Debating the future of Scotland

The proposals within the Scotland Bill - as well as the associated fiscal framework currently being worked out by the UK and Scottish Governments - represent big changes to Scotland’s political system, says Nicola McEwen. However, has enough room been left for the public at the negotiating table? 
 
“With great power comes great responsibility” – in Uncle Ben’s memorable last words to Spiderman. But is the reverse also true? Do great responsibilities bring great power?
 
I find myself asking this question when reflecting on the Scotland Bill currently making its way through the UK parliament. The Bill emerged from the Smith Commission and is intended to deliver a ‘powerhouse parliament’. There is no doubt that the Bill would increase the powers and responsibilities of the Scottish Parliament and Government, especially in taxation and welfare, but there are constraints. 
 
In taxation, the Scottish Government would be obliged to set the rates and bands for all tax on earned income. Scottish residents would no longer pay a UK income tax - their income tax would go to the Scottish Government. The Scottish Government could use this power to increase the rate of taxation paid by higher earners, either to raise more money for public services or to take less tax from the less well off. But since these tax powers are restricted to earned income, it could not prevent high earners from circumventing these policy goals by shifting more of their income into savings or dividends. 
 
Likewise, the Scottish Parliament would have no control over the personal allowance, the first slice of income which is tax-free for almost all earners. So when the UK Government makes changes here, it will have a knock-on effect for the amount of revenue that can be raised within Scotland. But unlike the UK Government, the Scottish Government would have only limited recourse to a broader basket of taxes to make up the shortfall.
 
In welfare, the Scotland Bill brings new powers over social security, especially over benefits for people with disabilities and their carers. In these areas, the Scottish Government would be free to keep, redesign or replace these benefits as it sees fit. It would also have the power to ‘top-up’ UK welfare benefits, and to introduce new benefits for working-age adults that are not already covered by the UK government. So, for example, the Scottish Government would have the power to restore housing benefit to under-21s who will no longer be entitled to UK housing benefit. 
 
In practice, if it wants to make any changes to existing benefits, top up or introduce new benefits, it will almost certainly have to set up new agencies or systems for the processing and delivering Scottish benefits, adding to the cost.
 
The Bill has already been through the House of Commons and is now being debated in the Lords. The Scottish Parliament will also have the opportunity to give – or withhold – its consent for the legislation. In addition, the two governments are currently negotiating the details of a fiscal framework behind closed doors, a key part of the devolution deal.  
 
These are big changes to Scotland’s political system. They could have profound implications for the powers, responsibilities and capacities of the Scottish Parliament and Government to develop and deliver public services. After the democratic engagement of the referendum campaign, it is disappointing that debates on the Scotland Bill have largely excluded the public. Everyone in Scotland should have a voice in debating Scotland’s future.
 
Nicola McEwen will be discussing the Scotland Bill at a public event, What Next for Scotland? in Edinburgh City Chambers on 26 November. For full details, follow this link. Thhis article is co-published with the Edinburgh Evening News.

Comments policy

All comments posted on the site via Disqus are automatically published. Additionally comments are sent to moderators for checking and removal if necessary. We encourage open debate and real time commenting on the website. The Centre on Constitutional Change cannot be held responsible for any content posted by users. Any complaints about comments on the site should be sent to info@centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk

Nicola McEwen's picture
post by Nicola McEwen
University of Edinburgh
19th November 2015

Latest blogs

  • 16th October 2018

    Bavaria’s long-dominant party, the conservative Christian Social Union (CSU), has reached its worst election result in 60 years. As well as causing a headache for Angela Merkel, argues Patrick Utz, this political earthquake reveals Bavaria’s predicament between regionalism and populism,.

  • 15th October 2018

    As the buildup to the EU Council meeting reaches fever pitch, Richard Parry explains that deals at dawn may work in Brussels but they don't always play to the home crowd.

  • 13th October 2018

    Theresa May’s efforts to keep her DUP allies onside may, suggests Prof Nicola McEwen, end up easing Nicola Sturgeon’s path to independence following any subsequent referendum on the subject.

  • 12th October 2018

    The Commission on Justice in Wales, chaired by Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, will further clarify the legal and political identity of Wales within the UK constitution. Doing so, explains Prof Dan Wincott, will also bring clarity to the enduring significance of other territorial legal jurisdictions.

  • 11th October 2018

    The Brexit and Environment network has spent the last year researching the implications of Brexit for environmental policy, with a particular focus on the devolved nations, which are all too often overlooked in these debates. They have developed three reports that detail their findings from meetings with stakeholders in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and they bring together insights from these in an overarching UK report. In this blog post, they summarise their key findings and recommendations.

Read More Posts