GOVERNMENT OF SCOTLAND. (Hansard, 27 March 1928)

§ Mr. BARR

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide for the better government of Scotland. This Bill establishes a national Legislature in the form of a single Chamber of 148 members elected by the present constituencies. It will deal with all the subjects which are meantime treated by Parliament in this House and in another place. It reserves certain subjects as common services. Questions relating to the Army, Navy and Air Forces, questions of foreign policy, and the like are to be jointly administered by England and Scotland. As soon as this Parliament is constituted, the representation of Scotland in this House will cease. If we are insisting on managing our own affairs, we cannot claim also to manage the affairs of England at the same time. It has been represented to me from all sides that this proposal of the withdrawal of the Scottish representation would be something of a national calamity and an injury to this House. I say, quite frankly, that I, and those who are acting with me, have an open mind on this question. What I see in the future is the separation of Imperial matters from more local affairs, which might by common consent be assigned to local Parliaments in England, Scotland and Wales, or wherever a district may be marked out, and, when that day comes, Scotland will claim a worthy part and her rightful share in the administration of these Imperial affairs and also in the wider field that is covered by what we know as the British Commonwealth of Nations.

I will put forward some of the grounds on which we urge that a First Reading at least should be given to this Bill. In the first place, in the interests of this House itself. On 4th June, 1919, a Committee was appointed, known as the Speaker's Conference. The proposal put before that Committee was to devise a scheme of federal devolution. The reference was passed by a vote of 187 to 34, and it is remarkable that the Scottish vote for devolution was 35 to 1. There was only one Member for Scotland who did not support the proposal for devolution. There arose in that Committee some difference of opinion as to the character and composition of the Grand Councils, or Legislatures, but there was no difference of opinion whatever as to the powers that 997 should be conferred on such Legislatures and that Scotland was an area which should have such a Grand Council or Parliament. In the next place, this is proposed in the interest of the dispatch of Scottish business.

4.0 p.m

The House may not be fully aware that the Secretary of State for Scotland has control of no fewer than 16 departments, and, whether he works with boards or, as he now proposes, with departments, it is an impossible task for any human being. We are given two days in the course of a Session to discuss Scottish affairs, Last year, when I spoke on this subject, I was surprised at the number of hon. Members opposite who came to me and said some movement of devolution was necessary in the interests of Scottish business. We have some special questions in Scotland—land, housing, education and public health—in which we have our own laws and customs and in which we have even more acute problems than there are in England. 4.0 p.m. These can only be properly organised, supervised and ameliorated if we have a Parliament in close touch with them. Then we advocate this in the interests of public economy. To secure the amalgamation of Edinburgh and Leith, a sum of £51,771 was spent in legal expenses at this end; and to secure an extension of the boundaries of Glasgow, £46,308 was spent at this end, and if the expenses of the opposing bodies are added at the other end, the sum was about £100,000. Demands have been made in Scotland for this Measure, or a similar Measure, ever since 1890, whatever the complexion of the Government, and we have not failed on any occasion to get, a large majority of Scottish Members for some such scheme of devolution as this. In 1912 the vote was 43 to 6, and in 1920 it was 38 to 9. I will not trouble the House with the names of the public bodies in favour of such a Measure. Support for this Measure passes far beyond party lines. On the 15th April, 1926, the Duke of Montrose wrote a letter to the "Glasgow Herald" saying he was in favour of a Scottish Legislature being established. I do not claim his support to the particular Measure I have in hand. He thinks it is in bad hands, and is being handled unwisely, but he stands for a Scottish Legislature. I will give his words: 998 I cannot believe that for all time coming Scottish affairs will continue to be settled by Englishmen in London. On the 18th April, 1926, Principal A. P. Lawrie, an eminent educationist, supporting in the "Glasgow Herald" what the Duke of Montrose had said, observed that the establishment of such a legislature would bring about a revival of national life in every department of thought and art. When I was in Australia I was very much struck by one of the speeches at a Scottish Home Rule meeting in Granville, New South Wales. The speaker said: We need no argument in Australia to convince us not merely of the utility but of the absolute necessity and inevitability of every nation managing its own affairs. One word more. We also put this forward on the ground of national sentiment. I need not say that in Scotland our whole literature pulsates with the passion for Scottish freedom and Scottish nationality. A protest was made in regard to this matter in connection with the panel, "The Building of Britain," in St. Stephen's Hall. I was not here to take part, but I will tell the House of the conclusion to which I have come. I am quite willing that that panel should remain, on condition that we realise that the building of Britain is not complete, and that we have another panel in which the grant of self-government, which was surrendered then, will be restored. As one of the common quotations regarding that old surrender of self-government was that of Lord Belhaven on the 2nd November, 1706: None can destroy Scotland save Scotland's self"— so I would propose to the House that the artist should take for the motto of the new panel: None can save Scotland but Scotland's self.