Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 10 March 2011
10 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Scotland Bill
When we discussed the Scotland Bill previously, some feared that our parliamentary committee would do nothing more than rubber stamp the bill that is currently going through Westminster. That was an underestimation of the committee convener’s tenacity and her track record on the issue. As other members have said, the committee’s report is a fitting legacy of the 12 years for which Wendy Alexander has served in the Parliament in a variety of roles.
Whatever else people think of the report, it would be incredible if anyone believed that it reflected a committee that was inhibited. The last people who will think that the committee was inhibited are those in the Westminster Government who now have to face the challenges of an intensive dialogue as a result of the committee’s work. I am glad to say that the report is far from a rubber-stamp job. The committee has decided to test the Westminster Government’s sincerity by challenging the provisions in the bill and recommending expansion of them. Further, the committee has done sterling work in exposing the shallowness of the exaggerated claims on fiscal autonomy. Although it might suit some to attempt to make a link between tax evolution and growth, the committee has shown that there is little to justify that as an automatic assumption.
Back in the early days of the Parliament, I remember some SNP members, some of whom are now in high office, becoming rather animated when I described devolution as a process rather than a full stop. The language seems to have changed considerably, which I welcome. Twelve years into the devolution journey, in the light of experience, the Scotland Bill is refining that process and the Parliament is demonstrating that it wants a say in how that refinement takes place.
The committee has demonstrated that through important recommendations, not least of which is that on the power to vary higher rates of income tax. If we believe that we can grow our economy and we have genuine aspirations for individuals to advance their economic activity, that recommendation is vital. The committee’s recommendations on the aggregates levy and air passenger duty would give breadth and flexibility to our tax-raising powers and our ability to influence critical sectors of our economy. Importantly, the committee has kept the door open with regard to corporation tax and has wisely recognised the need for action on the matter that involves all the devolved nations.
In an uncertain world, the committee is absolutely correct that the Scottish budget should not take an immediate hit if tax receipts fall below what is forecast. Economic shocks come in many forms and often without notice—the turmoil in the middle east and the current price of oil are just two examples. It is clearly right that there should be a more substantial short-term annual borrowing capacity, and the figure of £1 billion seems perfectly reasonable to me.
The committee’s report should form the basis for intensive dialogue between the next Scottish Administration and the Westminster Government. As I said, that dialogue will go a long way to confirming the shape and substance of the working relationship between London and the devolved Scottish Parliament. We are moving forward the process of devolution and our constitutional arrangements. The report helps us to do that in a thoughtful and constructive manner. Every political party that has an interest in Scotland’s economic enhancement and in allowing Scotland to find solutions for its priorities should now give whole-hearted support to the report. All parties should start to look not only to the future interests of the Parliament, but to the shape of our devolved settlement and to think more about what is in the interests of the people of Scotland and less about what might be in each party’s short-term electoral interests.
16:19
Whatever else people think of the report, it would be incredible if anyone believed that it reflected a committee that was inhibited. The last people who will think that the committee was inhibited are those in the Westminster Government who now have to face the challenges of an intensive dialogue as a result of the committee’s work. I am glad to say that the report is far from a rubber-stamp job. The committee has decided to test the Westminster Government’s sincerity by challenging the provisions in the bill and recommending expansion of them. Further, the committee has done sterling work in exposing the shallowness of the exaggerated claims on fiscal autonomy. Although it might suit some to attempt to make a link between tax evolution and growth, the committee has shown that there is little to justify that as an automatic assumption.
Back in the early days of the Parliament, I remember some SNP members, some of whom are now in high office, becoming rather animated when I described devolution as a process rather than a full stop. The language seems to have changed considerably, which I welcome. Twelve years into the devolution journey, in the light of experience, the Scotland Bill is refining that process and the Parliament is demonstrating that it wants a say in how that refinement takes place.
The committee has demonstrated that through important recommendations, not least of which is that on the power to vary higher rates of income tax. If we believe that we can grow our economy and we have genuine aspirations for individuals to advance their economic activity, that recommendation is vital. The committee’s recommendations on the aggregates levy and air passenger duty would give breadth and flexibility to our tax-raising powers and our ability to influence critical sectors of our economy. Importantly, the committee has kept the door open with regard to corporation tax and has wisely recognised the need for action on the matter that involves all the devolved nations.
In an uncertain world, the committee is absolutely correct that the Scottish budget should not take an immediate hit if tax receipts fall below what is forecast. Economic shocks come in many forms and often without notice—the turmoil in the middle east and the current price of oil are just two examples. It is clearly right that there should be a more substantial short-term annual borrowing capacity, and the figure of £1 billion seems perfectly reasonable to me.
The committee’s report should form the basis for intensive dialogue between the next Scottish Administration and the Westminster Government. As I said, that dialogue will go a long way to confirming the shape and substance of the working relationship between London and the devolved Scottish Parliament. We are moving forward the process of devolution and our constitutional arrangements. The report helps us to do that in a thoughtful and constructive manner. Every political party that has an interest in Scotland’s economic enhancement and in allowing Scotland to find solutions for its priorities should now give whole-hearted support to the report. All parties should start to look not only to the future interests of the Parliament, but to the shape of our devolved settlement and to think more about what is in the interests of the people of Scotland and less about what might be in each party’s short-term electoral interests.
16:19
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...