I am most grateful to my noble friend for the stand that he has taken on corporation tax. That is an example of an existing tax. We are not talking about existing taxes. My noble friend has confused the issue—I am sure not deliberately. We are talking about the creation of completely new taxes that would apply only in Scotland but which might have an impact on the rest of the United Kingdom.
I am simply saying that the procedure included in the Bill, which requires that to be dealt with by order, is inadequate. It should be dealt with by primary legislation. My noble friend is, in effect, enabling Ministers, by Order in Council—without having to go through the whole difficulty of introducing primary legislation—to give consent to new taxes that might be proposed by the Scottish Parliament. In doing so, he is driving a coach and horses through the way in which we levy taxation in this country. That is a huge step and that is why I feel strongly about it.
What is particularly irritating is that it is unnecessary to do that to achieve my noble friend's objectives. In his reply, he said, ““Of course, we have these agreed criteria””. Everything he said has been about how the Executive will ensure that there is protection. The whole point of our parliamentary democracy is that Parliament should provide protection for the people, because it is accountable to people in a way that the Executive are not. The Executive are accountable to Parliament. This procedure suggests that we should have an order. In this House, not only is it unamendable but, by convention, we do not vote against it.
That is a big step for no apparent reason other than administrative convenience—unless, of course, it is in the Government's mind that they want to give more powers to raise taxes or create new taxes without the bother of having to go through the procedure of having another Scotland Bill. I can well understand, given the time that I have devoted to my noble friend, why he might wish not to have another Scotland Bill and prefer the convenience of this procedure, but that is not right. Therefore, I am not satisfied with his response. I can see that I am not going to change his mind, and I am certainly not going to win a vote on this, so I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 15 withdrawn.
Amendment 16
Moved by
Scotland Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 28 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Scotland Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
736 c1486-7 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:51:20 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822476
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822476
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_822476