20/11/2013 Politics Scotland

Hello and welcome to Politics Scotland. Coming up on the

programme. New legislation to introduce same

sex marriage is expected to pass its first parliamentary hurdle.

Labour argue Scotland must remain in the union to guarantee big defence

contracts. The SNP disagree. That's our live debate in the chamber.

And here at Westminster, they are debating the mix of the British

Army. Should there be fewer regular soldiers and more reservists?

Plans to legislate for same-sex marriage reach a milestone when MSPs

vote on the issue for the first time. Holyrood is to debate the

general principles of controversial proposals to allow same-sex couples

to wed. I'm joined now by our political commentator for the

afternoon, Angus Macleod the Scottish editor of The Times. Good

afternoon. First of all, we have had a lot of debate about these

proposals. This is stage one of the actual bill, what is going to happen

here? It is going to be a very late vote tonight, I think it a clock is

a project to time. It is going to pass, I think. -- eight o'clock. But

there will be some interest around it, in the number of people who vote

against it. This is happening against a background of deep anxiety

from church groups and other groups in Scotland. It is as much about

what happens when the legislation is on the statute books, as what is in

the statute itself. That will only become obvious as it becomes law and

we see people getting married under the bill. The opposition can almost

be split into two camps. Those who are not necessarily opposed to the

general principle, but our concerned with protecting the churches, and

those who are against the general principle? There is conflicting

evidence on this? Polls in the past have shown that there are some

people, a sizeable number, who are against the whole idea. Other polls

have shown a distinct majority for the proposal. I do think there is a

genuine worry on the part of the churches about what happens after

the bill becomes law and whether they will be perhaps forced into

doing something, even though the bill seeks to protect them, that

they will be forced into the courts to defend themselves and to get them

to agree to a same-sex marriage ceremony when they do not want to.

It is a genuine anxiety. We will be speaking to MSPs about that. It has

been a week of economic papers. We had a report from the Institute of

financial studies -- Institute for Fiscal Studies. Yes, it produced

their analysis of the economy, the finances of an independent Scotland.

It was not particularly good news for the Scottish Government. But

then the Scottish Government yesterday produced their blueprint

for the economic opportunity which they say an independent Scotland

would have. Yes, it was aspirational, but what voters and

the people who are about to decide on independence will make of it all

remains to be seen. I think, at the moment, some of the headlines that

were generated on the back of the IFS report will not have done the

Scottish Government any favours at all. Thank you for that.

Let's go straight to Holyrood now for some political reaction. We're

joined by Marco Biagi from the SNP, Jim Hume of the Scottish Liberal

Democrats and from Scottish Labour, Jenny Marra.

Good afternoon. Thank you for joining me. It is going to be a late

setting for all of you. -- late sitting. Marco Biagi, you support

this legislation, but some of your colleagues do not. You were saying

on the radio this morning that concerns about churches being forced

into carrying out same-sex marriages are bit of a smoke screen? I think

some people are doing that, the case is very strong, the protection is

there. Laws like this have been passed around Europe and none of

these countries have forced churches to perform same-sex marriages. The

European Convention on human rights gives very strong protection to any

church against any challenge like this. You were speaking on the radio

with Jon Mason. What is the mood in the SNP now about these proposals?

It is a free vote. Is there some are -- agitation about this? It is a

free vote, allowing everyone to express their own opinion. Everyone

is in good spirits and maintaining friendly relations. We are party

that has always been able to agree to disagree. We have had debates in

public that have shown we are a party that can deal with vibrant

debate. Jim Hume, as I mentioned, it is a free vote. Do you feel the

people of Scotland are with you? You have quoted that 75% of people want

this legislation, is that an accurate figure? I think so. We have

seen a growth in support. In 2002, it was something like 40% in

favour. That grew. The committee has taken evidence from about 1300

people from all over and support was about 75%. Many countries in Europe

have already legislated on this. Jenny Marra, I sense it is the same

argument in labour at the moment. I take it you are in favour of it? Do

you think the guarantees and safeguards iPlayer for the

churches? -- are there? I am confident. But a lot of this detail

will be aren't out at stage two. We are at a tipping point. -- ironed

out. I think it came when Tony Blair put the civil partnership act

through Westminster and that was ahead of the curve in terms of

social attitudes. What we are doing today completes the jigsaw for equal

rights. Do you not show some concerns that if this is past, some

groups may take churches to court? Is any legislation is safe from

being reviewed by human rights legislation? Of course not, but

legislators cannot view of the courts. We have to do the right

thing. That is a precious thing about being a democratic evidence.

Even if there is a challenge, that is no reason for us not to do the

right thing. Lots have been discussed in Parliament this week.

Marco Biagi, we had the IFS report on Monday, not such a rosy picture

for independence in that? The IFS report attempted to Fortune tell if

nothing changed after independence, if we continued with businesses as

usual. The Scottish Government set out the type of action we would want

to take if we had independence. A whole range of areas, revitalising

manufacturer, boosting small businesses, targeting our

strengths. If we had the economic powers to do all those things, it

would show that the IFS model would be out of date and we would have a

very prosperous future indeed. But some of your critics have said, the

Scottish Government's report was all about motherhood and apple pie.

Everybody is in favour of this, that and the other, but the UK Government

has been pursuing those policies already. You were setting out a list

of aspirations that any government might want to pursue. The UK

Government has consistently adopted a one size fits all policy. When you

look at the abysses that has been put on certain areas -- emphasis

that has been put on certain areas, the charger system set up by

Westminster which is the most inefficient in Europe. -- childcare

system. Jim Hume, if the Scottish Government had their way, a small

targeted economy moving rapidly to create thousands of jobs. A very

envious corporate tax regime. What is there to complain about? The

figures do not really add up at the moment. 10% of the turnover of this

government would come out of the economy straightaway. A totally

independent body has come out and said they would have to be a

permanent 9% rise in tax in Scotland to match the books. Or 6% reduction

in spending. If you add 6% on 210%, you are talking about a 16% cut in

public spending at least. -- on to 10%. Jenny Marra, the IFS study,

Marco Biagi was saying there was a bit of fortune-telling going on, who

knows if their figures are accurate? Why take their figures? The

Institute of this cool studies is an independent body that knows what

they are talking about. The blue Alex Salmond's case for independence

out of the water. -- the blew. They will have to answer some big

questions in this White Paper next week. We will have to leave it

there. Thank you. Let's pick up with Angus Macleod

again. Marco Biagi was talking about the

IFS paper being fortune-telling, can you trust their figures? I am

tempted to say that when it comes to fortune-telling, who is better than

the Scottish Government? But I will let that pass. This is the gold

standard of think tanks as far as economic 's -- the economy is

concerned. That paper was very solidly based on facts and figures.

Governments all over Europe take the IFS incredibly seriously. I think

probably Alex Salmond does as well. He did not actually directly answer

the IFS analysis, he let it hang there. I think that tells its own

story. Let's recap on the same-sex marriage discussion. It is quite

interesting that discussions going on in the parties. It is a free

vote. Because they are the governing party, the spotlight will probably

fall on the number of Scottish National party MSP 's who fought

against this. It is inevitable that will happen. In terms of the other

parties, obviously, there are a number of MPs who will vote against

this. A handful, F that, according to the Labour Party, a lot more for

the Conservatives. People will start looking at which party people belong

to you voted against it. Let us turn our attention to current

business in the chamber. It is Labour debating time and they are

looking at the future of defence in Scotland. They say the best way to

secure defence contracts is to stay in the Union, but the SNP say

independence will offer new opportunities. In the quiet moments

today, we may feel some echoes from the past. The shipyards in Govan and

Rosyth are a source of great plague. Lovers with a sense of Scottish

history and an interest in the industrial heritage of the country

want to make sure we maintain skilled and highly paid jobs for our

workers. I appreciate the opportunity. I wonder if you think

that democracy is an urgent thing for everyone in the world? The

member for the constituency who has effectively blackmailed the workers

into voting for something. He is absolutely committed to his

constituents, including the ship yard workers. Perhaps his party

should be more honest about the prospectus. There are iconic images

of Glasgow, of these floating marvels been instructed and lodged.

You only need to ask and hear about from two very special Scots people,

Sir Alex Ferguson and Billy Connolly, about the impact of the

shipyards. It is a short source of great pride to all others. Sadly,

our competitors in other countries did not simply sit back and admire

what we did, the two started building these amazing ships. The

invested in these industries to take it on at our own game. In the early

1900, the Clyde built one fifth of the world ships. At its peak,

shipbuilding and the area employed 100,000 people. The days of

thousands of young men leaving school and walking into an

apprenticeship at the shipyard have gone. But this is still a key

industry in Scotland. It not only provides thousands of jobs. The

decision to go ahead with the building of the aircraft carriers

may be viewed as controversial by some. It is a lifeline for those

workers and it is a project with NAND, and sadly the end it is fast

coming up. For the 800 workers affected, they knew this day would

come, but this makes it no less palatable. The Deputy first Minister

said much I would agree with when she responded to a question about

this last year. We are very sad for the workers in Portsmouth. It is

beyond argument that there has been a steady decline in our shipbuilding

industry which should worry all others. Major concern about our

reliance on naval contracts comes from the potential gap in the order

books. In the context of that last point she made, does she believe

that the promises to make the peace dividend in Scotland or that Trident

is a missed opportunity. I am not totally clear the point you are

making. We have to recognise that the government has done nothing

about this. This was spoken about only when the cases in the arch,

rather than doing anything in the period beforehand. Nicola Sturgeon

has my full support and exporting any diversification to help

safeguard the future of shipbuilding. Perhaps we could of

done more. We all knew this day would come. Maybe we should have

come together across parties and try to market a long-term future for the

shipbuilding industry. But it is not too late. We are ready to engage in

the debate. Help manage any change and exploit any opportunities of the

world-class skills of our workers in the shipbuilding and defence

industries. If other countries can compete, letters understand what we

have to do as well. Letters get round the table with the United

Kingdom Government - management and workers and unions -, and to do

that, they will have the whole support of the Labour Party in

Scotland. But no change will happen overnight. A diversification plan

will take many years. Scotland will not become world beaters in

shipbuilding by Will alone or because the Scottish National party

says so. If we have a future, it will only be possible if we retain

the skills and capacity we currently have in Scotland.

Now to this week's Prime Minister's Questions, dominated by the

colourful private life of the Co-operative Bank's chairman, the

Reverend Paul Flowers. However, Labour leader Ed Miliband started by

attacking David Cameron for his proposals to close children's

centres in England. But the Prime Minister defended his government's

record, saying three and four year olds were getting 15 hours' free

childcare for the first time ever. Letters take another example, in

Essex, the proposal in Essex, their plan is to close 11 and include 37

from 50 hours a week to as little as five. Fewer centres, fewer staff, .

I is that doing what he promised before the election about improving

childcare? I will tell you what is happening with regard to childcare.

For the first time ever, 15 hours childcare for every child in the

country. That never happened under the Labour Party. Three childcare

hours for every disadvantaged -year-old in the country. That never

happened under Labour. Also, tax-free childcare under this

government, which never happened under the Labour Party. We also

upgraded the childcare tax credit by over ?400. That is what is

happening. One policy be no not adopted as the Labour policy is

funding more hours through the bank levy. I will tell you right, they

have already spent it came ten times over. The new jobs can, VAT cuts,

more capital spending. This is not a policy, Reverend Paul Flowers it is

an intent many people are forced back to work

too soon after they have had the Child. The Prime Minister sickening

to this so that British parents have the legal right to the time of after

giving birth. I am very happy to get this. It is possible to take a

little bit of time and stand back and come to terms with what has

happened. I think he raises are very important point. Is the Prime

Minister aware that according to the Economist, Britain is 159th in the

world in terms of investment? Can he tell the house when, under his

esteemed leadership and that of the Chancellor, Britain can catch up

with all these other countries? I can only conclude that the right

honourable gentleman has been out on a night out on the town with

Reverend Paul Flowers. In the first six months of this year, Britain has

received more inward investment than any other country in the world. Is

it Parliamentary for the Prime Minister to respond by abusing other

right honourable members? To say that I was taking mind altering

substances. I respect the honourable gentleman. It was an important

question and I tried to it. I made a light-hearted remark. If they

caused any offence, I will happily with the right. It is very important

that we can have a little bit of light had to light-hearted banter on

both sides. Now, he has only been in the job a

few weeks, but the new Scottish Secretary has already had to present

his department's annual report. The Scottish Affairs Select Committee's

remit is to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the

Scotland Office, including relations with the Scottish Parliament. Mr

Carmichael explained to MPs how he saw his office working in the lead

up to the referendum. It is clear that the resources of the Scottish

government are devoted to the promotion of a yes vote in the

referendum and I should wish to use resources of the Scotland office

within the limits of propriety to ensure that the benefits of the

United Kingdom and the benefits to Scotland team part of the United

Kingdom are fully understood by the population in Scotland.

Let us stay down at Westminster now and speak to our correspondent David

Porter. Letters stick with Alistair Carmichael. He has only been in the

job paid few weeks and then giving us the annual report. Yes, politics

works in strange ways. That annual report is a fairly wide belief and

it means they can go in all directions. They were discussing a

little bit about the financing of the Scotland office, but then get on

to the bedroom tax on the spare room subsidy, depending on your point of

view and, of course, everything as it will be seen until next

September, being seen through the prism of the independence rhetoric

referendum. They wanted to ask the questions and the minister was going

to answer the questions in a way he saw fit and ended up like the type

of explanation you would expect to hear from a private company. Now,

talk about the possible expansion of the Army reserve? Yes, this is an

argument about the break-up of the British Army. When the coalition

came into power, they looked at the books of a number of departments and

looked at the books of the Ministry of Defence and saw there was some

black holes in the defence expenditure. They were also looking

at the finance of the Ministry of Defence and cut their cloth

accordingly and decided that in future, the British Army, navy and

air force would look different, which was basically coded language

for saying there would be job cuts. There was a look at cutting the

regular Army from 100,000 to 80000 and making up for that by boosting

the voluntary defence organisations. The is a worry about this. There is

a worry that by increasing their Navy reservists, you will get the

mix and training of soldiers that you need should the British Army be

called on again and conflict. And the issue of the Reverend Paul

Flowers dominated debate. Ed Miliband, he was supposed to have

egg on his face over that, but it was the Prime Minister who had to

apologise. It was too much of a temptation as far as the

Conservatives were concerned to have a bit of fun with it. The only thing

we have not had about this and the Co-operative Bank is rock and roll.

Someone who, it appears had no banking qualifications, got to run

such a large corporation. He did not even know the assets of the bank.

That would not have been a problem, but the problem for the Co-operative

Bank was that it went through a merger and got itself a huge

financial problems. The Co-op has always prided itself on being an

ethical organisation. Questions now being asked about how competent

those running the Co-op were. Add to this, -- add to this the

relationship with the Labour Party. Let's pick up with Angus MacLeod.

Don't forget, the Financial Services Authority, the former regulator

actually approved Paul Flowers. The regulator has changed, we may well

have tougher regulation now, but why was Paul Flowers still in place

until quite recently. The Labour Party are very uncomfortable about

this. There are no questions about loans to the Labour Party from the

Co-op bank. There is a political backwash that the Conservative Party

is trying to make into some kind of tidal wave.

Thank you. Let's dip back into the chamber once again and pick up on

the debate about defence. Keith Brown, the Transport Minister,

is speaking. Could you resume your seat. I have a point of order. The

minister draws attention to the efforts of the Scottish Government

to protect employment. Why is there no employment minister here? Why is

the Transport Minister responding to this debate? This is not a point of

order. I have noticed that when members have not been able to make

interventions, they have made points of order, it is not respectful. To

test a proposition, we will look at the projects. The two aircraft

carriers, only one of which will be operational. One will be held in

extended readiness. The budget for both of them, the taxpayer was told

by the Labour Party, was ?3.6 million. The budget has now blown

out of the water and is 6.2 million. The UK defence procurement is a

shambles. Look at the Nimrod project. Costing up to ?3.6 billion.

The money paid for that was taken over by a half million pound

commission to scrap Nimrod, and the scrap million was over ?1 million.

We have no Nimrod aircraft to show for that. The third project, I would

quote Bernie Hamilton who said of the Nimrod project that the lunatics

have taken over the asylum, the UK defence procurement system is not

good for workers in Scotland. With regard to recent naval... Yes, I

will give way. Sustaining jobs in the Clyde is a good thing. This

ministers seems to be suggesting it is a bad thing. Notwithstanding the

direct consequences on those people who have lost their jobs. Inventing

things that have been said is not a good way to advance an argument. The

shipbuilding industry in Scotland, standing in sharp contrast to other

missed opportunities to diversify. Johann Lamont says she does not

understand the point of diversification. An independent

Scotland will not require ?6.2 billion aircraft carriers, will need

to address the fact... Order, please. We have a coastline longer

than I, the current system leaves are coastline very unprotected. We

will build upon expertise. Babcock is already diversifying into

renewables. We can do better than the UK Government has done. The

Scottish Parliament is working hard to support the industry and find new

markets, capitalising on our strengths. We are determining our

current procurement needs. I know that hundreds of B a staff are

working with Babcock staff to complete the Assembly of the

aircraft carriers. We need to see a change in defence technology.

Keith Brown speaking live in the chamber.

Let's go back to our top story, the same-sex marriage bill. Our

political editor Brian Taylor is standing by at Holyrood.

It is a late night for Holyrood tonight. What kind of opposition

might we see emerging? You see position among the public, the

churches and others. The opposition falls in two forms and that will be

reflected in the debate today. There is a fundamentalist opposition, who

oppose the proposal general. -- generally. The second is that the

guarantees given to churches will not hold. What are the guarantees?

The guarantees in the Bill say that for a church to take part, it must

opt in to doing so, and that must apply to individual celebrants. They

cannot be prejudiced against or prosecuted. You have two

perspectives with regard to that. Those who are against the idea and

the second, which will come more to the fore in the debate, those

concerned that the guarantees will not stand. We were speaking to Jim

Hume who was talking about 75% of Scottish people in one survey were

in support of it. Is this the kind of figure that is being talked about

in Parliament? You hear surveys and opinions. The actual consultation

resulted in a response that was against. Does that reflect public

view? Who knows? Anything that parliamentarians will decide upon

their own assessment of the public mood, their own assessment of what

is right, their own assessment of the guarantees that are given by the

government. It looks, at this stage, as if the Bill will go through with

a sizeable majority. Those who are opposed or disquieted by the Bill

will abstain rather than vote against it. But it is a vote on an

individual basis. My expectation is that it will go through and that

most members can accept the assurances regarding the churches.

The White Paper comes out next week, being launched in Glasgow. There has

been some concern about that, contempt of Parliament? There has

been a substantial row about that. As of today, there is a rammy going

on. The opposition parties kicked up a stink to the idea. The second

proposal, the second version is that the event in Glasgow will take

place, followed by a statement by a minister, followed by goings-on in

Parliament. But many feel it should be a parliamentary occasion. But the

proposal for next week's business, I think, will go through. An event in

Glasgow, parliamentary statement, and a full debate on Wednesday.

If you are keen to watch the debate and That is all we have time for

this week. There will be a special programme next Tuesday. I can enjoy

the same. From all others, until then, have a good afternoon.