
:18:31. > :18:35.businesses here in terms of the investment we are making, the
:18:36. > :18:39.economy that Labour will build, in terms of productivity improvement we
:18:40. > :18:43.will see. Thank you very much, Rebecca Long-Bailey.
:18:44. > :18:49.And listening to that was the Home Office Minister, Brandon Lewis.
:18:50. > :18:55.Over the years, you have got corporation tax by 20%, it is lower
:18:56. > :19:02.than international standards, so why are so many global companies who
:19:03. > :19:07.make money out of Great Britain, still not paying 20%? It is one of
:19:08. > :19:10.the problems with the point Labour were making and Rebecca could not
:19:11. > :19:16.answer, these companies can move around the world. One of the
:19:17. > :19:20.important things is having a low tax economy but these businesses, it
:19:21. > :19:25.encourages them to come at a rate they are prepared to pay. People may
:19:26. > :19:31.say they are right, if they were paying 19, 20% incorporation tax.
:19:32. > :19:40.But they are not. Google runs a multi-million pound corporation and
:19:41. > :19:44.did not pay anywhere near 20%. There are companies that are trading
:19:45. > :19:52.internationally and that is why we have to get this work done with our
:19:53. > :19:56.partners around the world. Has there been an improvement? It is more than
:19:57. > :20:00.they were paying before. Whether it is Google or any other company,
:20:01. > :20:06.alongside them being here, apart from the tax they pay, it is the
:20:07. > :20:10.people they employ. The deal was, if you cut the business tax, the
:20:11. > :20:15.corporation tax on profits, we would get more companies coming here and
:20:16. > :20:19.more companies paying their tax. It seems it doesn't matter how low, a
:20:20. > :20:25.number of companies just pay a derisory amount and you haven't been
:20:26. > :20:28.able to change that. As you outlined, the income taken from the
:20:29. > :20:36.changing corporation tax has gone up. That is from established British
:20:37. > :20:39.companies, not from these international companies. It is
:20:40. > :20:43.because more companies are coming here and paying tax. That is a good
:20:44. > :20:49.thing. There is always more to do and that is why we want to crack
:20:50. > :20:53.down. In the last few weeks in the Finnish Parliament, Labour refused
:20:54. > :20:59.to put to another ?8.7 billion of tax take we could have got by
:21:00. > :21:04.cracking down further. You claim to have made great progress on cracking
:21:05. > :21:09.down on people and companies to pay the tax they should. But the tax gap
:21:10. > :21:15.is the difference between what HMRC takes in and what it should take in.
:21:16. > :21:21.It has barely moved in five years, so where is the progress? He have
:21:22. > :21:24.brought in 150 billion more where we have cracked down on those tax
:21:25. > :21:35.schemes. The gap is still the same as it was five years ago. It's gone
:21:36. > :21:37.from 6.8, 26.5. It has gone down. The Prime Minister and the
:21:38. > :21:42.Chancellor said they want to continue work on to get more money
:21:43. > :21:48.on these companies while still having a competitive rate to
:21:49. > :21:53.encourage these companies. While big business and the wealthy continue to
:21:54. > :21:56.prosper, the Office for Budget Responsibility tell us those on
:21:57. > :22:02.average earnings in this country will be earning less in real terms
:22:03. > :22:08.by 2021 than they did in 2008. How can that be fair? I don't see it
:22:09. > :22:12.that way. I haven't seen the figures you have got. What I can say to you,
:22:13. > :22:18.Andrew, we have made sure the minimum wage has gone up, the actual
:22:19. > :22:27.income tax people pay has gone down. So in their pocket, real terms,
:22:28. > :22:29.people have more money. You are the self-styled party of work. We keep
:22:30. > :22:33.emphasising work. Under your government you can work for 13 years
:22:34. > :22:40.and still not earn any more at the end of it, and you did at the start.
:22:41. > :22:45.Where is the reward for effort in that? I have not seen those figures.
:22:46. > :22:51.There are 2.8 million more people, more jobs in economy than there was.
:22:52. > :22:55.1000 jobs every day and people are working and developing through their
:22:56. > :22:59.careers. This is what I thought was odd in what Rebecca was saying,
:23:00. > :23:04.investing in people is what the apprenticeship levy is about,
:23:05. > :23:09.companies are investing their works force to take more opportunities
:23:10. > :23:12.that there. We are talking about fairness, politicians talk about
:23:13. > :23:17.hard-working people and we know the average earnings are no higher than
:23:18. > :23:22.they were in 2008. We know the pay and bonuses of senior executives
:23:23. > :23:25.have continued to grow and the Institute for Fiscal Studies has
:23:26. > :23:31.shown 3 million of the poorest households will lose an average of
:23:32. > :23:36.?2500 a year in the next Parliament, benefits frozen, further sanctions
:23:37. > :23:41.kick in. 3 million of the poorest losing 2500. Under the Tories, one
:23:42. > :23:47.law for the rich and another for the poor. It is quite wrong. First of
:23:48. > :23:52.all, we have got to be fair to the taxpayer who is funding the welfare
:23:53. > :23:57.and benefit system. Which is why the welfare was right. Get more people
:23:58. > :24:05.in work and then it is important to get more people upscaling. As that
:24:06. > :24:10.allowance rises, people have more of the money they earn in their pocket
:24:11. > :24:16.to be able to use in the economy. People will be worse off. 2500,
:24:17. > :24:22.among the poorest already. They will have more money in their pocket as
:24:23. > :24:28.we increase the allowance before people pay tax. We have seen
:24:29. > :24:32.millions of people coming out of tax altogether. The reason I ask these
:24:33. > :24:37.questions, you and the Prime Minister go on and on about the just
:24:38. > :24:41.about managing classes. I am talking about the just about managing and
:24:42. > :24:45.below that. It is all talk, you haven't done anything for them. We
:24:46. > :24:50.have made sure they have an increasing minimum wage, it has gone
:24:51. > :24:56.up more under us than any other previous government. Their wages
:24:57. > :25:01.will be still lower in real terms. Let me come on to this plan for
:25:02. > :25:06.housing. We have announced a new plan to increase affordable housing,
:25:07. > :25:10.social housing, some council housing and social housing built by the
:25:11. > :25:14.associations. How much money is behind this? It is part of the 1.4
:25:15. > :25:22.billion announced in the Autumn Statement. How many homes will you
:25:23. > :25:24.get for 1.4 billion? That depends on the negotiations with local
:25:25. > :25:32.authorities. It is local authorities, who know the area best.
:25:33. > :25:36.I will not put a number on that. 1.4 billion, if you price the house at
:25:37. > :25:42.100,000, which is very low, particularly for the South, back at
:25:43. > :25:47.you 14,000 new homes. That is it. What we have seen before, how the
:25:48. > :25:51.local government can leveraged to build thousands more homes. That is
:25:52. > :25:55.what we want to see across the country. It is not just about the
:25:56. > :25:58.money, for a lot of local authorities it is about the
:25:59. > :26:04.expertise and knowledge on how to do this. That is why support from the
:26:05. > :26:10.housing communities minister will help. What is the timescale, how
:26:11. > :26:15.many more affordable homes will be built? I will not put a number on
:26:16. > :26:20.it. You announced it today, so you cannot tell me how many more or what
:26:21. > :26:23.the target is? It is a matter of working with the local authorities
:26:24. > :26:27.who know what their local needs are, what land they have got available.
:26:28. > :26:31.What we saw through the local elections with the Metro mayors,
:26:32. > :26:35.they want to deliver in their areas, whether it is the West of England,
:26:36. > :26:40.the north-east, Liverpool, Manchester and we want to work with
:26:41. > :26:44.them. You have said variations of this for the past seven years and I
:26:45. > :26:50.want some credibility. When you cannot tell us how much money, what
:26:51. > :26:53.the target and timescale is, and this government, under which
:26:54. > :26:59.affordable house building has fallen to a 24 year low. 1.2 million
:27:00. > :27:05.families are on waiting lists for social housing to rent. That is your
:27:06. > :27:09.record. Why should we believe a word you say? This is different to what
:27:10. > :27:14.we have been doing over the last two years. We want to develop and have a
:27:15. > :27:21.strong and stable economy that can sustain that 1.4 billion homes. This
:27:22. > :27:27.is important. In 2010, we inherited the lowest level of house building,
:27:28. > :27:32.75,000 new homes. That is about 189,000 over the last four years.
:27:33. > :27:36.That is a big step forward after the crash, getting people back into the
:27:37. > :27:47.industry. More first-time buyers onto the market. Final question, in
:27:48. > :27:52.2010, 2011, your first year in government, there were 60,000
:27:53. > :28:00.affordable homes built. May not be enough, but last day it was 30 2000.
:28:01. > :28:07.So why should we trust anything you say about this? On housing, we have
:28:08. > :28:13.delivered. We have delivered more social housing. Double what Labour
:28:14. > :28:17.did in 13 years, in just five years. This is what this policy is about,
:28:18. > :28:18.working with local authorities to deliver more homes to people in
:28:19. > :28:22.their local areas. Thank you. Now, they have a deficit
:28:23. > :28:25.of between 15 and 20% in the polls, but Jeremy Corbyn and those
:28:26. > :28:28.around him insist Labour can win. If the polls are right they've got
:28:29. > :28:31.three and half weeks to change voters' minds and persuade those
:28:32. > :28:33.fabled undecided voters We enlisted the polling organisation
:28:34. > :28:38.YouGov to help us find out how the performance of party leaders
:28:39. > :28:40.will affect behaviour Leeds, a city of three quarters
:28:41. > :28:49.of a million people, eight Parliamentary seats and home
:28:50. > :28:54.to our very own focus group. Our panel was recruited
:28:55. > :28:57.from a variety of backgrounds and the majority say they haven't
:28:58. > :29:01.decided who to vote for yet. Watching behind the glass,
:29:02. > :29:03.two experts on different sides Giles Cunningham, who headed up
:29:04. > :29:10.political press at Downing Street under David Cameron
:29:11. > :29:17.and Aaron Bastani, Corbin supporter, under David Cameron
:29:18. > :29:19.and Aaron Bastani, Corbyn supporter, I think Theresa May sees herself
:29:20. > :29:23.as a pound shop Thatcher. Milliband's policies but when it
:29:24. > :29:43.came about who you want,
:29:44. > :29:47.if you wake up on maybe a 2015, We found in a couple of focus
:29:48. > :29:50.groups, people saying we'd be quite relieved,
:29:51. > :29:53.even though some of those same people have been saying we quite
:29:54. > :29:55.like the Labour policies. I think the fact that Corbyn's
:29:56. > :30:00.going so hard on his values, this is a really progressive
:30:01. > :30:02.manifesto, they live But I think that's a new challenge,
:30:03. > :30:06.that wasn't there in 2015. Is there anyone here that
:30:07. > :30:08.you don't recognise? After a little warm up,
:30:09. > :30:10.the first exercise, recognising I think it's nice to have a strong
:30:11. > :30:17.woman in politics, I do. But I've got to say,
:30:18. > :30:19.when she comes on the news, I kind of do think,
:30:20. > :30:22.here we go again. Tell me about Tim Farron, what
:30:23. > :30:24.are your impressions of Tim Farron? It isn't going to do anything,
:30:25. > :30:29.it isn't going to change anything. You'll be surprised to hear it's
:30:30. > :30:37.actually the Greens. Strong and stable leadership
:30:38. > :30:50.in the national interest. Yes, Team May, it's
:30:51. > :30:55.the British equivalent of make What do we think about this one
:30:56. > :31:05.for the many and not the few? It's not quite as bad
:31:06. > :31:07.as strong and stable, but it will probably get
:31:08. > :31:09.on our nerves after a while. We must seize that chance today
:31:10. > :31:20.and every day until June the 8th. But that's not quite my
:31:21. > :31:28.question, my question is, if you are Prime Minister,
:31:29. > :31:30.we will leave, come hell or high water, whatever is on the table
:31:31. > :31:33.at the end of the negotiations? If we win the election,
:31:34. > :31:36.we'll get a good deal with Europe. Assertive and in control
:31:37. > :31:38.and he felt comfortable But the second one, I thought
:31:39. > :31:43.he was very hesitant. I thought he was kind of,
:31:44. > :31:52.hovering around, skirting around and that's the second
:31:53. > :31:55.time I've seen a similar interview with the question
:31:56. > :31:57.being asked regarding Brexit. I don't think I'd have
:31:58. > :31:59.any confidence with him You think you are going up
:32:00. > :32:02.against some quite strong people, how are you going to stand
:32:03. > :32:05.up for us? When you are in negotiations,
:32:06. > :32:09.you need to be tough. And actually is right
:32:10. > :32:11.to be tough sometimes, particularly when you are doing
:32:12. > :32:13.something for the country. There's a reason for talking
:32:14. > :32:16.about strong and stable leadership. It's about the future
:32:17. > :32:18.of the country, it's It's just that people kind of listen
:32:19. > :32:22.to that kind of thing and think Both on The One Show
:32:23. > :32:28.and in the news. She attracts the public better
:32:29. > :32:34.than what Corbyn does. She didn't answer the question
:32:35. > :32:37.in a more articular way than Corbyn Imagine that Theresa
:32:38. > :32:43.May is an animal. So, in your minds,
:32:44. > :32:46.what animal is coming to mind I've done a Pekinese because I think
:32:47. > :33:00.she's all bark and no bite. Alpaca because she's
:33:01. > :33:06.superior looking and woolly I don't think his policies
:33:07. > :33:22.are for the modern, real world. A mouse because they are weak
:33:23. > :33:25.and they can be easily bullied, but also they can catch
:33:26. > :33:28.you by surprise if you're What do you take away
:33:29. > :33:36.from what you saw then, and what message would you send back
:33:37. > :33:39.to the Tories now? I think what came over is people see
:33:40. > :33:42.Theresa May as a strong politician, not everyone likes her,
:33:43. > :33:44.but you don't need to be liked to be elected,
:33:45. > :33:47.because ultimately it's about who do you trust with your future
:33:48. > :33:49.and your security. I think what I also take out
:33:50. > :33:51.of that focus group, was it was a group of floating
:33:52. > :33:54.voters, there was no huge appetite for the Lib Dems and there was no
:33:55. > :33:57.huge appetite for Ukip. So my messaged back to CCHQ
:33:58. > :34:00.would be stick to the plan. I thought the response
:34:01. > :34:04.to the manifesto was excellent. It's clear that people aren't
:34:05. > :34:06.particularly keen on Theresa May, There are some associations with her
:34:07. > :34:11.about strength and stability, which is exactly what the Tory party
:34:12. > :34:14.want of course, but they are not positive and nobody thinks
:34:15. > :34:16.that she has a vision So, what I'd say the Jeremy Corbyn,
:34:17. > :34:23.what I'd say to the Labour Party is, they need to really emphasise
:34:24. > :34:25.the manifesto in Jeremy Corbyn himself has to perform
:34:26. > :34:31.out of his skin and I think he has to reemphasise those
:34:32. > :34:33.characteristics which may be have come to the fore may be
:34:34. > :34:36.over the last 12 months, resilience, strength and the fact
:34:37. > :34:39.that he's come this far, why not take that final step and go
:34:40. > :34:41.into ten Downing Street? We're joined now by the American
:34:42. > :34:49.political consultant For the sake of this discussion,
:34:50. > :34:56.assume the polls at the moment are broadly right, is there any hope for
:34:57. > :35:02.Mr Corbyn in the undecided voters? Know, and this is a very serious
:35:03. > :35:05.collection with serious consequences to who wins. Nobody cares whether
:35:06. > :35:10.you can draw and what animal they represent, they want to know where
:35:11. > :35:14.they stand, and I felt that was frivolous. I come to Britain to
:35:15. > :35:19.watch elections because I learned from here. Your elections are more
:35:20. > :35:23.substantial, more serious, more policy and less about personality
:35:24. > :35:28.and that peace was only about personality. That's partly because
:35:29. > :35:37.Mrs May has decided to make this a presidential election. You can see
:35:38. > :35:45.on the posters it is all Team May. I agree with that, and in her language
:35:46. > :35:48.she says not everyone benefits from a Conservative government, I don't
:35:49. > :35:50.see how using anything Republicans a Conservative government, I don't
:35:51. > :35:56.have used in the past. In fact her campaign is more of a centrist
:35:57. > :35:58.Democrats but it is a smart strategy because it pushes Corbyn further to
:35:59. > :36:03.Democrats but it is a smart strategy the left. Of course you said Hillary
:36:04. > :36:08.Clinton have won. On election night the polling was so bad in America,
:36:09. > :36:14.the exit polls that were done, the BBC told America she had won. No, I
:36:15. > :36:18.was anchoring the programme that night, I ignored your tweet. The BBC
:36:19. > :36:25.was anchoring the programme that had the same numbers. Yes, but we
:36:26. > :36:30.did not say she had won, I can assure you of that. Because of
:36:31. > :36:36.people like you we thought she had but we didn't broadcast it. That was
:36:37. > :36:42.a smart approach. My point is other than teasing you, maybe there is
:36:43. > :36:46.hope for Jeremy Corbyn. I think you will have one of the lowest turnout
:36:47. > :36:50.in modern history and I think Labour will fall to one of the lowest
:36:51. > :36:56.percentages, not percentage of number of seats they have had, and
:36:57. > :37:00.this will be a matter of soul-searching for both political
:37:01. > :37:03.parties. What you do with a sizeable majority, and she has a
:37:04. > :37:05.parties. What you do with a sizeable responsibility to tell the British
:37:06. > :37:12.people exactly what happens as she moves forward. He and Labour will
:37:13. > :37:17.have to take a look at whether they still represent a significant slice
:37:18. > :37:21.of the British population. Do you see a realignment in British
:37:22. > :37:25.politics taking place? I see a crumbling of the left and yet there
:37:26. > :37:29.is still a significant percentage of the British population that once
:37:30. > :37:38.someone who is centre-left. And they like a lot of Mr Corbyn's policies.
:37:39. > :37:41.I'm listening to Michael foot. I went to school here in the 1980s and
:37:42. > :37:44.I feel like I'm watching the Labour Party of 35 years ago, in a
:37:45. > :37:51.population that wants to focus on the future, not the past. Thank you.
:37:52. > :37:53.It's just gone 11.35, you're watching the Sunday Politics.
:37:54. > :37:59.We say goodbye to viewers in Scotland, who leave us now
:38:00. > :38:00.Good morning and welcome to Sunday Politics Scotland.
:38:01. > :38:06.Should the NHS have done more to protect itself
:38:07. > :38:10.and how safe are our other institutions?
:38:11. > :38:14.The Scottish Greens drastically reduce the number of seats
:38:15. > :38:18.I'll be asking their co-convenor why.
:38:19. > :38:22.But will we ever get close again to being amongst
:38:23. > :38:30.It came out of the blue and has caused major disruption for the NHS
:38:31. > :38:33.which is continuing to deal with the fall out
:38:34. > :38:36.11 of Scotland's 14 health boards were affected
:38:37. > :38:37.although some are hoping to be back to
:38:38. > :38:39.near normal working by tomorrow.
:38:40. > :38:41.Well, joining me from Edinburgh to discuss the latest
:38:42. > :38:44.on those attacks is Professor Bill Buchanan
:38:45. > :38:49.who leads the Cyber Academy at Edinburgh Napier University.
:38:50. > :38:56.First, Bill there are some reports seemingly based on the chap who by
:38:57. > :39:00.accident stopped the spread of this. seemingly based on the chap who by
:39:01. > :39:04.That it could all happen again tomorrow. Do you take that
:39:05. > :39:10.seriously? It could happen tomorrow. It is quite likely, it could have
:39:11. > :39:14.been much more severe, and we could have had a large-scale outbreak in
:39:15. > :39:18.the public sector systems in the UK. It has been well known that this
:39:19. > :39:23.vulnerability has been around for at least a month and it was given
:39:24. > :39:26.administrators working in time to be able to patch their systems,
:39:27. > :39:32.otherwise this would not have happened. Along with this we see
:39:33. > :39:37.that there are many windows XP system still in the NHS and as long
:39:38. > :39:41.as there is one of those computers in there that is a way for malware
:39:42. > :39:50.to get in. That is an interesting point. Just explain to people is XP
:39:51. > :39:58.and a old operating system? Several generations. Even if one double
:39:59. > :40:02.system is in a hospital network network with other Windows systems,
:40:03. > :40:09.even if they are Windows ten, they are that one to be updated by Mike
:40:10. > :40:15.assessed -- Microsoft, that can infect the whole lot. Everyone knows
:40:16. > :40:21.that Windows stopped updating their older systems. It is taken a long
:40:22. > :40:23.time to migrate away and it is a difficult challenge within the NHS
:40:24. > :40:26.because you are busy have business work which involves connection to GP
:40:27. > :40:31.practices which might not have the most up-to-date software. Just to be
:40:32. > :40:34.clear on the point I was making, are you saying that even one computer
:40:35. > :40:39.clear on the point I was making, are and XP system could infect an entire
:40:40. > :40:44.NHS system even if the rest of the and XP system could infect an entire
:40:45. > :40:49.NHS was up-to-date? It really depends how the network is made up
:40:50. > :40:54.but this is a worm and what a worm does is affect a leader in a network
:40:55. > :40:58.and naturally spread so all you need is one touch pointed to the old
:40:59. > :41:03.network, and it could also be someone clicking from a link from
:41:04. > :41:07.e-mail, dropping malware onto the computer, or a USB stick into the
:41:08. > :41:11.network which then infects the entire network so once it is in, it
:41:12. > :41:16.can then propagate across the whole network. Do you think the main
:41:17. > :41:21.problem is that as you have mentioned some of these systems are
:41:22. > :41:24.on the old XP abridging system or is the problem that most of them are on
:41:25. > :41:28.later versions of Windows, and they for some reason have not updated
:41:29. > :41:33.with all the security patches that they should have updated with? As
:41:34. > :41:38.you said, Microsoft had put out a patch for the some time ago. I think
:41:39. > :41:41.we need to look beyond the short fix beyond operating systems and
:41:42. > :41:48.computers, I think there needs to be a radical change of the hole in
:41:49. > :41:52.visage of health care, and move away from short-term fixes such as
:41:53. > :41:56.patches. The architecture we have for health care really needs to move
:41:57. > :42:02.into the modern era of cloud -based systems, having integrated policy,
:42:03. > :42:07.integrating things much more, and certainly to put the citizen at the
:42:08. > :42:11.core focus of health care systems. Again, just explain that because a
:42:12. > :42:15.lot of people would be terribly familiar with that. Cloud -based
:42:16. > :42:19.systems, this is where poor example patient data rather than being held
:42:20. > :42:24.on local servers, would be held effectively on the Internet in the
:42:25. > :42:29.way that a lot of information is these days, and is that more secure?
:42:30. > :42:33.Yellow macro no, it's not stored on the Internet, it is stored within a
:42:34. > :42:39.private clouds so that is within the NHS infrastructure, or held locally
:42:40. > :42:44.within a practice, so that is where the confusion comes in, as opposed
:42:45. > :42:48.to a public cloud which is busy addressable by anybody in the world
:42:49. > :42:52.but is also private clouds, many organisations such as in the finance
:42:53. > :42:56.industry are now going towards private cloud infrastructures, where
:42:57. > :43:00.they centralise the security policy of all infrastructure, into
:43:01. > :43:05.centralised places, and then the data storage is also backed up
:43:06. > :43:11.locally, and then in another remote location. They are hopeful I think
:43:12. > :43:14.of getting the systems that have been affected in the NHS in
:43:15. > :43:17.Scotland, we should be clear it is not all over Scotland, the real
:43:18. > :43:23.problem seems to have been particularly in Lanarkshire. How do
:43:24. > :43:27.they do that? As I understand that the only way to get rid of this is
:43:28. > :43:32.to effectively what the operating system on a computer and reinstall
:43:33. > :43:38.it. Increasingly computers don't store the information locally and I
:43:39. > :43:43.would expect the NHS will be storing all the data on a centralised data
:43:44. > :43:47.infrastructure so we typically just use the computer to login and get
:43:48. > :43:53.access to services, connect to the web and so on, so in most cases what
:43:54. > :44:04.will happen is it will be a really of the computers. -- reimaging. Can
:44:05. > :44:07.we be sure that individual computers are not affected? Yellow macro I
:44:08. > :44:16.don't think they can say that at all. That depends on the individual
:44:17. > :44:19.practices, local computers, and what is actively stored on these.
:44:20. > :44:22.Increasingly we needs to be storing in a centralised data
:44:23. > :44:28.Increasingly we needs to be storing infrastructure. Briefly, the other
:44:29. > :44:34.possible he is that out of sheer malice and frustration those who did
:44:35. > :44:37.this good trigger the deletion of encrypted information, and if that
:44:38. > :44:42.information has been encrypted back-up computers, there could still
:44:43. > :44:47.be some data loss on this, couldn't they? It looks like this is not the
:44:48. > :44:52.most sophisticated malware, but not being able to get access to the
:44:53. > :44:55.encryption key is the same as deleting the data, you can't get the
:44:56. > :44:59.data back unless you have the unique encryption key which has encrypted
:45:00. > :45:01.the data so although the files are still there, there is no way to
:45:02. > :45:08.access them unless you can actually find that encryption key. Some
:45:09. > :45:14.malware allows the files to be taken off the machine, allowing for more
:45:15. > :45:17.access of the computer so for example the camera and to be able to
:45:18. > :45:22.take files off but in this case it isn't as sophisticated will stop
:45:23. > :45:28.what is more important is the way that this spread was through a
:45:29. > :45:31.system called as M B which Microsoft announced over a month ago, which
:45:32. > :45:37.should have been blocked by the main firewall. -- the system was called
:45:38. > :45:38.SMB. The Scottish Greens will fight only
:45:39. > :45:41.three seats in the general election with co-convenor Patrick Harvie
:45:42. > :45:43.standing in one of them. Add that to the announcement
:45:44. > :45:46.this week that it won't be endorsing any other party in the 56 seats
:45:47. > :45:48.it's not contesting, and you're pretty much up to speed
:45:49. > :45:51.with the Greens' strategy, one which has inevitably left
:45:52. > :45:53.them open to the claim, in some quarters, that this
:45:54. > :45:56.is all about propping-up the SNP. In the first of our series
:45:57. > :45:58.of interviews with the party leaders, I'm joined
:45:59. > :46:12.now by Patrick Harvie. Patrick Harvie laughed when he was
:46:13. > :46:21.going to be on this. A wry smile. You are proud of this situation, but
:46:22. > :46:24.where you are not standing, you decided not to the candidate? All
:46:25. > :46:30.the branches made their decisions in their own way and stop some health
:46:31. > :46:34.meeting some will decide online. Or the 56 decided no, we don't want to
:46:35. > :46:40.stand. Rather than we don't want to stand, all of them voted that the
:46:41. > :46:43.resources they had left, after the seven national votes including the
:46:44. > :46:46.Holyrood and local elections that we put a huge amount of resource and
:46:47. > :46:50.energy into, they recognise that this wasn't something we were able
:46:51. > :46:54.to do. Bust than two years ago in the 2015 election we stayed in about
:46:55. > :46:56.half the seats in Scotland. I regret honestly that we are not in a
:46:57. > :47:02.position to do that again this time round. Or even to get close to this.
:47:03. > :47:06.What we do have to do is focus our resources where it will really make
:47:07. > :47:08.a difference because I believe it is critical at the particular time we
:47:09. > :47:11.are in at the moment that Scotland has a green voice at Westminster, I
:47:12. > :47:18.think we can achieve that but only if we focus. This has nothing to do
:47:19. > :47:24.with helping other parties? No, the branches in some parts of the
:47:25. > :47:29.country will no doubt, as the Green party in England and Wales have done
:47:30. > :47:33.as well, contemplate -- contemplate how to stop the Tories. If there is
:47:34. > :47:36.the Tory held seat that is one of the fact is that people will have in
:47:37. > :47:41.mind. Anybody on the progressive side of politics needs to be trying
:47:42. > :47:47.to prevent the kind of Tory takeover of Westminster that Theresa May is
:47:48. > :47:54.running for. This is an opportunity is -- opportunistic election, and
:47:55. > :47:58.she wouldn't be calling it if there were not a weak Labour Party. The
:47:59. > :48:00.two answers you have given seem to contradict each other. One minute
:48:01. > :48:04.you say this is entirely about resources, and your branches are all
:48:05. > :48:07.deciding not to stand, and now you are saying you are not standing
:48:08. > :48:13.because he wants to help beat the Tories. It is overwhelmingly about
:48:14. > :48:15.resources. Obviously one of the fact is that they branch which is
:48:16. > :48:22.covering a Tory held or Tory marginal seat, one of the factors is
:48:23. > :48:26.how best to prevent that very damaging outcome, the bigger Tory
:48:27. > :48:30.majority at Westminster but look, the plc is that there are going to
:48:31. > :48:32.be hugely important social and environmental powers moved from
:48:33. > :48:39.Europe to Westminster in the next session of part of -- Parliament.
:48:40. > :48:45.That will put lives on the line and a green voice at Westerners is a
:48:46. > :48:48.great priority. Maggie Chapman permit your co-convener said a few
:48:49. > :48:54.weeks ago that you would consider as you suggested your strategy offered
:48:55. > :48:57.to keep the Tories out that not standing in areas where you thought
:48:58. > :49:01.that would help people fighting Tories. She also said an approach
:49:02. > :49:05.would be made to the Scottish National Party, about a Progressive
:49:06. > :49:08.Alliance in what she said as the next couple of days. That was able
:49:09. > :49:16.the 18th. Was such an approach ever made? No. Why not? It wasn't a
:49:17. > :49:20.discussion that took place. It wasn't something be partly as a
:49:21. > :49:26.robotic decided to do and she was exposing her provisional view in an
:49:27. > :49:31.interview. The VLC is that the party makes decisions as local as
:49:32. > :49:36.possible. That is the way that we have always operated. Your
:49:37. > :49:40.co-convener said there would be an approach in the next couple of days,
:49:41. > :49:44.there wasn't an approach, why not? She said she was addressing a
:49:45. > :49:50.personal view. The party had not decided to do that. The national
:49:51. > :49:55.council never considered the option of doing that. Actually, after the
:49:56. > :49:58.2014 election and in the run up to 2015, the party's national council
:49:59. > :50:01.agreed that there should be some level of discussion with the SNP
:50:02. > :50:05.about whether there should be a different approach to the 2015
:50:06. > :50:10.election. They weren't interested and I frankly didn't think that they
:50:11. > :50:13.would be, so they clearly had the resources to fight everything and
:50:14. > :50:17.why would they change that strategy? I didn't expect anything different
:50:18. > :50:22.this time so I'm not sure why would explore that.
:50:23. > :50:31.People who would like to vote Green in the 56 seats where you are not
:50:32. > :50:36.standing, who should they vote for? It depends on what issues are
:50:37. > :50:42.important to them. If opposing Trident renewal is important to
:50:43. > :50:46.them, they may find SNP candidates or Labour candidates who agree with
:50:47. > :50:51.them. If the most important issue is ending subsidies to fossil fuels,
:50:52. > :50:57.they are unlikely to find many SNP candidates who support them. If the
:50:58. > :51:02.most important thing is sustainable transport, why would we send MPs
:51:03. > :51:07.from is Scottish constituencies to argue for an extra runway at
:51:08. > :51:12.Heathrow when our transport is unreliable and underfunded? What if
:51:13. > :51:20.they think the Tories have the best offer? If people want an ever
:51:21. > :51:24.meaner, harsher Social Security system that forces more people into
:51:25. > :51:30.poverty, they need to check their values. There must be many people
:51:31. > :51:38.whose priority is the environment who feel that Tories are sticking up
:51:39. > :51:43.for that. They would give the go-ahead to fracking, subsidising
:51:44. > :51:49.nuclear power while removing support from the renewable energy industry.
:51:50. > :51:54.Anybody who supports a sustainable future for the UK will look at the
:51:55. > :52:01.Tories and think they are not where it's at. Would you produce a
:52:02. > :52:07.manifesto for this? Think of the paper you would be using. We will
:52:08. > :52:15.produce a manifesto, the majority of it online, but we have a chance of
:52:16. > :52:19.getting are strong Green MP at Westminster because we are focusing
:52:20. > :52:24.our resources because we are not knocking on the doors of to fund the
:52:25. > :52:28.campaign but are knocking on the doors of constituencies where we are
:52:29. > :52:34.investing and talking about investment in the future, not fossil
:52:35. > :52:40.fuel addicted economy but one that will create jobs for the future, a
:52:41. > :52:45.Social Security system worthy of the name that allows people to choose a
:52:46. > :52:51.balance in their own life between learning, working and the other
:52:52. > :52:59.things that matter. But unlike the SNP, you are a parent UK movement.
:53:00. > :53:04.We are a global movement. You save on your website you want to make a
:53:05. > :53:10.real impact, joining forces with Caroline Lucas but that is not
:53:11. > :53:14.really what you want to do. You want to split up the UK so you cannot
:53:15. > :53:22.even be in the same parliament as Caroline Lucas. If Scotland has a
:53:23. > :53:33.chance to ask itself again the question of independence and resolve
:53:34. > :53:44.this conflict between 55% no vote in 2014 and 62% remain vote in 2016, I
:53:45. > :53:47.will stand with them. I'm sure many people in Scotland care about
:53:48. > :53:52.environmental issues and are opposed to independence to Scotland, but why
:53:53. > :53:58.do you have such a bee in your bonnet about it? I know there are
:53:59. > :54:03.such people and there are such people in the Scottish Green Party.
:54:04. > :54:08.You know we were the only political party clearly saying we have our
:54:09. > :54:14.majority of our members campaigning for a Yes vote but we have no
:54:15. > :54:17.problem with debating that in a spirit of friendly disagreement with
:54:18. > :54:24.Greens who will vote a different way. You don't want a second
:54:25. > :54:28.independence referendum, -- referendum, you don't want
:54:29. > :54:31.independence but you were otherwise paid up in caring for the
:54:32. > :54:38.environment, then you shouldn't vote Green? The question of a referendum
:54:39. > :54:46.has already been voted on in Parliament. If the Tories have a
:54:47. > :54:50.majority at Westminster then there will be a tussle about who has the
:54:51. > :54:56.bigger mandate, but the critical set of issues will be what to do with
:54:57. > :55:01.environmental protections, hard won over many years in the EU. Do we
:55:02. > :55:08.want to hand those over two Tories at Westminster? I think a green
:55:09. > :55:14.voice for Scotland at Westminster is important. According to
:55:15. > :55:21.International energy, there was the biggest fall of carbon emissions
:55:22. > :55:24.last year of anywhere in the world of the United States, where they are
:55:25. > :55:31.now back to where they work in the 1990s. This is almost entirely
:55:32. > :55:35.because of fracking and trapped gas replacing coal power stations, yet
:55:36. > :55:42.you are opposed to fracking on the grounds it is bad for carbon
:55:43. > :55:48.emissions. It clearly isn't, it is helping reduce carbon emissions not
:55:49. > :55:55.just in the US but in China. Everyone to reduce carbon
:55:56. > :56:00.emissions... You're not denying it. We need to look at the global
:56:01. > :56:04.picture, not just in one country. The biggest economy in the world.
:56:05. > :56:10.picture, not just in one country. And one of the most polluting,
:56:11. > :56:14.still. The US shifting to Frank gas does not mean those polluting fuels
:56:15. > :56:20.are not being used, they are simply shifting elsewhere. Fracking is
:56:21. > :56:23.opening up a new scene of fossil fuels, a new roll of the dice. It
:56:24. > :56:32.produces less gas emissions then fuels, a new roll of the dice. It
:56:33. > :56:36.call stations. Coal is still being used elsewhere in the global
:56:37. > :56:39.economy. But you are against nuclear, the other extreme form of
:56:40. > :56:46.pace power. Scotland can achieve nuclear, the other extreme form of
:56:47. > :56:52.stable energy system without nuclear power. Of the two things which can
:56:53. > :56:59.reduce carbon emissions, you are against them. Look at what the UK is
:57:00. > :57:08.doing with nuclear power, and saying it can be done quickly or safely. I
:57:09. > :57:13.don't think so. The allegation is you are better at being a Scottish
:57:14. > :57:17.nationalist than I green. I've heard that and other silly accusations
:57:18. > :57:24.from the Conservative Party. They keep coming up with not very well
:57:25. > :57:32.done means online. Maybe with an element of truth. The arguments of
:57:33. > :57:35.the Greens are coming from nowhere else in the Scottish political
:57:36. > :57:39.landscape. We will keep making that case. Thank you for joining us.
:57:40. > :57:41.Now, in the week before the general election, BBC Scotland
:57:42. > :57:44.will be hosting a series of "Ask the Leader" TV debates,
:57:45. > :57:46.a different leader each night, chaired by Glenn Campbell
:57:47. > :57:50.If you'd like to take part, then you can apply online
:57:51. > :57:52.by visiting our BBC News and Reporting Scotland websites.
:57:53. > :57:53.The state of Scotland's Education system
:57:54. > :57:59.has been in the news this week - though to be fair, it often is.
:58:00. > :58:02.showed the literacy skills of some pupils were declining, again.
:58:03. > :58:03.Then the Education Committee at Holyrood heard
:58:04. > :58:05.some rather surprising evidence from trainee teachers.
:58:06. > :58:21.I'm going to say someone's name and you have to listen. Learning the art
:58:22. > :58:27.of listening at an Edinburgh school this week. These pupils are doing
:58:28. > :58:32.well but the Scottish Government has been marked down in the latest
:58:33. > :58:38.survey of older children's S say. Government figures show that in 2012
:58:39. > :58:45.64% of second-year pupils were doing well or very well in writing. Last
:58:46. > :58:52.year it was just 49%. Primary school pupils also saw a drop in
:58:53. > :58:57.performance though reading ability remains broadly the same as 2014,
:58:58. > :59:03.and last year saw the worst result for Scotland in the programme for
:59:04. > :59:10.student assessments in maths, reading and science. The government
:59:11. > :59:15.says the decline is unacceptable. Recruitment needs to be undertaken
:59:16. > :59:19.to ensure young people and educational are met and the
:59:20. > :59:25.government is determined to do that but we have to see these figures
:59:26. > :59:30.within a round of information which points to strength in Scottish
:59:31. > :59:38.education. What has gone wrong and how can we get back on track? One
:59:39. > :59:41.expert says it's the curriculum. We have a curriculum in Scotland which
:59:42. > :59:48.has neglected the basics of literacy and numeracy and later by the
:59:49. > :59:53.secondary stage, the contact of knowledge that helped to develop
:59:54. > :59:59.children's literacy further than the basics, so the curriculum is the
:00:00. > :00:05.major explication. Hollywood's Education Committee heard evidence
:00:06. > :00:10.this week from trainee teachers. The likes of literacy, there would be a
:00:11. > :00:18.single week we focus on literacy, that would be the focus. I was told
:00:19. > :00:22.reading is good for children and makes them creative, which is useful
:00:23. > :00:27.for first-year but to be reinforced for two years is unnecessary, and
:00:28. > :00:33.have inexperienced the schemes like big writing ventures, having input
:00:34. > :00:40.into how the schemes work would have been more valuable. There may also
:00:41. > :00:44.be a sense that teaching isn't valued properly. I got told, you're
:00:45. > :00:46.be a sense that teaching isn't too bright to be a teacher, by my
:00:47. > :00:53.own teachers. The focus might be as too bright to be a teacher, by my
:00:54. > :00:57.much on teachers as pupils, which is what has happened at the school in
:00:58. > :01:01.Renfrew truck, where the council have partnered with the University
:01:02. > :01:02.Renfrew truck, where the council of Strathclyde to provide on-the-job
:01:03. > :01:04.development to teachers in the field Well, joining me now from Chelmsford
:01:05. > :01:07.is Professor Sue Hill, an education expert
:01:08. > :01:09.from the University of Strathclyde who was involved in that
:01:10. > :01:21.project in Renfrewshire. Can't we try to establish some facts
:01:22. > :01:28.in this rather heated debate? Let stand back from the politics. First,
:01:29. > :01:34.this idea that a fifth of students in Scotland are functionally
:01:35. > :01:43.illiterate? What does that mean? Is it defined in some way? It is, it
:01:44. > :01:49.means they cannot read a basic newspaper, they find it difficult to
:01:50. > :01:54.read or follow instructions, so there is quite a precise definition
:01:55. > :02:03.but since we are talking about facts, it is Renfrewshire, not East
:02:04. > :02:07.Renfrewshire. I apologise, but that sounds pretty drastic, what you
:02:08. > :02:13.described. Is this student is leaving secondary school? It is a
:02:14. > :02:18.measure taken at secondary school level but the issues they relate
:02:19. > :02:26.further back into primary schools, so the way pupils are taught to read
:02:27. > :02:31.and write, one thing about the survey is that it highlights the
:02:32. > :02:37.need for teachers to have a much stronger knowledge-based, not just
:02:38. > :02:43.about what you teach when you teach reading and writing but also how and
:02:44. > :02:45.why it is so difficult for some children and how schools can
:02:46. > :02:52.unintentionally amplify those difficulties. We look at that rather
:02:53. > :02:57.than at absolute standards because no one the standard isn't helpful if
:02:58. > :03:02.you don't know how to remove children on, so it is process
:03:03. > :03:07.knowledge that is required. Nicola Sturgeon has done a couple of
:03:08. > :03:16.interviews where she read rated that the figure that said more than half
:03:17. > :03:20.of S2 students couldn't write to the standard expected, she said that is
:03:21. > :03:26.true but she says what they were being tested on, they were 13 and
:03:27. > :03:33.14-year-olds being tested on the standard of 15 and 16-year-olds, and
:03:34. > :03:40.when they become 15 and you test them again, 80% can do it properly.
:03:41. > :03:47.Is that a valid response? I think it is partly valid. One difficulty with
:03:48. > :03:53.a sample survey like this is it takes very small numbers of children
:03:54. > :03:56.in each local authority and extrapolates out from that to a
:03:57. > :04:06.national picture, and the difficulty we have is that the SSN levels don't
:04:07. > :04:12.exactly match the other levels. There are levels about reading and
:04:13. > :04:18.writing in secondary schools, when children move into secondary schools
:04:19. > :04:23.it becomes more complex and if they haven't had a strong grounding in
:04:24. > :04:29.the intellectual grounds of reading and writing in primary school, they
:04:30. > :04:32.can founder badly. If you think about child moving through there one
:04:33. > :04:37.curriculum, they might start and have period one in an English
:04:38. > :04:42.classroom where they are being asked to read and write and think about
:04:43. > :04:44.the imagery and attend to the way something has been written, they
:04:45. > :04:47.then move on to a modern studies something has been written, they
:04:48. > :04:55.class where they have to think about who wrote it, is it biased, what IS
:04:56. > :04:59.is happening? Then in chemistry they might get three or four lines of
:05:00. > :05:04.writing but it's hugely detailed and downs and they have to do a lot of
:05:05. > :05:09.tight reading, the same with English, they are being asked to
:05:10. > :05:15.write fluently and use rich language. In geography you have
:05:16. > :05:21.similar issues and have to pack the knowledge in, so these difficulties
:05:22. > :05:30.can destabilise children who come to this. You have describe something
:05:31. > :05:36.can destabilise children who come to that is always the case for children
:05:37. > :05:42.going to school. Why are these students functionally illiterate in
:05:43. > :05:45.the way you describe, can't read newspapers or fill in forms that
:05:46. > :05:48.they might be expected to in the course of their daily lives. People
:05:49. > :05:52.like that are going to find it difficult in the 21st century to get
:05:53. > :05:55.gainful employment when leaving school. Why things getting worse? I
:05:56. > :06:01.gainful employment when leaving think part of the issue has been
:06:02. > :06:06.interviews with those student teachers has been such a strong
:06:07. > :06:09.focus on programmes and content and that is what student teachers said
:06:10. > :06:12.they wanted to learn about more but what we know about teaching content
:06:13. > :06:17.is that it is not powerful if you do not understand the context. The
:06:18. > :06:23.social basis of reading and writing, too. One of the things we do know is
:06:24. > :06:30.that from the international surveys of education levels is that 37% of
:06:31. > :06:35.reading is associated with social class is it to bluetits to
:06:36. > :06:39.differences in reading engagement. 70% is associated with gender,
:06:40. > :06:44.associated with reading engagement. Middle-class kids come to school and
:06:45. > :06:50.they have a view that reading is about relaxing, about being
:06:51. > :06:54.enjoyable times... But that doesn't answer why things are getting worse.
:06:55. > :06:57.enjoyable times... But that doesn't Things are getting worse because
:06:58. > :07:01.society is changing and education has continued to focus on content
:07:02. > :07:06.knowledge that is taught, rather than looking at what the actual
:07:07. > :07:09.social basis... Soap if you have some people coming to school
:07:10. > :07:12.thinking that reading and writing is actually about work, and it is a
:07:13. > :07:17.necessary evil, and other people coming to school thinking actually
:07:18. > :07:21.it is irrelevant because it is irrelevant at home, schools have to
:07:22. > :07:28.take all of those people and actually turn it around, address the
:07:29. > :07:31.social attitudes, changing social attitudes making things difficult.
:07:32. > :07:38.Whether it is people to get driving more safely or... I get the point.
:07:39. > :07:43.Your Mac rate is a hard thing and the curriculum has not focused on
:07:44. > :07:46.the enough. Thank you very much. We will return to this will stop I'm
:07:47. > :07:47.very sure. Now before we look at
:07:48. > :07:49.the Week Ahead, a quick refresher
:07:50. > :08:24.of the political Week Just Passed. and political
:08:25. > :09:13.commentator Paul Gilbride. The Greens, what do you make of them
:09:14. > :09:17.were hardly standing and candidates. No, but I think it is probably
:09:18. > :09:19.necessary because it is sensible financially but not sensible
:09:20. > :09:23.politically but they just don't have the money, they didn't expect the
:09:24. > :09:27.election, we were told to have a fixed term parliaments of five
:09:28. > :09:29.years, and we have had in Scotland, we have had six major elections in
:09:30. > :09:35.the thousand days. As you said, the we have had six major elections in
:09:36. > :09:37.Green party is not funded by billionaires and millionaires and
:09:38. > :09:42.they just don't have the resources to do that. But if you want to be
:09:43. > :09:49.seen to be taken seriously... You've just got to do it. I think we saw
:09:50. > :09:53.that in the 2015 general election, 32 candidates in as many
:09:54. > :09:59.constituency. I hate to use this word, it is now polarised politics
:10:00. > :10:00.in Scotland. With the Greens, they might want to save money, why would
:10:01. > :10:06.they stand in a seat against might want to save money, why would
:10:07. > :10:12.independent campaigners? That is the thing. Hang on. Patrick Harvie said
:10:13. > :10:19.that was not happening. What do you make of it so far, the campaign in
:10:20. > :10:22.general bastion Mark it's not really started? I felt it had wouldn't
:10:23. > :10:28.really started until about the middle of Thursday when the Labour
:10:29. > :10:31.manifesto had been leaked, and it suddenly began to be apparent that
:10:32. > :10:34.there were quite a lot of things in that manifesto that at least some
:10:35. > :10:38.people were quite interested in discussing, and it seemed to be a
:10:39. > :10:45.better reaction to it as opposed to the policies, but fairly
:10:46. > :10:49.centre-left, left manifesto, a good reaction to the policies from the
:10:50. > :10:52.public, that they were expecting and at that moment the election came
:10:53. > :10:56.alive a little bit because it seemed like there might be an election, not
:10:57. > :10:58.that Jeremy Corbyn could win but one which would actually change the
:10:59. > :11:01.terms of UK politics. Because of the which would actually change the
:11:02. > :11:05.content of the labour manifesto, which is reducing ideas into the
:11:06. > :11:12.British politics Milliyet which haven't been there since the Tony
:11:13. > :11:18.Blair period. If you are the Tories, do you think they will feel and
:11:19. > :11:21.Blair period. If you are the Tories, obligation to come out with
:11:22. > :11:25.interesting policies of their own? Or is it all about Theresa May and
:11:26. > :11:32.Scotland is all about opposing an independence referendum in, he
:11:33. > :11:37.strong stable government etc? I think were a strategic point of view
:11:38. > :11:43.I think absolutely. I agree with what Joyce is saying, the Labour
:11:44. > :11:49.manifesto leak has introduced the idea of policy into this campaign
:11:50. > :11:53.and that is interesting. From a Tory strategic point of view absolutely
:11:54. > :12:00.strong and stable as opposed to, well, weak and chaotic, and let us
:12:01. > :12:04.find out with the Labour launch manifesto later this week how much
:12:05. > :12:08.the leak document have actually made it into the final manifesto. There
:12:09. > :12:12.is a lot of infighting still going on with Labour, and I think the
:12:13. > :12:18.Tories just need to stand aside, and let Labour carry on as they have
:12:19. > :12:22.Tories just need to stand aside, and been. Are Labour polls closing the
:12:23. > :12:27.gap? I cope, the gap is huge but it is still closing. Of course they can
:12:28. > :12:30.say look, in actual event -- elections, they have done better
:12:31. > :12:34.than the polls have said. I think they will do better than what was
:12:35. > :12:38.predicted, I think it would be devastating enough for Jeremy Corbyn
:12:39. > :12:42.do have to resign if he really doesn't want to, and I think it will
:12:43. > :12:48.attract that source of quarter to a third of British people who are
:12:49. > :12:52.still really interested in social justice, and a shift back to the
:12:53. > :12:58.left, but it won't attract the rest of the people and their from -- from
:12:59. > :13:01.a burst past the post system I don't see how the Conservatives can't win.
:13:02. > :13:08.Do you think this is a good opportunity for them? Or is there
:13:09. > :13:12.not much in them. There is nowhere for the SNP to go after that extra
:13:13. > :13:17.my performance in 2015, except down. They're going to lose some seat but
:13:18. > :13:20.probably as not as many of the Tories would like. It seems to me
:13:21. > :13:26.that the SNP in particular would really rather not to have to sit. Is
:13:27. > :13:33.there a way they could turn this to their advantage? I'm sure they will,
:13:34. > :13:37.but I see how they can. If they were going to, I think they would have
:13:38. > :13:42.done it by now. There is not much glory in this selection for the SNP,
:13:43. > :13:44.there is going to be basically another referendum, and it is going
:13:45. > :13:51.to follow those lines. Prounion parties, and independence parties.
:13:52. > :13:55.We will have to leave that there. That's all from us this week, I will
:13:56. > :13:59.see you next Sunday. Goodbye.