Banner

By Bob Duncan
 
The Anti-independence coalition of Tory, Labour and Lib Dems have come under pressure to clarify their stance on Scottish devolution following Scottish Secretary Michael Moore's double failure to say which powers would be devolved to Scotland if the nation votes NO in the 2014 referendum.
 
Under interrogation from SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson MP at today's Scottish Questions, Lib Dem MP Michael Moore twice failed to address a direct question on what further powers would be devolved.

Moore's failure to clarify the proposals that will be offered by the Labour/Tory/Lib Dem allliance comes despite the official launch of the campaign, to be spearheaded by Alistair Darling, being only days away.

It also follows admissions from senior members of his own party that the status quo, including new powers contained in the Scotland Bill, is not enough.  Last year, Scottish LibDem leader Willie Rennie set up a new party commission to look at Home Rule, headed by Sir Menzies Campbell, to assess what extra powers for Scotland might mean.

As recently as February, the former Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott, senior Labour MSP Duncan McNeil and the Conservative former Holyrood presiding officer Alex Fergusson, put forward a proposal for a raft of new powers they referred to as Devo Plus.

The group argued that the Scottish Parliament should take direct responsibility for raising nearly all of the £35bn it spends each year. That would include control over all Scotland's income tax, its corporation tax and more than 80% of North Sea oil revenues, but would still leave the UK government collecting national insurance, VAT and other taxes for defence and foreign affairs.

Also in February Alistair Darling, the former chancellor, and his Labour colleague Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary, said that the Scottish Parliament will need new tax powers which could see it raising nearly all the £30bn it spends each year, independently of the Treasury.

A few weeks Later in early March, Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont announced the creation of a Labour Party Commission to propose constitutional and political reforms in Westminster and other parts of the UK, to avoid Scotland's new powers creating further tensions with the rest of the UK, or raise questions about the role of Scottish MPs at Westminster.

Despite these initiatives, Scottish Secretary Moore was unable to clarify what the position of the No campaign would be.

Early this year, Prime Minister David Cameron said the referendum did not have to be "the end of the road" for devolution, adding “I am open to looking at how the devolved settlement can be improved further and, yes, that means considering what further powers could be devolved."

Only last week Mr Cameron again hinted that Scotland might gain control over all of its income tax revenues, if the nation votes NO in the 2014 referendum.

Mr Moore's refusal to articulate the anti-independence campaign's position on more powers, on the eve of it's own official campaign launch, was seized on by Mr Robertson who said it showed a lack of consensus and confusion between the three Unionist parties.

Angus Robertson questions Michael Moore:

Speaking after the exchange in the House of Commons, Angus Robertson said:

“By avoiding two straightforward questions with a negative response, Michael Moore has added to the state of confusion that has engulfed the anti-independence parties over Scotland’s constitutional future.

“Mr Moore and his Tory and Labour allies all admit that the constitutional status quo is not sustainable but, with only days until the formal launch of the ‘No’ campaign, he cannot name a single power that he would devolve.  If the anti-independence parties claims were genuine they have a democratic duty to set out exactly what is on offer.

“The anti-independence parties have been left behind by people across civic Scotland who are considering the powers that Scotland needs to have a successful economy and fair society - instead of savage cuts and a stagnant economy from the UK coalition.  People in Scotland are entitled to know what the anti-independence parties have in mind, and whether their proposals include any real economic powers and responsibilities, for example, over welfare issues.

“Mr Moore seems to have ditched the Lib Dems’ own policy of more powers for Holyrood and is now just acting as a front man for a Tory Government Scotland didn’t vote for – no wonder so many Lib Dems in Scotland have abandoned the party in favour of the SNP.

"While we take nothing for granted, we are very confident that we can win the Yes case for independence and equality for Scotland in the referendum.”

The No campaign launch was recently delayed by the fiasco over the choice of name and slogan - "Better Together".  However it quickly emerged that "Better Together" was in fact already in use, having been introduced by Health Secretary Nicola Sturgeon in February 2008 as part of a drive aimed at supporting Scotland’s NHS Boards, front line staff and patients in driving forward service improvement.
 
The NO Campaign is now to be relaunched later this week under a hastily replaced official slogan “A stronger Scotland, a United Kingdom”.

Bizarrely, anti-independence insiders have announced that the NO campaign will not use the word “no”, due to it being too negative, the campaign will also avoid the word “Union” as this too is considered to be an electoral liability.

How BBC Scotland reported the session:

The full Scotland Questions session can be seen here:

Comments  

 
# Peter A Bell 2012-06-20 21:18
I have looked at the question of what a NO vote means. It is easy to see the uncertainties around a NO vote causing a great deal more problems than any supposed unanswered questions about independence.

Peter A Bell: What does no really mean?: peterabell.blogspot.co.uk/.../...
 
 
# bringiton 2012-06-20 21:36
It is essential that all funding for this referendum is open and transparent.If the NO campaign is being funded mainly from sources outwith Scotland,this has to be made clear to the electorate so that they can form a judgement as to why.
I suspect,as usual,it will be the best democracy that money can buy but we shall see.
 
 
# paulmahon 2012-06-20 23:30
I tend to think of politics as a constant state of flux - there is no position, only direction. Thus the status quo is never a real option (nor is devo max or even independence with the same head of state). A negative result in 2014 would be an invite to transfer powers from Edinburgh to London. This could include the dissolution of the Scottish parliament, but could also go further with the abolition of the Scottish NHS, Scots Law (see debate over UK supreme court), the establishment of the Church of England as a state agency north of the border (although this seems to be among the great many facts about which the free presbyterians are unaware) and the end of Scotland's distinct education system. So constitutional politics is also something of a gamble! There are a number of campaigning opportunities that arise from this reality. Independence can be packaged as the "safe option" against the aforementioned uncertainties and instability inherent in a "no" vote. The downside of this approach is that it can be labelled negative - it is negative but its also realist. The Scottish Government should, I think, publish two budgets prior to the 2014 vote, one detailing the capital spending plans for an independent social democratic state, and another doomsday budget signifying, for example, the unavoidable privatization of the NHS if people vote "no".
 
 
# chicmac 2012-06-21 03:10
Three absolutely essential questions for the No campaign for which answers must be attained before R-Day.

1. Will any of the existing powers in the Scottish Parliament be removed or downgraded if Scotland chooses continued dependence?

2. In particular, can you state that no legislation will be brought into existence which would prevent the Scottish Parliament holding another referendum when it deems fit?

3. Will changes to the election system be made to try to ensure another SNP majority is impossible?
 
 
# ubinworryinmasheep 2012-06-21 06:51
I would say that points 2 and 3 are very important. If these are not answered before R-Day then we should point out that this may be the last chance for independence ever, which may sway voters in our favour.
 
 
# 1314 2012-06-21 09:37
chicmac - your 1,2,3 is nowhere near enough.

This was my contribution to the Scottish Government's consultation regarding a second question.

'There should be just one question on the ballot paper.The only way that a second question about Devomax could possibly be on the ballot paper
would be if a majority vote supporting that proposal was binding on the UK government. Since the UK government's position is that there should be only one question it seems extremely unlikely that they would even get as far as discussing the details of a Devomax proposal never mind agreeing to a binding result.
'

So, my three questions -

1. What is proposed (in detail) as an alternative to independence?

2. If there are three possibilities, Independence, devoplus, status quo - how will a majority for one of these be arrived at?

3. If their is a majority vote, however devised, for devoplus - will it be binding on the UK parliament?

If the answer to 3. is NO - you can forget the rest.
 
 
# chicmac 2012-06-21 14:53
Indeed.

And I have in the past, here and elsewhere, put forward lists of questions the Unionists should be getting asked by an any fair and competent media, including the ones you give.

Some of the the other questions which should be asked are not all straightforward questions demanding a sensible answer but are designed to show just how stupid similar questions to the Yes campaign are.

e.g.s

Q. If Scotland generally votes NO but Shetland votes YES, will Shetland be allowed to leave Scotland and the UK?

Q. Will the UK stay in the EU?

And other straight sensible questions like:

Q. Will Scotland be able to adopt the European financial sector regulations if it remains in the UK?

Q. Will Scotland gain financial benefit from exporting water to England or will it find that it has to pay extra for the privilege of doing so as in the case of electricity exports?


These all have different purposes.

The three I chose for the above post, are the ones which indeed depict the likelihood of this being the last chance, through normal democratic processes, of gaining independence, as noted by ubin..
 
 
# Basil Metabolism 2012-06-21 22:11
Here's another one
Q.If Scotland generally votes NO but Shetland votes YES, will Shetland be allowed to leave the UK but stay in Scotland? (after all, Greenland left the EU but stayed in the Kingdom of Denmark)
 
 
# Silverytay 2012-06-21 08:35
I will tell you what extra powers we will get if we say no to Independence . Nothing , a big fat zero , Zilch call it what you want . I am old enough to remember the 70,s when they came away with the same old promises and scare stories that they are peddling today . We stupidly believed them in the 70,s and look what happened ! we got sha***d big time .
Almost 40 years later , nothing has changed apart from the fact that now have our own parliament and a first minister who actively goes out of his way to promote Scotland .
My last sentence is a bit contradictory ! What I mean is that the arguments and facts have not changed .
Trying to convince people that an Independent Scotland could not be any worse off than what we are under the present corrupt system is like banging your head against a brick wall ! .
 
 
# The Tree of Liberty 2012-06-21 10:21
Silvertay, I also remember the 70's when we got F.A. but I fear if we vote No this time we will get less than Zilch. If, God forbide, the people of Scotland vote No, the Establishment will ensure that we Scots will never be in a position to call another referendum again, by fair means or foul.
 
 
# DonMc 2012-06-21 10:35
After the last Scottish election I and my family was on a high. Since that time I have seen the insidious attacks on independence from within and without Scotland strengthen and begin showing a slowing of an acceptance of Scotland standing alone as a normal country should.

It was the intention of my wife and I to return to an Independent Scotland to end our days in happiness, that I fear will not happen, unless the Scottish Government does an UDI. A no vote for me is just unthinkable.

I will just have to sit here in the Antipodes drinking good Laphroaig and write and read poetry of the loss of Scottish innocence. Perhaps at this moment I am drinking too much of that Malt and feeling very homesick and sad.
 
 
# Aikenheed 2012-06-21 10:48
Courage DonMc - there is a long way to go and we have not yet begun to fight - this is just the preliminary skirmishing. One of the weaknesses of No but Yes but No campaign is that it is very difficult to take that stance without sounding as if one is talking Scotland down.
Substance will win over spin - that's why the date is 2014 to give us time to present the facts in digestible chunks
 
 
# Jimbo 2012-06-21 11:16
Since the BBC are overtly on the side of the nay-sayers, BBC licence payers should be made aware that their licence fees are partly funding the 'NO' campaign.
 
 
# Soloman 2012-06-21 11:20
Yeah 2014!
And these NO campaigners wanted to get on with the referendum straight away, of course that would have nothing to do with the efforts of the establishment rolling out the Union Jack in every town and village as well as on every other tv programme and just about every food package.......Jubilee London 2012 come on let's have the referendum now.
 
 
# J Gordon 2012-06-21 11:52
The No vote should be forced to reveal how it is financed. How is it possible that they are to hire already staff - it is totally untransparent.
 
 
# Silverytay 2012-06-21 12:21
T.T.O.L @10.21
I wholeheartedly agree with you on that one .
When I was on holiday at Easter , I was discussing the referendum with some English people and I told them at the time that Scotland could not afford to vote no as the retribution from westminster for the Scot,s even daring to think of Independence would decimate Scotland .
Unfortunately they could not see this and thought that everything would just go on as before .
 
 
# mealer 2012-06-21 14:13
Vote Yes for Scotland.
 
 
# cjmasta 2012-06-21 18:32
Moore was saying how they would use the civil service to make a case and draw up facts on why scotland should stay in the poxy union. We have seen before what happens when civil servqnts in london plan scotlands future and it usually envolves denying us of our resources and the truth of our wealth etc. If the unionists are going to use government resources to their benefit then maybe we should too haha. Can you imagine the blanket headlines in the scottish press.
 
 
# Aikenheed 2012-06-22 08:29
If the unionists are going to use government resources to their benefit then maybe we should too haha
Very good point CJ - what exactly will be the rules regarding expenditure on the campaigns - if Westminster is using civil servants how will this be costed?
 
 
# schawaldowris 2012-06-21 18:49
If I understand the devo plus argument correctly, Westminster will tell us what Scottish taxes we can keep for good housekeeping purposes and what Scottish Taxes they will retain for the more important concerns such as Foreign Affairs, Defence and macro economic policy

This decision is not open to negotiation as it is a Westminster directive. So do as yer telt!!
 
 
# exel 2012-06-21 21:37
Why do we not suspend speculation until "launch day is here"

I suspect it will be even more of a "damp squib" than the YES campaign.

Look at the weather forecast for Monday
 
 
# Davy 2012-06-22 07:10
Ok folks enough of the doom and gloom, the unionist parties have nothing to offer but decit and deception, and I believe Scotland has wised up to that heap of bolloxs a long time ago. Their NO campaign will be full of lies and half truths with a good mixture of scary stories and we will defeat that by telling the truth and laughing at all their scary stories.

They may have the MSM and the BBBC behind them but we have the internet and never discount the power of word by mouth.

Forget the polls and other such nonsense, speak to your friends, your neighbours and relatives show the face of positive Scotland.

Remember we won the election for homerule in the 70's but were cheated out of the result by Westminster. They dont have that power now, its Scotlands referendum, its Scotlands future and the future is positive.
 
 
# rhymer 2012-06-29 14:37
So far I have "converted " eleven (11) people over to the YES
Campaign - and all I did was show them a couple of articles on
this site. Newsnetscotland obviously imparts the knowledge that
help people make a decision about independence.

Use the fact that since the SNP won the Scottish parliamentary elections we have been banned from commenting on the BBC Scottish political news site but the English, N. Irish and Welsh sites are open to all is an issue that ALL Scots get annoyed about.

Or tell them to watch the STV 6:00pm Scottish news then switch channels and watch the 6:30pm BBC version of the Scottish news
and see the difference in how they either don't report a story or how they slant a story to suit their bias. Their response is amazing.
 

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

Banner
Banner

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Latest Comments