SCOTTISH politicians should have to consent to “major decisions” on defence and the UK’s Trident nuclear deterrent, an MSP has said.
Katy Clark also claimed that “lightning rod issues” such as the nuclear submarines – based at Faslane on the Clyde – and “unpopular wars such as Iraq” had helped drive people towards independence.
She made the case for Scottish politicians to be given more say on such matters in a new book which calls for the option of “radical change short of independence” to be included if there is a second referendum north of the Border.
Clark, a former senior aide to Jeremy Corbyn, became Baroness Clark of Kilwinning in September 2020 after being nominated as a life member by her former boss.
The book is edited by another Labour peer, Baroness Bryan, and proposes devolving powers over immigration, taxation, drugs laws and defence to Holyrood.
READ MORE: Katy Clark: Labour MSP claimed £15k in less than four months for Baroness role
In her contribution, Clark, a former MP who was elected as a West of Scotland MSP in May this year, wrote: “Whilst it is true that there are policy areas where the majority views of political representatives across the UK align, lightning rod issues like Trident and unpopular wars such as Iraq have effectively been recruiting sergeants for the cause of independence.
“The principle of the union between the nations should be based on the consent of each nation … North of the Border, this could require that political decisions relating to defence which specifically affect Scotland – including major decisions on the Trident nuclear weapons system – to also require the consent of the Scottish Parliament or the block of Westminster MPs representing Scottish constituencies in the House of Commons.”
Baroness Bryan – who edited Scottish Independence: There is a Third Option – argued if Labour is to reconnect with working-class Scots the party must reject the “uber-Unionism that has turned so many former voters away”.
On the issue of Scotland’s future, she claimed: “The status quo means continuing to suffer under one of the most right-wing, authoritarian Tory governments, and the alternative set out by the SNP for independence would lock Scotland into austerity policies for at least the first decade of independence with appalling consequences for public services and jobs.
READ MORE: Former Union Unit chief says it would be 'insane' to give Holyrood more powers
“It is clear that should there be a future referendum, it must be on the basis of three options – status quo, radical change short of independence and independence.”
While Labour is opposed to a second independence referendum, Baroness Bryan insisted that the “choices on Scotland’s future are for the people of Scotland to make”.
She also said the “binary divisiveness” of the debate over the constitution “is sucking the air out of politics, to the detriment of jobs and public services”.
Previous calls for so-called devo-max, where Holyrood is granted more powers but not full independence, have been criticised by those in the independence movement as "the Vow 2.0".
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel