Why UK and Scottish Governments must 'step up' on devolution
In a long-running devolution row, the SNP councillor said she was 'disappointed' by the letter, accusing the Scottish Secretary of suggesting the 'UK Government has no role in delivering deals for Scottish cities'.
'This is a misguided regression from what, up until now, had been a shared commitment to successful tripartite collaboration between two governments and the collective democratic leadership of the City Region,' Ms Aitken said.
However, she said: 'Glasgow – and Edinburgh, for that matter – needs both of our governments to step up on devolution.'
Read more:
The back and forth comes after Ms Aitken raised concerns that Scotland's largest city had been sidelined by the Chancellor's spending review in June.
The Treasury confirmed a £160 million Investment Zone in the Glasgow Region and £20m for Trailblazer Communities, but Ms Aitken argued it fell short of the funding offered to English counterparts.
Ms Aitken said Rachel Reeves took a "retrograde" step for devolution by expanding a scheme that allowed city regions in England to bypass applying for individual grants through competitive bidding processes.
The designated areas instead will receive long-term funding to make their own investment decisions.
Glasgow, meanwhile, must bid for funding alongside other parts of the UK.
Mr Murray had argued that devolution in Scotland was entirely "a matter for the Scottish Government".
However, he said the UK Government wanted to work together to "unlock the same levels of growth as your English counterparts in Greater Manchester" and offered to draft a joint letter to Mr Swinney.
The Glasgow City Council leader said she was 'happy' to take up the Scottish Secretary's offer to write jointly to the First Minister.
However, she said any letter must also be addressed to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and the Chancellor, Ms Reeves.
Read more:
Writing for The Herald, Ms Aitken said: 'The vast majority of the powers to be devolved are, indeed, in the gift of the Scottish Government – and I've made no secret of my view that they need to put more pace behind commitments to empower Scotland's city regions.
'However, the devolution of powers without funding would still leave city regions in all of our devolved nations without the economic tools available to our English counterparts.'
Ms Aitken said that equivalent funding outlined for English regions has not resulted in any additional cash for Scotland, adding: 'Therefore, it is clear that the resourcing of any devolution deal remains the responsibility of the UK Government.'
In his letter to the council leader, Mr Murray said: 'We are always open to constructive discussions with the Scottish Government to reverse its centralisation policy and devolve powers to our cities and regions.'
The announcement from last month's spending review means that almost 40% of England's population will now have local control over the integrated settlement funding.
London, the North East, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire and Liverpool City region were added to the scheme, joining the original arrangements in Greater Manchester and West Midlands.
In her response to Mr Murray, Ms Aitken said that leaders of the UK Core Cities have combined to urge the UK Government to provide 'parity' in funding for Glasgow, Cardiff, Belfast and Edinburgh.
'They agree that we are being disadvantaged and that the recent UK Spending Review was a missed opportunity to begin to address that inequity,' she said.
The Scottish Government previously told The Herald it was looking at ways to devolve further powers to cities including Glasgow. But Secretary Shona Robison said the spending review 'short-changed' Scotland.
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'Councils play a crucial role in our communities which is why we jointly launched the Local Governance Review with COSLA to ensure communities have greater control and influence over decisions that affect them most.
'We are also committed to working with local authorities to deliver greater regional empowerment on decision making and investment and are working with partners to explore ways of devolving further powers to Regional Economic Partnerships, including Glasgow City Region.
'The Scottish Government has delivered a wide range of fiscal powers for local councils including greater powers within planning, parking charges, workplace parking and in Council Tax, being able to charge up to 100% on second and long term empty homes. In addition, the two-year local government pay offer, accepted by trade unions last week, will see all workers getting the pay they deserve over the summer.'
A UK Government spokesperson said: "The UK government has delivered record funding for the Scottish government with an additional £9.1 billion in Barnett consequentials over the next four years, this includes an additional £380m as a result of plans for housing, communities and local government in England.
"On top of this the UK Government is also investing £1.7 billion in local projects across Scotland. We are pleased Councillor Aitken recognises that the powers that need to be devolved to city regions sit with Holyrood, and the Secretary of State for Scotland is looking forward to working with her to reverse an agenda of centralisation of both power and funding which has unfortunately been a hallmark of recent Scottish Government policy."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
12 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
'SNP government shouldn't be letting our own industry die'
They expanded into bus services and coachbuilding a century ago, in 1924, and grew to be one of the country's leading coachbuilders. Today, Alexander Dennis is a major player in the global bus industry, providing good, high-skilled manufacturing jobs across the country and exporting Scottish-built buses as far afield as Hong Kong, Malaysia, New Zealand, and the United States, with 31,000 ADL buses in service around the world, carrying 25,000 passengers every minute of each day. But this Scottish industrial success story is under threat as the ADL board now propose closing its Scottish manufacturing base and moving all production to Scarborough, citing a lack of demand from Scottish bus operators for their new electric buses. The closure of the Falkirk and Larbert factories would be a devastating blow for our country, with 400 job losses and another key Scottish industry gone. But this hasn't happened overnight – it is a direct result of the SNP government's self-defeating procurement policy that has failed to support this Scottish industry. Most of the new electric buses being bought by the likes of First Glasgow and McGill's are partially funded by Scottish Government subsidies. I recently asked the Scottish Government how many of these buses funded by the Scottish Zero Emission Bus Challenge Fund were made here in Scotland. While I knew that too often the government's procurement policy failed to bolster the domestic industry, I was shocked that less than a third of these buses were made in Scotland. Of the 523 electric buses funded through the Scottish Government subsidy scheme, more than two-thirds, 340 buses, have been manufactured overseas, with 287 buses – over half – made in China by Yutong. The reality is that while the Scottish Government has failed to support Alexander Dennis, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, has bought over 160 Alexander Dennis electric buses to operate on the new publicly controlled Bee Network bus franchise. If the Mayor of Greater Manchester can buy Scottish buses, why can't the First Minister? The Scottish Government's public procurement policy is not fit for purpose as, unlike in every other part of the UK, it completely disregards the 'social value' that is created in the local area. They are asleep at the wheel while other countries take increasingly assertive measures to develop their industrial champions. The Scottish electric bus scheme is weighted primarily towards financial cost (40%) with 'wider community and decarbonisation benefit' – including job creation – receiving only a 10% weighting. Chinese firms like Yutong exploit lower labour costs and weaker employment rights, allowing them to substantially undercut Alexander Dennis on price. While the process did include criteria for job creation and wider community benefits, the weighting of just 10% was far too low to counterbalance the cost advantages of overseas suppliers. As a result, the Scottish Government effectively prioritised the cheapest bids, regardless of where the resulting buses were made or the domestic economic benefits they could generate. It's amazing that Alexander Dennis won any contracts at all, given how the government's scheme was so unfairly rigged against its own industrial base. This senseless and damaging procurement policy must urgently be reformed to unashamedly support critical manufacturers in Scotland by prioritising wider social value considerations over financial cost, which domestic firms would be better placed to meet, rather than the perverse situation where Scottish taxpayers are subsidising foreign competitors putting hundreds of our own workers out of a job. When the government buys a bus from Alexander Dennis, it doesn't just support that business. For every job in bus manufacturing, it is estimated that there is a multiplier effect of three to four jobs in the wider supply chain. The negative impact is already being seen. A major supplier to Alexander Dennis, Greenfold Systems in Dunfermline, has made 80 workers redundant after a key contract between the two firms was withdrawn. The lack of social value weighting and understanding of the multiplier effect goes beyond procuring new buses. Earlier this year, the Scottish Government announced that the new fleet of Loch-class electric ferries for Caledonian MacBrayne would be built by Remontowa in Gdańsk, Poland. The Scottish Government-owned Ferguson Marine in Port Glasgow lost out on the contract, meaning the only thing keeping the lights on at that site is subcontract work for Type 26 Frigates from BAE Systems. The decision to award Remontowa the contract was based upon a weighting of 65% technical and 35% financial. At no stage was social value considered – the jobs that would have come from the contract or the positive economic boost to the west of Scotland. If Scotland is to reindustrialise, the Scottish Government must urgently embrace a more assertive, ambitious, and coordinated approach to industrial policy that is geared towards supporting Scotland's industrial champions, not foreign competitors. With Alexander Dennis recently extending the consultation on closure, it's still not too late; every avenue should be exhausted to safeguard jobs and save this crown jewel of Scottish industry.
Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The Afghan fiasco shows how badly the last Tory government let you down
The lifting of the superinjunction this week has exposed gross failings committed by those trusted to keep us safe. The truth about how and why this happened must come out. It must never happen again. There are some basic facts which the public needs to know and should have known from the start. Firstly, if a court issues an injunction relating to government business, Ministers are prohibited from speaking publicly about it for fear of being held in contempt of court. Anyone who is claiming that those who have left Government, could or should have 'blown the whistle' before the injunction was lifted does not understand our legal or political system. Like the media, many of us have been unable to speak on this for a long time. Secondly, and for context, the Afghanistan Response Route (ARR) was launched in April 2024 for those Afghan nationals affected by the leak. This was after I had left the Government and I was not involved in its set up or functioning. The ARR should not be confused with the Afghanistan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) which was set up in 2021 to rescue soldiers and translators who had served alongside our brave British soldiers that fought and died in Afghanistan. Thirdly, the mistaken data leak came from inside the Ministry of Defence. There is much more that needs to be said about the conduct of and competence within the Ministry of Defence and the House of Commons is the right place to do so. I hope we have the opportunity soon. Lastly, any plans to bring in 24,000 Afghan nationals are wholly wrong for our country. Many of these people will not be genuine in their claims to have helped British troops, many of them will pose a public safety and national security risk to the British people and we simply do not have the resources to accommodate them. What's worse is that all who have now arrived here will be able to bring their families under Article 2 of the ECHR. As Home Secretary, I tried my best to fix the crisis but ultimately failed. 40,000 migrants had crossed the Channel by the end of 2023, over 100,000 asylum seekers were being processed through our slow-moving system and tens of thousands were being housed in hotels all over the country – all this costing the taxpayer £6 million per day. It was out of control and still is. Whilst I managed to reduce the number of hotels used by asylum seekers, much more was required. What we needed to do – as I argued at the time – was to leave the ECHR so we had greater powers to detain and deport. If we had taken those steps in 2023 when we were in power, the Rwanda scheme would have been up and running and the small boats problem would have eased, if not been fixed entirely. We would have had much less pressure on the system and the costs would have fallen. We would have been able to refuse admission to 24,000 Afghans affected by the leak as they would not have been able to rely on Article 2 (right to life) rights or we could have worked with other nations like Pakistan or Rwanda to take them. In all this disgraceful betrayal of the people by their own government, I feel only shame. I, and a handful of others, fought this: but we failed to stop it. This is why on election night last year I apologised for what we had got wrong. This is why I warned about the direction we were heading in back in 2023. The last Conservative government let you down. The cover-up was wrong, the super injunction was wrong, and the failure to stop unwanted mass immigration has been unforgivable. So I am sorry: the Conservative government failed you and its leaders let you down. It wasn't good enough then. It's not good enough now. This episode exposes everything wrong with the Westminster establishment. The State apparatus thinks it can hide its failures behind legal technicalities while ordinary people pay the price. I understand your anger, and I share it. The people who have run this country so badly need to take a long, hard look at themselves. Those responsible must be held accountable, and the system that enabled this cover-up has to be dismantled.
The Herald Scotland
25 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
So you want progressive taxes, SNP? Fine: start with a land tax
Stories about wealthy people fleeing to avoid taxes are scarcely a novelty. Some of Scotland's most feted thespians and entrepreneurs have been following that route for decades. The others seem to have survived and feel no envy for the departed brethren, boring each other in sun-kissed places. The 'scare story' keeps running, however, as a deterrent to any government initiatives which might inconvenience the greediest. Never mind that it was Brexit which prompted more such departures than anything else. According to the Tax Justice Network, an average of 30 press articles a day appeared about 'the non-existent millionaire exodus in 2024', fed by lobbyists hired to promote the fiction. Read more by Brian Wilson In fact, many wealthy people want to do the right thing, particularly if they have acquired that status by creating businesses and employment to match. A fractional increase in taxation is not going to send them scurrying for their passports. As entrepreneurs, they are likely to be more concerned about the impact of business taxes than personal ones. The old statistic which gave rise to a theatre company, when seven per cent of the people owned 84 per cent of the wealth, is seriously in need of updating. Now, the richest one per cent own more wealth than the bottom 70 per cent while, according to Oxfam, billionaires pay 'effective tax rates close to 0.3 per cent of their wealth'. It's a pretty compelling case for starting to redress that gross imbalance while also contributing a few billion to the public finances, but it won't happen overnight or by grand announcement. Putting in place new structures which would be fair and effective, without unintended consequences, will be extremely complicated and take time, in the teeth of fierce resistance. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be embarked upon. Where better to start than in Scotland, which should be looking creatively at its own revenue options, beyond ritual moans about not being sent enough money or by raising income tax rates for people who are not at all wealthy. The number caught in Scotland-only higher tax rates has almost doubled in three years to over 700,000 and that particular well is running dry. People don't need private jets to escape a 48 per cent rate of income tax. The Scottish Affairs Select Committee at Westminster delivered a report this week which said the Barnett Formula is working well for Scotland and also that the Scottish Government should have more borrowing powers. I endorse both conclusions, but we can surely be more progressive than that? As one would expect, the SNP's contribution to the committee's work was based on their constitutional objective under the guise of Full Fiscal Economy, which nobody – including themselves – takes seriously. They just feel obliged to keep making that noise while, in real life, taking the money Barnett delivers, even more generously since the election of a Labour government. The area in which a radical Scottish Government could do immediate work is by replacing the council tax which is a regressive system introduced by the Tories in 1991 and causes no inconvenience whatsoever to the wealthiest in the land, particularly if their wealth is related to that very commodity – land. Eight years ago, SNP ministers asked for a report from their own Land Commission on the option of a Land Value Tax. In theory, this should be attractive to them because it plays into other stated objectives on which, otherwise, nothing is happening – land reform through greater diversity of ownership, land being freed up for housing, derelict land being brought into use, and so on. The Land Commission spelt out potential benefits of a Land Value Tax. 'Aside from raising revenue, one of the main theoretical benefits of land value taxation is that it should encourage land to be used more productively. This is because it is based on the value of land in its optimum use as opposed to its actual use. 'Taxing land value should also be an efficient approach to taxation because the supply of land is relatively fixed so taxing it should not affect supply. Whereas income taxes reduce incentives to work and corporation taxes reduce incentives to invest, taxing the value of land should not affect the amount of land available'. Funding arrangements for the Scottish Parliament are again under review (Image: Newsquest) For good measure: 'Taxing land is also attractive for administrative reasons because land cannot be moved so land value taxes should be difficult to avoid or evade.' At the end of all that, one wondered: 'What is there not to like?'. To be fair, the Commission added the caveat: 'The research did not find unequivocal evidence that proves they definitely deliver the various benefits often claimed of them. Any further steps toward implementation must therefore be taken with caution.' That was the get-out clause which the Scottish Government gratefully accepted. Whereas there is 'unequivocal evidence' that the existing system is deeply regressive, leaves large areas of Scotland untaxed and local government near bankrupt, there is no 'unequivocal evidence' that trying something else might produce better results. So after 18 years of SNP government, the Tory solution of 1991 – based on not offending the wealthy – remains undisturbed. Under the devolution settlement, the Scottish Government could only apply radical reform to funding councils rather than to national taxation. But it would be a start which would signal a genuine commitment to redistribution. And maybe if they tried it, working closely with the UK Government, it could become not just the most radical and interesting outcome Holyrood has ever delivered, but also a stepping-stone towards delivering a fairer tax system for the whole country. Or is it easier just to shout 'wealth tax' while avoiding even the smallest advance towards that objective? Brian Wilson is a former Labour Party politician. He was MP for Cunninghame North from 1987 until 2005 and served as a Minister of State from 1997 to 2003.
