Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 07 December 2011
07 Dec 2011 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Autumn Budget Statement and the Scottish Economy
My understanding, from what the cabinet secretary said earlier, is that there will be consequentials later in the spending review cycle involving increased spending for infrastructure. However, we need a greater emphasis on infrastructure spending right now. Unfortunately, as I have just illustrated with yesterday’s reactions to the plan, not only from The Scotsman but more widely, there are still too many questions about delays, about a lack of timescale for specific projects and about cuts in areas such as affordable housing.
Another central concern is the proposed 20 per cent cut in college budgets, which will damage our economy and further damage opportunities for our young people at a time when youth unemployment in Scotland already stands at 100,000. If the only concession that we are to get from the Scottish Government is £15 million in change funds when college budgets are to be reduced by £74 million, that will be entirely inadequate. It will mean that colleges will have to proceed with cuts, which will reduce educational opportunities for many people in Scotland.
We therefore ask the Scottish Government not to make the mistakes that the UK Government has made. We ask it to implement an infrastructure plan that will actually deliver new projects, and to think again about cuts that would damage our economy. We ask it to think again on these vital issues because the autumn statement was a demonstration of the cost of getting it wrong, and Scotland cannot afford for ministers to get this wrong. The people of Scotland do not want an economic strategy that is driven by an ideological obsession with cuts in public investment or with constitutional upheaval. They want an economic strategy that is driven by the need to return to growth and to get people back into work. We believe that, even in these tough times, with the right decisions, we can put Scotland on the right road to a more prosperous future. That should be the priority for ministers, because it is a priority for the people of Scotland.
I move amendment S4M-01501.3, to leave out from first “supports” to end and insert:
“calls on the UK Government to confer borrowing powers on the Scottish Government from April 2012 to allow for an expanded capital infrastructure programme; notes the publication of the Scottish Government’s Infrastructure Investment Plan 2011; urges the Scottish Government to provide milestones for each infrastructure project to ensure that the list of delayed infrastructure projects does not grow longer; notes that Scotland’s economic growth over the last 12 months has been disappointing despite economic growth being the stated purpose of the Scottish Government; calls on the Scottish Government to ensure that the measures in the Scottish budget support economic recovery to improve Scotland’s growth rate; to this end, urges the Scottish Government to reconsider the significant cuts that it has made to the affordable housing and further education budgets; notes that disposable household income has fallen by 2.3% this year, a post-war record, and is forecast to fall again next year, which coincides with public sector workers in Scotland and the rest of the UK having to pay more in pension contributions; notes that the Chancellor has outlined a further two years of spending cuts and that the proposed six years of cuts in spending are unprecedented, and regrets that the actions of the UK Government will lead to an increase in child poverty.”
15:42
Another central concern is the proposed 20 per cent cut in college budgets, which will damage our economy and further damage opportunities for our young people at a time when youth unemployment in Scotland already stands at 100,000. If the only concession that we are to get from the Scottish Government is £15 million in change funds when college budgets are to be reduced by £74 million, that will be entirely inadequate. It will mean that colleges will have to proceed with cuts, which will reduce educational opportunities for many people in Scotland.
We therefore ask the Scottish Government not to make the mistakes that the UK Government has made. We ask it to implement an infrastructure plan that will actually deliver new projects, and to think again about cuts that would damage our economy. We ask it to think again on these vital issues because the autumn statement was a demonstration of the cost of getting it wrong, and Scotland cannot afford for ministers to get this wrong. The people of Scotland do not want an economic strategy that is driven by an ideological obsession with cuts in public investment or with constitutional upheaval. They want an economic strategy that is driven by the need to return to growth and to get people back into work. We believe that, even in these tough times, with the right decisions, we can put Scotland on the right road to a more prosperous future. That should be the priority for ministers, because it is a priority for the people of Scotland.
I move amendment S4M-01501.3, to leave out from first “supports” to end and insert:
“calls on the UK Government to confer borrowing powers on the Scottish Government from April 2012 to allow for an expanded capital infrastructure programme; notes the publication of the Scottish Government’s Infrastructure Investment Plan 2011; urges the Scottish Government to provide milestones for each infrastructure project to ensure that the list of delayed infrastructure projects does not grow longer; notes that Scotland’s economic growth over the last 12 months has been disappointing despite economic growth being the stated purpose of the Scottish Government; calls on the Scottish Government to ensure that the measures in the Scottish budget support economic recovery to improve Scotland’s growth rate; to this end, urges the Scottish Government to reconsider the significant cuts that it has made to the affordable housing and further education budgets; notes that disposable household income has fallen by 2.3% this year, a post-war record, and is forecast to fall again next year, which coincides with public sector workers in Scotland and the rest of the UK having to pay more in pension contributions; notes that the Chancellor has outlined a further two years of spending cuts and that the proposed six years of cuts in spending are unprecedented, and regrets that the actions of the UK Government will lead to an increase in child poverty.”
15:42
References in this contribution
Motions, questions or amendments mentioned by their reference code.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott)
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-01501, in the name of John Swinney, on the United Kingdom Government’s autumn budget statement and the Sc...
The Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney)
SNP
I am grateful for the opportunity to open the debate on the autumn budget statement and the wider Scottish economy. It is now more than three years since the...
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Con
In comparing the United Kingdom with France and Germany, does the cabinet secretary accept that the coalition Government inherited the highest level of debt ...
John Swinney
SNP
I know that Mary Scanlon assiduously follows my speeches in the Parliament. She will not have noticed me in any way shirking from apportioning responsibility...
Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
The cabinet secretary has rightly referred to the revision downwards of growth forecasts. What impact will that have on the Scottish Government’s spending re...
John Swinney
SNP
Mr Baker asks a fair question. I point him to the evidence that I shared with the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee some weeks ago. In the year of greate...
Gavin Brown (Lothian) (Con)
Con
I apologise for missing the start of the cabinet secretary’s speech.In the switch from revenue to capital quite a large sum—about £150 million—will go into t...
John Swinney
SNP
No. The budget proposals rely on a shift from the revenue columns to the capital columns—that is a straightforward transaction in the budget document.
Gavin Brown
Con
The Forth crossing is not in the revenue budget.
John Swinney
SNP
I point out to Mr Brown that the UK Government has of course reduced our capital budget by 36 per cent, which has been moderated to 32 per cent. In the overa...
Willie Rennie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD)
LD
The infrastructure plan is a 20-year plan. The increased funding is provided within the first three years. What has been accelerated as a result of the incre...
John Swinney
SNP
Mr Rennie expects me to take a look at those questions, and we will come back to the Parliament, as we will on the other consequentials, to set out how our p...
Neil Findlay (Lothian) (Lab)
Lab
Will the minister give way?
John Swinney
SNP
I would give way to Mr Findlay if—
The Deputy Presiding Officer
Con
Cabinet secretary, you are in your last minute.
John Swinney
SNP
I apologise to Mr Findlay. I will happily deal with his points during the debate.The autumn statement provided some additional capital consequentials for the...
Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
This is a welcome opportunity to debate the autumn statement and its implications for Scotland. It comes at a critical point for our economy and for the worl...
Jackson Carlaw (West Scotland) (Con)
Con
Is it not a consequence of the coalition Government’s strategy that we have the lowest interest rates in the world? Would not a consequence of the Labour Par...
Richard Baker
Lab
I presume that Mr Carlaw would not have acted to bail out the banks. The UK Government has left us the lowest rates of growth in the world, and it has choked...
Gavin Brown
Con
Will the member acknowledge what the Institute for Fiscal Studies has stated? It said that if Labour’s plans had been implemented, they would“now of course h...
Richard Baker
Lab
No, because the figures that I have show that the UK Government plans £37 billion more borrowing in future years than the amount in Labour’s plans that were ...
Gavin Brown
Con
Will the member give way?
Richard Baker
Lab
I have already given way to Mr Brown. I will try to take an intervention from him later.We understand that there will be limited consequentials in the new pl...
John Swinney
SNP
Will Mr Baker take this opportunity to confirm his understanding of the spending review, which involves a rising trend of capital expenditure in Scotland des...
Richard Baker
Lab
My understanding, from what the cabinet secretary said earlier, is that there will be consequentials later in the spending review cycle involving increased s...
Gavin Brown (Lothian) (Con)
Con
It is worth reflecting on some of the analysis and feedback from economists since last week’s autumn statement. The Economist put it simply, stating that“the...
Stuart McMillan (West Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Does Gavin Brown agree that it is strange that it takes the OBR 18 months to realise that the strategic deficit is worse than planned? What has it been doing...
Gavin Brown
Con
I find it surprising that the member wishes to criticise the OBR, which has received praise for its work from across the political and economic spectrum and ...
Richard Baker
Lab
What is the cost to our economy from the fact that our growth rates are higher than only those of Greece and Portugal, out of the whole euro zone?
Gavin Brown
Con
The growth rates are very disappointing, but if one looks at the OBR report in full—not just the press release that accompanied it—one sees that, although th...