Scotland Bill

Part of the debate – in the Scottish Parliament at 11:17 am on 9 December 2010.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Murdo Fraser Murdo Fraser Conservative 11:17, 9 December 2010

I have consistently supported greater financial powers for the Parliament. I am delighted that we have a Conservative Prime Minister who agrees with me and is taking the agenda forward. In future, we will have a properly financially accountable Scottish Parliament and politicians who will have to concern themselves with not just spending but raising money.

There are critics of the Calman process who think that it is another step on the slippery slope to independence, but I do not think that improving devolution undermines the United Kingdom or that giving Scotland better government makes independence more likely. During the devolution debates in the 1990s, members of my party—including me—often argued that setting up a Scottish Parliament would boost support for independence. In the event, that did not happen and I am happy to admit that we got it wrong. Last week, the most recent opinion poll figures showed support for independence to be at an all-time low of 23 per cent. So much for the argument that a Conservative Government in Westminster would stoke the fires of nationalism.

Just as the argument that more devolution will increase support for independence is wrong, the argument that devolution will kill off nationalism, as George Robertson famously said, is wrong. There is no such thing as inevitability in politics or history. In Scotland we will get the constitutional future that we choose. That will ultimately be for the Scottish people to decide, and I have every confidence in their good sense. Their majority view is clear; we should back the proposals in the Scotland Bill, which will bring better government for Scotland.

The SNP has simply stood on the sidelines and criticised the process. Once again, the party has brought little constructive comment to the debate. I exempt from that general attack Alasdair Allan, who made a constructive speech. Indeed, his speech was much more constructive than the speech that we heard from the First Minister—I am deeply sorry if that in any way damages Alasdair Allan’s career prospects.

The SNP’s attack on the proposals in the Scotland Bill for financial devolution is based on the assumption that they will mean lower income for the Scottish Government. Let us leave aside the basis of the SNP’s fiddled figures on which the assumption is founded, which was thoroughly demolished by Derek Brownlee—I am sorry that the First Minister was not here to listen to Derek Brownlee’s demolition of his financial case. It staggers me that SNP members cannot see the irony of the argument that they are putting forward. If it is the case that we are seeing a fall in income tax revenues as a result of the economic recession, that would apply to Scotland whatever level of financial powers it obtained. If Scotland were independent, the position, far from being alleviated, would be made much worse. We have only to consider what has happened over the Irish Sea during the past few weeks for an example of the problem.