People want more powers for Holyrood

Only then will he have any sort of mandate on which to challenge the most radical decentralisation of power ever seen in the history of the United Kingdom.

Devolution was never intended to magically cure all of the country's ills. It was intended to bring decision makers closer to the people whose lives it affects.

It seems that Mr Miers and other proponents of Conservative policies in Scotland have been so comprehensively rejected by voters in consecutive elections that they have been reduced to standing on the sidelines and shouting in increasingly shrill voices in order to make themselves heard.

Every relevant opinion poll published in recent years has clearly indicated that the Scottish people want Holyrood to have more powers, not fewer.

If Mr Miers is confident that he can swim against this tide of public opinion, he should stand for election.

CHRISTOPHER T McCALL

Great George Street

Glasgow

The so-called think-tank, the Policy Exchange, is obviously obsessed with spending its time blocking Scotland's progress rather than once and for all dealing with the issues that hold Scotland back from fully developing economically (Comment, 15 July).

It is constitutionally illiterate of it to expect the Scottish Parliament or indeed the Scottish Government to sort out Scotland's economy when the major levers of economic power pertaining to Scotland lie at Westminster.

Scotland is only independent on matters of health, education and justice. Our fiscal policy, which influences our economy, and therefore wealth, is decided in London by a government with very different considerations to those of Scotland. Portugal does not job-lot import fiscal policy from Spain so why does Scotland do so from London?

It is not only the Policy Exchange that seems blinkered to Scotland needs. Labour MPs from Scotland seem to prefer Cameron's Tory policies from Westminster to independence regardless of the opportunity cost and joblessness suffered in Scotland.

ANGUS B MacNEIL (SNP) MP

House of Commons

London

Far from the devolution of further fiscal powers being a "distraction", it is a fundamental part of a liberalising programme of reform that brings power closer to people. Reform Scotland has consistently advocated this approach because it is the key to a stronger economy and public services.

Empowering the Scottish Parliament and local authorities to raise much greater shares of their own revenues is essential if they are to be autonomous and accountable.

It would encourage diversity, innovation and better governance because different tiers of government would have to create an attractive environment for business and deliver high quality public services. That is how it works in many other countries.

The claim that Holyrood is already fiscally autonomous, since it has control over local taxes and part of income tax amounting to 14 per cent of spending, doesn't hold water.

It may be able to alter the overall level of taxation, but there is more to fiscal autonomy than that. I can't imagine many people would regard the UK Government as fiscally autonomous if 86 per cent of its spending came in a block grant from the EU.

Gaining greater fiscal powers for Holyrood is not a silver bullet. We should use existing devolved powers to improve the performance of public services and the framework for economic growth.

However, the reality is that when the bulk of Holyrood's revenue comes in a block grant from Westminster, it breeds the sort of conservative culture and reliance on public spending which Tom Miers is so against.

A sensible reform strategy would recognise that this reliance on a block grant is the fundamental weakness of the devolution settlement and that making the Scottish Parliament responsible for raising far more of its revenue would be an important catalyst for change.

GEOFF MAWDSLEY

REFORM SCOTLAND

Edinburgh