Fiscal framework: Clock ticks on doing a deal
- Published
Time ticks on as both sides attempt to agree the fiscal framework
According to David Mundell, the gap between the UK and Scottish governments on the subject of future spending amounts to a "molehill" - by comparison, that is, with the tax powers on offer.
Pursued by the wicked media, Mr Mundell declined to quantify the size of said molehill. However, he gave us to understand that it was small.
By contrast, the verdict from Scottish Ministers might be, to misquote Winston Churchill, "some mole, some hill." (See the great man's Ottawa speech from 1941.)
Mr Mundell said he would not outline the dimensions of said earthly eruption because that would be to enter into a "running commentary" upon the detail of the talks. Which would be wrong.
His news briefing, by contrast, was dealing with very general matters. Which was entirely fine. Certainly, with me. (Actually, I would like the running commentary too - but one step at a time.)
The Scottish Secretary, it should be reported, appeared to be in fine mischievous form - while treating the topic with due seriousness.
At one point, he suggested that the Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney was "chancing his arm" in trying to wring more cash from the Treasury.
Team Swinney, needless to say (which is why I say it), insist that their man is the most "straight-backed" politician in such matters, the very pillar of rectitude. Was that an "if only" I detected in the distance?
David Mundell says a deal is possible next week
John Swinney says there is some way to go before a deal is reached
Meanwhile at First Minister's questions Nicola Sturgeon turned upon Ruth Davidson of the Tories when she suggested that the Scottish government might loosen up a little, certainly on timetable if not on substance.
Ms Sturgeon positively pounced. She would not, she said, abandon Scottish interests. The FM suggested that Ms Davidson might usefully spend her time contacting her London colleagues to prevent "billions" being taken from Scotland's budget.
Beneath the rhetoric, there is a serious point there. One or two in the Scottish government have come to believe that this issue may only be resolved if and when the Prime Minister tells the Treasury that there is a bigger prize at stake; namely the redemption of the Vow to which Mr Cameron appended his signature.
Mr Mundell is, of course, of a different view. He minimises the difference - and suggests that a deal is possible next week.
His latest initiative was to suggest that a review might be held after a few years to ensure that the deal remained fair. From his perspective, it is a reasonable move but one which, I would suggest, is scarcely likely to placate Scottish ministers.
What stage are we at?
Why so? Well, if they think the deal is a stinker now, they are scarcely likely to be impressed by the notion of confirming its pungency a few years down the line.
So where are we? The Treasury says it has offered a deal which is fair to Scotland and rUK. As I disclosed earlier this week, it has offered to modulate the offer to take account of population differences. In effect, a Barnett formula for tax and welfare.
Scottish Ministers say the deal remains unacceptable. They have offered to ensure that any cash raised in England from alterations in tax would stay in England and would not have any Barnett consequentials for Scotland.
Which is an offer - although, again, it is one that is presaged in the Smith commission. Mr Mundell seemed to think it was simply common sense - and not much of a concession.
There is a further SG concern. New welfare powers are being transferred to Scotland. By contrast with the tax deal, that means topping up the block grant. The SG concern is that the top-up will match population share, not historically higher need.
So where do we go from here? Treasury officials are in St Andrew's House today, trying to strike a bargain. The next round of Ministerial talks are scheduled for Monday. Maybe we will learn the dimensions of the molehill then.