By Keith Aitken in Edinburgh | 26 April 2012
Scotland's most senior trade unionist has backed the Scottish Government’s timetable for an independence referendum and the inclusion of a question on further devolution. In doing so, Grahame Smith has broken step with the unions' partners in the Future Scotland civic coalition.
Smith, general secretary of the STUC, told Public Finance that it would be ‘daft’ to rule out a multi-option referendum in favour of one that asked Scottish voters only if they wanted to leave or stay within the UK.
‘We’re absolutely comfortable with the [Scottish Government’s] 2014 timescale because it gives us the opportunity to debate,’ he said.
‘We will as the STUC – and our affiliates and members will expect it – reach a view before the referendum on what our position should be.’ He added: ‘It is absolutely “get off the fence time”, but there is still a period of time when it is legitimate to have that discussion.’
Smith’s comments will make uncomfortable reading for his Future Scotland partners, which include churches, voluntary organisations and the Institute of Directors. They have insisted that discussion over possible further devolution should not be bound by the Scottish National Party’s referendum timetable.
The stance will also jar with the unions’ traditional political allies in the Labour Party, who want a single-option referendum held earlier than 2014. It is significant too because of the STUC’s long-standing role in pulling together Scotland’s major civic coalitions.
In an interview with PF before the STUC conference on April 23–25, Smith emphasised the congress’s co-operative relationship with the SNP Government. He said he believed Scottish ministers could have done little more to resist the UK coalition’s austerity programme: ‘The SNP supported our Better Way campaign [against cuts] in the Parliament and at their conference.
‘Given the powers of the Scottish Government, given the Barnett consequentials and given that these issues are sensitive to application of macro-economic levers, there is little that the Scottish Government could do, other than encourage the UK government to take a different approach.
‘I take what [Finance Secretary] John Swinney tells me at face value, and I genuinely don’t believe the administration wanted these changes,’ he said.
Co-operation with the SNP was ‘not in any way a problem for us’, Smith added. ‘The point we always make is that we are not a party-affiliated organisation. We will work with all political parties where we believe it’s in the interests of our membership.’
The STUC has twice signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Alex Salmond’s government, as with its Labour-Liberal Democrat predecessors. As evidence of influence, Smith cited the STUC’s role in promoting a common stance by all the UK devolved administrations against austerity, and Salmond’s adoption of the STUC’s proposal for a Scottish Investment Bank.
Scotland's most senior trade unionist has backed the Scottish Government’s timetable for an independence referendum and the inclusion of a question on further devolution. In doing so, Grahame Smith has broken step with the unions' partners in the Future Scotland civic coalition.
Smith, general secretary of the STUC, told Public Finance that it would be ‘daft’ to rule out a multi-option referendum in favour of one that asked Scottish voters only if they wanted to leave or stay within the UK.
‘We’re absolutely comfortable with the [Scottish Government’s] 2014 timescale because it gives us the opportunity to debate,’ he said.
‘We will as the STUC – and our affiliates and members will expect it – reach a view before the referendum on what our position should be.’ He added: ‘It is absolutely “get off the fence time”, but there is still a period of time when it is legitimate to have that discussion.’
Smith’s comments will make uncomfortable reading for his Future Scotland partners, which include churches, voluntary organisations and the Institute of Directors. They have insisted that discussion over possible further devolution should not be bound by the Scottish National Party’s referendum timetable.
The stance will also jar with the unions’ traditional political allies in the Labour Party, who want a single-option referendum held earlier than 2014. It is significant too because of the STUC’s long-standing role in pulling together Scotland’s major civic coalitions.
In an interview with PF before the STUC conference on April 23–25, Smith emphasised the congress’s co-operative relationship with the SNP Government. He said he believed Scottish ministers could have done little more to resist the UK coalition’s austerity programme: ‘The SNP supported our Better Way campaign [against cuts] in the Parliament and at their conference.
‘Given the powers of the Scottish Government, given the Barnett consequentials and given that these issues are sensitive to application of macro-economic levers, there is little that the Scottish Government could do, other than encourage the UK government to take a different approach.
‘I take what [Finance Secretary] John Swinney tells me at face value, and I genuinely don’t believe the administration wanted these changes,’ he said.
Co-operation with the SNP was ‘not in any way a problem for us’, Smith added. ‘The point we always make is that we are not a party-affiliated organisation. We will work with all political parties where we believe it’s in the interests of our membership.’
The STUC has twice signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Alex Salmond’s government, as with its Labour-Liberal Democrat predecessors. As evidence of influence, Smith cited the STUC’s role in promoting a common stance by all the UK devolved administrations against austerity, and Salmond’s adoption of the STUC’s proposal for a Scottish Investment Bank.
