Caron's Musings: The Secret Truth behind the Lib Dems' private Conference
Today the Scottish Liberal Democrats gather, on Hallowe’en, in Dunfermline in an event only open to Party members. This has led commentators to wonder if there’s something sinister going on, if rebellion is afoot, speculating about mutinies about all sorts.
The truth is far more mundane. While there will be a session to discuss the Party’s response to Alex Salmond’s referendum bill at which, no doubt, a very wide variety of opinions will be put forward, this takes up an hour at the end of the day.
The rest of the time is taken up with something much more mundane. You know how we all have that cupboard in our house that we never, ever get round to cleaning out until, eventually, you can put it off no longer because we can’t find anything? Well, today my friends and colleagues are doing the Party’s equivalent of that – reviewing the constitution. We have been putting it off forever because there has always been something better to do until we’ve got to the point where there are bits of it which just don’t make sense any more because they are so out of date.
Ever since the Party decided to use today to get that bit of housekeeping out of the way, it’s been an event that’s been open only to Party members. To say that going through 60 pages of tightly packed constitutional amendments with 441 votes planned is mind numbing would be extremely charitable. As an example, one of the votes, number 60, is to delete the word “hereof” from clause C14. I think a two thirds majority will be required for that one, too! Believe me, this is a process that only a true Liberal Democrat geek could love.
What’s more remarkable is that there will be those who do love it – you would be surprised at how passionate a debate can become if it’s perceived that the centre is trying to take too many powers away from the members. This Review doesn’t even have much of that, if truth be told, though. It’s all quite sensible, sadly. Out of the 441 votes, there are probably less than 10 I’d argue about, and only a couple I’d be annoyed about if they got through.
So there’s no witchery or ghoulishness afoot – just a bit of much delayed and much needed Spring cleaning which gives our constitutional anoraks a bit of a treat.
The truth is far more mundane. While there will be a session to discuss the Party’s response to Alex Salmond’s referendum bill at which, no doubt, a very wide variety of opinions will be put forward, this takes up an hour at the end of the day.
The rest of the time is taken up with something much more mundane. You know how we all have that cupboard in our house that we never, ever get round to cleaning out until, eventually, you can put it off no longer because we can’t find anything? Well, today my friends and colleagues are doing the Party’s equivalent of that – reviewing the constitution. We have been putting it off forever because there has always been something better to do until we’ve got to the point where there are bits of it which just don’t make sense any more because they are so out of date.
Ever since the Party decided to use today to get that bit of housekeeping out of the way, it’s been an event that’s been open only to Party members. To say that going through 60 pages of tightly packed constitutional amendments with 441 votes planned is mind numbing would be extremely charitable. As an example, one of the votes, number 60, is to delete the word “hereof” from clause C14. I think a two thirds majority will be required for that one, too! Believe me, this is a process that only a true Liberal Democrat geek could love.
What’s more remarkable is that there will be those who do love it – you would be surprised at how passionate a debate can become if it’s perceived that the centre is trying to take too many powers away from the members. This Review doesn’t even have much of that, if truth be told, though. It’s all quite sensible, sadly. Out of the 441 votes, there are probably less than 10 I’d argue about, and only a couple I’d be annoyed about if they got through.
So there’s no witchery or ghoulishness afoot – just a bit of much delayed and much needed Spring cleaning which gives our constitutional anoraks a bit of a treat.
posted by Caron at
12:32
6 Comments:
There is a simple question in Scotland. Why out of the five parties represented in the Scottish Parliament are the three parties which represent the old political alignments of left, right and centre so hard line unionist?
There is a clue in the fact that the constitution of the Lib-Dems' regional section in Scotland is a sub-section in the Federal Lib-Dems constitution. Page 173 if you're interested. You won't find it on the Scottish region Lib-Dem web-site.
The simple answer is because they aren't Scottish parties. There are no Scottish Lib-Dem, Conservative or Labour parties. Hunt for them in the Electoral Commission register and you won't find them.
The reason that Labour, Lib-Dem and the Tories are so unionist then becomes plain. What they represent are the views of the UK parties that they are part of. UK parties which are headquartered in England and with an overwhelming English membership as a consequence of England's size.
In the preamble to the Lib-Dems' constitution they commit to keeping the Union above the sovereignty of the people:
We believe that sovereignty rests with the people and that authority in a democracy derives from the people. We therefore acknowledge their right to determine the form of government best suited to their needs and commit ourselves to the promotion of a democratic federal framework within which as much power as feasible is exercised by the nations and regions of the United Kingdom. (My bold.)
The limits of, "feasibility", are obviously the integrity of the UK.
Since in the Lib-Dems' constitution Section 5.1 it states:
The Federal Party shall determine the policy of the Party in those areas which might reasonably be expected to fall within the remit of the federal institutions in the context of a federal United Kingdom.,
then it's a moot point if the Scottish region have the power under their constitution to unilaterally permit a Scottish independence referendum without reference to their headquarters in England.
It's going to be a very interesting, "hour at the end of the day."
The thing about Liberal Democrats is that our gut instinct is to devolve power to the lowest practicable level. We don't want a decision being made in Brussels that's better made in London, or one in London that's better made in Edinburgh or one in Edinburgh that's better made in Wick. We are not a unionist party, we're a federalist one.
We're quite proud of the many advantages that we see in the Union - it's not perfect and there needs to be more powers for the Scottish Parliament, but we think Scotland both gives a fantastic contribution to the union and benefits from it. There are just things it makes sense to do on a UK wide level.
As someone who loves Scotland with a passion, I'm comfortable within this kind of set up.
Our constitution was written the way it was because it reflects the way that we see things.
Scotland, by the way, is not a Region, within the Federal Constitution of the Lib Dems, it's a State within a Federal structure. The convener of the Scottish party is automatically a vice convener of the Federal Party and Scotland, England and Wales are all represented on the Federal Committees.
I can honestly say that I can't remember a single time when the Federal Party (of which the Scottish Party is a part) has ever told the Scottish Party what policy to adopt. Such a move would be highly counterproductive anyway.
We are not a unionist party, we're a federalist one.
Federalism is Unionism. Federalism is just the reorganisation of local government within a unitary single passport state. The opposition within the Lib-Dems to the independence aim of the SNP and their refusal to deal or form a coalition with the SNP because of that independence aim is the hallmark of a unionist party.
Scotland, by the way, is not a Region, within the Federal Constitution of the Lib Dems...
Semantics. It's a regional sub-structure within the single Liberal-Democrat party.
Scottish Party
I refer you of course to the Electoral Commission register of political parties. There certainly is a Scottish organisation within the Lib-Dems but there is no Scottish Lib-Dem Party.
Caron
"We're quite proud of the many advantages that we see in the Union"
We have asked many Unionists over at Blether with Brian many times to list those percieved advantages yet none have been forthcoming to date.
Maybe thats a blog to ponder!
Caron said:
"The thing about Liberal Democrats is that our gut instinct is to devolve power to the lowest practicable level."
Ah, yes - Menie-Trump-LibDems.
When the 'wrong' result comes up the local party implodes!!
DougtheDug makes a brave attempt to use the Liberal Democrat constitution to argue that the Scottish Liberal Democrats are not a distinct Party. Brave, but inaccurate.
The world authority on Federalism is K C Wheare, who makes the crucial point that, in a devolved unionist system, different components have specific responsibilities, but one component is in overall charge of the other. In a federal system that is not true: each component has exclusive authority in its own protected sphere, and the components co-operate by choice when they need to. See www.federalunion.org.uk/archives/wheare.shtml for further details.
But the biscuit is surely taken by praying in aid the Electoral Commission! The Commission operates under the terms of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, which was conceived and driven through Parliament by a Labour Party which understands about as much of federalism as DougtheDug does (i.e. nada). In Labour world, anything that is not the centre is an "accounting unit". The Lib Dems protested vehemently that legislation in this form would require political parties to behave in ways totally against their internal structures, and weren't the only ones to do so. But Labour didn't understand the point, far less care about it, and drove it through anyway. If you expect Lib Dem members to agree that they're a unionist party because Labour legislation forces a government body to treat them that way, you're nuts. The law must be obeyed, but it can't change facts.
I also wouldn't advise going in for the "federalism is unionism" line in an election campaign. Nationalist parties in Spain, Germany and Italy are entirely comfortable within federal or highly devolved systems, and (by implication) calling your sister parties unionist might get you thrown out of the Euro White Heather Club.
Post a Comment
<< Home