Yousuf yesterday blogged about the latest opinion poll saying how it could lead to a hung Parliament. He also pointed to his post from Friday about how only, in his eyes, a vote for Labour would deliver Home Rule as laid out by the Calman Commission.
Now I'm not someone you whose eyes you can easily pull the wool over so lets look at the facts. Yes Labour brought us devolution, but the main goal wasn't so much to give Home Rule to Scotland and Wales, it was a way they saw to deal with the Northern Ireland situation and a small price (even smaller in Wales's case) to pay. You only have to look at how committed some of the same Labour MPs who were still sitting on the green benches when Tony Blair pushed through the devolution Acts were to the no campaigns in 1970 to see how deep their commitment was. The party was split on the issue in the 1970s. As I've blogged before both here and on Malc's 'vacationing' blog the Lib Dems or their predecessor parties really are the party of Home Rule, with over a century of talking about it, bringing bills before Parliament and attempting to make it happen.
Not convinced then you only have to look at how much central control the Labour Westminster administration has taken in, even with varying degrees of devolution in some of the outer reaches. They are trying to micromanage education (12 different Bills in 12 years), health, crime etc from London instead of letting the local authorities have responsibility for their own regions. Where a bespoke approach based on central tenants is what is needed, Labour have offered the regions of England and to a lesser extent the devolved parts an off the peg answer.
Look how the greater power that has been given to the Scottish people, the variable tax raising powers given to Scotland were not a Labour initiative but came from the other members of the Constitutional Convention. Fairer votes for Local Government came from the 2003 Partnership agreement with the Lib Dems. Indeed so did much of the policy differences they brought in, some of which like a personal care-lite they announced in the Queen's Speech. They are not a Home Rule party they are a centrist party, always have been and continue to be so.
However, Yousuf is right to mention about the only way to ensure Home Rule in a post titled Hung Parliament. If either Labour or the Conservatives were really committed to Home Rule they would have brought legislation ages ago to bring it about. After a 75 year gap from the previous Bill for Scottish Home Rule the Scotland Act came before Parliament. However, when they are safe they don't think about such things, the 1970 Scottish referendum came about because Labour needed the backing of the Liberals the help them through tough waters. It was another Scottish born Labour MP, George Cunningham, who set the bar high enough for the referendum to fail. Indeed it was only the threat of a hung parliament in 1997 that made Tony Blair let Robin Cook sit down to discuss electoral reform, Lord's reform and devolution with the Lib Dems.
So therefore if you want you see Home Rule in Scotland the best way for any move to come is liable to be through a hung Parliament, not an overall majority for either of the parties that are backing away from the Calman Commission's report. Then the power to help see it through will lie in the Liberal Democrats, not that I'm advocating a hung Parliament, we'd get a far more sensible, sane and progressive agenda carried out under a Lib Dem majority, than either of the other two.
2 comments:
As I've blogged before both here and on Malc's 'vacationing' blog the Lib Dems or their predecessor parties really are the party of Home Rule, with over a century of talking about it, bringing bills before Parliament and attempting to make it happen.
The Liberals may have talked about it and brought bills before Parliament but it was only the fear of the SNP and the possibility of Scottish independence that brought about devolution. Labour didn't bring in devolution because they thought that Scotland might get a Liberal majority. Only voting SNP gets results and as Alex Salmond accurately said, "Labour's devolution bus runs on SNP petrol".
...the variable tax raising powers given to Scotland were not a Labour initiative but came from the other members of the Constitutional Convention.
These powers were never used and Calman's "assigned tax" proposal is just an increase from the 3p in the pound to a 10p in the pound variable rate with a huge overhead in bureaucracy to implement it.
However, Yousuf is right to mention about the only way to ensure Home Rule in a post titled Hung Parliament.
What do you actually mean by Home Rule Stephen? After decades of indecision the Lib-Dems haven't made up their minds yet whether they want a, "Nations and Regions", type of federalism which is just a copy of Labour's, "Nations and Regions", devolution plan or whether it is a genuine federalism where England gets its own parliament. Even if there is a decision the Lib-Dems have decided on nothing apart from the plan to have a second constitutional convention. What's going to be the transfer of powers and fiscal autonomy in the third option for home rule if the referendum bill gets passed? Have the Lib-Dems got their worked out costed option ready yet after decades of talking about it?
So therefore if you want you see Home Rule in Scotland the best way for any move to come is liable to be through a hung Parliament...Then the power to help see it through will lie in the Liberal Democrats...
Whether you call it devolution, federalism or home rule what Scotland has got is as much as it's going to get. The failure of the unionist tri-partite Calman Commission to come up with more than the dog's breakfast of recommendations it produced shows the paralysis that affects all three parties when it comes to more powers for the Scottish Parliament. The Lib-Dems obsession with preserving the Union is easily recognised by their failure to call for an English Parliament which would separate out England from Britain and threaten the idea of Britain as unitary state with three devolved provinces in the North and West and shows that they are as fearful as Labour and the Conservatives that Scots might choose independence.
What do you actually mean by Home Rule Stephen?
That is easy to answer. We already have the foundations of Home Rule in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We in Scotland are the most autonomous of the Nations thus far. But more can and should be done.
The answer for England is what remains. That is a matter for the English Lib Dems to come up with, because there is Federal decision making on our party. They did fully support regionism across the UK, which made sense because of the diversity across the regions. All they have so far is a level of devolvement in London. Yet it is the regions such that need to be able to tailor bespoke decision making to their needs.
That being said there are two things that did arise from the aborted half-hearted attempt at devolution Labour were prepared to allow in English regions. The Vote in the NE was on a assembly that was merely a talking shop, it didn't even have the power of the Welsh assembly to take their decisions to Westminster for approval.
An English Parliament is not something that our party has ruled out, though we do believe in devolving many of the powers currently retained at Westminster to a lower level and that would still be true of an English Parliament. But if an English Parliament is all that we can acheive for a devolution of powers in England then that is what may have to be considered.
The Lib-Dems obsession with preserving the Union is easily recognised by their failure to call for an English Parliament which would separate out England from Britain and threaten the idea of Britain as unitary state.
Assume for one minute that pre-banking crisis Alex Salmond had acheived his dream. Where would an Independent Scottish Banking system be now? We'd probably have lost the Dunfermline altogether. We may have kept one bank, that would have been the Clydesdale, RBS and BoS would have been lost.
The issue is that England is still too big a location to make some of the bespoke decisions that Westminster cannot make. The needs of the South West with the large proportion of absentee holiday homers and of Cumbria are similar in some ways but different in others. The Midlands and the North East again appear similar to the outsider but are different when you get under the cover.
It's not a failure to call for an English Parliament but a call for what is better. Or course the best may not be acheivable, then alternatives that still improve the lot of the people will be looked at.
But at the devolution debate at Bournemouth this year, the challenge was laid down to the English party to come to the table wioth something, as they seemed to want what we have got and are looking to increase.
Post a Comment