Currently viewing the category: "Barnett Formula"

Yesterday in the House of Commons there was a debate opened by David Mowat entitled Funding Formula in oral questions about Scotland and he raised the subject of using the Barnett formula to work out Scotland’s share of the national debt if it votes for independence.

What was said:

David Mowat What discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the funding formula for Scotland.

The reply from the minister

David Mundell The Government are aware of the concerns that have been expressed about the current system of devolution funding, whereby changes to the block grant are calculated according to the Barnett formula. Owing to the unprecedented deficit that we inherited, our immediate priority is to reduce the deficit, and we have no plans to change the present arrangements before the public finances have been stabilised.

The government cannot keep using the deficit to keep this unfair on England Barnett formula going.

The response:

David Mowat Given that the Government have no plans to replace the current formula with a formula based on need, and given the requirement for clarity so that the people of Scotland know what proportion of the national debt they will inherit before they vote, does my hon. Friend agree that the Barnett multiplier would provide a good solution?

I wonder if he has signed my petition on this very subject?


Other times Barnett Formula has been mentioned in Parliament to consider.

 

Yesterday in a Northern Irish Assembly debate the cat was let out of the bag about the unfair on England Barnett formula by Nelson McCausland who stated that the Barnett formula is not based on needs in the middle of his contribution to the debae.

What he said:

Nelson McCausland We must remember that the funding arrangements for social security are unique. They operate outside of the Barnett formula and are based on actual need. Therefore, in effect, our benefit costs are fully funded. However, that funding stream is predicated specifically on the maintenance of parity. Any additional costs arising from a breach of parity would have to be picked up by the Northern Ireland block grant. The statement of funding principles provides for funding to be reviewed if parity is breached.

There we have it social security is based in needs and is outside of the Barnett formula which by his admission is obviously not based on needs.


Other Barnett formula debates in the devolved administrations or social security debates in the devolved administrations.

 

Yesterday in the House of Commons debate entitled Oral Answers to Questions — Deputy Prime Minister the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg used the pathetic excuse that it is too complicated to get rid of the Barnett formula at the moment in a response to a question from Karen Lumley.

What was asked

Karen Lumley In 2010-11 the average public spending purse per person in Wales was £9,947, and for the west midlands it was only £8,679. In the light of the fact that Welsh MPs can vote on matters that affect my constituents, how can I justify that discrepancy to the people of Redditch?

You can’t justify if only an English Parliament will stop these inequalities affecting England.

The response:

Nick clegg I know that this is a sensitive issue, but I do not think that at a time like this, when we are seeking to fill the black hole in the public finances, reopening the mind-numbingly complex issue of the Barnett formula should be our No. 1 priority. That does not mean that we cannot make progress on how fiscal devolution could proceed in the United Kingdom, which is why the Silk commission has been established to look, for instance, at the new fiscal powers that could possibly be devolved to Wales in the future.

What about England having some powers for itself then?


Other times Barnett fomrula has been mention in Parliament to consider.

 
Set your Twitter account name in your settings to use the TwitterBar Section.