Why is there a need to abolish legislative devolution?

The SNP have shown over the last 18 years of power at Holyrood that they are monomaniacal and pathological in their pursuit of separating Scotland from the rest of the UK and will never give up on pursuing it, so as long as Holyrood exists, there is a perpetual danger of them getting back into power at some point in the future and grabbing a fluke, undeserved win. It’s neverendum.

The Scottish National Party only has one real reason for existing-separation from the UK. They are monomaniacal and pathological in their obsession, their fixation, with separating Scotland from the rest of the UK and especially the hated England, their bête noire. They are never going to give up on their obsession and have fixated upon a policy of one referendum after another until they get what they want-to break the Union, irrespective of and against the wishes of, the majority of Scots, as most opinion polls show.

Added to this, they just ignore any constitutional legal constraints on their behaviour (such as a reserved remit) and utilize Holyrood as a tool to pursue separation. This is clearly shown by the way they’ve virtually entirely ignored legislating on improving the living and working conditions of ordinary Scots and concentrated on pursuing a separation referendum, as well as striping powers from local councils and centralizing them under their control in Holyrood.

Therein lies the crux of the matter. Contrary to the ill-conceived notions of legislative devolution’s originators, devolved legislatures haven’t had the effect of ‘killing nationalism [read ‘separatism’] stone dead’ as Labour politician George Robertson put it in 1995, or even reduced support for it. The reality is, it’s VASTLY INCREASED the ability of the SNP to pursue separation.

Holyrood: The SNP Enabler

During the last nearly three decades of its existence, Holyrood has ENABLED the SNP to rise to political dominance, displacing the pro-Union Labour and Liberal Democrats, and provided them with a vastly improved platform through which they can promote separatism. With the SNP hell-bent on separation, any opportunity they get to achieve this will be taken. Therefore, the mere fact that Holyrood exists will ALWAYS present a clear and present danger to the Union, as there will always exist the possibility that they get back into power at some later date and continue with their separation obsession once more.

Voting the SNP out of office is only a short-term solution to stop the separatists pushing through a separation referendum as they can just get back into power later and begin the neverendum again, ad infinitum until they get the result they want. They only have to be lucky once, those that want to maintain the Union have to win every time. The anti-UK separatists (the SNP in Scotland, IRA-Sinn Fein in Ulster and Plaid Cymru in Wales) could just achieve a fluke win and the Union ends. They could even ware down Unionist resistance with their war of constant attrition, and an exhausted Unionist majority could just stop resisting, worn out by years of guerrilla tactics by separatism.

Consequently, the ONLY viable solution to the SNP’s neverendum is to get rid of the mechanism that enables them to do all this-their devolved legislature, Holyrood.

GET RID OF THE SNP AND THEIR NEVERENDUM PERMANENTLY-ABOLISH HOLYROOD.

The same applies to the other devolved legislatures where anti-UK separatism is using legislative devolution to push its unwanted anti-Union agenda, Stormont in Ulster and the Welsh ‘parliament’.

It is often asserted in various quarters (even by some who are pro-UK, not always the usual suspects, anti-UK separatists) that legislative devolution is a permanent part of the UK Constitution and so can’t be revoked. Even the so-called ‘Conservative and Unionist Party’ is guilty of this. David Cameron said he wanted to make devolution permanent and inserted a clause in the 2016 Scotland Act that asserted unequivocally that the UK Government accepted the permanence of legislative devolution. Boris Johnson’s Conservatives also publicly stated on more than one occasion that they were committed to supporting the continued existence of legislative devolution, as have all his successors as Conservative Prime Minister or leader (Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak and Kemi Badenoch). Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer has proposed federalism, an even worse option. Pro-legislative devolutionists argue that it is impossible to abolish the devolved legislatures (Holyrood, Stormont in Ulster and the Welsh ‘parliament’) as it has existed for nearly three decades now and so is too deeply entrenched to be scrapped. They also erroneously claim that it is a UK Constitutional tradition that once something is established, we don’t repeal or abolish it.

This is just not the case in reality. David Cameron appears to have misunderstood the Parliamentary sovereignty principle of the UK Constitution expounded by the renowned constitutional expert and jurist A. V. Dicey in his 1885 work, ‘Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution’:

‘No Parliament can be bound by any previous Parliament or pass an act that will bind a future Parliament. No other body has the power to override or set aside an Act of Parliament’ — A.V. Dicey’s definition of Parliamentary Supremacy.

and

‘The doctrine of implied repeal is a concept in constitutional theory which states that where an Act of Parliament or an Act of Congress (or of some other legislature in a common law system) conflicts with an earlier one, the later Act takes precedence and the conflicting parts of the earlier Act becomes legally inoperable.’

In summary, under the UK Constitution, any law passed during the sitting of one Parliament can be repealed by a subsequent Parliament irrespective of any clauses inserted in it.

Added to the above, under the 2016 Scotland Act, Holyrood can be abolished if a majority of Scots vote for it in a referendum:

‘…it is declared that the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government are not to be abolished except on the basis of a decision of the people of Scotland voting in a referendum.’ *1

The UK is a Unitary State

The UK is a unitary (single) country in which the House of Commons may devolve power over certain matters to any part(s) of itself, but no legislative sovereignty is transferred to the devolved legislature (ultimate political sovereignty always remains with the electorate across the UK). It remains entirely and solely with the House of Commons. The difference between a central government that has devolved power over any matters to part(s) of itself and a federal government is that the autonomous status of the self-governing regions exists by the permission of the central government. As such they may be unilaterally revoked with a simple change in the law by the central government that repeals the Parliamentary acts that set them up in the first place.

How can we abolish legislative devolution?

There are two main ways to resolve this matter in a successful, democratically valid way:

1. If public support for abolition of legislative devolution is consistently in the majority among Scots, the Welsh and in Ulster for a substantial period of time (I.e. is clearly the settled will of the majority of the inhabitants of Scotland, Ulster, and Wales), a UK political party could include the abolition of Holyrood and the other devolved legislatures (Holyrood, Stormont in Ulster and the Welsh ‘parliament’) with administrative devolution to decentralize power to the constituent parts of the UK in their manifesto in a subsequent UK General Election. This could take the form of going straight to abolition if a mandate was given by winning the election, or by promising to hold a referendum as soon as it was practicable if elected, If this party won an election on a manifesto pledge to abolish legislative devolution, then that would give them a cast-iron democratic mandate to either abolish legislative devolution after winning the election (winning the election would give them the democratic mandate to do so) or hold a subsequent referendum which would decide the issue.

2. Build up public support for abolishing legislative devolution then when this shows consent majority support for a sustained period and is shown to be the settled will of the majority of the inhabitants of the parts of the UK then the UK Government would be approached for a referendum to abolish or keep the Scottish Parliament.

How can we build up majority support for abolishing legislative devolution?

The abolition of legislative devolution is the next big idea to pursue

Rise of the devosceptics: The anti–devolution revolution is coming. An examination of the processes that drove Brexit and which are currently driving attitudes towards legislative devolution reveal striking similarities.

In 1991, an obscure Cambridge academic, Dr Alan Sked (a Scot) founded a political party called ‘The Anti-Federalist League’, later to become ‘The United Kingdom Independence Party’ (led by Nigel Farage) which aimed to get the UK to withdraw from the then European Economic Community (today’s EU) as he said that the bloc controlled us, and we weren’t an independent country any more. He was virtually unanimously vehemently sneered at and derided by most of this country’s population as holding non-mainstream views and of being an extremist.

The same process can happen with abolishing the devolved legislatures. What is perceived as the views of a minority can, if the positive case for abolition is consistently and assiduously put to the public (with objective empirical evidence to support it) gradually be recognized for what it is, the truth, by the majority.

Lessons to Learn from Brexit and UKIP

Just as the Eurosceptics employed persistence and determination in the face of hostility from all corners, including the Establishment, people who are sceptical of the reality of legislative devolution, the constitutional crisis it has created and the clear and present danger it presents to the Union, the devosceptics must show similar persistence and determination in pursuing the goal of securing the existence of the U.K. into the future by persevering on a path towards reuniting our country by consistently presenting the positive case for keeping the UK together. Like Brexit, it won’t happen quickly, but the result is definitely worth the effort.

The famous victory of Brexit can be that of the devosceptics.

In June 2016, the long journey of the Eurosceptics, largely led by an initially small, but gradually larger, UKIP, triumphed after all those years of campaigning led to the majority of the UK backing leaving the EU in the referendum of that year.

UKIP had won an impressive victory against what had appeared to be insurmountable odds and an establishment that was solidly against them by consistently presenting the positive case for leaving with much patient persistence. It had taken a long, tough and titanic struggle, but the result had undeniably been worth it. An initially small, marginal party viewed by the vast majority of the public as eccentrics had won a famous victory against all the odds.

This CAN happen for people who want to abolish Holyrood, the Welsh ‘parliament’, Stormont and the London Assembly, the
devosceptics.

If the same tactics as the Eurosceptics are employed and the case for the abolition of devolution is patiently and consistently presented then, after a journey that might be arduous at times, the devosceptics CAN emerge victorious after winning a famous victory against apparently insurmountable odds.

All those who desire to maintain the Union should begin to vigorously and robustly strive to advocate at every turn the case for abolishing Holyrood, the Welsh ‘parliament’, Stormont and the London Assembly to those in power and to the wider public as a matter of extreme urgency.

Disillushionment in Devolution

Surveys in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland that consulted as much of the poulation in those members of the UK as possible have determined that disillusionment with Holyrood, the Welsh ‘parliament’, Stormont and the London Assembly is gaining traction as their manifest failure to improve the living and working conditions of ordinary citizens or provide good governance becomes ever more manifest and now stands at around 22%.

ABOLISHING LEGISLATIVE DEVOLUTION IS ACHIEVABLE.

WE CAN DO IT.

Despite the fact that the devolved legislatures’ ability to break up the UK should actually be considered a UK-wide matter, to have political legitimacy, the decision to dissolve Holyrood must be one taken by Scots, by the inhabitants of Ulster for Stormont and by the Welsh in the case of the Welsh Parliament

Some anti-UK separatists have claimed that if there were to be a referendum on abolishing Holyrood, the question should be posed as a choice between abolishing Holyrood and Scotland leaving the UK. But they had their chance: now it’s our turn.

If successful, a positive referendum result that returned a majority for abolishing Holyrood would lead to the UK Parliament enacting a Scottish Parliament Dissolution Bill. And Holyrood would be gone, by the consent of Scots.

The same process of holding referenda then abolishing the devolved legislature if a majority in favour of the proposition is won could be undertaken in Ulster (‘Northern Ireland’) and Wales.

It must be remembered that Holyrood and the other devolved legislatures were themselves established after referenda were held, so it is only fair and perfectly democratic that they are abolished by such a method.

It is also a constant allegation, thrown up and disseminated by the SNP and other anti-UK, pro-separation agitators, that ‘British nationalists’ and/or the UK Government are conspiring to abolish Holyrood ‘against the will of Scots’. As usual, however, the SNP are displaying their rank dishonesty.

It is important to note that there is absolutely no requirement under the constitution to seek and receive the consent of the devolved legislatures beforehand. The democratic consent of the electorate of the devolved parts of the UK (Scotland, Ulster, and Wales) IS ESSENTIAL to enact the abolition of legislative devolution. It also needs to be noted that it must be a UK political party that deals with the abolition of legislative devolution if consent is won from the majority of people in the devolved parts of the UK as the Constitution (under which devolution falls) is a reserved matter and only the UK Parliament has the constitutional power to abolish the devolved legislatures. Holyrood (and the other devolved legislatures) doesn’t have the ability under UK Constitutional Law to deal with this matter. *2

The pro-legislative devolutionists are wrong in asserting that factors like the length of time legislative devolution has existed means that it can’t be abolished as it’s not a factor that comes into consideration under UK Constitutional Law. If that was the case, we could never repeal any old laws that have become outdated. That would plainly be ridiculous. It is also specious to assert that devolution is too deeply entrenched to be scrapped for the same reason. If we can repeal a law from centuries ago for certain reasons, then we can certainly do so to one from twenty years ago. Neither is it true that it is a principle or tradition that, in the UK, we don’t go back on something once it’s been established. Look at, say, a monarchical system of government. That was established for centuries, but was abolished and replaced with a Parliamentary system when found to unfit for purpose.

However, for either of these options to happen in the first place, it is ESSENTIAL that public support is demonstrated, primarily through opinion polling, but also through other activities, such as support from the media and from political figures.

It is most emphatically NOT being suggested that abolition should just be imposed on Scots (or Ulster or the Welsh) by Westminster without their majority consent and anti-UK separatists are just showing their basic dishonesty when they claim it is.

Once legislative devolution has been abolished, the UK can be decentralized to keep power over purely local (Scottish, Ulster, and Welsh) matters localized to the constituent parts of the UK. How? With the administrative variant of devolution.

ADMINISTRATIVE devolution keeps power and democracy localized to the parts of the UK as they control their own purely local matters. Anything that affects the UK as a whole would remain within the remit of the House of Commons. The Union is 100% guaranteed as there are no devolved legislatures through which modern aggressive separatism, as personified by the SNP but also IRA-Sinn Fein in Ulster and Plaid Cymru in Wales, can push for separation referenda, the fatal intrinsic flaw in LEGISLATIVE devolution. *3

The hard objective tenants of constitutional law are there for all to see. There is a clear procedure to implement the abolition of legislative devolution. All that’s needed to implement that procedure is to first get majority democratic consent to do it.

Sources:

*1 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/11/section/1

*2 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/schedule/5

*3 https://www.facebook.com/100064468789107/posts/pfbid02Azt3Zo64LJcWAep7wy8YXd2deihsGXe18RiSyEy1rZc6HK6bttZkJ1rZSwKc4sD1l/

(Does not represent the view of Scotland Matters)