MPs call for more transparency over Barnett formula calculations for Scotland
The committee also said consideration should be given to increasing Scottish ministers' ability to borrow cash for infrastructure projects.
The Scottish government said the committee's report confirmed its finances are largely dictated by Westminster.But the UK government said Scotland had received a record settlement in the recent spending review.Patricia Ferguson, chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee, said the Barnett formula had been the subject of continued debate since its introduction almost 50 years ago. She added: "Throughout our inquiry we've scrutinised it from every angle and ultimately found that the formula is fit for purpose and support its continued use to determine Scotland's funding levels."The formula is in no way perfect, but the committee heard no convincing evidence that there is any need for the formula to be reformed significantly, or that there is a workable alternative."The Labour MP for Glasgow West said the report set out ways to improve the way it operates in practice by "improving transparency" and making changes to the Scotland's broader financial framework.
Scotland's Finance Secretary Shona Robison welcomed the findings.She said: "This report rightly recognises that Scotland's finances remain largely dictated by the UK government's spending decisions, irrespective of the impact on Scottish public services. "That has meant Scotland has been left with a shortfall of £400m to pay for the chancellor's national insurance increase, and saw Scotland short-changed by more than a billion pounds over the next three years at the recent Spending Review."Robison said the decision to tax higher earners more in Scotland helped support public services and provide free tuition, prescriptions and the Scottish Child Payment.Scottish Secretary Ian Murray said the June spending review provided the Scottish government with an extra £9.1bn.He added that, thanks to the formula, spending per head in Scotland was around 20% higher than the rest of the UK.Murray said: "This report confirms that it appears to be the position of the Scottish government to scrap that formula that delivers higher funding."They should explain why they want less money for public services in Scotland."Their plans for full fiscal autonomy would mean a £12bn cut in public spending for Scotland."
The committee supported the continued use of the "imperfect" formula and recommended a series of measures to the UK government to improve its operation.In a bid to improve transparency it called for greater clarity on how comparability percentages are calculated. This could be addressed by publishing details of its calculations in future funding policy statements. The committee also expressed concern about the impact of UK government spending decisions on the Scottish government's budget "often with little warning".It said ministers in Edinburgh should have more fiscal flexibility and greater capital borrowing powers.Currently, the Scottish government is limited to borrowing £600m for day-to-day spending and £450m for capital projects.In written evidence to the committee, Robison reiterated support for full fiscal autonomy - an arrangement which would see powers over tax and spending devolved.But the report described this as an "unrealistic prospect" and added there was not a compelling case that it would automatically result in higher levels of funding for Scotland.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Starmer's former shadow chancellor urges Reeves to consider wealth tax at next budget
Former Labour minister Anneliese Dodds has urged the government to consider a wealth tax at the next budget in order to plug holes in the public finances. The former shadow chancellor – who quit Sir Keir Starmer's government in February over the PM's decision to cut the foreign aid budget to fund a boost in defence spending – warned that spending cuts will not 'deliver the kind of fiscal room that is necessary'. It comes amid mounting questions over how the government will raise the money to fill the black hole in the public finances left by a series of major U-turns and spending commitments. Ministers have already squeezed significant savings out of their departments in cuts that were unveiled at last month's spending review, meaning there is now a mounting expectation that the chancellor will be forced to raise taxes instead. But Labour's manifesto pledge not to raise taxes on 'working people' leaves the chancellor with a limited number of workable options. Speaking to Sky News' Electoral Dysfunction podcast, Ms Dodds pointed to work undertaken by the Commission on Wealth Tax. 'They looked at the operation of lots of different wealth tax. They looked at all of that evidence and set out how it would be possible to deliver something like that in a UK context', she said. 'I would hope that the Treasury is considering that kind of evidence as well as other changes that have been put forward. 'We've seen the deputy leader of the Labour Party, for example, put forward suggestions. I think it's important for all of those to be considered now." It comes after a memo leaked earlier this year showed Ms Rayner suggesting eight wealth taxes on the super-rich and corporations in a move supporters described as the 'progressive alternative'. Ms Dodds added: 'I don't think you can, particularly via cuts, actually deliver the kind of fiscal room that is necessary. But I know Rachel will be thinking deeply about this.' The Labour MP for Oxford East also urged the government to take a 'longer term approach' to the public finances, after the prime minister was bounced into a £5bn U-turn on welfare cuts by his own MPs. Speaking about the welfare cuts, Ms Dodds said: 'It can sometimes seem like the right thing to do for tactical reasons, in order to deal with a gap that had opened up because of the OBR's assessment, to try and plug that by cutting spending. 'It may make sense tactically, but strategically a longer-term approach is needed and that's the big issue that the government has to face up to.' The government has so far failed to rule out a wealth tax, but the prime minister has previously said 'we can't just tax our way to growth' when pressed on the subject at PMQs last month. Rachael Maskell, the leader of the rebel Labour MPs who forced Sir Keir to abandon his welfare reforms, called for a wealth tax to meet the cost of the U-turn, suggesting that as much as £24bn a year could be raised by increases in capital gains tax and other measures. pensioners following a U-turn on the issue earlier this year will cost the Treasury a further £1.25bn. The Treasury has been contacted for comment.
The Independent
19 minutes ago
- The Independent
Wealth tax should be considered by Treasury, former Labour minister suggests
A former Labour minister has suggested a wealth tax should be considered by the Treasury, as she argued the Government must face up to the fact that a longer-term approach is needed. Anneliese Dodds has argued it is 'important' for the Government to consider evidence set out by the Wealth Tax Commission, which looked at whether such a tax would be desirable and deliverable in the UK. In its final report, released in 2020, the Commission said a one-off wealth tax on millionaire couples paid at 1% a year for five years would raise £260 billion. Others in the Labour Party, including former leader Lord Neil Kinnock and Wales's First Minister Baroness Eluned Morgan, have also called for a wealth tax. Union leaders, including Sharon Graham of Unite, are also pressuring ministers to consider the move. A tax on the wealthy has not been formally ruled out by ministers, but Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds branded the idea as 'daft' in June this year. Ms Dodds resigned as a Foreign Office minister over the Government's decision to cut overseas aid to fund a boost to defence spending in February. Speaking to Sky News' Electoral Dysfunction, she said work undertaken by the Wealth Tax Commission 'has changed the debate'. The MP for Oxford East added: 'They looked at the operation of lots of different wealth tax. They looked at all of that evidence and set out how it would be possible to deliver something like that in a UK context. 'I would hope that the Treasury is considering that kind of evidence as well as other changes that have been put forward. 'We've seen the deputy leader of the Labour Party, for example, put forward suggestions. I think it's important for all of those to be considered now.' On Rachel Reeves' approach to welfare, Ms Dodds said: 'An attempt was made to deal with a quite immediate problem, but I don't think you can, particularly via cuts, actually deliver the kind of fiscal room that is necessary.' 'It may make sense tactically, but strategically a longer-term approach is needed and that's the the big issue that the Government has to face up to,' she added.
Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Voters will agree with Donald Trump, not Ed Miliband about wind farms
Who's right about wind farms? Donald Trump or Labour and the SNP? The question arises because the wheels of Air Force One had barely touched down back in the USA before his opponents started singing the praises of wind farms. After Trump's pretty savage attack in which he described them, variously, as 'ugly' and as bird killers, ministers from both the British and Scottish Governments queued up to disagree with him. Labour and the SNP heaped praise on the decision to allow the development of what may turn out to be one of the world's biggest wind farms – with 307 turbines – at what's known as Berwick Bank, off the coast of East Lothian. Scottish Secretary Ian Murray welcomed the decision taken by the SNP – an extremely rare event – and said it tied in with his determination to prioritise more clean energy jobs in Scotland. And he said that the Berwick Bank project had the potential to make a 'huge contribution' to the UK Government's energy policy. Mind you, I don't for a second think that Mr Murray's priorities played any part in the Nats' decision. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband also praised the SNP decision saying that it meant the British Government was now 'within touching distance' of its offshore wind targets to deliver clean power by 2030. He added that the Berwick Bank decision was helping secure Britain's energy security. However, it's pretty certain that the relevant SNP minister, Kate Forbes, while acknowledging the gratitude of her political enemies, would prefer to hail her decision as a major contribution to Scotland's – and not necessarily Britain's – energy future. With opponents of this huge venture insisting that a wind farm on this scale would result in the death of thousands of sea birds – including everyone's favourite, puffins – Scotland's Deputy First Minister insisted that her final approval was subject to a 'detailed seabird compensation plan', to show how the birds could be saved. How's that for a bit of typical SNP 'havering' and trying to keep everyone sweet – from hungry developers to bird lovers? But Kate Forbes is at least one of the more practical nationalists and said that this project was a major step in Scotland's progress towards achieving net zero and tackling the climate crisis, as well as supporting national energy security and growing our green economy. During his recent Scottish visit Trump returned to his frequently expressed view that wind turbines were 'ugly, costly and harmful to wildlife', while large scale wind farms were 'a con job'. Both Labour and the SNP are super-keen on renewables, but while voters might still be persuaded about a rosy future for wind power, ministers in both parties would be mad to sneer at Trump's words about North Sea oil and gas being a 'treasure chest' for the UK. I'm certain that a great many voters agree with him, and will vote accordingly in next year's Scottish Parliament election.
