Devolution Question should be discussed UK-wide, not just by Scottish elites
Article posted by Unlock Democracy
Responding to the publication of the Calman Commission’s First Report, Deputy Director of Unlock Democracy Alexandra Runswick said:
“Like the Calman Commission, we strongly believe that Scottish devolution has been a great success. The rest of the UK would benefit from greater devolution and decentralisation as well.
“However, the implications of furthering Scottish devolution affect the whole of the UK, not just Scotland. There is a real danger that if it looks at Scottish devolution in isolation of the wider constitutional settlement, the conclusions of the Calman Commission could prove to be even more divisive than the status quo.
“Sadly the First Report suggests this may well happen. For example, it warns against greater financial autonomy on the grounds that it would lead to less ’shared social citizenship.’ That may be true in Scotland but the experience suggests that, if anything, the lack of financial autonomy is causing resentment in England and goes to the heart of Tam Dalyell’s West Lothian Question. Fundamentally, we believe this to be a false dichotomy; a fairer and more transparent financial settlement will be good for Anglo-Scottish relations on both sides of the border.
“Finally, the competition between the Calman Commission and the Scottish Government’s own National Conversation is divisive and will potentially lead to a stalemate. Neither review has shown much interest in engaging the public beyond the usual suspects. Unlock Democracy continues to call for a Scottish-wide Convention lead by citizens, not the great and the good, feeding into a wider process involving people from across the UK.”
December 2nd, 2008 at 1:43 pm
[...] Unlock Democracy have responded. …the implications of furthering Scottish devolution affect the whole of the [...]
December 3rd, 2008 at 11:37 am
I’ve not had time to fully digest the Calman Commission’s initial output but one rather obvious fact sticks out.
Based admittedly on media interpretations, what does the Commission’s apparent rejection of the principle of full fiscal autonomy for Scotland mean exactly? For me the vital word in this phrase is “full”
We already knew that the Calman Commission was unlikely to deliver radical solutions simply because its terms of reference are based on retention of constitutional framework provided by the United Kingdom.
I have no problem with the idea of retaining the Union but what I have to question is the unspoken assumption of a United Kingdom at ease with itself.
The entire edifice called “The United Kingdom” also desperately requires root and branch reform. This is patently obvious to all but “those who will not see”. Unfortunately this latter enclave includes the movers and shakers in Whitehall.
In the words of Brian Taylor, BBC Scotland’s political editor: “Calman endorses the view of the earlier submission by Professor Anton Muscatelli’s team that it is critical to decide what form of devolution one wants then to design a funding system to suit.”
This immediately begs a question; If the entity from which devolved governance is being considered, is itself in need of urgent wholesale reform, what chance is there of an equitable outcome for the devolved territory in question? No wonder the SNP boycotted the whole affair?
Within the context of an essentially unitary United Kingdom framework, the Calman Commission’s output to date seems measured, deliberate and ultimately quite sensible.
However, this merely sidesteps the wider issue so I return to that seminal word again “full”
However, in a Federal UK framework – perfectly compatible with retention of the key policy portfolios specified by Calman; Constitution, Defence, National Security, Foreign Affairs, Currency & Coinage – at UK level, FULL fiscal independence for a semi-autonomous Scotland also makes perfect sense.
The problem here is, of course, that adoption of a Federal agenda would provide Calman’s ultimate paymasters with an even bigger headache. How to solve the perennial conundrum better known as “The United Kingdom”?
Peter Davidson
Alderley Edge
NW.England