FEATURE REFERENDUM REFLECTIONS


Scottish devolution: the next steps – Paul Cairney One of the unfortunate things about the


independence referendum campaign was its failure to clarify ‘devo max’. For some, ‘devo max’ refers to the idea of devolving everything except foreign and defence policy – something that can’t happen if Scotland seeks meaningful membership of the UK and the UK remains a member state of the EU. Instead, at the very least, the Bank of England would remain in charge of monetary policy and the UK Government would retain control of many fiscal policies.


In the lead up to the referendum vote, the three UK party leaders offered ‘extensive new powers’ in a remarkably short space of time, with draft legislation to come before the next general election. From that starting point, several obstacles remain. First, the parties will have to agree on extensive new powers in less than a year, when their previous attempts to produce the more-limited Scotland Act 2012 took several years. Second, the balance of power in Westminster after the 2015 election, which is likely to influence the final settlement, is unclear. Third, the devolution of more powers will require more co-operation between the UK and Scottish Governments, to pursue shared aims or distinctly Scottish solutions under a UK framework. Yet, the experience so far is of two governments working as independently as possible. The potential devolution of economic,


welfare, energy, and other powers will not be enough to allow the Scottish public a sense that it can hold the Scottish Government to account for tax and spending decisions. Rather, it will increasingly share responsibilities with the UK. This outcome should prompt us to consider how we can hold such governments to account. If two or three authorities – in Scotland, the UK and EU – share responsibility for many policy choices, how can we blame any one of them at election time for the outcome? Paul Cairney is Professor of Politics and Public


Policy at the University of Stirling and leads research on public policy within the ESRC Centre on Constitutional Change The English Question – Charlie Jeffery People in England who went to bed on 18


September 2014 thinking the issue at stake was whether Scotland would vote Yes or No to independence may have been surprised to hear the Prime Minister David Cameron speaking


“


David Cameron needed to act on England to shore up his own right flank


Linking Scottish devolution


and EVEL was in part about internal party management


about England at breakfast time on the 19th. In his post-referendum statement, the PM linked the commitment to additional devolution to Scotland that he had promised if Scotland voted No to action on ‘English Votes on English Laws’ (EVEL). EVEL of course is shorthand for MPs from Scotland not being able to vote on legislation in the House of Commons that focuses on England. Linking Scottish devolution and EVEL was


”


in part about internal party management. Many on the Conservative backbenches think that devolution outside of England – and further devolution for Scotland – leaves people in England without an effective voice in the UK political system. Cameron needed to act on England to shore up his own right flank. But he also had Labour in his sights in promising action on EVEL. Labour is strong in Scotland. It could emerge from a UK General Election with a UK-wide majority because of its strength in Scotland, but a minority of MPs in England. EVEL could deny a future Labour administration the capacity to deliver policies in England. So Labour doesn’t like the prospect of EVEL. But that could create the impression that it opposes the right of people in England to have their own representative arrangements. That, as the May 2015 UK election approaches, may be a difficult sell in England. Charlie Jeffery is Professor of Politics and Co-


ordinator of the ESRC Future of the UK and Scotland programme n


i 18 SOCIETY NOW AUTUMN 2014


For further information on the Future of the UK and Scotland research programme and the ESRC Centre on Constitutional Change, see: www.futureukandscotland.ac.uk


▲


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32