IN response to a freedom of information (FOI) request, the Scottish Government revealed earlier this week the person who will be charged with leading the development of the “detailed prospectus” for independence.
That prospectus was first mentioned in the 2021-2022 programme for government (PfG), published in September of last year after the historic agreement between the SNP and Greens was reached.
The PfG stated: “The Scottish Government will work to ensure that a legitimate and constitutional referendum can be held within this Parliament, and if the Covid crisis is over, within the first half of this Parliament.
“It must be up to the people of Scotland – not a Westminster government they didn’t vote for – to decide how Scotland is governed. Before this referendum the people of Scotland will have the information they need to make an informed choice about their future and, therefore, the Scottish Government will start work on a detailed prospectus for an independent Scotland.”
READ MORE: I'll do everything in my power to hold indyref2 in 2023, Nicola Sturgeon says
The answer to an FOI request, published by the Government on Wednesday, makes clear some key information about the work which has so far been done on this prospectus.
First, the release states that “final decisions” on the staffing, budget and timescale of work on the prospectus have not yet been taken.
However, it clarifies that work “on scoping what will be required” to come good on the commitment to publish the document - a successor to 2013’s “white paper” on independence - is currently “in progress”.
It further states: “Coordination of this work lies within the remit of David Rogers, constitution director, whose grade is senior civil servant – director, and whose responsibilities also include elections, devolution policy, relationships with the UK Government and a range of other matters.”
Information on David Rogers is thin on the ground. The Government website says he was a geologist before moving to work in the Scotland Office under John Major, starting in 1993.
It says his civil service career has since covered a range of topics, including housing, environmental policy and government finance, “but constitutional policy has been a major theme”.
He worked on the legislation to establish the Scottish Parliament in 1999, and has worked on the current Scottish Government's constitutional programme (including the 2014 independence referendum and subsequent proposals for further devolution) since 2008.
He has been the director for constitution and cabinet since November 2012.
Further insights on Rogers can be gleaned from a substantial FOI release put out by the UK Government in 2009.
The release of these papers, which reveal tensions with Whitehall over the introduction of Scottish devolution, followed a near five-year battle with the then Labour government.
The documents span hundreds of pages and relate to the Sewel Convention, the theory that the Westminster government will avoid legislating in devolved areas without the consent of the Scottish Parliament.
They make clear that Rogers was intimately involved in the matter, often being included in email chains alongside top politicians and having been sent a draft copy of the Sewel Convention around the same time as the Lord who gave it its name (above).
He also seems to have been an advocate for strengthening the powers of the Scottish Parliament, saying it should have a "veto" over Westminster attempts to legislate in devolved areas.
In an email from June 1999, Rogers said it would be in the Scottish government’s “interest in the long term to establish a precedent that Whitehall should not promote [bills that impact on devolved areas] without consent”.
In another from the same month, he writes that he thinks “that consent should be required whenever a Bill contains a provision which is about a devolved matter”.
He adds: “Ultimately the SP [Scottish Parliament] should have a veto and Whitehall should not be bludgeoning.”
In a third, reported by the BBC in 2009, Rogers wrote: “If we make it too difficult for [Whitehall] the buggers will just run roughshod over our convention.”
The full FOI release around the Sewel Convention’s negotiation can be found on the website What Do They Know.
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