Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 10 March 2011
10 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Scotland Bill
If the member does not mind, I will make some progress first.
The committee report is bold in arguing that the significant borrowing powers that are being provided for should be based on transparent principles and that, after the current financial pressures ease, they might imply in practice higher borrowing limits and less Treasury interference in detail—although even the Scottish Government recognises the macroeconomic responsibilities of the United Kingdom Government.
The committee makes the important proposal, which echoes through Liberal Democrat contributions over the years, that there should be a joint exchequer committee with statutory underpinning that acts as a powerful forum for intergovernmental discussions on the wide range of fiscal issues that are now in play, and which is able to sort out the differences over the scope for new taxes, the cost of tax collection and issues about the grant. That is part of the respect agenda, but the institutional framework displays the growing maturity of the arrangements. As the report states, they are parallel to the set-up in other federal and quasi-federal countries.
As I did at the launch of the report, I remark today that the most notable feature of the report is its confidence—confidence in the future; confidence in our ability to say to Westminster, “Yes this is great, but we need improvements too”; confidence that comes from developing a vision of the future that is signed up to on a consensual basis by the bulk of political and public opinion in Scotland; and confidence in the strength and potential of Scotland in a United Kingdom that will, itself, be strengthened by the proposals.
It is the SNP that has been all over the place on the matter. If anything was clear, it was that it was against key aspects of the bill, notably the income tax proposals, and against anything at all, however sensible, that involved re-reservation. SNP members were even against the re-reservation of Antarctica. Whether they have in mind some latter-day Darien scheme, I am not quite sure. Today, it seems that the SNP is no longer against the income tax proposal, which is not mentioned in its amendment, and nor does it seem to be against all re-reservations on principle. I wonder whether I detect some delicate shift in the balance between the fundamentalists and the gradualists that has hitherto remained out of sight.
The committee report is bold in arguing that the significant borrowing powers that are being provided for should be based on transparent principles and that, after the current financial pressures ease, they might imply in practice higher borrowing limits and less Treasury interference in detail—although even the Scottish Government recognises the macroeconomic responsibilities of the United Kingdom Government.
The committee makes the important proposal, which echoes through Liberal Democrat contributions over the years, that there should be a joint exchequer committee with statutory underpinning that acts as a powerful forum for intergovernmental discussions on the wide range of fiscal issues that are now in play, and which is able to sort out the differences over the scope for new taxes, the cost of tax collection and issues about the grant. That is part of the respect agenda, but the institutional framework displays the growing maturity of the arrangements. As the report states, they are parallel to the set-up in other federal and quasi-federal countries.
As I did at the launch of the report, I remark today that the most notable feature of the report is its confidence—confidence in the future; confidence in our ability to say to Westminster, “Yes this is great, but we need improvements too”; confidence that comes from developing a vision of the future that is signed up to on a consensual basis by the bulk of political and public opinion in Scotland; and confidence in the strength and potential of Scotland in a United Kingdom that will, itself, be strengthened by the proposals.
It is the SNP that has been all over the place on the matter. If anything was clear, it was that it was against key aspects of the bill, notably the income tax proposals, and against anything at all, however sensible, that involved re-reservation. SNP members were even against the re-reservation of Antarctica. Whether they have in mind some latter-day Darien scheme, I am not quite sure. Today, it seems that the SNP is no longer against the income tax proposal, which is not mentioned in its amendment, and nor does it seem to be against all re-reservations on principle. I wonder whether I detect some delicate shift in the balance between the fundamentalists and the gradualists that has hitherto remained out of sight.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-8114, in the name of Iain Gray, on the Scotland Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation. I invite membe...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab)
Lab
Today is important for the Scottish Parliament and all those who believe in devolution for Scotland. As the Scotland Bill Committee’s report makes clear, the...
The Minister for Culture and External Affairs (Fiona Hyslop)
SNP
The Scottish Government has been extremely constructive not only with the bill committee but with the UK Government. We have made 30 different suggestions fo...
Pauline McNeill
Lab
The member does not recognise that, but I will come to that. Until now, Fiona Hyslop has argued for independence or full fiscal autonomy to the death. Nothin...
The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Bruce Crawford)
SNP
I do not think that you are very amusing at all, actually.
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Order.
Pauline McNeill
Lab
The Scotland Act 1998 was by any standard a landmark piece of legislation. It gave the Parliament very wide powers and, as the Calman commission showed, it g...
Tricia Marwick (Central Fife) (SNP)
SNP
Will the member give way?
Pauline McNeill
Lab
I will take a brief intervention.
Tricia Marwick
SNP
I was struck by the member’s assertion that the Scottish Parliament would be responsible for levying almost a third of the money that it receives. That is si...
Pauline McNeill
Lab
I have heard Tricia Marwick say that before, but the last time I heard her say it, she said that the figure was 15 per cent. I am reading from the committee’...
The Minister for Culture and External Affairs (Fiona Hyslop)
SNP
This debate is a staging post in the Scotland Bill process, and the Scotland Bill is a staging post on the constitutional journey to achieve more powers and ...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I was intrigued by what the minister said about supporting the bill, with reservations. That is not quite what she said at the beginning, when she damned the...
Fiona Hyslop
SNP
We still think that there are fundamental flaws in the income tax proposals, not least because we have no idea how the Treasury will adjust the block grant. ...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)
LD
Will the minister give way?
Fiona Hyslop
SNP
I am moving on. The Scottish Government has provided the impetus for the current national debate on the way in which Scotland is governed. Our position is cl...
Fiona Hyslop
SNP
However, we recognise that some, including Mr Purvis, have other sincerely held views. Hence our national conversation provided a detailed and ambitious visi...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con)
Con
Just to make it absolutely clear, I say that the referendum that is proposed in the amendment is on the LCM powers as proposed in the motion. It is clear tha...
Fiona Hyslop
SNP
The member might want to look closely at her amendment, because it talks about fiscal powers.The Government has taken the Scotland Bill on its merits. We sup...
Pauline McNeill
Lab
Why did the Government choose 1999 as the basis of its calculations? Does the minister accept that, if the Calman proposals were in place now, Scotland would...
Fiona Hyslop
SNP
As far as I remember, 1999 was the year in which the Scottish Parliament was established and devolution began. The projections that were provided to the comm...
Pauline McNeill
Lab
Will the minister give way?
Fiona Hyslop
SNP
I am moving on.It is important to point out that, although the bill seeks more powers for the Scottish ministers, it provides a net loss of powers to the Sco...
Jim Hume (South of Scotland) (LD)
LD
Will the member give way?
Fiona Hyslop
SNP
I am closing now.Throughout the process of constitutional debate that was initiated by the Government in the national conversation, we have been open to idea...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con)
Con
Today’s debate is hugely important, and I fully recognise that, on the issue of the fiscal powers that should be available to Parliament, members will argue ...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD)
LD
I am trying to find out whether this is an opening speech for the Conservative party or an opening speech for Margaret Mitchell—I am not quite sure.
Margaret Mitchell
Con
This is an amendment speech. With his political experience, Mr Rumbles should know that.The Parliament has justifiably been proud that, since its inception, ...
Ian McKee (Lothians) (SNP)
SNP
Will Margaret Mitchell take an intervention?
Margaret Mitchell
Con
I am sorry—I am in my last minute.The only way to ensure that the Scottish Parliament genuinely seeks the views of and listens to the people whom it represen...