National Conversation

TheNational Conversationwas the name given to theScottish Government'spublic consultationexercise regarding possible future changes in the power of thedevolvedScottish Parliamentand the possibility ofScottish independence,a policy objective of theScottish National Party,who at the time were theminority governmentwith power over devolved affairs inScotland,as theScottish Government.It culminated in a multi-option white paper for a proposedReferendum (Scotland) Bill, 2010.

Scottish First MinisterAlex Salmondand Deputy First MinisterNicola Sturgeonat the launch of the National Conversation, 14 August 2007

Alex Salmond during a speech at the National Conversation

Process

The National Conversation was launched on 14 August 2007 byAlex Salmond,theFirst Minister of Scotland.It consisted of a 59-pagewhite paper,titledChoosing Scotland's Future,and awebsite.The white paper included a draftbillfor areferendumto allow for negotiations with theUK Governmenton Scottish independence. The website encourages comments to be made on the white paper. Comments are encouraged from members of the public, rather than justinterest groups.

As a culmination to the National Conversation, awhite paperfor the proposedReferendum (Scotland) Bill, 2010was published onSt. Andrew's Dayon 30 November 2009.The 176 page paper was titled, "Your Scotland, Your Voice".The paper detailed four possible scenarios for Scotland's future, with the text of the Bill and Referendum to be revealed later.The scenarios were: No Change, Devolution per the Calman Review, Full Devolution, and Full Independence.

Response

On 6 December 2007, theScottish Parliamentvoted to create aCommission on Scottish Devolution,chaired by SirKenneth Calman,and with the remit:

To review the provisions of the Scotland Act 1998 in the light of experience and to recommend any changes to the present constitutional arrangements that would enable the Scottish Parliament to serve the people of Scotland better, improve the financial accountability of the Scottish Parliament, and continue to secure the position of Scotland within the United Kingdom.

The Commission was supported by the three mainpro-Unionpolitical parties in Scotland:Labour,ConservativesandLiberal Democrats.Wendy Alexander, at the time leader of the Labour party in the Scottish Parliament, proposed the motion, rejecting the National Conversation and an amendment proposed by theScottish National Partycalling for support for the National Conversation was defeated, Ms Alexander associating it with moves towardsScottish independenceand making the following response:

The SNP amendment predictably calls for us to participate in the National Conversation, but how can the SNP possibly claim to be leading a conversation when it has already decided what the only acceptable outcome will be? Worst of all, it has no parliamentary mandate whatsoever for the conversation. How can the SNP possibly justify the use of taxpayers' money on something that is little more than propaganda?

Notably the remit of the Commission on Scottish Devolution precludes the consideration of Scottish independence.

The rejection of the National Conversation by the Scottish Parliament has led to criticisms as to its legitimacy.Concerns have also been raised by

Website controversy

On 24 April 2008,Lord Foulkes,a LabourMember of the Scottish Parliament,claimed that the National Conversation had been met with "complete indifference" by the people of Scotland, quoting website visiting figures. He further claimed that the website had become a meeting place for SNP activists, noting also that although 41 comments had been removed from the site, "there are stillanti-Englishremarks bordering onracism."

Influence

The initiative influenced theParti Québécoisand, in March 2008, shortly before the Parti Québécois National Council, leaderPauline Maroispresented the party's plan to propose aconversation nationaleto Quebecers as part of Marois' renewal of the party's approach on independence andsocial democracy.In this case, however, the conversation is to be solely on independence, instead of three options. The expression was met with less enthusiasm inQuebecand arose cynicism in the press and objection with someparty hardliners.Shortly after, the Parti Québécois replaced the term withdébat sur la souveraineté( "debate onsovereignty").

See also

• Choosing Scotland's Future
• Independence referendum
• Public consultation
• Scottish referendum bill 2010

External links

• The National Conversation website