Finding and introducing a viable alternative will take a lot of thinking about and no doubt negotiation with the Treasury, which will not be easy.
But unless we do it, the Treasury will seek to control Yorkshire’s new administration as puppets as they do with other governmental departments, councils and external bodies already are.
An American Governor and Senate are not expected to go with the begging bowl to central government every time they want to fund something new or to seek their approval, they have their own fund-raising powers. Same with the Swiss Canton and to an extent the German Lander.
This is what we want for the Yorkshire Executive!
Those opposed to us will question and throw doubts on the Executive ability to control its own finances and talk about the need for Central Government to keep a tight control on public spending, which is a laugh for a start.
If, however, we are unable to provide adequate assurances on both these counts, we will be on a hiding to nothing.
Would continuing to rely upon the Barnett formula, even if it were to be revised, be sufficient to give Yorkshire the level of independence we crave, the answer is doubtful, to say the least.
So, would now be a good time to shift to more localised taxation and consider such ideas as land location value for examples?
This is not the place to set future fiscal policy, that will be a matter for the future Executive once elected. We do however need to establish the broad principles of how the Executive is going to be funded.