From the outset, I must disclose, I’m not Scottish so ultimately, it is not for me to decide Scotland’s constitutional future. But, Ben Thomson’s book offers an insightful third option which sits between Scottish Independence and Unionism. The book details the history of Home Rule from the 1800s to devolution in 1997 to the independence referendum in 2014. The next two sections of the book help to define Home Rule as a constitutional concept and the benefits it would bring Scotland. The final reflection of the book is that ultimately we are heading towards a second referendum on Scottish Independence, and unlike 2014, the Scottish public should have the option of Home Rule.
The first section of the book details the history of the Home Rule movement. Ben Thomson is able to effortlessly explain how from the 1800s the Home Rule movement grew in both Ireland and Scotland. He explains that it was not until 1913, when a Government of Scotland Bill first was proposed. Then, Thomson explains how concurrent to the Home Rule movement, the nationalist movement formed. This culminated with the formation of the Scottish National Party (SNP). By looking at the 1979 Referendum, Thomson shows how afterwards consensus among parties and politicians was created on the idea of devolution. This grew in momentum, and led to a second referendum in 1997. Finally, he explores the independence referendum, and discusses how home rule as a policy started to be talked about again, albeit being referred to as devomax. But ultimately, David Cameron chose to not allow Home Rule to be an option on the ballot paper.
The middle section of this book better defines Home Rule. In effect, home rule means devolving most domestic policy to Scotland, and creating a ‘constitutionally mandated partnership of equals’ (Thomson, 2020:17) between the Scottish Government and the UK Government. For Thomson, this means policy surrounding international affairs, defence and external trade should be the prerogative of the UK Parliament, while pretty much all other domestic policy for Scotland should be decided in the Scottish Parliament. This is far more extensive than the current devolution settlement, because devolution is based on what the UK government is willing to give up, instead of a principled belief in decentralisation. As well as this, Thomson believes that Home Rule depends on fiscal devolution, so that the Scottish Government has not just responsibility for spending (like it currently does), but also responsibility for raising the revenue for such spending. This would create better accountability in Scottish politics, thus being more democratic. Underpinning any divergence in regulation, would be the idea of mutual recognition which you find in other federal nations and within the European Union. He also makes it clear that the block grant would be replaced with a ‘Social Cohesion Fund’ which would recognise resource and economic inequalities across the union, which the UK government would give out to tackle such inequalities.
The final section details how fiscal devolution could allow Scotland to divert from current UK policy. Due to welfare being the prejocative of the Scottish Parliament in Home Rule, they could consider new ways of simplifying benefits or pensions. They could also change how Scotland taxes by recognising the unique economy which Scotland has. Thomson makes the point that within the United States, states tax different things to build up revenue because economies are different, requiring different fiscal policies. Home Rule would enable the Scottish Government to adopt a unique fiscal policy to the benefit of the Scottish economy, which it currently cannot do. This is ultimately why Thomson believes this third option must be offered. It gives Scotland the security of being in the Union, which can give Scotland a clear voice at NATO, UN, G7 etc. But, it would also give Scotland the freedom to enact a wide range of domestic policy, for example drug decriminalisation. In this book’s view, this is the best of both worlds.
My thoughts on this book are quite clear: Home Rule seems to be the sensible option for Scotland. I have long supported the idea of federalising the United Kingdom. But, pushing aside my personal convictions, this book is effective in explaining the history of Home Rule and what Home Rule is. It does all of this in 176 pages, so clearly is not an exhaustive book in understanding the issue, but a useful starting point. It paints a clear, readable vision for Scotland, which on the whole is rid of academic jargon. This makes it the perfect manifesto for Home Rule. I agree with the conclusion of the book: Home Rule should be an option in any future referendum on Scotland’s future.
The Next Conversation 