Devolution, democracy, development
By George Smid - Chair Corby
Originally published by East Midlands Liberal Democrats
So the Scottish referendum was a victory for democracy. And on Friday the police had to keep Yes and No supporters apart in Glasgow. Of course Glasgow voted Yes and its antipode Edinburgh voted No. Emotions run high.
The Scottish referendum was a victory for further devolution as well - not only for Scotland but for all of the UK. But the question of devolution has to parts - what to devolve, and how far to devolve. Already there is an open feeling that Scotland has preferential treatment in what devolved powers were promised to her. And the Glasgow clash shows that the devolution itself should have limits - nobody is arguing that 'the majority' of Glasgow wanted independence and therefore Glasgow should go it alone. Fortunately. History is full of examples of splinter groups, too small on their own, declaring 'independence'.
I agree with democracy and I agree with devolution. But it cannot be a 'run away' train dividing the whole into the smallest possible constituent parts. (Mathematically you would end up with two people either staying together or parting company.)
There is something missing in the debate: in my view the third D: development. However the UK apportions the future devolved power, in whatever units will the country be democratically divided we must create vibrant, confident and viable 'units'- enabling not only collaborating with each other but also competing with each other.
Democracy, devolution, development - perhaps rather than arguing about what power should Scotland get (and Wales, and various English regions, and Northern Ireland) we should define what exactly will the powers be all of us agree to share.