06/01/2016 Scottish Questions

Hello and welcome to a somewhat springlike Westminster. It is

shaping up to be a busy political year already. The possibility of a

referendum on Britain's place within the European Union could happen this

year. No shortage of topics for MPs to get their teeth into. As far as

Scottish MPs are concerned, one issue, to do with the financial

arrangements surrounding more devolution to Scotland, the

so-called fiscal framework, is looming large. And it played a large

part at Scottish questions. Here is how proceedings got under way.

Question number one, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, can I begin by wishing you

a very happy New Year? And in light of the recent flooding in Scotland,

can I also pay tribute to all those in the emergency services and local

authorities and volunteers who have dealt with these challenging

circumstances, and to say that the thoughts of the whole House will be

with those who have had their homes and businesses flooded. With

permission, Mr Speaker, I will answer questions one, two, five and

ten together. The UK and Scottish governance are discussing the fiscal

framework through the Joint Exchequer Committee. There have been

five meetings between the Deputy First Minister and the Chief

Secretary to the Treasury. Next is due to take place Friday. I thank

him for that answer. I associate with what he says about the

flooding. My constituency has been affected and was an appreciative of

the work being done by the emergency services. The block grant will need

to be adjusted to take account of revenue raising powers being

devolved. As by the Swiss Smith Commission, the Scottish Government

should not be financing disadvantages as a result of the

transfer of the new powers. Will he give us his views as to what would

be a fair indexation of the block grant adjustment? Mr Speaker, my

understanding is that the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, John

Swinney, who I had a very productive meeting with just before Christmas,

is actually conducting these negotiations on behalf of the

Scottish Government just and Mr Swinney at my meeting assured me

that his object was exactly the same as that of the United Kingdom

government, a settlement which is fair to Scotland and fair to the

whole of the United Kingdom. This is also a question on the so-called

fiscal framework. It will ensure that Scotland is no worse off

financially as a result of the transfer of powers. Does the

minister agree with the cross-party view and that of various others that

only the model of indexed deduction per capita would adequately deliver

the principle of no detriment? What I have said, Mr Speaker, in my

previous answer, is that we are involved in an ongoing negotiation.

Mr Swinney is conducting that negotiation. I have got tremendous

respect for Mr Swinney and his ability to reach a fair settlement

for Scotland. I have got tremendous respect for the chief secretary to

reach a fair settlement for the rest of the United Kingdom. I am

confident on the basis of the discussions which took place,

including my own discussions with the Deputy First Minister, those

involving the Prime Minister and the First Minister, as well as the

meeting which is due to take place on Friday, that we will be able to

achieve the first settlement. A good New Year to you, Mr Speaker. I think

many people will find it bizarre and unacceptable that the Secretary of

State for Scotland is not even attending the negotiations. Can the

Right Honourable gentleman explained why his office of Secretary of State

seems to have been deemed irrelevant to these critical negotiations? And

given he is not directly involved, can he share his personal view of

whether he agrees with the learning professors on the preferred model?

Mr Speaker, I think what many people in Scotland will find bizarre, at a

session in Parliament which is called Scottish questions, that the

Scottish National Party could come up with only one question Veljko

clearly they were all told to ask! But Mr Speaker, I know it may

impinge on the self-importance which some SNP MPs a tribute to

themselves, but it is the Deputy First Minister of Scotland, John

Swinney, who is negotiating the agreement, not SNP MPs! The model of

indexed adjustment for the block grant may result in the Scottish

block grant falling substantially without consideration of the

different rates of population growth north and south of the border. Does

the minister agree with me that this or any other model of block grant

adjustment which results in a diminished Scottish budget year on

year will not fulfil the Smith mission's principle of no detriment?

Mr Speaker, I am disappointed with the honourable gentleman's analysis.

Because the new powers, which are being delivered by the Scotland

bill, Kate the opportunity for Scotland's economic growth to

increase, for Scotland's population to increase. I am very surprised

that he has such a negative view of the use of those powers that it

would be impossible to increase the population or the economic growth in

Scotland and therefore increase tax take. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does my

right honourable friend agree that with the transfer of the new,

extensive powers which my right honourable friend has just agreed

will be given to the Scottish Parliament, it will far once put the

SNP government truly to be accountable to the Scottish people,

and that this talk of a second referendum is just a smoke screen to

take away their accountability to the Scottish people? Conservative MP

for Leicestershire south. I actually agree with my honourable friend, the

impression created again today, Mr Speaker, by the SNP, is that they

are entirely driven by process arguments, not about hitting on with

getting an agreement on the fiscal framework, about getting the new

powers in place and then doing something positive for the people of

Scotland with those powers. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can my right

honourable friend confirm that once the fiscal framework has been

agreed, the devolution of tax powers to the Scottish Parliament can "Lee

Wallace the Conservative MP. Mr Speaker, I am absolutely committed

to delivering the powers set out in Scotland bill once it becomes an act

of Parliament as quickly as possible. We want to see that act on

the statute books ahead of the Scottish Parliament election so it

can shake those elections and the parties can set out what they intend

to do with the powers. And I would like to see the tax powers in place

by April 2017. The success of the fiscal framework is absolutely vital

to the future success of the tax powers which have been devolved.

Confidence in the framework is vital for individuals and businesses,

especially in the border region. Does the minister believe the

Scottish Government is approaching these discussions in good faith,

which will be fair to people on both sides of the border? I absolutely

am, Mr Speaker. From the discussions, which are Nicola

Sturgeon, the First Minister of Scotland, had with the Prime

Minister, from those I have had with the dippy First Minister, and we

have to remember that stays in the people who are determining what will

be agreed in relation to the fiscal framework, their view is clear, and

I take it as Cynthia, that they want to achieve a fiscal framework

agreement within the near future, and that we can move forward with

enacting the bill and transferring those powers, which can make such a

difference to the people of Scotland.

The Smith Commission recommended that the cost of establishing the

infrastructure for the collection of taxes should be cost borne by the UK

Government. The Secretary of State for Scotland confirm that the UK

Government accepts those recommendations? What I can confirm

to the honourable gentleman is that gas is one of the items which is

part of the discussion between the UK Government and the Scottish

governance. But Mr Speaker, it is rising that SNP MPs have such little

confidence in Mr Swinney and the Scottish Government in the

negotiations, to hold out for positions which would be benefit all

for Scotland! I find it staggering! I wonder if the Secretary of State

agrees with the First Minister, with the Professor and with the test EU

see, that more powers for Scotland and not come at any price. That the

fiscal framework must deliver fairness for Scotland. Can he give a

date by which that agreement must be reached? I absolutely agree that the

arrangements must be fair. Fair to Scotland, third just to the rest of

the United Kingdom. I think that that is perfectly achievable. The

negotiations and discussions which have taken place, whilst not

providing a running commentary, have been productive. I think the

comments made by Mr Swinney for example to the finance committee in

the Scottish Parliament, where he clearly said that the Scottish

Government should benefit from the positive decisions they take but

accept the consequences of bad policy decisions, is one which I am

absolutely in agreement with. And that should apply to the UK

Government, too, in relation to our responsible at ease. May I wish you,

Mr Speaker, and all the staff of the House of Commons a happy New Year?

You would have thought the pantomime season was over, but judging by

today's questions, it clearly isn't. There is no shortage of things which

could be... Oh, yes it certainly is. I was expecting that, Mr Speaker,

from someone who has got no jokes whatsoever. There is no shortage of

things that we could be gritting the government on. The Secretary of

State has created this sham I keeping the fiscal framework secret.

The Finance Secretary who is negotiating this... The people of

Scotland are being kept in the dark. will the Secretary of State, and I

have asked this before, but an end to this pantomime of manufactured

grievance and be completely transparent about the fiscal

framework? Mr Speaker, the government is completely transparent

about its position in relation to the fiscal framework. We want it

agreed as soon as possible. We want it to be scrutinised by both

parliaments. When I was in the Scottish Parliament recently I have

the opportunity to meet with Bruce Crawford, the convener of the

devolution committee. He has assured me that he is satisfied that in

connection with the finance committee in the Scottish

Parliament, there will be adequate opportunity to scrutinise the fiscal

framework. I am clear that there will be an opportunity in the other

place to scrutinise it. And the Scottish affairs select committee is

currently conducting an inquiry. I don't think the people of Scotland

will be in the dark in any way about the fiscal framework and I think it

will achieve what we wanted to achieve but it will also be subject

to proper scrutiny. I don't think the Secretary of State understands

the process and how important it is. The Scotland bill constitutes the

biggest transfer of powers ever to Scotland. But the underpinning

provisions are being hidden from the Scottish people. I have written to

both governments to try and get transparency and the response from

both governments has been no. Meanwhile the Scottish covenant are

threatening to veto the bill. Whilst these negotiations are being

conducted in secret, both governments can blame each other

with manufactured grievance, and it is the people of Scotland who will

lose out. So can the Secretary of State at least assure us that in

future, negotiations as important as this on Scotland's finances are

conducted with greater transparency and greater democratic scrutiny?

I have no grievance because I am confident that the Scottish

Government want to achieve an agreement, the UK Government wants

to achieve an agreement based on fairness to Scotland, and the rest

of the UK. Well I given an absolute commitment? As agreed, it will be

adding full Parliamentary seat scrutiny in the Scottish Parliament

and in Westminster. This is a question about defence

installations. Mr Speaker, may I start by adding to your comment just

now introducing question number three by congratulating my

honourable friend for the recognition he received last week

for 30 years service to this House and the people of Norfolk. It's a

great pleasure he had that recognition last week. In response

to this question, the MoD engages with the Scottish Government about

defence establishments and matters at many levels official and

ministerial. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for

Scotland, met the Cabinet Secretary for infrastructure, investment on

the 17th of November to discuss the issue and the defence Minister has

met the Scottish Government Cabinet secretary twice previously and the

Defence Secretary has agreed to meet the Scottish Government Cabinet

secretary soon. Can I thank him for his generosity. Given that Faslane

will sustain the largest employment site in Scotland, isn't it clear

that Scotland is the biggest beneficiary? Surely this makes the

stance on Trident even more perverse and damaging? Here's quite right

that this Government we are investing very significantly in

defence in Scotland and, following the SDS are, not only will we be

spending ?500 million at fast lane, one of the Royal Navy three

operating bases and one of the largest operating sites in Scotland,

currently 6000 military jobs there today. This will increase to 8000 as

we move all submarines based there by 2022. Scotland will also be home

to our new maritime patrol aircraft when 400 extra personnel will be

stationed to man the squadron at RAF Lossiemouth. Scotland is a vital

location. As the SNP has been pointing out for a long time, it's

been dangerous for a maritime state like the UK not to have maritime

patrol aircraft so we welcome the recent U-turn by the Government in

the procurement of the aircraft. Can you confirm when the entire fleet

will be operational? What we made clear is the procurement of nine

aircraft and the fleet will be put short through a perfume and

contract, the latter of which has already been submitted to the United

States. The first aircraft will be operational in 2019. The Minister

wasn't able to answer the question of when will the entire fleet be

operational so perhaps when it comes back after my second question, he

will answer the first. The RAF is currently maintaining its skill base

by training on maritime patrol aircraft with Canada, USA, Australia

and New Zealand. The importance of training was scheduled to be base at

RAF Kinloss before the scrapping of the Rod fleet. Will the Government

ensure that training for this aircraft is based at RAF Rosser

mouth as it currently is for both tornadoes and typhoons? As we are

currently in contractual negotiations for the procurement, it

would be wrong of me to pre-empt precisely the nature of those

negotiations so I can't answer as initial question as to how many

aircraft will be available by when until such time as the contract has

been concluded. As to training, he is right to reflect the fact that we

have cruise in service on this platform with other users in the USA

and the training will be established as part of the procurement process

in the coming months. This is another defence-related question.

While defence and national security remain reserved to the UK Parliament

we recognise the importance of engaging with the devolved

administrations and I just said it previous answer the Parliamentary

Under-Secretary of State of Scotland and I have met with a Scottish

Government to discuss these matters. UK defence contracts are a major

source of jobs in Scotland with 2500 employed on Clydeside so can the

Minister explain why his Government would to defence spending by 14% in

the last Parliament? Well, I'm sorry he seeks to hark back rather than to

look forward, having just published at the end of November the SDSR

during which this Government committed to increase defence

spending in real terms for each year this Parliament which is what we are

looking forward to and much of that investment will be spent in Scotland

and indeed in South Wales we procure the Ajax vehicle.... Foundations for

a stronger economy. A Scottish economy has been going for 11

quarters in a row. Scotland benefits from being part of the UK. The

fastest-growing G7 economy in 2014 and is forecast to the joint fastest

in 2015. Of course, will my right noble friend agree this is one

element which makes the union so successful? I do agree with the

honourable lady. It's a fundamental part of the growth in Scotland

economy that we are part of a single market within Ali UK. I had the

pleasure recently to visit Alexander Dennis, in Falkirk and I'm sure they

would agree the rest of the UK is one of the most important markets.

Given that employment in Scotland is now 53,000 higher than it was

pre-crisis, and given that output in Scotland is 3% higher than at the

peak crisis point, will he concur with Scottish business leaders that

to oppose the savage cuts by the Treasury in the Autumn Statement to

the UK's trade and export agency,... I very much welcome the figures my

honourable friend setup. In relation to the positive economic situation

in Scotland. I don't subscribe to the frequently voiced SNP position

that anything good that happens in Scotland is in relation to the

Scottish Government, anything bad is in relation to the UK Government. We

have two governments working together for the benefit of

Scotland. The North Sea oil and gas industry is part of Scotland's

economy. Yesterday a Scottish MSP claimed there was no crisis in the

industry. Even though it's been estimated 65,000 jobs have been lost

since 2014. The SNP clearly inhabits a different world to everybody else.

Can the Secretary of State tell us what is Government is doing to

support the oil industry and what it is doing to protect the thousands of

jobs which depend on it? Mr Speaker, I find it extraordinary that anyone

who represents the north-east of Scotland could claim that there was

no crisis in the oil and gas industry. This Government has

demonstrated yet again in the Chancellor 's Autumn Statement that

we are committed to that industry and thousands of jobs that it

supports right across the UK and there will be further evidence of

our commitment to Aberdeen and the north-east in the weeks ahead. This

is a question about benefit changes. The spending review 2015 shows over

half of all spending on welfare public services goes to the poorest

40% of households in the UK. This is not changed as a result of a

Government policy since 2010. The ISS estimates by 2020 more than 2.5

million working families on Universal Credit will be, on

average, ?1600 a year worse off due to the cuts to the work allowance in

Universal Credit. My constituents know how that's going to damage then

but does the Secretary of State have the first clue? How many of those

families are in Scotland and what the impact and scale will be on

them? The best way to help working households in this country is to

ensure that we have a job-creating economy, we see wages going up, we

introduce a national living wage to help millions of people and we have

a secure and stable economy. That's what this Government is delivering.

Household incomes in Scotland will be of intense interest, not least to

people living in Scotland. We must hear the questions and the answers.

I recently asked a question to the Secretary of State, what discussions

he had had with the Secretary of State of Work and Pensions on the

introduction of a new working health programme in Scotland? Has answer

was a masterful example on how to not to answer would is what we've

seen today. Will he take this opportunity to tell the House if he

has bothered to discuss how this new programme will affect my

constituents and the DWP? This Government is making reforms to the

welfare system, making sure work always pays, we have to ensure it is

affordable but Mayor also remind her that of course with the powers under

the Scotland Bill, Scottish Government does have the power to

top-up benefits and introduce new benefits. This is a question or the

number of students at Scottish universities. The figures show

applications for those aged 18 in 2040 was 37% in Scotland compared to

44% in England. I wish to share the voice of Christchurch. How can it be

in the UK national interest that school leavers from Scotland are

being denied access to their own universities because of the

arbitrary cap on numbers imposed by the Scottish Government when school

leavers with lower qualifications from the rest of the UK are able to

gain such access? The honourable gentleman makes an important point.

I've had students from my own constituency refused entry to

Scottish universities because of the cap which has been imposed by the

Scottish Government. We hear a lot about free tuition in Scotland, but

this is one of the consequences and I'm sure it will be part of a debate

on the forthcoming Scottish Parliament elections. The Scottish

affairs committee have been looking into higher education specifically a

study scheme for Scotland. He will find everybody, universities, trade

unions, employers Association, one that scheme for Scotland. Will he be

a Secretary of State for Scotland and put that case to the Home

Office? We always listen with interest and take forward in a

positive way anything forthcoming from the Scottish affairs select

committee and I look forward to reading his report. A question about

how much it costs to run the Scotland Office. The admin costs of

running it and the office of the aggregate general for Scotland in

the financial year 2010-11 was 7.68 8 million. Administrative provision

for both offices in 2019-20 agreed the recent spending review is 9.24

million. Will he confirm to the House what the percentage of the

administrative costs of his department are met by Scottish

taxpayers? The honourable gentleman knows that the funding arrangements

within the UK don't work on that basis. He also knows this Government

is committed to retaining the Barnett Formula, a fair allocation

of funding to Scotland. I'm afraid that's all we got time for at the

moment. We will be back with the next Scottish Questions in exactly

five weeks' time. That is on Wednesday the 10th of February so

put a note in your diary and join us then if you can. But, from all of a

sudden Westminster, goodbye. -- from all of us at Westminster, goodbye.

You'd better come in with a brilliant product.

Get it right and we might help your business reach the next level.