Pre-Budget Report

I do not think that Scotland is fundamentally different from the rest of the UK. We all face the same problem and we are all experiencing the beginning of cuts. For example, I am meeting the Minister for Science and Innovation in a few days' time about the impact of cuts in that sphere. We cannot have an indiscriminate approach to public spending reduction, and my argument is not that the cuts should not happen, in Scotland or anywhere else, but that they have to be much more carefully thought through and targeted. That is the approach that I would adopt. The Select Committee's report, although expressed guardedly as it represents a cross-party consensus, contains some serious implied criticisms of the pre-Budget report, which take two forms. The first is the acknowledgement that the Government have been nowhere near detailed enough in spelling out how they will approach future cuts in spending. The key conclusion reads:""However we note that although the Treasury believe the Pre-Budget Report contains sufficient detail about the way in which the structural deficit would be reduced, our expert witnesses all criticised the document for not providing enough information about how this will be achieved."" The Committee does not say that it agrees with the expert witnesses, but that is implied. The second criticism is of excessive optimism about economic growth in the future. The report states:""There is, however, considerable scepticism among economists around the Government's growth forecasts for 2011-12."" That is a hedged-around comment, but its drift is clear. The criticisms have been made and need to be taken seriously. I would add the additional, and most serious, criticism that the Government have mobilised to raise taxes—£113.5 billion over four years—but instead of using that money to consolidate the budget, as they will surely have to do as they themselves acknowledge, they have committed it to additional spending. That is surely wrong and has sent all the wrong signals.