:00:24. > :00:28.Hello, and welcome to Politics Scotland. : : The economics of
:00:28. > :00:32.independence. Better off in the union? There is a
:00:32. > :00:36.warning to MSP is that reviews of access to cancer drugs may not
:00:36. > :00:39.result in patients getting better access to life-saving treatment.
:00:39. > :00:44.And David Cameron and Nick Clegg once again say that the Coalition is
:00:44. > :00:48.safe in their hands. Hello. Two papers on the economy
:00:48. > :00:56.this week. Who is right and who is from? One from the Scottish
:00:56. > :01:03.Government details and optimistic economic outlook, and one from
:01:03. > :01:08.Westminster was more pessimistic. On Monday, the Scottish Secretary
:01:08. > :01:12.was in Edinburgh to talk about the banking sector. He launched a UK
:01:12. > :01:16.Treasury report which claims that independence would add cost and risk
:01:16. > :01:21.to the industry in Scotland. When you are looking to buy a consumer
:01:21. > :01:25.product in a market of 60 million as opposed to a market of 5 million,
:01:25. > :01:29.you're going to have more choice and sharper pencils when it is that big
:01:29. > :01:35.an audit. I think people see it will be lower costs and better choice as
:01:35. > :01:39.part of the UK and also that the British economy, as it did when the
:01:39. > :01:44.Royal Bank collapse, is there to prop things up and keep things
:01:44. > :01:48.going. Yesterday, the Scottish Government set out what it described
:01:48. > :01:51.as the economic judgements for independence. At a visit to a bus
:01:51. > :01:55.factory in Falkirk, the first minister said Scotland can more than
:01:55. > :01:59.afford to be a successful, independent country and that
:01:59. > :02:03.Westminster is holding it back. argument is that we have got what it
:02:03. > :02:10.takes, that Scotland has what it takes, to be a successful and
:02:10. > :02:15.independent country. In this factory, skilled workers need the
:02:15. > :02:19.tools to do the job. So it is for our economy. Our message today is
:02:19. > :02:25.give Scotland the economic tools so that we can build a successful,
:02:25. > :02:30.independent nation. Thank you. I am join now, and for the duration of
:02:30. > :02:35.the programme, by the political commentator David Torrance. First of
:02:35. > :02:39.all, these two papers this week, the Scottish Government's one and the UK
:02:39. > :02:44.Government's one, anything you can either one? Me it would be a
:02:44. > :02:51.positive case for independence, perhaps a slightly -1 from the UK
:02:51. > :02:58.Government. Not really anything new at all. It is just the latest stage
:02:58. > :03:01.in what the Herald has called the document wars. I think both papers
:03:01. > :03:06.had strengths and weaknesses. I think the British one is the least
:03:06. > :03:12.successful of the analysis series coming out of Whitehall. I think
:03:12. > :03:16.they were guilty of overstating certain dangers. It seemed quite
:03:16. > :03:19.clear from discussions afterwards, technical discussions, that the
:03:19. > :03:26.changes they were highlighting were perfectly manageable, nothing too
:03:26. > :03:30.drastic. The Scottish Government paper was quite buoyant and upbeat,
:03:30. > :03:34.and I've read most of it yesterday and I was quite struck that the
:03:34. > :03:38.first 25 pages actually set out a very positive vision of Scotland
:03:38. > :03:43.within the United Kingdom. You could almost have mistaken it for a
:03:43. > :03:47.unionist argument. And then it suddenly changes tack and it says
:03:47. > :03:52.that it is clear that Westminster is letting Scotland down. Only, I am
:03:52. > :03:55.not sure it is that clear. In economic arguments, I think it is a
:03:55. > :04:01.real danger that it is becoming a bit technical and it might put
:04:01. > :04:04.people off. Talking of people out there, looking at the documents and
:04:04. > :04:08.watching coverage on television, what can people get from these
:04:08. > :04:12.documents? If you are in favour, nothing will change your mind, and
:04:12. > :04:15.if you are against, nothing will change your mind. All we can get
:04:15. > :04:21.from both sides is a general impression of how things might look.
:04:21. > :04:25.It is a much harder case, almost by definition, for the Yes side to
:04:25. > :04:29.make. What Whitehall is describing is, at the end of the day, the
:04:29. > :04:35.status quo and all of us, because we live in the status quo, have a good
:04:35. > :04:38.idea of what that looks like. The onus is on the Yes side on the
:04:38. > :04:43.economic and emotional front to say that this is what it would look like
:04:43. > :04:50.and to convince people that they are sure about that. We flee, I think
:04:50. > :04:55.people are looking for really definitive answer is. With these
:04:55. > :05:00.papers, it appears those definitive answers may never be found. It is
:05:00. > :05:04.simply not possible. All of this is subject to negotiations. I think
:05:04. > :05:09.both sides are now gradually conceding that it is at the end of
:05:09. > :05:16.the negotiations that we will find out our answers. Let's get some
:05:16. > :05:22.political reaction to this no from MSP is from Hollywood. We are joined
:05:22. > :05:30.by the SNP's Kenny Gibson, the convener of the Finance Committee,
:05:30. > :05:36.Scottish Labourers James Kelly, and Gavin Brown from the Conservatives.
:05:36. > :05:41.We were discussing this paper on Sunday. It seems to be a running
:05:41. > :05:43.flow of critique that Scotland has been effectively mismanaged by a
:05:43. > :05:50.succession of UK governments. would a Scottish administration do
:05:50. > :05:54.any better? If we were in control of Scotland's full resources and policy
:05:54. > :05:58.instruments then we could do a lot more. It is always better to take
:05:58. > :06:02.decisions for yourself. What we have seen in recent years is that the
:06:02. > :06:05.British governments of both Labour and of the Conservatives have
:06:05. > :06:12.focused more and more on London and indeed, David Cameron has called
:06:12. > :06:15.that unstable and wasteful. We, by contrast, believe that Scotland has
:06:15. > :06:19.tremendous potential to deliver a much better quality of life and
:06:19. > :06:25.greater prosperity for the people of Scotland to independence. Is that
:06:25. > :06:29.all just wishful thinking at the moment rather than hard facts?
:06:29. > :06:35.don't think it's wishful thinking. What is clear is that revenue per
:06:35. > :06:39.capita in terms of taxation paid per Scotland was higher for 30
:06:39. > :06:43.consecutive years than it was in terms of the UK. We clearly have a
:06:43. > :06:49.massive oil industry. But it is not just focus on oil. We export �15
:06:49. > :06:55.million per year in exporting goods, �12 billion in food and
:06:55. > :07:00.drink, �5 billion in the creative industry, so quite clearly, Scotland
:07:00. > :07:04.has the potential to be independent. We also had 200,000 people
:07:04. > :07:10.unemployed and a quarter of our population live in poverty so there
:07:10. > :07:13.is a lot more to do. Briefly, on that point, is it not a little
:07:13. > :07:19.contradictory? You are setting out how great Scotland is in key
:07:19. > :07:24.industries, so Scotland is perhaps thriving in the union. I think what
:07:24. > :07:29.is important is that some people in Scotland feel talked down to, like
:07:29. > :07:37.Scotland is a poverty stricken backwater. Like we are poor and
:07:37. > :07:42.Albania. We were quoted in a debate with a Tory ones as being unable to
:07:42. > :07:45.watch Coronation Street. I think what is important now is that the
:07:45. > :07:49.conversation is at a much more sophisticated level and everyone
:07:49. > :07:52.agrees that Scotland could be more successful as an independent nation.
:07:52. > :07:58.Our view is that, quite clearly, this document shows that Scotland
:07:58. > :08:02.can do much better for its people with independence. James Kelly, I am
:08:02. > :08:06.sure you agree that Scotland could be successful as an independent
:08:06. > :08:10.country. It sounds like Scotland has a lot going for it, as he points
:08:10. > :08:15.out, but if there were more powers in Scotland, those industries could
:08:15. > :08:20.be unleashed and a lot more could be done. I think if you look at the
:08:20. > :08:27.paper that was published yesterday, believe the SNP are all over the
:08:27. > :08:31.place and it is time for Captain Salmond to send for the lifeboats. I
:08:31. > :08:34.think the serious questions that have got to be answer from this are,
:08:34. > :08:41.if the SNP are going to cut corporation tax and there is going
:08:41. > :08:49.to be a black hole in the Scottish budget because of the �2 billion
:08:49. > :08:53.pension shortfall, how many teachers and nurses less are going to
:08:53. > :08:56.employ? How few houses? These are the questions that people on the
:08:56. > :09:00.ground are seriously asking and I think people are waking up to the
:09:00. > :09:04.fact that there are real risks to the Scottish economy if Scotland
:09:04. > :09:09.separates from the rest of the UK. People recognise that we are better
:09:09. > :09:13.working together and taking the benefits of combined resources that
:09:13. > :09:16.we get in the United Kingdom. Kenny Gibson points out, what is the
:09:16. > :09:21.point of working together if it seems that the UK Government is so
:09:21. > :09:27.focused on the south-east of England? There has been a big story
:09:27. > :09:30.running in the newspapers this week. A former Labour Chancellor, one of
:09:30. > :09:34.those British administrations, he says the underplayed the value of
:09:34. > :09:37.oil because the so-called threat of nationalism threatened it. It seemed
:09:38. > :09:42.that these British governments were not operating in Scotland's
:09:42. > :09:48.interests. If you take energy, for example, and you look at the
:09:48. > :09:53.benefits of renewables in Scotland, we pay 10% into the renewables take,
:09:53. > :09:57.but we take a third from that, so there are clear benefits are. In
:09:57. > :10:07.terms of science and innovation, we get double from the UK than what we
:10:07. > :10:08.
:10:08. > :10:12.put in. In terms of per capita money, people in Scotland get �1700
:10:12. > :10:15.more than the rest of the United Kingdom. So, there are real benefits
:10:15. > :10:20.to Scotland being in the United Kingdom and we see those benefits
:10:20. > :10:22.within the Scottish economy at the moment. So, Gavin Brown of the
:10:22. > :10:30.Conservatives, Mr Salmond was setting out his vision for an
:10:30. > :10:34.independent Scotland. What does Alistair Darling's -- as Alistair
:10:34. > :10:43.Darling said, the rest of the UK might block a corporation tax cut if
:10:43. > :10:50.Scotland was in the pound will stop I think the SNP position was that
:10:50. > :10:55.--. I think the SNP position was that the SNP case has been blown out
:10:56. > :10:59.of the water, really. If you go for a currency union, which is the
:10:59. > :11:03.Scottish Government's preferred option, it is inevitable that the
:11:03. > :11:06.Bank of England will want to look at the fiscal policies and have a say
:11:06. > :11:11.over the fiscal policies of any Scottish Government. So, whether a
:11:11. > :11:15.currency union would happen is up for debate, but if it did, there
:11:15. > :11:20.would almost certainly be terms and conditions attached. Of course, we
:11:20. > :11:24.saw the clip from the Secretary for Scotland a minute ago. Are there
:11:24. > :11:30.more than just scare stories contained in these UK Government
:11:30. > :11:34.warning papers? I would say it is a very serious piece of analysis. It
:11:34. > :11:39.poses the questions that need to be answered. For example, if Scotland
:11:39. > :11:43.were to be separated, the size of its banking sector would be enormous
:11:43. > :11:49.compared to our GDP, more in line with Iceland, for example, than
:11:50. > :11:55.other countries in Europe. If that were to be the case, how do you deal
:11:55. > :11:59.with that? How do you protect against the risks? Or do banks, and
:11:59. > :12:03.other companies, move their headquarters? These are very
:12:03. > :12:07.important questions. Also, if you have a separate Scotland and a
:12:07. > :12:12.separate financial regulator, how do you ensure that consumers in
:12:12. > :12:17.Scotland are protected and how do you ensure that financial services
:12:17. > :12:23.can operate seamlessly across the UK? Really serious questions and I
:12:23. > :12:27.was disappointed that the Scottish Government paper dodged them almost
:12:27. > :12:31.entirely. Kenny Gibson, from the SNP, just a brief point on
:12:32. > :12:36.corporation tax. This is now almost a race to the bottom. The British
:12:36. > :12:41.Government wants to get corporation tax ten to 20% is, and Alex Salmond
:12:41. > :12:46.says he will have it at 3% below what ever the UK Government has. It
:12:46. > :12:51.seems strange to have this when you also want to find other services
:12:51. > :12:56.such as nursery care. If you look at the document, what you see is that
:12:56. > :13:00.the 3% cut in corporation tax will lead to an extra 27,000 jobs. We
:13:00. > :13:04.want Scotland to remain competitive. All that we have heard from the
:13:04. > :13:08.others is gloom and doom. James Kelly talked about Scotland being a
:13:08. > :13:14.begging society and of course the Treasury scare stories from Gavin
:13:14. > :13:18.Brown. Quite clearly, that has already been described as
:13:18. > :13:21.scaremongering by other senior commentators. The Treasury, just as
:13:21. > :13:26.was in the 1970s, is still working for the British Government against
:13:26. > :13:29.the interests of Scotland and in favour of the status quo. They are
:13:29. > :13:33.not a neutral organisation trying to look at things in a balanced way.
:13:33. > :13:36.They are totally against the Yes campaign and people should take that
:13:36. > :13:44.into account when they look at some of these documents. I just want to
:13:44. > :13:52.briefly touch with all of you on one other point today. From the
:13:52. > :13:55.Association Of Scottish Police that the justice system should be
:13:55. > :14:02.reconfigured. Do you think it is a good idea to cut down on the number
:14:02. > :14:05.of councils? We have the intention of looking at the boundaries, but we
:14:05. > :14:10.will not change the number of local authorities as regards policing. Of
:14:10. > :14:15.course, they are trying to prove they still exist as a party. Last
:14:15. > :14:21.week their policy of giving votes to prisoners did not go down too well.
:14:21. > :14:24.James Kelly, from Labour, your reaction? I think we have 32 local
:14:24. > :14:28.authorities across Scotland and what you must remember is that these are
:14:28. > :14:32.local authorities that are well rooted in communities and people
:14:32. > :14:36.interact with them through community partnerships. They are used to the
:14:36. > :14:41.structures and the set-up, and I do not think we want to be ripping up a
:14:41. > :14:43.model that is stable and successful. And Gavin Brown from the
:14:43. > :14:51.Conservatives, I think John Major last we organise Scotland's councils
:14:51. > :14:55.in 1995. Hats once again? It is not conservative policy to reorganise.
:14:55. > :15:02.We have to look at services and where we can merge them. We need to
:15:02. > :15:09.get the servings savings that are required. Thank you. Gavin Brown,
:15:09. > :15:13.Kenny Gibson, and James Kelly, thank you for joining me.
:15:14. > :15:18.Now, all politics is local, said Tip O'Neill, the Speaker of the US House
:15:18. > :15:20.of Representatives and you cannot get much more local than this. MSP
:15:20. > :15:22.is local, said Tip O'Neill, the Speaker of the US House of
:15:23. > :15:28.Representatives and you cannot get much more local than this. MSP's are
:15:28. > :15:33.today debating in Aberdeen. It is a labour debate the Aberdeen Donside
:15:33. > :15:41.constituency, which has a by-election due in June. Richard
:15:41. > :15:45.Baker is speaking now. When the SNP came to power in their
:15:45. > :15:49.first infrastructure investment plan, the Haudagain was notable by
:15:49. > :15:54.its absence, this is despite the fact in the previous Parliament SNP
:15:54. > :15:59.members tabled a number of motions calling for immediate action, and
:15:59. > :16:03.this is as long ago as 2005 and 2006. Motions with notable
:16:03. > :16:07.signatories including Mr Swinney and Mr Neil who in his ten years failed
:16:07. > :16:13.to lift a finger to get on with work at the Haudagain. Despite the SNP
:16:13. > :16:18.calling for immediate action, nearly ten years ago, when I tabled a
:16:18. > :16:23.question asking for the latest timescale I would be informed work
:16:23. > :16:27.would not begin and would take nine months to complete. At the most
:16:27. > :16:32.ambitious end of the Scottish Government's timetable it will be
:16:32. > :16:36.2019 before work at the Haudagain is completed. Now we foe SNP members
:16:36. > :16:41.call for immediate action what they mean action some time in the next 20
:16:41. > :16:45.years, at the heart of the appallingly sluggish approach of the
:16:45. > :16:50.SNP ministers to this transport priority, has been the refusal to
:16:50. > :16:54.begin work at the round about before the completion of the AWPR. By
:16:54. > :17:01.refusing to start work on the Haudagain before the bypass is
:17:01. > :17:06.completed, this means court process on the APR has led to years more.
:17:06. > :17:10.This was avoidable. Before they came to Government it was SNP members who
:17:10. > :17:14.called for the work on Haudagain to take place before the completion of
:17:14. > :17:18.the AWPR, not least because when the project is completed, the Haudagain
:17:18. > :17:23.is on roads which are detrunk and not the responsibility of Scottish
:17:23. > :17:30.ministers but the local council, and local council taxpayers. I think Mr
:17:30. > :17:34.Stewart may want to come back in later on. There have been assurances
:17:34. > :17:38.the Scottish Government will pay for the Haudagain after the new trunk
:17:38. > :17:42.road is completed, they understanding is they have not
:17:42. > :17:46.entered into a legally binding obligation to do so. It would be far
:17:46. > :17:52.better that they take the action this motion calls for and move
:17:52. > :17:59.forward with the planned improvements. Sub Sanative work can
:17:59. > :18:03.be achieved now and Kevin Stewart's comments display what a believe is a
:18:03. > :18:07.wilful misrepresentation for the plan put forward and the plan he
:18:07. > :18:11.voted for when he was on the council, unless he didn't understand
:18:11. > :18:15.what he was voting for. We can't rule that. It falls some way short
:18:15. > :18:21.of the fly overs proposed by the SNP when they were in opposition,
:18:21. > :18:24.because we believe time was of the enessence we believe it must
:18:24. > :18:28.proceed. No-one is suggesting the round about needs to be closed
:18:28. > :18:32.during the duration of this work. The solution he endorsed mean itn't
:18:33. > :18:36.isn't taking place at the round about itself. The main features of
:18:37. > :18:41.option five; the plan agreed to, are the tren should have been the
:18:41. > :18:44.existing round about and a new dual carriageway connecting north
:18:44. > :18:50.Anderson drive with the road. This is work taking place away from the
:18:50. > :18:54.round about. A plan for improvements chose been I the SNP will involve
:18:54. > :18:59.rehousing some residents and other plans for regeneration in that area,
:18:59. > :19:03.and Aberdeen City Council move forward with this work now and to
:19:03. > :19:10.unage work to commence on the improvement well in advance of the
:19:10. > :19:15.current plans. Listening to what Mr Baker says, Mr Baker confirm whether
:19:15. > :19:21.or not Labour are committed to a third crossing to to be in place any
:19:21. > :19:25.time in the near few future? member is aware city Cowen ill is
:19:25. > :19:29.proposing a third crossing the council stand to move forward this
:19:29. > :19:33.work and for it to commence on the improvement well in advance of the
:19:33. > :19:37.Scottish Government's current plan, with the right cooperation from
:19:37. > :19:42.ministers on issues like compensation orders the relocation
:19:42. > :19:46.of residents which the plan requires can take place at an appropriate and
:19:46. > :19:55.seventive place and the pre-council said work could be done within three
:19:55. > :20:02.years and that was in 2008. For the SNP to suggest we can be a separate
:20:02. > :20:05.nation is nonsense. Last week, the Labour leader of the Aberdeen
:20:05. > :20:09.council announced they were move fog war with plans to link the drive to
:20:09. > :20:12.the trunk road, with these improvements to be completed in
:20:12. > :20:17.2015. This project will significantly improve surface access
:20:17. > :20:20.to the airport and to areas in the north of the city where we see
:20:20. > :20:24.significant new office developments for business in Aberdeen. We are
:20:24. > :20:28.calling on the Scottish Government to show the same kind of initiative
:20:28. > :20:32.with Haudagain round about and not subject businesses to years more of
:20:32. > :20:35.traffic, congestion, many misery. We ask ministers to think again and
:20:35. > :20:39.work with the council to give the green light to this project and take
:20:39. > :20:43.the actions required to get it underway. If they fail to do so this
:20:43. > :20:46.will not only mean years more of traffic jams, it will mean years
:20:46. > :20:52.more of tens of millions pounds worth of cost to local business and
:20:52. > :20:56.this is avoidable. Not acting now would mean ministers have failed to
:20:56. > :20:59.listen to councils, local businesses and local people. It is time for
:20:59. > :21:03.ministers and the SNP to listen and think again, on their refusal to
:21:03. > :21:08.give this work at the Haudagain the priority it needs, otherwise the
:21:08. > :21:13.charge will be justly levelled at the SNP that Aberdeen is their
:21:13. > :21:17.forgotten city. They deserve better than that. We all agree the city,
:21:17. > :21:21.Aberdeen deserves better. We agree the city is vital to the whole of
:21:21. > :21:31.the Scottish economy. That is why I ask the chamber to support our call
:21:31. > :21:31.
:21:31. > :21:38.for immediate action at Haudagain and I move the hoeings in my name.
:21:38. > :21:41.-- move the motion in my name. Thank you. The Scottish Government
:21:41. > :21:44.of course recognises the important contribution that Aberdeen and the
:21:44. > :21:48.North East makes to the wider economy, and that an effective
:21:48. > :21:52.transport network is vital to economic growth. It's a shame we
:21:52. > :21:58.didn't have that decades ago when we should have had. The the project
:21:58. > :22:01.improves to the round about and a new bridge form a core part of a
:22:01. > :22:07.commitment to improving transport in the North East along with proposals
:22:07. > :22:10.to dual the A96 by 2030. We have stated on a number of occasions our
:22:11. > :22:16.commitment to funding the design and the construction of the road
:22:16. > :22:22.improvements and this will include associated land and compensation
:22:22. > :22:27.costs. The resolution of the legal issues has allowed us to progress
:22:27. > :22:31.without reday -- delay. Work has commenced on the design with the
:22:31. > :22:35.appointment of Jacobs UK limited. The design work is necessary and
:22:35. > :22:39.that will ensure construction of this much-needed project can begin
:22:40. > :22:47.immediately after the project is completed in 2018, worth reminding I
:22:47. > :22:52.think at this point that the council have said that benefits of the
:22:52. > :23:02.Haudagain project will only be realised after the AWPR and the
:23:02. > :23:04.
:23:04. > :23:08.crossing are complete. I think Richard bake seems to have forgotten
:23:08. > :23:13.there has been a protected challenge. But the similar fact is
:23:13. > :23:17.he didn't answer it in his point, the council that he has listen laud
:23:17. > :23:22.today have said on a number of occasions Haudagain will only
:23:22. > :23:28.produce benefit whence the AWPR and the crossing are complete. Labour
:23:28. > :23:32.have had a conversion. You are watching Politics Scotland from the
:23:32. > :23:36.BBC. Still to come in the programme. The coalition will go on, David
:23:36. > :23:46.Cameron and Nick Clegg launch a defence of their Government and
:23:46. > :23:46.
:23:47. > :23:50.leadership amid backbench revolts. Now, medical experts an --... They
:23:51. > :23:54.were giving evidence to Holyrood's health committee in reports into the
:23:54. > :24:02.Scottish Medicines Consortium, which approves medicines and on individual
:24:02. > :24:08.patient treatment requests. They are a system used by patients trying to
:24:08. > :24:11.access unapproved drugs. We have two reports and they are the
:24:11. > :24:15.recommendation about transparency and process and don't deal with the
:24:15. > :24:19.issue how you improve access to medicine, I have had nothing that
:24:19. > :24:24.suggest the IPTR process is going to improve to let more people in, I
:24:24. > :24:28.come back to the fundamental question of no withstanding the SMC,
:24:28. > :24:33.you know, saying yes more often and that will take time and a different,
:24:33. > :24:38.I think set of recommendation, I come back to the issue the issue
:24:38. > :24:42.which is we have pay patients who are considering moving to England,
:24:42. > :24:47.to get access to medicines you can't guilt here, I am wondering where in
:24:47. > :24:53.the set of recommendations, is that issue going to be resolved. Or, I
:24:53. > :24:57.think somebody pension -- mentioned earlier, there is the potential of
:24:57. > :25:01.saving �300 million on our drugs bun. Could some of that be pressed
:25:01. > :25:06.into play? I just wonder if somebody was to offer a solution on how we
:25:06. > :25:10.resolve the issue of the unfairness in the system, what would that be?
:25:10. > :25:14.We are in a situation here where there is a big disparity,
:25:14. > :25:17.particularly with regard to cancer medicine, but, you know, I don't
:25:17. > :25:22.think the creation of a Cancer Drugs Fund is necessarily the best
:25:22. > :25:28.solution, I think this whole idea of finding a Scottish specific solution
:25:28. > :25:33.that is fair for all conditions, you know, but it needs flexibility, and
:25:33. > :25:39.SMC or, if it is an organisation that sits outside of SMC, that there
:25:39. > :25:45.is going to do this negotiation, with, try and get the best possible
:25:45. > :25:51.value, then, you know, the other thing is that we need nor
:25:51. > :25:55.flexibility, you know -- more flexibility. They are to a certain
:25:55. > :26:01.extent hamstrung by rules and theres after a good example when we had a
:26:01. > :26:06.drug for ovarian cancer, where we wanted the coalition in Scotland had
:26:06. > :26:11.done a big clinical trial using half the licensed dose and it may have
:26:11. > :26:15.made the drug cost effective but SMC could not assess that dose because
:26:15. > :26:21.it is only allowed to assess licensed medications I would like to
:26:21. > :26:25.see them given the remit to speak to the clinicians in Scotland and be --
:26:25. > :26:30.allowed to have that flexibility. Rather than a sort of a fund that
:26:30. > :26:34.sits outside of everything, like the Cancer Drugs Fund, which patients
:26:34. > :26:37.with non-cancer conditions could consider to be very unfair, then we
:26:37. > :26:42.should have a sort of more global solution, but we need to start
:26:42. > :26:46.working for it now, and right at this point in time, there is a big
:26:46. > :26:51.disparity and patients who have got diseases now, that they want to get
:26:51. > :26:56.drugs for, are talking about moving south of the border.
:26:56. > :27:02.It is important to remember some of the things they have said yes to. We
:27:02. > :27:06.said yes to the drug for hepatitis C it is a major public healthish --
:27:06. > :27:12.issue, the drugs were very expensive but incredibly beneficial, so the
:27:12. > :27:17.cost, the estimated cost to NHS Scotland for the drugs is �50
:27:17. > :27:20.million at year five. We said yes to all of the new anti-coagulant
:27:21. > :27:25.medicines which will prevent stroke in patient, three new drug, we said
:27:25. > :27:32.yes to all, and the cost are estimated about �20 million at year
:27:32. > :27:37.five. That is �70 for two sets of drugs, so we do say yes and we are
:27:37. > :27:42.prepared to pay a high price where there is great benefit. It seems to
:27:42. > :27:52.be that people think all of the medicine it is because of the cost.
:27:52. > :27:53.
:27:53. > :27:57.Even though we might cause an affordability... I think the SMC
:27:58. > :28:01.reports was fair, I think that you know all the consultants that are
:28:02. > :28:06.work with understand the complexity of the situation and sensitive to
:28:06. > :28:12.the fact that all these drugs are expensive, and, we have to look at
:28:12. > :28:17.cost effectiveness, so I think that was fair, I think transparency is a
:28:17. > :28:22.good thing, I think that the IPTR report was really very
:28:22. > :28:28.disappointing, and basically does not change my practise at all, and I
:28:28. > :28:32.think that we are still in the same situation as we were in before the
:28:32. > :28:39.report was published in that we have a very difficult situation, or
:28:39. > :28:44.system to navigate, and I don't think it is going to bring grater
:28:44. > :28:50.access to medicines that have been turned down or not been through SMC.
:28:50. > :28:55.-- greater. I II would agree with everything that has been said
:28:55. > :28:59.before, this report, while welcome and does bring forward good
:28:59. > :29:04.recommendations, particularly with regard to the S manufacture C
:29:04. > :29:09.policy, there is some glaring admissions within this and the IPT
:29:09. > :29:14.issue is one we would like to make sure is addressed going forward,
:29:14. > :29:18.from this review there will be no change, patients will not be able to
:29:18. > :29:23.access medicines enthough there is a fund in place. This is something the
:29:23. > :29:31.committee will need to take forward. From information I have had given to
:29:31. > :29:38.me, there is going to be a long-term from IPTR and SMC getting
:29:38. > :29:43.information to the health boards, and for the process. Of IPTR. I feel
:29:43. > :29:49.it is difficult for a person with a long-term condition, to go through
:29:49. > :29:59.that process, and have a long time to wait to get the "yes" or the no
:29:59. > :30:05.
:30:05. > :30:10.answer. You have to also demonstrate they are going to do better than the
:30:10. > :30:16.trial population. So this is asking the clinicians to come out of the
:30:16. > :30:20.evidence, gas is already there, and try and put forward scraps of
:30:20. > :30:24.evidence that might make them different, or on a clinical ground
:30:24. > :30:28.only. That is the only way they want it is on a clinical ground. There is
:30:28. > :30:34.a section patients are supposed to put forward a statement. I think
:30:34. > :30:39.that is cruel, what does that add? It is on clinical ground. With a
:30:39. > :30:44.drug for 12 patients, in the, in Scotland, it is going to be
:30:44. > :30:49.impossible to try and tease out both of these point, trying to tease out
:30:49. > :30:54.somebody who is different to the trial population. Even when you do,
:30:54. > :30:59.my experience has been that the drug is still turned down, so I don't
:30:59. > :31:04.know with where you go from here but the IPTR process is not Six
:31:04. > :31:09.Nationsing as it should do. I think that you have -- is not functioning,
:31:09. > :31:13.it comes down to cost, but when of the comments in the report was that
:31:13. > :31:18.you know, a lot of the doctors didn't understand the process, which
:31:18. > :31:22.I agree is probably true, and that we should be able to seek advice
:31:22. > :31:25.from the specialists, with all due respect we are the specialist, we
:31:25. > :31:30.know the patient, we know the condition, we know the literature,
:31:30. > :31:33.yet we are able to put forward the data but not involved in the
:31:33. > :31:37.decision making process, the edecision making process is taken
:31:37. > :31:41.out our hands and taken over by management, and I think that is
:31:41. > :31:46.wrong. It should be, we should be sitting at the table, helping make
:31:46. > :31:49.the decision. We need to be looking a back at the
:31:49. > :31:53.approval system and saying is there something we can be doing there,
:31:54. > :31:58.that will improve the situation, so that people are not having to go
:31:58. > :32:06.through IPTRs so we are not seeing that Azerbaijan the answer, because
:32:06. > :32:12.it is never going to be the answer. And so that wider debate round the
:32:12. > :32:15.idea of value, SMC level and looking at those process, in terms of
:32:15. > :32:19.improving the system for the vast majority of patients is where we
:32:20. > :32:25.should be focussing efforts. So David Torrance our political men
:32:25. > :32:29.Tay for is with me now, David, these cancer drug, it is a huge political
:32:29. > :32:34.issue and was the feature of the exchange at First Minister's
:32:34. > :32:39.questions last week. Yes, and health, you know, in all the polling
:32:39. > :32:43.showings that health is one of the main concern, so it its prominence
:32:43. > :32:46.is understandable. What it height light what is that evidence session
:32:46. > :32:50.highlights is how difficult it is to strike a balance between what
:32:50. > :32:54.patients want and what the M&S is willing to pay for providing. You
:32:54. > :32:58.can't have a system where whatever treatment a patient wants they get
:32:58. > :33:01.and equally, the NHS won't offer any and so it is about the balance. I
:33:01. > :33:05.think politically it is tricky for the Scottish Government, because
:33:05. > :33:08.they have sort of set up the Scottish NHS, which they almost
:33:08. > :33:13.depict as being an independent separate organisation which of
:33:13. > :33:16.course it is not, as one of the great success story, completely
:33:16. > :33:21.public sector, very little private involvement, but this is beginning
:33:21. > :33:25.to sort of, you know, expose some tensions and problems within the
:33:25. > :33:30.system and that could undermine one of their political arguments.
:33:30. > :33:35.Now, there are no Prime Minister's Questions today as Westminster is in
:33:35. > :33:39.recess but we oin joined by David porter on College Green. David, some
:33:39. > :33:44.news this afternoon that Eric Joyce has been arrested at Edinburgh
:33:44. > :33:49.airport? Yes, in follows an incident on Sunday night when we understand
:33:49. > :33:53.there was an altercation after Mr Joyce got off a plane and mislaid
:33:53. > :33:58.his phone and tried to get it back. It seems ass though there was an
:33:58. > :34:02.altercation and he wanted to get his phone and he wasn't allowed to get
:34:02. > :34:06.it. He was arrested. This news has only broken this lunchtime, the
:34:06. > :34:10.indications from the police in Scotland is that it is what they
:34:10. > :34:14.call an active case and there maybe charges to follow, though it is
:34:14. > :34:18.worth saying that as we stand, at the moment, no challenges have been
:34:18. > :34:21.preferred. You said in your introduction there is no Prime
:34:22. > :34:25.Minister's Questions, that is because the Commons has gone on a
:34:25. > :34:30.recess, the House of Lords are still doing their bit, but I think there
:34:30. > :34:35.will be many Conservative whips whob will be very happy to get their MPs
:34:35. > :34:39.back to their constituency at the moment. It has been a febrile ten
:34:39. > :34:43.days here, to discuss that and the latest, I am pleased to say I am
:34:43. > :34:53.joined by two journalist who know the Scottish political scene and the
:34:53. > :34:53.
:34:53. > :34:59.UK political scene very well. If you are a Tory whip you would be
:34:59. > :35:03.glad to get that lot away. Let us see, they have split on Europe, more
:35:03. > :35:08.after that half the backbenchers voted against Europe. They split on
:35:08. > :35:13.gay marriage, with over 115 Tories and some ministers voting against
:35:13. > :35:16.Government legislation, and we have had Cameron's xhums calling the
:35:17. > :35:21.grass roots of the Tory party swivel-eyed loon, it couldn't get
:35:21. > :35:25.much worse, no wonder they are going on holiday. But they can't be
:35:25. > :35:28.placated. It doesn't matter how much Cameron concedes to the right-wing,
:35:28. > :35:38.they don't like him. They don't like the coalition and they don't like
:35:38. > :35:40.
:35:40. > :35:45.the fact that UKIP is breathing down their neck. A bit of Sun, which
:35:45. > :35:51.would be good for us all, we'll do them some good. Maybe they will come
:35:51. > :35:55.down by the time we come back. Every time David Cameron has given
:35:55. > :36:04.something to the Euro-sceptics, a bit like Oliver, they have said
:36:04. > :36:14.please can we have some more. classic tactic. His backbenchers are
:36:14. > :36:20.bloodthirsty at the moment. They're certainly not satisfied. UKIP are
:36:20. > :36:25.breathing down their necks in lots of constituencies and a lot of them
:36:25. > :36:31.don't actually accept the Cameron agenda, they are not pro-European in
:36:32. > :36:38.any respect. They want the UK out of Europe. They are certainly not
:36:38. > :36:43.pro-gay marriage. This has been described by activists as core
:36:43. > :36:46.values. It was more than just a dislike of Cameron, there is a real
:36:46. > :36:50.sense of betrayal felt by some backbenchers. Sticking with Europe
:36:50. > :36:59.for a moment, do you say Conservative backbenchers that you
:36:59. > :37:03.speak to have got the idea that you can have a Private Members Bill to
:37:03. > :37:07.bring legislation in for a referendum or IV suspicious that
:37:07. > :37:13.this is David Cameron just trying to do something that he couldn't do
:37:13. > :37:17.because the Liberal Democrats would let him? Most are quite sceptical.
:37:17. > :37:22.They are happy to go with it for the moment, but what they want is
:37:22. > :37:27.Government time to do this. They see this as just another example of the
:37:27. > :37:35.Liberal Democrats stopping and doing them what they -- stopping them from
:37:35. > :37:39.doing them what they want to do. Let's be honest. We all know that we
:37:39. > :37:45.all know that we're being fobbed off. No referendum passed in this
:37:45. > :37:48.Parliament can be effective in the Tories are really scared. All of the
:37:48. > :37:54.more senior journalists here in Westminster say that they have seen
:37:54. > :37:58.this all before, in John Major 's day, for example, when Tory party
:37:58. > :38:03.was split over Europe. But this is not like John Major's day. Back
:38:03. > :38:07.then, he had people backing him in Cabinet. It is hard to find a
:38:07. > :38:11.pro-European voice on the Tory benches now. The other factor which
:38:11. > :38:15.is affecting all parties is the UKIP factor. We have austerity in
:38:15. > :38:21.Britain, people worried about their jobs and immigration, worried about
:38:21. > :38:24.jobs for the kids, and all of this is being viewed through the prism of
:38:24. > :38:28.an anti-politics ceiling which is expressing itself to UKIP just now.
:38:28. > :38:33.I know that Tories look at their supporters going to UKIP, that
:38:33. > :38:37.Labourer, who have been watching the Tories tear themselves apart for the
:38:37. > :38:42.past ten days, should not be complacent. Their leadership is very
:38:42. > :38:45.soft. Ed Miliband is very soft. He has not sold his deal to the
:38:46. > :38:52.electorate yet. His support has melted away either to the Liberal
:38:52. > :38:55.Democrats or two UKIP. There is also another agenda going on in the
:38:55. > :38:59.Conservative party. Most MPs have now accepted they will not get the
:38:59. > :39:04.referendum they want before the election. They wanted before the
:39:04. > :39:08.election, not in 2017. What they are doing is tied to move the party to a
:39:08. > :39:13.position where it is not just promising a referendum, but is
:39:13. > :39:21.promising out of Europe. They are saying we want a referendum and to
:39:21. > :39:24.push for out. That is what Cameron has said he does not want.
:39:24. > :39:31.doesn't want that, but there is no counterweight within the party
:39:31. > :39:37.itself, or even within the other party. They are not spelling out the
:39:37. > :39:42.benefits of being in Europe. There are echoes of where we were in
:39:42. > :39:45.Scotland at couple of years ago when the assertions of the SNP and the
:39:46. > :39:52.agenda of the SNP and the vision of the SNP was virtually unchallenged
:39:52. > :39:58.by its opponents. Nowadays there is more scrutiny. We will see things
:39:58. > :40:02.swing backwards and forwards, mostly back the other way, but that is not
:40:02. > :40:06.happening at a European level. Scotland, we are used to foreign
:40:06. > :40:10.party politics. Will the same be true of Westminster in the future?
:40:10. > :40:14.think there is a chance. You have not yet made the breakthrough that
:40:14. > :40:19.they need to have won a Westminster seat. -- UKIP have not yet made the
:40:20. > :40:27.breakthrough. There has been talk of a possible by-election in Portsmouth
:40:27. > :40:32.South. As a former journalist from Portman said, it is pretty exciting,
:40:32. > :40:37.and UKIP would stand a good chance of winning it. There is some concern
:40:37. > :40:46.that, come the European elections next year, UKIP could drop the poll.
:40:46. > :40:48.They could. You could end up with a British national was party winning
:40:48. > :40:55.in England and a Scottish Nationalist party winning in
:40:55. > :41:00.Scotland. They might blow up on the starting line, or they may become a
:41:00. > :41:06.force in British or English politics. The first real test is in
:41:06. > :41:12.Scotland, in Donside, with the SNP are defending a by-election seat
:41:12. > :41:18.will stop I think it was a mistake by Alex Salmond to sneer at UKIP.
:41:18. > :41:23.What happens if they get more than 2%? What happens if they get 10% of
:41:23. > :41:31.this anti-politics feeling? People might stop following the SNP because
:41:31. > :41:36.they are antiestablishment, they are the Government now. What if they get
:41:36. > :41:40.10%? What it UKIP have one in ten Scots in their pocket? Nigel Farage
:41:40. > :41:44.is very positive about Scotland. He thinks that UKIP has not tried hard
:41:45. > :41:51.enough in Scotland. He thinks that they can get a European seat next
:41:51. > :41:55.year in Scotland, and he thinks that they can get MSP's. His view is that
:41:55. > :42:03.there is the centre right foot in Scotland which the Tories have given
:42:03. > :42:12.up on, essentially, and they are there for him to take. It is quite
:42:12. > :42:15.possible. Thank you very much. So, Andrew, perhaps one to watch. It is
:42:15. > :42:20.not just all about UKIP. There could be repercussions in Scotland as
:42:20. > :42:25.well. Thank you. David Torrance is still
:42:25. > :42:33.with me here. David, it was interesting to hear David Cameron
:42:33. > :42:39.take to the airwaves on Radio 4 trying to reassert his authority.
:42:39. > :42:44.Yes, he has a real job on his hands to reassert his position as leader
:42:44. > :42:47.of the Conservative party, and I say that quite specifically. Curiously,
:42:47. > :42:52.as Prime Minister, I think he is protected by a fixed term Parliament
:42:52. > :42:56.and to an extent by the Coalition. He is also protected by the fact
:42:56. > :43:01.that there is no obvious successor. But as leader of the Conservative
:43:01. > :43:05.party, he is certainly in a much weaker position now. And of course,
:43:05. > :43:09.Nick Clegg has been trying to hold things together as well. He is not
:43:09. > :43:15.keen on seeing the Coalition break-up before that fixed election
:43:15. > :43:20.date in May 2015. It certainly looks that way. Clegg is going out of his
:43:20. > :43:23.way to safeguard the Coalition. But he must balance that out against the
:43:23. > :43:27.views of his party, and it could be that they are getting extremely
:43:27. > :43:32.itchy feet at this point in the game. I have always thought, and
:43:32. > :43:36.there were thoughts to this effect recently, that the Liberal Democrats
:43:36. > :43:41.might formally disengage from the Coalition after next year's Budget.
:43:41. > :43:46.That would give them 12 months to reassert themselves as an
:43:47. > :43:52.independent force, perhaps with a different leader. David Cameron has
:43:52. > :44:02.also been e-mailing party members. This was after the swivel-eyed loons
:44:02. > :44:02.
:44:03. > :44:10.comment, which his MPs the night had been made. It is a difficult
:44:11. > :44:14.situation. What is the top in the corridors of power? It has come to
:44:14. > :44:19.something when the leader of the party has to e-mail his trips and
:44:19. > :44:24.say that he loves and respects them. It is factionalism likely have never
:44:24. > :44:28.seen before in the Tory party. There has always been a right wing and a
:44:28. > :44:30.Euro-sceptic wing, pretty much the same thing, but now you have seven
:44:31. > :44:35.or eight different factions on Europe and it is very difficult to
:44:35. > :44:39.keep track of what they all want. It is all bundled up in different
:44:39. > :44:43.things. Genuine opposition to the UK's place in Europe, some just do
:44:43. > :44:46.not like David Cameron, some do not maintain but do not think he is a
:44:46. > :44:51.proper conservative, and all of these things overlap and conflict
:44:51. > :44:57.with one another and it is a very complicated picture. How he manages
:44:57. > :45:04.any of that just is not clear. course, he had to manage the
:45:04. > :45:08.same-sex legislation vote on Monday. Some people in the UK Government and
:45:08. > :45:13.Labour had to do a grubby compromise to get that too. I think attention
:45:13. > :45:21.is no turning to Scotland and legislation here. Yes. Of course, we
:45:21. > :45:25.still do not have it. The Scottish Labour Party protect a message today
:45:26. > :45:29.saying -- put out a message today saying that the SNP is dragging its
:45:29. > :45:33.heels. I think that is to do with certain tensions within the Scottish
:45:33. > :45:37.Government, not just tensions in Westminster, but also in the
:45:37. > :45:40.Scottish Government, where there is a clear split between when this was
:45:40. > :45:45.last discussed between the Nicola Sturgeon wing, who see this as a
:45:45. > :45:49.clear priority and they want to press ahead with it, and other more
:45:49. > :45:52.cautious people. Not perhaps socially conservative, but they
:45:52. > :45:57.think it is politically risky and they want to move at a much slower
:45:57. > :46:01.pace. And of course, the Scottish Government has seen the reaction
:46:01. > :46:04.down south and seen the reaction from the Tory MPs on same-sex
:46:04. > :46:08.marriage. They will be worried about that kind of reaction up here. Do
:46:08. > :46:13.you think it might come in before the referendum will be wait longer?
:46:13. > :46:17.I have always thought they will do whatever necessary to delay it until
:46:17. > :46:21.after the referendum. It is not just -- it is just not a fight Alex
:46:21. > :46:31.Salmond considers worth having where there is so much more at stake. I
:46:31. > :46:33.
:46:33. > :46:36.think it will be kicked into the long grass.
:46:36. > :46:41.Eric McQueen said feasibility studies will consider locating court
:46:41. > :46:47.and other justice services in regional hubs in the border, high
:46:47. > :46:50.land Fife and Strathclydement of what we are trying to do in
:46:50. > :46:53.setting outeded ares is not all the bad news about cuts and reduction,
:46:54. > :46:58.part is trying to think more creatively of how the justice system
:46:58. > :47:04.should look in the future. We have been quite open and clearly
:47:04. > :47:08.identified our response document, that we see justice centres as being
:47:08. > :47:14.an integral part to support the court, we have looked a the border,
:47:14. > :47:19.Highlands, Fife andary area of VAT collide as being areas we would like
:47:19. > :47:23.toe so a justice centre we mean or more nan a court bidding we see it
:47:23. > :47:26.being the type of service that is provided alongside the Scottish
:47:27. > :47:30.Court Service, alongside the police with a custody unit, with the Crown
:47:31. > :47:34.office, with social work, with Victim Support, with the support
:47:34. > :47:40.services we need, where there is a volume of business it makes that
:47:40. > :47:46.worthwhile having. We have committed to undertaking feasibility studies
:47:46. > :47:52.in those areas and we have funds set aside for do that this year, in the
:47:52. > :47:56.borders, the meeting will be the week after next where we will have a
:47:56. > :48:01.meeting to get agreement on having a justice centre, there is already a
:48:01. > :48:05.suggestion that in terms of location, Galashiels would make a
:48:05. > :48:09.good central hub, to us it would be a good model of try to keep the
:48:09. > :48:13.borders cases and maintaining borders identities within the
:48:13. > :48:19.border, so we are committed to it as a way of trying to improve the
:48:19. > :48:23.justice. System, improve delivery. We will sit down with partners and
:48:23. > :48:27.the council, justice colleagues in a week after next, to start scoping
:48:27. > :48:31.out the feasibility and the practicality of trying to achieve
:48:31. > :48:37.them. If you forgive me, because we have moved on to my patch. I will
:48:37. > :48:40.come in with a supplementary. We have a justice centre in
:48:40. > :48:44.Peeblesshire court which was threatened with closure under the
:48:44. > :48:49.previous executive and moved into Rosetta Road. Has the police there
:48:49. > :48:53.through the door, it has social work. Child welfare. As far as I
:48:53. > :48:57.know has very very small running costs because it is not even owned
:48:57. > :49:04.by the Scottish Court Service, so do we not already have one, and you
:49:04. > :49:09.know what are the advantages from somebody moving just as, we have
:49:09. > :49:14.some in Broughton says it has to get, I welcome it would be Selkirk,
:49:14. > :49:19.somebody has to get from brow on the to Selkirk instead of Broughton to
:49:19. > :49:24.Peebles. To be blunt Peebles could be a good model. It doesn't have a
:49:24. > :49:30.business. So there is not the sufficiency of business in peepables
:49:30. > :49:35.to justify operating that as a full-time border centre. Bear with
:49:35. > :49:39.me, if you are talking about justice centre in Gala, which is taking the
:49:39. > :49:43.business from peepables, why is the business not just staying in Peebles
:49:43. > :49:49.and developing that site. It has Great Parking round about it, it is
:49:49. > :49:53.easy access, it is pretty good area to travel to, so we already have the
:49:53. > :49:58.place, what is wrong with using it? Making that the justice centre?
:49:58. > :50:02.that was the view of people in the borders that was an easy access
:50:02. > :50:07.journey and accessible across the whole of the borders, that will come
:50:07. > :50:11.out as part of the study. Sorry the whole of the borders so what is the
:50:11. > :50:17.plan? The plan is to do a feasibility study. You said the
:50:17. > :50:20.whole of the borders The plan is to do a feasibility study of whether a
:50:20. > :50:25.justice centre could serve the whole of the boarer, we will look with
:50:25. > :50:29.partners. So all the other courts will close That is something we will
:50:29. > :50:34.consider. I have to ask you that that is where you are taking us
:50:34. > :50:39.is why we will have a study. We will look at the feasibility centredy of
:50:39. > :50:44.having a court in the borders. Although people seem surprised, I
:50:44. > :50:50.don't think anybody would imagine this is a justice centre plus, this
:50:50. > :50:54.is looking at how do we best deliver justice in the borders in terms of
:50:54. > :50:58.having one central hub where you deliver business, so yes, we will
:50:58. > :51:01.look wide across the borders in terms of what is the ideal model.
:51:01. > :51:05.MSPs have voted in favour of a Scottish Government motion
:51:05. > :51:09.supporting Scotland as a science nation. They debated the important
:51:09. > :51:15.contribution of science centres and Science Festival, which aim to make
:51:15. > :51:20.since accessible to people of all ages. Science, engineering and
:51:20. > :51:24.technology are of course shaping the world in ways we would reck wouldn't
:51:24. > :51:29.recognise ten or 15 years ago. It gives us an opportunity to celebrate
:51:29. > :51:32.the work of those organisations that help the wider public make sense of
:51:32. > :51:36.science in their every day lives and therefore contribute to the
:51:36. > :51:41.positioning of Scotland as a science nation. Admittedly must much of this
:51:41. > :51:44.will rely on the strength of our education system and the economic
:51:44. > :51:49.development levers that nurture business, innovation and industry,
:51:49. > :51:54.but there is a wider issue that is at the heart of this debate and that
:51:54. > :51:58.is how do we Iing nigh -- ignite that initial spark of science in the
:51:58. > :52:04.first place? How do we encourage adults who may have been let down by
:52:04. > :52:09.science at school, to reengage with science issues affecting them, as
:52:09. > :52:14.diverse as climate change, healthy eating or even vaccinations. How can
:52:14. > :52:19.we encourage debate and discussion round new and often contention
:52:19. > :52:24.science development that will shape Scotland in the future, from stem
:52:24. > :52:29.cells to energy use. And this is where science engagement comes in, I
:52:29. > :52:33.believe, presiding officer. From science centres and Science
:52:33. > :52:36.Festivals to outreach tours taking Scottish research to schools and
:52:36. > :52:41.communities across the country. I believe presiding officer there is a
:52:41. > :52:46.great deal to celebrate about our science engagement community. But
:52:46. > :52:48.there will always be challenge, particularly round funding, and how
:52:48. > :52:53.to increase audiences and this is especially the case in communities
:52:53. > :52:57.that are less able, or less willing to engage with science. There is
:52:57. > :53:01.clearly a role for science communicators, industry and academia
:53:01. > :53:05.to play their part and I know there are many in initiatives out there
:53:05. > :53:09.that involve collaborations between these three main areas. But there is
:53:09. > :53:13.also a role for colleagues in the Scottish Parliament. We can help
:53:13. > :53:17.raise awareness of the opportunities available, many of which are free of
:53:17. > :53:24.charge, for our local schools and communities to find out more about
:53:24. > :53:30.science. The Minstermen shunned The Big Bang festival, I suspect the two
:53:30. > :53:34.hours and 50 minutes we are devoting to this debate this afternoon will
:53:34. > :53:39.be slightly less educational and slightly less entertaining than
:53:39. > :53:45.spending two hours 50 minutes watching reruns of The Big Bang
:53:45. > :53:50.theory, which might be commended to people, because I think that we have
:53:50. > :53:55.missed an opportunity here today. Just a few months after a debate in
:53:55. > :54:00.science, we had the opportunity to actually do something thatted that a
:54:00. > :54:04.focus and intent -- that had a focus and intent. There is nothing in the
:54:04. > :54:08.minister cease motion that I would disagree with, indeed, there is
:54:08. > :54:13.nothing what the minister said that I would disagree with. The problem
:54:13. > :54:17.is, I am not sure that it takes this Parliament or indeed anyone else
:54:17. > :54:21.that much further forward, other than is all standing up today,
:54:21. > :54:27.saying how much which agree with each other about the significance
:54:27. > :54:32.and the importance of science. One of the things that with might want
:54:32. > :54:37.to reflect on is can we look at different and better ways of doing a
:54:37. > :54:41.business in different and better ways of engaging with the public,
:54:41. > :54:45.because given the significance that the minister clearly attaches to
:54:45. > :54:51.science and the Scottish Government he says attaches to science, then we
:54:51. > :54:55.could have had some of our committees, find maybe doing joint
:54:55. > :54:59.committee investigation into different aspects of science.
:54:59. > :55:03.Scotland's exports come froms science, engineering and technology
:55:03. > :55:08.related sectors yet the oil and gas industries have expressed their
:55:08. > :55:13.consend about school's shortages and a recontribute survey of companies
:55:13. > :55:17.in Aberdeen identifying finding talent and skill shortages as the
:55:17. > :55:22.number one challenge to their future competitiveness. That is an
:55:22. > :55:26.important warning. Scotland science centres and
:55:26. > :55:30.festivals play a crucial role in making it more accessible to all age
:55:30. > :55:33.group, we are happy to support the Government's motion. Nonetheless we
:55:34. > :55:39.believe we need to enhance that attraction, and to do more to ensure
:55:39. > :55:43.there is a stronger and more diverse science qualification network that
:55:43. > :55:49.will meet the academic needs of pupils across Scotland.
:55:49. > :55:54.Conservatives Liz Smith there. Let us get Fiat final thoughts from our
:55:54. > :55:59.commentator David Torrance, it was just about a year ago the "yes"
:55:59. > :56:03.campaign launched in Edinburgh. Hard to believe that time has gone by.
:56:03. > :56:10.How have things progressed in that year, now we are getting all this
:56:10. > :56:15.information from both sides, looking at the papers? Time flies when you
:56:15. > :56:19.are having referendum fun! The striking thing is, after almost a
:56:19. > :56:24.full year's campaigning from both sides and the onslaught of
:56:24. > :56:29.information, some might said propaganda, there is no discernible
:56:29. > :56:33.movement in the opinion polls. A recent one showed a slight dip.
:56:33. > :56:39.Another showed a slight rides, but there has been no movement in either
:56:39. > :56:42.the "no" or "yes" vote in a full year. What that says to me ITVer
:56:42. > :56:46.people have made up their mind, which is possible, or yes Scotland
:56:46. > :56:51.are better together are preaching to the converted. They are not getting
:56:51. > :56:56.beyond the Holyrood and Westminster bubble and people like us who are
:56:56. > :57:00.fascinated by it. They are not reaching real voters and it is
:57:00. > :57:04.possible real voters haven't begun thinking seriously about the
:57:04. > :57:10.question at hand. Sometimes you wonder normal people, away from the
:57:10. > :57:13.bubble are not maybe quite engaging in this debate yet. Once they do
:57:13. > :57:18.start, we could see maybe a radical movement in the polls from either
:57:19. > :57:24.side. Yes, and vat gists from yes Scotland will tell you and it is a
:57:24. > :57:29.God point we saw this in the May, April May 2011 election campaign,
:57:29. > :57:34.when Labour had an apparently unassailable poll lead and half way
:57:34. > :57:38.through the campaign when voters got into a Holyrood mind set and thought
:57:38. > :57:42.about who they wanted as First Minister, there was a radical shift
:57:42. > :57:48.in the opinion polls. This isn't quite the same thing. Independence
:57:48. > :57:51.has been discussed for decades, it is not a new debate, and a
:57:51. > :57:55.referendum isn't really the same thing as a Holyrood election, it is
:57:56. > :58:01.a much different order of decision. Next summer and this is another year
:58:01. > :58:05.away, before the formal 16 week long campaign start, that is when you
:58:05. > :58:10.will see movement if at all. Briefly, it is a head and heart
:58:10. > :58:14.debate. We have heard a lot from the head side when it comes to the
:58:14. > :58:19.economic stuff. Yes, think there might be a case to be made there has
:58:19. > :58:23.not been enough emotion so far. As I said earlier the economic stuff can
:58:23. > :58:27.get arid and might turn people off, but in order to get voters fired up,
:58:27. > :58:31.we need to see more motion over the next year from better together and
:58:31. > :58:35.yes Scotland. Thank you for joining us David
:58:35. > :58:41.Torrance. And that is all we have time for this afternoon. Join me