The most startling development over the past few days has not only been the narrowing of the polls but the consequential commitment of the three UK party leaders to Gordon Brown’s accelerated timetable for agreeing more devolution. Whether or not it convinces voters, this promise will have far-reaching effects not just for Scotland but also for the rest of the UK. The Brown plan envisages the setting out of options by the end of October, a month-long consultation before a White Paper on a plan by the end of November, and draft legislation in January.
Leaving aside all the practical difficulties of meeting that timetable, there is no agreement on what ‘devo more’ might mean. The Tories have suggested that Scotland would be able to set its own income tax bands and rates, and receive all income tax revenues, while the Scottish Government would receive a share of VAT raised north of the border. Some welfare spending would be transferred. The Liberal Democrats take a similar view on income tax while also proposing that Scotland would have charge of inheritance tax, capital gains tax and air passenger duty (the latter also a Tory option). Proceeds of corporation tax would be assigned to Scotland. Labour has been more cautious, giving Scotland the power to vary the income tax rate by 15p in the pound above or below the rest of the UK – which is not very different from what is due to be implemented in 2015-16 under the 2012 Scotland Act—and rates would be made more progressive. But Labour does not envisage any action on VAT or air passenger duty. Labour would devolve a range of welfare and employment policies, covering the attendance allowance, employment tribunals, the work programme and skills development.
Reconciling these differences and, above all, getting the agreement of the Scottish National Government will be very hard in such a brief period. It will require a major commitment of time by David Cameron and George Osborne themselves.
Moreover, even the hint of these proposals has raised the profile of the long-dormant English question. Conservative MPs for English constituencies are not alone in saying ‘what about us?’—that is also the view of the strong Labour city/regions lobby. The snag is that there is no agreed plan for England. Past initiatives—for regional assemblies or for elected mayors—have either failed or received lukewarm support. But the coalition will, at least, have to have some ideas about English devolution if it is going make promises of more devolution for Scotland a reality. And that is before taking account of the knock-on effects in Wales and Northern Ireland, where further devolution proposals are in the pipeline.
A pressing question will be what happens to the 59 Scottish MPs at Westminster. Tory MPs demanding action should remember that there is a plan on the table to give English (and where relevant Welsh) MPs a determining say over legislation just affecting English/Welsh constituents. This was proposed by the government sponsored McKay Commission 18 months ago, and, although it has been largely ignored since then, the proposals are both practicable and could be implemented by a simple Commons resolution.
These are just some of the complications resulting from a ‘no’ vote. A yes vote, well, that’s another matter…
Peter Riddell is Director of the Institute for Government, which has published the report Governing after the referendum – Future constitutional scenarios for Scotland and the UK
Comments