The greatest achievement of the Campaign for a Scottish Parliament to date has been its initiating and leading role in the creation of the Scottish Constitutional Convention, and its consensus approach to agreeing a powerful Home Rule scheme. The first version 'Towards Scotland's Parliament' was published in November 1990, and was the basis on which the Labour and Liberal Democrats fought the 1992 General Election. While the scheme was endorsed by the Scottish voters, the English electorate ensured the return of a Government determined to defend the status quo.
'Towards Scotland's Parliament' had dealt with a number of issues, particularly the question of the preferred electoral system, in fairly broad strokes. It was therefore agreed to take more time to address this and other questions in greater detail. The second, more detailed scheme, 'Scotland's Parliament. Scotland's Right.' (95k) was published in November 1995. It is the most definitive, detailed blueprint for a Scottish Parliament ever to have been produced. (See Briefing No.10 for a detailed guide to the agreed electoral system.)
(Web Editor's Note: The Scottish Constitutional Convention site, set up to co-incide with the publication of the SCC's report to the Scottish People, has now been moved here to the CSP site for public record and reference.)
The Claim of Right for Scotland argued the case for a distinctive Scottish notion of sovereignty vested in the people, and concluded that the relationship with Westminster should be entrenched, i.e. incapable of being unilaterally amended at a later date by a simple majority vote in the Westminster Parliament. The conflicting English notion of unlimited parliamentary sovereignty bedevilled attempts to envisage how formal entrenchment would be achieved.
The Convention eventually concluded that the Scottish Parliament legislation should be preceded by a parliamentary declaration, carried following a tightly time-tabled debate, that the ensuing legislation should not be tampered with without the demonstrated consent of the Scottish people. Although this falls short of the constitutional entrenchment that was initially sought, it gives the establishing legislation an added moral authority.
The establishing Act will embody the principle of subsidiarity which, as the preamble to the Maastricht Treaty on European Union states, requires that decisions be taken as closely as possible to the citizens affected by those decisions.
Scotland's Parliament will have a defined range of powers and responsibilities set out in the Act. These will include all areas of public policy currently within the remit of the Scottish Office. The primary matters to be retained by Westminster will be defence, foreign affairs, immigration, nationality, social security policy, and central economic and fiscal responsibilities. On this basis, the Scottish Parliament would assume responsibility for some thirty different defined areas of national life:
The Scottish Parliament scheme agreed by the Constitutional Convention offers Scots the prospect of real power to make decisions in many of the policy areas that are central to the quality of our lives and our opportunities. People in Scotland will be able to make democratic hoices through a fair electoral system that will reflect Scotland's egalitarian consensus. Let's illustrate this by looking at some of the powers listed above, and the range of policy options that will be open to us:
Decisions will be taken here in Scotland on the kind of testing and verification that seeks to inform and assist rather than condemn and dismiss.
In the post-16 sector, it is Scotland's representatives alone that will
decide on the future of the 'Higher' or its replacement. The decision
as to whether or not to bring the Further Education Sector back under
democratic accountability, whether local authority or as part of a wider
post-school sector delivered nationally, will also be ours to take, as
will decisions on the future of student financial support.
(See also Briefing No.9 - Education)
The Convention Scheme gives the Scottish Parliament the power to vary the UK level of income tax within the limits of plus or minus 3p in the pound. It is on this ground that Michael Forsyth and other opponents of Home Rule have chosen to make a last desperate stand. The slogan "tartan tax" has been coined in an attempt to shake the confidence of the people of Scotland in our ability to run our own affairs. This represents a complete turn around in Tory thinking. Back in the 1970s, Conservatives attacked Labour's devolution proposals as "irresponsible" because they did not give the proposed Scottish Assembly any responsibility for raising any of its own revenue.
If an additional 3p were to be levied, it would yield some 400 million pounds per year, 1.6 billion pounds over a four year term. While these are relatively small sums in the context of the overall Scottish budget, they could make a significant impact if targeted on the Scottish people's priorities. If the Scottish people want to vote for parties that propose using additional revenues to fund Care in the Community properly, or to build decent houses for reasonable rents, or to develop our transport infrastructure, then they should have the right to do so. The decision whether or not to use the power to raise additional revenue should be their decision.
This prospect of democratic control contrasts markedly with our experience of the last seventeen years during which taxes rejected by Scotland have been imposed on us against our will. The classic example is, of course, the detested Poll Tax, devised by Michael Forsyth, and others, and introduced in Scotland a full year ahead of England and Wales. (Web Editor's note: arguably in contravention of the original Treaty of Union!) If the ever was a "tartan tax" it was the Poll Tax - the Forsyth Tax.
Go to...