JUST seven days after the humiliation of having its budget rejected, the SNP is today celebrating the almost unanimous approval of its £33m spending package. A hectic week of negotiations finally delivered a 123-2 vote last night in favour of the Scottish Government's 2009-10 budget.
Finance Secretary John Swinney said only 0.3 per cent of proposed spending had been reallocated since last week's defeat. But that figure belies the massive investment of time and energy by all concerned in thrashing out deals which would suit their
own political priorities but also spare the parliament another tied vote.
All the parties put the best possible spin on what they managed to achieve, even if some of it looked fairly thin.
Yesterday's debate was likened to Groundhog Day – another Wednesday, another round of budget speeches – but instead of ending as an administration stunned by an unexpected defeat and threatening an election, the SNP was able to emerge posing statesmanlike and consensual, having brought opponents on board.
In the end, the only people who appeared to have lost out – and the only ones unhappy enough to oppose – were the two Green MSPs, whose votes had proved decisive in the original defeat.
Last week, they appeared to have a pledge of up to £33m of government cash for a free home insulation scheme. Yesterday, the SNP announced £15m government funding, plus £15m from other sources, for a means-tested insulation programme, which the Greens say won't work.
Labour can point to a 70 per cent increase in the number of apprenticeship places next year, as well as a guarantee for apprentices who are laid off that they can complete their training and an increase in funding for PACE (Partnership Action for Continuing Employment) to help people faced with redundancy. The party also claims credit for £60m to be invested in town centre regeneration – but the Tories insist that was money they won.
Labour originally pressed for 7800 extra apprenticeships each year for the next three years, then compromised after the budget defeat by proposing the same figure for two years.
One Labour source says the party could have got a deal on 7800 apprentices last week. "But they were just offering apprentices and nothing else," they said. "We could have town centre regeneration and the PACE funding but not the apprenticeships. It was only at the end of the latest negotiations that all elements were on the table. But they know an extra 7800 apprentices is the right thing to do and a lot of their backbenchers want it too."
Another Labour insider admitted to surprise that the SNP had been willing to reach a deal with them. "I thought they would want to exclude us. There's no-one more politically partisan than Alex Salmond. John Swinney is much more open to a deal but when Salmond got involved after the defeat, I expected him to say, 'let's do them' – but he didn't."
The Nationalists could have ignored Labour because they successfully struck a deal with the Liberal Democrats first.
Last week's defeat gave the Lib Dems a second chance because they had effectively ruled themselves out of budget negotiations first time round by going all out for a 2p tax cut, which was never going to be agreed.
However, other parties point out the deal they secured is remarkably lacking in hard cash. The party seems to regard its key prize as Alex Salmond's agreement to make a joint presentation to the opposition-sponsored Calman Commission, making the case for Holyrood to be given borrowing powers.
It's true the SNP has been extremely dismissive of the commission since it was set up by the opposition parties to look at extending devolution and has specifically excluded independence as an option. But a politician like Mr Salmond is not going to find it embarrassing to tell such a body why he believes Scotland should have the power to borrow, like any normal government.
The agreement to set up a cross-party spending review – presented by the SNP as the most significant part of the deal with the Lib Dems – may look like an exercise in consensus government. But sceptics will see it as an attempt to get opposition politicians to share the blame for spending cuts.
However, if the pledge on funding for school buildings through the Scottish Futures Trust is to be taken at face value, that does represent a genuine advance.
Edinburgh City Council has repeatedly appealed for more cash to help pay for the replacement or refurbishment of five "wave three" schools but up until now it has got a dusty response from the Government, with the Education Secretary insisting the council must find its own "funding solutions".
The Tories, who didn't need to be won over because they backed the budget first time round, insist they are the big winners from it all. They have calculated the deal they did with the SNP is worth £168m in next year's budget. But a big chunk of that is continued spending on police and business rates from last year's deal.
The Government has declared itself delighted with the broad support for its budget and appears unperturbed about those two votes against.
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion the Greens have been punished for bringing about last week's result. But that must raise questions about the future of the co-operation agreement reached between the SNP and the Greens after the 2007 election. As a minority administration the SNP knows there will be close votes in the future when two extra votes could be the difference.
How will the budget spat affect the special relationship? One Green source says: "We're not the 'opposition for opposition's sake' type of people but it's not going to make it any easier."
