Fiscal devolution is about more than just transferring powers from one
parliament to another. It has to be part of a strategy to reduce inequality in
Scotland.
That was the key message in my Sunday Times (£) column yesterday. I set
out the options for fiscal devolution and my own preferred option as described
in the Red Paper on Scotland and UNISON Scotland’s ‘Fairer Scotland –
Devolution’ paper. This approach devolves all property-based and income taxes,
including the power to vary the rate in each band. Business and consumption
taxes are retained at UK level, because business tax competition simply leads
to a race to the bottom.
I also took the opportunity to rebut some of the recent criticisms of
fiscal devolution, including the impact on the Barnett formula and the risk
that further devolution will lead to independence. Both in my view miss the
point completely.
However, the main thrust of my column was that powers, including fiscal
devolution, have to be for a purpose. That purpose is a fairer and more equal
Scotland because more equal societies perform better on every measure.
The Yes campaign and the White Paper makes much of the OECD 2011 paper
that appears to show the UK as the fourth most unequal society in the developed
world. However, this selective use of the paper only deals with income
inequality. The OECD paper actually emphasises the role of public services in
reducing inequality. The paper says:
“But
public services improved their impact on reducing inequality. Social spending
in the UK relies more on public services (such as education, health etc.) than
on cash transfers: spending on services amounts to over 15.4% of GDP while
spending on cash transfers is some 10%. These services reduce inequality more
than almost anywhere else, and this impact has increased over the 2000s.”
This is why the strongest argument for fiscal devolution is that
Scotland is suffering from the financial consequences of English public service
reform as the Tories shrink the state. Having the power to develop our own
public service model is weakened if the financial rug is pulled from under it.
University privatisation and NHS cuts are two recent examples. The IPPR ‘Devo
More’ paper makes a similar point.
The OECD key policy recommendations are also noting:
·
Employment
is the most promising way of tackling inequality. The biggest challenge is creating
more and better jobs that offer good career prospects and a real chance to
people to escape poverty.
·
Investing
in human capital is key. This must begin from early childhood and be sustained
through compulsory education. Once the transition from school to work has been
accomplished, there must be sufficient incentives for workers and employers to
invest in skills throughout the working life.
·
Reforming
tax and benefit policies is the most direct instrument for increasing
redistributive effects. Large and persistent losses in low-income groups
following recessions underline the importance of government transfers and
well-conceived income-support policies.
·
The
growing share of income going to top earners means that this group now has a
greater capacity to pay taxes. In this context governments may re-examine the
redistributive role of taxation to ensure that wealthier individuals contribute
their fair share of the tax burden.
·
The
provision of freely accessible and high-quality public services, such as
education, health, and family care, is important.
The Yes campaign would of course argue that we could do all of this with
independence. There is a certain irony that the SNP’s currency union could
actually result in greater financial control from ‘London’ than fiscal
devolution. The SNP (Stewart Hosie’s line in the last BBC debate) would still
have us believe that Scandinavian levels of public services are possible on
current tax rates. Scandamerica is simply not a credible proposition for anyone
who is serious about tackling inequality.
All the polls make it clear that the majority of Scots want to see
greater devolution short of outright independence. Scottish Labour has to go
with that majority by arguing for the fiscal powers that can help deliver a
vision of the fairer and more equal society. Anything short of that really
would encourage a drift to independence.
No comments:
Post a Comment