A pledge by David Cameron to maintain Scotland’s controversial public spending formula was yesterday branded by Conservative MPs as a ‘last-minute bribe’. Senior Tories warned the Prime Minister faces a ‘deferred bloodbath’ over the inducements offered to the Scots to persuade them to stay in the UK. Yesterday, Mr Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg signed up to a ‘vow’ to the people of Scotland, including a guarantee to continue the Barnett allocation – which sees the Scots get more than £1,300 per head in public spending above the UK average. Scroll down for video . Vow: The promise to Scotland's voters was delivered on the front page of the left-wing Daily Record newspaper . But even Lord Barnett, who devised the formula in 1979, said last night that it was ‘grossly unfair’ and should be scrapped. The party leaders said the UK ‘exists to ensure opportunity and security for all by sharing our resources equitably across all four nations’. Mr Cameron used to argue that the formula was ‘coming to the end of its life’, but retreated from that position last year after talks with Mr Salmond. The Barnett formula was devised as a way of adjusting block grants to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to spend on devolved policy areas, based on population. Nationalists insist there are good reasons why Scotland receives more spending per head than the UK average, such as the difficulty of providing services in remote areas. But Lord Barnett said it was ‘a subterfuge of a formula’. Asked in an interview with Radio 4’s The World Tonight if he thought it should be axed altogether, the 91-year-old Labour peer said: ‘I do now.’ He said he would call a debate in the Lords next month and try to force a vote on the issue. Lord Barnett added that he had intended the formula to be used for a year or two, but it has now been 35 years. Unrest is already mounting at Westminster over the leaders’ pledge to agree an ‘extensive’ package of new powers for Edinburgh, including control of tax and welfare, within six weeks after a No vote. The boss of one of the biggest pollsters last night admitted that his industry may have got the referendum result completely wrong. Martin Boon, director of ICM, said the vote could be a ‘polling Waterloo’ if companies fail to predict the outcome. Recent forecasts suggest the result is on a knife edge. But Mr Boon said there was a ‘real danger’ to polling accuracy as data may have been corrupted. Results could be skewed by a surge in Yes votes among people who do not normally vote, because they are often below the radar of pollsters. On the other hand, ‘shy No’ supporters afraid of being accused of lacking patriotism may decline to tell surveyors how they plan to vote, he added. The situation recalls memories of the 1992 election, when polling firms predicted a knife-edge victory for Neil Kinnock – but John Major won by a slim overall majority. Mr Boon told BBC Radio 4 that the actual referendum result could see a much more comfortable victory for either side. ‘I think and hope that the best that we in the industry can hope for is that we dodge a bullet,’ he said. There is particular anger that Gordon Brown appears to be dictating the terms of commitments from the three parties. Mr Cameron has ruled out an English parliament, but said the need to rein in the right of Scottish MPs to vote on matters no longer affecting their constituents – the so-called West Lothian Question – was becoming ‘pressing’. Today’s Survation poll for the Daily Mail finds that even Scots believe the present system is unfair and that their MPs’ influence should be reduced as Holyrood becomes more powerful. It finds that, in the event of more powers being devolved to the Scottish Parliament, 58 per cent of Scots think their MPs should not still be able to vote on laws which only affect the rest of the UK – with just 21 per cent backing the status quo. There are growing demands from Tory MPs for a ‘grand committee’ of English MPs at Westminster, which would determine English-only affairs. ‘What price the union?’ said one senior Conservative MP angered by the last-ditch offers to the Scots. ‘And why is Gordon Brown the tail-wagging Westminster dog? ‘Nobody wants to cause trouble ahead of the referendum but these panicked offers mean Alex Salmond has won whatever the result.’ Tory MP Peter Bone said: ‘I don’t see why people in the East Midlands should be worse off to the tune of thousands of pounds than the people of Scotland … we’ve always thought it was unfair, but now … it has to be dealt with. You can’t just give powers to Scotland without a fairer distribution of funding and solving the West Lothian Question.’ Former minister Christopher Chope added: ‘I can’t understand how they think they can deliver this without Parliament looking at the whole picture.This smacks of a last-minute bribe. The party leaders don’t have the authority to make a bribe on behalf of the people of the United Kingdom. ‘Taxation is an issue for Parliament … We don’t legislate by presidential-style decree.’ One Tory MP angered by the last-ditch offers asked: 'Why is Gordon Brown the tail-wagging Westminster dog?' 'These panicked offers mean Alex Salmond has won whatever the result,’ said one angry Tory MP . Gordon Brown last night attempted to rule out curbing the rights of Scottish MPs as part of a post-referendum deal. The former prime minister told Channel 4 News he does not think you can have ‘two classes of MPs at Westminster’. John Redwood, a former Cabinet minister, said: ‘If Scotland is going to decide some tax rates as well as spending for itself, so should England.’ JAMES SLACK'S ANALYSIS: The last-minute bribes being offered to stay in the UK . The ‘vow’ by David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, in the left-wing Daily Record newspaper yesterday, amounts to Westminster capitulating to demands made by the Scottish left-wing establishment in recent years. Yet, despite having huge constitutional and financial implications for everybody in the UK, the three party leaders cooked them up behind closed doors without any proper debate – and with Gordon Brown at the fore. Here, Home Affairs Editor JAMES SLACK examines the ‘bribes’ which have been offered north of the border in a desperate attempt to sway tomorrow’s referendum. A financial sweetener that perpetuates a system by which Scotland gets £1,623 – 19 per cent – more expenditure per head than England. The Barnett formula, devised in the 1970s by then Labour Chief Secretary to the Treasury Joel Barnett, was meant as a temporary measure to solve rows in the Callaghan government over how much money should be allocated to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Desperate: The Yes vote has had a strong final push and almost all polls have the two sides neck and neck . But politicians have repeatedly ducked the challenge of reforming it – mostly for fear of provoking a row with the Scots. The decision is yet another U-turn by David Cameron who said in 2008 the formula ‘cannot last forever’. The idea of resources shared ‘equitably’ will raise a hollow laugh across the rest of the UK, given the capitulation over Barnett. Unlike those living in England, Scots are already able to enjoy free social care for the elderly and free student tuition. Wales claims the decision to preserve Barnett will leave the country £300million a year poorer than if money was allocated fairly. A counter to claims by Alex Salmond that the NHS is under threat from Westminster. The running of the health service north of the border is already the responsibility of Holyrood. But new powers – expected to allow Holyrood to vary the income tax rate by at least 15p in the pound – would allow extra money to be raised for healthcare. With Scotland in charge of every aspect of its own NHS, there is little or no justification for allowing Scottish MPs to continue to vote on the running of the NHS in England. Deal: Alex Salmond and David Cameron in 2012 signing the agreement which led to tomorrow's referendum . A statement seemingly tossed out without consideration of the constitutional implications. The Scottish Parliament is the result of legislation enacted by Westminster, which could be repealed. No Parliament can bind its successor – yet the leaders are promising to do exactly that. Experts say the only way to make Holyrood permanent would be to introduce the UK’s first ever written constitution – a task that could take Parliament years to achieve. Cameron, Clegg and Miliband have no agreement among their parties to give new powers to the Scots or change the constitution. The deal has been hatched behind closed doors, with Brown taking a lead role. Mr Cameron can expect a rebellion by Tory MPs who want an English parliament in which Scots can not sway the vote on issues with no effect on their constituents. What is certain is that, in the event of a No vote, the last nine months of the current Parliament will be dominated by the fallout. There is already resentment that the vow was made in a Scottish newspaper, without any warning.
Three main parties promise £1,300 more than average spent on every Scot .
It is part of Barnett funding formula called 'grossly unfair' by own founder .
Today Survation poll for the Mail finds even Scots think disparity is unjust .
One Tory MP: 'Panicked offers' mean Alex Salmond has won either way .
The Barnett formula for the allocation of resources will continue .
The UK exists to ensure opportunity and security for all by sharing our resources equitably .
The final say on how much is spent on the NHS will be a matter for the Scottish Parliament .
The Scottish Parliament is permanent .
Extensive new powers will be delivered to the Scottish Parliament, starting on September 19 .
A pledge by David Cameron to maintain Scotland’s controversial public spending formula was yesterday branded by Conservative MPs as a ‘last-minute bribe’. Senior Tories warned the Prime Minister faces a ‘deferred bloodbath’ over the inducements offered to the Scots to persuade them to stay in the UK. Yesterday, Mr Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg signed up to a ‘vow’ to the people of Scotland, including a guarantee to continue the Barnett allocation – which sees the Scots get more than £1,300 per head in public spending above the UK average. Scroll down for video . Vow: The promise to Scotland's voters was delivered on the front page of the left-wing Daily Record newspaper . But even Lord Barnett, who devised the formula in 1979, said last night that it was ‘grossly unfair’ and should be scrapped. The party leaders said the UK ‘exists to ensure opportunity and security for all by sharing our resources equitably across all four nations’. Mr Cameron used to argue that the formula was ‘coming to the end of its life’, but retreated from that position last year after talks with Mr Salmond. The Barnett formula was devised as a way of adjusting block grants to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to spend on devolved policy areas, based on population. Nationalists insist there are good reasons why Scotland receives more spending per head than the UK average, such as the difficulty of providing services in remote areas. But Lord Barnett said it was ‘a subterfuge of a formula’. Asked in an interview with Radio 4’s The World Tonight if he thought it should be axed altogether, the 91-year-old Labour peer said: ‘I do now.’ He said he would call a debate in the Lords next month and try to force a vote on the issue. Lord Barnett added that he had intended the formula to be used for a year or two, but it has now been 35 years. Unrest is already mounting at Westminster over the leaders’ pledge to agree an ‘extensive’ package of new powers for Edinburgh, including control of tax and welfare, within six weeks after a No vote. The boss of one of the biggest pollsters last night admitted that his industry may have got the referendum result completely wrong. Martin Boon, director of ICM, said the vote could be a ‘polling Waterloo’ if companies fail to predict the outcome. Recent forecasts suggest the result is on a knife edge. But Mr Boon said there was a ‘real danger’ to polling accuracy as data may have been corrupted. Results could be skewed by a surge in Yes votes among people who do not normally vote, because they are often below the radar of pollsters. On the other hand, ‘shy No’ supporters afraid of being accused of lacking patriotism may decline to tell surveyors how they plan to vote, he added. The situation recalls memories of the 1992 election, when polling firms predicted a knife-edge victory for Neil Kinnock – but John Major won by a slim overall majority. Mr Boon told BBC Radio 4 that the actual referendum result could see a much more comfortable victory for either side. ‘I think and hope that the best that we in the industry can hope for is that we dodge a bullet,’ he said. There is particular anger that Gordon Brown appears to be dictating the terms of commitments from the three parties. Mr Cameron has ruled out an English parliament, but said the need to rein in the right of Scottish MPs to vote on matters no longer affecting their constituents – the so-called West Lothian Question – was becoming ‘pressing’. Today’s Survation poll for the Daily Mail finds that even Scots believe the present system is unfair and that their MPs’ influence should be reduced as Holyrood becomes more powerful. It finds that, in the event of more powers being devolved to the Scottish Parliament, 58 per cent of Scots think their MPs should not still be able to vote on laws which only affect the rest of the UK – with just 21 per cent backing the status quo. There are growing demands from Tory MPs for a ‘grand committee’ of English MPs at Westminster, which would determine English-only affairs. ‘What price the union?’ said one senior Conservative MP angered by the last-ditch offers to the Scots. ‘And why is Gordon Brown the tail-wagging Westminster dog? ‘Nobody wants to cause trouble ahead of the referendum but these panicked offers mean Alex Salmond has won whatever the result.’ Tory MP Peter Bone said: ‘I don’t see why people in the East Midlands should be worse off to the tune of thousands of pounds than the people of Scotland … we’ve always thought it was unfair, but now … it has to be dealt with. You can’t just give powers to Scotland without a fairer distribution of funding and solving the West Lothian Question.’ Former minister Christopher Chope added: ‘I can’t understand how they think they can deliver this without Parliament looking at the whole picture.This smacks of a last-minute bribe. The party leaders don’t have the authority to make a bribe on behalf of the people of the United Kingdom. ‘Taxation is an issue for Parliament … We don’t legislate by presidential-style decree.’ One Tory MP angered by the last-ditch offers asked: 'Why is Gordon Brown the tail-wagging Westminster dog?' 'These panicked offers mean Alex Salmond has won whatever the result,’ said one angry Tory MP . Gordon Brown last night attempted to rule out curbing the rights of Scottish MPs as part of a post-referendum deal. The former prime minister told Channel 4 News he does not think you can have ‘two classes of MPs at Westminster’. John Redwood, a former Cabinet minister, said: ‘If Scotland is going to decide some tax rates as well as spending for itself, so should England.’ JAMES SLACK'S ANALYSIS: The last-minute bribes being offered to stay in the UK . The ‘vow’ by David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband, in the left-wing Daily Record newspaper yesterday, amounts to Westminster capitulating to demands made by the Scottish left-wing establishment in recent years. Yet, despite having huge constitutional and financial implications for everybody in the UK, the three party leaders cooked them up behind closed doors without any proper debate – and with Gordon Brown at the fore. Here, Home Affairs Editor JAMES SLACK examines the ‘bribes’ which have been offered north of the border in a desperate attempt to sway tomorrow’s referendum. A financial sweetener that perpetuates a system by which Scotland gets £1,623 – 19 per cent – more expenditure per head than England. The Barnett formula, devised in the 1970s by then Labour Chief Secretary to the Treasury Joel Barnett, was meant as a temporary measure to solve rows in the Callaghan government over how much money should be allocated to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Desperate: The Yes vote has had a strong final push and almost all polls have the two sides neck and neck . But politicians have repeatedly ducked the challenge of reforming it – mostly for fear of provoking a row with the Scots. The decision is yet another U-turn by David Cameron who said in 2008 the formula ‘cannot last forever’. The idea of resources shared ‘equitably’ will raise a hollow laugh across the rest of the UK, given the capitulation over Barnett. Unlike those living in England, Scots are already able to enjoy free social care for the elderly and free student tuition. Wales claims the decision to preserve Barnett will leave the country £300million a year poorer than if money was allocated fairly. A counter to claims by Alex Salmond that the NHS is under threat from Westminster. The running of the health service north of the border is already the responsibility of Holyrood. But new powers – expected to allow Holyrood to vary the income tax rate by at least 15p in the pound – would allow extra money to be raised for healthcare. With Scotland in charge of every aspect of its own NHS, there is little or no justification for allowing Scottish MPs to continue to vote on the running of the NHS in England. Deal: Alex Salmond and David Cameron in 2012 signing the agreement which led to tomorrow's referendum . A statement seemingly tossed out without consideration of the constitutional implications. The Scottish Parliament is the result of legislation enacted by Westminster, which could be repealed. No Parliament can bind its successor – yet the leaders are promising to do exactly that. Experts say the only way to make Holyrood permanent would be to introduce the UK’s first ever written constitution – a task that could take Parliament years to achieve. Cameron, Clegg and Miliband have no agreement among their parties to give new powers to the Scots or change the constitution. The deal has been hatched behind closed doors, with Brown taking a lead role. Mr Cameron can expect a rebellion by Tory MPs who want an English parliament in which Scots can not sway the vote on issues with no effect on their constituents. What is certain is that, in the event of a No vote, the last nine months of the current Parliament will be dominated by the fallout. There is already resentment that the vow was made in a Scottish newspaper, without any warning.
that it was ‘grossly unfair’ and should be to ensure opportunity and security for all by sharing our resources equitably across all four talks with Mr Salmond. The Barnett formula was becoming ‘pressing’. Today’s Survation poll for the Daily Mail finds that even Scots believe the more powers being devolved to the Scottish referendum but these panicked offers mean Alex Salmond has won whatever the result.’ Tory MP One Tory MP angered by the last-ditch offers Scottish MPs as part of a post-referendum deal. Callaghan government over how much money should claims by Alex Salmond that the NHS is under responsibility of Holyrood. But new powers – allowing Scottish MPs to continue to vote on the say the only way to make Holyrood permanent would current Parliament will be dominated by the