HENRY McLeish has criticised Jack McConnell over his “gloomy” assessment of where devolution has taken Scotland and where the country currently stands.
In an emotional interview last month, former Scottish Labour leader Lord McConnell, who succeeded McLeish as party leader and first minister in 2001 and held the finance and education briefs in his predecessor’s Cabinet, argued that despite his early and enthusiastic support for the new Scottish Parliament, its creation had now led to a “polarisation around the constitutional debate” as well as a lack of accountability and proper public discourse.
“This is the exact opposite of what I believed and hoped for from the age of 18 about devolution ... sorry, I’m feeling quite emotional about it right now,” he told Holyrood magazine, close to tears.
“I spent my whole life, from the age of 18 to the age of 38, trying to get the Scotland Act passed, because I believed that if you had a devolved parliament in Scotland, you could create a new quality of public debate in Scotland, that we would see us making, mostly, the right choices and vitally, improving life across every part of Scotland.
READ MORE: ‘Let’s not allow Scotland to fall into Westminster’s trap’, says Henry McLeish
“I absolutely believed that’s what it would mean, and I think we tried to do that. But I think we’re in a situation now where probably Scotland is worse than it has ever been. And I find that just incredibly sad. I’m really, really, sad. Really, I mean, really. I’ve just found this year sad, everything about the Scottish Parliament election this year, before, during and after it. We just seem stuck.”
Speaking to The Sunday National, McLeish, who as devolution minister in the 1990s worked on the law underpinning Holyrood, helping to pioneer the Scotland Act through Westminster, was asked what he thought of McConnell’s views.
McLeish, who in September said he would vote for independence if the UK did not reform, agreed there was an impasse over the constitutional debate but disagreed on where the creation of the parliament had taken Scotland. He was optimistic about the country’s future.
“Jack’s right to say it’s stuck,” he said when asked about where Scottish politics stood.
“It’s not the most elegant line I would use, but on the other hand where I differ is – and this is where my positivity comes in – I think we have huge potential in the parliament and within the political parties still to be realised.”
He added: “Jack was a bit gloomy. But I have enormous pride in the parliament that I had a small part in creating and I have tremendous pride in the progress that has been made.”
He went on to point out Holyrood is just 22 years old, while Westminster was re-established more than 300 years ago.
“It’s in its infancy. I think Jack was right to flag. It is stuck on the political constitutional debate moving forward, the circumstances with Covid, the brutalism and buffoonery of Johnson which is dangerous with it,” he said.
“Devolution and the Scottish Parliament have been a huge success. Only the worst cynic would deny that. Scots can be proud of the progress the parliament has made. I don’t think the importance of the parliament has been given enough credit and it’s further potential has not been recognised in taking Scotland much further.”
READ MORE: Cabinet Office refuses to reveal cost of FOI battle over ‘secret’ Union polling
McLeish went on to say the parliament can still be used a key tool to bring about positive change as he called for its leaders to begin cross-party talks on areas where agreement could be reached, such as on devolving immigration and forming a closer relationship with the European Union. “In this period of Covid, Johnson, climate change, Brexit, I see the parliament as the fulcrum upon which we can move forward,” he said.
“Scotland has got a bright future. But we don’t know what that future is. If you have one party with 40% to 50% of the country supporting it you cannot forget the other 50 to 60% that may not support it. There is an ugly atmosphere around the political parties in Scotland, there is too much hate. I am talking about a bridge between where we are and where we might want to be as a nation.”
McLeish replaced Donald Dewar after the first Scottish first minister’s death in 2000. He implemented the free personal care for the elderly scheme but quit in November 2001, after only a year in post, for failing to declare office expenses during his time as an MP. He claimed the issue was “a muddle, not a fiddle” as the SNP heaped pressure on him to go.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel