Banner

By a Newsnet reporter

The Chief Executive of the Scottish Council of Voluntary Organisations (SCVO) has called on the anti-independence parties to come clean on what ‘more powers’ they would offer the people of Scotland.
 
Speaking after an Edinburgh conference on the referendum yesterday, Martin Sime also insisted that the best way to ensure enhanced powers came to Scotland was to have the option on the referendum ballot.

Mr Sime said:

“The best way to get more powers is to get it backed in a referendum.   A popular mandate would be so much more difficult for a UK government, of whatever stripe, to avoid.”

His comments were welcomed by the SNP with Margaret Burgess, SNP MSP for Cunninghame South and member of the Welfare Reform Committee, saying:

“Martin Sime's comments are a positive and welcome contribution to the debate. They rightly recognise that the Tories and other anti-independence parties’ promises of jam tomorrow lack credibility.

“The SNP is totally committed to having a fully-informed debate on Scotland’s future – which is why we will continue to set out the benefits of independence for people, jobs and business in Scotland.

“In 2013 we will publish the full prospectus for independence in plenty time for the referendum.   What is entirely lacking from the UK Government and the other anti-independence parties is any clarity about what their alternative to independence is.

“These are all matters to be decided in Scotland, and the SNP also strongly agree with the STUC’s position that the UK Government should not seek to impose ‘pre-conditions’ on the people of Scotland’s referendum.”

Mr Sime’s comments followed backing from the STUC for 16 and 17 year olds to be allowed to take part in the ballot.

The organisation also backed the SNP’s proposed timeline for an independence referendum saying there were advantages to a 2014 date and described moves to rule out a third option on the ballot paper as “inappropriate”.

STUC General Secretary Grahame Smith, said: "Our response recognises the enormous value of clarifying through legislation the right of the Scottish government to legislate for an independence referendum."

He said: "STUC does not oppose a 2014 referendum and sees some advantages to this timescale which would allow for the resolution of all matters of process, for ensuring the proper legal basis for the referendum is clearly established, and for ensuring that the people of Scotland are able to engage in the widest possible debate on the constitutional future of our country.

"Whilst recognising practical difficulties with respect to extending the voting age to include 16 and 17 year olds, STUC supports in principle the view that 16 and 17-year-olds should be entitled to vote."

Meanwhile the Conservative’s Scottish leader Ruth Davidson has been accused of causing further confusion over her parties stance on more powers for the Scottish Parliament.

In a speech in Aberdeen Ms Davidson said that her party would offer “real devolution” to the Scottish people.  However she appeared to rule out devo-max and devo-plus, the two options currently battling it out for the middle ground spot.

Claiming she wanted to put the choice in the hands of the people, Ms Davidson said: ““I want to talk about devolution - not devo max or devo plus, or devo mix, or I can’t believe it’s not devo - but real devolution from Holyrood to people and communities across Scotland.”

Having previously insisted that the current legislation contained in the Scotland Bill was a “line in the sand”, Ms Davidson’s has now muddied the waters between her preference and that of her leader, PM David Cameron who indicated recently his preference for ‘further devolution’.

Commenting on Ms Davidson’s remarks, SNP MSP Jamie Hepburn said the Tories were at sixes and sevens on the constitution.
 
Mr Hepburn claimed her comments put her at odds with the Prime Minister who has made the vague promise of additional powers for the Scottish Parliament – a position which former Tory MSP Ted Brocklebank has said has “destroyed any remaining shreds of her credibility”.
 
Mr Hepburn, MSP for Cumbernauld and Kilsyth said:
 
“Echoing Michael Forsyth’s policy, which saw the Tories lose all their MPs in Scotland, only puts the Scottish Conservatives into an even more ridiculous position.
 
“The Tory Party in Scotland are now at sixes and sevens on the constitution with their leader caught between playing to the reactionary element of her party and the ever-changing instructions from her boss in Westminster.
 
“Her comments about the Scotland Bill being a ‘line in the sand’ were clearly out of sync with the thoughts – if not outlined policy – of her boss David Cameron.  Now taking up Michael Forsyth’s failed position of the 1990’s not only makes the Scottish Tories out of touch but out of date.
 
“It all makes one wonder if the Tories actually speak to each other.
 
“Only the SNP will stand-up for the people of this country by putting forward positive policies which will move Scotland forward.”

Comments  

 
# hiorta 2012-03-10 13:19
Full, free Independence with full control over our own destiny - or pig-in-a-poke Unionism.

Now....that's a hard one, isn't it? Hmmmh.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2012-03-10 13:43
Oink! Oink! :D

Does it for me every time! :D
 
 
# Legerwood 2012-03-10 13:46
Quote:
Meanwhile the Conservative’s Scottish leader Ruth Davidson has been accused of causing further confusion over her parties stance on more powers for the Scottish Parliament.


'parties' is the plural of party.

party's stance: stance of her party.

Aplogies but it is the teacher in me and I am fed up seeing this sort of mistake particularly in words ending in 'y'.

On the subject of the article: I noticed in today's Herald that Lord Wallace is calling for the Unionist parties to decide what additional powers they think Scotland should have and to put those in their manifestos for the 2015 general election. So clearly he feels the referendum will give a 'No' vote.

Problem 1: who believes manifesto pledges by the Unionist parties?
Problem 2: who believes the 'No' vote will be in the majority in the Referendum?
 
 
# Exile 2012-03-16 23:04
My sympathies over the spelling, Legerwood. If I'd had enough hair left in the first place I'd have pulled it all out by now over precisely this point. Unfortunately it's an epidemic nowadays. Perhaps it's to do with the approach taken at school in recent decades. I dunno.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2012-03-10 13:51
Quote:
Aplogies but it is the teacher in me and I am fed up seeing this sort of mistake particularly in words ending in 'y'.



I think you'll have a lot of problems on this site then Ledger. :D

Never mind there is always the "Darkened Room" :D

P.S. I think it might save your sanity to steer clear of my posts, they might just send you over the edge. :D
 
 
# J Wil 2012-03-10 17:21
Perhaps the SNP should drop the hint that they might define Devo Max themselves when their consultation shows a large body of opinion in favour of it. This would have the Unionists scurrying to produce their own definition before they are left behind again owing to their reluctance on the matter.

The SNP conference speaker Mr Finnie had several interesting things to say, particularly about the Trident replacement and the effect on the remainder of the UK, when the bases on the Clyde get shot of the nuclear arsenal. I was glad that there was no suggestion that the SG should rent the bases out to the UK to retain its WMDs there.

It was also interesting to hear him stress the importance of Foreign Affairs to Scotland. That it should not be left to London in any deal on devolved powers as it is too important not to be devolved. If there is to be a second question, Devo plus seems far too weak and Devo max has to include Foreign Affairs. Why not throw in defence too for good measure.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2012-03-10 17:37
I was half listening to the conference via the web whilst having a good laugh at the antics of the EBC clowns before the speech by A.S.

I heard one speaker, can't remember who, mention a booklet called "Trident - No Where to Go"

I think this is the document in question.

banthebomb.org/.../...
 
 
# J Wil 2012-03-10 19:00
That looks like the one Finnie mentioned. Will have a good read when I get 5 mins ...or so!
 
 
# amfraeembro 2012-03-10 23:28
Acceptable Devo Max = Full Fiscal Autonomy + Foreign Affairs + Defence. Westminster can keep control of air-guns and speed limits.
 
 
# Edulis 2012-03-10 20:59
O/T Just been listening to the 'Referendum on Separation' session by the Scottish Committee at HOC. Chairman Ian Davidson falls foul of the first rule of chairmanship by asking the academics loaded questions throughout. Alan Reid, LibDem and that MacKenzie fellow from Greenock asked the most innane questions which John Curtice, Peter Kelner and Iain MacLean had to bat back as being irelevant/inappropriate. You will be able to find it on the iplayer under BBC Parliament.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2012-03-10 21:08
Thing is Edulis the very fact it is the Scottish Committee says it all. Every one knows who the idiot chairman is so you know right from the get go the whole session is going to be lop sided.... against Independence.

I heard Curtice on the SNP conference show today talking about the committee. Isn't it great. A committee discussing how a question should be put in order to get the "right" answer. The guy's a complete eedjit!

As far as watching the Scottish Committee I daren't. I think my T.V. would end up in need of some serious repair. :D
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Banner
Banner

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Latest Comments