Scotland Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury
Lord Pearson of Rannoch Portrait Lord Pearson of Rannoch
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I merely say that the record will confirm that the noble Lord has not answered the question that I asked him.

Baroness Rawlings Portrait Baroness Rawlings
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I remind noble Lords that on Report a Member may speak only once except for a short question of elucidation to the Minister.

Lord Sassoon Portrait Lord Sassoon
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I shall try to address some of the further points that have come up, although I have addressed one of the key points so I will not repeat myself. Although my noble friend Lord Lang of Monkton went rather wider—I thought we were going back to Second Reading—he provided some important context for the clause. We do not want to leave ourselves with the impression of a weak Scottish economy that my noble friend paints. It is right to remember that with 8.4 per cent of the UK’s population, the gross added value contributed by Scotland was 8.3 per cent, which is almost in line with the percentage of the population. I could cite many figures, including some which show that Scotland’s economy outperforms that of the UK as a whole. We should not think that we are making Scotland too reliant on the 10 per cent of tax base. I think my noble friend suggested that we were relying excessively on that 10 per cent. To be clear, under the Bill about 60 per cent of Scotland’s budget will still come from the block grant, so that context is important.

I wish to address one or two of the issues specific to this clause and the amendment. It is important to realise that the power we are talking about allows for the Scottish Parliament to be given full control over a specified tax. It does not allow for the Scottish Parliament to be given control over particular aspects of taxes such as the rate. It is a power to devolve complete control of a specific area. As I have explained, it will then be for the Scottish Parliament to go through a process to create a new tax to fill the space.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Pearson of Rannoch Portrait Lord Pearson of Rannoch
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Before the Minister replies, to qualify what the noble and learned Lord, Lord Cameron of Lochbroom, asked, will the Minister be specific and say whether the empty space could include a tax on Sassenachs who own cottages, a window tax or a land tax?

Baroness Rawlings Portrait Baroness Rawlings
- Hansard - -

My Lords, perhaps I may remind the House that:

“Only the mover of an amendment or the Lord in charge of the bill speaks after the minister on report except for short questions of elucidation”—

as I mentioned before—

“to the minister or where the minister speaks early to assist the House in debate”.

Lord Pearson of Rannoch Portrait Lord Pearson of Rannoch
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Minister was still speaking and I asked a very short question, to which I look forward to the reply.

--- Later in debate ---
Lord Deben Portrait Lord Deben
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As my purity has been called into question, I would like to say that it is a purity that demands that we do something that recognises sparsity and the difficulty of reaching people. The trouble is that this new clause recognises it in Scotland but not in Wales; that is what is wrong with it.

Baroness Rawlings Portrait Baroness Rawlings
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I remind your Lordships that on Report a Member may speak only once, excepting for a short question of elucidation to the Minister, as I have said.

Lord Kerr of Kinlochard Portrait Lord Kerr of Kinlochard
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I understand the noble Lord’s point. My principal argument would be about timing. I do not think that the politics of this in Scotland would play well. Personally, I go with the prediction made by the noble Lord, Lord Steel, about what is likely to happen—perhaps rather more slowly than he suggested, but that is the direction of travel. That direction is not objectionable, but my worry about it is that it does not make sense to wait until after 2014, as he was implicitly accepting, to define what this further devolution of tax-raising power is. I think that one ought to do this in advance. That was my twofold worry about the Prime Minister’s speech in Edinburgh. It is unwise to offer the measure; it is certainly unwise to offer it undefined and suggest that it can be defined only in the light of a referendum result. To me that is the greatest worry about this matter.