THE UK Government has been urged to “deal with the fact” that it has no mandate in Scotland.
Tommy Sheppard took the issue up in the Commons with Leader of the House Jacob Rees-Mogg.
The SNP MP also raised concerns about English Votes for English Laws (EVEL) being used on funding issues which will impact services in Scotland.
Sheppard said: “I want to gently say to the Leader of the House that the fact he will not answer my question does not make it go away.
“So I ask him again: when is the Government going to bring forward proposals to deal with the fact that it does not have a mandate north of the Scottish border?”
Sheppard pointed out that the question was being asked in a week when a new poll found more than half of voters in Scotland want indyref2 in the next five years – the lifetime of the current UK Parliament. The YouGov study reported that 55% of voters think Boris Johnson should not stand in the way of another independence referendum by 2025 – while only 27% think this should not be the case.
READ MORE: Poll reveals half of Scottish voters want indyref2 in five years
He continued: “So when will this government stop ignoring that and deal with it?”
Rees-Mogg claimed the SNP MP was making a “very typical confusion”, adding: “That is to say when an answer is given that is not the answer that is wanted that does not mean that the question has not been answered. These are two separate concepts, so I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I have given previously.”
Sheppard also urged the Tory government to make arrangements to allow MPs to debate its spending estimates.
On Monday, the House will be asked to approve funds for public expenditure ahead of the Budget to be announced on March 11.
Each year, three "estimates days" are set aside for the House to consider the estimates of public spending by Government departments.
But Sheppard raised concerns over the use of the EVEL for funding, saying that it would have an impact on the money available for services in Scotland.
Addressing Rees-Mogg, he said: "The Leader may remember that when EVEL was introduced, this party made the argument that many of the matters which are reserved to England and Wales have consequences through the Barnett Formula for the funding of services in Scotland.
"We were told at that time that since Barnett was essentially about money rather than policy, the proper place to debate this would be when the House comes to consider the estimates.
"Now we have a bizarre situation coming up next week where this House is being asked to approve hundreds of billions of pounds of public expenditure without any debate at all.
"I know that is because the Liaison Committee has not met, but that is hardly our responsibility and therefore I want to ask the Leader, will the Government make arrangements to allow this House to debate the estimates and for us to move amendments about the consequences that they would have for public services in Scotland?"
WATCH: Michael Gove refuses to call SNP by their proper name
Rees-Mogg replied: "I have sympathy for what [Sheppard] is saying, there are deadlines in terms of when the estimates have to be approved by but the Government is conscious that it owes the Liaison Committee and the Back Bench Committee time to consider these issues and that will be an opportunity for [Sheppard] and his party to debate the matters that they wish to bring forward."
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel