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

  • Comment Who made my clothes?

    Who made my clothes?

    By Stella Creasy MP and Alison McGovern MP It’s been a long four years in opposition, and each year we’ve seen the country decline further for the lack of a Labour Government. But whether speaking up about legal loan sharks, the misuse of zero hours contracts or promoting the economic case for the living wage, we both believe that there are campaigns worth fighting, even if, from opposition, progress is many times harder, and very much slower. That’s why we […]

    Read more →
  • Featured 5 things Labour’s new rapid-rebuttal team need to get right

    5 things Labour’s new rapid-rebuttal team need to get right

    Yesterday’s story of a new Labour media management team, seemingly in the mould of Alastair Campbell’s famously effective rapid-response unit, and headed by Michael Dugher, should be welcome news to us all. A well-run operation can make a huge difference, and in an election as close as 2015 looks set to be, that difference could be Miliband or Cameron in Number 10. But for it to be truly helpful, it needs to get some things right. 1. Be rapid This may sound […]

    Read more →
  • Comment Should politicians do God?

    Should politicians do God?

    Easter is traditionally a time when Christians reflect on their faith, and there is no reason why politicians shouldn’t do so too. But this year David Cameron forsook his usual Easter message for a much stronger and more personal foray into the religious arena. He urged Britain to be more confident of its status as a Christian country; he spoke of the strength of his own faith; he said that we should be “frankly more evangelical about the faith that […]

    Read more →
  • News Iraq Inquiry report possibly delayed until after election

    Iraq Inquiry report possibly delayed until after election

    We reported recently that the Chilcot Report is now not due to be published until 2015, causing worries among Labour strategists that it could harm the Party’s chances at the general election. However, according to the Mail today, its release date could now be held back until after polling day next year. The article states: “Whitehall sources suggest that with an election due in May 2015, it will be deemed too politically difficult to publish it until after voters have […]

    Read more →
  • News Labour to cut ties with Co-op Bank as it continues to slash debts

    Labour to cut ties with Co-op Bank as it continues to slash debts

    The BBC reports this morning that the Labour Party is to cut its near century long relationship with the Co-op Bank: “The Labour Party is looking to sever its links with the troubled Co-op Bank, bringing to an end one of the oldest political partnerships in the UK. The BBC has learned that Ian McNicoll [sic], Labour’s general secretary, is looking to move loans worth more than £1m to the trade union-owned Unity Trust Bank.” Speaking to LabourList this morning, […]

    Read more →