
Senior figures from the main political parties have clashed over how Scotland should be funded in the future, during a special BBC election debate.The Tories and Lib Dems suggested a needs-based alternative to the population-based Barnett Formula, used to work out Treasury cash for Scotland.
But the SNP and Labour warned a change to the system, set up in the 1970s, could result in a funding cut.
The BBC Scotland economy debate came ahead of polling day, on 6 May.
The Barnett Formula, initially set up as a short-term fix, has been branded "unfair" by those who believe it subsidises devolved administrations at the expense of English taxpayers.
Conservative Scottish affairs spokesman David Mundell told the programme, staged at BBC Scotland's Glasgow headquarters, that his party had no "immediate" plans to change Barnett.
But he added: "We do think that, if a needs-based analysis was carried out over the whole of the United Kingdom, then that would provide a basis for discussion about future funding within the United Kingdom.
"I'm very clear and David Cameron's been very clear to audiences in England he doesn't think that would lead to significant reductions in the funding that Scotland receives."
The Liberal Democrats' Malcolm Bruce said Barnett should be replaced by something based on need and ultimately wanted to see taxes going directly to the Scottish Parliament.
He added: "We are committed to ensure the Scottish Parliament does not depend on a block grant, but gets access to taxes raised in Scotland and is accountable to the people of Scotland."
But SNP Treasury spokesman Stewart Hosie said moving from Barnett to a needs-based formula was an "appalling idea".
Services 'expensive'
Stressing alternatives such as fiscal autonomy, Mr Hosie said: "Not only do the Liberals and Tories plan the same level of cuts as Labour, they have a special Scottish cut with a so-called needs-based assessment of Barnett."
Jim Murphy, the Scottish Secretary, described Barnett as a "great deal for Scotland", adding: "Yes, we have a tenth of the UK's population, but we have a third of the land mass - it's more expensive to provide public services such as the health services in Scotland."
The four politicians also clashed over whether the planned third runway at Heathrow Airport was needed for Scotland's economy, which has only just emerged from recession.
The runway has not been ruled out despite a High Court ruling last month that said the government's public consultation process was invalid.
Mr Murphy said the project was needed, and its environmental impact offset, adding: "I think that despite us having phenomenal economic hubs in Scotland across our cities and elsewhere in Scotland - connectivity to London, tourism and also business is so vitally important, so we're in favour of that third runway." But Mr Bruce said it was not needed, warning: "The environmental regulations are such that, if the Heathrow runway goes ahead, then the improvement, modernisation, expansion of every other airport in the UK is squeezed - so it's in competition with our regional airports."
Mr Hosie and Mr Mundell said it was far more important to deliver plans for a high-speed London to Scotland rail link.
Mr Mundell said his party did not support a third runway, adding that Heathrow could be run more efficiently and still deliver the connections Scotland needed.
He added: "Our proposal is actually to deliver the high-speed rail link that Scotland needs. It has to start somewhere, we're going to start in London, it's going to come via Heathrow up to Leeds, then on to Manchester, Newcastle and into Scotland."
Echoing the comments, Mr Hosie responded: "I think we can avoid the short-haul flights to London by getting the super-fast London to Scotland railway up and running in phase one and not stopping in Birmingham and maybe going to Manchester in 25 years' time - that would be a better option for all concerned."This article is from the BBC News website. ? British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

