For some time now we have been told – by the editor of this magazine among other, less distinguished, commentators – that David Cameron and the Downing Street machine view Scotland as a rum, far-off place about which they know little and which, on the rare occasions they pay attention to it, perplexes them mightily. One would like to think this were not the case but it seems a dispiriting and accurate appraisal.
Why – indeed why-oh-why – do Conservatives abandon the principles of Conservatism when discussion turns to Scotland? On Sunday “sources close to the Prime Minister” apparently ruled out any talk of fiscal autonomy, devolution plus, devo max or anything else you care to call the useful accumulation of greater revenue powers at Holyrood. The people, it seems, will have to choose between apples and oranges even if they would prefer a banana.
How depressing. Just when there’s an opportunity for the Conservative party to lead a discussion it chooses to shut down debate. Anywhere else in the world, Conservatives would deplore a parliament that enjoyed the power to spend but not the responsibility to tax. This would, quite properly, be considered an invitation to spendthrift, unimaginative, obese government of a kind that lacked the nimbleness to be effective government. Worse still, conservatives would argue, such a government would lack the incentive to be lean and nimble and disciplined and, above all, accountable. As tends to be the case in such circumstances, this would be a compelling diagnosis.
Apparently, however, there is one last corner of the planet in which, as far as the Conservative party is concerned, these principles do not apply. That would – sigh – be Scotland. Poor Scotland must endure government that, measured against any reasonable conservative philosophy, must be found wanting. Scotland will just have to lump it for fear that something worse might be around the corner. Unionist shibboleths must be valued above all else and everything else can go hang.
I don’t pretend this is the only reason the Conservative party struggles in Scotland but it is one of the reasons why it deserves to struggle. According* to “a senior UK government source”:
Oh really? Does this plugged-in fellow not appreciate that the Scottish government may already vary the basic rate of income tax (albeit within a narrow band)? Does he not know that the Scotland Bill proposes some other (probably inadequate and certainly unsatisfactory) changes to taxation powers? Sheesh.“There are certain levels of autonomy that are inconsistent with the UK. A unified tax and benefit system is at the heart of a united country. If you start dismantling the tax and benefit system then that is inconsistent with a single country.”
The United Kingdom is not a federal structure but nor is it quite a unitary state and nor, for that matter, is it really “a single country”. Anomalies** and variations abound. It has always been this way (consider the abortion laws, for instance) and most probably always will be. The Prime Minister made a speech last week emphasising the importance of subsidiarity. Apparently he was talking about the European Union but why shouldn’t the same principle – evidence of an admirable Tory belief in smaller platoons – not apply to the United Kingdom too?
Back to the matter at hand: are Cameron’s “people” unaware of the consultation his own government announced last year, canvassing opinion on whether the Northern Ireland Executive should enjoy the power to vary the rate of corporation tax levied in the province? Perhaps he is. If so then the Prime Minister needs to be surrounded by better people. Because the consultation, even if it produces no change in actual policy, concedes, by nature of its very existence, that taxation need not be uniform across the United Kingdom. Further, it concedes that the world will not end if this happens. (Though it would change the block grant.)
Ah, you say, but Northern Ireland is a separate case and needs to compete with the Republic of Ireland’s tax policies. So it is and does. But are the other parts of the United Kingdom not special cases too? Could the benefits of tax competition (assuming there are some) not apply north and south of the Tweed as well? (Or even in Wales?) Apparently not. Yet the principle is the same even if, mysteriously, it does not appear to apply to Scotland.
Of course there would be technical difficulties to overcome if Scotland (or Northern Ireland) enjoyed these powers. But that’s the kind of thing we employ a civil service to manage. Again, what counts, in the first instance, is the principle.
Here we might note that the interests of conservatives and nationalists are distinct but overlapping. Each should seek the same goal, even if they might do so for opposing reasons. At present, however, the Conservatives appear determined to minimise their influence and support in Scotland. This is a curious way for a political party to behave, especially when doing so sacrifices so many fundamental conservative principles.
The Tories might never have wished to sail upon the SS Devolution but, now the barque’s afloat and listing badly they appear disinclined to assist with any repairs that might make her seaworthy. Better to sit in the Doldrums or even sink than reach an uncertain destination. This is a position that merits some contempt.
I am not quite alone in thinking this. Here’s Brian Monteith in today’s Scotsman:
Unfortunately, there is no positive side to Cameron’s toss of the coin: it is heads Westminster wins, and tails Holyrood loses, and the Scottish public will not be blind to such injustice denying them what they want. They may even tire of Cameron and his like, and see Salmond’s great gamble as worthy of their support.
[…]Those Conservative Scots like me, who support greater powers, have as yet nowhere to turn. What is needed is not a new party but a new movement, a Conservative campaign for financial accountability.
If there is to be a positive and progressive voice that advocates a new unionism based upon Scotland being in Great Britain by choice, with our national parliament and our town councils self-sufficient from the dues they collect, then we are going to have to speak up ourselves – the Conservative Party has shown us yet again it is unable to offer the leadership we crave.
Quite. It is not yet too late for the Conservatives to change course but time is running out. Greater fiscal autonomy (or Real Home Rule or whatever else you want to call it) is a conservative idea. Perhaps, however, the Tories are petrified by it because it is, in the end, an idea. And they’ll brook nothing of that sort, thank you very much. At least not in Scotland which is, incidentally, a land sorely in need of conservative ideas. Instead all we here is no, no, no and no again.
Finally, this is not all about the referendum question or questions. There are other ways to do it. Read Kenny Farquharson’s excellent SoS column to see why or how.
*The usual caveats about blind quotes in Sunday newspapers apply. Nevertheless…**A political system that reserves places in the legislature for one religious denomination but not others is odd. And that’s before you consider the fact that hosting The Apprentice is also, apparently, reason enough to be elevated to the peerage. I’m happy enough with our Heath Robinson constitution but pretending, per Downing Street, only Scotland-related affairs introduce anomalies and weirdness is just a nonsense.
Comments