Kate Forbes on Scottish business relationship and income tax
The Scottish Government's relationship with the business community was sharply in focus at that point and, while the spotlight on this is probably slightly less intense, it is still bright.
Asked if she believed the overall relationship between the Scottish Government and business had improved over the last year, Ms Forbes replied: 'I think so. I mean, the first meetings I had when I became Economy Secretary was with all the business organisations one by one, to understand what their top asks were.'
Ms Forbes declared the Scottish Government had since then worked through the first programme for government, then the Budget last December, and now the most recent programme for government 'to try and deliver against those asks'.
She said: 'I think the business community understand that we can't do everything overnight, but we can either stop doing things that would otherwise have made the cost of business higher, or do things that lower the cost of business. The most recent programme for government led with economic growth and prosperity. So our sentiment, my sentiment is pro-economy, pro-prosperity, pro-business.'
Of course, the greater income tax burden for higher earners in Scotland relative to the rest of the UK has been very much in focus over recent years.
Ms Forbes said in the exclusive interview last June that this would be kept 'under review', taking into account 'how easy it is for taxpayers to shift'.
These comments appeared at the time to be a signal of the stance of the then new leadership team on this crucial issue, and that turned out to be the case.
Ms Forbes noted last week: 'The First Minister was very clear when he became leader that he didn't believe that you could continually raise income tax, and that we should provide certainty. And that's what last year's Budget delivered - the Budget announcement last year for this financial year. And the programme for government then built on that in May - being very clear that there wouldn't be further divergence from the rest of the UK on income tax for the remainder of this parliament.
'And the reasons for that is because certainty matters in a world that seems to be constantly in flux with lots of global headwinds and challenges of recruitment for businesses. The more certainty that we can provide, the better. And the only changes to income tax was essentially a small reduction for the basic and intermediate rate-payers because of the above-inflationary increase to the thresholds.'
Income tax would appear to be one of the key issues when it comes to what some in the business community think of the Scottish Government.
Asked about the reaction of business to the income tax stance, given this was an issue that had been highlighted previously, Ms Forbes replied: 'I think we have seen a lot of positive comments from the business community.'
Taking the previous comments from people in business about Scottish income tax at face value, you would certainly have thought they would have been happy that there has been no further divergence when it comes to the burden on higher earners north of the Border.
Read more
Offering further thoughts on her perception of the reaction of business people to the stance on income tax since she took up her current roles and John Swinney became First Minister in May last year, Ms Forbes said: 'They have indicated that they feel the Scottish Government is listening, that they are taking any concern seriously and that we're on their side in navigating these choppy waters. Now, we obviously only…have limited powers over taxation.'
The Deputy First Minister has been heavily critical of the UK Government's decision to raise employers' national insurance contributions. This move, announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves in her Budget last October, is aimed at raising about £25 billion a year.
Ms Forbes last week contrasted this national insurance move with the stance on income tax in the wake of the change at the top of the Scottish Government last year.
She said of people in Scotland's business community: 'What's really hit them hard this year was the increase to employers' national insurance contributions, which is essentially a jobs tax, and it was, for many of them, a total surprise because it hadn't been flagged in Labour's manifesto.
'So I think in that context, the more that the Scottish Government can do to provide stability and certainty, the better, and the strong signals from the business community is they feel they are getting that now from the Scottish Government.'
It will be interesting to watch how the relationship between the Scottish Government and business develops.
Ms Forbes also highlighted the importance of restoring confidence in the Ferguson Marine shipyard at Port Glasgow, which has been owned by the Scottish Government since 2019.
She said: 'I have been crystal clear that Ferguson Marine's future relies on them being able to competitively bid in the open market for new work.'
And, in one of many attention-grabbing comments, Ms Forbes added: 'I would like to think that all parties in the Scottish Parliament want to see Ferguson Marine succeed and survive, which is why we need to build confidence, not knock it.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
15 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Government ‘putting its money where its mouth is' with £200m for Acorn scheme
Ministers confirmed they are meeting in full the request for development funding for the Acorn project in Aberdeenshire – the first time a government has provided funding of this scale for such a project to proceed. The scheme, which proposes storing emissions from across Scotland under the North Sea, had previously been overlooked for support despite repeated calls from the Scottish Government and others for it to be backed. With the UK Government also pledging to support the Viking carbon capture and storage (CCS) project in the Humber, Mr Miliband insisted the two schemes will 'support industrial renewal' with 'thousands of highly skilled jobs'. According to the sector, Acorn could support about 15,000 jobs at its peak, with up to 20,000 jobs at the Viking project. As it develops, it is planned the Acorn site will link up with the former oil refinery at Grangemouth via more than 200 miles of pipelines. An existing 175 miles of gas pipes will be repurposed for this, with 35 miles of new pipeline also being built, allowing CO2 from the Grangemouth site to be transported to Acorn's storage facilities under the North Sea. The move is seen by many as being key in securing a future for the facility, where some 400 workers were recently made redundant. Ed Miliband visited the Acorn project site near Peterhead, Aberdeenshire, on Thursday (Paul Campbell/PA) Speaking as he visited the site near Peterhead, Aberdeenshire, Mr Miliband said: 'This Government is putting its money where its mouth is and backing the trailblazing Acorn and Viking CCS projects. 'This will support industrial renewal in Scotland and the Humber with thousands of highly-skilled jobs at good wages to build Britain's clean energy future. 'Carbon capture will make working people in Britain's hard-working communities better off, breathing new life into their towns and cities and reindustrialising the country through our Plan for Change.' Mr Miliband visited the site the day after Rachel Reeves promised funding for Acorn in her spending review – although the Chancellor did not put a figure on how much support would be given in her statement to MPs. (PA Graphics) Tim Stedman, chief executive of Storegga, the lead developer of Acorn, said: 'We warmly welcome the UK Government's support for the Acorn project and the commitment to development funding that will enable the critical work needed to reach final investment decision.' He added the 'milestone' is 'key not only for Acorn but for establishing Scotland's essential CCS infrastructure needed to grow and scale the UK's wider carbon capture and storage industry'. Mr Stedman continued: 'We look forward to working with Government in the months ahead to understand the details of today's commitment, and to ensure the policy, regulatory and funding frameworks are in place to build and grow a world-leading UK CCS sector.' Graeme Davies, executive vice-president at Harbour Energy, which is leading the Viking project, said the commitment in the spending review 'sends a strong signal' that the project is 'an infrastructure-led economic growth priority' for the Parliament. He added: 'We will work with Government on the critical steps needed to progress Viking CCS towards a final investment decision.'
The Herald Scotland
22 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Hypocrisy and double standards taint the West's view of Israel
The West Bank has been occupied by Israel since the Six-Day War of 1967. The UN and the International Court of Justice have said time and again that the occupation is illegal, but that hasn't stopped Israel from allowing 700,000 of its citizens to settle there, displacing Palestinians by often violent means in the process. The Israeli military have actively assisted in the eviction of ordinary Palestinian families from their homes and land. Yet only now does the West take baby steps to express its displeasure; it's far too little and far too late. Do our leaders not recognise their hypocrisy and double standards? There's no doubt that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a brutal and illegal act, rightly condemned by the West. But Russia hasn't reduced Ukraine to rubble and what it's doing is a recognisable war of imperial conquest. What Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel is doing in the West Bank is ethnic cleansing; in Gaza, there's no war, but there is genocide. The evil of apartheid in South Africa was overturned by a determined campaign of boycott, divestment and sanction. Why on earth are we not doing the same to Israel? Apartheid was a cruel, racist policy, but it didn't involve dropping one-tonne bombs on terrified families in tents, it didn't involve the slaughter of 17,000 children in a little over a year and a half. Yet South African athletes were barred from international competition, while Israel is invited to sing a cheery song at the Eurovision Song Contest; why? The West appears to have lost its moral compass, or maybe we've just become inured to scenes of atrocity on our screens. We see and hear dreadful reports from so many parts of the world and it can be tempting to just shrug and look away. That's a temptation that must be resisted. We should be looking out for our neighbours, doing what we can to help the weak and innocent when they are assailed by violent oppressors. And, in the modern connected world, everybody is a neighbour. Doug Maughan, Dunblane. Why can't London replace Faslane? WHAT a surprise! Rachel Reeves has included a couple of important 'gifts' to Scotland from the large proportion of our Scottish taxes that Westminster keeps, under the pretext of using them to pay for pan-UK projects like Crossrail and HS2. We are, after all, to get the new computer for Edinburgh University that was promised before the general election last year, but cancelled when Labour won a big enough majority not to need Scottish support. We will also get funds for the Acorn carbon capture project in Aberdeenshire, which was ready to establish a world-first pilot more than a decade ago, but was refused funding by Westminster, in spite of support from the oil companies agreeing to the use of their pipelines and depleted wells, and at a time when its success might have saved Longannet. This project site was also bypassed when funding was allocated instead to two sites in England and was left on the back-burner. I wonder, however, if even now, it will actually go ahead. I may be becoming a conspiracy theorist, but I suspect these two funding offers are the bribe to sweeten the pill of Scotland providing the facilities for the Westminster intention to increase the nuclear components of their defence plans and to base them at Faslane, as far from London as possible. I believe that is precisely the purpose of the funding to 'upgrade' to that site and will be the first recipient project to be undertaken. Thereafter, it is not beyond possibility that 'changing fiscal circumstances' might still see the other two cancelled, again. I firmly believe that the majority of Scots already consider that having nuclear capacity so close to our largest city makes us a first-strike target and want them removed. If it is safe enough on that site, then somewhere on the Thames in the periphery of London should be equally safe. Of course, when the upgrade is completed, the redundant submarines et cetera will then quickly be added to the rotting hulks at Rosyth and radioactive material buried somewhere in the north of Scotland. Are we happy to host yet more, more powerful, nukes, attack submarines and such dangerous material anywhere in Scotland? If not, independence is the only way to avoid it, and soon! L. McGregor, Falkirk. Time is up for the nationalists IN the spending allocation Scotland has been given a record £52 billion for its budget and the predicted reaction from the SNP is that it's not enough. The harsh reality is that the SNP have over the last 18 years totally mismanaged funds and wasted millions of pounds through total incompetence and poor commercial judgement such as the ferry fiasco, Prestwick Airport, and pursuing lost causes in the courts. The Hamilton by-election allowed the Scottish voter a say in what they thought about the SNP and gave them a real bloody nose as change is urgently needed in Scotland and the time is now up for the SNP. Dennis Forbes Grattan, Bucksburn, Aberdeen Swinney should lead SNP next May IT is unbelievable that senior SNP figures should be contemplating a change in leader of the party with less than a year to go until the next Scottish Parliamentary Election. Other than appointing Nigel Farage, a change of leader will do nothing for the party's chances next May. The sensible course of action is to fight the next election with John Swinney as leader and then consider changing leader in a controlled and dignified manner. Knee-jerk reactions do no credit to the SNP and if that is the way in which they intend to behave it does not augur well for an independent Scotland. Sandy Gemmill, Edinburgh. WHEN you think of all the things Labour's Joani Reid could have raised with Sir Keir Starmer at Prime Minister's Questions It seems strange that Ms Reid should squander her opportunity by asking whether Sir Keir thought John Swinney 'should stay put' as SNP leader following the Hamilton Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. Ms Reid made no mention of the raft of SNP successes in defeating Labour at recent council by-elections, including a double win in March. So certainly, Mr Swinney should stay put. Ruth Marr, Stirling. Unhealthy competition HEALTH Minister Neil Gray said that 'A&E in Scotland faces similar pressures to those elsewhere in the UK.' May I remind Mr. Gray that running our health service is not a race against England, Wales or Northern Ireland. It's not a competition to see who has the best medical services. You were elected to be part of the Scottish cabinet doing a very important job for Scotland. Unfortunately you're not very good at it. Ian Balloch, Grangemouth. Managing NHS resources YOUR correspondent, David Gilchrist, asks whether the resources of the NHS could be more economically organised (letters, June 11). An important issue, to be sure. Premises and equipment are essential, certainly, but the most important and expensive resource the NHS employs is its workforce. Mr Gilchrist offers three negative portrayals of NHS staff. Firstly, you can see 'a large number of staff milling about, sitting at computers.' Apart from the obvious fact that using a computer is an absolutely essential part of the delivery of patient care, it's a good trick to be able to 'mill about' while sitting at one. Secondly, the staff is described as 'enormous.' Well, yes, look at how much work needs to be done. Thirdly, 'unionised' is used pejoratively. This is insulting. Unions exist to ensure that working people are fairly rewarded for the work that they do. Does anybody think that they shouldn't be? AJ Clarence, Prestwick. English people heading north IN Jane Lax's partly justifiable critique of Scotland under the SNP ('Why on earth would anyone want to come to Scotland?', letters, June 12) she ignores the fact that, as a recent newspaper article elsewhere has highlighted, immigration from England is booming. It also said that those coming to the UK will tend to seek their compatriots already here ('birds of a feather fly together'), most of whom are in England's conurbations. George Morton, Rosyth.
Daily Mirror
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
'Rachel Reeves promises so much - but we're worried how it will be paid for'
Rachel Reeves' Spending Review promised big boosts for the NHS, defence, and housing - but many of you are worried about how it will all be funded If you're wondering where all the money's going to come from to pay for the Chancellor's Spending Review then you're not alone. Rachel Reeves finally delivered her long-anticipated plan to renew Britain – and while there were some big promises, it left many of you asking how it's going to be funded. Standing at the despatch box in the House of Commons, the Chancellor pitched her plan as a blueprint for 'Britain's renewal' and took a swipe at years of 'destructive' Tory austerity. She announced that departmental budgets will rise by 2.3% each year in real terms, with hefty sums heading to the NHS, defence, and housing. In parliament, Ms Reeves batted away claims she would raise taxes and said her spending plans were paid for by decisions made at the Autumn Budget. She repeated her pledge not to raise taxes on working people. But a think tank says tax rises are likely in the autumn. The Resolution Foundation reported the big rise in public spending has been largely paid for by £39.7 billion in tax increases (set for 2028-29) announced in last Autumn's Budget, along with £3.6 billion in benefit cuts (also in 2028-29) revealed in the Spring Statement – which works out to about £1,550 for every family in Britain. "But the combination of a weaker economic outlook, an unfunded spending commitment on winter fuel payments, and just £9.9 billion of headroom against the chancellor's fiscal rules, mean further tax rises are likely to be needed this autumn," it says. We asked Did Rachel Reeves get her Spending Review right? Just 908 of you felt she did, while a whopping 1,982 said she didn't. Many of you responded to our original story, here's just a slice of what some of you had to say: Martinsopinion posted: "I don't know about you, but I don't want to pay more council tax for less services. I wonder what other ways they will find to tax us? Maybe spending money on poorly connected urban sprawl to maybe help a few, when the country needs a new city full of six-storey buildings. The policies are so misguided." Hfchbffch said: "What happened to the 22 billion black hole? Looks like it's gone bigger. Where is all the cash coming from? I don't see any country given money to the UK for all the problems it has got. It looks like the UK working people will foot another bill." 72Momma added: "Where is all the money coming from? Have they actually got rid of the 'black hole' or are they just remortgaging the country? To be able to spend over £102bn ... who is she borrowing from?" Joeyd: "Margaret Thatcher's Reagonomics caused the global economic crash. She sold off Britain to foreign countries for a pittance, wrecked mining, shipbuilding and steel towns across Britain, sold off council housing and put all our money into banking. When the banks collapsed, the country collapsed with them. The Conservative Government introduced 14 years of failed austerity making the rich even richer, and the poorest even poorer. Someone has to reverse decades of neglect, we'll have to wait and see if they carry through with the infrastructure plans she's promising." Seccmjfl01: "It might not be perfect but at least she's trying and making an effort. Things take time and she needed some stability. Good luck to her." Wolveslegends: "The Chancellor promises so much with no money to pay for it. Come the Autumn she will gain the funds from guess where from? All of us will donate to her cause if we like it or not including the disabled and those too old to work. Welcome to New Labour." Reeves is pledging an extra £29 billion a year for the NHS – a real-terms boost of around 3% annually. And on housing, she laid out a massive £39 billion package to build hundreds of thousands of affordable homes over the next decade. It's being called the 'biggest cash injection' in 50 years and is part of the drive to get 1.5 million new homes built by 2029. Following details of the winter fuel U-turn earlier this week, Reeves confirmed plans to restore the payments to millions of pensioners. OAPs with an income of £35,000 or below in England and Wales will receive the benefit this winter. It is a major uplift from the current £11,500 cut-off point announced last summer. In an "age of insecurity" the Chancellor said defence spending will rise to 2.6% of GDP by 2027. She said the figure includes spending on intelligence agencies. 'We will make Britain a defence industrial superpower," Ms Reeves vowed. The Mirror understands schools will also get a major boost to per pupil funding, with £4.5billion extra for the core schools budget. This includes a major expansion of free school meals to 500,000 more pupils. Some £15.6billion will also be handed to mayors for major transport projects across the country. This will go towards plans to improve trams, trains and buses in the North and the Midlands. Other announcements include ending the "costly" use of hotels to house asylum seekers, £3 cap on single bus tickets, and over £14billion worth of investment will go towards building the Sizewell C nuclear power plant on the Suffolk coast. Keir Starmer told the Cabinet that the Spending Review: "Marks the end of the first phase of this Government, as we move to a new phase that delivers on the promise of change for working people all around the country and invests in Britain's renewal." However, Tory Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride slammed the announcement, as he fumed: "This spending review is not worth the paper it is written on.' He goes on to claim Ms Reeves has "completely lost control" and warns of tax rises to come in the autumn."
