Commission on Scottish Devolution

Commission on Scottish Devolution
none known · Public domain · source
Name	Commission on Scottish Devolution
Formed	2007
Dissolved	2009
Jurisdiction	Scotland
Headquarters	Edinburgh
Chair	Sir Kenneth Calman
Type	Independent commission

Commission on Scottish Devolution The Commission on Scottish Devolution was an independent inquiry established to review the scope of Scottish devolution following the 2007 Scottish Parliament election. It examined the constitutional settlement created by the Scotland Act 1998 in the context of changing political dynamics involving the Labour Party (UK), Conservative Party (UK), Liberal Democrats (UK), Scottish National Party, and civic organisations across Edinburgh, Glasgow, and other Scottish constituencies. The commission reported with recommendations intended to influence legislation debated in the UK Parliament and the Scottish Parliament.

Background and establishment

The commission was created amid competing positions from leaders including Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, Alex Salmond, Nicholas Clegg, and Jack McConnell after the 2007 election that produced a minority Scottish National Party administration. Its establishment reflected pressures from devolution debates connected to the Scotland Act 1998, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Calman Commission (1999) legacy, and wider constitutional discussions following the Good Friday Agreement and the constitutional revisions in the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. The decision to form the commission involved cross-party agreements involving the UK Treasury, the Department for Constitutional Affairs, and the Scottish Executive apparatus then led from Holyrood.

Membership and mandate

Chaired by Sir Kenneth Calman—a figure whose career spanned posts including roles at University of Glasgow and University of Durham—the commission included representatives from academia such as Professor Sir Neil MacCormick and figures from civic life like Mary Mulligan and Lord Smith of Kelvin. The mandate, set out by ministers including Alistair Darling and Jack McConnell, required examination of fiscal powers, legislative competence, and intergovernmental relations involving institutions such as the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, the Scottish Court Service, and the National Records of Scotland. It was tasked to advise on matters intersecting with statutes such as the Scotland Act 1998 and potential revisions touching on reserved matters in the UK Parliament.

Evidence gathering and consultations

The commission conducted oral evidence sessions drawing witnesses from political parties including the Green Party (Scotland), UK Independence Party, and the British Labour movement, as well as legal experts connected to the Faculty of Advocates, unions like the Trades Union Congress, and business groups such as the Confederation of British Industry. It visited civic venues in Aberdeen, Dundee, Inverness, and Stirling and consulted with cultural organisations including representatives from the National Theatre of Scotland and the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Submissions referenced comparative examples from the Government of Wales Act 1998, the Northern Ireland Act 1998, federal systems exemplified by Germany and Canada, and constitutional scholarship from institutions like Oxford University and Cambridge University.

Recommendations and report

Published as the Calman Report, the commission’s final document recommended adjustments including enhanced fiscal powers resembling elements from the Barnett formula reform debates and measures addressing the block grant amid proposals comparable to fiscal frameworks seen in Canada and Spain. It proposed changes to the legislative consent mechanisms involving interactions with the House of Commons, the House of Lords, and guidance relevant to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom’s jurisdiction over devolved matters. The report recommended clarity on reserved versus devolved competence, drawing on jurisprudence from cases such as those adjudicated by the UK Supreme Court and precedent from the European Court of Human Rights. It also set out proposals for intergovernmental machinery similar to inter-ministerial forums used in Belgium and Australia.

Political reactions and implementation

Responses spanned the political spectrum: the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party and the Liberal Democrats (UK) endorsed parts of the recommendations, while the Scottish National Party and advocates linked to Yes Scotland critiqued them as insufficient compared with calls for full independence following arguments associated with Alex Salmond and campaign rhetoric from the 2014 referendum period. Implementation required legislation debated in the Westminster Parliament and enacted via subsequent statutory instruments influenced by ministers like David Cameron and Gordon Brown at national levels. The report prompted amendments to fiscal arrangements, legislative competence clarifications, and the establishment of intergovernmental processes involving the Joint Ministerial Committee.

Legacy and impact on Scottish devolution

The commission’s legacy persisted through legislative adjustments that influenced the later Scotland Act 2012 and the broader statutory architecture preceding the Scotland Act 2016. Its recommendations shaped fiscal frameworks used by the Scottish Government and informed debates during the 2014 Scottish independence referendum and subsequent constitutional realignments. Academic analysis from institutions like the Institute for Government, the Hansard Society, and the Constitution Unit at University College London assessed the commission’s influence on intergovernmental relations, comparative constitutionalism, and the evolution of devolution settlement debates involving entities such as the European Union prior to the Brexit referendum. The commission remains a reference point in discussions about asymmetric devolution across the United Kingdom and comparative federal systems.

Category:Politics of Scotland Category:Devolution in the United Kingdom