WESTMINSTER faces a "no brainer" choice between giving Holyrood £15 billion worth of new tax powers under the UK Government's plans or creating a £10bn black hole in the nation's coffers under the SNP's flagship policy of Full Fiscal Autonomy, according to David Mundell.
The declaration from the Scottish Secretary is the opening salvo on the first of two days of House of Commons debate on the new Scotland Bill, which will focus on tax powers today and welfare powers tomorrow.
The level of heat that will be generated has already been illustrated in pre-debate skirmishes, with the SNP insisting the choice is between Holyrood or David Cameron's Conservatives exercising control over Scottish policies.
The Liberal Democrats have condemned the SNP's approach, with their Scottish leader Willie Rennie urging them to unite behind the Bill "instead of putting forward amendments designed to divide".
For its part, Labour has urged politicians to "stop playing games with the constitution" and focus on how to use the significant powers the Scottish Parliament is about to receive.
From the UK Government's perspective, the legislation will make Holyrood one of the most powerful devolved parliaments on the planet, ensuring it has a wide range of tax powers worth, when £4bn of VAT receipts are assigned to Edinburgh, £15bn.
"This is a 'deal or no deal' moment for the fans of FFA," declared Mr Mundell. "They can either vote for a more powerful Scottish Parliament that shares risks and resources with the rest of the UK or they can support a black hole plan, that would cost Scotland the same amount as we currently spend on education and justice combined. Most people would consider this a bit of a no brainer."
The Clydesdale MP made clear FFA would be bad for Scotland, leaving the nation with £10bn less to spend by the end of this Parliament; this, he noted, was equal to the amount the Scottish Government spent on education and justice.
When coupled together with Edinburgh's dramatically lower oil forecasts, he added: "This makes their current policy of full fiscal autonomy for Scotland all the more of a full fiscal shambles."
The SNP, for their part, have tabled a raft of amendments to devolve extra powers from issues like working-age benefits to National Insurance.
A lengthy amendment on FFA refers to the UK and Scottish Governments entering into an "economic agreement" and notes the transfer of all tax and spending powers would be "implemented over a period of time as the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government acquire capacity to carry out their additional competences".
Labour and Tory critics have denounced this as a "full fiscal fudge" but the SNP 's Angus Robertson has hit back, saying: "At a time of savage cuts to the welfare state by the Tories - causing real hurt to hard working families and vulnerable people, and driving more and more people to food banks - the choice is between having welfare powers in Scotland's hands, or leaving them in the hands of Iain Duncan Smith and George Osborne. There is no other option."
He challenged Labour to support its proposals between "Scottish control or Tory control", adding: "Voting against the SNP's amendments or abstaining will signal that they prefer Tory control."
But Ian Murray for Labour, which has also put down a raft of amendments to give Holyrood more welfare powers and create greater spending transparency, urged people to keep their focus on the implementation of more powers.
"Too often it has seemed that getting one over on opponents is more important than getting the best deal for families in Scotland; people deserve better than that. It's time to stop playing games with the constitution and deliver for Scotland.
"Labour takes a grown-up and credible approach to the constitution. Where we agree with other parties we will say so. That's grown-up politics," added the Shadow Scottish Secretary.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article