19/09/2012 Politics Scotland

Hello and welcome to Politics Scotland. Coming up on the

programme: The Finance Secretary is busy balancing the books ahead of

his draft budget tomorrow - we'll be speaking to him live. There's

concern the Scottish government is going back on a commitment to

invest in the railways. As the UK government claims an independent

Scotland couldn't pay its welfare bill, one blind claimant tells

Holyrood how new assessments make him feel the victim of a witch hunt.

I'm not a criminal. I am a human being that needs additional support,

but here I'm facing a criminal panel who is making the decision on

my life. And after talks with David Cameron, the First Minister Alex

Salmond enters the row over welfare payments. Hear what he has to say.

But first the Finance Secretary will outline his draft budget for

2013/14 tomorrow. John Swinney has pledged the budget will be one

focused on boosting the economy. I'm joined now by our political

commentator for the afternoon, Alf Young. John Swinney says he wants

to boost the economy, what can he do do you think? He is constrained

as he himself has indicated. He has got a budget within the framework

of UK spending settlements. So what he is going to try and do is what

they have been trying to do for years now, to shift more money into

capital investment. Because you can then get shovel ready as they say,

project under way. It Willem ploy people and give a sense of activity.

What he can't do is to address the fundamental question in the British

economy. And the Scottish economy. That is about demand. There is not

enough demand. Because there is not enough demand and people are

anxious and constraining, what they're doing, then the consequence

of that is people are still out of work, companies are frightened to

invest and so the old circle goes on. Until someone unlocks the key

labelled demand and does something about that, not a lot will happen.

The UK Chancellor of course is facing a tight financial settlement,

but he can pull a rabbit out of the hat, John Swinney can't do that.

and there may be some rabbits later in the year in December when George

Osborne produces his autumn statement. But until then, there is

not much sign that the UK Government will do skrr much. There

will be continued debates about more money for capital spending.

But given how much budgets have been slashed, it is only repairing

some of the damage that has been done. Looking at this politically,

in the terms of independence referendum, how important is this

budget? Well it is critical, because the budget that John

Swinney is going to announce tomorrow kicks in next April and

runs through to March of 2014. That is roughly six months before the

planned timing of the referendum. So it is the last year of spending

before that referendum takes place. And in terms of the pitch that the

current Scottish Government has in terms of its competence and the way

it is delivered, that is the last snapshot that the people will have

of how well they have performed as an administration. Alf is back

later thank you for that now. Well I am now joined by the Finance

Secretary, John Swinney. Good afternoon. I know you're a busy man,

you want a further phases of support for the economy. What are

your key target and which areas have been targeted. Labour say the

housing buplgt has been slashed, will you address that? You will

forgive me if I don't set out the details. I will leave that for

Parliament tomorrow. But let me talk about the general situation. I

agree with what a will the of what Alf Young has said, capital budgets

b -- have been cut too dramatically by the UK Government. If your

budget is reduced by a third, there are difficult decisions that have

tab taken. We have had to take those decisions. What I have been

trying to do for the last five years is ensure we put enough

effort and investment into capital investment in our country, because

that is the real foundation of growth. Labour say that that

Scotland's jobless rate is higher than rest of the UK and they want

an ambitious government-led employment programme. You complain

you don't have the levers of power, but you have the power to do that?

The Labour Party is good at setting out spending commitments and bad at

sending out how you might pay for them. I have got to set out how we

pay for everything and I will do that tomorrow. It what is I have

been doing for five years. But what can I assure the viewers is the

Scottish Government will take decisions focused on encouraging

economic recovery and that we can continue our drive tone sure that

Scotland leads the low carbon economy debate and we secure the

investment in our public services upon which many people depend. Now,

we have managed to do that for five years and we have been re-elected

taking these difficult decision. What I have to wrestle with this

year is not just a real terms reduction in the Scottish budget,

but a cash reduction. That is a challenging set of financial

numbers. That have to be dealt with. It sounds challenging and difficult.

Which sectors will be disappointed tomorrow? Well I think people in

Scotland will be able to see tomorrow is a Government using all

the levers that it has at its disposal to maximise the

effectiveness of our investment in the economy and to support recovery.

What they will also see is a government making the point to the

people that if we want to break out of straight jacket where we are

limited by the budgets decided by the UK Government, is we have got

to have the full range of fisxal and economic powers which within

vand that will enable us to take the right decision. That is the

choice that people will make. tricky situation, but Labour say

that when you do have procurement process, they say the Scottish

Government has messed up and the taxes money has been sent to China

and not Scottish companies? Labour Party's idea is all over the

place. If we need to get steel for the forth replacement crossing and

cannot procure it from here, we have got to procure it from

somewhere. If you look at the forth replacement crossing, you have

thousands of people from Scotland working on that contract. The huge

numbers of contracts are being undertaken by Scottish companies

involved in the activities around the construction of the bidge and

of course that is contributing also to the training and educational

opportunities for many young people on modern apprentice ships. So it

is easy for the Labour Party to snipe from the sidelines, but what

you will hear from the Scottish Government is a budget that is

about economic recovery, about maximising the effectiveness of the

use of money and that our services are delivering for the people.

looked like last time there would be a modest pay increase, when

Labour at Westminster support a pay freeze, how can you afford a pay

like? What we will set out is our approach on pay policy. I made

clear that I hoped that 2012 would be the last year of the pay freeze

and we could afford some increases and clearly I will set out the

position that we take forward on pay. What I accept and is one of

the points that Alf Young made a moment ago, is that when there is

pay restraint and price inflation and precious on peep's incomes,

Government has to do its bit to help people. So that is why we have

delivered the Council Tax freeze and access to higher education and

support the travel scheme and put in place free prescriptions. These

are issues that we have to manage sensitively within the pressures on

the finances that I referred to. Your sounding very responsible

there for the giveaways, but COSLA say there will be a �3 billion gap

by 2016, is it now to cut things like free prescription and bus

fairs? Last year I set out a significant agenda for reform that

involved some structural change, such as the creation of a single

police and fire service that will save about �130 million each year.

And we have set out a consulting - eand are consulting on the

integration of adult health and social care services in which there

are better ways in which we can deliver services that better meet

the needs of individuals by drawing together the work of our health

authorities and local authorities. So there is a reform agenda about

making sure that we deliver public services in an effective way. And

that is the way we manage the pressures of change, of rising

demand that will take place in the years to m co-. But the approaches

that we set out in the review last year which are being implemented by

health boards and local authorities, involved in the voluntary sector,

is the route to ensure we deliver a better approach to public services.

And we have had Iain Duncan Smith, the Work and Pensions Secretary,

saying that an independent Scotland could not afford its welfare

payments as spending is 6% higher north of the border and he said

that North Sea oil and gas revenues could not meet that cost. It is

rich from Iain Duncan Smith yesterday we had a gentleman, Henry

Sherlock, in front of Scottish Parliament, and a gentleman who is

blinds, recounting the more ror of being subjected to some of the

welfare assault that Iain Duncan Smith has unleashed on vulnerable

people. So shifplt has got -- Iain Duncan Smith has got a brass neck

talking about cuts in welfare, when he is inflicting such misery on

decent members of the public like sherlslerl what we heard about. As

a matter of fact, Scotland's social protection costs are 40% of

revenues in Scotland, and the rest of the UK they are 42%. So Scotland

is already able to pay for our social protection and will take no

lessons from Iain Duncan Smith, who is coming to Scotland to

scaremonger about the future of independence, when he is axing

welfare benefits. And causing his Troy innocent and decent members of

the country. On the issue of transport, in the budget we will

hear what happens with Edinburgh to Glasgow rail improvement programmes.

It was a press release went out in the summer saying there would be a

cut of �350 million in that programme. And that cancellation

and reduction of some of the electrification of the network. So

people may be disappointed to hear that? What commuters will hear

about is a Government that is delivering significant investment

in the rail network. Doubling the investment per capita that is

happening south of the border. A Government this a opening new lines,

we have completed the Airdrie to Bathgate link linking west lorsian

with Glasgow and the East End of Glasgow with Edinburgh on a new

link that is very popular. And they will see a Government keeping rail

fares down. What comauters will -- commuter will see is a government

determined to ensure we maximise the effectiveness of the rail

network. We said how important this budget is for you in the run up to

the independence referendum, and it run up until just six month before

the referendum, how difficult is it for you to try to make people keep

the faith that an independent Scotland could survive and

programmes per under these tight I think if you forgive me Andrew I

feel as if I have been here before. People told me before the 2011

election the Government could never win the election by taking the type

of decisions I had to take on public expenditure. But we got our

priorities right. We invested in the economy, in public services. We

told people straight how we were going to be able to to do that. And

people gave us a majority in this Scottish Parliament. So if you will

forgive me the SNP Government has taken responsible decisions about

the public finances. We've done that that for the last five years

and will continue to do that in the last years of this parliamentary

term. John Swinney, thank you very much for speaking to us this

afternoon. You can see Mr Swinney deliver his

draft budget live on BBC Two tomorrow afternoon at 2.30pm. We'll

have a special programme with full reaction.

Labour have secured a debate on the Scottish Government's intentions to

cut by a third of a billion pounds the required investment planned for

the Edinburgh to Glasgow rail improvement programme. Let's cross

to Holyrood and watch the debate live in the company of our

political editor Brian Taylor. Andrew, thank you. The motion from

Labour saying that businesses, passengers and areas will lose out.

There'll be an amendment from Keith Brown, the Minister, saying the

opposite, that business, passengers and areas will benefit. The

difference in the emphasis is that Mr Brown is talking up a �5 billion

future programme in rail, but Labour are saying they reckon it

has been pegged back by some �350 million. Here is Labour's MSP...

Order! My constituents in Cumbernauld are delighted that it

will be electryified. Why is it the case that we see such rail

connections across Europe. They don't exist, but why would the

Government Government invest in a rail service which benefited

another country? According to written answers senior officers in

both organisations were aware that Transport Scotland was undertaking

a review. However, there seems to have been no consultation with

other partners, such as sterling council, cha has invested

significantly in planning for the infrastructure. Officers from

sterling council met Network Rail only the day before the

announcement of the reduced programme. Clearly neither

organisation had been advised they were wasting their time. If the

chief executive of Network Rail had been, as he says, aware of

Transport Scotland's review and had been involved in reviewing their

findings he didn't seem to have passed this information on to

others in that organisation. And now the Jacob Report has not been

published. I have been published it will be published in due course.

Another said the report was in draft form. And yet this important

decision was made, apparently on the basis of a draft report which

cannot yet be published. Questions I have asked about how the savings

were calculated were not answered, on the basis that the information

was commercially sensitive. So we can't even know how cutting the

programme in half is saved only one third of the budget. I wonder if

the resides programme has been subject to an appraisal. The

Government Government will doubtless blame Westminster cuts.

However, the financing of this was to have been a via a 30-year low

interest rate loan from Network Rail against its asset base. If the

schemes not included at this phase are to go ahead later, presumably

another will have to be made later. Ian Macmillan of the CBI has stated

that as the original project would have improved journey times and the

environmental performance, he would have expected the CBI to be

consulted if major changes were planned. They were not. The

Scottish Chamber of Commerce expressed concern that the

potential to the transform arable may fail to be realised. S --

transformational may fail to be realised. She seems to have

neglected two statements, one by the leader of Glasgow City Council,

who said this announcement is good for the city. And another which

said we welcome this and that it will (Inaudible) I did check with

my colleagues. They did provide the statement but nobody showed them

the entire press release or explain to do so them that the budget was

being cut. A number of questions need to be answered. Transport

Scotland published the specification on the 1st June. At

that time you had a statement of funds available, on 21st June. Did

you know that it was going to be cut, and if you did, why was no

statement made to Parliament? What's the Government's timescale

now for the sterling Alloa and Dunblane programme and north to

Aberdeenshire? And is there any connection between the Office of

the Rail Regulator turning down a request, and did the Government

overpromise on the programme? Perhaps the Minister will enlighten

us. APPLAUSE Thank you. Can I ask you to move your motion? Very sorry

Presiding Officer. I move the motion in my name. I call on Keith

Brown to speak to the amendment. Thank you Presiding Officer. Since

the funding of rail was devolved to Scottish Ministers in 2006 we have

seen major investment in the rail network and its services. The

Government, this Government alone has presided over the opening of

two new lines, seven new stations and the procurement of 38 new

trains. New powers have brought new investment and people across

Scotland have seen the benefit with new rail services providing access

to jobs, education and leisure. Performance has increased to record

levels. The last four weeks have seen the best reliability since

2005. Journey times are improving across the network.

Good performance and record investment since 2007 has

stimulated a resurgence in rail travel in Scotland over the last

few years. Indeed passenger numbers have increased by 30% since the

start of the ScotRail franchise. This is good news for the economy,

the environment and travelling public. However, sustained

improvement and growth needs sustained investment in future as I

announced in June we'll be investing to support the franchise

passenger services and enable Network Rail to operate, maintain

and enhance the network. In that statement to the chamber I

committed to continue the delivery and ensuring that it and other

network improvements are compatible and said further progress would be

announced shortly I has delivered further improvements at the

Haymarket tunnel and the Glasgow to Schotts line.

In December 2012 new Edinburgh to Glasgow I havia Carstairs services

will be delivered. This responds to local demand for new links

between... Order! These will deliver a step change in passenger

capacity on this important route between our two major cities, with

improved connectivity. I announced on 4th July we will electrify the

new line and the electrification of the Cumbernauld lines in time for

the Commonwealth Games. This represents a �650 million package

of investment in Scotland's railway infrastructure, rolling stock and

service provision, which will enable hundreds of new jobs and

provide a major boost to the wealth of Scotland and its long term

economic sustainability. Before I give way, perhaps I could say how

if it is intended by the Labour Party they would reinstate that

�250 million. The Minister knows of my long-standing interest in this

project. I wrote to Network Rail. First in the summer and the autumn.

Neither of which have happened. The letter I've received from them

tells me that as a result of the announcements by the Minister, in

partnership with transport Scotland we, Network Rail, are working

through the detail of what this would mean too the scope of works

and timescales we had consulted on this. Work will take a number of

months to conclude. Can the Minister tell us what the up to

date timescale for these works is? There is no answer to the question

about where if �250 million would come from. I note the previous

intervention... Order! I think the last contribution was to propagate

scare stories about Glasgow station closures which never happened in

the first place. On the point I mentioned, we've already started

The Minister is not taking an intervention. We will continue the

progress according to the previous timetable by 2016. The Jacobs

Review identified an opportunity to deliver extra capacity by

lengthening platforms. The City Council is working to make this a

reality, as Welbeck as delivers faster and better electrified

services to passenger this, brings considerable savings, which we do

have to identify and will meet passenger demand into the next

decade. We were determined to ensure the rail programme is

affordable and we drive the best value out of every pound we invest.

Twre have to take advantage of every opportunity to maximise value.

I committed the Government to sustained increases in rail

investment until the end of the decade. Any savings made will

increase opportunities for investment elsewhere in the rail

network. That was the Transport Minister, Keith Brown there. It is

a busy day at Westminster for scish politics too. The First Minister

has been -- Scottish politics too. The First Minister has been

speaking. We had the joint ministerial committee taking place.

Can you remind us what it is and what was discussed there? The joint

ministerial committee is made up of representatives from the UK

Government and the devolved administrations. Scotland, Wales

and Northern Ireland. They are meetings to discuss issues of

common interest. Today they were discussing the economy and calls

from the devolved administrations from TUC Government and the

Treasury particularly to do more to stimulate the economy, to go ahead

with infrastructure projects, to try to kick-start the economy. Also

they were concerned with something called connect itself, a posh word

for better road, rail and airport links. Alex Salmond in particular

was concerned he feels that scored doesn't have the links it needs to

airports like Heathrow Airport. That was discussed at the meeting.

And a brief chat between David Cameron and Alex Salmond, Michael

Moore and Nicola Sturgeon on the referendum question. Basically

deciding when and where it will take place and who will be able to

vote, and, crucially, whether it will be one or more questions.

We'll talk about that in more detail later. Taff talks in Downing

Street, which lasted over an hour, all the various Ministers came out.

I caught up with Alex Salmond as he came out of Downing Street. All of

the devolved administrations have made the point very clearly that in

addition to the other efforts being made on monetary policy, on long

term infrastructure investment, there's a dramatic need for an

immediate injection of capital investment into the economy. All

the administrations made the ninety the construction sector is one of

the key sectors which is dragging back economic recovery, which has

been the reason for the double dip, possiblyly treble dip recession.

And therefore demand the urgent requirement for immediate capital

injection has been made by the administrations across these

islands. Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland had specific examples

of the difficulties of the sector, of the decline in capital budgets

by over 30%, and a strong request for the UK Government to recognise

that. The constitutional dimension of course to that a I would prefer

to be in a circumstances where the Scottish Parliament could decide

directly to do something about that right now, as opposed to making the

case to the Treasury to do it in due course. It is an ought

requirement in terms of economic recovery that's required now.

do you make of the Iain Duncan Smith that an independent Scotland

wouldn't be able to afford the welfare system as present? It is

nonsensical. Yesterday at the Scottish Parliament we had a very

emotional presentation from somebody with a blind disability

who had been, as he argued, reduced to begging in penury as a result of

the welfare changes introduced by Iain Duncan Smith. So I think Iain

Duncan Smith is the very last person to aid the save the

political union campaign, because his department are responsible for

fairly significant suffering among sections of Scottish population, as

dramatically illustrated at the Scottish Parliament committee

In fact as a percentage of GDP the welfare budget in Scotland is less

than the UK as a whole and on the last figures that we have available,

there is a substantial surplus. So Scotland would be in a position to

invest more across a range of things. Certainly, I cannot

conceive of any administration of any political colour in an

independent Scottish Parliament who would be pursuing the policies of

harshness that Iain Duncan Smith has in Scotland now. That was the

First Minister speaking to David Porter. It was a strong response

from the First Minister about Iain Duncan Smith's comments about

welfare in Scotland wasn't it? Iain Duncan Smith is making the

comments in Scotland today and essentially his argument is that at

the moment he would argue that something like Scotland receives

something like 6% more welfare spending than other parts of the

United Kingdom and his argument is under independence he is not sure

whether Scotland would be able to continue paying benefits at the

present Rangers he said they would have to put up taxes or cut

benefits. The Scottish Government has said tt figures that they have

show that they would be capable of doing that 5 they say they put more

into the UK Treasury than they get out. It is developing into an

argument over figures and I would expect both sides to put out more

figures to try and back up that are case. But it was interesting in

comments that Alex Salmond made later, he floated idea, only

floated the idea, that perhaps rows like this could cause a road block

and perhaps cause problems for the referendum negotiations which are

going on. He didn't go as far as saying yes, this would be a

definite block, but he raised the possibilities, if there were rows

it could slow it down. He said these things could be blown off

course if these things continued. It was an interesting threat that

he was almost taking out there. Did that kind of talk fit in with what

had been discussed earlier between Nicola Sturgeon and Michael Moore,

the Secretary of State for Scotland. Was there that atmosphere at those

talks? No the mood music and the negotiations which took place

between David Cameron, Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon and Michael Moore

specifically in Downing Street on referendum and later at the

headquarters of Scotland office. I think after that they feel they are

making progress. Nicola Sturgeon said she was optimistic a deal

could be achieved. They will be holding more talks on the issue

next week. But both sides in this seem to be indicating they making

progress. Now there seems to be, although it may not be at the stage

where there are definite dates in the diary for when Alex Salmond and

David Cameron will sign off an agreement. That appears to be the

course of action, the way they are going. But it was noticeable that

Alex Salmond did raise this idea that if you have will the of rows,

it could in his words blow things off course. And now some of the

economic fing things that were discussed, Alex Salmond said they

needed a capital injection. John Swinney has his draft budget

tomorrow. Less facing a tough financial settlement. Lower in cash

terms than the previous years. So these devolved administrations are

going there asking for more money. Yes, everyone is desperate to do

all they can and to spend whoever money they have to the best effect

to try and get the economy moving again. And as we heard,

construction is an industry which gets people back to work. You're

using materials sourced locally and it all those in the devolved

administrations had infrastructure projects they would like

Westminster to pay for or help pay for or allow them to borrow to put

into place. All sides agree that more has to be done to reflate the

economy and get people back to work, to get more out put from the

economy. The devolved administrations see it as a case

that the UK Government could do more. The UK Goth said it is

priority is to bear down on the deficit and they say if you Max

United on the credit card, you can't -- max out on the cedid card,

you can't continue do that. They are not singing from the same hymn

sheet as the UK Government on this and they have different priorities.

Thank you. Welfare is at the top of the political agenda this week. The

First Minister made reference to blind man who told MSPs he was made

to feel like criminal while being assessed over benefits. Holyrood's

Welfare Reform Committee was taking evidence about changes to benefits

yesterday. Henry Sherlock claimed the reforms reduced him begging A

clerk read his testimony. I thought the day of a blind man begging on

street corners has gone. But that is not the case. ESA and PIP will

never pleat the cost of disability. If disabled people were provided

with help, the true cost to the Treasury and the local authority

would be lier than the current benefits. To be honest I have got

to the stage where I think I don't want to apply for it. Because at

the moment I don't apply for any other support. I don't want to go

through it again. It is such an infringement on my personal life

and who I am as a disabled person. I'm not sure if I will go forward.

I couldn't face an appeal. You are being judged. It is like doing a

crime. That is what it feels like. I'm not a criminal. I am a human

being that needs additional support that here I'm facing a criminal

panel, who is making the decision on my life for the future. So I'm

not sure whether I will appeal against any decision made. I think

anybody in their person would say yes there is a lot of misuse of

benefit system. I agree with closing loopholes, but the proposal

to change DLA to PIP are too rigid and don't take account of the needs

of individual and it is a blanket effect and the individual is more

important. In our case it doesn't recognise complexity of Asperger's

syndrome and other AHDA sufferers. They all unique and the regulation

don't Iraq niez -- don't recognise this unique bs. -- uniqueness. The

propose arls I think would make a short-term saving for a long-term

additional cost. I can't understand why people are getting ESA, apart

from the support group that, don't pay contribution rate, they get it

on their income, they have never woorked day in their lives lot of

them and never contributed to national insurance. Neither will a

lot of their partners, but Nair income won't change. They have

never made into the system. Not like my husband has, and they

continue to get employment support allowance, because it is not done

on contribution rate. It is done on their actual income. But it is the

people that have paid into the system that this is hurting. They

have paid contributions and maybe got a partner who worbgs and I feel

the whole situation is unfair. Since this new law started about

the one year on the people who pay the contribution rate to ESA there

is, it as affected thousands of people who have had a massive

change in their circumstances. This I understand is may possibly lead

to people lying about whether they have a partner and whether they

work 24 hours and lying about their circumstances, just so they can get

some income. Which is wrong I know, but some people may be desperate.

Now let's cross to Holyrood to speak to some MSPs with your - o'

our political editor, Brian Taylor. Two McDonald's, Mark and Lewis and

Willie Rennie. The welfare points being made by witnesses in evidence

yesterday and Iain Duncan Smith saying today in slond there is

money available for those in genuine need, but it must be

targeted and people were being neglected. I think Iain Duncan

Smith has a nerve, yesterday we heard testimony at the welfare

reform commit tee from a blind gentleman who is saying he is being

forced out to beg as a result of the same time yesterday we heard

that the Remploy factory in Aberdeen will close and Iain Duncan

Smith has the clique to come to Scotland and try and lecture us

about welfare. He should be looking at gets his own house in order.

Vulnerable people are losing out. Make no mistake, these are in the

isolated cases. He said the money is being targeted and those in

genuine need are getting the cash. I would invite Iain Duncan Smith to

speak to people here. He says that an independent Scotland could not

afford the welfare provision that is now available. That is the

greatest brass neck of them all, when you look at the amount the

amount Scotland puts in. We are capable of funding our fell ware

state. Two points there about the Iain Duncan Smith and independence?

Iain Duncan Smith is talking about people on incapacity benefit. Those

of whrous remember the introduction of the benefit will know who

brought them in, and that was the Tory party. It was never thought

that it would deal with so many people? It demonstrates the Tory

Government we have now is worse than the one we had then. What we

see is the... They say the economy is worse as a result of Labour?

They would make a political argument. I'm look at it from the

point of view of my constituents. What they're facing is a more

heartless Government. You would rather have that than an

independent Scotland. Mark Macdonald claims the benefits

system would be kpwhror glorious about - glorious under independence.

One of the consequences of Iain Duncan Smith's changes is that John

Swinney has control of many of the things. You prefer a Conservative-

led UK Government dealing with welfare. What I prefer is a social

democratic Britain. That is what gave us a welfare state and a

National Health Service. Things that would be put at risk by the

SNP policy. A tough gig for you, leader of the Scottish Liberal

Democrats. Your party is in quolgs with the Conservatives and do you

defends these changes. Both my colleagues favour reform, but what

they don't say is what they will change. They just protest about

what is happening. We're dealing with a huge deficit and we need to

get it under control and we need to change the system o' we enable

people to get out of benefits. There is a trap. I have men hundred

of people who spend their whole life in benefits. They want to get

out, but they're trapped in the system. That needs to change.

is a difference between addressing the system to make sure people are

can get into work and removing from people Ben pipt fits - benefits to

which they are entitled. The people making assessments are making them

in a way that disadvantages the claimant. Don't you have to assess

people? Yes. But when I see the evidence of people who clearly are

incapable of holding down a job, being told the op sit, by assessor

s who have met them once and force them into this impossible position.

What about that? This is a system that Lewis's Government set up. It

was set up by Labour. And by Mark's Government. These issues are

important. If we don't get the welfare system right we will leave

people on benefits for another generation. There is a point about

opportunity. If we look at the Remploy closure and what happens

when factories were closed in 2008 and the number of people still

looking for work, can they say there is more opportunities. Will

the Scottish Government do We are getting the budget tomorrow

from John Swinney, a spending statement for 2013-14. What are you

hoping for? The Scottish Government continuing to pursue its priority,

moving money to capital investment to stimulate the economy to create

jobs in Scotland. We are always going to be in a position where we

have to deal with cuts being brought to bear at Westminster. We

are seeing real term cuts in the Scottish Government going forward.

We have to mitigate against that. hope we see a different set of

priorities from the last two Scottish budgets. We saw serious

cuts now amounting to half the budget for housing has been removed.

But not from capital. John Swinney is talking about assisting the

construction industry, possibly not the day-to-day budget in housing.

It will have to go a long way. Within the limits, he said he will

try. A 50% cut over the last two years. It will take a lot to make

up for that. We want a budget to create jobs and growth, and

fairness. The Scottish Government takes responsibility for some of

these welfare benefits cut from Westminster. There's two things.

One, to protect some of the improvements we made last year with

funding for colleges, early intervention and housing. We worked

with the SNP to develop those improvements. The second thing is

the �1.5 billion locked up in Scottish Water. They've got to

power to do it. You would invest in broadband, jobs, early intervention

insulation. �1.5 billion. If they started discussions with the

Treasury we could see if we could get that money locked up in

Scottish Water. There's got to be a liberation on pay tomorrow. A pay

freeze ends in 2003 for the 20,000 employees under direct control of

John Swinney. Would you like to see that pay freeze ended and by how

much? If there is to be any change, it won't be substantial. We do need

to see movement. We need to see particularly movement on pay for

the low paid. They've been protected, those are the 21,000.

The definition of low pay on my mind is a bit wider. I certainly

don't think the pay increase we need to see on �20,000 is the same

for people on �100,000. You have to look at this as a policy in terms

of people, the living wage, in terms of protections like the

council tax freeze, which impact on the low paifpltd you have to view

it as an overall package. I think the Scottish -- the low paid. You

have to view it as an overall package. Thank you all three of you.

We'll get that statement from you from John Swinney. Will it be

covered from the BBC live at 2.30pm. We are expecting possibly after

2013 a modest pay increase with the emphasis on modest. Brian Taylor,

thank you. Apologies for some of the sound

quality during that interview. Let's speak to Alf Young once again.

Lots of discussion there about welfare reform. It has hit Holyrood

quite hard today, talking about the gentleman who appeared at the

committee who said he'd been reduced to beg. And Iain Duncan

Smith's comments saying Scotland couldn't afford to go its own way,

an independent Scotland to pay for the welfare bill. It's a tricky

situation for the Scottish Government when Iain Duncan Smith

makes comments like that. There are two big issues that really were

getting conflated in the responses from politicians. One is about the

reforms that Iain Duncan Smith is implementing in the UK welfare

system, where there are people who are being assessed as capable of

work and losing benefits as a result of that. And whether that's

fair. You can hear a testimony like Mr Sherlock's and feel great

sympathy for him, but it doesn't answer the other big question that

Iain Duncan Smith was raising, which was really about can an

independent Scotland take on the responsibility of all the welfare

benefit, all the state pensions and the other benefits that are

included in the welfare bill, by far the biggest part of public

spend chur, and nans as well as -- public expenditure, and fans that

as well. That's going to be a central question in the whole

debate about the referendum, but it is not resolvable by pointing to a

particular individual and saying this individual is having a hard

time because of Iain Duncan Smith's reforms. There are people who are

losing out as a result of these reforms, but the bigger question is

about numbers, and how big that bill is, how big it is in Scotland

compared to the rest of the UK, whether the Scottish Government

independently could afford that. We'll have the same ramy I suspect

about that in items of numbers as we've been having for years about

the report on overall spending and revenues in Scotland, vis-a-vis the

rest of the UK. We are hearing from the finance secretary about the pay

freeze. Do you think Mr Swinney will have a modest increase for

Government employees? I thought the tone of what John Swinney said when

he answered that part of your question was it what be very modest

indeed, if it is going to be anything at all. He talked about

the council tax freeze, free prescription charges and all the

other things that we are helping to moderate what's happening, but I

don't think he was giving us story that he's got a big present in

terms of public sector pay increases from 2013. Alf, thank you.

A further bid to legalise assisted suicide in Scotland is under way

after MSPs backed the preparation of a new bill. The independent MSB,

Margo MacDonald, has launched a second proposal after receiving

support. Good afternoon to you. Thank you for joining me. Hi Andrew.

Hello there. This was defeated in the last session why. Again? Have

you got some improved new proposals to put before Parliament? It's a

better bill. That's the first thing. The politics of it I think are more

conducive to it passing, because we don't have a general election

looming. MSPs always feel a bit more relaxed when it gets close to

an election they batten down the hatches. I'm glad we have a chance

to take a trial run with it. What we've got after our consultation

with this one, having learned the lessons from the first one sing a

very much better bill. Why sit better? What changes are you

proposing that will make it better? One of the things we've done is

tried to make people realise this is a question of right. It's not a

health question at all. Parallel to living wills, we suggest that

people who've terminal conditions, while they are still hale and

healthy, in good spirits and of sound mind, inform their doctor

that they are of the mind that if things change as they approach

death and it looks as if they are going to have a bad death, they

would like assistance to end it before nature would. Now, that

should mean that the answer is there for the people who are

concerned that vulnerable people will be roped into this. When you

are of sound mind and healthy you can inform your doctor, so that he

knows nearer the time if you really do want to use it that you have

felt that way for years. Right. That's an pool. I think. OK, the

Church of Scotland says the bill undermines the inherent value of

life. The Scottish Catholic Church echo those comments, and say

Parliament has give an lot of time to this issue already. I think you

were saying this was because of the case of Tony lick Lynn son-in-law

England. It has raised the profile of this. Is it right to keep

bringing this before Parliament? think so, because opinion polls

outwith the Parliament show that roughly two thirds to three

quarters of people consistently support this being made a change in

the law. Therefore I think the public would like to see this

happen. The MSPs wouldn't. I wouldn't expect the churchs to drop

their moral faith-based objections. They are perfectly entitled to

organise behind these, but they month imagine that the people of

faith have any more rights, any more legal and civil rights than

people who don't go to church. Margo MacDonald, thank you very

much for taking the time to speak to us this afternoon.

Let's go back to the chamber at Holyrood and dip back in to the

live debate. Labour have secured debating time to criticise the

Scottish Government for cutting �350 from the Edinburgh to Glasgow

rail improvement programme. Allowing the public sector to

purchase around 270 low-carbon vehicles. The �50 million future

transport fund which will support cycling infrastructure, electric

vehicle infrastructure, concessionary bus travel has been

extended to disabled veterans. Can I say emphatically the rumours of

its abolition are nonsense and cause worry unnecessarily among our

senior citizens 2011 five bus operators purchased vehicles. And

the purchase of a further 26 new vehicles. There's new projects

coming as part of rail 2014, an investment fund to build new and

existing station. �100 million to secure and develop the sleeper

service. �250,000 for WiFi on trains, between Glasgow and

Edinburgh. Briefly please. member mentioned many projects, but

would the member give his view on the project and the fact that it

has been changed so drastically. Briefly please. I don't recognise

the changes that the member seems to think has occurred to the

project. Clearly it is being delivered in phases that. Seems to

be what's happening. In short, Presiding Officer, there is every

proof to the Government's commitment to rail travel and

public transport in particular. Richardson. Thank you. The

cancellation of the electrification beyond the Central Line is very

unwelcome, both sterling and Alloa had plans to include this as one of

its pillars. Electrification would have led to new facilities between

Alloa, Dunblane and Glasgow. The economic aspect of this was really

very important. Not wonder that the Minister announced this important

matter during the recess. I'm talking about sterling and Alloa

which have been seriously affected by this cancellation and which the

Minister's own constituents didn't hear about until the are assess. It

did not give us any opportunity to question him. At Westminster, that

would have been treated by the Speaker as complete disrespect for

this Parliament. And that is what it was. We learned that it is on

the basis of a highly partial report. Where sterling Council even

consulted about the proposed doubts this programme? O'clock man

manshire, were they consulted? There's been in consultation about

this important report, which has led to what some are calling

phasing but I'm calling cuts. What are the consequences of this

disinvestment citizen? It is not the Minister's press release, which

as usual from the SNP overstated with the headline, "Full steam

ahead for the rail project." It is not even quarter steam head. He

might have announced Ministers announcement... A lively debate

there at Holyrood. Let's speak to a couple of members of the press

following developments over in Edinburgh. We've got Campbell Gunn

from the Sunday Post and Alan Cochrane from the Daily Telegraph.

Thank you gentlemen for moneying me. Campbell Gunn, we've got to draft

budget tomorrow. We've been speaking to John Swinney. He's

facing a tough financial settlement isn't he? Yes, he's got a reduced

budget to deal with in real terms understand cash terms, another we

have been told there'll be a 1% pay increase for public sector workers

across the board, which is a brave move considering it hasn't been

done in England after two years of a freeze in Scotland. Alan Cochrane,

looking at the IDS, Iain Duncan Smith, the challenge he's laid down

the gaunt to the the Scottish Government saying an independent

Scotland couldn't afford its welfare bills. It is another

example of people at the sharp end of policy challenging the narblss

to come up with the truth. The facts -- nationalists to come up

with the truth. All we get from the SNP Government is allegations of

scaremongering. They do it all the time. They did it with boroughs o

on the EU membership. They do it with Osborne on the Treasury. We've

got to start -- they've got to start answering the questions.

General Secretary of Labour has resigned. The communications chief

has been suspended apparently. What's going on there do you think?

This is the result of the inquiry into Labour after the disaster last

It is a bit of both. Labour should have moved their headquarters to

Edinburgh at the start of devolution. They thought about it,

but couldn't get the money. So there has been two power centres in

ebb and Glasgow. It has been nuts. And at long last Johann Lamont as

leader of the party, is cracking the whip and cementing power here.

The SNP have criticised Labour, saying that their MPs and service

can't even get on with each other. -- MSPs can't even get on with each

other. The SNP claim sovereignty lies with the Scottish people and

Johann Lamont has agreed with that. And today a Labour MP said

sovereignty lies with the Westminster Government wirbgs I

guess technically is true. Alan Cochrane we have the big yes rally

in Edinburgh this weekend, a lot of speakers, the First Minister will

be speaking a big turn out expected, I suppose you will be covering

that? I hope for their stake they make it better than last one. The

launch was abysmal and it took off, well it hasn't taken off yet. I

hope for their sake we get an argument, because I do like an

argument and we're not getting one from the yes campaign.

important is this rally? They have to get the campaign going, because

after the launch and after both launches, things fell flat and

hopefully this will kick start the argument. We all enjoy a good

argument. Campbell Gunn and Alan Cochrane thank you. Now a final

word from Alf Young. There will be a hearing at the Court of Session

tomorrow about the Scottish Government's destoigs mount a legal

challenge against whether it should reveal the advice that it has

received on the status of an independent Scotland in the EU.

This is going to be an interesting one? Yes, the information

commissioner has described her need to go to court over this as

unfortunate. You know, Alex Salmond said it is about preserving the

ministerial code and can't reveal the information. This is a central

to the debate about welcome becoming independent, whether we

can assume we will still be a member of the EU or have to go

through an accession process. I would have thought in the interests

of openness and when we look back to something like Hillsborough and

what that has taught us about secrecy in the state, then in the

interests of openness with the Scottish people, why can't we know

what the opinions are? It is critical to the whole process. I

think it is just a game that is being played. But it is a game that

if they keep on playing it won't go down well with the people who have

to decide whether they want to stick with the UK or become an

independent state. The freedom of information commissioner has been

concerned about the public not getting access to the document?

is saying because of changes in Government and there are more ad

hoc bodies being set up and bodies that don't necessarily fall within

the rules as they apply, that it is getting harder for people to get at

information that the freedom of information legislation was

supposed to make possible. So she is saying that it is getting harder

and she is getting more complaint and having to adjudicate on more

complaints. The system was set up to become a more transparent and

open system with the public who, at the end of the day Fay taxes and

elect the representatives and have a rights to know. I would have

thought it is in the interests of all politicians to translates out

of being economical with the actualty as one civil servant said,

and come up with more of the goods, particularly on big issues like

welfare and Europe. Thank you. That is all we have time for. We have