Scottish Assembly

HC Deb 01 March 1989 vol 148 cc263-5

5. Dr. Bray

To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he plans to introduce a Bill to create a Scottish assembly.

Mr. Rifkind

The Government believe that the present constitutional arrangements provide for Scotland's interests to be fully respected and recognised. The Government therefore have no plans to introduce legislation to create a Scottish assembly.

Dr. Bray

Is the Secretary of State aware that the Government cannot continue to introduce legislation which is plainly contrary to the wishes of the people of Scotland and that if he replies by saying that Scotland is a part of the United Kingdom he will be inviting dissolution?

Mr. Rifkind

The hon. Gentleman is entitled to his point of view, but he sits in the Parliament of the United Kingdom, in which there is a majority in support of the Government elected by the electorate of the United Kingdom.

Mr. Steel

Does the Secretary of State recall his excellent speech in the House in December 1976 in support of a Scottish assembly? What facts in that speech have altered since then?

Mr. Rifkind

I have always believed that any system of devolution or decentralised Government which does not apply throughout Great Britain is bound to weaken rather than strengthen the Union. What has changed in the past 10 years is that I and many others allowed ourselves to believe that there was an irresistible demand from the people of Scotland for a devolved system of government whereas the referendum showed that the people of Scotland were as divided on the issue as the House of Commons is and always has been.

Mr. Allan Stewart

Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that the long-standing farce surrounding the so-called "constitutional convention" has been a joy and a delight to all those who like a good free laugh on a continuing basis? Does he further agree that those shenanigans have shown merely—and overwhelmingly— that there is no consensus against the Government on constitutional reform?

Mr. Rifkind

My hon. Friend is correct. We had always assumed that the so-called "constitutional convention" would end in tears, but we never expected that it would begin in tears.

Mr. Canavan

Given that in the referendum 10 years ago the proposals for a Scottish assembly were supported by a majority of those who voted—including, we are led to believe, the Secretary of State himself—what has happened since then to buy him off?

Mr. Rifkind

The hon. Gentleman will recall that two thirds of the people in Scotland did not vote in favour of the Scotland Bill. I recall saying in public on the day after the referendum that I believed that there was not sufficient support in Scotland for devolution, given that two thirds of the people of Scotland had either voted against or abstained. That was my view the day after the referendum and it has remained my view ever since.

Mr. Sillars

Is the Secretary of State aware that what has changed in the past 10 years has been the Scottish people's 10-year experience of what "unionism" really means and of what the price of unionism really is? May I thank the right hon. and learned Gentleman for the legal definition of Scotland independent within Europe that he gave in 1984 and refer him for legal reading to the 1978 Geneva convention on the succession of "states"—in the plural?

Mr. Rifkind

What has changed in the past 10 years is that the hon. Gentleman has moved from his second party to his third. The hon. Gentleman chose to refer to my remarks about Greenland's status some years ago. I am somewhat astonished at the comfort that the hon. Gentleman takes from that incident as on that occasion Greenland was involved in three years of difficult negotiations with the Community, and the end result was not independence in Europe but independence outside Europe. If that is of comfort to the hon. Gentleman, it shows that he is easily satisfied.

Mr. Gerald Howarth

Given the confusion between the Socialists in the Labour party and the Scottish National party on this issue, does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that only the Conservative and Unionist party offers the people of Scotland a sensible and coherent policy and delivers the results?

Mr. Rifkind

My hon. Friend is correct but it is not only the Conservative party that describes itself as "unionist". The Labour party, the Democrats and the Social Democrats are all unionist parties. The nationalist party is outside the Scottish consensus, which overwhelmingly believes that Scotland's interests are best served by full participation within the United Kingdom.

Mr. Dewar

May I begin by thanking the Secretary of State for his concern and assure him that my cheeks, at least, are not tear-stained?

Mr. Rifkind

I bet they are not.

Mr. Dewar

The Secretary of State will no doubt be aware that dinners have been arranged in London and Edinburgh to celebrate—if that is the right word—the fact that 10 years ago, despite a majority "yes" vote, the Scotland Bill was not implemented. May I congratulate him on not attending those functions, which is a welcome sign of grace on his part?

If it were established beyond reasonable doubt that public opinion in Scotland wanted a constitutional change and that there was an irresistible demand for that, is not ministerial opposition now so entrenched that, irrespective of what Scotland says, there would be no move towards an assembly so long as the present Government have an overall majority in the House?

Mr. Rifkind

I believe strongly that if those who are unionists, like the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends, want constitutional change in the United Kingdom, that matter is of common interest to all parts of the United Kingdom. Such a decision cannot simply be based on a diktat from any one part of the kingdom, be it England, Scotland or Wales—[Interruption.] I am sure that there are no tears on the hon. Gentleman's face as a result of the ending of the prospects for an all-party constitutional convention. Indeed, the hon. Gentleman could barely suppress his delight at that outcome.

The hon. Gentleman was correct in saying that I shall not be attending tonight's dinners in London and Edinburgh, the main reason being that I have not been invited.

Mr. Ian Bruce

Will my right hon. and learned Friend confirm that throughout the United Kingdom—in the regions of England, in Wales and in Scotland—there is no demand for an additional tier of government? In fact the move is towards single-tier local government rather than regional government. It would be a disgrace if we spent even more money on even more levels of government which would end up being subsidised by the rest of the United Kingdom.

Mr. Rifkind

Although some interest in constitutional change is evident in certain parts of the United Kingdom, my hon. Friend is right that it is impossible to point to any strength of opinion which would justify the constitutional upheaval implied by the proposals.