Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mike Crockart (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 26 April 2012. It occurred during Debate on bill on Scotland Bill.


Scotland Bill

I welcome the amendments to the Scotland Bill, which—I am proud to say—was brought forward at the earliest possible opportunity in the coalition's programme by a Liberal Democrat Minister, reflecting our 100-year commitment to home rule. The Bill is the outcome of an inclusive and iterative process, and reflects the devolution journey embarked on in 1999. I am sure that it will not be the final iteration. The Bill devolves huge further powers to the Scottish Government, which will make that Government much more responsible to the Scottish people for the taxes they raise and the money they spend, and that is hugely welcome. Powers should reside at the best level for them to be exercised, and in accordance with that sentiment, the original proposed reservation of powers relating to insolvency and the regulation of health professionals—as well as the powers relating to Antarctica, as we would not want to forget those—was a sensible part of that iterative process. I happily supported them as they reflected the key Liberal Democrat principle that powers should reside at that level of government where they most sensibly lie. I understand the reason for removing those parts of the original Bill, given the assurances that the Minister has now received from the Scottish Government, but I am left confused by the situation that remains for the SNP and the Scottish Government. We now have assurances that insolvency will be treated similarly cross-border, and that regulation of health professionals will also be maintained in the same way. Those issues are added to the currency, monetary policy, the monarchy and, yesterday, income tax levels as areas in which there would be no change if Scottish independence were achieved. In the same vein, NATO membership may even be up for grabs. The Bill and the amendments are the result of a sensible consultation and compromise, and that is surely the correct and proven way to move the devolution settlement forward. I know we will see further iteration of that once the distraction of independence has been put to bed as quickly as possible.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
543 c1164-5 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Appeals Corporation tax Crown lands and estates Devolution Antarctic Borrowing Block grant Health services Elections EU law Income tax Legislative competence Excise duties Insolvency Health professions Legislation Landfill tax Powers Lord Advocate Public finance Scotland Regulation Scottish Parliament Taxation Speed limits Tax rates and bands Supreme Court Scottish Executive Stamp duty land tax Advocate General for Scotland High Court Scottish Government Legislative consent motions
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk