THE fiscal framework behind the new powers to be devolved to Holyrood has not yet ignited passions in the same way the Scotland Bill did.

That might be about to change.

As acknowledged by the Lords Economic Affairs committee, former Treasury adviser and principal of Glasgow University Professor Anton Muscatelli and many other economists such as Jim Cuthbert, it is perhaps the most important part of the agreement.

Cuthbert, a man not known for his hyperbole, calls agreeing the fiscal framework the second most important decision Scotland has made in 300 years.

If the wrong decisions are made here then it could cost Scotland hundreds of millions of pounds.These decisions will determine Scotland’s economic future.

The political fallout may be substantial. If Holyrood and Westminster cannot agree on the framework this will dominate the run-up to next May’s campaign and beyond. Scotland should not be expected to take some sort of Mephistophelian deal that grants us greater devolution only to be accompanied by unnecessary and unfair financial risk.

The cut to the block grant to match revenue generated in Scotland lost by Westminster will be increased over time. It is those increases and what fuels them, and how Scotland keeps up with the rest of the UK that must be closely watched.

If Holyrood is prevented from being able to access powers promised in the Scotland Bill due to any penalties or detriment resulting from the fiscal framework, this will clearly have repercussions and could be a trigger for the next referendum.

There is much in the Lords report to disagree with, their recommendations on the Barnett formula are wrong. That was a clear commitment in the Smith Agreement.

However, they are right, this is an important Bill and deserves nothing less than detailed scrutiny.