THE Scottish Budget has passed its final vote at Holyrood, the product of a fourth straight deal between the Government and the Greens.
The tax and spending plans were approved by 63 votes to 55.
During the debate, Finance Secretary Kate Forbes praised other parties for the constructive nature of negotiations on the Budget.
The #ScotBudget has been backed by MSPs at Stage 3 following today’s debate @ScotParl. pic.twitter.com/PevReoWuwq
— Scottish Government (@scotgov) March 5, 2020
But she was attacked by Scottish Conservative finance spokesman Donald Cameron, who claimed the extra £173 million – slated to be spent on councils, policing, climate change and assessing the viability of free bus travel for under-19s – made available as part of the deal with the Greens showed a lack of transparency.
Forbes had told the chamber and various committees that all the money in the public purse was accounted for and the extra funding would come from "managed underspends" and a re-profiling of business rates.
Cameron said: "I acknowledge that the Cabinet Secretary introduced this Budget in difficult circumstances and I accept this is a draft Budget and is always subject to small tweaks here and there, but that doesn't negate the lack of transparency in terms of what money was ultimately available in terms of her negotiations with other parties."
He said the result was "simply a repeat" of past budgets.
When challenged by SNP MSP John Mason, who said the Finance Secretary gave a "clear explanation" of where the additional funding would come from, Cameron did not accept that was the case.
The Tory also questioned how committees would be able to scrutinise draft Budgets when "the figures they are looking at can change on a whim".
Earlier in the debate, Ms Forbes said: "I'd like to thank all subject committees and political parties for their deliberations on the Budget.
"I fully appreciate the challenge that was faced in assuring proper scrutiny within a shortened Budget process meant that everybody had to participate slightly differently and I recognise the value that they have added to the process."
In recent years, the draft Budget has been announced in December, giving a number of months before it needs to be passed and allowing for more thorough scrutiny by MSPs.
However, a delay to the UK budget also pushed back the announcement of Scotland's spending plans to February 6.
On the eve of the Budget publication, then finance secretary Derek Mackay resigned after The Scottish Sun published details of 270 unsolicited messages he sent to a 16-year-old boy. He has since been suspended from the party pending an investigation.
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon has had 'no contact' with Derek Mackay since he quit
Forbes was thrust into presenting the plans, for which she received widespread praise and was eventually given the job permanently.
Green MSP Mark Ruskell told how the new Finance Secretary's "spirit of compromise" had "rescued negotiations with the Greens this year".
Speaking about the Budget deal, he said: "I'm sure it won't be her last deal with the Greens in this Parliament."
LibDem leader Willie Rennie said it was "inevitable that the Greens would back the Budget".
But he said they had been "duped by promises of a review about the possibility of maybe having free transport for young people".
Labour's Rhoda Grant accused the Scottish Government of wasting money on "vanity projects and poor decisions".
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