THE last Scottish Constitutional Convention took place in very different times, but the demand for political change has far from faded away over the subsequent decades.
The first meeting of the convention took place in March 1989, attended by MPs, councillors, clergy, trade unionists, businessmen and academics. Reports noted that by 3pm, the gathering had dwindled as “trade in the nearby pubs picked up”.
Chair Canon Kenyon Wright, a long-time campaigner for devolution, had the difficult task of trying to find consensus among the disparate groups.
READ MORE: Call to invite Unionists to Scottish independence convention
His rallying cry of “We say yes and we are the people” to address the expectation that Margaret Thatcher would veto any proposals for Scottish devolution has gone down in history.
However reports of the first meeting highlighted how it was difficult for the media to find any sign of disputes, with the occasion described as “ominously constructive”.
Writing in The Glasgow Herald, Murray Ritchie said: “While the gathering applauded a succession of speakers with spontaneous and heartfelt goodwill, the massed ranks of the media, ever alert for a fresh angle, looked for splits, demos, interlopers, trouble. They were having a disappointing time.”
He also noted the presence of a “scruffy mob outside, some wearing Rangers scarves, waved a Union flag and shouted abuse”.
He added: “They were, apparently, some new breed of young Conservative, certainly not the type to endear themselves to the twinset and pearls crowd. But their demo fizzled.”
The Tories were not the only party that did not take part in the convention.
Ahead of the first gathering, a meeting of the SNP’s national council voted not to take part by 191 votes to 41, with a debate hearing concerns the convention would not succeed and was a Labour “trap”
to lure the party into campaigning for devolution.
Then vice-president Jim Sillars said: “We have to decide whether we are part of a marshmallow set of Scottish society that looks good until you squeeze it and find nothing.
“We are going to take our country to independence in Europe on the basis of hard-rock principle.’’ Not everyone agreed, however, with national executive “dissident” Isobel Lindsay arguing refusing to take part would be out of step with the opinion of Scottish people.
She said: "That convention will meet on March 30 and make a ringing declaration asserting the sovereign rights of the Scottish people.
“Are we going to push that national drive forward or are we going to be out there standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tory Party and the CBI?’’ By October of 1989, the Scottish Constitutional Convention published 250,000 copies of a consultation leaflet seeking the views of Scottish people on three possible types of parliament for Scotland – including an elected parliament in an independent Scotland.
The convention laid the groundwork for Labour’s inclusion of a policy for devolution in its 1997 election manifesto.
A referendum on the creation of a Scottish Parliament was held the same year and the first meeting of the institution in its modern form took place in 1999.
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 here