For Labour Party members - what happens in Scotland matters in England (and Wales)

Among the legacies of New Labour in Government were a series of partial and unfinished constitutional innovations, including (for example) limited reform of the House of Lords (to remove voting rights from most, but not all, hereditary peers, leaving a largely appointed second chamber).

We also have now developed a peculiarly lopsided quasi-federal union of “four nations” in which the UK Government also serves - effectively - as the Government of England (by far the largest of the four, with a great majority of the population). An unforeseen consequence of the devolution agreed around the turn of the century is the demolition of Labour’s Scottish representation in both the Westminster Parliament (where we have just one Scottish MP) and the Holyrood home of the devolved Scottish Government (where we are now the third party).

This matters for socialists south of the border, because - historically - Labour has depended upon strong representation of Scottish MPs in order to stand a chance of forming a Government for the UK as a whole. It is clear that our Party in Scotland has been suffering from the centrality which has been assumed by the “national question” since the 2014 referendum rejected calls for independence by 55% to 45%. 

Supporters of independence have clearly been drawn to voting for the Scottish National Party (SNP), who have repeatedly won the majority of Westminster constituencies on the back of being the major Parliamentary voice for the 45%. As for supporters of the union, they have the option of the Conservative and Unionist Party. 

Labour - as a party standing for policies in support of workers’ rights, public services and social welfare in the interests of working class people - can wish all we want that Scottish politics wasn’t being dominated by constitutional issues, but - at least for Westminster and Holyrood elections - they clearly are right now.

This makes a recent intervention from my friend and comrade Katy Clark all the more important. Katy wonders aloud whether there might be a middle way (between the status quo and outright independence) along the following lines;

• Full tax raising powers for the Scottish Parliament.
• Westminster raising taxes for reserved matters.
• Transparency in funding transfers between nations and regions.
• The pound as the currency with an agreed remit for a renamed Bank of England.
• Substantial borrowing powers for the Scottish Parliament within a framework set between Westminster and Holyrood, and with the ability to invest to protect and develop industry and sectors.
• Reserved areas to be agreed between the four nations, i.e. pensions, customs, etc.
• Qualified majority voting by nations on reserved matters with specific consents required where stipulated, i.e. war.
• Representation of nations and regions in a reformed second chamber.

It’s not for English socialists to tell the Scottish people what to do, but clearly, if Scottish Labour were advocating an updated “devo max” position that might be a better way to differentiate the party from the nationalists on the one hand and advocates of the status quo on the other (as well as arguably - and crucially - corresponding to the interests of the people our Party was set up to represent). It is certainly hard to see how a position of simple opposition to another referendum could rescue the Party in Scotland from its current impasse.

Of course, whatever Labour does north of the border, nothing can guarantee that the constitutional “national” question will cease to dominate politics. The example of Quebec is a cautionary tale. The Parti Quebecois (PQ), having lost a referendum  (for “sovereignty-association”) by a margin of 60% to 40% in 1980 came within a whisker of winning fifteen years later (with more than 49% supporting sovereignty for Quebec).  Twenty five years further on, the PQ are considering a third referendum - and although they are not in Government in Quebec now, three quarters of the votes cast (and seats won) in Quebec’s 2018 election went to parties based in Quebec (whilst the associated Bloc Quebecois won 32 of Quebec’s 78 seats in Canada’s federal Parliament in 2019) , and the issue of independence and/or the degree of autonomy for Quebec (within Canada’s federal constitution) remains central to politics in the Province.

It may be that the only final settlement to the question of Scottish independence will be found when Scotland becomes independent, and a Scottish Labour Party based upon the Scottish labour movement can win back supporters who, for the time being, are supporting independence. However, Katy Clark’s suggestions for greater devolution might offer both an opportunity for Labour to renew its appeal to Scottish voters and to settle the “national question” (at least for a time) so that voters can consider other questions.