Honesty is the best policy when debating taxation
IT’S quite the in-tray for new SNP leader John Swinney: unite the party, regain support from other MSPs, and make the case for independence to those who are not yet convinced. All while, in his words, working towards building a stronger, fairer Scotland.
For some, including those who might have challenged him for the role of SNP leader, “working towards” those goals might not cut it. They will want action. With a new leader at the helm, will the party (and parliament) be pulling together, or trying to steer in different directions?
It’s no secret that Kate Forbes’s economic vision for Scotland is different to that of her one-time leadership rival Humza Yousaf, although suggestions of a huge gulf between them perhaps do not match reality.
We are told she will be returning to a senior government role under Swinney, so the Scottish Greens will have to like that or lump it. Last year they said her losing to Yousaf was a “considerable source of relief”, so will her return to the
Cabinet put them back on edge? And does it matter at all to them that the Scottish public seemed to like a lot of what she had to say?
It’s worth separating what makes Forbes socially conservative from what is considered economically conservative. We should remember that on the economy she is not a fringe figure, some isolated “rebel”, but a former Scottish Government finance secretary who was widely praised for her performance in that role. She has allies within the parliamentary group who back her approach to engaging positively with the business community.
It was only when she attempted to become first minister that her religious beliefs, including her stances on gay marriage and abortion, received any real scrutiny.
It’s unlikely she could have ducked further questions on the latter topic had she stood again for leader this month, as very significant changes to abortion law in England and Wales are set to be debated at Westminster next week. Those who disagreed with Forbes but were unconcerned by her stances on what seemed like settled issues may soon have cause to think again.
For now, however, Forbes is keeping her powder dry and will be hoping to influence the SNP’s economic policy direction. Her solution to Scotland’s current and future economic problems is to increase the tax base, rather than simply increase taxes. She has been outspoken about the need for more immigration into Scotland – especially into the Highlands, which is facing a particularly alarming demographic timebomb – and argued alongside her SNP colleagues for immigration powers to be devolved.
So she’s not exactly Suella Braverman, but might she still deserve the “tartan Tory” label? That perhaps depends on whether it’s considered Nationalist heresy to point out that not everyone we might wish to attract to Scotland is unfazed by the idea of paying more income tax when they get here than they would in England.
If it is “Tory” to worry about how NHS Scotland will fill consultant roles, then Forbes may be guilty as charged. Some of her opponents may be comfortable asserting that a utopian independent Scotland will have no need for the kind of mercenary types who care to scrutinise their pay slips, but in the real world tax increases must be considered with care.
It’s dishonest to argue that the Scottish Government using the minimal tax levers available to it – those relating to income tax – won’t dissuade anyone from moving to (or staying in) Scotland just because we have baby boxes, free prescriptions and fee-free university tuition.
It’s also not correct to characterise the taxation of higher earners as “making the wealthiest pay more”, since income and wealth are not the same thing.
Someone who is all too aware of that is Swinney’s other would-be challenger, Graeme McCormick, a long-standing campaigner for the introduction of a land tax (or annual ground rent) to replace all other taxation in an independent Scotland.
Many others are still pushing the
SNP to deliver on their long-standing promise to totally overhaul the unfair Council Tax system, rather than just tinkering around the edges – or, indeed, freezing Council Tax without consulting councils first.
The Council Tax system will never be fair as long as it is underpinned by property values from 1991, a state of affairs that leads to huge inconsistencies.
In February a coalition of campaign groups demanded fundamental reform, with the head of Oxfam Scotland declaring a property revaluation “a nonnegotiable stepping-stone towards any meaningful reform of the Council Tax, which party leaders must unite to deliver by the end of this parliament.”
If party leaders decline to deliver this, they should explain why they won’t. Talk about a fairer Scotland needs to be backed up by policy action and we need to have frank discussions about who will benefit, who will lose out, and what intended and unintended consequences there might be.
The man known as “Honest John” should welcome open discussion of all policy ideas, regardless of whether they come from stalwart SNP members or his new Cabinet colleagues.