Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 18 September 2013
18 Sep 2013 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Scotland’s Future
It will give me enormous pleasure to move the motion in my name. In exactly a year’s time, the people of Scotland will choose whether to become an independent country. It is a precious thing for any country to be able to decide its own future through a democratic vote, following a free debate. That places a responsibility on each and every one of us.
When this Parliament was reconvened in 1999, Donald Dewar said in what, in my estimation, was his best-ever speech, that devolution was
“about more than our politics and our laws. This is about who we are, how we carry ourselves.”
How we carry ourselves—how we conduct the arguments—will be more important than ever over the next 12 months. Both the yes and the no sides must live up to the standard set by the Edinburgh agreement, an agreement that brings credit to both the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government. The debate over the coming year must be respectful as well as vigorous, constructive as well as passionate, and influenced by empathy, not enmity. That is the best possible way of ensuring that Scotland emerges next September as a stronger nation. Although both sides will ask searching questions of the other, it is important for both sides—actually, it is incumbent on them—to set out a positive vision. History tells us that fearmongering is likely to be counterproductive.
It is interesting to look back at some of the rhetoric about devolution in 1997. The week before that referendum, a Conservative leader called William Hague—I wonder what happened to him—came to Glasgow to predict:
“devolution would make no difference to schools, to hospitals, to jobs or to business. The tartan tax would lead to foreign investors saying no to Scotland.”
Those fears were wrong—100 per cent wrong. Investors have not said no to Scotland; Scotland has led the rest of the UK at attracting foreign investment. Far from making no difference to schools, hospitals, businesses and jobs, devolution has helped us to reintroduce free prescriptions and to safeguard the national health service as a public asset, saving it from the chaotic fragmentation of the health service in England. Under this Parliament, employment is higher and unemployment is lower than in the rest of the UK. The Scottish Government has used its powers to create the most business-friendly local tax environment in these islands.
We are getting similar scare stories at the moment. George Osborne repeated the inward investment scare just a year past November. Using the full authority of his office as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he said that he knew that even holding a referendum would put off investment. More than a year later, we have had a record year for inward investment and are outperforming the UK as a whole.
There was an even less successful claim over the summer that mobile phone charges would go up in an independent Scotland, a claim published on the very day that the European Commission set about abolishing roaming charges across Europe. When we hear such stories, it is worth remembering why William Hague and other opponents were so wrong in 1997. They were wrong because they believed that the people of Scotland would make choices that were harmful to Scotland. The record of the Parliament proves exactly the opposite. It has shown that the best people to take decisions on Scotland’s future are the people who live and work in Scotland.
At present, however, decisions affecting Scotland in far too many areas are taken by a Westminster Parliament that has 59 Scottish members out of a total of 650. That democratic deficit affects the public services, employment opportunities and life chances of people across the country.
Just last week, the UK Government introduced its plans for Royal Mail privatisation, plans that were opposed by 80 per cent of MPs in Scotland. The bedroom tax was opposed by 90 per cent of Scottish MPs, yet it threatens to penalise 80,000 households in Scotland, 80 per cent of which include people with disabilities. Last week, it was condemned by the special rapporteur for the United Nations. The Conservative Party chairman said that it was disgraceful that the rapporteur was commenting. The disgrace is that she had to comment in 21st century Scotland.
When this Parliament was reconvened in 1999, Donald Dewar said in what, in my estimation, was his best-ever speech, that devolution was
“about more than our politics and our laws. This is about who we are, how we carry ourselves.”
How we carry ourselves—how we conduct the arguments—will be more important than ever over the next 12 months. Both the yes and the no sides must live up to the standard set by the Edinburgh agreement, an agreement that brings credit to both the United Kingdom Government and the Scottish Government. The debate over the coming year must be respectful as well as vigorous, constructive as well as passionate, and influenced by empathy, not enmity. That is the best possible way of ensuring that Scotland emerges next September as a stronger nation. Although both sides will ask searching questions of the other, it is important for both sides—actually, it is incumbent on them—to set out a positive vision. History tells us that fearmongering is likely to be counterproductive.
It is interesting to look back at some of the rhetoric about devolution in 1997. The week before that referendum, a Conservative leader called William Hague—I wonder what happened to him—came to Glasgow to predict:
“devolution would make no difference to schools, to hospitals, to jobs or to business. The tartan tax would lead to foreign investors saying no to Scotland.”
Those fears were wrong—100 per cent wrong. Investors have not said no to Scotland; Scotland has led the rest of the UK at attracting foreign investment. Far from making no difference to schools, hospitals, businesses and jobs, devolution has helped us to reintroduce free prescriptions and to safeguard the national health service as a public asset, saving it from the chaotic fragmentation of the health service in England. Under this Parliament, employment is higher and unemployment is lower than in the rest of the UK. The Scottish Government has used its powers to create the most business-friendly local tax environment in these islands.
We are getting similar scare stories at the moment. George Osborne repeated the inward investment scare just a year past November. Using the full authority of his office as Chancellor of the Exchequer, he said that he knew that even holding a referendum would put off investment. More than a year later, we have had a record year for inward investment and are outperforming the UK as a whole.
There was an even less successful claim over the summer that mobile phone charges would go up in an independent Scotland, a claim published on the very day that the European Commission set about abolishing roaming charges across Europe. When we hear such stories, it is worth remembering why William Hague and other opponents were so wrong in 1997. They were wrong because they believed that the people of Scotland would make choices that were harmful to Scotland. The record of the Parliament proves exactly the opposite. It has shown that the best people to take decisions on Scotland’s future are the people who live and work in Scotland.
At present, however, decisions affecting Scotland in far too many areas are taken by a Westminster Parliament that has 59 Scottish members out of a total of 650. That democratic deficit affects the public services, employment opportunities and life chances of people across the country.
Just last week, the UK Government introduced its plans for Royal Mail privatisation, plans that were opposed by 80 per cent of MPs in Scotland. The bedroom tax was opposed by 90 per cent of Scottish MPs, yet it threatens to penalise 80,000 households in Scotland, 80 per cent of which include people with disabilities. Last week, it was condemned by the special rapporteur for the United Nations. The Conservative Party chairman said that it was disgraceful that the rapporteur was commenting. The disgrace is that she had to comment in 21st century Scotland.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-07721, in the name of Alex Salmond, on Scotland’s future.14:40
The First Minister (Alex Salmond)
SNP
It will give me enormous pleasure to move the motion in my name. In exactly a year’s time, the people of Scotland will choose whether to become an independen...
Gavin Brown (Lothian) (Con)
Con
The approach of “empathy, not enmity” does not appear to have lasted long.The First Minister suggested that“an independent Scotland will not inherit any shar...
The First Minister
SNP
First, I do not think that commenting on what the United Nations rapporteur has said is introducing antipathy into the debate; it is the bedroom tax that is ...
Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lab
I am proud to rise and speak to the amendment in my name. Indeed, it is because I am a proud Scot, not despite it, that I support Scotland’s remaining strong...
The First Minister
SNP
Earlier today—and I have the quotation here—Johann Lamont herself made the argument for Scottish decision making. She said about the Scottish Parliament:“Wha...
Johann Lamont
Lab
I thought that I made an excellent point, but obviously the First Minister, as ever, missed it. He is saying that all decisions have to be made here, but we ...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Order.
Johann Lamont
Lab
Alex Salmond looks at the Parliament of 1707 and says, “This Parliament is reconvened.” This Parliament, with a democratic suffrage, has nothing to do with t...
Ruth Davidson (Glasgow) (Con)
Con
In the run-up to today, the year-out point from the referendum, words such as “historic” “generational” and “once in a lifetime” have been regularly sprinkle...
Margo MacDonald (Lothian) (Ind)
Ind
I wonder whether Ruth Davidson is aware that there are fewer men under arms in the British army and other services now than there were at the start of the ba...
Ruth Davidson
Con
I believe that our footprint around the world is such that we are in the top three defence forces in the world, given our commitment of gross domestic produc...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Order.
Ruth Davidson
Con
I believe that our future alliances, our future assistance and our future security will be best served by the British Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force—
Kevin Stewart (Aberdeen Central) (SNP)
SNP
Will Ruth Davidson give way?
Ruth Davidson
Con
—and not by the division of personnel, platforms, assets and hardware that separation would entail.
Kevin Stewart
SNP
Will the member give way?
The Presiding Officer
NPA
The member is not giving way, Mr Stewart.
Ruth Davidson
Con
If Margo MacDonald is making the point that our footprint is smaller than it once was, in different times of war, to break up our nation and break up that de...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Ms Davidson, you must end.
Ruth Davidson
Con
I believe in devolution. I believe in a strong Scottish Parliament in a strong UK and that is why I am proud to back the amendment to the motion.
The Presiding Officer
NPA
We now move to the open debate. Speeches are to be six minutes long. I ask members to be as brief as they can.15:10
George Adam (Paisley) (SNP)
SNP
We live in exciting times. This is a time of potential responsibility and opportunity for our nation, although when people listen to the leader of the Labour...
Richard Lyle (Central Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Name and shame him!
George Adam
SNP
No, I will not do that, because he is not here.One young boy came up to me afterwards and said, in true Paisley fashion, “George—you had him on toast.”During...
Margo MacDonald
Ind
On the matter of campaigning 40 years ago, I was there. A report then found that one child in 10 was born to fail.
George Adam
SNP
I remember hearing about that report. It was one of the things that motivated me to become involved in politics. It is one of the reasons why, in the real wo...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
You must bring your remarks to a close, Mr Adam.
George Adam
SNP
We have the bedroom tax currently, and Mr Sarwar, the deputy leader of the Labour Party, is constantly making all kinds of accusations, and policy on the hop...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
I really must ask you to close, Mr Adam.