AS revision: devolution

The 10th anniversary of the first round of elections to the new devolved arenas in Scotland and Wales passed by earlier this month, and the 10th anniversary of the Scottish Parliament reconvening after a gap of nearly 300 years happens next month.

A whole clutch of news outlets have considered the impact of a decade of devolution and a browse through any of the special reports would help consolidate understanding on this topic.

Links to special reports in the Financial Times and the Times (Scotland) are here.

If you are to read one article that will help inform you of the issues that link to the Politics syllabus then I suggest this one by Michael White.

Students should be aware of the election of the SNP government and what this says about nationalist sentiment and whether we will see the break up of Britain. For what it’s worth, I’ve found that the only people who seriously think indpendence is likely for Scotland in the next few years are the SNP. But the drive to self determination seems to be an emerging trend throughout the world and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it happened in our lifetime.

Election outcomes and controversies
Following the 2007 election, Alex Salmond, went into talks with the Greens about the possibility of them joining in a coalition. Eventually they agreed to form a ‘co-operation agreement’ which stopped short of a formal coalition. A similar process went underway in Wales after Labour lost control in Cardiff Bay. Labour eventually entered into a coalition agreement with Plaid Cymru.

It would be wrong to interpret the SNP victory as a reflection of a rise in support for independence. Instead pollsters find that the boost in the SNP’s fortunes was driven by a combination of disappointment in the Jack McConnell led Labour government, and antipathy towards the London Labour Party. What is different this time round was that there were no signs of Labour managing to turn things in their favour as the campaign reached its final weeks. In fact it looked like appearances by the Labour big two (Blair and Brown), merely served to reinforce the perception that Scottish Labour remains tied to the London leadership’s apron strings.

Shortly after the election there was great deal of media coverage about policy decisions in Scotland that devolution critics believe are driving a wedge between Scotland and England.

News emerged that a new eye drug will, controversially, only be available to patients via the NHS in Scotland. Treatment with the new drug, Lucentis, costs just under £30,000 per year and patients face blindness without it.

Of equal controversy, but probably a bit closer to the bone for A level Politics students, was the story of a plan by the Scottish Executive to scrap payment by students for higher education altogether. Currently students north of the border pay something called an endowment at the end of their degree, but this amounts to only £2,000, an amount that is far less than what students in England pay in fees. This discount will not be available to English students who attend Scottish universities.

The independence issue
August witnessed the release of a white paper by the SNP led administration on Scottish independence. The Scottish First Minister launched the document, entitled ‘Choosing Scotland’s Future: A National Conversation’.

The white paper sets out what the SNP sees as the three main realistic choices for Scots: The present devolved set-up; Redesigning devolution by extending the powers of the Scottish Parliament in specific areas; Or full independence.

On the referendum issue, Scots would be asked whether they agreed or disagreed “that the Scottish government should negotiate a settlement with the Government of a United Kingdom so that Scotland becomes an independent state”.

What was highly significant was that the SNP leader, Alex Salmond, had more or less conceded that it is unlikely there will be a referendum on independence before his term comes to an end in 2010. However many felt that it was unlikely that Salmond would press ahead with his plan anyway. He does not have a majority in the Scottish Parliament, opinion polls do not show a majority in favour, and there would be calls for the SNP to resign if a referendum was lost on what is the central plank of the SNP manifesto – with the SNP enjoying their first taste of government in Holyrood would they really want to throw it all away?

A cynic would suggest that Salmond was looking to force a debate with the other big three parties (essentially the opposition, comprising Labour, the Lib Dems and the Tories) in the hope of emerging at the other side with plans for the second option outlined above, i.e. increased powers within the existing union framework – what some have dubbed ‘devolution max’. This would leave Salmond one step closer to his primary goal of independence. Not a bad job for their first time in office.

If a vote were held on independence it is unlikely, as things currently stand, that the SNP would get their wish. First of all, the Scottish electorate see devolution as their preferred from of government. Whilst most voters are, as John Curtice put it, ‘underwhelmed’ by devolution, this has more to do with how politicians have performed than any dissatisfaction with the devolved processes themselves. It is true that voters may prefer Holyrood to have more powers, but coming out from under the wing is not the same as leaving the nest altogether: there is a sense that Scotland is ‘too wee’ to go it alone, even within the wider framework of the EU. Reticence by a large number of Scots would probably mean that Salmond’s party would fail to attain the necessary support for their proposal. A further reason is that the SNP have never governed before. It is unlikely that the people of Scotland will put their destiny in the hands of a bunch of politicians that are as yet fully tested. However, some leading members of the Scottish Nationalists are playing the long game, seeing incremental increases in the powers available to the Parliament as a stepping stone to full independence.