What the Scottish National Party will try to do inWestminster
蘇格蘭民族黨在議會中的舉動意欲何在
WITH hardly a glimpse of tartan, Nicola Sturgeon,leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), presented her squad of 56 MPs at the House ofCommons on May 11th (although she herself is not one of them). Their increased numbers—theSNP won all but three Scottish seats—represented a victory beyond most nationalists' dreams.Yet their modest demeanour suggested that, for now, they have come to London to dobusiness, not to cause chaos.
A decade ago the scale of the SNP's success would have been seen as a mandate forindependence. Alex Salmond, Ms Sturgeon's predecessor, drew that conclusion again. ButMs Sturgeon claims separation is not high on her agenda. She has even played down the ideaof a speedy introduction of full fiscal autonomy, seeking only a promise from Westminster tostart handing more powers to Scotland.
Part of the reason for the more cautious tone is that the collapsing oil price and the declineof offshore revenues has made independence seem like a dubious proposition. The Institutefor Fiscal Studies (IFS), an independent think-tank, calculates that, under full taxautonomy,Scotland would need to find an additional 7.6 billion (12 billion) to close its deficitto British levels, a gap it reckons will widen to 9.7 billion, or 4.9% of Scottish GDP, by 2019-20.To accept tax autonomy without continuing to receive the substantial subsidy Scotlandcurrently gets from the Treasury is “tantamount to economic suicide”, says George Kerevan, anSNP politician.
Another explanation for the caution is that, after last September's independencereferendum, in which 55% of Scots voted to remain part of Britain, David Cameron, the primeminister, promised to give Scotland new fiscal powers. Over the next five years the Scottishgovernment is due to gain control of earned-income taxes, air-passenger duty and a levy onaggregates such as sand and gravel. It will also be assigned the revenues of the first tenpercentage points of value-added tax and oversee around 2.5 billion, or about 15%, of welfarespending. The IFS reckons this will make Ms Sturgeon responsible for raising about half of whather government spends.
She and her party nonetheless could, and probably will, give Mr Cameron a headache. Thoughnot rushing now to achieve it in full, Ms Sturgeon has made clear that she wants even morefiscal control. She would like to oversee most welfare spending, as well as corporation taxand national-insurance payments. The SNP hopes to reduce employers' contributions tonational insurance in order to compensate for raising the minimum wage. Ms Sturgeon wantsthe floor to rise from 6.50 per hour now to 8.70 by 2020. This, she says, would enable her toboost the economy, reduce the deficit and move towards full tax autonomy more quickly.
The new SNP intake can also be expected to make full use of their privileges as the third-largestparty at Westminster. MPs will pose tricky questions and use committee chairmanships to harrythe government, especially over austerity. Ms Sturgeon argues that such actions would notjust be on behalf of Scots but for all Britons. She sees Labour entering “a period ofintrospection” and claims the SNP will be “the principal opposition” in Westminster.
This leaves Labour in a bind over whether to position itself to the SNP's right or left. But it alsoposes a dilemma for Mr Cameron. He could concede to what the SNP wants, in order to avertfurther fracturing between Scotland and England—but that would imply the Scots were right toelect them. Or he could dig in and allow himself to be caricatured as the Scots' enemy. Eitherway, Ms Sturgeon looks to be sitting pretty.