Sorry, I clearly missed this, since it's old I'll be brief.
Yet Scotland are proportionally represented in any UK Government...and given the historical Labour centric voting of Scotland in UK elections, could it not be argued that a Labour Govt would indeed be representative of Scotland if they returned a majority of Labour MPs?
It's not proportional at all, on nearly every measurable output.
Re; Labour popularity in Government with Scottish votes; it's not so exclusive. Popularity of Blair fell sooner and quicker in Scotland than it did elsewhere, for example, on his quest for war and Thatcherism.
I think we all want more local decision making, that is fairly universal across the UK.
I think Westminster could do more to support the process constructively, these things always run along party political lines, yet it's the almost colonial attitude that is displayed by some at times that only adds to the emotional impoteous to set the agenda in the devolved nations. There are some very progressive politicians in Westminster, I even admire (just) a few Tories, but the overall effect and democracy is lacking and slow.
No doubt, it is a difficult political position to give power to any regional part of a State (even when that region is a country in their own right) without considering how the rest will react...Politics is hardly the least divisive of occupations after all. The important part is that the UK Govt listened, considered, argued and eventually acceded....this would imply a least some representative position of the Scots (and others) when considering such matters.
It had nothing to do with Westminster or Government as a whole, but of Labour pre-election who knew that standing on a manifesto of devolution for Scotland and Wales would project them into power standing ontop of a decade of bad Tory governance and unpopularity. Even that had self interest, as it was assumed that it would in fact remain a layer of Labour hegemony over Scotland.
But would that coalition have been made up of Labour and Liberal Democrat...and therefore representative of the voting in Scotland?
Yes, we find a few 'token Scotsmen' from time to time.
So in effect, the Scottish Govt are asking the Scottish people to decide on a constitutional matter without having a draft constitution on which to base their decision?
Each party can set out an early draft proposal now, which a few of the parties are working on doing, others will not.
It seems quite reasonable for us to sit down in a calmer political climate and discuss what our common rights, obligations aims and ambitions are. It has to be by consensus, and that's unlikely to be forthcoming this side of the referendum. We will still maintain our current constitution by way of custom and establishment coming out of the referendum, and follow the examples of many other nations such as the US in forming a true constitutional convention in the advent of the Scottish people voting Yes.
More details can be found in this whitepaper here;
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00413757.pdf
Section 1.7.
Is that not like asking people to vote for a candidate, but not telling them who they are or what their manifesto is until after they are elected?
No, it's how many nations on earth have codified their constitution. The first time Scotland will have had one in a modern sense.
