A FORMER Scottish Office chief statistician has accused an influential Westminster committee of perpetuating “dangerous myths” about Scotland’s finances.
Westminster’s cross-party Public Accounts Committee (PAC) released the findings of its inquiry into the “complicated and opaque” funding for devolved administrations late last month.
PAC chair Meg Hillier of Labour called for greater transparency into the Treasury’s cash allocations and the committee – which includes among its members the Dunfermline and West Fife MP Douglas Chapman of the SNP – said more parliamentary scrutiny is needed.
Now economist Jim Cuthbert has accused the committee of misleading the public by spreading “dangerous myths” about the Barnett formula.
Writing exclusively in The National today, he says the report “does not reflect at all the reality” of Scotland’s fiscal settlement, post-referendum, or bust claims that the system is over-generous to Edinburgh and offers enhanced protection for the economy.
READ MORE: The Barnett formula as we knew it is dead. Here's what that means for Scotland
Branding the paper a “regrettable missed opportunity,” Cuthbert – who also criticised SNP MPs and Boris Johnson – wrote: “What the report fails to do is to dispel certain myths about the operation of the Barnett formula: in fact, it does the opposite, and perpetuates these myths.”
Cuthbert, whose career also took him to the Treasury and the Australian Government – backed the transparency call.
However, he stressed: “What should have been an opportunity to introduce reality into the current debate has been missed. So we continue to exist in a strange, looking glass world, where it is quite clear that both of the above myths about the Barnett formula are still widely believed.”
Commenting on the release of the report in late July, Hillier said: “The complicated and often opaque method for calculating funding levels for devolved administrations is based on population levels and needs across the UK agreed 40 years ago.”
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel