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

January 15, 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

  • News Chris Leslie rules out raising National Insurance to pay for social care

    Chris Leslie rules out raising National Insurance to pay for social care

    The possibility of Labour pledging a specific tax to raise money for NHS spending resurfaced this weekend, with Ed Miliband apparently believing that the NHS is going to be a major issue in 2015. The supposed likely tax rise would be in National Insurance, and this has raised some debate on LabourList this summer, with MP Frank Field supporting the idea, while Andrew Harrop and Adebusuyi Adeyemi have both warned against it. In a revealing interview with Progress magazine, Shadow Chief […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Free School Meals: let’s avoid the sour grapes

    Free School Meals: let’s avoid the sour grapes

    This time last year, the government announced that it would introduce free school meals for all infant school children before the next election. The policy had been endorsed by the School Food Plan commissioned by Gove. It was being championed by the Lib Dems and brought forward so it could be implemented before the 2015 election in what appeared to be a pre-conference deal between the coalition partners. This week 1.5million children in infant schools in England, including my six year […]

    Read more →
  • Featured Weekly survey: Crime commissioners, Douglas Carswell and Labour defections

    Weekly survey: Crime commissioners, Douglas Carswell and Labour defections

    The role of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) has been in the news lately, with the low turnout at the recent West Midlands by-election and the Rotherham abuse scandal becoming focussed on the refusal to quit by the South Yorkshire PCC Shaun Wright. LabourList reported this weekend that Labour are planning to abolish PCCs after the election next year. Should the role be discontinued? Or is there just a better way of making them work? The defection of Douglas Carswell […]

    Read more →
  • Comment It shouldn’t cost so much to be a candidate

    It shouldn’t cost so much to be a candidate

    I love the Labour party. I enjoy canvassing, I pay my subs, go to the various fundraising dinners and vote in National Executive Committee (NEC) elections. I, like many, hate the constant barrage of ‘please donate’ emails and fear the dreaded fundraising call. And if I feel like that, imagine the dread felt by a candidate when they receive such a call. Don’t believe that happens? Hard to believe as it is, on more than one occasion now I have […]

    Read more →
  • News Jim Murphy resumes “100 streets” referendum tour after nationalist abuse

    Jim Murphy resumes “100 streets” referendum tour after nationalist abuse

    Jim Murphy is resuming his soapbox street meetings tour of Scotland tomorrow, after suspending it last week in the face of increasing co-ordinated abuse by supporters of independence. These protests at Murphy’s open-air meetings came to the attention of the media (and the police) when the Shadow Defence Secretary was hit with eggs last week. In a blog for the Spectator this weekend, Murphy explains how the organised groups go beyond the “normal cut and thrust” of politics that the meetings […]

    Read more →