The Scotland Office Minister, David Cairns, has been hung out to dry for saying that constitutional reform was only an issue for the ‘McChattering classes’ and that’s unfair. His remarks may have been offensive, ill-informed and inflammatory, but what he said was more a true reflection of the thinking among the majority of Scottish Labour MPs than any belated, empty platitudes, spoken by the Prime Minister in defence of a ‘review’ of the powers of the Scottish Parliament which could, he said, even involve handing back some powers. Baloney! Cairns has been accused of being out of the political loop and painted as an embarrassment but perhaps Gordon Brown should talk to some of his fellow Scottish Labour MPs who, unashamedly, see the current constitutional debate as a mere trifle. The Prime Minister has entered into the fray because he has to support his beleaguered leader in Scotland and hopefully, he has recognised that for the Labour Party to survive in government in the UK, it needs to re-establish itself in Scotland and this could be the way to do it. But the truth is that if the SNP had not won the election in May and seized the reigns of power from the Labour/Lib Dem coalition, none of this discussion would be taking place anyway. Throughout the election campaign, Labour denied the need to review the devolution process. There was a need to come to terms with the powers we have, and to look at new ones, they bleated, but here we are, nine months down the line, following an election they lost and they are taking the credit for leading a constitutional debate. Make no mistake, this commission, convention, natter, chatter or gnashing of teeth, is steeped in nothing but self-interest. The three parties of opposition in the Scottish Parliament have refused to take part in the SNP Government’s National Conversation, which is also designed to review the powers of the Scottish Parliament but instead are taking part in a self-important and self-inflated exercise in appeasing themselves. Labour knows it has to do something to reassert itself as the party of choice. Wendy Alexander, to give her her due, has recognised that the electorate did not boot her party out of power because they thought devolution was rubbish, they voted with their feet because they have seen that more powers could work quite well. And while her Westminster colleagues may adopt a head in the sand and, frankly, patronising approach to the importance of devolution, she knows that they are wrong to think that the electorate is not interested in reform - every opinion poll shows support for greater powers for Holyrood, particularly over finances. The Lib Dems, bless their cotton socks, have always argued for devolution to be an evolving process; they’re federalists, for God’s sake and the Tories have realised that devolution actually works quite well for them in terms of bums on seats in a Scottish Parliament - they may even believe that they can regain a foothold in Scotland. But the one thing that all these parties agree upon is that independence is wrong so they remove it as an option by not taking part in the Government’s debate. For once, the party that is often seen as narrow and one dimensional, the SNP, is the party that is calling for an inclusive and comprehensive debate on constitutional reform that, yes, includes independence but also everything in-between. That is a debate worth having and not one that political parties who are convinced of their own arguments should shy away from. Why are we having two constitutional reviews and not one? If the politicians want the voters to take them seriously, it is time they listened to each other.

Tag it: