SCOTTISH Labour MSP Alex Rowley has called for “home rule” to be considered as part of the ongoing debate around a second independence referendum.
Rowley, who represents mid-Scotland and Fife said “all options” should be on the table as part of the ongoing debate around a second independence referendum, including devo max alongside yes and no options. Speaking to The Herald on Sunday, he claimed Scotland is currently in a “constitutional stalemate”.
“It results in poor government, rewards political parties for maintaining divisions, and we therefore have to find a way forward and settle the issue,” he said.
Rowley claimed division and healing the nation cannot be solved by “telling 50% of the population they are wrong”. “The way forward must be an open and civil debate that examines the issues and has all options on the table,” he said.
“My own view is the option of home rule must be considered as part of the debate but, regardless, the significant and material change since 2014 means the same binary choice is no longer on the table.”
However, the SNP MSP Rona MacKay hit back, stating that “no-one can trust” Scottish Labour to stick to their word.
MacKay said: “Scottish Labour made the same vow to Scotland in 2014 and then broke that promise. No-one can trust them to stick to their word this time. And no amount of constitutional tinkering would protect Scotland from the catastrophe of Brexit or the Tory created cost-of-living crisis.
READ MORE: Yes campaigners share their thoughts on indyref2 plans
“The only way Scotland can escape corrosive Westminster control is with the full powers of independence. However, Alex Rowley clearly recognises Scotland’s right to choose its own future in a referendum so he should be demanding his boss, Anas Sarwar, dumps his Donald Trump policy of denying clear democratic election results delivered by the people of this country.”
Party leader Anas Sarwar has consistently ruled out backing a second referendum. When asked on the Sunday Show if he believed an independence referendum should be “categorically” ruled out over the next 10 years, he said: “We said right at the start of the election campaign that we believe the focus of this Parliament should be on our recovery and that’s why we didn’t support a referendum.
“On the principle of Scots having a right to choose, of course I believe that Scots have a right to choose. But basically, during term we should be focusing on recovery.”
Sarwar also stated he will be “setting out in a couple weeks’ time” his vision for alternatives to a second independence referendum, stating that Labour wants to demonstrate that “the next electoral context is going to be a general election”.
“[We want to show] what voting Labour in that general election means and what change looks like right across the United Kingdom, to what change looks like for people in Scotland”, Sarwar said.
READ MORE: English Labour should back Nicola Sturgeon on Scottish independence
“Yes, the Tories are a disaster, yes I want to boot them out, yes I don’t agree with the priorities of the SNP – I think they’re a bad government here in Scotland – but we can’t wait for the public to want them to lose. We’ve got to serve them.”
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, along with Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie, fired the starting gun on the indyref2 campaign last week as they launched a series of new documents making the case for an independent Scotland.
Sturgeon insisted a referendum will be held with or without a Section 30 order, while Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross vowed to boycott any “wildcat” ballot.
A recent Scottish Election Survey found that 55% of voters considered the results of the last election to be a mandate for indyref2, based on a neutral question.
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