Scottish Devolution Road Map – A French Perspective




300 Years of Abuse

The act of Union 1707. Ah!! Scottish Utopia!!! But you see we were short changed. The traffic is and always has been, all one way. South to London & the South East of England

Westminster politicians gather all the finance from Scotland. then, if minded to do so – throw Scotland a few scraps – from time to time. If they wish to try something new – but possibly dodgy they introduce it in Scotland first eg Poll Tax Experiment Yup!!

Try it on Scotland first, eg Cheviot sheep – Introduce them in huge numbers in Sutherland – but the families? Bugger them – throw them off the land – let them starve – ship the remainder out to the colonies. Industry!! – Order books a bit light!! – Close Scotland down.

Coal-mining – move it to England. Car production, move from Bathgate to England. Steel production – Close Motherwell – move steel production to England. Nuclear Weapons – Yes please but not in England – to dangerous Yup! – bugger it – locate them in Glasgow. Ship Building – Can’t have ship building and nuclear weapons on the Clyde MOD will not allow it. OK shut down the ship building – give ‘em one or two military orders from time to time. a few battleships will keep the natives happy.

Lets fight Johnny Foreigner!! – troops needed – Not a problem – Go to Scotland. shut down factories stop training the teens – get them on the dole – offer them security through service in the forces. Lots of Scottish deaths and injuries – easy build a few monuments – organise lots of military parades, start a few charities – cash for heroes – charity for injured soldiers. Charitable housing for wounded soldiers recurring money to support handicapped – injured soldiers – not a chance let the Scottish public find the money.

Upgrade the infrastructure improving the movement of goods – Yup!! agreed loadsa money for this but England first. then, if anything’s left Scotland – Stop them from getting restless – Let them have a, “wee parliament” but retain all the power in England. Give them some play-dough!! – They might gain some confidence and ask for independence – naw!! they’re to stupid. we’ll let their MP’s loose on them – the Scots are to stupid to vote for a new way – they’ll do what we tell’em.
Any mumbles – tell them extra money will be forthcoming in the new year – Jam tomorrow – Yup! that’s how to buy the buggers.

The list is endless, endless, endless, endless, endless I voted, “Yes” in the referendum but many didn’t. They voted for austerity. Hell mend ’em. Rid Scotland of the, “chains of oppression” that is Westminster. Remember the word’s of Rabbie Burns, “a parcel of rogues” sold Scotland out 300 years ago.

Scottish devolution in 1999 promised Scots so much but delivered little. The Scottish Bill under discussion promises to bring change which will deliver the failed promises of 1999. It is crucial that John Swinney and his team are not manipulated into accepting anything less than is good for Scotland’s future and drive for full independence.

The 2016 election offers another chance to tell Westminster Scot’s wish to decide how we will care for ourselves. the fate of Scotland in Scot’s hands not the grubby paws of a bunch of corrupt rich toff’s, rich lord’s and even richer baron’s. Feathering their own nest’s, selling the nation into bondage. Vote SNP – SNP – SNP let those who live in Scotland decide their own governance.




April 1998 A French view of Scotlands Journey From Darkness Into Light

Scottish devolution is under way, spelling an end to centralist decision-making in the United Kingdom. In accordance with the September 1997 referendum, Scotland is to have home rule. Nearly three hundred years after the abolition of the last Scottish parliament, the country will again have its own elected legislative authority. Within Europe, Scotland will have an identity as specific as, for instance, Catalonia or Bavaria. But there is no knowing if this stage will be Scotland’s last. (Philip Schlesinger)





Scotland’s Quiet Revolution

Scotland is rapidly moving out of England’s shadow to take its place as an autonomous nation in Europe. On 11 September 1997, nearly three centuries after the abolition of the last Scottish parliament, the country voted decisively to repatriate its politics to Edinburgh. The Scotland Act, conferring wide devolutionary powers on the new Scottish parliament, should complete its passage at Westminster by summer 1998. Scottish parliamentary elections will take place in 1999. Although Scotland will remain within the United Kingdom, its new devolved political status may be a stage on the road to separate statehood within the European Union.

Almost two decades ago, in 1979, the last attempt to decentralise power in the British state was swept aside by the victory of the Conservatives, who under the leadership first of Margaret Thatcher and then of John Major, remained implacable opponents during their eighteen long years of rule.

The Scots are to have a fully-fledged parliament. Consequently, Scotland’s parliament, for which elections are planned in 1999, will be a uniquely powerful new counter-weight to Westminster and a major symbolic focus for the national aspirations of the 5.1 million Scots. Some observers believe that the extensive powers being given to Scotland will not easily be contained in future and may ultimately result in the break-up of the British state.

Since the Treaty of Union of 1707 (when Scotland’s last parliament was suspended), the country has retained its separate legal and educational systems and church, all of which, with differing importance over time, have contributed to the shaping of a distinct national culture and identity.

Since 1886, the national institutional matrix has also had a powerful territorial political and administrative dimension in the shape of the Scottish Office, based in Edinburgh. This office is run by the Secretary of State for Scotland, who sits in the British Cabinet and is answerable to the House of Commons at Westminster. The case for a Scottish parliament has been made in terms of the need to extend democratic control, in Scotland, over the Scottish Office.  Because the Scots have many of the appurtenances of a state, Scotland’s institutional distinctiveness has contributed powerfully to their dual identity: they are Scottish by nationality but British by citizenship. The current evidence suggests that Scottishness is increasingly preferred to Britishness.

Because the Conservatives had lost all their Scottish seats in the May 1997 general election, there was now little serious opposition, in London or in Scotland, from those in favour of the centralist status quo. Deciding on Scotland’s affairs in London, but administering them through Edinburgh, had become an untenable option.

The coalition for change was unstoppable: the referendum campaign in August and September 1997 brought together for the first time Scotland’s two main pro-devolution parties (Labour and the Liberal Democrats) with the pro-independence Scottish National Party (SNP). The referendum implicitly identified the Scots as a civic nation, as voting was open only to residents of Scotland, irrespective of their ethnic backgrounds or places of birth. Scots outside the country had no voting rights.





Opposition to the status quo

A telling majority of Scots voted for political autonomy. On a turn-out of 60.4%, 74.3% supported the creation of a Scottish parliament, while 63.5% agreed that the proposed legislature should have tax-varying powers. The 1997 vote was a milestone, as it reversed the result of the previous referendum of 1979.

Much of the groundwork for the devolution White Paper and the subsequent Scotland Bill, was published in December 1997 and now in the legislative process at Westminster, was prepared through the patient activities of the Scottish Constitutional Convention. Little known outside Scotland, this body first convened in March 1989. It has been a crucial vehicle for key elements of Scottish civil society to devise a common approach to devolution.

Contributing to the Convention’s initial impetus was a resentment of the strident centralism of Margaret Thatcher. This had led to the widespread sense that Scotland was not adequately represented by Westminster politics. John Major’s government did not change this dominant view, although it modified some of the worst excesses of centralism.

The Convention brought together Scotland’s dominant Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats. It also included other minor parties and representatives of a wide range of interests such as the trades unions, the women’s movement, local councils, and the churches. Its political project was the restoration of home rule to Scotland within the framework of the United Kingdom. Both the anti-devolution Conservatives and the independence-oriented SNP refused to join.

To legitimise its opposition to the constitutional status quo, the Convention invoked the will of the Scottish nation. By seeing sovereignty as vested in “the people” rather than in the Crown-in-Parliament at Westminster, it drew a sharp distinction between Scottish and English constitutional thinking.

The Convention also pointed to decentralising developments in the European Union to bolster its intellectual case. Home rulers often invoke the German Länder and the Spanish autonomous regions and nations as examples to support British alignment with the European trend towards “subsidiarity”.

As an expression of civil society, the Convention could draw both on the legacy of the Scottish Enlightenment and find inspiration in civic movements intent on promoting political change and democratisation in Eastern and Central Europe. Important support came from agenda-setting elite newspapers such as The Herald (Glasgow) and The Scotsman (Edinburgh) which showed a consistent interest in the home rule movement, as did Scottish broadcasters. Indeed, Scotland’s distinctive media – especially the press – are a key element of the country’s civil society.

The Convention managed to maintain a remarkably broad political consensus over a period of eight years. Its detailed committee work and policy documents set the stage in 1997 for the White Paper, Scotland’s Parliament, and the subsequent historic Scotland Bill, whose provisions are very far-reaching.

Devolution means that Scotland will legislate in all major areas except those reserved to Westminster, principally, the constitution, UK financial matters, foreign policy, defence, social security and citizenship.

Powers exercised in Scotland will encompass key areas such as health, education, local government, economic development and transport, environment, agriculture, forestry and fishing, law and home affairs, sport and the arts, and permit a tax-varying power of up to 3% of basic income tax.

The first general election will be in 1999. There will be 129 Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs), of which 73 will be elected by the first-past-the-post system in existing Westminster constituencies. An additional member voting system will elect the other 56 members from party lists (seven from each of the eight European parliamentary constituencies).


Promoting Scotland

As the Scotland Bill heads towards enactment at Westminster this summer, a new political culture has been rapidly developing north of the Anglo-Scottish border. The future practice of the Edinburgh legislature, to be sited at Holyrood, is being defined against the Westminster model.

New departures include a substantial shift towards proportional representation in parliamentary elections, the apparent determination of the major parties to ensure a gender balance at Holyrood, and the desire to employ a consensual rather than adversarial style in parliamentary committees.

These could all contribute to giving Scottish political culture a quite distinctive style and flavour. There is also an evident desire to escape the incestuous Westminster lobby system of political reporting. Ministers are discussing the practicalities of greater openness in media relations with the new Scottish Parliamentary Press Association.

The Scottish Office is presently considering how cable and digital technology might be used to increase public access to the parliament and how pressure groups and the general public might be encouraged to make use of the planned new legislature building. A special committee, including non-party constitutional advisers, is currently drawing up rules of conduct for the parliament, aimed at offering a style quite distinct from Westminster’s traditionalism and stuffy formality.

From 1999, Holyrood will be home to a four-party parliamentary dynamic. Labour will almost certainly form the largest group. The Liberal Democrats are possible coalition partners, and the Scottish National Party likely to be the main opposition. Next year’s election offers the first major chance of rehabilitation for the Scottish Conservatives, who have made it clear that they will use the new arena to relaunch themselves. Each party will vie to devise the most authentically popular Scottish policies and, as distinctive national concerns begin to predominate, there may well be new political alignments quite distinct from those at Westminster.

The new importance of Edinburgh as a political capital has begun to generate a political market-place, with political and public affairs companies keen to exploit the new opportunities. Moves are afoot to set up an association of professional Scottish parliamentary lobbyists. Several new think-tanks have sprung up, intent on influencing the policy process.

The major national broadcasters, BBC Scotland and Scottish Television, are planning parliamentary and news coverage attuned to the new political agenda. Newspapers based in Glasgow, Scotland’s media capital, are setting up major news operations in Edinburgh.

Of the London media, Channel 4 Television has adapted to devolution by establishing a new office in Glasgow. The telecommunications giant, British Telecom, has declared its interest in the restoration of trust in the political process, underlining the role of information technology in promoting public electoral involvement and proposing remote electronic access to the parliament’s work for its Members.

Currently, research is being undertaken by the official body, Scotland the Brand, into “Scottishness” and its exploitability in advertising and the packaging of Scottish goods. The country’s new official marketing device, unveiled in November 1997, is the word “Scotland”, in signature style, in which the Saltire blue of the national flag blends into tartan.

The logo is to be used across the range of products and services – food, drink, textiles, financial and medical services, engineering, the universities. By December 1997 it had already been adopted by 150 companies, including major household names. It seems that consumer nationalism of a kind will now be inescapable, even if it is not necessarily politically separatist.

Scottish Devolution is certainly sounding the death-knell of centralist decision-making in the United Kingdom. Consequently, the British state is now likely to experience the strains of “asymmetrical government”. There have already been illustrative opening skirmishes between Edinburgh and London about control over inward investment, over higher education fees for students, and most importantly over the proportion of UK funds to be allocated to Scotland in future.

The British political class – whether it is located in London or in Edinburgh – will rapidly have to learn the new political art of making devolution work. Otherwise the new Scottish democracy may, by degrees, push towards independent statehood within the European Union.



7 thoughts on “Scottish Devolution Road Map – A French Perspective”

  1. I am sick to death of hearing that Scotland has one of the strongest devolved parliaments in the civilised world, so feckin what, we are still TOLD what we can and cannot do by a bunch of tory posh boys that treat Scotland and the Scots with utter contempt, derision and disgust, they TELL us and our representatives what they are willing to give us subsidy junkies. Get it through our thick Scottish heads, we are not equal partners we are not even equal humans in their eyes. Stuff devolution up their jacksies , we need independence.

    We are not one of the strongest devolved parliaments in the civilised world the UK is, it is governed by the unelected mandarins of the EU and herr Merkel who tells them what to do and when to do it , and when TTIP is introduced they will dance even more to the great USA . I want a free Scotland, free from Wastmonster free from slavery, not to be subjugated to a European superstate run by lunatics


    1. Well said but Scotland is likely to be tied to Westminster for a while. We can only keep chipping away at the controlling measures allowing the parliament in London to lord it over Scots. A way forward might be to insist that the Secretary of State for Scotland be appointed by the Scottish parliament. He would be able to attend cabinet meetings of the UK government when the business under discussion is relevant to Scottish or foreign affairs since EVEL is now established at Westminster which allows the remit of the UK government to be largely revised


      1. I agree CJ that would be a step in the right direction but a small step, I watched the news today with Camoron effusing about the great deals he is making on his negotiations re the EU WTF he is going backwards, every condition he set out has been hobbled by Tusk, every condition would be temporary if at all agreed to, every condition has a qualifying opposing condition, the perfect example of how to do business under the tolly ( not a typo) government, lie, lie lie and lie some more.

        To ALL the people wanting to remain within the EU I ask, do you want this snake oil salesman Tusk and his fellow Merkelites to direct your government which they will do, do you trust these self serving neocons to work for the betterment of the Scottish people, when they gleefully and enthusiastically jumped on the better together bandwagon and helped promote project fear, with senior europhiles eagerly chastising Salmond and telling Scotland and the Scots to get in the queue, and sorry there are no guarantees that we will let you in our gang. Well I for one say GIRFUY you can stick your gang up where the sun don’t shine


  2. I must be very stupid or I am missing something, all I see is a shower of self serving europhiles whose biggest focus is to keep the European trough topped up, they constantly and collectively ignore the wishes of their citizens as evidenced by Merkel”s open door welcoming mat ,with no consideration given to the real fears experienced by the indigenous people due to the impact mass migration is having on social services.

    The European state is a failed ideal, the shengen agreement and open borders is a failed ideal, they have proven that their abject failure to manage a situation which they are at least partly responsible for, is beyond their capabilities.

    I am at a loss and truly dumbfounded why Nicola Sturgeon and the Scottish Government are so mesmerised by this shower of proven incompetents and are so fixated on joining them thereby giving up our sovereignty.

    Independence in the EU is a misnomer


    1. So many vipers invited into the nest. One recent analysis identified 2ooo refugees of which 1600 were male aged between 12 -25 the bulk of which were unaccompanied. Border Control Officers estimated around 75% were economic migrants the remainder could be classed as genuine refugees. The economic migrants should be returned to their parent state.


  3. I agree that unaccompanied young children should be rescued and protected from possible abuse, but I have major concerns that charities ,aid workers and social services are being hoodwinked and abused due to the insurmountable numbers of applicants. Everyone knows that charitable humanitarian thoughts and deeds are open to abuse, and reprehensible people will take full advantage of this crisis, but it is incumbent on governments to ensure that the kindness and security shown by their actions will not be abused and distorted to benefit persons , families or individuals who have no legal right to access these benefits.

    In the wake of the Cologne outrage governments of all hues have been shown to have been engaging and conspiring with the MSM and police to cover up and ignore repeated assaults, sexual assaults and severe criminality allegedly carried out by groups of men and individuals of ME and African descent, they purportedly have resorted to these illegal, disturbing and frankly outrageous measures to mollify, placate and attempt to convince the citizens that all is well with the world.

    All measures should be utilised including medical examinations to ascertain eligibility for unaccompanied children status, the reasons behind their situation , and anyone found to be abusing the facility should automatically be banned from asylum and deported with no right of appeal.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.