Conservative Minister, Allan Stewart's answer to the Lorraine Mann Question.
| 'Given the devil of devolution and the deep-blue sea of independence, I would go for independence.' Conservative Minister, Allan Stewart's answer to the Lorraine Mann Question. | |
INDEPENDENCE for Scotland would benefit Tories both north and south of the Border in the long term, former Scottish Office Minister Allan Stewart has claimed in the face of Conservative campaigning to maintain the Union.
The astonishing statement by the Tory MP for Eastwood seems likely to find favour with a surprisingly large number of the party faithful when they gather on Thursday for the last Scottish Conservative Party conference before the next General Election.
A growing number appear now to be acknowledging that, in the event of Labour winning the next election, an independent Scotland where Scottish Tories would be freed from the image of being dominated by the English wing of the party, would allow them to regain much of their natural support.
Many feel the Scottish people would soon become disillusioned with a high- spending, Labour-dominated devolved assembly and opt instead for an independent state in the Scandinavian model. They believe that if Conservative candidates stood for election for an independent Scotland, they would attract patriots disillusioned by the SNP's left-wing stance.
Business and industry, which, they believe, would have been driven away by a devolved parliament imposing high taxes, would be attracted back to an independent Scotland by a Conservative-dominated administration offering low taxation and fiscally attractive policies.
According to Mr Stewart: ''The Tories, after the trauma of a complete breakdown of the Union, would be able to gain the natural centre-right vote.''
He adds: ''The party advantage in England is obvious. Without Labour's Scottish majority to contend with, the Conservatives would have a much higher chance of obtaining control at Westminster.''
In his autobiography he goes much further than he has in the past in his constitutional analysis. He also reveals stronger Euro-sceptical tendencies, criticising Mr Major for withdrawing the whip from the party's Euro-rebels last year, and declaring his personal admiration for arch Euro-rebel Sir Teddy Taylor.
It is a sign of how much Scottish Tory thinking has moved in the last few years that Tory colleagues who were previously shocked by his conclusions on the constitution are now quietly voicing their agreement. While his claims might rock the party conference, they may find favour in some surprising quarters.
Despite the Tories' recent battering in the English local elections, the Scottish party's mood is unexpectedly defiant, with the Scottish Secretary's recent hardline stance on law and order and Europe bolstering the more right-wing sections.
In his autobiography, The Long March of the Market Men, Mr Stewart argues strongly for the constitutional status quo. However, should Labour establish a devolved parliament then its abolition by a future Tory Government, ruled out last week by Scottish Secretary Michael Forsyth, would, in Mr Stewart's view, be perfectly logical.
Slashing Scotland's block grant from the Exchequer ''might result in a climate of opinion in which the advantages to Scotland of a return to the Union became self-evident'', and abolition of Labour-introduced Scottish devolution by a subsequent Conservative and Unionist Government would be feasible and simple.
He has no truck with the idea of his party trying to improve on the devolution scheme. ''Conservatives would be trying to make the unworkable work,'' he writes. ''That leaves the apparently unthinkable. A swift move from devolution to separation might occur in any event, even during the next Parliament.''
For Conservatives, the break-up of the Union would be ''an appalling wrench'' because of history, traditions, and emotions but, in an analysis which will shock some of his party members, he proceeds to think the unthinkable and even sees possible advantages.
''What an irony it would be if a Unionist party had to face the irreparable breakdown of the Union following devolution and had to conclude that the separation of Scotland from the remainder of the UK was the only sensible policy.
''Curiously enough, in the long term, the Conservatives both north and south of the Border would, in purely partisan terms, almost certainly benefit from such a move.''
Scots, he believes, are more collectivist than the English but not fundamentally left wing. ''The Tories, after the trauma of a complete breakdown of the Union, would be able to gain the natural centre-right vote.
''There is no reason to believe free-market ideas would not prosper in the land of Adam Smith. Is such a constitutional and political catalyst desirable? Of course not. But such an outcome would be entirely the Labour Party's own fault.''
A longstanding critic of aspects of the European Union, particularly the ''appalling'' Common Agricultural Policy, he argues for a larger, wider Europe rather than a deeper Europe.
As a noted Euro-sceptic, he will surprise some by admitting that in the future, if the circumstances were right, he could support a single currency, provided the people are given their say in a referendum.
Mr Stewart said he would back the Government if it announced plans to withdraw from the Common Fisheries Policy, and revealed that his disagreement with the decision to withdraw the whip from the Euro-rebels went as far as offering them public support, although he was a Scottish Office Minister. He particularly admired the qualities and consistency of Sir Teddy Taylor: ''At the time, I gave Teddy a note to say that if he needed a Government Minister to speak to his constituency party, just to give me a ring.
Return to home page