WHAT KIND OF REFORM DOES SCOTLAND REALLY NEED?
- David Younger
- 3 days ago
- 3 min read

So it’s begun.
Reform have their first MSP, albeit through the back door but this signifies not only the possibility of more MSPs after May but evidence of a far greater danger which, in our parochial view of independence, threatens to obscure what it is that we really want to see for our country.
I have spoken before about the reasons why any form of plebiscite vote at the next election is futile and cannot work but this has not taken the general discussion about how we decide our future any further forward. A significant portion of the public believe that somehow the Scottish parliament has, or can assume, powers beyond the gift of Westminster and, worse still perhaps, can somehow reform itself to give up its dedication to extreme centralisation. It won’t and nothing under the system we risk inheriting will change its mind.
We must look not only to our simple domestic situation or even to the UK in isolation, but we have to pay attention to the global so-called polycrisis to see what will have a far bigger impact on how we make decisions in the future together with the urgency of making those decisions now. Not some time in the indeterminate future but right now. Time has run out for us.
In his book, Goliath’s Curse, Dr Luke Kemp explains the reason why empires fall. The prime reason is inequality and he illustrates very clearly how inequality, far from being a modern phenomenon, can be found at the heart of every collapsing empire throughout history. This is happening today and one of the earliest effects will be the collapse of global trade as manufacturing countries can no longer afford to make products and the rest of the world can’t afford to buy them. For Scotland to survive this, we have to design for ourselves a self-sustaining economy with equality at the heart of it.
The national convention is essential for this. We have to be given the information we need in order for us to understand what is going to happen and how best we can mitigate the effects. We need to be careful to control outside influences in decision-making. Party politics is part of the problem along with corporate interests and, although we advocate inclusion of the Scottish MPs at Westminster, this is for important constitutional reasons and they would not have anything like a majority in the convention.
The convention does not make decisions on behalf of the people, rather, they pass resolutions which are put to the vote. Using something akin to the Swiss model, full information relating to the resolutions passed by the convention is given to all voters and it is their vote that determines what becomes the policy of the country.
Why do we need a different format for the electorate? This is perhaps the most important point of all. The current electorate is under the control of the UK government and subject to whatever they decide we can or cannot vote on. Furthermore, the system is clumsy, antiquated and phenomenally expensive. Given that we may have up to a dozen national votes as part of the convention process and that it is inevitable that, at some stage during the convention, we will be asked to vote on dissolution of the Treaty of Union, I think you can see why. Furthermore, any decision regarding independence in particular is, internationally speaking, none of Westminster’s business. No supreme court, no ICJ, the decision is taken and internationally inviolate.
The final matter is the registration fee. As I have said before, this is a one-off payment and it goes to the cost of the convention together with the cost of holding the votes which, while only one twentieth of the cost of the current system, nevertheless is not absolutely free. The fee also ensures that we are not subject to outside influence in any way.
Scotland Decides wishes to make it clear that we will avoid at all costs setting up a rival convention to any other plans which might be in place. We would engage and discuss the format of a convention with all interested parties. Going to war with each other will achieve nothing.
Please register and join the movement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References:
Goliath’s Curse, Luke Kemp. Penguin Books Ltd £25.
Lots of good points. However, I don't think there is a union to dissolve. There is overwhelming evidence to suggest that there is no UK, it was always a giant hoax. You just have to look at the facts and common sense will tell you that there was no possible way of doing it. It was never anything else than an annexation by England of Scotland. So you simply can’t negotiate your way out of a contract that doesn’t exist.
Scotland, by rights, should have been decolonised in the 50’s under the United Nations Decolonisation Programme as outlined in the UN Charter but in 1952 a Royal Commission was set up (published in 1954) which stated that “Scotland is a…