THE Coalition should scrap controversial regional pay plans and instead move thousands of jobs from London to other parts of the UK, argues the SNP.
The move would save millions of pounds every year as well as helping rejuvenate struggling local economies, according to the party.
The SNP condemned the regional wage plans, saying their introduction would further cement pay divisions between different parts of the UK.
The party claims that having so many civil service jobs in London means workers around the country are effectively subsidising their extra allowances.
The call comes as figures show the UK Government spent more than £116 million on London weighting, the extra money paid to employees because of the high cost of living in the English capital, and other related allowances for staff.
The highest spenders were the Department for Work and Pensions, which spent more than £45m on London weighting last year, and the Home Office, which spent more than £22m, according to parliamentary written answers.
Mike Weir, the SNP's business and enterprise spokesperson, said substantial savings could be made and called on the UK Government to put a halt to regional pay plans.
He said: "The Government's plans to introduce regional pay disparities is a wrong- footed move that will further entrench the imbalance in jobs and investment towards the south-east.
"The two-tier system it would create would penalise civil servants across the land, who will see their salaries cut while jobs are effectively subsidised in London.
"Rather than taking more cash from the pockets of hard- pressed public servants, some of the £116m used to subsidise London living could be recouped by redistributing jobs [to] where they are needed most. "
He described the spend by Whitehall as "staggering".
He added: "In defence, we see almost £11m spent annually on London weighting and living allowances for staff, while Scotland has seen over 10,500 defence jobs lost since the last strategic defence review."
The LibDem-Tory Coalition is looking at ways to offer what it describes as "local pay" for workers in a number of government departments.
Ministers claim differences between private and public-sector pay are crippling parts of the economy locally.
Figures released by the Treasury show those who would be hardest hit by the move would include women in Scotland, who earn about 19% more in the public sector than in the private sector.
The Strathclyde area could also be expected to suffer, with the public-sector "premium" running at about 17%.
However, there has been strong opposition to the plans, and opinion polls have shown they are deeply unpopular with voters.
The Coalition has said the move will not lead to any workers suffering a pay cut, leading to the belief that wages will instead be frozen until those in the private sector have caught up.
Campaigners are also concerned that new staff will be taken on at much lower salaries than those already doing the same job.
It is thought the plans could be implemented as early as next year.
Earlier this year, the Labour MP John Mann called for Government departments to be moved out of London, taking coveted civil service jobs with them.
At the time he also suggested the move could save millions by allowing Government departments to rent cheaper office space.
The rate of London weighting varies across Whitehall departments, but in their answers some made it clear that staff were being paid almost £4,0000 more because their job was based in the capital.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article