27/01/2016 Politics Scotland

Good afternoon and welcome to Politics Scotland.

The Scottish Liberal Democrats claim it would save

And David Cameron will visit Aberdeen tomorrow in an effort

And here at Westminster the row over Google's tax affairs continues.

The Liberal Democrats have announced proposals to boost funding

for education by adding a penny to income tax.

The party says the policy would allow increased spending

Our political correspondent Andrew Kerr is at the Scottish Parliament

What are they hoping to gain by this Good afternoon from Hollywood. --

Holyrood. We announced this policy this morning. ?475 million to be

invested in the Scottish education system by raising the Scottish rate

of income tax I 1p for each band. The parliament has that power just

now. What do they hope to gain quiz mike the Lib Dems say that

investment is needed in Scottish education. Willie Rennie is critical

of what he says as Scottish Government cuts. He says the 475

million would be invested in early learning and the pupil premium to

help the poorest of pupils in cutting the council budgets that

have been cut by the Scottish Government. He was a reversal of

those cuts. He once a reversal of the cuts in decline of college

places too. That is what he is saying at the moment. He is laying

down the gauntlet of the SNP because that is the interesting thing about

this, the Lib Dems don't have much of a chance in the Scottish

Parliamentary elections so here's laying down the gauntlet. The Lib

Dems had this policy before, we have been here before. When it comes to

the people of Scotland, what will they make of this? We have been here

before back in 1999, that didn't go down too well. I presume education

is a big issue for all parties but it is interesting because each time

round some party rather thinks telling people the tax is critical

is a sure-fire vote winner but I'm not sure there is much evidence

there is. That is true. It didn't work for the SNP back in 1999 but

the Lib Dems say, look what they did in the UK Coalition Government. They

raised the tax threshold so people are paying less tax just now. They

are saying 1p is a viable investment in Scottish education. The education

will be debated later on here at Holyrood. They are investing ?5

billion in education, there is ?100 million attainment fund to help

those who are of pupils and that is what Nicola Sturgeon, that is her

number one priority. The Scottish Conservatives say this is a lurch to

the left from the Liberal Democrats and are not approving of this

policy. It does make the Holyrood campaign interesting because getting

policies coming forward such as this from the Lib Dems. They were looking

at lowering taxes to. It makes for a refreshing Holyrood campaign this

time round. West Coast fishermen West Coast fishermen have been

protesting at Holyrood over the Scottish Government's plans for a

network of marine protected areas. The disused come under renewed

scrutiny from MSPs amid warnings that fishermen's livelihoods are at

risk and claims that those in favour of the measures have been subjected

to intimidation. It makes me anger, it makes me angry the Scottish

Government, the folk I put in there is not supporting the fishing

industry. Fishermen from across the west coast came to Holyrood to make

their views knows. Supporters were here too. This is proved to be an

increasingly bitter and divisive debate with strong views being

expressed on both sides. Today, it is Hollywood's rural affairs

committee that has found itself at the centre of the storm. Many people

have spoken to me who said they are too scared to be cut publicly

whenever asked them to do so. Thank you. The committee rejected a bid

from the Conservative MSP Jamie McGregor to script that scrap

fishing restrictions. My guess for the day is The Herald's

political editor, Magnus Gardham. Just on that, one doesn't want to

see people with their livelihoods and a threat but it does seem cute

race, I thought it was the fishermen would do a big thing about

preservation areas. How can you have one without catching fewer fish? I'm

not surprised this has blown up as a bit of an is to come it is a

difficult issue given that the strenuous efforts he has made to

have good relationships with the fishing industry. It is interesting

to see a fishing industry outside. I have been covering this long enough

to see fishermen burning a effigy of the former Minister. It is

difficult. Richard Doherty has two balance the interests of

conservationists who are keen on the MPA 's and fishermen who say it is

going to end closed on their ability to do their jobs. The advantages is

the fishermen and united. There are different sections of the fishing

industry. It is: dredging that is particularly affected. There are

different sections of the industry that are concerned about

restrictions in different areas. I think you will get his way

ultimately on this one. Now, the Liberal Democrats. Must forget about

education. This idea that this time if we tell people we put the taxes

up, people will flock to you. It has been tried before and the sensible

arguments are, if we serious about what we say about how much we are in

favour of public services we should be paying more taxes first up are

week as Mac that is the argument Alex Salmond bid in 1999. It didn't

work very well for the SNP back then. No party since then has even

dared suggest using the tax powers that Holyrood has. The Liberal

Democrats are in a particular position here. They need to be

noticed. This is a bold plan. For a party which above all in this

election campaign needs to carve out a niche, needs to get its voice

heard, it is not a bad idea in those terms. Basically, the implication

is, they can say anything but the main point is people would remain

the Willie Rennie exists. There is a large element of that. That is where

the Lib Dems are at the moment. Not that the language he is using. Save

education. It is completely overblown. Look at the Commons he

was making yesterday about Amazon, it is a brave thing for a politician

to start criticising the biggest employer in his constituency. Billy

back with you in a moment. Let's go to the chamber now where the debate

is being led by the Liberal Democrats. This is about what they

have been talking about the education spokesperson is calling

for the introduction of the pupil premium to help raise the attainment

of disadvantaged pupils. Let's crossover to the chamber.

We can make a real difference in education. My colleagues set out

earlier today plans to transform Scottish education over the next

five years by committing to raising income tax by 5p. We'll be able to

spend ?475 million more on education next year alone. The biggest

investment in education since devolution. What a difference that

could mean. It could help address some of the damage done to our

sector over recent years by a government hell-bent slashing jobs.

150,000 fewer places representing 150,000 opportunities lost. These

extra resources could help reverse of the savage cuts by John Swinney

to the Council budgets. Cuts, let's face it, that were hit education at

the locker level. Will be an opportunity to deliver on the

promises made by ministers in relation to early learning and

childcare. A mere 7% are reaping the benefits. South of the border, he

figures 42%. That shortfall is unacceptable and there's nothing to

address the attainment gap. David Holden and that make clear the

foundations are set out in the earliest years. -- save the children

and others. As well as helping close the attainment gap, this represents

investment in our economy and the social well-being of our country.

That is what the Scottish Liberal Democrats have stepped on. We want

to extend free early learning and childcare to two-year-olds. It is

also why we have tarnished the approach taken by this government in

relation to its attainment fund. As I have done on many occasions

previously, I welcome the additional resources but the way ministers have

decided to spend the money is wrong. Firstly, it is targeted at you have

to is in councils but since then more local authorities have been

added to the list to the point where the minister now boasts 64% of

disadvantaged pupils now benefits from funding. 11 councils remain

excluded. Children from poorer backgrounds whose knees may be every

bit as great as their counterparts elsewhere are deemed by this

government as inevitable. Almost 30,000 children will lose out. I

thought the debate earlier this month summed up the absurdity. He

talked about two schools who share one building but where one gets

attainment funding, the other does not. It isn't as the inconsistency

between neighbouring schools Buster serene neighbouring streets. How

whenever can it be squared with the first ministers promised to close

the attainment gap completely? Assuming the First Minister and

Cabinet Secretary as serious in their attentions, they must

recognise funding should be based on the individual needs of the

individual child where ever they live. That is the underlying

principle behind the pupil premium. It is working south of the border,

we want to see the same principle applied here in Scotland. This

year... Very briefly. I'm apprehensive about the Liberal

Democrats talking about finances and education given your history on

tuition fees. How much of the pupil premium be for every pupil? What is

the total cost? I've already explained we would deliver 435

minute pounds a year into the education, something I'm sure he

would acknowledge. Funding available acquitted to ?935 per secondary

pupils south of the border. The average schools with average

numbers, this would represent a ?200,000. Many schools use the

funding for individual coaching but other projects have included some

classes are paying for transport extra curricula activities. The

National Audit Office noted last year that early signs are the pupil

premium has potential. Are there areas that need improvement? Yes.

Will it take time for this approach to show its value? Probably. Is it

showing its potential, absolutely. The Minister...

The Liberal Democrat Education Spokesperson Liam McArthur

Now, the Prime Minister has dropped a heavy hint that further

financial aid could be on the way for the North Sea oil

At Prime Minister's Questions, David Cameron said he would be

Yesterday, the Energy Minister Fergus Ewing urged the UK Government

to introduce tax measures in the spring budget

Mr Ewing was responding to a question at Holyrood

about research by the law firm Pinsent Masons.

70% of the 200 executives it surveyed hoped to cash

in on the drop in oil prices by buying up distressed firms.

Here's more of what Fergus Ewing had to say in the Scottish Parliament

There's 22 billion barrels of oil and gas remaining. There are still

many opportunities in the North Sea, but maximising them will require a

concerted effort from everyone from industry, governments, and the new

regulator. We continue to stand alongside the oil and gas industry

in Scotland, doing all that we can to improve collaboration,

cooperation and innovation, creating a more competitive sector as well as

further developing its status as a global centre of oil and gas

expertise. In order to encourage global centre of oil and gas

bring in a series of tax measures, including clarifying and

decommissioning liabilities, a refinement of the investment

allowance to include Opec's, and further fiscal measures to

incentivise exploration in order to increase the international

competitiveness of the UK CS. I welcome the response from the

Minister and the action the Scottish Government is taking via the energy

jobs task force to minimise redundancies wherever possible,

jobs task force to minimise repeatedly called for more

exploration. The level of exploration has dropped to parlous a

low levels. In order to maintain the teams are expertise of people

specifically in exploration, there needs to be more work for them to

do. So iron Tiley agree with them that that is necessary. But it is

not simply a matter of dismissing tax reliefs, although perhaps Mr

McDonald was not seeking to do so. It is also recognising that while

tax is not the main focus of industry at the moment, a frankly a

survival. Taxes are necessary tool in box that can contribute towards

the objective of surviving to thrive thereafter, and in particular, very

few operators that I have met in the last few weeks, with earlier

intensive engagement with the industry, and I will not name them,

but they have said the same thing. There must be clarity of

decommissioning liabilities. That lack of clarity is impeding

investment, blocking deals. Those deals could secure the future of the

constituents of Mr McDonald, and therefore, I do urge the UK

Government to include in their spring budget the necessary steps

upon which I know they are obtaining advice in order to allow those

deals, to allow that investment, which will considerably assist the

industry in its toughest challenge. Back to the chamber now,

where MSPs are debating the Liberal Democrats' proposals

to introduce a "pupil premium" to help raise the attainment

of disadvantaged pupils. Alister Allan, the Minister for

learning, is responding for the government. And how this funding and

support them, and the result is targeted and focused on literacy,

numerous to human health and well-being, both within and beyond

the school. Family link workers, speech and language therapists,

community learning workers, alongside teachers, are paid for by

the attainment Scotland fund, alongside work to develop programmes

and approaches to close the equity gap. The pupil premium approach in

place in England and were, and which seems to be recommended by some in

this place, is yet to be shown to have had an impact. The June 2015

national audit report included that it was too early for the impact to

be known. It also concluded that the pupil, funding had fallen in real

terms, and -- in 45% of schools between 22 and 20 15. Most

disadvantaged secondary schools' funding has fallen by 5% over the

same period, despite the introduction of the pupil premium.

In Scotland, our average per pupil spending in 2014-15 for both primary

and secondary was higher than in England, and the Attainment Scotland

Fund will provide business and funding to those children and

communities who face some of the greatest challenges, and we will

continue to do that. It is clear that where there are large

concentrations of children living in deprived communities, there is a

greater need for support, and our approach deliver that.

We will continue to review how we target funding to ensure that we

reach the children in the end people his outcomes are impacted greatly by

living in poverty. Whilst our focus is on schools with a high

concentration of children living in deprived communities, we are also

aware of the need for universal support to close the attainment gap,

and have enhanced the support already available by putting an

attainment adviser in place for every authority. The development of

the national improvement framework, the primary three read, write, Count

campaign, and a maths programme. We must not lose sight of the fact that

success is elusive for a small amount of our children, and a

significant amount of our children from deprived communities. The gap

in attainment is narrowing, but if we are to achieve our ambition of

delivering a world-class education system for all of our children, we

must and we will do more. Our approach to targeted funding through

the Attainment Scotland Fund is clear evidence, I believe, of our

determination to achieve just that. And I move the amendment in Miss

Constance's name. Many thanks. I now call on Ian Brady. A maximum of five

minutes, please. -- Ian Brady. -- Ian Gray.

Our proposals do bears significant similarities, though in developing

our own proposal, we didn't consult rather more than a thesaurus to find

a different name for it. Indeed, one of the things we did consult with

the work in research and analysis that had been done of the pupil

premium, and so I would argue that the proposal we put forward today

and have done already on a number of occasions is a more focused and more

detailed proposal, and indeed, it is closer in fact to what was

introduced in Wales, where some changes were made to the pupil

premium, exactly to try and meet some of the flaws which had been

identified. Perhaps the most significant flaw identified with the

pupil premium is that although Ofsted did find some evidence of

effectiveness, it also found some evidence of head teachers banking

the pupil premium as part of their overall budget, and in fact, not

using it in any way to help close the attainment gap. Our proposal, as

I will come too late, does try to avoid that as a possibility. But

where we do very much agree with Mr McArthur is on the weaknesses of the

approach of the SNP government. We have argued previously and continue

to argue that the attainment fund, while welcome, is firstly

inadequate, in that there are not enough funds, and that it is wrongly

targeted. I think that the minister rather gave that away when he said

they would continue to consider how it is targeted, which gives the game

away, I think, that since this fund has been announced, the government

has shown every sign of making it up as they go along in their targeting.

In the past, I have given examples of some of the worst cases of the

result of that approach, and Mr McArthur referred to one - to

schools and St Johnstone, one campus, one entrance, one Jim Hall,

want to know Hall -- one dinner hall. Pupils coming from exactly the

same street, get one of those schools get attainment funding, and

the other does not. In fact, the one that gets no attainment challenge

funding of the one that has more pupils from poorer parts of that

community. But we see the same thing elsewhere. In East Ayrshire, in

Kilmarnock, I have seen an example of a street which is divided by a

catchment area boundary, so that children from the same street go to

two different schools, and in one of those schools, they will benefit

from attainment challenge funding, and in the other, they will not. I

was in the borders earlier this week, where only two primary schools

on the whole of the Scottish Borders get attainment challenge funding.

Both of them are in Hoik, so in Galashiels, where I was, no schools

benefit. And I have spoken before about the example of my own

constituency, when not one single school benefits from the attainment

challenge funding. So that is why we have proposed an alternative. ?1000

which follows every child with a free school meal entitlement to

Emory School. -- primary school. That would pretty well benefit every

primary school in the country, but it would also mean that the

headteacher would have to use those resources from a choice, a suite of

agreed evidence -based interventions, which we know would

really make a difference, as is the case in Wales. A fund would also

provide a lesser fund to nurseries, providing free nursery place

entitlement, because Mr McArthur is right when he says all the evidence

is, intervention must be as early as possible. And what would be the

benefit of all of this? Well, for the borders, which I referred to

earlier, their primary schools would share some ?860,000. In East

Ayrshire, ?1.9 million, a council area where at the moment, only six

primary schools benefit. And in my own constituency of East Lothian,

almost ?1 million, meaning my constituency would have some schools

with a fund every year of around ?85,000, which they could use to

employ additional staff, classroom assistants, particular equipment, or

to run particular programmes in literacy and numerous sea, whatever

the staff and Headteachers in those schools thought would be possible.

That was Ian Brady speaking there. I'm joined now from Hollywood by a

galaxy of MSPs. -- Ian Gray. Jim Hume, this people are lured

pupil premium, why is it you can have a pupil premium in England with

no includes in income tax, but to get one in Scotland, you need to put

your income tax bills up? We have to look at what the SNP are

doing. We have seen half ?1 billion being cut off council tax. We have

seen ?152,000 college places disappear since 2007. That is a long

hill we have got to climb, so that is why we are proposing what we're

today. I will ask the question again. Why can they have a pupil

premium in England with no increase in in contact, but there has to be

an income tax increase here? I will repeat the question, starting

from a very low level. The pupil premium down south...

Sorry, sorry, you say we are starting at a very low level. I

using Oss gusts spending per student in the Scottish is a case in system

is lower than in England? -- are you saying? I thought it was higher.

In Scotland, we have seen a college places disappear, we are seeing a

proposed that the council budgets, with about half of that going on

schools. So we have to address that as quickly as possible. We want to

hit the ground running, and ensure that we have the best education

system for years to come. I still don't understand. Of

education for student -- if spending per student is higher than in

England, and if in England, you can have a pupil premium without putting

up income tax, why is it, in Scotland, we need to put up income

tax in order to do that? Why not take money from somewhere else?

We won't make sure we close that attainment gap, which has been

closing elsewhere. -- we want to make sure we close that attainment

gap. As you have heard in the debate, there are very few schools

that at the moment get any attainment funding from the Scottish

Government, so we want to make sure we hit the ground running and have

the best education department in the future.

Joan McAlpine, I'm not sure if you could hear what Iain Gray said

there, one of the points he was saying about this attainment is

funded it seems arbitrary in the way it works. He gave an example of the

street weather is a catchment area that runs through the streets, half

of the students go to one school and half gets the other. One school gets

the attainment fund and the other doesn't. It seems to be made up. It

goes down to the index of deprivation which the Labour

government used in the past. But what about the case when a boundary

goes through a street? 67% of pupils in the lowest categories are getting

this money. We have set up their new fund for innovation which can be

targeted at all pupils. As well as that, local authorities have been

given an attainment advise funded by the Scottish Government which

directs funds to the people that needed most. That is one of the best

things you can do in terms of attainment. One of the points

Alister Allan from your party was making, he said the evidence shows

it is too early to show whether the pupil premium in England is actually

having any effect on the attainment of students. Do you have any

evidence at all that your attainment fund is having any influence on the

achievements on students? Givers are we while. It has only been in place

a few months. I think it is reasonable to suggest if you target

resources on the skills that need it most you get a result. Hold on

amendments, you mustn't lose sight of the fact that in equality in

education stems from inequality in income and the way we address that

are very much in Westminster's hands. Having said that, we can use

education to address that inequality which is coming from austerity

policies from the UK Government. That is another form of mitigation.

Neil Bibby, Iain Gray in what he was saying in parliament there, he kept

saying he wanted to model what your plans are and what was happening in

Wales. It seems that the Julia thing your model you plan on giving the

last test, Wales was the worst of any of the UK nations on every

count. Maths, reading and science. Wales will have challenges as well

as Scotland. We need to address the problems that exist here. Hang on a

second, if we are fans of evidence -based public spending wisely but

basing its plans on evidence from the area of Britain which is doing

worse than any other area? We will work with head teachers, teachers

and education professionals to see what is the best way of improving

attainment. We will prioritise the resources to improve the outcomes of

children in Scotland. We have seen over the past couple of years new

Morrissey standards falling, 4000 fewer teachers. --. There was a

school where one school was getting the support and the other isn't.

This these to stop. Labour is saying we were about ?70 million into the

fair starts fund to Tiger support for the pupils who need it most. We

will work with teachers and head teachers are the best to spend that

money. You still haven't explained to us why Wales should be the model

for this. Wales are targeting support in the poorest pupils. We

need to look at all the examples there are right across the United

Kingdom to improve education in Scotland. Why choose the example of

the country that is doing worst? We have seen some improvements in the

education system in Wales. There have been long-standing problems

with education in different parts of the UK that they have seen

improvements in Wales and we want to see how we can replicate them in

Scotland. We've got huge challenges here in literacy standards, numerous

to standards are falling. We need an alternative plan. The Conservatives

claim credit for the pupil premium in England, or credit along with the

Lib Dems, as Alister Allan said there, that isn't any evidence it is

making any difference. He would say that wouldn't see. Anything in

Westminster College of the SNP is bad. People premium has only been

there for four years. Evidence from teachers in England is... Evidence

on the ground is called hearsay. The policy has only been there for

four years. It is better to get statistical evidence from an early

age. You have to track children throughout their school career. They

will be later in their school career before you can have statistical

information. The evidence from school teachers in England is the

pupil premium is helping provide additional resources. Briefly, why

is all the debate in Scotland always about throwing more money at

schools? The report I was referring to earlier makes the point that in

maths, 30% of the variance between country can be put down to spending

per student. The main factors affecting education and nothing to

do with the amount of money you spend. People looking at what is

happening in schools and what is happening with the cutbacks we have

seen and the decline in teaching numbers will realise that finance is

important. It is important to targeting assistance to the people

in need. The best route out of inequality is to improve educational

opportunity for those who are most vulnerable. That is what the pupil

premium is achieving in England and will do in Scotland. Thank you all

very much. What do you make of this? Do you think there is an issue that

might become an election issue? I don't know how that will translate

into the election but there is an interesting debate that is going on

about education. I'm sure it'll take clever educationalists along time to

weigh up the best approach. There is a difference of approach. It is

worth reminding ourselves that all of the parties here seeking to

achieve the same thing which is to reduce the attainment gap between

better rough and less well off kids in schools, the SNP taking an

approach which is targeted more regionally. Alistair Darling talking

about deprived communities and using the index of deprivation to do that.

-- Alister Allan. Labour and the Lib Dems saying the money should follow

the individual. Critics of the SNP's approach are saying a lot of schools

and 85% of schools, aren't benefiting from the SNP's attainment

challenge. What might be an interesting, there isn't any hard

evidence anyone can produce. If this continues someone at some point a

lot to produce some evidence that any of these things actually work.

That has been one of the problems about debate about public spending

in Scotland, it isn't measured by the results. You think that might

change? There is a genuine problem here. That is a lack of hard

evidence. Liam McArthur marshalled some evidence to suggest there have

been modest improvements south of the board as a result of the pupil

premium but I think what Murdo Fraser says, it should be taken into

account. Four years isn't a long period of time foreign policy which

is intended to have such a long-term effect... To be fed to the SNP, it

has been in a few months that they've had the attainment. Maybe

some point they will feel constrained to come forward and say

we have done the evidence is it works or it doesn't. Do remember the

days when the Scottish Parliament was advertised as a laboratory where

differences of approach could be tested within the different nations

of the UK and we find that the best way of making public policy. I'm

sure that the whim of the vast majority of people.

David Cameron has insisted that the government has done more

than any other to crack down on tax evasion and avoidance.

Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions,

he defended the agreement with Google to pay ?130 million

in back taxes saying the money should have been collected when

Independent experts have said Google are paying 3% tax. Does the Prime

Minister dispute that figure? are paying 3% tax. Does the Prime

independently by HMRC but I'm absolutely clear no government has

done more than this one to crack down on tax evasion and aggressive

tax avoidance, no government and certainly not the last Labour

government. Mr Speaker, we have had no answers on Google, we've had no

answers on Jeff, can I raise with him another

answers on Jeff, can I raise with which was a judgment by the European

Court as we put in place in the 1990s when this government decided

rightly in my view to raise the retirement age, we made the decision

no one should suffer greater than 18 must increase in their retirement

age. That is the decision this House of Commons to in ending

discrimination of the pension system, the interdiction of the

single tier pension at ?155 a week, is one of best ways we can end

discrimination because so many women retiring will get more in their

pension. And the kiss government it is triple locked protected. -- under

this government. Since the Chancellor took control of

the public purse he has failed to get the deficit under control. To

date this year he has boggled 74 billion to plug the gap. --

borrowed. It is a monumental black hole. Is he now likely to breach his

own deficit-reduction target by ?9 billion? My right honourable friend

the Chancellor has the economic strategy this government has pursued

coming he's got the -- cut the deficit in half. What a contest I

would say with the situation that Scotland would be facing if Scotland

had voted for independence in just six weeks' time we have seen a

collapse. If 94% of the all revenues. That's collapse in the oil

price and the taxation won't affect able in Scotland but has gotten then

independent it would have been a dark, dark day indeed.

As you will be able to see, I would Westminster correspondence has

adopted a cunning strategy to maintain his reign free reputation.

Thank you very much. The news is it is raining and the most important

part of that is, I am not in it and neither am I guess. Let me introduce

you to them. Ian Murray for Labour. I will start with the Conservatives

today. Was that Google tax still a good deal? I am very proud today the

UK is one entrance ?30 million richer because of HMRC and the

Conservative government. There is not the Getty this is about paying

backdated tax... My apologies for that. We will have to leave David,

there seems to be some problem with the sound. We all joy to fix that

and go back to it, but in the meantime, Magnus, let's talk a bit

more about this education thing. Is that going to be the Big Issue

during the election? I think it is going to be a big issue, and all the

parties are trying to set their stall out with 100 days to go.

There has been disagreement about what exactly constitutes 100 days.

It seems to have been going on since Sunday. But the Lib Dems are now

putting all their eggs in the education basket. Kezia

Dugdale asserting about their Fair Start fund, which is their version

of that. I think we will see Nicola Sturgeon popping up at primary

schools and nurseries a lot over the next couple of days. But it is

interesting that the Lib Dems and the Conservatives and Labour are all

thinking education to be further powers that will be coming to

Holyrood, or tax powers are least. -- linking education. Should all

this be sorted out, and this very complicated fiscal framework in

place, there will be some debate, but of course, if the whole thing is

done, it could be an election which is basically about tax, for the

first time in Scotland. It will be about how much tax you

are going to pay. Certainly. The Lib Dems are talking

about using the existing powers, so they can put 1p across the board and

that they exist in power is. Others might want to adopt the

recommendations of this report. Yes, for that 30p income tax raised.

Labour's education plans are predicated on raising the additional

rate from 45p to 50p, which would only come under the new Scotland

Bill, probably in about 2017. I have to say, I think all of that is

probably a little bit up in the air at the moment.

It is interesting that leaves the SNP, am I right in thinking, that

they are the only party that don't have any specific proposals on tax?

I know the Tories had not formally adopted this position, but that

means the SNP and the anyone with no official position on changing

taxation? John Swinney said he would not change the basic rate, and they

hinted that they might go along with what Labour are seeing is the top

rate. But then, actually, a formal announcement. Yes, that is my

understanding. We are told that we can look forward to progressive

proposals. We certainly know, as you have said, that the SNP are backed

-- eventually backed the 50p tax rate in the last general election,

boy not sure what they are planning to do, which is interesting, given

the finely balanced state of negotiations around the fiscal

framework, which will be the financial underpinnings of this.

Lets talk more about the petitions about the minute.

Now, not only do it have the glorious sight of David, I think we

can hear him properly. Thank you very much. Yes, it is an

irony, we move into the warm and dry, and all the equipment goes

capital. Hopefully, things are better. I will continue with our

discussion. I was talking to Alberto about the Google tax deal, really at

the end of the day, whether it was such a good deal.

I was just announcing the good news that this country, the United

Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is ?130 million

richer today than it was under the Labour government, because what we

have done is, we have collected the backdated tax is that Google owed,

backdated from 2005, as far back as Tony Blair's Premiership. So I think

we should be thanking HMRC for the good work they have done to get that

big company to pay backdated taxes. Let me also add that the

Conservative government has been shutting down the loopholes that

existed during the Labour government years, and we have raised more in

taxation than during the Labour years. I think that is something we

can be proud of across the United Kingdom, having a Conservative

government. So, Ian Murray, all Labour's fault

or not collecting the tax on the first place?

He would say that, wouldn't you. This was identified in 2009, when

the enquiry began. It has been six years coming to fruition. The

Treasury Select Committee think this is a derisory amount. The public and

committee think the same. Most of the city bankers not too far from

the think it is a derisory amount, and all the people in Scotland who

are filling out their tax returns, there is possessed and forms, and

late into the night between now and the end of the week, I would have

thought, putting together, I'd get the same service from HMRC, or get

the same preferential treatment. This is a sweetheart agreement, and

Robert helps at all this out, Alberto had a very eloquent response

there, but it would be some transparency. If we could see and

look at what the deal was, we would be more satisfied. That are big and

30,000,010 years is a very good tax take.

You may not like it, but it is all within the law. If the law is on

right, is not up to people to change it? I think one of the important

thing is, as has been said, is about the transparency, and absolutely, I

agree that we need to close loopholes and make sure companies

pay more tax. One thing I'm concerned about is the

fact that, if ?130 million, which is apparently about 3%, if that is OK

for a big corporation to pay that, we'll be OK for other big

corporations to also only pay that small amount. It is not OK frame

small trader or an individual to pay that amount. We need transparency to

see of this is all the backdated taxes Google owes, and come with its

other companies to pay one at the O. Does 3% and become the going rate

for large corporations? No, it absolutely cannot be. We can

go from a situation where, under Ian's party in government, it was

0%, and now it is effectively 3%, backdated. Other countries seem to

be doing a better, so this great country of Great Britain and

Northern Ireland possibly needs to learn from other countries that do

recognise that global operating companies, mainly intact, can shift

resourcess quite conveniently for their own resources, where nation

states, who have to have revenues for our own public services, need to

be able to have a smart tax system, as smart as possible. I think this

should be a wake-up call for us in this country. We need to be aware

that the way these global companies operate now cannot be the right way

forward for us to get the revenue that we need.

We are pressed for time, so I'd like to move onto another issue. The

Prime Minister is going up to Aberdeen tomorrow to talk about the

oil industry. It is widely expected he will announce measures to help

the oil industry. Alberto, is it going to be enough?

This is extremely welcome news, and I hope that the Labour Party and the

Liberal Democrats will join me in welcoming the fact that the

Conservative government are the ones helping to build a bridge for the

oil and gas industry for Scotland's future within the United Kingdom.

Let me say this - we are going a step further, because the Secretary

of State for Scotland, is of course, going to Mozambique to help sell the

expertise that has been guarded on the island gas industry, and

thirdly, the Conservative government will help diversify the economy in

Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire, and I hope that they would create that

with satisfaction, that it is helping Kirsty's constituents, to

develop Scotland's expertise in diverse of buying that.

And that same question to the Freeview, very briefly.

Ian first. I wrote to the Chancellor a few weeks ago to ask the UK

Government to do all it possibly could to support the UK oil and gas

industry. Hopefully, we will see a city deal signed tomorrow.

Hopefully, both governments are part of that city deal, not just in the

structure and innovation, but also on housing and transport which is

crucial as well. 65,000 jobs are being lost. The oil price will be

low for a considerable time. We need to give all the support we can,

because the UK has benefited from oil revenues when things were good,

so it is up to the UK now to help the oil industry now things have

turned slightly bad. Kirsty.

In Aberdeen, we have been feeling this. My constituents have been

losing their jobs, and it has been really concerning. I have been very

pleased that the city deal is on the table, and we're looking at this. In

fact, every party has pulled together on this at every level of

elected representatives, and it is a real success story Aberdeen. And the

Scottish Government. Jerry, the last word to you.

The future of industry requires a very long-term view now for the next

30 years, so I agree with Kirsty that this has to be party politics

aside. I would like there to be a long-term strategy by joint strategy

Scottish Government and UK Government, not two different

partial one, but are jointly to work that can be for the future.

I would like to continue this, and we will at some future point, but

unfortunately, the clock has beaten us. Thank you for your perseverance

with the technical problems. Gordon, back to you.

Magnus, we will just give you briefly aid chance to finish your

thought about the election. If, as has been present, there is no fiscal

framework comedy thing that changes things?

Clearly. If there is no fiscal framework, there will be no Scotland

Bill before the election, certainly. There are tactical advantages,

potentially, to John Swinney and Nicola Sturgeon if that happens, not

least pulling the rug from under a lot of the policies that their

opponents are going to be talking about during the election, so John

Swinney has set a deadline of February the 12th, and he will just

have to wait and see how that goes. Do you think, being cynical, it

could sue them? Being cynical, I think it could. I

think we would get an almighty row. -- suit them.

It would be an odd thing for a national government sued change the

views and powers. We will have to leave it there.

That's all we have time for this afternoon.