28th Session of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe – 24-26 March 2015

Congress discusses Scotland after the 2014 independence referendum

A sense of Scotland was flowing through the Council of Europe´s debating hall when members of the Congress Chamber of Regions from 47 member states discussed “Scotland after the 18 September 2014 referendum“ and its  consequences for Scotland, the  UK and  Europe. It was that airy Scottish political understanding which has made Scotland and its parliament famous in the UK. You can have a different political point of view, you can fight the other party or even strongly dislike the standing of your opponents but when it comes to Scotland politicians from all sides of the political world seem to have agreed a joint target:  to bring Scotland and its people forward.

While Prime Minister´s Question time in London´s  House of Commons at Westminster often presents a house of shouting and blaming , Holryood ( the Scottish Parliament is situated opposite the Palace of Holyroodhouse, Her Majesty´s seat in Scotland) in Edinburgh usually delivers a much more civilized debate, very often mixed with that world-famous Scottish  sense of humour. Many parliamentarians from all over Europe will have felt that in this Scotland debate. Even if very different and very outspoken Scottish politicians express their open views and clearly show where they are standing, they are united by their commitment to Scotland.

Christina McKelvie, Scottish National Party SNP member of the Scottish Parliament (SP) and convener of the SP´s Europe committee plainly supports the current Scottish National Party government in Edinburgh. She said “we had the independence referendum and we lost, but that is not the end, but the start for something new”. She added “We only lost because the Westminster parties, with Conservatives and Labour working in lockstep, vowed that in the event of a No vote, they would deliver more powers to Scotland”. The result was the Smith commission, a hastily assembled grouping of all parties which came up with a clear series of proposals on enhancing Scottish devolution. Smith, she told the 300 Congress members, had “recommended the power for the Scottish Parliament to set income tax rates and ban ds, increased borrowing powers, control of some benefits and licensing of oil and gas extraction”. Mc Kelvie’s observation of the current political climate in Scotland is very clear:” There is now a storm of desire for change in Scotland “.

Obviously Lord Wallace of Tankerness , Liberal Democrat and a Scot from Orkney speaking for  the UK government, and Scottish Councillor  Harry McGuigan, Scottish Labour, did not agree with Mc Kelvie’s remarks. To understand their views it has to be remembered that in the 1998 referendum on installing a new Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh Orkney and Shetland voted against it. In the Indy Ref, how Scots call the September 2014 independence referendum, 51 % in North Lanarkshire voted for Independence while in South Lanarkshire  54% voted for No and for Scotland remaining  in the UK. Lord Wallace and Councillor McGuigan have been devoted NO voters and are fighting the SNP in Scotland in the coming Westminster election.

Lord Wallace, a former Scottish government minister and Deputy First Minister in Scotland, clearly sees a Scotland staying in the “UK family of nations” as a big chance to empower devolution in Scotland. “Devolution”, he said,” means that the SP and Scottish Government are empowered to take decisions, and be accountable for those decisions, on a range of domestic policy areas , such as health, education and policing, so that specific Scottish needs are addressed”.  The next stage of his UK government, if re-elected, would be “to take a new Scotland Bill through Parliament (in Westminster) - each of the three main UK parties has committed to this. No matter who makes up the government after May, these powers are coming”. 

Councillor Harry McGuigan, a former secondary  teacher of Maths and Physics in North Lanarkshire schools, who also worked in local Steelworks and Electronics industry, went one important step further. As a leading member of COSLA, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, he and many other local councillors in Scotland want to bring on devolution to local level. The local councils should be much more responsible on what they are doing, deciding and spending. Harry MacGuigan wants more powers on grassroots level, “to finally bring devolution to the local people”. People in their daily lives should experience devolution and feel the direct impact devolution could have in their communities. They are there to decide how communities should look like.

Many Congress delegates applauded the fact that Scotland for the independence referendum lowered the voting age. For the first time in Scotland and the UK young people from the age group between 16 and 18 were allowed to vote. Many observers during the referendum campaign had seen a vast increase in young voters and saw a new commitment for politics no one had expected. The voting rights for young people could be a very good example to raise future interest in politics again.

At the closing of the debate, Nataliya Romanova, Councillor of the Chernigiv District Council and Vice-President of the Council of Europe´s Congress, invited Scotland and its politicians to bring-in their referendum experience to Ukraine to help solving the devolution and independence problems in her country.

Concluding the debate, the President of the Chamber of Regions, Gudrun Mosler-Tornstrom, said the discussions confirmed that the way the United Kingdom and Scottish authorities have dealt with the people of Scotland’s aspirations for reinforced autonomy or independence can indeed be regarded as a best democratic practice, and a source of inspiration for other similar cases throughout Europe.