HOPE AND HISTORY
Eminent historian Sir Tom Devine asks if the hope voiced by Donald Dewar was justified?
Parliament is here to stay Undoubtedly the parliament has brought legislative possibilities for Scotland much closer to the people.
It is clear there are a number of things that would not have happened if it hadn’t been for the parliament – they include abolition of student tuition fees, the smoking ban introduced earlier than the rest of the UK, free prescriptions and free personal care of the elderly. Perhaps most importantly of all is the first stages of what one might call land reform.
It is still not particularly radical, but certainly wouldn’t have happened given the role of the House of Lords in the Westminster Parliament.
The other thing to note is according to all the polls over the last 10 years or so, the Parliament is now firmly embedded.
Some people did say before 1999 and its establishment that it might be transitory. But it is now well bedded down and to abolish it would now be regarded as unthinkable. We are more Scottish now There was the beginnings of a greater sense of Scottishness before the parliament in a whole range of areas – literature, film and the culture of the country.
Also in what I call neo-Highlandism – the new popularity of Highland dress for things like graduations and marriages.
You could argue the parliament was one result of that. But at the same time, the existence of the parliament has given a further acceleration to that process, and Scottish people feel more in charge.
They recognise of course they are not independent – that has been shown many times over the last 20 years when Westminster has said no.
Since about the mid-18th Century there has been a kind of duality in Scottish identity – of Britishness and Scottishness. The pendulum has undoubtedly swung much more to the latter rather than the former.
I think Dewar was getting at a stronger sense of Scottish identity, the way we carry ourselves. That has definitely happened.
I don’t think you get many people now talking about the Scottish cringe. Laws for Scots by Scots A lot of the legislation passed, has reflected intrinsic Scottish concerns. Not British concerns, or Westminster concerns.
In that sense, the renewal of parliament did give voice to specific issues in Scotland, in which Westminster was disinterested or even opposed to. That is very important.
There is a double irony here – you could argue that without the Scottish Parliament, the constitutional structure or channel of the Scottish Parliament, there wouldn’t have been a 2014 (independence) referendum.
Those who were opposed to it said how do we know there is a desire for this – one of the ways was because a nationalist party was in control in Holyrood.
On the other hand, you could argue that if devolution had not occurred, the union would have been in even greater difficulty, because of the contrast and frustrations that are occurring, especially in an age of austerity.
That is another aspect in which the Scottish Parliament has been important. Since the crash and the banking financial crisis, it has been under very strict control from Westminster in a budget sense.
But to some extent at least in the public services, the parliament has played the role expected of it – that is to protect Scotland from some of the greater excesses of Westminster policy.
I think it is fair to say that has happened to some degree at least, especially in areas like health.
Maturity and confidence The parliament was mediocre in the early years, there was very little confidence.
I think it is a tragedy that Dewar died, although he was a cautious man and there might not have been very much there in the way of significant changes.
The period of office of his successor Henry McLeish was inadequate, then there was a bit more being done by Jack McConnell.
At that time, people were starting to complain about the parliament’s value.
That has changed quite radically since 2007, not simply because of the SNP, but because of the fact it has become more mature and more confident. In the beginning, it was virtually entirely dependent on the block grant. Since the Smith Commission reported after the 2014 referendum a very large proportion of the money spent by the Scottish Parliament is now raised in Scotland, which ensures the electorate can have more control over its activities.
One criticism levelled at it is that its aspirations are still modest. Those who are looking for a visionary, radical approach, especially in terms of Scotland’s historic ills of inequality and child poverty, say there has been hardly impact at all in those areas.
I think the jury is still out on how far it will be able to tackle these historic problems in Scotland – to be fair, they are enormously difficult to tackle because they have been there for generations. Show us the passion There has not been enough debate, argument and passion. One of the aims was to be different from Westminster and not have the adversarial quality. But politics has got to be adversarial. I think the shape of the Chamber was a mistake. Westminster is a bear pit but, at its best, as has been shown during the Brexit debate, it can be riveting viewing.
You get the impression the debates in the Scottish Parliament are more reminiscent of county council or town council debates.
To change that, the current generation will probably have to clear away and a new generation of politicians come up.
How many visionary thinkers are in the Scottish Parliament? The calibre of people who over the last 100 years have played great roles in the UK Parliament.
We are a much smaller nation and therefore the pool for parliament is much more limited – but I would like to see people from a wider range going for election in the parliament.
There is an imbalance in that the vast majority, if you look at their CVs, have come through the public services. This extraordinary period The Scottish Parliament is certainly worthy of celebration. Scotland would have been different without it – that is the key point.
A nation deserves a parliament and there would have been a void without it.
In terms of the future, I hope there can be improvements and further development, but it might take a new generation of politicians to deliver that.
The other point is that – given the old cliche I use that the future is not my period – I have never known a time, certainly not in my lifetime, when the future of the UK in Europe and indeed the future of the UK as an entity has been in more doubt.
So when we talk about the Scottish Parliament it is not a likelihood, but certainly a serious possibility that because of Brexit and the election of the next Conservative party leader, we will be talking about in 10 years time the parliament in an independent Scotland.
In terms of transformation and metamorphosis, this has been the most extraordinary period.
Sir Tom Devine’s latest book, The Scottish Clearances: A History of the Dispossessed 1600-1900, is out now in paperback