Getting the tanks off the Holyrood lawn
The Conservative Conference in Blackpool has discussed defence and foreign affairs.
Along with the broad economy, these issues will, by definition, form the core of the next UK General Election in Scotland, whenever one is called.
For why? Because other big election issues - health, schools, crime and the rest - are all devolved to Holyrood. And MSPs are not up for election.
I am acutely aware that I have a pedantic tendency to labour this point. Perhaps it鈥檚 an obsession, perhaps it鈥檚 a foible, but I dislike muddle. I lean towards clarity.
So let鈥檚 be clear. In a UK General Election, candidates and parties contesting seats in Scotland should generally confine themselves to the issues reserved to Westminster, rather conveniently set out in schedule five to the Scotland Act 1998.
They should not promise to cut hospital waiting times. That鈥檚 not on their ward. They should not promise to improve literacy. Not their book. They should not promise to tackle street crime. Not their neighbourhood.
In truth, that has been the case since the advent of a Scottish Parliament in 1999.
Remember the guddle Labour got into when they tried to major on health at their Scottish campaign launch in 2005?
However, in addition, we now have a devolved administration in Scotland which is of a markedly different political colour from the present UK Government and any potential successor.
That adds edge to an existing factor.
It means, again, that a would-be MP in Scotland simply cannot credibly promise action on devolved topics.
Let鈥檚 say a Tory candidate wants to focus on crime, perhaps under the slogan, "hug a hoodie, really hard.鈥 No can do.
Kenny MacAskill, of the SNP, remains the Scottish Justice Secretary - and will do so whatever happens in a UK General Election.
Or perhaps a Labour or Lib Dem candidate wants to spotlight schooling. No can do. Fiona Hyslop remains . . . well, you get the concept.
This applies to SNP Westminster candidates too.
They can haver all they like about the actions of their colleagues at Holyrood. But, if they win through to Westminster, they won鈥檛 be voting on devolved issues. It won鈥檛 be part of their job.
They too should keep their tanks off the devolved lawn.
Too prissy, too restrictive? Well, perhaps - but such an approach would have the advantage of honesty.
Voters are already fed up of promises not delivered. Imagine what they would make of promises that are constitutionally impossible to deliver.
In truth, the reserved list is sufficiently extensive. The broad economy, most taxation, welfare and pensions, immigration, terrorism and security, relations with the EU, wider foreign affairs, defence including Britain鈥檚 nuclear deterrent, the Union and the Crown.
More than enough, I would suggest, for substantial debate and argument - without encroaching on Holyrood territory.
I'm 
Comments
Brian I am so glad that you have pinpointed this with such clarity! Most of the havers emanating from the Conferences Doon Sooth have barely mentioned the topics which are UK wide, so basically UK mainifestos appear non-existant.
There is a fair list of UK topics to be debated but will it? Honesty from candidates of all colours definitely required.
At last some clarity - thanks Brian.
This really annoyed me in the last Westminster elections. In discussing the merits of the various parties with friends and colleagues, it was obvious that many people didn't understand which areas are devolved and which are reserved to Westminster.
In debating these points during an election and making promises, as you point out, that simply can't be delivered on constitutionally, politicians are muddying the waters significantly - but then, maybe that's their idea?
The current "muddle" as Brian puts it shows the inevitability of more change in the future. The current settlement is just so easily picked apart.
Brian, I agree wholeheartedly.
But given the fact that only the Liberal Democrats had an English manifesto at the last General Election it's a bit difficult to expect the Scottish Electorate not to vote on the policies put forward in the UK manifestos of the Labour and Conservative Parties.
Labour and the Conservatives need to publish a separate English manifesto.
That may have been the case in previous debates but in the new political climate within Scotland things have changed much more again. There is the implication if the SNP is elected by the People of Scotland to represent their policies at Westminster, with more than 50% of Scottish Mp's that it would be reasonable to claim a mandate to seceed from the Union. Of course there is also the possibility that the SNP and Plaid could influence the votes if the Tory Party and the Libdems and Labour run close with their share of seats. An SNP Plaid coalition having a strong voice in Westminster as well as their devolved Government would hopefully result in a backlash from the English Voters that could force the end of the Union.
One can only live in hope...
While this is true! I think that the two elections will always overlap! The Labour Party will no doubt criticse the SNP's performance at Hollyrood, whenever the election is called.
Undoubtably, one of the factor's in the SNP success, in the Scottish Parliament election, was the war with Iraq.
Makes you wonder why Scottish MPs bother getting out of bed in the morning. This current constitutional arrangement is a total shambles. Of course Labour won't change anything until it suits their Westminster majority to do so. A bunch of self-serving polticians holding back the progress of an entire nation.
Independence for the nations...
Lib / Lab coalition in England to beat the Tories with PR voting as a deal breaker... everybody's happy and properly represented politically.
Brian
The Prime Minister - and Labour is the only party which has been in power since devolution - did exactly the same in Bournemouth last week.
As he actually wields some power, would this criticism not have been more relevant then?
Brian
Just bring it on! What a farce this all this. It's about time the UK became like Scotland and had fixed four year terms.
Thank you Brian for your pedantry and leanings towards clarity; it's a pity more people who should know better did not exhibit similar tendencies.
Malcolm Rifkind made a reasonable stab at it with his proposal for an English Grand Committee but I suspect it will never see the light of day with the current Tory fad of 'English votes for English matters'. The PM's constitutional review will not look near it either as anything that is likely to challenge the status quo is definitely off the radar.
Fortunately our new devolved pals in Belfast and Cardiff can help us press for extending this move towards greater clarity across the whole of the UK, including your own 麻豆官网首页入口 masters in London.
wonderful Brian. You have, in a page, highlighted the constitutional madness that engulfs the UK at the moment. Scotland is now much removed from the westminister political scene and this is highlighted in the conference season. GB and DC both promise action on health, education and still go on about the British people, every schoolchild in Britain, etc. When, in reality, they mean Britain minus Scotland, whom on a sizable amount of issues has its own way of doing things.
Let us end this union; its outdated, no ordinary Scotsman ever voted for it and its an afront to the Scottish people. Its time for Scotland to flourish...alone
I am in complete agreement with your comments regarding the main UK parties in a UK General Election. This causes confusion to a lot of voters in Scotland when these parties talk about devolved issues as if they had complete control over these issues in Scotland. The problem is also exacerbated by the press and television coverage including the Scottish newspapers and TV. Examples of this can be found on the 麻豆官网首页入口 where the 10 o鈥檆lock news is the same as what is broadcast on News 24 and also in Newsnight when we can get 30 minutes on English Education and/or English Health and then 20 minutes on Scottish issues although there appears to be some attempt to use the first 30 minutes for National and International issues but these are always from a London view.
This situation will not change until we have the news reported from a Scottish perspective (not just a Scottish Six but all news programs). The 麻豆官网首页入口 could pioneer the production of TV news programs for the Scottish audience, they already do so on the radio and there are many news items from home and abroad reported on radio that are not covered on the Scottish TV news. If the 麻豆官网首页入口 started this then the other TV channels and the newspapers would have to follow. This would perhaps force the political parties to produce a separate election manifesto and election material for Scotland which would be more relevant to us here.
Brian - well said. Westminster candidates in the U/K election should confine themselves to their remit. I bet that they do not!
Yes, and well and good Brian, as rational folk we should be all for clarity.
But it just won't wash, because The Labour Party now looks as though it is entering a state of permanent denial about the new Scottish political landscape i.e. it's no longer a fiefdom managed in subservience to Labour politicians' Westminster ambitions.
In the past week or so, we have had Labour MPs Cairns, Hamilton and the guy that replaced Robin Cook, all clumping about and committing great big faux pas after faux pas becuase they cannot comprehend the new landscape.
Hence we have these Westminster Labour MPs patronisingly offering to 'give Wendy the tools she needs', or stating that Wendy Alexander came to power in an election and not a coronation (because 'someone could have stood against her'?!?)... or Robin Cook's replacement who did not seem to know we had an election in Scotland earlier this year ('we don't need an election becuase we had one just two years ago).
This lot being able to discern subtleties between different policy lawns? I don't think so.
Ted Harvey
Appreciate the reminder of just what are and are not reserved matters. Of course it wont stop any of the candidates bringing in devolved subject matter when it suits. With regards to your recent blogs wouldnt it be a great deal simpler to have 1) clear restrictions on allowable campaign topics between devolved and reserved issues and 2) fixed intervals between elections (barring one forced by a no confidence vote). Therefore by staggering, on a fixed schedule, local, national and UK polls we might manage to remove a bit of voter (and political) cynicism (or maybe not).
I agree but your colleagues at the 麻豆官网首页入口 among others in the media have to take their share of the blame for not standing in the way of the proverbial tanks. In the weeks running up to the general election we are going to be told by the national media that the "big issues on the doorsteps" are education, health and crime.
What better time than the run up to an election to pilot the Scottish Six...
"But, if they win through to Westminster, they won鈥檛 be voting on devolved issues. It won鈥檛 be part of their job."
Surely it will be part of their job as a UK MP to vote on devolved issues as they apply in England?
I agree that they should not be in that situation but until Westminster stops being a national (?) i.e. UK government and a regional i.e. English government then this anomaly remains.
No Brian you are not being to fussy or prissy, you are being accurate in your usual professional way. One thought though, this argument gets dangerously close to English votes for English laws, might Scottish Westminster MP's be heading for the scrap heap? Just a thought!
You are right Brian, to say that voters are fed up of promises not delivered. What has the SNP Government done in four months?. They have produced a White Paper on Independence; well, their Civil Servants have!.What a waste of time. They know full well that on that topic, they are on a hiding to nothing.
Have a look at their Election pledges. One that stands out is to " immediately abolish prescription charges for sufferers from chronic diseases". Have they?. Certainly not. But they have produced a bit of paper. In the four years they have in office, that means they could produce 12 bits of paper, which is probably all they will do. Yet, when the next Election comes around, they will be glad-handing us to put them back in power. Come to think of it, the other lot are not much better!
鈥溾uch an approach would have the advantage of honesty鈥︹ Brian, we are talking politicians.
Whatever comes to pass, there will be the voices of Little Englander鈥檚 calling for English only votes for English issues, why they bother when English MPs have an inbuilt majority of 412 MPs; however it is a fair point that 鈥榦ur鈥 candidates should not encroach on the issues devolved to the Scottish Parliament and I must state that I do not see that as double standards.
I feel David Cameron is hoping the SNP will cancel out Labour鈥 Scottish contingent to Westminster, as he obviously has little faith or time for Scottish Conservatives; I for one would not like to predict what will be the outcome of the Scottish votes for Westminster, I will leave that for the time being in your capable hands.
I am in complete agreement with your comments regarding the main UK parties in a UK General Election. This causes confusion to a lot of voters in Scotland when these parties talk about devolved issues as if they had complete control over these issues in Scotland. The problem is also exacerbated by the press and television coverage including the Scottish newspapers and TV. Examples of this can be found on the 麻豆官网首页入口 where the 10 o鈥檆lock news is the same as what is broadcast on News 24 and also in Newsnight when we can get 30 minutes on English Education and/or English Health and then 20 minutes on Scottish issues although there appears to be some attempt to use the first 30 minutes for National and International issues but these are always from a London view.
This situation will not change until we have the news reported from a Scottish perspective (not just a Scottish Six but all news programs). The 麻豆官网首页入口 could pioneer the production of TV news programs for the Scottish audience, they already do so on the radio and there are many news items from home and abroad reported on radio that are not covered on the Scottish TV news. If the 麻豆官网首页入口 started this then the other TV channels and the newspapers would have to follow. This would perhaps force the political parties to produce a separate election manifesto and election material for Scotland which would be more relevant to us here.
Thank you Brian, for blogging on my personal pet hate. Gordon Brown's completely disingenious speech all about the impact he was going to have on 'our' health and education! Completely pointless to those of us in Scotland! So what will he campaign on here? He doesn't care - he can rely on his tribal voters who will vote for him no matter what, and in any case. Annonyingly, even the media in Scotland failed to point out that he has no control over such matters here. So please, raise this with your colleagues on 麻豆官网首页入口 Scotland, they are equally as guilty. On the point of Scottish Westminster MPs, having studied the 'annual reports' that our Labour MPs here in West Lothian insist in sending out, they are entirely without point now. No mention at all over anything that affects local issues, because they have no control over the devolved issues. Plenty of foreign trips though!
Politicians will never turn their brain cell to diferentiating between devolved and non-devolved issues. The media - YOU - are whom we choose to uncover the deception. Go to it...
Agree entirely with Brian, and with the comments about how most of this confusion is caused by the TV/Radio news programmes not being sufficiently 'devolved' themselves.
Scotland must surely be the only country on earth (apart from maybe Burma or North Korea) where our 'national' news programmes tell us that something is happening to e.g. our health service when, in fact, it is not.
We need all news programmes shown in Scotland to be filtered to reflect what does and what does not affect us here in Scotland. Until that happens, we're all going to remain confused...
I note that tired old chestnut "Little Englanders" crops up in this thread.
Despite the fact that MPs sitting for Scots constituencies have already overturned the will of representative English MPs at least twice (Top Up Fees and Foundation Hospitals), we find here the usual bigoted anti-English cry of "Little Englanders!" aimed at ridiculing those desiring equality.
May I just ask, if those campaigning for the break up of the Union or a federal UK in England are "Little Englanders", are those who campaigned for a Scottish Parliament, those who signed the Scottish Claim of Right (including Gordon Brown), those who act as lobby fodder for the Labour Government at Westminster, and all MSPS, "Tiny Scotlanders"?
Well said Brian!
There is a Scottish Labour Party, Welsh Labour Party, Scottish Tory Party etc but no English Labour Party, English Tory Party. There should be.
Brian, do you listen to debates in the House of Commons?When discussing health education etc they are talking about England but MPs rarely if ever say England. They say 'in this country' The phrase 'in this country' is code for England! I'm an English nationalist and I have complained to MPs and even to the Speaker, with no success!
And what about the 麻豆官网首页入口? Today 麻豆官网首页入口2 were discussing the budget and money for English health and education (not that you'd know, the E word wasn't used at all!) It was also broadcast on 麻豆官网首页入口 Scotland but has nothing to do with Scotland.