'I've created a monster' says man behind Scottish subsidy
Updated on 06 July 2007
Controversial funding which sees millions more spent in Scotland than England should be scrapped - the minister who invented it tells Channel 4 News online.
Lord Barnett describes the Barnett formula - which means £1,251 more is spent per head in Scotland than England - as 'deeply unfair and unacceptable' and says the 30-year-old funding system was not supposed to be a long-term measure.
The cash disparity has proved a controversial topic in recent years, with Scottish students not having to pay tuition fees, and drugs such as Lucentis, which prevents blindness, being prescribed in Scotland but not England.
Former Treasury Minister Barnett set the formula up in 1977 as part of a cost-cutting exercise, but now brands it "unacceptable."
The Labour Lord told Channel 4 News online: "At the time I did it I was having to make expenditure cuts all over the place.
'The problem is the formula is based on spending per head, rather than need. It needs to be changed.'Lord Barnett
"We just had to cut out Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and leave them to a settlement on a per capita [per head] basis.
"The trouble is it was never supposed to last this long. Thatcher and Major carried it on for 18 years - then Blair refused to change it.
"Cameron's got nothing to lose as he hasn't really got any seats in Scotland, so he's said he's not going to change it either!"
Latest Treasury figures show that Scotland's public spending is £6,154 a head, well above the £4,903 per head spent in England.
Lord Barnett said: "The problem is the formula is based on spending per head, rather than need. The differences in spending now are deeply unfair and unacceptable. It needs to be changed."
The former MP for Heywood and Royton is pushing for the Lords liaison committee to appoint a select committee to examine the issue. He expects his request to be successful, if not he says he would push for a vote.
Despite the Treasury figures, many commenters say Scotland is not necessarily better off from current arrangements, citing the redistrubution of reveune from North Sea all as one reason why it would actually be better off as an independent state.
