AQ: Stephen Gethins MSP, Helen McDade MSP, Michael Shanks MP, Lorna Slater MSP

Hello and welcome to Krayal, a picturesque Scottish fishing village at the eastern end of Fife. Krayal Harbour is said to be one of the most photographed in Scotland, with its stunning vista and small sandy beach frame by whitewash cottages. But it is more than a tourist attraction. Every day boats set out into the Firth of Forth, you can buy fresh crab and lobster on the

quayside and there is a strong sense of community here. Among its many local clubs and associations, This Krail golfing society is one of the oldest in the world. We are at Krail Parish Church, which has stood in Krail since 1175. The courtyard is the site of some of the most important Renaissance funeral monuments in

Fife. Here with me is Stephen Gethens, the SNP MSP for Dundee City East, and the Minister for Europe, External Affairs and Energy in the Scottish Government. He won his seat at last month's Hollywood election and stepped down from Westminster,

where he'd been his party's spokesman on international relations. For politics, he worked for non-governmental organisations on peace-building, arms control and democracy in areas affected by conflict. Michael Shanks is the Labour MP for Rutherglen and an energy minister in the UK government.

He's been an MP since 2023 and before that he was a case worker for Labour politicians. He has also worked in the charity sector on supporting families and reducing offending and he used to be a secondary school teacher. Lawness later is the Scottish Green Party MSP for Edinburgh Central and the party's

spokesperson for public service reform. Lorna was the co-leader of the Scottish Greens from 2019 until last year. She was a government minister under the SNP Green Power Sharing Deal, and before politics she was an engineer in the renewable energy sector. And Helen McDade is the Reform UK MSP for Mid-Scotland and Fife, and the party spokesperson for health. She's also the convener of

Hollywood's Health, Care and Sport Committee. Before politics, Helen was a veterinary surgeon and she worked as head of policy as a charity dedicated to protecting and enhancing wild land and places. Creil, please welcome your Any Questions panel.

It is the case every week that our panel do not know the questions before they are read out live on air. Our first comes from Ian Johnson. Hi. Hello. How would you pay for the effective defence for the UK?

A pertinent question, Ian, after the resignation of course of John Healy as defence secretary. He resigned saying that the Prime Minister was unable, the Treasury was unwilling to commit the resources the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats. He was followed out the door by among others Al Kahn's, the security minister.

Ian Johnson wants to know is how would you pay for the effective defence of the UK? Michael Shanks. Well first of all let me just say John Healy is a man of great principle and of dedicated public service and I think he's a great loss to the government. He was Labour to his core but never tribal in that and I think the tributes that have been paid

for his work as defence secretary across the political spectrum highlight that and Dan Jarvis, who is now the Defence Secretary, has many of the same qualities. The truth about this is that we are investing

huge amounts in our defence. Over the parliament, 270 billion pounds, five billion pounds this year alone, because the threat the country's facing

is becoming more and more serious. And it's right that we invest in the future of our armed forces to meet that threat, but also, frankly, to pick up the mess

that we inherited of underfunding of our armed forces that were hauled out for 14 years. Trouble is, if John Healy thinks you are still underfunding, that's why he's gone.

Now, and the Prime Minister has acknowledged today that we have to do more on that, but the defence investment plan goes above the 270 billion that we've already committed to in this parliament. And the point I think that gets to Ian's question is, there are really difficult trade

offs in all of this. There are no easy choices around how we invest in our armed forces, but we must. And we've already made, for example, on cutting international development something nobody in politics would choose to do. It was an important decision to make in order

to drive forward the investment we've already seen. There will be further difficult decisions like that and there will be no easy choices because the fiscal position is difficult, but we know that we have to invest to meet the threat that the country faces and that's what we will set out in the coming weeks.

So just a few numbers. The estimated shortfall in defence funding is around £28 billion. What the government has reportedly put forward to fund this defence investment plan is around 13 billion. That's a pretty big gap. And to Ian's question, you've talked about trade-offs, you've talked where the government has already cut spending, international

aid. Where else are you going to cut if you're going to fund that defence investment plan as the government says you are, as the Prime Minister says you are? Well, look, we haven't published the plan yet, so the numbers are speculation that are out there. But look, what we are trying to do is find where there are savings

that can be made across departments, including my own, that can be invested into this. but it's also around how we innovate in some of what we do with defence. I mean, this isn't just thinking around

how we get back to the strength and the capabilities that we once had. It's about thinking what the future threat looks like and that does mean building up our armed forces

in a different way. And there are different ways to think about that, but the other really important thing about the defense investment plan is

this is an economic opportunities for community across the country as well, building and procuring as much as possible of this in Britain as well.

So it's not a zero sum game. Okay, Stephen Geithins.