A debate which will have an effect on everyone in the UK

15th January, 2013 3:48 pm

Rarely does Parliament stop to consider issues as fundamental as the future composition of our country, but this afternoon in the House of Commons that is exactly what MPs are being asked to do.

The title of this afternoon’s debate – on the draft Scotland Act (Modification of Schedule 5) Order 2013 –isn’t likely to inspire much interest among anyone except the most hardened of constitutional lawyers. However, go beyond the title and into the substance and this is actually a debate which will have an effect on every person living not just in Scotland, but across the whole of the United Kingdom.

This afternoon’s debate is the result of the agreement signed by David Cameron and Alex Salmond in October and will see power over the “Union of England and Scotland” passed from the UK to the Scottish Parliament.

It’s a move which we support. Like them, we want to see a referendum which is “made in Scotland”, with the terms and detail of the referendum set through a Bill in the Scottish Parliament. This is important so that the process and result of the referendum is wholly accepted by all sides. Putting the responsibility for the referendum in the hands of the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament means that no one, including the SNP, can question the result. In the words of the agreement that was signed by both the UK and Scottish Government, the referendum will:

“deliver a…decisive expression of the views of the people of Scotland and a result that everyone will respect.”

In the Labour Party, we should take pride in the fact that the Scottish Parliament is being charged with this responsibility. It is worth remembering that in 1998, when Labour created the Scottish Parliament, many people (including a large number of Conservative MPs) said it would never work. With this agreement, we see another step in the evolution of Scottish democracy. The new powers also places a high responsibility on Scottish Government Ministers to rise to the occasion and act not just in the interests of partisan advantage, but in the interests of the whole country.

For those of us who have always seen constitutional change as a means to an end, and not an end in itself, this afternoon’s debate means that we might now be able to move further beyond process and into the substance of what affects Scottish people day in and day out. The debate ahead on the future of Scotland has to be more than an accountancy exercise. The tone and tenor of it has to match the high aspirations that people on all sides have for an event of this significance.

As we have been doing from the outset, we will continue to grasp the nettle and deal with the difficult and challenging issues that Scotland has to face with rigour and honesty. It has to be a debate that meets the ambition of the generations of Labour advocates for devolution. In the words of Donald Dewar, Scotland’s first First Minister:

“Introspection will not solve our problems. Nor will preoccupation with constitutional point-scoring. Responding to the needs of the Scottish people is what matters.”

For those of us who have spent a life time in Scottish politics, this is an important opportunity to settle this question once and for all. When Parliament’s debate concludes this afternoon, we will be one step closer to that end.

Margaret Curran MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland

  • uglyfatbloke

    Not the most inspiring of debates really…the gnats are conspicuous by their absence in the chamber and Ian Davidson and Eleanor Laing have taken the opportunity to deliver lengthways doses of snide – and not very honest – party whingeing. A fine demonstration of sheer uselessness by both sides.

  • uglyfatbloke

    Unbelievably, the debate got worse as it went on..and on…and on….
    Wishart actually made a fair point about the undesirable tendency toward denigration (which did n’t stop him chucking the odd brick himself) but was utterly denigrated for doing so. The best contributions were from Lazarowicz and Robertson – let’s have more of the same.
    Thankfully, very few people listen to such debates so Davidson, Laing and McNeill etc. probably have n’t done all that much damage, but we really can’t go on like this, it’s offensive and counter-productive..

  • http://www.facebook.com/jim.crowder2 Jim Crowder

    The only reason I can think of to refuse the people of Scotland a referendum to determine their future is that they may not deliver the right answer. Why should we be scared of the people being wrong?

  • http://twitter.com/andrew_graeme Andrew Smith

    Quite possibly one of the poorest debates I’ve seen and based on one of the most important issues. Please be more positive and don’t let Sarwar say frankly silly things (such as comparing Salmond to a dictatorship) or Davidson serve up such bile. The current tone will not inspire people to become active in the Labour Party or Better Together.

Latest

  • Comment Featured There are too many young people in prison who don’t need to be there

    There are too many young people in prison who don’t need to be there

    Some truisms exist for many years yet nobody acts upon them. Then along comes an avalanche of evidence that proves the case and the argument’s time has come. A new report ‘Changing Prisons Saving Lives’ from Labour’s Lord Toby Harris about why so many 16-24 year olds die in prison is such an avalanche. It has been so diligently researched across all the issues raised by these tragic deaths and the environments where they occurred and its conclusions are so […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Labour’s leadership hopefuls need to ditch ‘aspiration’ and start talking about ‘meritocracy’

    Labour’s leadership hopefuls need to ditch ‘aspiration’ and start talking about ‘meritocracy’

    As the post-mortem of Labour’s election defeat takes place in the midst of the party’s leadership election, observers can’t help but have noticed the term ‘aspiration’ persistently cropping up in the language of the three main contenders. The theory is that Labour failed to appeal to those in the middle in the last campaign, because its manifesto and campaign was too narrowly focused on the interests of those at the bottom. Therefore, we have this focus on ‘aspiration’, but what […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News “I’m the only person in this race that isn’t ‘Continuity Miliband'”, says Liz Kendall

    “I’m the only person in this race that isn’t ‘Continuity Miliband'”, says Liz Kendall

    Liz Kendall has argued that she is the only person in the Labour leadership race who isn’t ‘Continuity Miliband.’ Kendall is running to be Labour leader against Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Jeremy Corbyn. In an interview with the Sun, she argued that: “The other candidates haven’t spelled out how they would be different from Ed Miliband. If we stick with what we have been saying for the last five or eight years, we will have the same result”.  This […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Don’t set up an English Labour party, say LabourList readers

    Don’t set up an English Labour party, say LabourList readers

    Last week Jon Cruddas revealed that he is part of a group of MPs (the rest of whom currently remain anonymous) who are setting up an English Labour party. However, Labour officials said that this is not currently supported by the party. We do LabourList readers this? Do Labour need an English wing of the party, similar to Scottish and Welsh Labour? Most say no. 53% think that Labour shouldn’t support Cruddas and other MPs’ plans. However 32% are on […]

    Read more →
  • Featured News Cooper says she’d create two million high-skilled manufacturing jobs as she calls for Labour to champion science investment

    Cooper says she’d create two million high-skilled manufacturing jobs as she calls for Labour to champion science investment

    Yvette Cooper will today announce how she would create two million new high-skilled manufacturing jobs. Cooper is in the running to be Labour’s next leader. Today she will visit the Graphene centre in Manchester where she will say that she would seek to bring the UK in line with countries like Germany, by investing 3% of GDP in manufacturing jobs. She will also say that she’ll increase collective investment in science and Research and Development to 3% of GDP. As […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit