It is has been enlightening to see how many think it is worth overplaying accusations of government ‘interference’ in the setting the time and scope of the referendum over independence for Scotland.
The Guardian reports “Britain's pro-union parties were struggling on Monday to present a united front on the proposed referendum on Scottish independence amid Liberal Democrat and Labour dismay over Downing Street's handling of the announcement”.
Yet whilst there is doubtlessly some tactical machinations on Whitehall’s part, the undeniable constitutional situation is that it is Westminster which holds lordship (quite literally) over sanctioning the ways and means of separation.
The most recent contemporary example is that it was Welsh Secretary Cheryl Gillan, and not Carwyn Jones, who originally announced that the ‘powers’ referendum for Wales would be held between January and March 2011. The actual date became 3 March 2011 after representations to the Welsh Secretary from the Welsh Government.
For governments, regional and national, referenda have become democratically symbolic devices whereby populations are given the impression that they are actually influencing affairs. Yet what neither administration has yet flagged up is the extent to which independence for Scotland also means the dissolution of the Acts of Union and its associated baggage – and thereby comes the real rub for both parliaments.
Of course, there might actually be a substantial majority who would prefer to see Balmoral become a holiday home complex and leisure park. Or is that treason?
1 Comments:
Just like our government is not allowed control over our water the Jocks are not allowed to have an independence referendum.
If people want democracy Dave will gladly send the troops in, providing those people don't live next door.
Post a Comment