THE Scottish Parliament are not being given enough time to “properly scrutinise” the Scotland Bill, according to an influential cross-party committee in Holyrood.
The call from committee chair Bruce Crawford came as Deputy First Minister John Swinney and Scottish Secretary of State David Mundell were due to appear in front of his Devolution (Further Powers) Committee this morning.
The two senior politicians will be grilled by the cross-party committee on their proposals for the Bill and their plans to adjust.
Speaking ahead of the session, Crawford said: “It is vital that this committee – and by extension the Scottish Parliament – has the opportunity to properly scrutinise the Scotland Bill. While we welcome the priority given to the Bill’s progress by the UK Government, the timings mean that those opportunities are fewer than ideal.
“Thursday’s evidence session allows the committee to raise questions of both Governments about the Bill’s provisions in a range of areas such as tax, borrowing and welfare and to consider to what extent the final Bill is likely to meet the spirit and substance of the Smith agreement.
“The Committee unanimously found that the draft legislative clauses did not yet sufficiently reflect Smith and an initial analysis of the Scotland Bill by the Scottish Parliament’s independent researchers supported that view. It remains the Committee’s desire to arrive at a point at which we can agree that the Bill meets our expectations.”
Speaking to The National, Conservative committee member Alex Johnstone accepted there could have been more time, but he said the timetable was “essentially established in the hours immediately after the referendum”.
Johnstone said: “And the fact that some question the UK government’s commitment to the timetable has guaranteed that [it] will stick rigidly to the timetable put forward.
The Aberdeenshire MSP continued: “In terms of what we have in legislation the two sides are never going to agree about how close we get to the spirit and substance of the Smith Commission.
‘‘What is clear is that both sides are working towards what they see as the spirit and substance of the Smith Commission. And, as with all great pieces of legislation, this may come down to brinkmanship at the end of the day.”
Earlier in the week, both Swinney and Mundell had written to the committee. Mundell had assured the committee that the Scotland Bill in front of MPs in Westminster was the embodiment of Smith. Meanwhile, Swinney sent the committee a number of clauses that he wanted added to the Bill, including one that would allow Scotland full fiscal autonomy.
Cameron dismisses SNP power plea as ‘full fiscal shambles’
PRIME Minister David Cameron has again dismissed SNP calls for full fiscal autonomy to be written into the Scotland Bill.
At Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday Angus Robertson, the SNP’s leader at Westminster, said the Scotland Bill as it stands did not deliver on the Smith Commission proposals.
He told MPs: “The Prime Minister and other UK party leaders made a promise, they made a vow that more powers will be delivered to the Scottish Parliament. The people were promised home rule, they were promised and I quote ‘as close to federalism as possible’.
“Why does your Scotland Bill not even deliver the limited Smith Commission proposals?”
The Prime Minister said that the SNP was concerned only with process and challenged it to start talking about the policies they would like to put in place.
Cameron said the MPs did not dare speak about which powers they are being given in the Scotland Bill they would like to use.
He said full fiscal autonomy had become “full fiscal shambles”.
The Prime Minister insisted the Bill did fulfil the vow, but added: “Of course what it doesn’t fulfil is the full fiscal autonomy that your party would like that would land Scottish taxpayers with a bill of thousands and thousands of pounds.
“If that’s your policy, when you get up, you should say so.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here