Scotland Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: HM Treasury

Scotland Bill

Brian H. Donohoe Excerpts
Tuesday 21st June 2011

(12 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stewart Hosie Portrait Stewart Hosie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It has to be initially to get this kicked in. At that point, the Scottish Government are rightly responsible for their revenue raising and their tax spending within it. That is normal, grown up and quite appropriate.

Brian H. Donohoe Portrait Mr Brian H. Donohoe (Central Ayrshire) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

I ask a simple question: what does the hon. Gentleman mean by “initially”?

Stewart Hosie Portrait Stewart Hosie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

A permanent reduction for corporation tax to be devolved and taking responsibility for the income we raise to pay for the services we have.

--- Later in debate ---
Stewart Hosie Portrait Stewart Hosie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It will not be a reduction because we will have the corporation tax yield, which is comparable to the reduction in the block. It is the same amount of money initially and we take responsibility thereafter.

Brian H. Donohoe Portrait Mr Donohoe
- Hansard - -

rose

--- Later in debate ---
Stewart Hosie Portrait Stewart Hosie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I suspect that any MP trying to take a carry-out through airport security would immediately be stopped.

The devolution of alcohol excise duties would also enable the Scottish Government to implement a revised alcohol duty structure to offer greater protection to the competitive position of Scotch whisky, something we have tried to do on several occasions in a number of past Finance Bills. On 12 May 2009, the vote on alcohol duty took place at half-past midnight. We were trying to implement a fair rate of duty—which we can achieve through the devolution of excise duties—so that alcoholic beverages were taxed on their alcohol content, and on no other spurious measures. Interestingly, five Conservatives managed to vote with us, yet 268 Labour Members voted against, thereby maintaining the unfair level of duty on Scotch whisky. I am sure the hon. Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Jim Sheridan) is sincere in his view, but it does not stand the scrutiny of the recent voting record.

The devolution of excise duties ought to be handled through the devolution of additional powers as described in the amendment, because alcohol duty is levied on all products consumed in the UK irrespective of their country of origin. As a result, the UK Exchequer collects duty on Scotch whisky only if it is consumed in the UK, as exported whisky is not liable for excise duty. Similarly, imported products such as spirits produced overseas are liable for duty when entering the country to be sold in the UK market. We seek to devolve this power, and the Scottish Government seek the responsibility to vary the rate of duty levied on products in Scotland and to implement a more streamlined and efficient system of alcohol taxation that better targets rates of duty to combat binge drinking and excessive consumption of cheap alcoholic products, and that supports a fairer and less discriminatory system for premium products such as Scotch whisky.

Brian H. Donohoe Portrait Mr Donohoe
- Hansard - -

Will the hon. Gentleman at least give credence to the fact that over a great number of years previous Governments held back from imposing higher taxes on Scotch whisky, along with all other spirits, and that as a consequence the level playing field he seeks is close to being achieved?

Stewart Hosie Portrait Stewart Hosie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am prepared to recognise that duty did not rise for a number of years, but that is not the point I am making. My point is that alcohol taxation is unfair because it is based on different types of alcoholic drink, and not entirely on alcoholic strength.

Brian H. Donohoe Portrait Mr Donohoe
- Hansard - -

But it is getting to that point.

Stewart Hosie Portrait Stewart Hosie
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is no such thing, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman’s contacts in the Scotch whisky industry will confirm.

There is a strong social case for the devolution of alcohol duty, not least because there is clear evidence that, for alcohol, price is a driver of consumption. There is strong evidence from numerous surveys in Europe, America, Canada, New Zealand and elsewhere that levels of alcohol consumption in the population are closely linked to the retail price of alcohol. As it becomes more affordable, consumption increases, and as the relative price increases, consumption falls.

We, and the Scottish Government, are committed to introducing a minimum price for alcohol, and gaining control over the excise duties would provide an additional mechanism to address excessive alcohol consumption. That would help to reduce the annual cost of alcohol misuse in Scotland. Devolving excise duty would enable a future minimum price per unit to be established within the excise system. Under the current system, the introduction of a minimum price is estimated to generate additional revenue for retailers, not the UK or Scottish Government. That was the argument the Labour party made in the Scottish Parliament. Devolving excise duty for alcohol would therefore result in all the additional revenue from increasing the price of low-cost alcohol products accruing to the Scottish Government, and those revenues could then be reinvested in public services in Scotland. The case for devolving alcohol duties is very strong indeed.