|
Beware LibDems bearing promises
Let’s get this straight. Nick Clegg, the UK LibDem leader, says Scotland should have Home Rule. Nicol Stephen, the Scottish LibDem leader, takes his cue and asks Sir David Steel to reconvene his commission and produce a clear blueprint for more devolution – the same commission which point blank refused to consider full fiscal freedom, never mind independence.
Gordon Brown chips in and says he wants the other commission, the Wendy one, to return some devolved powers to Westminster. Wendy and Nicol Stephen say no. The Tories don’t want Home Rule but grudgingly concede there might be a case for some “adjustments” to some areas of taxation.
We, who want independence, can be forgiven for being a touch confused. We should be guided by history.
Promising Home Rule for Scotland and failing to deliver is a long-standing Liberal tradition. The same can be said of Labour who abandoned the idea when its time came. After the Liberals failed with Ireland they dropped the idea for Scotland. Labour lost interest in Scottish Home Rule because the phrase had Irish connotations. They invented “devolution” as a less sensitive option.
Gladstone’s vision of Irish Home Rule included full economic power, with Westminster no longer having Irish MPs. The UK would have remained responsible only for foreign policy and defence and some trade issues. There is no way the UK LibDems would buy that idea now. Ditto Labour and the Tories.
So the first thing we need from the LibDems is a clear definition of what they mean by Home Rule. I have been criticised for using Home Rule when I mean devolution or autonomy or self-government or whatever we have in Scotland now. I plead guilty to laziness although I am not alone. I will have to buck up and be more cautions when saying Home Rule now because no-one knows what it means.
Seems to me the LibDems are going round in circles yet again. The Steel commission talked of fiscal federalism and warms to Scottish control of direct taxes such as income and corporation tax, economic authority over climate change, landfill taxation and perhaps a share of North Sea oil revenues. Sounds encouraging. But in the next breath it denounces full fiscal autonomy where Scotland would raise and retain all taxes while remitting a sum to Westminster for shared services. Such a system operates in no other industrialised country, it argues.
Yet full fiscal autonomy is, in my view, the closest we will get to true Gladstone-style Home Rule. It is also the penultimate step in the gradualist journey to independence - which is precisely why the Steel and Wendy commissions and Gordon Brown and the Tories simply won’t give it, despite what Nick Clegg promises.
If there was indeed a prospect of full fiscal autonomy I think the independence convention should support it. Until then we should have nothing to do with any of these commissions or “reviews” in (Mr Brown’s preferred description) which are specifically designed to thwart us. We should sit back and continue to enjoy letting them try to buy us off.
Comments
Chris Walker 5/03/08 |
One of the several virtues of "Independence" is the clarity of language it ought to evoke. I believe 'Independence does what it says on the tin', and with minimum ambiguity, at least politically. Thus I regret that Murray's attempt in an earlier blog to discuss what its 'social consequences', in contrast to the political effects, will be in its slipstream aroused so little debate. Perhaps that is also why the 'mushy' options offered by the Lib Dems (and even more temporising shuffling by New Labour) alternatives discussed here retain an inherent attraction for some. Nobody will get too upset as we nudge our way to self- government for Scotland. But therein lies a problem, dare I say a large problem.
I see it the other way round: clarity of political objective and discussion of prosaic issues such as how best to conduct the velvet divorce proceedings to avoid messy outcomes are devoutly to be wished.
I was in West Yorkshire last weekend where this very issue of the 'divorce' came up in conversation. English friends increasingly understand that better governance for all might mean Independence for Scotland as well as England, and a wish to ensure that we part as friends and not enemies - more hardheads and fewer bravehearts. Of course the 'manner' of negotiating Independence will be crucial to the success of the outcome, not to mention its speed of decision making.
'To govern is to choose' may be a French injunction, but the choices have to be transparent. That's not what the Lib Dems and New Labour are about. Their agenda is based on the nod-and-wink variety of choice, especially that of the 'having your cake and eating' concomitant. Beware all those who enter 'negotiations' on Scotland's future by that door. They may be simply trying to close it to Independence all the while. |
| |
|
Rodger Dean 26/03/08 |
I wish all this talk about the indepenence of Scotland could be brought to a quick conclusion as I am thoroughly fed up to the back teeth of hearing all the winging and backbiting regarding England, who, after all are partners not only in the United Kingdom but also Great Britain which would be broken up bythe nationalists. If this weree to happen I believe that I am among a large number of people who were brought up in Scotland for most of my life even though I am English by birth and parentage, would definately depart this part of former United Kingdom and return to my birthplace even though I am approaching 70 years of age and retired. I am so disgusted by the continual harping on and on about how doentrodden the Scots and Scotland are, and it would be arelief to get away from it all. |
| |
|
John McCallum 27/03/08 |
My take on it. The Scottish dimension is that the SNP election victory has, at least initially, forced the other unionist parties to come together to discuss the best political countermeasure to the perceived threat of momentum towards independence under the new Scottish Government. At the same time Gordon Brown is ensuring his overtones are seen as defending the interests of the UK and his own as a Prime Minister who just happens to be Scottish! However, I’m quite sure that there is no fracture between Gord and Wendy but an understanding that two games of football are being played at the same time, both of which are heavily reliant on defence. With respect to Nick Clegg I think we might be seeing the first signs that all might not be well in the unionist convention camp, or, he’s decided to grasp the Scottish political limelight in a manner akin to David Cameron the rugged Arctic Environmentalist – most likely a mixture of both. This is all music to the ears of Alex Salmond who has cleverly created a situation whereby the other political parties are reluctantly or otherwise beginning to build the bridge to independence for us. It’s either that or a face the distinct possibility of a referendum against a rejuvenated SNP with a popular and very determined man at the helm. They do say history repeats itself. |
| |
|
Bill Graham 28/03/08 |
In his speech today, Gordon Brown made a surprising comment about Wendy's Scottish administration in his dreams, leading Scotland to take its rightful place in Europe and the world. What can this mean from this towering intellect,who has been most adamant in retaining Westminster representation of Scotland at all times? |
| |
|
Dot Jessiman 30/03/08 |
Like Mr Dean I was born in England. Like him I'm in my seventies. Like him I've lived in Scotland for over thirty years. Unlike him I don't see the call for Independence as anything other than a recognition of the fact that the two countries are different; their priorities are different; and that both would be happier if each were free to follow their own differnt bents as tolerant friends and, in many cases, colleagues.
Incidentally if I were looking for a winge-free country to live in I don't think I'd put England at the top of my list.
Wingeing is, I agree, what Scotland did. For in my book wingeing is about moaning about a problem but doing nothing to solve it. What Scotland is now doing is stating problems that need tackling and trying to solve them...
Take a few cases in point. Does Mr Dean think it wingeing to say we dont think the elderly should pay for personal care? Is it wingeing when I object strongly to the Westminster government than zapping the £27m savings from a better system instead of leaving it to be used on those who need it?
Is it wingeing to say local government does not work and we should try something different? (Most of my English friends and relatives think it a damn good idea) Nor will it be wingeing if we protest loudly if the Westminster government fulfils its threat to withdraw £400m of local government support.
Is it wingeing to say that somehow - and it has to be at the expense of something else given the overall cuts -we must make sure we do not send our brightest young people into life loaded with debt.
Independcence is of course itself one solution to a problem - not a winge- and one which, to my mind will bring about a more fruitful relationship between my country of origin and my country of adoption .
So don't go, Mr Dean. Stay and enjoy it and, dare I say it, contribute something of what you 've learned in seventy years. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Would you like to comment on this Blog?
If so send us your comment and we will upload it.
|
|
