The Scotsman

Holyrood will get more powers. The key question is, how will they be used?

- Brian Wilson

There always has to be a grievance and someone always has to be doing us down. Twenty years ago this week, Alex Salmond was desperatel­y insisting that Tony Blair could not be trusted to deliver a referendum on creating a Scottish Parliament.

How wrong could he be? The Bill to hold the referendum was the first piece of legislatio­n passed by the incoming government. In the intervenin­g 20 years, government­s of all UK parties – Labour, Tories and Liberal Democrats – have extended the powers and budgets set by the initial Scotland Act.

Much has changed but the background dirge remains the same. Having delivered all this, “Westminste­r” is – rather oddly, normal people might think – now intent upon a “power grab” under the cover of Brexit. Dark forces are at work in a Whitehall bunker plotting to reverse the devolution process.

Holyrood is called upon by the woman who has spent her adult life fostering division within a small island to build “consensus” against this dire prospect. Like Salmond’s prognostic­ations 20 years ago, it is complete rubbish, though we can be sure it will be played out as breathless drama over many episodes.

Heaven knows, there is enough to be concerned about over the way Brexit negotiatio­ns are evolving and implicatio­ns which might flow from them without creating our own straw man. As powers are repatriate­d from Brussels, it is inevitable that more will end up with the devolved government­s rather than fewer.

That is the true context for negotiatio­n. Whether powers arrive at Holyrood via Westminste­r or are transferre­d direct, which is clearly problemati­c given that the UK is the member state, is a question of process rather than substance. Constant allegation­s of deceit and betrayal create a climate which is scarcely conducive to achieving optimum outcomes. Apart from that, they’re plain boring.

As ever, the real question is what will be done with the powers? It is again instructiv­e to look back 20 years to the forgotten question on the referendum ballot paper. Should the Scottish Parliament have tax-varying powers? Older readers will recall the cacophony of grievance, betrayal, etc etc when Tony Blair decided this question should be included.

It was an effort to pre-empt the permanent complaint of Holyrood not having enough money. The optimistic theory was that giving it power to raise more would transfer responsibi­lity for that dilemma. Fat chance. The powers have never been used and the alternativ­e demand has never been surrendere­d: “Send more money”.

Holyrood’s power to vary income tax is back on the agenda with a commitment in the SNP’S Programme for Government to a discussion paper later this year. The working assumption seems to be that everyone but the Tories would support tax increases, certainly at the higher end of the scale and possibly further down.

I advise caution. The assumption that tax rises, preferably for other people, reflect a Scottish consensus should be taken with a large pinch of salt.

Holyrood has a £37 billion budget which will grow by a few more billion with the transfer of social security powers. The potential for spending money better, rather than more of it, should be explored before anyone endorses Scotlandon­ly tax increases.

A Scottish Parliament research paper found this week that if Labour’s tax plans had been incorporat­ed into the Scottish budget, Holyrood would have had a billion extra pounds to spend over the past two years. I’m not sure, however, that is a persuasive argument. That figure is dwarfed by the £13-15bn per year which allows Scottish public expenditur­e to run at £1,400 a head more than the UK as a whole. Would the extra half billion make a critical difference?

Much smoke and mirrors around the Holyrood budget needs to be cleared away before the cry of “more taxes” becomes credible. Why have the full Barnett consequent­ials from NHS spending not been committed to the NHS in Scotland? Why has the money for local authoritie­s (including education) been cut so disproport­ionately to Holyrood’s own budget? Without answers, it is impossible to know what gaps an extra half billion would actually be plugging. Scottish voters might be more impressed by a commitment to an extremely comprehens­ive spending review.

Again looking back 20 years, the best decision taken before Labour came to power was, initially, to work within the spending limits we inherited. It led to a far more creative approach to government than exists when “more money for everything” becomes the standard refrain.

In his own musings on the events of 20 years ago, Tony Blair recalled how he tried to influence the creation of a British Football League as a way of bringing the whole country together. On grounds that are entirely non-political, most Scottish football supporters would have been grateful if he had succeeded, though that was never likely for reasons beyond even a Prime Minister’s control.

It was instructiv­e, however, to note Sturgeon’s response to Blair’s reminisce. The idea of a British League was proof, she pronounced, of “how little (pause for condescend­ing halflaugh) he understood the Scottish psyche”.

So the Scottish psyche doesn’t want our clubs to fulfill their potential by competing at the highest level? The Scottish psyche would reject the massive economic benefits that club football brings, for example, to the great city of Manchester? The Scottish psyche prefers to live with the historic baggage which attaches itself to Scottish football, rather than marginaliz­e it by being part of something bigger?

I have no pretention­s to unique insights into the Scottish psyche but then neither should Sturgeon, who recently cost 21 of her MPS their jobs by misreading it so badly. However, I suspect her reaction owed less to defending “the Scottish psyche” than to a prejudice against anything which carries the word “British” in its title or seeks to unite rather than divide.

The question of football leagues was hypothetic­al but, for example, breaking up the British Transport Police for “purely political reasons” so that it could become part of the wonderfull­y successful Police Scotland is very real.

When politician­s start confusing their own hang-ups with the psyche of the nation, it’s time for them to be reminded of political mortality.

 ??  ?? 0 Tony Blair in Parliament Square, Edinburgh, the morning after the devolution referendum delivered a decisive Yes Yes
0 Tony Blair in Parliament Square, Edinburgh, the morning after the devolution referendum delivered a decisive Yes Yes
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom