• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • About
  • Contribute
  • Contact

Sceptical Scot

Asking Questions. Seeking Answers.

You are here: Home / Blog / People O’ Oor Ain

People O’ Oor Ain

June 11, 2019 by David McCrone Leave a Comment

Twenty years of a Scottish parliament, and for what?

Given that the parliament is a legislative creature of Westminster, confirmed by the UK Supreme Court in 2018, and has no independent legal right to exist, what do people in Scotland think of it? There is a view, recently expressed by the leader of the Labour Party in Scotland, that the independence debate has distracted Holyrood from its original mission. It should, he says, focus on jobs, schools and hospitals, rather than constitutional issues (The Scotsman, 7th May 2019).

This is an auld sang, often expressed by supporters of devolution who see it as an end-game, that ‘real politics’ matter far more to ‘ordinary people’ than constitutional matters. Remember, if you’re old enough, Jack McConnell’s slogan ‘Doing Less Better’?  

So what do those ‘ordinary – real – people’ think of it so far? We have 20 years of Scottish Social Attitudes surveys (SSA), kept alive by the heroics of the Scottish Centre for Social Research (ScotCen), with grudging (and measly) support from successive Scottish governments. The findings here are based on analysis of those SSA surveys, in the recent issue of Scottish Affairs, entitled ‘Peeble them wi’ stanes: twenty years of the Scottish parliament’. 

Here’s the puzzle. Why, given that the Scottish parliament is the creature of Westminster, and with few powers over the big issues of life (the economy and taxation) do people rate it highly? Back in 1999 there was considerable optimism; that trust in the parliament was high, that people wanted it to have the most influence over their lives, that it would give them a greater say. Surely, many thought, once the novelty wore off and ‘real politics’ (those again) kicked in, pessimism would reign, and it would be seen as a ‘pretendy’ parliament (not funny, Billy, even then)?

Well, no. Trust in the Scottish parliament has remained high. People see it as ‘theirs’, populated by ‘oor ain’. It gives them more say, and Scotland a much stronger voice in the wider world. 

‘Real’ politics

Why this optimism? Why haven’t constitutional matters (‘un-real’ politics?) gone away? Assessing the first five years of the parliament, Alison Park and I identified a ‘devolution conundrum’. Put simply, improvements in people’s quality of life (even matters like the standard of living over which Westminster had greater say) were credited to the Scottish parliament. Pessimists blamed Westminster.

Surely that no longer applies, given the daily grind of twenty years? No. The conundrum still holds true. Credit for improvements – in health, education, the economy, standard of living – go to Scottish parliament and government (and regardless of who is in power at Holyrood). It’s Holyrood what gets the credit; Westminster the blame. 

But why is that? The conundrum gets us closer to explaining the ‘success’ of the Scottish parliament in people’s eyes. Recall early claims that devolution was the settled will of the Scottish people (credited to John Smith). Recall too the belief that devolution and constitutional issues mattered far less to ‘real people’ than jobs, housing, schools and hospitals. True enough, but a false dichotomy. They segue into each other seamlessly.

The answer to our conundrum is that the Scottish parliament (and government) provides the key institutional framework for politics and policy-making in Scotland, and this has lang been. Recall the teeth-gnashing of unionists that people were being sold a false prospectus, that ‘real politics’ are what mattered. Indeed so, but people see constitutional matters as the means to better social and economic policy. This too has lang been. Political parties are successful in Scotland when they harness these expectations.  

So who are the people who think Scottish government is good at listening to people’s views, more inclined to believe it works in Scotland’s long-term interests, and who trust it to make fair decisions? Manifestly politics comes into it: those in favour of maximising Scottish powers, and SNP supporters, and also those with higher levels of education and who are bettered resourced. UK government is better thought of by unionists, Tories, but also those with low levels of interest in politics. But even among such folk greater trust attaches to Holyrood than Westminster.

Back in 1999, Alice Brown, Lindsay Paterson and I wrote that ‘Scots are not nationalists for expressive reasons: identity matters less to politics than effective government… for the foreseeable future Scottish politics will continue to be dominated by the question of how the country is governed’. True enough then; and even more so now.  

First published by the Centre on Constitutional Change

Filed Under: Blog, Elections, History Tagged With: Scottish devolution

About David McCrone

Emeritus Professor of Sociology at University of Edinburgh

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

About Sceptical Scot

Welcome to Sceptical Scot, Scotland’s premier non-tribal forum for passionate, informed debate. Sceptical Scot is for all who care about Scotland’s future, regardless of how they vote: for party, independence or union, EU or Brexit. We aim to provide an arena that is both broader and deeper than current online/print offers with a rich diet of well-researched, polemical, thought-provoking writing. Read more » about About Sceptical Scot

What’s new on Sceptical Scot

  • What’s in the new Programme for Government? Look in the long grass September 8, 2023
  • Learning from Scotland: what a Labour government would mean for the right to roam September 7, 2023
  • Europe must unite to stop deep-sea resource grab September 6, 2023
  • Energy market reforms must embrace a social tariff August 30, 2023
  • Climate change at the Edinburgh festivals August 21, 2023
  • GERS 2023: uptick in oil revenues narrows the budget deficit August 16, 2023
  • Zombie Scotland must wake up to its future August 14, 2023
  • Let’s make interest rates zero – permanently August 10, 2023
  • Treasury gives Holyrood more fiscal leeway August 3, 2023
  • Ukraine’s recovery will ‘take a village’ of international actors July 28, 2023

The Sceptical Newsletter

The Sceptical Scot cartoon

Categories

  • Articles (678)
  • Blog (569)
  • Books & Poetry (26)
  • Brexit (211)
  • climate crisis (33)
  • climate crisis (6)
  • Covid19 (66)
  • Criminal justice (18)
  • Culture (315)
  • Devo20 (1)
  • Economics (195)
  • Economy (120)
  • Education (77)
  • Elections (192)
  • Energy (2)
  • Environment (76)
  • European Union (264)
  • Featured (42)
  • federalism (14)
  • Federalism (20)
  • Health (67)
  • History (75)
  • Housing (26)
  • Humour (11)
  • identity (19)
  • Independence (288)
  • Inequality (80)
  • International (41)
  • Ireland (10)
  • Ireland (7)
  • Local government (87)
  • Longer reads (75)
  • Media (11)
  • Podcast (3)
  • Poetry (72)
  • Policy (240)
  • Politics (363)
  • Polls and quizzes (2)
  • Reviews (24)
  • Social democracy (85)
  • Trump (10)
  • UK (361)
  • Uncategorized (7)

Sceptical Scot elsewhere

Facebook
Twitter

Footer

About Sceptical Scot

Since 2014 Sceptical Scot has offered a non-tribal forum for passionate, informed debate for all who care about Scotland’s future

Recommended

  • Bella Caledonia
  • Centre on Constitutional Change
  • The UK in a Changing Europe
  • Common Space
  • Gerry Hassan
  • Scottish Review
  • Social Europe
  • Think Scotland

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in