Spoke in the debate on Stage One of the Scottish Budget today. Worth reading the full debate for a cracking contribution by Michael Russell. Mark McDonald (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP): I welcome the strong economic performance that the cabinet secretary outlined, with employment at record levels and the lowest unemployment rate in the UK. I also welcome the Scottish Government’s continued support for agencies such as Skills Development Scotland, Scottish Enterprise, Scottish Development International and the Scottish Council for Development and Industry, many of which deliver excellent work and support for organisations and people in my constituency in north-east Scotland. Last year, I held a jobs fair in my constituency at which SDS provided a workshop on CV writing and interview skills, which helped a number of my constituents from an area of Aberdeen in which—although the city’s economy has been buoyant—there have been particular issues with getting people into employment. That was despite the local Labour Party objecting to SDS having any involvement in the process. Those agencies’ role in the north-east has been in sharp focus in recent months because of the on-going issues affecting the oil and gas sector. I welcome the Scottish Government’s establishment of the energy jobs task force, which recognises that intervention is needed to ensure that those who face redundancy or potential redundancy get support, alongside the work that the partnership action for continuing employment—PACE—teams will do in the area. That underlines the point that the key interventions that are needed in the area must come from Westminster. Alongside the endorsement of the Scottish Government’s budget today and the impact that it will have in supporting the work in north-east Scotland, we must be clear and unite in calling for fiscal intervention from Westminster where it is required, whether that is through a reduction in the supplementary charge, the introduction of an investment allowance for marginal fields or tax credits for exploration. That could boost exploration activity and ensure that, when the price recovery happens, as experts predict it will, the industry is in the most advantageous position to capitalise on it. I would have a degree more sympathy for the positions that some politicians have outlined if they first acknowledged that they campaigned for the UK to remain responsible for the oil and gas sector and to have control of the fiscal regime in the North Sea and then pointed in that direction in calling for the key interventions that are required. We have heard again today talk of a resilience fund. At least a rough figure has now been stuck to it, but we still do not understand exactly where the funding is supposed to come from and nor do we understand who it is supposed to be given to directly, how it would be disbursed or what purpose it would serve. It will be of great interest to the many communities across Scotland that have undergone economic shock in recent times that it is only now and in specific circumstances that the Labour Party has decided to call for a resilience fund. Lewis Macdonald (North East Scotland) (Lab): I recognise the point that the member makes about working out the detail, but does he at least acknowledge the value of the principle of an intervention fund for industries that suffer sudden shocks to the system, as has happened to the oil and gas industry in Aberdeen, and will he call on his ministerial colleagues to endorse that principle? Mark McDonald: Until I understand exactly what the fund is to be used for and where it is to be directed, it is difficult for me to say anything about the broad principle of such a fund. Having a pot of money is all well and good, but it needs to be targeted. The Scottish Government’s intervention to establish a jobs task force is right, because it has been established with a defined purpose to support individuals and companies for which redundancies are arising or have the potential to arise. Fergus Ewing: Is Mr McDonald aware that, during the 13 years of the Labour Party’s period as the United Kingdom Government, successive Labour Governments received in total in taxation from oil not £10 million but £93,000 million and that not one penny was set aside for Scotland, whether in a resilience fund or an oil fund? Mark McDonald: I absolutely acknowledge that. Anybody who has cast a cursory glance over the letters pages of The Press and Journal in recent weeks will have seen that people in the north-east are not being hoodwinked. Jackie Baillie said that she would be interested to look at the detail of the cabinet secretary’s announcement on tax. To compare what was proposed at the Finance Committee and what the cabinet secretary has announced, she had to do only two things. One was to read the annex to the Finance Committee report, which outlines what Gavin Brown proposed, and the other was to write down what the cabinet secretary announced on the bandings. I would not have thought that that would be a stretch for her. If Jackie Baillie had done that, she would have found that the threshold up to which people will not pay tax has been increased, which will help more first-time buyers, and that the upper threshold for the 5 per cent rate has been reduced from the £500,000 that Gavin Brown proposed to £325,000, as the cabinet secretary outlined, which will ensure that those who buy properties at the higher end of the market pay a fair share of taxation on those purchases. She can put out her pre-prepared lines if she wants, but she should at least take cognisance of what has happened in the debate before she does so. I will have to be brief, because I took two interventions. On adjustment to the block grant, we need to learn lessons from what the UK Government has dragged its heels on. That applies to future taxation and to late announcements—an issue that has been highlighted by, for example, Professor David Heald. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I am afraid that you must finish, Mr McDonald. Mark McDonald: While we have to consult and announce our proposals early, the Treasury and the chancellor have the ability to pull the rug out. The chancellor attempted to do that with stamp duty and it could happen again in relation to income tax and assignation of VAT. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Mr McDonald, we have no time. Mark McDonald: We have to ensure that there is a fair financial playing field when it comes to devolved taxation in the future.
Posted on: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 23:08:22 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015