By Keith Aitken in Dundee | 16 March 2012
Delegates at CIPFA Scotland's annual conference have condemned the Scotland Bill for failing to meet the country’s public finance needs.
They recommend that it be converted into an enabling Act, ready to implement a different approach to devolution.
Polled yesterday following a lively panel debate, delegates in Dundee also expressed a preference for the 'Devo-plus' option for Scotland’s future over the status quo, the Scotland Bill route (limited income tax-raising and borrowing powers), ‘Devo max’ (raising all taxes and returning an agreed sum to London to fund reserved functions) and independence. Under ‘Devo-plus’ Scotland would raise some taxes to pay for devolved functions, leaving the remainder with Westminster.
Although the table vote, conducted by electronic polling, does not purport to represent either CIPFA policy or to be a scientific poll, the rejection of the Scotland Bill by a margin of almost two-to-one was a notably clear-cut result.
Don Peebles, CIPFA Scotland's policy manager, told Public Finance: ‘What this shows is that public finance professionals now need to turn their professional attention to an assessment of the advantages and disadvantages of other formulations.
‘Perhaps the lack of support for the Scotland Bill reflects a concern among public finance professionals that the borrowing powers proposed for Holyrood would levy a cost on Scotland's public finances.’ he added.
Half the delegate votes favoured amending the Bill so it could be left on statute to await and enact a different devolution scheme, while 30% thought it should be dropped entirely and 20% wanted it put into force.
Asked for their preferred constitutional form, 32% favoured 'Devo-plus', with 21% each for 'Devo-max' and for leaving the present position unchanged.
The Scotland Bill route was backed by 16%, with 11% for scrapping devolution together and zero for independence.
In a panel discussion preceding the vote, both Professor Jim Gallagher, a former director general for devolution in the UK government, and former Holyrood Labour adviser Professor Arthur Midwinter, argued that the fiscal package in the Bill was stable and practical.
But former Liberal Democrat MSP Jeremy Purvis, representing the Reform Scotland think-tank, called for greater fiscal accountability at Holyrood for Scottish spending.
The session was opened by Linda Fabiani MSP, chair of the Holyrood committee tracking the Bill. She admitted that it was as yet unclear whether Holyrood could block the Bill under its ‘Legislative Consent’ procedure, but said she understood the two governments were in discussion about it.
