30/11/2011 Politics Scotland

Good afternoon. Welcome to Politics Scotland. Coming up on the

programme. On St Andrew's Day, pickets and protests from Shetland

to the borders. Scotland's public sector goes on strike. A I will be

at a Hollywood where MSPs are debating the future of public

sector pensions, at least those who are not on the picket line.

that Westminster, where MPs assess the impact of the public sector

strikes, they are also mulling over the Chancellor's gloomy predictions

for the economy. Public sector services have been disrupted across

Scotland as over 300,000 public- sector workers have gone astray.

The SNP government is debating the issue at Holyrood this afternoon. I

am joined by our business editor, Douglas Fraser. Let us put this in

some context, first of all. Why are we here, that these strikes? Some

18 months after coming into power, one of the things the Government is

trying to do, not really related to the deficit reduction which is

their main policy at the moment, they what it takes a long-term move

to change the public sector pension regime, to some extent, to bring it

into line with the private sector regime. Also because people are

living longer and the bill is rising. They want to increase

contributions from public-sector workers and that the same time, to

see people working longer, very often past 60, many people retire

at 60, in the public sector, and they want to shift from a final

salary, to an average salary. Partly because people are not the

supply on their highest earnings at the last point in their Korea.

heard that the STUC was seeing they were not sure what the Government

was putting forward. There have been claims from the Cabinet Office

minister Francis Maude that negotiations had been ongoing well

the opposition leader Ed Miliband claimed the last discussions had

been on the 2nd November. Or almost everything you say about this is

contentious. There may be some talks that are not formalised tops.

We don't Robert that and we do not know who is right. In October they

quarterback they could offer from the Government which was said to be

more attractive. The unions want negotiations to go on without the

Government approach to this, but in October, a less unattractive offer

was put on the table, particularly for those with a pin you still to

go, and slightly more generous at rules at that point might. The

unions have been pushing for a stripe date, to show the anger

there is within the public sector, not just on pensions but on what is

happening with p, and with shedding of staff. -- with pay. In the past

one or two months, it seems that formalised negotiations have broken

down because people have been building towards this show of

strength. On the Government's side, there is a feeling that once the

unions have let off some steam, the Government hopes to get back to

negotiations. The unions will have made their point, it is a point

they can choose to make again at the negotiations can continue.

UK government says it is trying to fill this pensions gap. It is a

pretty hard sell they are trying to do, and it is a tough one to make

people accept. Why do they say it is necessary for these changes to

happen? The key reason is, people are living longer, and everyone can

agree that is a good thing, but it means people who retire can be

expected to draw pensions and can be expected to live longer and a

draw patience for longer. That is a much more expensive proposition --

draw attentions for much longer. There is some democratic change

which means a decreasing number of working people, paying taxes. Many

of these pensions are not funded. With the exception of local

authority Scotland workers who have a pension pot which is invested

most of the others are relying on a promise which future taxpayers will

have to meet. And in order to draw back on the commitments that have

been made for future generations to pay for people who have yet to

retire, the government is trying to get the cost of the system down,

and more balance with those currently in the system. But there

is no fun to contribute to, those making contributions are simply

making it into the Treasury accounts and that money is being

dissipated throughout all public services. And how do you think this

will play out in the future? You said you thought the unions wanted

to show their muscle. Could there be more strikes on the horizon?

depends how the unions feel about that. Clearly they have got a lot

of support but they are getting some brickbats from the public, who

are inconvenienced by this. It is not just about technical issues,

pensions, a cruel rates, -- accrual rates. It is about the gap not

being filled, and people having to work harder. And there is a salary

freeze at the moment which will become of 1% cut for two years

after it is finished, and indeed there is a change proposed in the

autumn statement yesterday so that you get differential rates of pay.

At the moment if you are in the police, fire, the civil service

around the country, you get the same rate for the same job. That

may change, so that places with different labour markets and

different wages will be paid less than London and the South East.

That might be a good time. It might bring jobs to parts of Scotland,

the north-east of England and Northern Ireland. But it is quite

contagious and provocative, also. - - contentious. The industrial

action has seen thousands of people mobilised across the country. Let

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 47 seconds

us take a look at what has been Some of the scenes from across

Scotland today. Now, for a look at what is happening inside Hollywood,

the can cross like to the chamber, where the SNP government pursues to

clear the parliamentary timetable for what the finance secretary

called a UK government cash grab one pensions. I have to say, it is

unusually quiet on the Labour benches. There is nobody sitting

there. They refused to cross the picket line, saying they wanted to

show solidarity with picketing workers. The SNP benches are almost

full. John Swinney is on his feet at the moment, registering strong

opposition to the UK government policy. We can cross now, live, to

the chamber. The pensions was back in surplus in 2009-10.

Contributions higher than payments. And then, when we take recourse to

the existing agreements made with the trade unions, the shield deals

which were in place before the Hutton report was commissioned, we

find that the cash and share arrangements agreed with trade

unions would have contributed at least the past year of the

increased contributions demanded by the United Kingdom government, so

there was no case for short-term increases in contributions, other

than to reduce the deficit that the Tories were determined to reduce at

too far, and too fast a pace, for the benefit of our people. We are

going to have an afternoon of entertainment, yes. Carry on.

insists that this is to reduce the deficit but what impact does he

think it has on the deficit? goodness! Where is my quo? This is

from the independent public service pinches commission terms of

reference. The object of the proposals that Hutton was to look

at in the short term, was "to contribute to the reduction of the

structural deficit". If it has not caught up with the brief of the

Conservative government, what hope is there that they do what is going

on, on this particular issue? -- that they know what is going on. It

was appropriate for Parliament to meet on this occasion and to have

the debate we are having today. I believe the Government agrees that

on days like this, Parliament has the responsibility to make its

boys' hair. We have a duty to put our case to Westminster, and that

is why we're here and parliament, today. I was struck by the quote

from Mr Crawford read out to Parliament last week from Jim

Sillars, who said that a parliament is not an office or factory, it is

the heart, the soul, and the instrument whereby civic society

gains democratic legitimacy for the Protection of free-speech, and

ruled by the ballot box. On an issue as significant as public

sector pensions, I believe it is absolutely correct that the

Scottish parliament meets here today, amid such public anger to

make our view clear to the United Kingdom government. I fully

understand why so many public sector workers dualled Anita strike.

We feel it is necessary, both to make their voices heard in the

pensions debate, and to register disapproval of the UK government

plan to said that the giggly increase pension contributions. At

a time when public sector workers face a pay freeze, significant

increases in National Insurance, the dishes, higher VAT, a rising

inflation and your costs, it is simply the wrong thing to do. Using

our limited powers, the Scottish could and it has taken action,

issuing a social breach to help hard-pressed families. We have

maintained the council tax freeze, renewed its commitment to the

Scottish living wage, and to notified redundancies within those

parts of the public sector which we managed directly. These are

practical measures the help people facing financial challenges. The

key to resolving disputes of this nature is to maintain a process of

meaningful and open discussion which allows all sides to explore

creative and imaginative solutions within an agreed timetable. And I

hope that opportunity exists, to make progress on these issues. It

is important, as we explore this issue, that we understand that the

financial, political and legal context which shapes the debate we

are having, that approximately five 400,000 members of the six main

public-sector pension schemes in Scotland, the NHS, teachers, local

government, the Civil Service, the police and fire and rescue services,

these schemes collectively support 314,000 pensioners and dependents

or nearly 20% of the population, directly affected by this issue

either as a scheme member or as beneficiary, and we're all, at

least, indirectly, affected. I set out to Parliament the fact that

contributions in 2,000 and then totalled �3 billion and the total

paid out as pension payments was less than that, at �2.8 billion. In

macro-economic terms across the UK as a whole, the cost of meeting

public sector pension liabilities represents around 1.8% of GDP, per

annum. The Hatton report highlights that pension piers are scheduled to

fall as a percentage of GDP over time, there for the bus to wrap up

contributions in the short term is demonstrated as misplaced, one more

time. Does the Cabinet Secretary agree with the GDP assumptions with

a NATS graph, and that report? simply setting yet the evidence

that the Hutton report has put into the public domain, clearly evidence

gathered as part of extensive process of analysis undertaken by

the Hutton report. One of the important factors in driving the

debate in pensions is that people are living longer and have a better

quality of life. The latest Office for National Statistics data

published in October 2011, shows male life expectancy rose by 6.8

years, between 1985-2010, and is expected to increase by another 4.9

years in 2035. Female life- expectancy also went up and is

expected to increase further, by a further 4.6 years, by 2035. Another

piece of context which is of vital importance is that we must tackle

the myth of the gold-plated public sector pension. The reality is that

public sector pensions are, in the mean, relatively modest. The

average in the gestation is �7,057 per annum, and for a local

government worker is �4,754. Although it is right for us to

question, and to consider the affordability and sustainability of

the current arrangements, we must do so on an informed basis and not

on the basis of ideological cant, or prejudice. The final piece of

the contextual jigsaw concerns the powers and responsibilities of

Scottish ministers when public- That responsibility is fettered by

significant legal and financial constraints imposed by the UK

Government which makes it difficult for us to deliver appropriate

responses to the pensions challenge. The responsibility for the civil

service scheme is reserved to the UK Government. The United Kingdom

Government commissioned Lord Hutton to undertake his review of this

issue. And we supported Lord Hutton in that exercise, making it

possible for him to engage with stake holders in Scotland. His

report was published in October 20 10 and his final report was

published in March 2011. It said new schemes should be developed

based on a more equitable sharing of costs. It said the Government

should replace the existing final salary pension scheme with a new

career average scheme and recommended... The Finance

Secretary speaking there. Let's go to the chamber and Glenn Campbell.

It looks a lot more quiet now outside the Parliament? Yes the

protesters came and then they went. It is chilly here on St Andrew's

day, but an hour or so ago, there were around 7,000 people rallied

outside the Scottish Parliament, trade union officials say the

figure was actually nearer 10,000. But a very large demonstration,

perhaps the largest that there has been since the Parliament opened

here in 2004. Now obviously the Finance Secretary is on his feet

inside the chamber and addressing MSPs from the SNP, from the

Conservative Partys and from the Liberal Democrats. But Labour and

the Greens staying a I way from Parliament, preferring to stand on

the picket lines, with striking workers. With that context let's

discuss the strike with the General Secretary of the STUC, Graeme Smith.

Are you happy with the support you have had for the strike? There has

been tremendous support from the public sector workforce. We have

had a huge rally in Edinburgh and Glasgow. There are about 17 events

taking place and we have seen the depth of anger, of frustration, of

determination of the public sector workers to resist what has been

done, not just to their pingess, but the threat to their jobs and we

had thrown in yesterday the additional two years of a pay

freeze. People are angry and we have seen that demonstrated today.

Do you make any apology to those who have had their operations

cancelled or have had to take the day off work to look after the

kids? I e -- I regret there needed to be a strike, but it is difficult

to negotiate with the Government, because the Government has not been

clear about the negotiations. For two weeks the Government has spent

the time in a propaganda war of misinformation and lies and trying

to viltkwri trade unions and the public sector. It would have been

better trying to resolve this dispute. That is what we need to

see happen now. Can that happen now, or is it inevitable that the

changes will be pushed through? unions have shown a willingness to

negotiate around this issue. We have not had that responded to by

the Government. The Government seem to be very keen to pick a fight

with the public sector workforce and again it demonstrated that

yesterday. But I hope that there will be serious, there will be fair

negotiations and if that is the case, then hopefully it can be

resolved. If not my fear is there may be further industrial action.

In the private sector, pensions have been squeezed and the

Government points out that people are living longer, isn't it

unreasonable to expect that the deals of the past can continue?

This is one of the issues that has been raised, because things are bad

in the private sector, they should be bad in the public sector. Our

ourle campaign -- our campaign is about justice for all. Those in the

private sector wants to see individuals save for themselves. We

need to address the issue of pensions across the board. The real

division is not between the public and private sector, but between

ordinary workers who don't have pension and the rich directors who

pay themselves huge pensions. you saying the existing schemes are

sustainable. Or are you prepared to negotiate some reduction? There

must be a recognition that only a few years ago the trade union sat

down with the Government and negotiated significant changes,

changes which increased contributions and the retirement

age and put limits on the amount of contribution Naas the taxpayer

would make to pensions. Unions have shown a willingness to negotiate

and I hope the Government will respond F they don't, they should

be in in doubt this action could continues. On the politics of this,

the Scottish Government, through the Finance Secretary, making clear

he does not support your action. Labour at Westminster seem to be

sitting on the fence. In Scotland they're on your side. Well I have

to say I have been pleased that the Scottish Government has been

supportive of the cause of the public sector workforce. But very

disappointed they didn't support Labour and the Tkwreens -- Greens

in abandoning the Scottish Parliament today. Today is not a

day for debating pensions, but for MSPs to demonstrate their

democratic duty by standing alongside their constituents who

are on strike, rather than o' eera ther than talking to themselves in

Parliament. Thank you. We will have more from here at Holyrood from a

couple of MSPs later. Thank you. Now some of the issues with our

commentator, Angus Macleod from the Times. Thank you for joining me.

First, the negotiations point that Graeme Smith was making there. The

UK Government saying that negotiations are still ongoing and

Francis Maude made that point in Scottish Parliament. -- in

Parliament. How have the negotiations been going through?

This is like nailing jelly to the wall. Are the negotiations going on

or not? This the unions say not since November have they been in

touch with anyone. But I thought the atmosphere of this was

ratcheted up at the weekend when Danny Alexander the Chief Secretary

to the Treasury, said that the improved deal that was on offer

from the Government, that no pension member within ten years of

retirement would see any reduction in their pension and obviously also

making them an offer which has been on the table would be withdrawn, if

the unions did not come back and sit down and hammer out some deal.

Well it seems that in fact that has, that tactic has only succeeded as

many predicted it would n souring the atmosphere further. I think

that it was a bit of cack-handed of him, who ironically picked the

Guardian, the fayreed -- faifrd paper of the -- favoured paper of

the unions to announce this. will things pan out? Will these

change go ahead? I don't think it is inevitable. What is inevitable

as Graeme Smith I thought graphically pointed out, that more

strikes may follow. That raises a point about the patience of

everyone else in the great unwashed Scottish public with a series of

strikes. Maybe today they show understanding and think maybe these

people have a point, but whether that understanding will hold for a

series of these one day strikes is another matter. What about the

Scottish politics of this? We're hearing John Swinney speaking, he

is having to ride two horses. Everyone seems to be riding two

horses. I can put some flesh on the bones. I have seen a tweet from

Stuart Hosie the Dundee SNP MP, saying that he has been supporting

the strike at meetings in Dundee. At the same time, John Swinney is

telling us that he doesn't support the strike. As for Labour, they're

all over the place. The MSPs are not crossing picket lines, but the

MPs R it is a botch up on everyone's parts. For Labour their

Scottish Labour MPs were in the commons. Yes and happy to be there.

Some will say I chose -- that shows the independence of Labour group at

Holyrood. But I think it shows a break down in communication. Thank

you. Still to come: The Saltire flew from No 10 Downing Street and

David Cameron wished all Scots a happy St Andrew's day. But he

didn't have a happy day at Prime Minister's questions. That is

coming up. And now more on the strikes. Our reporter Kevin Keane

is in Aberdeen. This rally has been going on in Aberdeen. You can see

several thousand people are here with banners from a whole range of

unions, from the Fire Brigades Union, through to Unison and others.

A lot of them involved in this and several people speaking from the

centre of castle gates. One of these speakers I'm joined by, that

is Kay Barnet. Ouch how much of a strength of feeling is there -- how

much of a strength of feeling this? Sni You can -- You can see and hear

there is a massive strength of feeling. It is display of support

from public sector workers, unions like mine, the teachers, the EIS,

we have 60,000 members, but it is a display of unions coming together

in the public sector and putting a clear and strong message across to

the Government. About pensions, and about the public sector in general.

The UK Government have condemned the strike. Do you think this is

having an effect on them? Yes it is. Because in actual fact, on my way

down I stopped at a picket line and I have been stopped in the streets

on the way to here, by members of public, not just union members,

saying thank goodness there are people in Scotland who are willing

to stands up and give the Government a clear message about

how irresponsible they're being. It is not public sector workers or

trade union members who are here and across Scotland, they're not

the irresponsible people in Scotland. It is those who will not

listen. To very fair-minded, decent public sector workers. It is your

union that comes in for the most criticism. People who themselves

have children are having to take time off and look after children.

Because your members are on strike. What do you say to those people?

a mother of three children, I can say not only myself, but other

members sympathise greatly. But parents in Scotland, just as much

as the public, know that what today is about it is not not just about

pensions, but the whole future of public services and the public

sector in Scotland. So although the focus today is a focus on pensions,

it is about the whole future of public service in Scotland and I

think that parents in Scotland very much appreciate that and as I said,

I have been stopped by parents and members of public pliers who are

preerbtdive of what we're attempting to -- myself who are

appreciative of what we're trying to do. Some may be members of the

private sector. What do you say to those people? It is interesting how

those are in the private sector are beginning to understand where we're

coming from. It is the Government that have tried to set public

sector against private sector workers. And that is not a fair and

right thing to do. We do not believe that we're a special case,

we believe that all workers in society and beyond should have the

right to a decent pension. Thank you. It is of course a typically

cold day here, but no rain and there are substantial numbers here

to take part in this rally today. Thank you. No surprise the strike

action dominated Prime Minister's questions, which saw one of the

most furious exchanges between David Cameron and Ed Milliband in

weeks. In June the Prime Minister praised the head teacher of a

school in red itch for refusing to strike. Today he is closed her

school and says, this has been the most difficult decision of my

professional life. The difference in the summer was I had faith in

the Government. I have not seen any progress, so I have decided to

strike. Why does the Prime Minister think so many decent hard working

public sector workers, many of whom have never been on strike before,

feel the Government's not listen The reason people last writing is

because they might object to our reforms that public-sector pensions.

But I believe those reforms are absolutely essential, and as the

former Labour pension secretary Lord Hutton said, and he said this,

"it is hard to imagine a better deal than this." what I would say

of of all to people who are on strike today is that they are going

on strike, at a time when negotiations are still under way.

The Right Honourable Gentleman refers to what was said in June.

Let me remind them what he said, on 30th June. These strikes are wrong,

the strikes are wrong, at a time when negotiations are going on. Why

has he changed his mind? They declare their positions at and then,

and said they have made their final offer! And they have not even met

the unions for four weeks, since November 2nd. And what has the

Prime Minister going round saying to people? He has gone round saying

he is privately delighted the unions have walked into his trap.

That is the reality. He has been spoiling for this fight. And the

reason people have lost faith is, he has not been straight with

people. Will he admit that 100,000 low-paid workers on 15,000 a year

or less are facing an immediate tax rise of 3% on his pension plans?

know that his entire party is paid for by the unions, but I have to

say, it is extraordinary that what he has just told the House, is

completely and utterly untrue. The fact is, there were meetings with

the trade unions yesterday. There will be meetings with the trade

unions tomorrow, there will be meetings on Friday. These

negotiations are under way. And let me repeat again what he said in

June. "it is wrong to strike when negotiations are going on". And yet,

today, he backs the strikes - because he is irresponsible, left-

wing and week. I am proud that millions of hard-working people in

this country support the Labour Party. Better that than millions

from Lord Ashcroft! Now, the problem is, the problem is that he

does not understand his own policies. He does not understand

they are part-time workers getting less than 21,000, who will be hit,

800,000 low-paid, part-time workers, 90% of Umar woman will be paying

more, and he denies it, but it is true, Mr Speaker. He sits there

shaking his head. He doesn't even know his own policy. And of course,

Mr Speaker, he couldn't explain or justify what he did to everyone on

low pay, with the miserable deal cooked up with the Deputy Prime

Minister, to cut �1 billion from tax credits yesterday and in the

Autumn Statement. They have no explanation for why they are doing

that. The latest from Prime Minister's Questions. Back to the

Chamber of the Scottish Parliament and to my colleague, Sarah

Patterson. The debate is continuing. The Conservative economy spokesman

is currently on his feet. He has been talking about the fact that he

and his opinion, most public sector workers will seek no reduction in

their pensions. And he has been calling on the SNP finance

secretary to stop grandstanding against the UK government. We can

cross now to hear what else he has to say. This is a hugely sensitive

issue. That was the rationale for giving up to an independent,

respected figure like Lord Hutton. We are living longer, and pensions

are to be paid for. What the UK government is attempting to do is

strike a fair balance between the taxpayer and the employee, and in

many cases, they will end up with a better pension. That is a better

proposal than the schemes proposed by the SNP in the S P P A

submission to Lord Hutton, and on that basis, I move the amendment in

my name. I call on Willie Rennie to speak, amendment No. 14402. A tough

course is right that I start my contribution -- it of course is

right that I start my contribution by expressing support for the fight

hundred 1,000 people who were public sector workers in Scotland.

We may disagree that whether they should be on strike, but it is

clear from the hundreds I have met across Scotland that they used to

work in the public sector because they believe in what that means and

a dedicated to their jobs. I can understand their concern, as the

changes be made to their terms and conditions, but part of that gives

us some insight as to why this debate is happening in this

Parliament, and why this Parliament should be setting, because however

some people try to portray it, Scotland is not just the contrary

of public-sector workers. There are half a million affected directly by

the changes to pensions, but there and another 2 million other

taxpayers who have an interest in this issue, who have to pay part of

the Pension Bill and are entitled to have their interests represented.

Strike almost right? The public of Scotland should expect to see --

strike or no-strike? The public of Scotland should expect to see these

issues discussed. People who have left school at 15, what will 65,

retired at 65, but in more recent times, people went to university.

Perhaps have a gap year, start work at 25, continue to will the age of

60, but then still what a strong pension for another 20 years. To

keep the same pensions simply does not add up. An element of change

has visited each of those groups already. People who work for

private companies have seen the end of their final salary pensions.

People with private pensions have seen annuity rates drop

dramatically and the cycle of world stock markets has seen the value of

many people's retirements cut by tens of thousands of pounds. Of

course people are concerned, but I am grateful for the steps that the

UK government has taken to instil fairness in the changes that are

proposed, to protect those on low incomes, contrary to what John

Swinney says, to increase benefits for many workers, and to make sure

that all the accumulated benefits are retained, especially for those

who are only 10 years away from the end of service. Change to public

sector pensions was always going to... On the point of fairness, can

remember justified the move from the retail price index to the

consumer price index as the way for calculating inflation related

Updating, given that it affects everyone in receipt of a state

pension and not just everyone in the public sector? It is applying

across the public sector, across society as a whole. This is the

rate the Bank of England uses and it is an appropriate, more accurate

level to use, reflecting the cost that people bear. The Labour Party

has accepted that they should up reforms to public sector pensions,

in London. That is what is going on in the chamber. No Labour Party or

Green Party MPs -- MS Ps, present. Were joined by the SNP MSP Kenny

Gibson and by Malcolm Chisholm. Malcolm Chisholm, why are you not

at work representing your constituents? I have been talking

to a great number of constituents today, who are taking action. This

is not just a strike like other strikes. If you look at women

workers, there has never been in the history of this country so many

women on strike as the Arc today. Of course we should be debating the

issue, but not today. It is unfortunate as the Fijians have

said, that be SNP decided to debate this, today, when they should be

out showing support for the public sector workers whose pensions are

being attacked. Kenneth Gibson, from the SNP, this must be awkward

for you, because there must a been unease at having to cross picket

lines, amongst some MSPs. Mull, is being disingenuous. We have just

seen Ed Miliband and the House of Commons speaking, so I wonder why

it is OK for Labour MPs to go into the House of Commons to debate this,

but not the Scottish parliament. We know our police, and that is

debating the issues of the day in the Scottish parliament. There is

no picket at the Scottish Parliament at this time so there is

no reason why Malcolm Chisholm cannot walk through the door.

Labour position on the strike has been an absolute mess. In the House

of Commons, the Labour leader Ed Miliband, not condoning or

condemning the strike, but Scottish Labour taking a very different line.

You have not got a very coherent argument. We're taking the exactly

the same line as London but we get criticised if we do anything

different. We had been asked to attend Parliament by Boland and

colleagues but the trade unions asked us specifically not to take

part in Parliament, so we're listening to what our constituents,

in the public-sector unions, are saying, but we are mindful of the

way in which this is a completely unprecedented strike. It is very

important that we challenge the myths a growing public sector

pensions. Some of them I hear that your coverage of the debate from

the Conservatives and Lib Dems with in the last few minutes. I was glad

to hear Gavin Brown Ref Bear to the Hatton report, but Lord Hutton said

public sector pensions, as a share of GDP, is declining, it is 1.9%

now, it would be 1.4% in 2016, without the changes. We do not make

these changes. There is not a crisis of public sector pensions.

want to put up on Hutton report with you, Kenneth Gibson. This has

been called a naked cash grab by the UK government, tough meet the

deficit. But do you not agree there was a �9 billion gap between

contributions and payments coming up in four years' time, so we do

actually need this money? I don't agree with those figures. The money

in Scotland in the public sector pension fund has increased by 200

million over the last year. But the timing of this is wrong. We're

talking about imposing an additional pension contribution on

public sector workers, at a time when inflation is 5.2%, VAT has

gone up by 2.5%, but there is a pay freeze for those earning less than

�21,000 per year, so when families are struggling, it is the wrong

time to impose this. What has upset us in Scotland is that we have been

blackmailed into this. For every month the delay bringing in these

proposals, the Scottish parliament will be fined �8.4 million per

month. You say you are being blackmailed into this, but you I --

you are either a government or you are not. Would you except John

Swinney has the power to put forward his own arguments? Pensions

are reserved. We would be fined �100 million. That is the salaries

of the year 4,000 teachers at a time when the Scottish budget has

been cut by 12% over three years, and it would be grossly

irresponsible to sell to impose a �100 million cut which would not

tell anyone in the long run. We think that is nonsense. I would

point out that, Malcolm Chisholm crossed picket lines last year,

along with other MSPs when the Labour Government cut redundancy

payments by one per possible service workers, causing civil

service used to roll out a strike last year. Mr Chisholm, the

previous Labour government did not address this. The pension timebomb

was not addressed by the previous UK Labour government. That is

completely untrue. There was a pension agreement between the then

Labour government added radiance in 2007. The National Audit Office did

an audit of that arrangement and said that as a result of what

Labour did then, the pension issue was stabilised, and that was

followed by the Hatton report which said there would be a declining

share of GDP going to public-sector pensions. There is no pages crisis,

and we have to challenge the myth being put forward by the UK

government. I agree with much of what Kenny Gibson said in his last

statement, although it is contradicted by the statement that

the Scottish government need on pigeons, but this is a cash grab or

in a public sector workers already enduring a pay freeze, so workers

who are physically going to have a pay freeze for the ears were being

asked to pay extra for their pensions and it is a tax grab, and

in many cases, attacks grab one very low-paid workers, who

certainly do not have gold-plated Labour say you won't take your

salary today, where will that money go? The money is Wirth held and

people can make contributions their own money to whoever they want. It

will be the same for anyone else on strike, the money will be withheld

by those who pay the salaries. Thank you both for joining me.

Labour MPs have crossed the picket lines to enter the house of

Parliament. There is a lot o' discuss after the Chancellor's

autumn statement and on this day of strike action, let's go to

Westminster and David Porter. Some tough questions for David Cameron

at Prime Minister's questions today? Yes it was a noisy event

today. It was one of the instances where it was not synthetic anger.

People were angry and had different views on the strikes and the autumn

statement. We have also had within the last couple of hours news from

the Foreign Secretary that he ordered the Iranian Embassy to be

shut and Embassy staff to withdraw from Britain as retaliation for

what has been going on in Tehran and the storming of British Embassy.

So no shortage of things to discuss with Iain Murray from Labour. And

Mike Weir from the SNP and Jo Swinson from the Liberal Democrats.

Jo Swinson, why is it that the Government is having to get so

tough with those in the public sector with relation to their

pensions? Well the good news that we're all living longer and while

that is an excellent thing it means it is not sustainable for pensions

to continue in the way they have been. When many of the schemes that

started out it was about 50% was paid by the employee and 50% by the

taxpayer. And that balance is nor like two thirds being paid by the

taxpayer and that is not going to be able to be sustainable. So we're

asking people to pay more, but what is on offer from the Government is

still a very good pension deal and in fact it has been made better by

the improved offer which Danny Alexander announced. I I would

encourage people in the public sector and the unions who are

striking to look at the detail and recognise that defined benefits are

being protected, everything that has been acrude is protected and it

is a generous period of transition. I'm 31 and I think about pensions

will be like when we draw pension and it is going to have to change.

People are drawing pensions for 20 years now. Some of us can't

remember when we were 31 x but Mike Weir from the Government say it is

unsustainable to have pensions at their current levers. No, the

Government are taking money out of the pockets of people who can't

afford it. Most people in the public sector are low paid and are

being asked to pay 3% when they're facing higher fuel and and food

prices and at best a pay freeze in some cases, that is a difficult

situation and it is also adding to the economic woes. That is taking

money out of local economies. There is a danger that low paid workers

will opt out of pension schemes and that is storing up problems.

there not case if your party was in Government, you would beable 1 to

do the same thing? "-- be having to do the same thing. Well there are

negotiations going on about pensions, but this immediate 3%

increase in contribution rate is a 3% income tax on the lowest paid.

People are striking not because they want to have a go at the

Government, but because they have had enough. They see their

contributions going up and they're being asked to work longer and that

is not good enough. The Government have to get around the table with

the union and come to a settlement. Otherwise the rhetoric that we're

about to see about this 2nd November proposal will come to

fruition. That notice helping anyone. It is a case you're going

to have a negotiate a deal and may as well do it sooner than later?

agree all sides need to get around the table. But in terms of low paid

workers, they're going to benefit, because moving to the average

salary, the deal the Government has put forward makes it better

pensions for low paid workers than they would be able to get. The

other thing we need to remember, the state pension, that many people

rely on as part of their income, anding thanks to Liberal Democrats

we have a triple lock and pensions are going up by 5.2% and that is

the big increase there has been in the state pension. We're doing a

lot to protect pensioners and the most vulnerable. And so while these

are difficult times, there is still a focus on the low paid and the

most vulnerable rabble. We're fighting a helicopter policing the

march, if you wanted better pensions for people in Scotland,

this anything the SNP or the Scottish Government could do to say

we would have a different pensions deal in Scotland? The Scottish

Government wanted to do that, but Danny Alexander said he would take

a hundred million out of Scottish budget if we did. The Scottish

Government are tied by the grant from Westminster and we don't have

the power to vary that. We would seek to do it differently, because

of the the way the system is set up we can't do that. This system must

change. How do we get to where we don't have millions withdrawing

their labour? It must be done on the basis of consensus. We are

hearing rhetoric from Jo Swinson, but the winter fuel payments have

developed, because of decision made by the Government. And would the

Scottish Government do something. Their submission to the Hutton

Inquiry is to do something worse than what the Conservative

Government is trying to do. That is nonsense. It is true we need to

look at pensions, but it must be done with proper negotiations and

not imposing a 3 pence tax. pension strike is the second half

of an important week here, yesterday the autumn statement, and

Jo Swinson, however the Government would like to put a gloss on it, it

was gloomy from the Chancellor. one is denying we're in a difficult

financial situation. In 2008 there was a massive shock to the global

economy. We're dealing with the aftermath of that and further

trouble within the eurozone which effects the British kpwhri. But we

are helping low paid workers through raising the income tax

threshold and a hasive programme of investment with new transport

projects to boost the economy. There is a Barnett consequential,

with �400 million going Scottish Government and I hope the snl will

use that. You are getting �433 million from the Barnett

consequentials. Will the Scottish Government put that to good use?

course it will. The Scottish Government have already been doing

what they can within their powers to push forward infrastructure

projects. What is not clear about the money however is what the

revenue consequences are and as I understand I, the Scottish

Government have been told the capital outcome, we have yet to see

the whole picture and the other thing there is a the statement

yesterday said that growth will be 0.7% in 2012. Much of that money

isn't coming in until after 2012. So there is only a small amount

available, welcome that though it is. Iain Murray, you say the

Government is cutting too much too deeply. But it appears it is a non-

start tore take the braibs off and boost spending. The markets

wouldn't buy that? They are borrowing �158 million, because the

Chancellor's plan is not working. Unemployment will rise and the

number of people losing their job is going up and the Chancellor has

to do something to address that. He refuses to move off his

ideologically draifr driven plan and look at something to boost the

economy. We have to leave is there. Thank you. We have battled

helicopters and sirens and now we finish, it goes quiet. Thank you.

Now let's round up with Angus Macleod. Very interesting hearing

that debate. It is difficult for folk watching to pick out who is

right in this pension debate? a lot of things, there is right on

both sides. I have no doubt, most people looking at this would say

that the Government has handled the issue with an astonishing lack of

finesse and we go back to last weekend. But I listened to Malcolm

Comisholm and others saying that pensions as a percentage of GDP is

declining. But of course that begs the question what GDP? We're in a

situation where the Scottish economy some would say is already

in recession. And it is difficult to see how public sector workers

can a void taking their share of the pain that that means across

society. That brings us to the wider context of the autumn

statement yesterday, those growth figures were a shock. Yes, we have

heard the description of economics often enough as a dismal science,

yesterday it showed how dismal it can be. Osborne a year ago when he

presented his staipt, h talked in positive terms, there was light at

the end of the tunnel, deficit reduction was on track and well

what a difference a year has made? Because of low productivity and

inflation and to give him this, because of the eurozone shock, all

his calculations have come well and truly unstuck. Politically north

and south of the border it is tricky when it comes to timing. We

have the general election in 2015, the Scottish elections in 2016 and

the referendum. It is not good for political parties when the economy

is not in a good way. It may be that the result could be the moment

the political language, the political train will change, if you

remember Osborne and David Cameron were going to go to voters and say

we have got rid of the deficit. Well they're not saying that. It

may be lighter, they say. And in term of referendum it is your guess

as good as mine how will voters vote? Against a very bleak economic

back grounds. Will that make them more inclined to vote yes or more

inclined to vote no? I wouldn't want to bet on either at the moment.

Talking about the Chancellor and his plan A and there were further

cuts in spending. He stood up yesterday, do you think he had the

cred cibility -- credibility to carry on with his plan. In term of

credibility, his credibility is just holding. But only just. If

these, if his latest forecast go awry next year, and we see Britain

back into recession, I am not sure that he will be able to, well he

might not even be around for the next stpaiment. I think David

Cameron will prove loyal. But I think there needs to be some ideas

put forward by the Treasury as to how to haul Britain out of the

recession. The ideas Osborne came up yesterday, I don't think they

qualified. Some one said it reminded them of Gordon Brown,

micromeasures, nothing really that was a -- could be said to change

the face of the economic situation. Thank you. Our web-site is being