Meeting of the Parliament 16 September 2015
The reference to welfare spending is part of a clearly expressed argument about welfare spending. As far as total spending is concerned, the Smith commission’s proposals do not give us more than 50 per cent control over total spending in terms of the revenue that is raised here. Those points are well charted by what the Scottish Government has said in the past.
I turn to the issue that Alex Johnstone raised about implementation of the Smith commission’s recommendations. If we reflect on the efforts of the UK Government since their publication, it is clear that the current approach will not implement the commission’s recommendations in full—either in spirit or in substance. Last week, the architect of the vow, Gordon Brown, described the UK Government as
“falling short on the delivery of the recommendations of the Smith Commission on Scottish Devolution”.
In May, the unanimous report of the cross-party Devolution (Further Powers) Committee, which was supported in this chamber, provided the authoritative analysis of the UK Government’s draft clauses. Its overall conclusion was that
“In some critical areas, the then UK Government’s draft legislative clauses fall short”
of the Smith recommendations. In considering the Scotland Bill that was introduced in May, the committee found that only one clause had been changed to reflect the committee’s findings, 12 were completely unchanged and a further eight had been changed but in a way that left it unclear whether the committee’s findings had been reflected. The clauses in question included clauses on key areas of social security, employment programmes, the Crown Estate, borrowing and the Sewel convention. That position is a considerable disappointment to the Scottish Government.
I say in response to Mr Johnstone—it is one of the material points in today’s debate—that it is clear that despite having the necessary information and the submissions from the Devolution (Further Powers) Committee and the Scottish Government, the UK Government is
“falling short on the delivery of the recommendations of the Smith Commission on Scottish Devolution”.
That is what former Prime Minister Gordon Brown is now telling parliamentary committees. I think that we would all describe him as one of the key players in terms of the outcome of the referendum; I readily accept that he was a fundamental player in the conclusion of the referendum campaign and in the success of the no campaign, by virtue of the promise that was made. It is a point that I think Parliament must take very seriously.