Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 10 March 2011
10 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Scotland Bill
It is a pleasure to speak in the debate. This might be my final opportunity to speak in a Scottish Parliament debate, although I hope to speak in the members’ business debate on co-operatives later.
It is arguable that the bill has had the longest period of pre-legislative scrutiny in history. I was going to say that we have been talking about it since 1999, but I defer to Jeremy Purvis’s greater interest in history and what has gone before.
The bill is unique and the bill process has been unique. I thank Wendy Alexander for convening the Scotland Bill Committee and I thank the members of the committee and the officials who supported its work. The committee produced a good and thorough report. In another role, I must consider and absorb it and take forward a number of the points in it.
It is important that there has been a more consensual tone in the debate than I expected, particularly from the Scottish Government benches, given some of the comments that I heard in another place only a few days ago. Then, the London wing of the SNP seemed to be arguing that because the bill was not fit for purpose and would not do any of the things that the SNP wanted, it would give the bill a hard time and was not entirely sure whether it would support it. I am sure that the minister will have been on the phone or will have communicated in whatever way the SNP communicates between Edinburgh and London to ensure that, when the bill is next discussed, the more consensual tone that has been taken here will be noted.
I will highlight a couple of areas that will need further scrutiny and in respect of which it is important to have a further LCM. That applies to some clauses that are not related to the Calman commission, particularly on the work of the Advocate General for Scotland’s expert group. Not all members, here or in another place, think that we have had the opportunity to scrutinise those things properly. It is right and proper that the committee recommended that we should look at a further LCM.
It is arguable that the bill has had the longest period of pre-legislative scrutiny in history. I was going to say that we have been talking about it since 1999, but I defer to Jeremy Purvis’s greater interest in history and what has gone before.
The bill is unique and the bill process has been unique. I thank Wendy Alexander for convening the Scotland Bill Committee and I thank the members of the committee and the officials who supported its work. The committee produced a good and thorough report. In another role, I must consider and absorb it and take forward a number of the points in it.
It is important that there has been a more consensual tone in the debate than I expected, particularly from the Scottish Government benches, given some of the comments that I heard in another place only a few days ago. Then, the London wing of the SNP seemed to be arguing that because the bill was not fit for purpose and would not do any of the things that the SNP wanted, it would give the bill a hard time and was not entirely sure whether it would support it. I am sure that the minister will have been on the phone or will have communicated in whatever way the SNP communicates between Edinburgh and London to ensure that, when the bill is next discussed, the more consensual tone that has been taken here will be noted.
I will highlight a couple of areas that will need further scrutiny and in respect of which it is important to have a further LCM. That applies to some clauses that are not related to the Calman commission, particularly on the work of the Advocate General for Scotland’s expert group. Not all members, here or in another place, think that we have had the opportunity to scrutinise those things properly. It is right and proper that the committee recommended that we should look at a further LCM.
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...