THE SNP's position of "inserting themselves into English local decision-making" is not about contributing to democratic debate south of the Border but a crude ruse to break up Britain, David Mundell has claimed.
The Scottish Secretary also made clear the SNP General Election landslide would make no difference to how the Conservative Government would approach more powers for Holyrood, saying: "I don’t see the result as an endorsement of separatism or a reversal of the referendum as some people suggest."
But Mr Mundell signalled that he was preparing to alter the wording of certain parts of the Scotland Bill in an attempt to placate the Nationalists, who have complained about Westminster retaining vetoes, particularly on the issue of welfare.
“It’s perfectly possible to have a shared space in relation to welfare...We are not in the business of vetoing; we’re in the business of making this work," declared Mr Mundell.
The Secretary of State brushed aside repeated questions about whether or not the UK Government would, as some MPs have demanded, bring back its controversial proposal for English Votes for English Laws(Evel) in the form of legislation rather than a mere change to the Commons' standing orders; he insisted the proposed change had “no detriment” to Scotland and did “not carry any threat to the UK”.
But earlier this month David Cameron ordered a tactical retreat on Evel after fears were raised that the Conservative Government in the face of opposition from Labour, SNP, Northern Irish and Welsh MPs could risk a Commons defeat. Last week, peers inflicted such a defeat for the Prime Minister when they backed a call to shelve Evel and, instead, establish a joint committee of both Houses to consider the proposal.
Mr Mundell admitted the Government had botched its approach, saying: "There wasn't an understanding as to what exactly was being proposed."
He stressed he was still in favour of Evel as a modest means of bringing "fairness and equilibrium" to the devolved settlement, denounced the "staged hysteria" of its critics and claimed that the Government, by postponing the vote to the autumn, had given MPs "a longer time for consideration".
Asked about the SNP's apparent shift on voting on England-only matters such as fox-hunting, the Scottish Secretary claimed it was "entirely predictable" given, he argued, the Nationalists always operated out of opportunity not principle.
"It has three objectives. One is attention; that objective was achieved. Secondly, there is a clear objective and we saw it in comments Angus Robertson made about wanting to insert themselves into English local decision-making. People see through it and that what this is about is the objective of breaking up the United Kingdom. It’s not about contributing to democracy or debate in England...It’s not going to work because people see it for what it is.”
Given the SNP have complained the Scotland Bill does not fully reflect The Vow on more powers for Holyrood, Mr Mundell was asked if the Government was ignoring their democratic mandate of May 7.
“The democracy at the end of the day is that this was an election to the UK Parliament. In the context of the referendum and what people in Scotland have done is to elect their representatives to the UK Parliament, having voted to stay in the United Kingdom. I don’t see the result as an endorsement of separatism or a reversal of the referendum as some people suggest."
Noting how the SNP proposition during the election of a Labour-Nationalist alliance was rejected in favour of a majority Tory Government, the Secretary of State insisted: "There isn’t an issue about the legitimacy of the Government across the whole of the UK...
"The SNP pitch was not on specific Smith Plus powers, it was on delivering the powers promised during the referendum and it was being a voice for Scotland. That’s what we are doing; we are delivering the powers promised during the referendum and we’re giving them their voice," he added.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel