Meeting of the Parliament 01 April 2015
I am not sure whether Mr Mason simply does not understand the arithmetic or whether that is actually an admission from Mr Mason, who is a straightforward character when it comes to debating, that we would actually be worse off in Scotland were we to go for full fiscal autonomy and therefore he is not going to argue for it. That is somewhat against what ministers on his front bench will argue today and have argued over the past weeks and months.
The third reason why we want this debate is that the Scottish Government has failed to publish any figures on the basic impact on our finances of full fiscal autonomy. It has been able to ignore some of the more challenging questions in the wider debates on the economy that we have had in the Parliament. Today, we want to debate the specific issue so that we can hear straight from the Deputy First Minister what those figures are. We implore him to publish the figures so that the people of Scotland can see in a transparent fashion what the impact would be.
Some people in this country may well want full fiscal autonomy even if it means that we are markedly worse off, and that is their right. However, many people will be voting on the judgment of whether we will be better or worse off. That is why the Scottish Government, as the Government in this country, has a duty to publish those figures so that people can make their own decisions.
I will look at what the experts have been saying. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, which has independent and highly regarded experts, has been pretty up front on the issue. The IFS has looked at the reduced oil revenues, due to a lower price, higher costs and tax breaks; it has also looked at what the fiscal position would be for Scotland and for the United Kingdom. We know through the “Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland” figures that the UK had a fiscal deficit of 5.6 per cent in 2013-14 and that Scotland had a fiscal deficit of 8.1 per cent, which is a marked difference. However, the IFS projections suggest that the deficit for the UK would drop in 2014-15 to 5 per cent, and then down to 4 per cent in 2015-16. For Scotland, under full fiscal autonomy, the deficit would increase to 8.6 per cent for 2014-15 and stay at 8.6 per cent for the following year.
By the end of the 2015-16 financial year, we could have a position in which the UK had a falling deficit of 4 per cent but Scotland had a rising deficit of 8.6 per cent, or more than double the UK deficit. That would translate, as the IFS states, to a £7.6 billion gap that would have to be plugged by a measure such as decreasing spending. However, that would have to be over and above the trajectory of the UK Government for that as set out in the recent budget, so it would mean having every spending reduction set out by the UK and £7.6 billion on top of that. However, if the Scottish Government did not want to make £7.6 billion-worth of cuts, it would have to increase tax to a degree or increase borrowing to degree, but the most likely outcome would probably be a combination of all three.
Does the Scottish Government accept that figure of £7.6 billion? Every time the Scottish Government has been asked that question, as it was again today by Neil Bibby at portfolio question time, it has ignored it. Does the Scottish Government accept the figure of £7.6 billion or does it have an alternative figure? If it does, will it publish it? Will the Scottish Government tell this chamber and the people of Scotland what it believes the deficit figure to be?