20/01/2016 Politics Scotland

Good afternoon and welcome to Politics Scotland.

A fall in unemployment, with the number of people in work

NHS 24 bosses are criticised by MSPs for squandering millions of pounds

And here at Westminster, a universal welcome for the record

number of people in work, but concerns about the underlying

Employment in Scotland has reached its highest level ever

with the latest figures showing that more than 2.6 million people

The total grew by 21,000 in the three months

between September and November last year.

Here's our Business Correspondent David Henderson.

A new business teeing off in Edinburgh. Shop scope sells wearable

technology which allows golfers to see how they have performed out on

the course. As this market expands, so does the company and its

workforce. We've gone from a team of three at the start of 2015 to 18 of

ten at the end of 2015. We are about to move offices to a larger office.

We have just launched the product and are running a pre-selling

campaign. Success at firms like this is helping drive down the

unemployment rate and bring more people into the Labour market. This

latest rise in employment levels means Scotland passes another

milestone. The last time this number of people were in work here was

before the financial crisis and a recession which followed. That's

more than seven years ago. There has been a bit of a problem since the

recession in that Scotland has created fewer full-time jobs, more

part-time jobs and fewer self-employment jobs. So, although

the employment figures as a whole are going up, the composition isn't

as good as it is in the rest of the UK. And problems remain. Falling oil

prices have meant thousands of job losses in the North Sea. Stuart

Massey was an offshore drill for 19 years but now he is out of work.

It's difficult. There really isn't anything about. When we were in

work, regular phone calls used to get from the agency often, clips

here, trips there, that has completely dried up. There are job

players but the one thing missing there was oil related companies. So

problems in the offshore industry put a dent in these job figures but

overall the signs are positive. And David joins me now

from the newsroom. David, particularly given that

employment is going up despite the situation in the oil industry, it

might seem to Lee to raise David Bell's point but it is interesting.

He is saying that the composition of employment compare to the rest of

the UK is what? Is it more people doing part-time jobs, low-paid paid

jobs at the points specifically to fewer full-time jobs, more part-time

jobs, fewer people in self-employment. I suppose it feeds

into the broader point that it is taking a long time for the Scottish

economy to recover from the financial crisis. The recession

which followed. Seven years ago now. Employment they have returned to a

level that we saw back in 2007, 2008, but there are clear underlying

differences that David Bell is pointing to there. It is a reminder

that the market has changed. In the past when we had recessions you

would see a great spike in the number of people unemployed. The

unemployment figures would reach 3 million or more. We didn't see that

over the last few years because the market is more flexible. But instead

what you see is far more of what economists call under employment,

pretty simple concept, people not getting as many hours of work as

they would like to. People working part-time, three quarters time, not

working full-time. And it shows that the Labour market still has some way

to go before everyone is working full-time. It is borne out as well

in the GDP figures that came out last week which showed that the

growth in output in Scotland has full third in the last couple of

quarters. These figures today underlined that. They show that

there is still some way to go before we have anywhere near full

employment. I am sorry to drop this into polite conversation, but all

these figures the politicians love to bat around, some questions over

whether they mean what they seem to mean, particularly with the

unemployment figures. Yes, when you look at the direct comparison

between the strength of the Scottish economy and the UK economy, looking

at the unemployment figures, the difference between Scotland and the

rest of the UK is something like 0.3%, it does beg the question just

how accurate are those figures, are we in the sort of what you might

call a margin of error which means it is impossible to tell which

actually is performing best? I know the Scottish Government in recent

weeks has been fighting this up. There is a wider point here, which

is in terms of the way data is gathered for job figures, ultimately

it comes down to a regular survey of what people are telling surveyors.

We have seen with the opinion polling in the last few days but

there are problems with opinion polls, they are not always

tremendously accurate. There is a claim that actually there is just

not enough data out there for the nations and regions of the UK to be

very confident that things are being measured properly. This all seems

rather theoretical but it is going to be more and more important, as

more powers are devolved to the Scottish Parliament. More and more

decisions about the best thing to do economically are going to rely on

data. If for example the Scottish fiscal commission is going to be

able to do is job properly it has to have a very sound data and certainly

these figures suggest that we may be some way from that. Thank you for

that. My guest for the day

is Andrew Picken, who's These economic figures, politically

it is difficult to know... Of a seedy Scottish Government will claim

it is done to them but George Osborne will claim it is all done to

him. -- obviously the Scottish Government. I think politically you

touch on the composition of the labour market earlier. The one thing

striking in these figures was all through the recession, the impact on

female employment and unemployment. All of the growth in employment and

the fall of unemployment was pretty much taken care of by men getting

jobs. You can see that developing to an election quite easily -- election

issue quite easily. We all know that women make up the large majority of

people in part-time roles. It was quite interesting, that wages aren't

going up and salaries aren't going up very fast. They are going up by

more than inflation? I think if used about the bonuses it has fallen by

2%, the earnings. It is going up by 2%? It is a bit above inflation but

hardly very dramatic, is it? The unemployment figures, and that, they

both speak to the issue that you don't get the sense that people in

the street are feeling this. But there is this general sort of

growth, as such. Interesting, because it may be that what David

was saying about the composition, could you help -- it could help

explain that. Angry MSPs have complained that

hundreds of nurses could have been recruited with the money squandered

on a new IT system for NHS 24 At a Holyrood hearing,

NHS 24 bosses were told they should feel "ashamed" over

the waste of money. This from our political

editor Brian Taylor. As the name suggests, NHS 24 is on

call round the clock to help patients. In 2011 it was decided

that a new IT system would improve the service. Five years on, it's

still not in place and the project is ?41.6 million over budget.

Apologise unreservedly... The new Chief Executive Iain Crichton said

the original business case had been weak, the contract had contained

gaps and system delays had added to the price. The committee convener

voiced anger at the cost. In my estimation is that would be a red

1900 nurses that could be employed as a result of this overspend. Do

not find that unacceptable? I do. Do not think on behalf of the

organisation, do should be at an apology but they should be ashamed

they should find themselves in this position, is not correct? The

committee then turned to his predecessor John Turner. Mr Turner

said response ability build the rest of the he felt let down by a senior

colleague. Mr Turner signed off the contract but it later emerged that

key service specifications were left out. That was because the thousand

page printed version did not match the online contract which had been

updated over months. There were gaps and they were spotted. Why did that

happen? That is a question that has tormented me since this case came to

light. The MSPs were taught the new IT system had failed tests but

should be up and running for patients this year. Although that

might cost another ?7 million. Eventually they were assured it

would save the health service money. And Brian Taylor joins

me now from Holyrood. Large public sector organisations

and large IT contracts don't really mix very well, do they? This was

repeatedly pointed out during the hearing that this is very far

unfortunately from the first time there has been problems with an 80

contract in the health service and the public service more generally.

-- IT contract. The health service welcome the fact that NHS24 bosses

but previous and present displayed humility but you had two hours of

sustained astonishment from the MSPs at the extent of the... Involved.

And the cost weighing upon the public purse. There were repeated

questions from MSPs as the wider hadn't been disciplinary procedures

and possible legal action as a consequence of the problems

associated with this contract. The answer given was that it had been

felt that the important thing was to try and sort the mess out in the

interests of patients. What I found very amusing, was I think a lot of

our viewers when they see things like this think there must be

something terribly technical to do with accounting. It sounds like

something someone didn't bother to make sure what the posted on the

injured was at the centre of the printer. You could have heard had

been a pin dropping in the committee room it certainly would have been

audible all around the chamber. The MSPs were astonished at that. They

were looking first of all to discover the cause of this problem.

Who are looking for wider lessons, Gordon, one point being made was

that how does this come about that isn't expertise in charge at the top

of these currents. The current interim Chief Executive of NHS24

said he accepted that perhaps the governments generally in the public

sector in the health service, governments of IT projects over all

was not as it should be, not as good as he suggested it was for example

in property. There was a suggestion from both sides that central

services in Scotland, where there is expertise residing, should perhaps

be used in a more consistent and frequent basis by the NHS boards.

Brian, thank you for that. Note of the debate on oil. The

motion calls on the Scottish Government to... Let's listen to the

co-convenor. The oil sector has lost 65,000 jobs, with another oil and

gas production rises for the first time in 15 years. This alone is

enough to demonstrate that the mantra of maximum economic

extraction is not the same as securing maximum economic benefit

our society or does it guarantee the security and safety of jobs in that

industry with the wider economy. Many will recognise the context in

which the current situation has taken place. Though oil prices to

their great connection to wider geopolitical factors, the behaviour

of Saudi Arabia and others. As well as the long-term decline in

North Sea reduction. Something which I hope none

notion that the North Sea will get back to the levels of production it

once had is not something that is credible. And the over reliance on

fossil fuels throughout our society and economy, not just energy but for

a wide range of other economic and industrial activities. But there are

additional aspects to this context. Aspects which will in my view

require 's up to the long-term transition which is required and a

necessary move to requiring the change that this transition will

bring about. First of all, the carbon bubble. This is an argument

set up in the IPCC's that assessment report which was the first to

include an assessment of the overall carbon budget of the planet. Some

estimate something like a thousand billion tonnes of carbon dioxide

emissions or equivalent, to give us a likely chance, a likely chance of

achieving that 2 degrees threshold not allowing climate change to

exceed 2 degrees above preindustrial levels. And by 2011 it was estimated

that more than half of that budget had already been emitted, so

depending on the varieties of interpretations, somewhere between

446 and 616 billion tonnes left to emit if we want to have that

reasonable Other estimates put this more

starkly. If we look at the additional warring factions from the

way in which carbon dioxide is admitted, some estimates put this as

little as 270 billion tonnes left in the global budget. This is

dramatically at odds with the level of fossil fuel reserves existing on

the planet. We already know we have far more fossil fuel than we can

afford to burn if we are mostly serious about achieving that

likelihood. This is not an argument that only comes from the IPCC, I

took the ministers still able to hear me, this is not only an Aardman

that comes from the IPCC, but the global intergovernmental body

advising all of us, it is not a argument that only comes from

environmentalists and campaigners. Just recently, a few months ago,

Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, made much the same

argument. Speaking, again, not to campaign, not the activists, but to

financiers in the City of London come one of the national stability

risk this country faces given our massive overexposure to the carbon

bubble. This is an industry profoundly overvalued because it's

values are based on the assumption that all those reserves will be

turned into economic resources. We will be effectively put onto the

global market and burned. The budget managed to between one fifth and one

third of the world's proven reserves of oil, gas and coal, he said that

estimate even of doing that approximately correct it would

render the vast majority of reserves stranded, literally unbearable,

which itself alters fossil fuel economics. This is a case that could

be Scottish Government on a number of occasions and one previous

minister, last climate change minister, appear to understand in

October 2013I asked about that IPCC report and the growing consensus on

the carbon bubble. He answered, I don't have a figure to give Mr happy

for the percentage of fossil fuels that I would like to see remain

under the earth, but I accept the point that if we were to burn all of

the fossil fuels in the world we would be doing untold damage. Sadly

Scotland's energy minister has repeatedly failed to endorse this

basic argument. All of this comes before the most recent development

in contests Zebre context, the Paris agreement. The carbon budget in the

fifth assessment report is based on the 2 degrees target, the idea of

creeping climate change to a limit of 2 degrees above preindustrial

levels. The Paris agreement goes further. It notes with concern the

estimated greenhouse gas emissions in 2025 and 2030 resulting from

intended nationally determined contributions and says they do not

fall within at least 2 degrees. Patrick Harvie of the

Scottish Greens there. And staying at the Scottish

Parliament, I'm joined by the Liberal Democrat Jim Hume,

Labour's Claire Baker Claire Baker, let's start with

tributes from you. You would presumably like to pay tribute,

given today plus a job as figures, to George Osborne's economic policy?

Obviously the figures today are encouraging for Scotland and it's

good we seek a higher employment rate. By the figures there are still

real concerns about the level of part-time employment in Scotland and

the levels of low pay in Scotland. As the SEC have pointed out, the

levels of an implement around women. There are still issues to be

addressed. There are issues, but you're being a bit, June, I knew?

Implement is at record levels. Record levels in recent years, not

record levels. We see in Poland figures and slow growth in Scotland

as well as across the rest of the UK. There is much more to be done to

improve the quality of the employment of people are saying and

opportunities people have availability to. What is your take

on this Stewart? One moment the Scottish Government is saying it

wants to campaign against George Osborne's fullest territory and was

stimulate the economy and the next great new report record implement

figures? They don't match up. We do have to welcome the announcement

today from the Resolution Foundation and there are ports and welcome the

fact that record numbers of people employment in Scotland since the

recession. These figures go back to 2006. We do have to welcome that but

at a same time we also have to recognise that there is still work

to be done and the Scottish Government have been clear on that

and will continue to work hard to ensure we do get more people into

employment and continue to foster that grows in the Scottish economy.

What does that mean? In specific terms, how can you claim that any of

the growth and employment, which is mirroring what is happening in the

UK as a whole, has anything to do in the Scottish Government? One of the

things the Scottish, to have introduced, which you'll be aware

of, is the increased number of individuals going into

apprenticeship places and when you also consider the huge level of

capital investment that the Scottish Government have put injuries cottage

economy such as 30,000 houses being developed in Scotland and going

forward we have a target of 50,000 houses in the next parliament if

re-elected. Jim Hume, do you put any significance to the point that David

Bell was making earlier in our programme that the condition of

employment, arguably, despite the good news on employment, the Cubs

have implement in Scotland appears to be worse than the rest of the UK?

Smack the composition. It is great we have more people in employment

but unemployment is still slightly higher than south of the border. We

got to look at the reasons behind them but you're right point out that

we have far more people in part-time jobs, so we're losing quality jobs

and in the north-east you can see that with the oil industry, which we

might be looking into afterwards and in the Scottish borders we have seen

quite a few losses in jobs in the textiles industry. We are busy high

quality jobs and we seem to gain more part-time jobs. That is not the

balance I would like to see. Claire, what about oil? Which is figuring

largely. Today it is trading about $20 per barrel? Do you think there

is something more going on than a collapse in the price. This is, if

not the end for the North Sea, is the beginning of the end? Obviously

we are seeing a long-term decline in the North Sea but there is still

much employment and productivity we can get from this asset we have in

Scotland, a valuable asset. There is a crisis in the oil and gas sector

at the moment and my own constituency and region there has

been over 100 redundancies announced this week alone in companies that

are supplying companies to the oil and gas sector. You can accuse the

Government of being complacent, there is a real need to have another

summit and make sure we have a better understanding of why we see

these impact in the North Sea at Government should take

responsibility for doing more research on having more bulletins

and information on what the oil and gas sector is like in Scotland. More

bulletins upfront now? I've never heard a politician say that before!

They need to be more honest about the situation were facing. Over the

last year they try to ignore the crisis, we had an SNP MSP on a

couple of weeks ago saying there was no crisis, it's clear there are

people using ethnic losing jobs in the north-east as well as in Fife

and the Scottish Government needs to take a more serious look at this

situation along with the UK Government and see how we can get

over this difficult period because people working in that sector are

dependent on that employment. Stewart, do you think the SNP and

Scottish Government need to be more honest with people of Scotland about

what has happened? Is only one year and a half since you told us that

all the -- oil revenues could help cover the Scottish Government

potential deficit independent Scotland. There were going to be too

oil funds, want to find short-term capital expenditure and a long-term

oil fund like Norway and know all of the money has gone. But there has

been no attempt by the SNP or Scottish Government to say, look, we

got that wrong, here's what the figures would be nine. As Nick would

be now. Oil and gas revenues increase and decrease and as does

the price of oil on a daily basis and 12 years ago the price of a

barrel of oil was similar to what it is now. We've been in this situation

before. In terms of going forward, clearly there are challenges for the

oil and gas sector and with the sanctions regime they have been

enlisted from a run and more oil... Do think it's incumbent for the

Scottish and say we did all these mistakes and said we would do this

with our money, here's what we will do now. The forecast at the time

were based upon independent analysis as well and also the forecast to

admit the SNP Scottish Government had produced at the time were less

than the forecasts of the UK Government. As I said, the price of

oil does increase and decrease, but on a daily basis. Going back to the

North Sea industry, do you think, one of the arguments just now is

that even if oil prices recover, because the North Sea industry is

going into decline and you have to pay companies both to decommission

saying that make things pagan subsidies to get difficult oil out

of the sea that oil revenues have gone in terms of resources for the

state? I think oil revenues are very important for the state. We

furniture at Macmillan -- we heard Stewart McMillan compare the

importance as Salva Kiir to UK as an entirety, the UK as a hoard is 2%

relied on oil prices adverse Conditis 20%. Oil is important for

the Scottish economy. Of course we got look at alternatives. Don't you

remember that people voted no in the referendum, it is not reliant at all

oil revenues. The SNP claimed that in an independent Scotland they

would use so much from oil revenues, 100 plus pound a barrel, we've seen

today date was $20 per barrel, obviously they did not get their

sums right. What I'm trying to say is obviously oil is still importance

to the area, there is many jobs and we don't want to talk the industry

don't. We have to leave it there. Thank you very much indeed.

Now a Parliamentary inquiry into the closure of the Forth Road

An engineering consultant has told MSP's that a seized pin caused

the crack in a truss under the carriageway which forced

the bridge to close in the run up to Christmas.

Richard Hornby said there was nothing in the inspection regime

which would have discovered the seizure and advised that

My recommendation would be that all those linkages get replaced because

one, is shown itself to be time served, all of the others are

ticking time bombs to a greater or lesser extent and they should all be

repaired having worked out what the actual best solution is that for one

-- for that one location and implement it on all eight corners.

Andrew Picken of the Sunday Post is still with me.

Sees pins, will this be the new buzzword for the ages? That the

problem with the story it's very technical. It's interesting the

enquiry is underway and focusing on the links, which I've had the

pleasure of going through the reports talking about this sort of

thing. What the story is about in Lehman's terms is the capital budget

cuts that the bridge authority at the time had to endure in 2012. Do

you think they were responsible for what has happened? Of course there

is great efforts being made to say that had nothing to do with it? They

had the 65% cut in their capital budget, they had to make choices and

prioritise work against other things and to a calculator is gamble that

we can strengthen this part of the bridge instead of replacing it,

which would have cost ?15 million and caused an cold traffic chaos. --

untold. The party took that decision at the time but as a consequence of

central Government cuts to their funding. Back at that discussion we

had there, do you think any politicians say anything sensible

about oil revenues? It was like a rerun of 2014 again, wasn't it? The

Greens debate is interesting, trying to move things on to post oil, they

are coming at it from an environmental argument. Their

argument seems to be that this 24 billion barrels that the SNP talk

about, Patrick Hardy would say much of that should be left exactly where

it is because of the effects on the climate if it was taken out and we

should shift the economy in a different direction. Scotland does

not have a great track record with the low carbon economy, does it?

Think about the thousands of wind turbines across Scotland, the

majority would have been manufactured overseas and a lot of

them are owned by companies based overseas as well, where the profits

go. It has been successes, but it's been a missed opportunity as well.

It's also difficult to know, because there were hopes with things like

title and everything, but that doesn't seem to be going very far?

They have been hammered because of the subsidy cuts from UK Government.

Back with you later on. The Health Secretary has expressed concern

about the low levels of mental health officers in some local

authorities following reports last weekend that hundreds of mentally

ill people across the country are being detained against their will.

Because they did not have the additional safeguard

of a Mental Health Officer's consent when subjected

to an emergency detention certificate.

Emergency detention is only permissible where it is necessary as

a matter of urgency because of a significant risk to the health,

safety or welfare of the patients were safety of others. Medical

practitioners are required to seek agreement from the mental health

officer unless it is impractical for them to do so for example weather is

an immediate serious or life-threatening danger to the

patient and others around the patient. I am concerned by low

levels of involvement by mental health officers in some areas as

identified by the mental welfare commission in its annual monitoring

report in September 20 15th, consent by mental health officers is an

important safeguard and it is essential that local authorities

ensure they have the appropriate goals of staff in place to meet

statutory duties. I'm pleased to note that the mental welfare

commission has plans to meet with one health board was there appears

to be a particular issue on this. I look forward to hearing the

outcomes. I have also asked the mental welfare commission to

undertake analysis of the reasons why the medical practitioner has

reported it was impractical for them to consult a medical health officer,

and separately I have asked the Scottish Government's chief social

worker adviser to investigate issues about the shortfall in mental health

officers in local authorities with chief social worker officers and

expect him to report back by the end of April. The situation is now that

in the last report of the mental welfare commission has indicated,

45% of those detained under the emergency detention system did not

have a nHL, but this was an increase for 42% in the previous year, and

37% year before. We have been in a deteriorating situation in which the

mental welfare commission has drawn attention to in repeated reports. So

I wonder in giving the new funding that is coming forward, whether she

would give an -- considered giving specifically allocated funds to the

local authorities to recruit more mental health officers. Short-term

detention certificates should be granted wherever possible, in

preference to an emergency detention certificate given the additional

protections that they provide for the patient. So there are a number

of issues that I think we need to look at and understand better which

is right in my original and so I asked for a number of piece of work

to look at this, to understand better some of the reasons but more

importantly what action we can take. Richard Simson asked about the

resources that have been allocated to help over the next five years,

150 million of additional resources. Of course he will be aware of is it

that there is a clear separation between the rules of the mental

health officers employed by local authorities and the NHS for good

reason that they may be investigating issues within the NHS,

which is why where I would normally .2 I JBs B territory where these

things can be resolved, there is a more compact issue here because of

the potential conflict of interests, we need to be quite careful. However

what I will do is once we have the reports back, and if that waste is

specific action that these to be taken, and if there is an element of

resorting behind that, of course I will give consideration to whether

or not there requires to be further work in that domain, but I think we

should wait and see what the issues are first. Given the shortage of

mental health officers has been an increasing problem for some time,

can I ask the Cabinet Secretary, given that mental health officers in

terms of is sectioning patients, given that this is not a legal

requirement, it is an important safeguard and it is best practice,

will be government considered now making mental health officers input

and support a legal requirement in order to ensure that that input

happens at the time a patient is sectioned and ensure that numbers

are now brought forward to be fully trained and suitably qualified to

fill the gap? It is about getting the balance. That we don't restrict

action being taken that is required for immediate safety of the patient

and potentially others around them as well. With the best practice of

involving in mental health officer. Again I would be happy to keep her

involved in some of the discussions that will be taken forward with the

mental welfare commission and the chief social worker adviser.

Back to the chamber now where the independent

and Scottish Green group of MSPs has been calling

for the Scottish Government to plan a transition away from what they see

as an over-reliance on fossil fuels and the jobs created

The Minister for Business, Energy and Tourism -

Fergus Ewing - is responding for the Government.

We need them again to look at tax rates. We need to look at extending

the investment allowance to enable great if feels to continue their

work. Lastly we need to continue the good work we are doing in respect of

decommissioning. We in the Scottish Government to our economic develop

agencies have worked closely with many players here and have done a

great amount of work. I can cite one example, the work taking place in

Lerwick with the partnership between the port authority and it is an SPS,

a major company in the field. So in conclusion, Presiding Officer, they

believe it is in all our interests to have both a thriving and

successful oil and gas industry which navigates these more severe

challenges, but also going forward a thriving unsuccessful renewable

sector -- and successful. I believe that as the energy minister over the

last five years, we have made considerable efforts to achieve both

objectives and we will certainly continue so to do. Many thanks.

Amendment 1356 .2 point one. In the name of Fergus Ewing. You have six

minutes. Thank you. Can I start by welcoming the opportunity presented

to us this afternoon by the Independent and green group for a

debate on North Sea oil and gas. It is indeed a very well timed debate.

Only on Monday, the economy, energy and tourism committee by Justice

report on future prospects for oil and gas in Scotland. Patrick Harvie

of course sits on a committee and to be fair to him he did dissent from

four of the committee's recommendations in that report. I

noticed he was in the press yesterday describing reports

conclusions as reckless, which I think is rather unfortunate I wish

to use from a report that was supported by all the other members

of the committee, all other parties represented, a report which is in my

view measured unbalanced. A report which has been warmly welcomed by

those in the sector and those whose jobs depend on it. The fact this

debate is timely is probably the kindest thing I can say about the

motions afternoon. Pour it is a remarkably downbeat depressing view

of a sector, which is still of great importance to the Scottish economy.

The overwhelming view of the coming enterprise and tourism committee was

that with the appropriate support from government and enhanced

collaboration, a sustainable industry can emerge from an existing

downturn. Of course it is so long ago since we heard the Green Party

banging on about peak oil. We don't need too long it in this chamber to

remember Mr Harvey his colleagues that oil production was at record

high levels, that the oil was going to run out very soon and that oil

prices were on an embassy upwards trajectory and they would become

increasingly unaffordable commodity. Today as we look at an oil price per

barrel of just $28, these predictions have as much fidelity as

though they said that the finances of an independent Scotland would be

based on oil price of 110 dollars a barrel or more. They got a

spectacular rerun. They have now changed their tune and are now

saying that the decline in oil price needs transition away from fossil

fuels towards a new economy. Yes, Mr Harvey can remind us of everything

you said about peak oil if he wants. I am sure that Mr Fraser understands

the reality of peak oil arguments and they bear no relationship to his

words a few moments ago but will he at least acknowledge that our key

argument, whether oil prices are high or low is that burning all the

stuff we have got is simply incompatible with our own survival.

That the context of bring forward is one of geology, but she'll politics

and economics? The fundamental problem with his argument is that he

assumes that the only use to which we put hydrocarbons is to burn them.

There are many other uses to which we put harder carbons. If he visits

the plant in Grangemouth he will see that hydrocarbons are used as the

raw material in production of a whole range of products, hardly a

thing we use in the model world that does not include some elements of

hydrocarbons as source material so this is not just about having

industry to produce material we can burn, it is also about having

industry that produces material that provide essential components in

virtually every area of modern life. Unlike other members of the

Parliamentary committee, I am well aware of the decline in the sector

with some 65,000 jobs that are helping support and new job losses

being announced almost on a weekly basis. We also know that nature of

the industry is cyclical. If you look back on changes in oil price

over the last 40 years. We see that oil prices go up and down. While

none of us can accurately predict the future, what we can do is expect

that there will be a recovery sooner or later. There will be understated

support in the coming decades and what our role today is to ensure

that the industry gets the support it needs in the interim. So three

areas where I believe action is required. The first is in drowning

out costs and inefficiency were already the industry is taking

action and undoubtably be low price is a driver to help this happen more

quickly than otherwise would be the case. The second is in relation to

tax. The industry was very pleased with the changes brought in by the

Chancellor last year. While the result is room for more changes to

been considered and I know that the cancer will be considering these in

the run-up to the budget this year, the evidence -- Chancellor. The

evidence that tax changes are not in fact -the list of industry demands

of the present time. That was Fraser from the Scottish Conservatives

there. You can follow that on the Holyrood

website. Now - to Prime Ministers Questions,

where the Labour opposition leader pressed David Cameron

on why his government was abolishing Jeremy Corbyn said Mr Cameron had

"form" for hitting the less well off with unannounced policies

that did not feature But the prime minister

defended his plans, saying they would allow more

people to go to university as they were "uncapping

aspiration". In 2010, the Prime Minister's

government travel tuition fees to ?9,000. Defending it by saying they

would be increasing maintenance grants for students from less

well-off backgrounds. They are now scrapping those very same grounds

they used to boast about them being increased. -- grants. Where is the

sense in doing this? Why are they abolishing those maintenance grants?

The sense in doing this is we want to uncap university places so as

many young people and our children in our country who wants to go to

university can go to university and that is what we are doing. And

before too much shouting from the party opposite, when they were in

government it was labour that introduced the fees and loans

system. Thousands of civilians have been killed in Yemen including a

large number of the Saudi air force. We have done that using British

built planes with pilots who are trained by British instructors who

are dropping British made bombs and are coordinated by the Saudis and

the presence of British military advisers. Isn't it time for the

Prime Minister to admit that Britain is effectively taking part in a war

in Yemen that is costing thousands of civilian lives and he has not

sought Parliamentary approval to do that? I think the Right Honourable

Gentleman started in a serious place but then seriously wandered off. It

is in our interest that we back the legitimate government of Yemen and

it is right to do that. We have some of the most stringent arms control

measures of any country in the world, but just to be absolutely

clear about our role, we are not a member of the Saudi led coalition.

British military personnel are not directly involved in the Saudi led

coalition operations. Personnel are not involved in carrying abstracts,

directing or conducting operations in Yemen or selecting targets and we

are not involved in the Saudi targeting decision making process.

But yes, do we provide training and advice and help in

order to make sure that countries actually do obey the norms of

humanitarian law? Yes, we do. There is concern on all sides about the

recent rather patchwork approach to constitutional reform. We need a new

act of union, one which sets out the rules and responsibilities so that

the process of devolution by consent will be both fairer and more

compensable. We'll be Prime Minister agreed to meet with me and other

members of the constitutional reform group to discuss a new act of union.

We come from all the major political parties including experts such as

Lord Lisvane better known to this house as the former clerk Robert

Rogers. Very happy to meet with the honourable lady who has great

expertise in this area. What I believe and I think where would be

common interest in is what we are trying to do as a government is find

the devolution settlement that works for all of the devolved nations of

the United Kingdom, including importantly for England as well. I

think we have made some very good progress with the further devolution

measures we have had in Scotland and Wales the maintenance of the

devolved Assembly in Northern Ireland. If there are further

measures we can take I am very happy to see them but I don't necessarily

believe that simply write anything down in one place. The problem but I

am happy to meet with her. Does he agree with me that our nuclear

deterrent only works against our nation's enemies of our nuclear

submarines actually are equipped with nuclear missiles? And that

those such as the Leader of the Opposition who do not believe that

having the defence policy inspired by the Beatles yellow submarine and

while the members opposite may twist and shout the current leader

certainly needs help. I congratulate my friend Matt on his

ingenious question. There is a comic element descending submarines to see

without missiles but it is absolutely serious because the

deterrent has been on a cross-party basis and absolutely key part of our

defence and making sure we have got the ultimate insurance policy which

we support from this site we should vote on in this house. All I can say

when it comes to Beatles songs is that the Leader of the Opposition

prefers back in the USSR. Let's cross to College Green

outside Parliament now, On one guarantee. No more Beatles

jokes? No, I was thinking about to say it to me namely a Beatles song.

I am a great Beatles fan but whatever I did would not be funny so

I will resist that temptation. It might be a question I thought my

guests and they're all looking slightly worried now. Lord Jim

Wallace for the Liberal Democrats come Iain Murray from Labour, Hannah

Bardell for the SNP and John Stephenson for the Conservatives.

John Stevenson, unemployment figures could today but there is a feeling

that perhaps there are dark economic clouds around the corner? I have

welcomed the news today because we have seen it go back turned

prerecession levels, more people in implement and the average salary

going up by 2%, inflation is low, meaning the standard of living is

improving. There's lots of positive news and I agree we should never be

complacent, we got to make sure we stick to our long-term economic plan

and make sure the economy continues to grow and we continue to see in

climate grow as well. Your Government has been very critical of

what the Government down here at Westminster has done. Yet we have

record implement in Scotland? We do, that is very much to be welcomed.

Scotland is doing better than the rest of the UK in terms of implement

figures, particularly in youth employment, more people going to

bolster destinations than before, over 90% across Scotland. There are

still ?12 billion of welfare cuts coming down the line and hitting

some of the poorest families harder and families that are in work, 6000

people in my constituency going to be affected. It's great to more

people in employment but it's about good quality long-term jobs as

insuring we protect the poorest in our society. Iain Murray, as far as

Scotland is concerned we've heard of record implement levels they are to

be welcomed, but if you go to the north-east of Scotland, there are

very bit concerned about the oil industry? Absolutely, the oil and

gas industry, there is a concern at the moment and it seemed oil price

private -- plummet further with the Iranians sanctions lifted more oil

will come onto the market and it looks like the oil price will be

consistently low for a long period of time that at this year 's

concerns and I just spoke to the Chancellor to ask him to look at his

budget again to see what help you can provide and I'm sure cross-party

everyone will do everything they can to make sure the anchor that

industry in Aberdeen and the city deal would be a big part of that

they the Chancellor comes to a conclusion. Interestingly the

Resolution Foundation report unemployment and an implement is

interesting because it highlights key areas. You mentioned some of the

headwinds but particularly in Scotland there is an issue around

getting disabled people into employment and people with low

qualifications. It is lagging behind the rest of the UK and that's why

I'm pleased the work reason Paris in the Scotland Bill will be devolved

to Scotland so it can design his own system to get its people back into

work. In hindsight, when you were in college and Government some of your

colleagues were very concerned about what the Conservatives wanted to do

that with hindsight, where the Conservatives right about austerity?

It appears as though in employment terms the economy is turning? We

knew we had difficult as it is today, it was a coalition decision.

The Conservatives cannot take all the greater things are improving, we

took the hit at the last election but many things we did were right

and it was not on the right path to get these implement levels. There is

no room for complacency. The point being made by the low oil price and

real challenges facing the oil and gas industry in the North East,

that's why both governments have got to work and I fear sometimes there

is complacency, SNP MSP tells us the oil industry is in good health, I

don't know where he is, he cannot be picking up messages from his own

constituents, both governments have got to address these issues have

been European's point, the report as a number of recommendations that I'm

apply to both governments and I hope that both will be responding to try

and address some of the issues of people with disabilities and lower

skill levels. We will probably get something on the oil industry in the

upcoming budget. That will be a big Parliamentary occasion. Another

potential big parliamentary occasion will be when Westminster MPs get the

chance to vote on the renewal of Trident. In party political terms

with the divisions within the Labour Party, this is a gift for you, isn't

it? It is sad that for many years we had a consensus between the two

major parties about our defence policy with regard to the nuclear

deterrent. It's a shame you're starting to see that change, Dodig

is good for the country and people of this country would like it and

from my party's perspective we will be renewing Trident and supporting

the renewal of Trident. I think it's very sad to see that they've been

now got to a union that list part is developing a little thing that's

good and don't think the people of this country would like to see that

either. Hannah, it will come as no surprise that your party will be

voting against the Government on this. Absolutely, it's important to

render that for some time politicians and people across

Scotland have been united in their opposition to Trident. ?167 billion

to be spent on a nuclear warhead we will never use and we have some of

the poorest people in society becoming poorer. On the matter of

oil and .com there's a report today from the Robert Gordon University,

saying that all powers should be devolved to Scotland for the oil and

gas industry because the UK Government is failing the industry.

We heard political point scoring from parties on both sides,

particularly from the Government, added gleeful joy that the oil price

has dropped. We must unite and do everything we can to support the

industry. There's been some positive noises but we hope that tax

allowances will be strongly considered by the UK Government.

Going to the topic of Trident, your party is quite divided on this

issue? Has been clear, the party policy of the Labour Party as we

currently stand is to renew the nuclear deterrent, there is no split

in that sense. That is is table position and can only be changed at

the conference, which is not until September. We're going through a

defence review just now and my leader as a different view to the

party policy. I have a different view to the party policy at the

moment but that's clearly where we are and that defence review will

run. Emily Thornaby has put out the terms and conditions of the review,

including the renewal of Trident and will see where it goes. I wouldn't

say that any debate on the subject is division, the country is divided

and I did a straw poll of about 120 people and was on was 50-50. It's no

wonder that there are two from views about the revered -- we will try to.

It's a complex and difficult subject unveiled the defence review comes to

a sensible conclusions we can take that followed the conference. The

vote could be before then and let's not forget that the Conservatives

already have an overall majority in the house, it looks like they are

pretty solid in terms of this particular issue, so they will

probably get renewal in any case, but let's have a proper debate. That

a point, we know the Conservatives support this and they have a

majority on this issue. For the good of Parliament, might be good to get

this sooner rather than later? It is in the Government's hands. I suspect

it will try to make some political capital out of it if it causes

embarrassment to some of the other parties. I don't think is the best

way of doing such a fundamental position. -- decision. We don't

support like-for-like replacement, we want to de-escalate and say they

should be de-escalation and it's worth remembering that in

Government, as did the previous Labour Government, the number you

nuclear warheads we had reduced quite significantly that must

continue that. I don't believe you achieve anything by relocating

Trident from the Clyde to barrel or wherever, that does not do anything

for reducing nuclear capability and that's what we should concentrate

on. Final question, the issue of Trident, is it something that could

almost hijack the Scottish parliamentary elections if we get a

vote in the next month or so? I don't know, there are wider issues

for the Scottish by Mngeni elections when you look at devolution, the

Scottish Parliamentary elections are about it is happening in Scotland,

health, education, policing, and that's what it should be about.

Trident is a national issue that should be decided here at

Westminster and clear about that. That just shows the lack of

understanding of the issue in Scotland. People do see this as a

Scottish issue, of course, it's an issue across the UK, but the nuclear

warhead is in Scottish waters and those convoys are going through

Scottish streets and one of my colleagues had a ten minute rule

Bill on this issue today but overall Beeb will want to know what the key

issues are for people of Scotland, the economy, and what the SNP will

be doing. I hope Trident does not overshadow the Scottish

Parliamentary elections because this will be his first Scottish

Parliamentary elections with proper fiscal power was coming and we want

to hold the SNP Government to account on their deplorable record

in terms of public services. The biggest issue that might overshadow

the elections is a potential EU referendum on the 30th of June. As

the danger. I think, Trident might come into it. Scottish opinion is

not clear-cut as we are alleged to Lee. Opinion polls show there are

mixed views within Scotland. We should look at what the response of

those is our office discovered a Scottish parliament and what their

record on education and health and police and transport and they have

lots of arguing to do. Thank you very much. That is it from us. Let

it be. No! Time for some final

thoughts from you Andrew. Economy, it strikes me watching

that, a few years ago, 2010, 2011, both the SNP and Labour had a good

narrative on the economy. Austerity is wrong, it's increasing the

downturn in the economy, is wrong-headed not just for the

effects on people but for the effects on the economy as a whole.

Do you think the SNP and Labour have a problem now? You're not taking

account of this, there is no real narrative, is there? The job figures

have fluctuated but overall things are getting better. It makes it a

lot more difficult from the point I made earlier in terms of the detail

below it, in terms of the mill in Plymouth, that is where the argument

will move onto if they cannot move on to the headline. -- female

employment that if you George Osborne you say, I accept, I will

try and do my best. You have no intellectual critique. It is the

simplest argument. Everyone can understand that fewer people are out

of work. Trident, relisted literally do you think that would dominate the

Scottish election? Is hard to say, the SNP would want it to be but for

the people watching at home, they need to know its academic because

the Tories had a majority, so of course it will pass. This is about

political embarrassment and I don't think that chimes with people. The

most interesting thing was Iain Murray's answers. Rather than say,

and he is against renewal, is said of saying I'm against renewal, he is

saying it is not an issue, Labour Party policy will not change before

its conference, contrary to what we heard last week, can we just pleased

to talk about this. It is incredibly difficult for him, isn't it?

Everything he said is right, but the reality of the politics is they are

so divided on this issue. He did not even mention the fact that fact that

the Scottish Labour Party just voted against rearing Trident. Look the

other way, he did was to Galway and lots of people in Labour do but for

a lot of people in Labour it's a defining issue and they will rebel

on this. That's all we have time

for this afternoon. We'll have live coverage

of First Minister's Questions tomorrow at midday -

and I'll be back with Hope you can join us then,

but from everyone here,