In fact, some have even argued that it would speed up that process. On the other side, pro-Union folk are concerned that devo max would not be the end of the debate – that it would simply be another step towards Scottish independence. Fundamentally, this third option wouldn’t deliver independence immediately – and it also does nothing to respond to the biggest change to the constitution between 2014 and now: Brexit. There are concerns that people who would be ‘soft’ Yes voters would instead opt for devo max. Well, for pro-independence people, devo max is often seen as diluting the case for independence. But he also admits he views this option as a way to “create a path to independence” rather than an end in itself. Interestingly, Hanlon himself defined devo max as “the smallest amount of increased devolution that I think those who support independence can live with”. Immigration, for example – would Scotland have full control of its international borders, would it have some control for specific circumstances (to combat labour shortages, for instance) or is it better to have the UK government decide all policy across the UK? However, there are significant differences of opinion among supporters as to what ‘max’ means and a divide between theory and what is practically possible. Typically, that has referred to Westminster retaining power over defence and foreign policy, and currency and monetary policy. That depends on who you ask! Broadly speaking, it means devolving as much as possible (the max) to the Scottish Parliament. But whatever the cause, it certainly got political circles talking about a third option. Motives were quickly attributed to Hanlon about why he wrote the piece. Former policy development convener Chris Hanlon penned a column in The National at the start of the month, admitting he had “always been uncomfortable” about the binary choice put before the Scottish people in 2014. Stranger still that the latest iteration of the debate seems to have been sparked by someone from within the SNP.
It might seem a bit of an odd time to be talking about devo max, or home rule, or full fiscal autonomy, whatever you want to call it, again when the conversation on a second independence referendum has barely moved in the last seven years.
The idea of a third way through the constitutional logjam has reared its head once again, despite no one really knowing what it is.
0 kommentar(er)
