Written evidence submitted by Rt Hon Tony Blair (IGR0013)
Scottish Affairs Committee inquiry: Intergovernmental relations: 25 years since the Scotland Act 1998
1st November
Submission from Rt Hon Tony Blair
I would first of all like to thank the Committee for asking me to give evidence to this important Inquiry.
In my submission I will set out a general narrative response, covering some of the points you include in your areas of interest. I will focus my comments on the period of the last Labour Government but offer some wider thoughts at the end. I trust this will be helpful to the committee.
Context of 1998 Scotland Act
An important element I want to start with is the context to the 1998 Scotland Act. As part of our electoral programme Labour came to office with a commitment to devolution. I’m naturally cautious on the matter of devolution but in the context of the late 1990s it was an issue we needed to confront. In a fast-changing world, at both a global and local level, my Government aimed to bring power down to the level people felt most control and connection.
There had also been a long tail to this issue.
The Scottish nationalist movement had grown through the 1960s. A royal Commission was set up in 1969 to look at issues including devolution. In the 1970s pressure around the issue grew and the then Labour Government put forward a legislation to create a Scottish Assembly- the 1978 Scotland Act. This attempt at reform failed at referendum stage in 1979. The following Thatcher Government did not support devolution as set out in the 1978 Act but brought forward its own proposals. These failed to meet the test for many of those campaigning for further devolution and pressure continued to grow. This culminated in the creation of the Scottish Constitutional Convention (SCC) which went on to publish a number of reports with recommendations on devolution. I then took over as Leader of the Opposition from John Smith, who had committed to further devolution and had referred to a Scottish Parliament as the, “settled will of the Scottish people”.
Moving forward with devolution for Scotland was particularly important because we did not want a false choice to be presented to the public there between status quo and separatism.
Our reforms were aimed at showing a middle path. How Scotland could remain part of the United Kingdom through a package of reform that would return more powers to the regions. Bluntly, to show Scotland there was a path to reform without needing to separate.
To be clear, I never expected that devolution would end the campaign for separatism but I did believe ultimately it would limit its appeal. The test for the reforms, in my view, should not therefore be whether the voices of separatism have disappeared but whether they have prevailed.
Focus of the reforms
As you will know the Scotland Act made provision for a Scottish Government and Parliament. The first elections were held in 1999 and the Scottish Parliament thereby brought into existence.
The Act itself set out powers that would remain the prerogative of the UK Parliament, with those not included then within the remit of the Scottish Government. Devolved matters included: health, education, local government, policing, justice, agricultural & environmental policy and economic development.
The Scottish Parliament was granted legislative powers but not on matters reserved by the UK Government.
The Scotland Act also introduced an Advocate General for Scotland. The position of the Advocate General was as a UK Law Officer, giving the UK Government legal advice on Scottish law and devolution. The Advocate General also had powers to intervene where legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament fell outside the scope of its remit.
These were the broad terms of the 1998 Act. While there were no formal structures for intergovernmental relations, the above, including the Advocate General, were the main methods of engagement.
Since the Act, however, there have been a number of attempts to further define intergovernmental relations, particularly through memoranda of understanding (MoUs). I list these as a footnote for reference.[1]
The above, and the related footnotes, are the rough structure of how intergovernmental relations between the UK Government and the Scottish Government have evolved since the Act.
Have they worked?
In terms of the effectiveness of these policies I will focus, I hope understandably, on my time in office. I’ll offer a few reflections on the period after the last Labour Government but, as I’m sure you will understand, I am much less familiar with this period.
In terms of Labour’s time in office, my recollection is that the structures in place were broadly fine. Of course, as the MoUs show, there was need for refinement but overall, I have no direct recollection of feeling there was a problem in intergovernmental relations. Of course, issues arise in these inter-governmental relationships but, from my experience, come down in the end to the ability of the two leaders, the two governments, to work those through. A lot of that is about personal relationships, wider political dynamics, rather than structure.
The key for me with the reforms we made in Government were whether they proved an effective and viable way for us to offer Scotland a home within a devolved United Kingdom, transcending the question of status quo (pre-1997) versus separatism.
On this basis I feel confident they were effective and improved intergovernmental relations. The polling below shows that since the implementation of the Scotland Act support for devolution has consistently polled ahead of independence. The result of the 2014 referendum was clear in favouring remain and, were it not for Brexit, would have put the issue to bed for a generation.
As I say above, the test for the reforms should not be whether the separatist voices have disappeared, but whether they have prevailed. And to date, they have not.
I note that recent changes to the structure of intergovernmental relations between Scotland and the UK have been made, with the introduction for instance of the Prime Minister and Heads of Devolved Government Council.
What all of the above points to, in my view, is the following:
- The precise structures for intergovernmental relations have and will evolve as the dynamics of the relationship between the two countries evolves- for instance recently in light of Brexit.
- A fundamental pre-requisite for effective relations is the nature of the relationship between the respective leaders and respective governments. Within reason the right relationship of respect can manage issues within the wrong structure. The wrong relationship will be hard to manage even within the right structure.
- How to assess success- when we look back at the reforms Labour made, we need to measure their impact against the objectives. The key for us was to offer a path for Scotland to stay within the UK through devolution, navigating the question of secession through reform. So far that has been achieved.
- The recent polling by my institute points to the fact voters in Scotland want tangible progress to be made on devolved matters. The right Government in Scotland, with the right agenda, can meet the concerns of voters without the need for Scotland to leave the UK. It comes down to politics in the end.
The path forward for now is to build a relationship of trust between the two governments, fully bed in the new structures for intergovernmental relations and ensure the political parties in Scotland are addressing voters’ concerns.
November 2023
4