Oral evidence: The future of devolution after the referendum, HC 700Monday 24 November 2014

Oral evidence, 24 November 2014.

Witnesses

Willie Rennie MSP, Leader, Scottish Liberal Democrats, and Lord Purvis of Tweed, Adviser to Willie Rennie, gave evidence.

Chair

Willie, welcome. It is very good to see you. I am sorry we missed you when we came up to Edinburgh.

Willie Rennie

I was in for an operation on my back.

Chair

Successful, I hope?

Willie Rennie

Yes. Well, I am alive, which as far as I am concerned is a positive thing.

Chair

Obviously a few things have happened since we saw you last in Edinburgh, which I am sure you will allude to in your remarks.

Willie Rennie

It was a very enjoyable discussion last time, I thought. I enjoyed it.

Chair

Your colleague is—?

Willie Rennie

I have Jeremy Purvis, who is Lord Purvis of Tweed, who advises me on constitutional matters.

Chair

Jeremy, you are very welcome. Willie, would you like to say a few words to start us off or do you want to jump straight into questions?

Willie Rennie

I think it is worth reminding ourselves about what we have been through, which was the biggest democratic experience of my life, and probably of the life of anybody who experienced it in Scotland. Everybody was talking about it, and we need to remember the sheer panic that existed among not just political leaders but the voters who up until that point had thought the United Kingdom was in the bank, that it was guaranteed, that it would definitely stay together, with that opinion poll. When people are thinking about constitutional change going forward, they need to remember the agony and the pain that they felt in those last 10 days, because often the forces of constitutional conservatism in the United Kingdom are very powerful and we come up with all sorts of excuses under the sun not to do things. Whether it is problems in Syria or problems with the economy or in Europe, these other things are obviously far more important to deal with than constitutional matters; “We can’t do more than one thing at once so let’s just focus on what really matters.” They come up with every possible excuse under the sun and I think we need to remember the pain that we felt in those last 10 days when we are considering these matters and use that as motivation so that we do not return to those days and the pain and agony that we felt.

Chair

We came within 400,000 votes of the Union dissolving less than nine weeks ago and sometimes I feel, particularly in this place, that we have lapsed back into our default position pretty damn quickly. I have a feeling we might have a bit more to do once Lord Smith and others make their contributions over the next week or so.

Willie Rennie

Absolutely.

Paul Flynn

Can you help us with understanding the choreography of the extraordinary event of the final week? We have been presented with a picture suggesting that the three Union parties were coming together slowly, majestically, into a few days before the election when they produced this wonderful embrace of unity called the vow. Is this how it happened?

Willie Rennie

I would not say majestically, but it certainly was gradually coming together. The significant difference with the vow and the commitment that the three Scottish party leaders gave the week before was that previously we were having a kind of a Unionist offer, in which each individual party would put its proposals in its manifesto and if it won power it would implement those proposals. It was a direct line from its commissions to implementing its legislation. What changed was that it was going to be a cross-party affair, including the SNP and now the Greens, and also there would be a consensus before the general election. That is what the significant change was in the last period. People say that is merely technical, but what it means now is that we have an inclusive process. It means we can get the sanction of the general election for that inclusive process. Therefore, being cross-party, I believe it will be much more sustainable.

Paul Flynn

Was it not the 52% support for independence in the poll that had the galvanic effect?

Willie Rennie

Yes, certainly, there was a galvanising effect.

Paul Flynn

The picture we see now is of a great change that is planned at a very fast pace. Is it not the experience that those laws that are conceived in fear and panic and legislated for in haste are always mistakes?

Willie Rennie

I think we know more about the constitution of our country than anybody would really want to know now. We have been debating this for three years. We know the ins and outs of how the whole system works. Therefore, I think we need to use the energy created by the referendum to defeat the forces of conservatism that inevitably will rise again and stop any substantial change. We have to run with it just now. We know more than anybody would really want to know about their constitution and I think we will make very sound decisions.

Paul Flynn

I should say that Welsh MPs, I among them, have had our mouths bandaged for the last year on this subject. This is someone who in 1953 marched through Cardiff demanding independence for Wales, a long time ago, under a Labour party banner. But we have kept out of it, I think in the belief that any intervention from outside would be self-defeating. Assuming Lord Smith’s commission reports by 30 November, do you think the timetable is a feasible one?

Willie Rennie

Yes, absolutely. If you give people three years, they will take three years. If you give them two months, they will take two months. I think there is plenty of time. We know an awful lot about our country and I think we are best placed to make good decisions. Yes, absolutely, plenty enough time.

Paul Flynn

What change has taken place in the membership of your party since the referendum?

Willie Rennie

I do not have exact numbers but it is not quite 60,000, I think.

Paul Flynn

Has it increased by a substantial percentage?

Willie Rennie

Yes, it has gone up. It is not substantial but it has gone up.

Paul Flynn

It is puzzling for those who are outside to see that the victors in the campaign are downcast and that the losers are triumphant. Why is this?

Willie Rennie

Yes. It is difficult to understand exactly, but the big success of the yes campaign was because they had a mass grassroots organisation. That kind of energy was going to have to be channelled somewhere after the referendum. Many joined the Greens. Many more joined the SNP. We had a meeting the other night for Better Together to thank people and we asked the audience, mostly who were not party political, how many had joined political parties and not one person put up their hand. I think it is their way of expression of channelling their energy that was created during the referendum, whereas our people tend to be much more reserved in their approach.

Paul Flynn

After the rollercoaster of support falling away, supposedly, and increased support throughout the final days and weeks, a snapshot was taken on a certain day and a decision was made. How do you think you can gauge the public support as these changes are introduced?

Willie Rennie

I think there were 27,000 submissions to the Smith process. There have been quite a lot of debates. There have been evidence sessions taken. I think there is going to have to be a role for Government and the political parties to engage on a much longer-term basis as these plans are implemented. I do not know, Jeremy, whether you want to add to that point.

Lord Purvis of Tweed

From our party’s submission, which is calling for a quite radical increase in the powers of the Scottish Parliament, it will have some significant consequences there for civil Scotland. Individual groups, community groups that will be affected by it will have to be part of the ongoing process. As Willie said, there will be a role for Government there and there will be a continuing role for political parties. We very much are wanting this process not to be an end in itself for engaging people in the governance of Scotland and I think that the prospects of our submission for the Smith commission is that that is one of our understandings. The second element of it is for much more focus on taking power down from Holyrood, which I had the privilege of serving for two terms, into communities, which will require that level of engagement to go forward as well.

Paul Flynn

How do you intend to gauge the reaction from the rest of the United Kingdom? We have seen since the referendum that the monstrous forces of EVEL have raised their ugly heads. There is a new mood in politics that is resentful of devolution outside of England itself and England is there, rampant, red in tooth and claw, threatening, resentful, belligerent. How are you going to deal with this?

Willie Rennie

It depends whether you regard demands for change as monstrous. I actually think demands for change are constructive.

Paul Flynn

I think the nationalist beast that we have aroused from its lair is monstrous. It has been sleeping there for a long time.

Willie Rennie

I think the demand for local, flexible decision making is a good thing. If it is just unleashing nationalism then obviously it is a bad thing, but it is up to us to make sure that rather than resist change, which is often the desire in these circumstances, we embrace it and make it a positive change.

Paul Flynn

The Prime Minister—I am sure you follow his every word—said on 19 September that arrangements for England to be able to vote separately on issues of tax, spending and welfare devolved to the Scottish Parliament, “must take place in tandem with, and at the same pace”—which is useful if you are on a tandem—“as the settlement for Scotland”. If there is no agreement in Westminster about how to handle the English question, and it is unlikely there will be, what are the consequences for Scotland? We will no longer be moving in tandem; you will have a wheel forward and the English wheel will be yards behind. It is a frightening prospect.

Willie Rennie

I think he has clarified since by saying that one is not contingent on the other.

Paul Flynn

Did he say that?

Willie Rennie

Yes.

Paul Flynn

Okay, fine. He spoke the other day.

Willie Rennie

I thought you followed his every word.

Paul Flynn

He speaks frequently. Do you have a view on how the House of Commons should handle legislation that does not affect Scotland?

Willie Rennie

I think this is an example of where, rather than resisting the demand for change at Westminster, we perhaps should embrace it. Every form of devolution that we have had in the United Kingdom has involved an element of proportional representation. Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland are all elected by proportional representation. If we are going to have similar change in the House of Commons by having some form of sub-Parliament decision, grand committee or whatever it is that McKay proposed, then that should be based on proportional representation as well. You will not be surprised to see that I argue for that but, rather than resisting any change, perhaps the Labour party and others should be embracing that form of change and accepting the proposals.

Paul Flynn

You might be surprised to know that I produced a new six points for Chartism in the year 2000 that included proportional representation, fair votes and votes for people at 16, so the day is full of surprises.

Willie Rennie

I do follow your every word, so I did.

Paul Flynn

You did? Thank you.

Robert Neill

It is good to see you, Willie. What will be the consequences of further devolution to Scotland? What implications do you think that should have for powers of Westminster being devolved to the rest of the UK? Looking at it from the English point of view, as you probably heard one of us saying to Ruth earlier on, if there is devolution to Scotland—leaving aside tandem or otherwise—is there an inevitable knock-on effect on what some might say is one of the most centralised states, south of the border, within western Europe?

Willie Rennie

I used to live in Cornwall. There was great debate at that time about a Cornish assembly, and there still is. They never regarded themselves as being part of England and resented Devon as much as they did London. I understand that the make-up of England is not in bite-sized chunks, so having a symmetrical form of devolution might be quite a challenging thing to do. I accept that. I think, therefore, an incremental approach to that, devolution on demand, is perhaps the way to approach it rather than on a top-down system imposed from here. When people see what you can do by making different decisions in Scotland and Wales, they should want the same for themselves as well. That could create quite an untidy constitutional settlement for the UK, but as long as it meets needs at a local level, I do not think it matters too much. I think it needs to be driven from the bottom. If people can demand it and a certain threshold is met, then powers can be devolved. It does not have to be the same powers in every way. City Deals might be the embryonic form of that being developed. I think that kind of thing should be encouraged where it is desired, rather than in a neat and tidy—I know politicians like drawing lines on maps to make it all very tidy, but people tend not to be that interested in lines on maps.

Robert Neill

There is some evidence in places like Spain and other places in western Europe that asymmetrical devolution can work in practice, even if it looks fiddly on the map. With logic, therefore, where the demand is, that may involve different levels of fiscal devolution.

Willie Rennie

Exactly. I think fiscal devolution is part of this. One of the things we have discovered in Scotland is that having the power to have the budget without the ability to raise the money changes the nature of the political debate. We have just introduced the land and buildings transaction tax in Scotland to replace stamp duty. It is a tiny little tax but the impact it had on the debate was quite significant because you were no longer just thinking about how you are going to spend the money but also thinking about the people who are paying it. It was fascinating how, in just a small way, it changed. I think it will help mature the Parliament if that goes further.

Robert Neill

That is very interesting and it leads me on quite neatly to the next question. What sort of revenue-raising and expenditure powers do you believe the Scottish Parliament should have in this first tranche and then—and some of it you have largely covered—any other knock-ons and so on? Should we move away from block grant funding at some point? We have the commitment in Barnett as it states, but there is an argument for Scotland—the same one as many English local authorities make to me—that essentially a block grant form of funding is not in the long term a very satisfactory means of doing it.

Willie Rennie

I think you want the balance between local decision making, local power and local accountability, because you have spending as well as raising money but you also want the equalisation. One of the central parts of the UK is pooling and sharing of resources, so you want that stability. You do not want full fiscal autonomy; you do not want each region and country of the United Kingdom to raise all the money that taxpayers contribute. My belief is that you want to raise the majority of the money that they spend. That is the principle. If you raise the majority of the money you spend, you are much more accountable and much more responsible. I would never go to full fiscal autonomy; I would go to raising the majority of the money we spend. That would be where I think parts of England eventually should move towards as well, but that might be some time down the path.

Robert Neill

I think the key point you are making is that the majority shifts from where we are at the moment but there will always be something.

Willie Rennie

The majority of them. There will always be a block grant. That will always be there because that is, in part, the United Kingdom. That is the stability and the security and the safety that it brings, but you also want to have accountability and responsibility and that is what you get raising the majority of the money you spend.

Robert Neill

From your experience in Scotland and elsewhere, would you expect that could shift the same way within the other individual parts of the UK?

Willie Rennie

Yes. I think it is regrettable that local government, particularly in Scotland, has had a reducing share of its spending raised by itself. You could attract even more people to local government if there was that greater fiscal responsibility.

Robert Neill

When I was an English Minister, one thing that surprised me a little was that you had almost a devolved body centralism towards local government, that there was a tendency for local government in a devolved Scotland world to be the losers, with their powers sucked into the assembly or to the Parliament. Is that your experience?

Willie Rennie

Jeremy was the finance spokesman for us in the Scottish Parliament so he has direct experience with that.

Lord Purvis of Tweed

My reflection as to whether a Scottish model can be transferred is that it is harder to transfer that approach. Over the last year that I have been in the other place, I have established with a Labour peer, Lord Foulkes, an all-party parliamentary group on UK reform, decentralisation and devolution. I know, Chairman, you have attended one of the meetings. One of the observations on Scotland is that it is quite a straightforward area to see as both a distinct legal entity and an economic entity as a market. It is harder to identify the equivalent areas within England that are quite definable economic areas. What has been really interesting is the emergence of the combined authorities because it seems, for the first time in a very long time, that there are identifiable areas where the public understand that there are both of these markets. I think that does raise the potential of there being greater fiscal devolution. Our experience as Liberal Democrats in the Scottish Parliament was that one of the things that did not happen in 1999 was the second element, the balance sheet element, the financial accountability. You can establish a legislature, or in England you could propose a regional assembly, but as the public operator with the accountability for the politicians elected to that, the finance has to be an element of it. The observations that we have had on the situation for England is an appeal perhaps to be proactive in looking through the principles of how you would do any of the further devolution, the appropriate taxes, and how that would interact with grants from central Government. To some extent, we have been doing it the other way around. I think we will be close to getting to a conclusion on that in the Smith process for the long term, but you have an opportunity within England, quite conversely perhaps, to start on this basis of having that fiscal balance at the outset.

Chair

Willie, just let me be clear: the Liberal Democrat position in the evidence you put into Smith was for income tax assignment in part. Are you now saying—

Willie Rennie

No, we said all. We said all of the income tax.

Chair

Forgive me. You are committed to full income tax assignment to Scotland?

Willie Rennie

Yes, with some allowances and reliefs remaining here.

Mr Turner

Can you tell me what is meant by federal structure, and is it different from what Conservatives probably think of devolution? I have no idea what the Labour party mean.

Willie Rennie

What we mean by federal structure is the institutions themselves being created on a decentralised model with different powers at different levels, but also the permanent nature of it: it is embedded; it is entrenched; one is not a creature of the other. That is why we make a differentiation between devolution and federalism. With federalism, we say that the Scottish Parliament needs to be a permanent institution. In reality, it is never going to be abolished—there would be an outcry if it was—but the fact that it could changes the balance of the relationship. It is not treated necessarily as a partner or anywhere near an equal partner in the United Kingdom; it is treated as a creature, the fact that Westminster can still legislate on anything that the Scottish Parliament does in any area. There is a convention with Sewel that there is an agreement sought but that is just a convention. There is the potential, in a crisis, for Westminster just to impose its will. The theoretical possibility of that existing changes the nature and balance of the relationship, and that is why we want that permanency to be created. That is a central part of how we would see federalism develop.

Mr Turner

How would the federal structure or the devolution—for a moment assuming they mean the same, and you could perhaps explain why they do not—work where England is a much larger country and therefore out of balance with the other nations?

Willie Rennie

There is an issue about the dominance of England within any potential federal structure. It is not for me as a Scot to dictate how England would cope with devolution within it but you could have regional institutions, assemblies, whatever, within England that would give more parity throughout the United Kingdom. Again, that is for England to determine. We debate all sorts of things in the Scottish Parliament, including Israel and Palestine and all sorts of other things; we do not limit our discussions to devolved issues. You could see the circumstance where, if maybe Palestine and Israel was debated in an English Parliament, that would have a massive impact on the federal parliament if a conclusion was reached in that institution. That is just one example of why there needs to be that dispersed power throughout the United Kingdom so that they are all treated as equal institutions and one does not dominate within the larger entity, and that is what we would be in favour of. We know the problems that exist; regions within England are not necessarily commonly agreed. We understand the issue. That is why it is not for us to impose but for regions to demand and for that to evolve over time. I am not saying there is going to be an equally tidy solution from the very beginning but it is something that we should strive towards. Does that make sense? Hopefully.

Chair

Andrew, may I interrupt you? There may be a vote and, if there is, I will suspend the Committee when the bell rings so that those colleagues who wish to vote on this matter can.

Mr Turner

Does a federal system mean more than devolution means for further transfer to local authorities?

Willie Rennie

Does it mean more than devolution means for further transfers to local authorities? Do you want to have a crack at this?

Lord Purvis of Tweed

In the absence of a written constitution, that would then codify what the role within that constitution would be for the local authorities, I do not think that it would make a difference. The only aspect would be if local authorities in Scotland or in Wales have an interaction with federal bodies; because they are agents of those bodies, it may well have an interaction with that, but not considerably.

Mr Turner

Is the balance of power between central and local government in Scotland fair? How should it be amended to make it fairer if you think it is failing at the moment?

Willie Rennie

How do we change the relationship between central and local government in Scotland?

Mr Turner

Yes.

Willie Rennie

That is something that is hotly debated in Scotland. There is great anxiety that a nationalist Government is hoovering into the centre. We would like the same kind of principles that we are applying to the Smith process, to the vow—that we should raise the majority of the money we spend and there should be a certain entrenchment and support—also to apply to local government, and that they should be given a greater status and responsibility because with that comes greater accountability. We think the same principles should apply. In the absence of a written constitution, it is quite difficult to entrench those, but our belief is that if it is good enough for Holyrood it should be good enough for local government.

Mr Turner

If we had EVEL in England—recognising our differences about whether we have proportional representation or not—is there anything other than that that you would find unwholesome or horrible?

Willie Rennie

I think we need to make sure that this is English people voting on English issues rather than the way that the current electoral system works, meaning that one party has the dominance and therefore it is effectively Conservative votes for English issues. We need to make sure we have a proper devolutionary system. That, to me, is the centre of this. Unless we can resolve that, it is difficult to see how you can get far-reaching change that will meet the needs and aspirations of people. I think they will be deeply disappointed if the only response in Westminster is to have EVEL based on first past the post. If that is the limit of the change, I think people will think, “Westminster has not got the message.” There needs to be that devolution on demand and there needs to be relinquishing of power, financial power, and not just the Scottish stuff; Wales has demands for change and I am sure Northern Ireland would like something similar. That all needs to happen, rather than just timid, partisan EVEL.

Mr Turner

I think the question is, is it timid or does it have the confidence of happening? Then there would be what I call devolution at the same time further than England, and that seems to me to be inevitable.

Willie Rennie

I think it is timid—tremendously timid. If this is it, if this is all that Westminster thinks needs to change, then Westminster has not got the message. People think it is way out of touch already and I think they will think so even more. People were deeply disappointed when the Prime Minister stood on the steps of Downing Street the very next day, within hours of the result, and all he could say, apart from welcoming the result, was, “English votes for English laws”. That was deeply depressing in Scotland.

Mr Turner

Was that because the Prime Minister spent a little time thinking of England or was it because you would have asked him to say more about England?

Willie Rennie

I think he probably should have just reflected more about how 45% is a significant number and how we get the dissatisfaction that exists in Scotland so we have understood that it is more than just this limited area.

Mr Turner

But you will understand that we, meaning English people, do have some reference more to what is going to go on in England than Scotland?

Lord Purvis of Tweed

I guess it is a reflection that, as far as I am aware, there has been nothing stopping any Government of the United Kingdom decentralising England. There has been no Scottish veto on decentralisation or devolution within England. There has been absolutely no Scottish veto on enhancing the power either of English local authorities or of regional combined authorities. There has been absolutely nothing stopping any Administration from reforming the Westminster institutions themselves, including, for example, reforming the Chamber that I am a member of to make it much more reflective of the nations in the UK and the regions of England. If this is now on the agenda for English reform, that is absolutely fantastic, but it is not necessarily the case that this should be seen as some form of necessary response to what has been happening in Scotland. It should actually have been on the agenda already. If you look at it purely in isolation as an English response, you would be wanting to look at situations where you may well perceive that there are English laws but in fact they do have consequences across the United Kingdom. Our submission to the Smith commission process was arguing for much greater partnership working, recognising that there are UK-wide structures that will continue to be UK-wide structures that have impact on Wales and Scotland—whether it is in broadcasting, energy, social security and so on—where, in some form of immediate response, England would simply categorise everybody and every area that is not currently the remit of the Scottish Parliament as somehow English and Welsh. That is the problem when you simply want to respond in the way of now having to talk about EVEL in the absence of a federal relationship between the nations, recognising that there are some bodies that do have to have a response across the United Kingdom. That is where you do still get into difficulty, if you think that a UK Minister is simply an English Minister. That is not the case.

Mr Turner

I think I would argue with that but, yes, okay.

Chair

I asked the previous witness, Ruth, the same question, which is: if you have devolution in England, does that not rob the separatists of their greatest ally, which is an over-centralised Whitehall-Westminster? Doesn’t that help those who believe in devolution in Scotland as opposed to those who believe in separation?

Willie Rennie

I think that is right, although it would not be my primary motivation just to stop the separatists. An awful lot of people voted for the separatists in the referendum, so we have to win those hearts and minds back. I think the dominance of Westminster, the concentration of power here, has the effect in Scotland that no matter what we say, no matter what we do, somebody else will decide. Therefore, that kind of much more decentralised, devolved set-up would assist in creating a feeling that our voice is heard.

Chair

But if you have devolved power throughout the whole of the United Kingdom in appropriate forms for each of the nations, who do you want to separate from? There is a strong sentiment, which I feel sometimes in my own region and my own city, that moving away from being told what to do by Whitehall is an unalloyed good thing.

Willie Rennie

Yes.

Lord Purvis of Tweed

Mr Chairman, I do not wish to be discourteous to the Committee but there is a Division in our end rather than your end, so if you would forgive me—

Chair

I think that is a first for us, but you are very welcome.

Lord Purvis of Tweed

Exactly. It is almost federal, isn’t it?

Tracey Crouch

Do you think there is a case for a constitutional convention to discuss and determine the future relationship between the component parts of the UK?

Willie Rennie

Yes, I do.

Tracey Crouch

What sort of issues do you think it should consider? Do you think it should also perhaps consider broader constitutional change?

Willie Rennie

A written constitution, House of Lords reform, devolution on demand as we would describe it, the powers for the existing devolved Administrations, perhaps a federal structure—all these matters should be discussed.

Tracey Crouch

Have you been dining with the Chairman? It is just that this is music to his ears, I am sure.

Willie Rennie

There is a big “if” here. The issue is: how long do you take to discuss this? It comes back to my initial point. Remembering the pain of almost losing the United Kingdom should be the motivational factor, and the longer we take to consider these matters, the less that pain will be remembered. Therefore, I would urge a relatively swift process—not hasty but a swift process, perhaps two years—to consider that much wider package of reforms. I think also there should not be an all-or-nothing approach. There can be an incremental approach too. That is why we support devolution on demand so that if people want it they can get it, but the facility is created for that to be called upon. I fear that an “if we do not get everything, we will do nothing” approach sometimes stops good change from happening. That is why I would support that. Equally, sometimes people get the things they want and then just stop with the rest of it. So there is a balance to be struck there but I would urge a relatively swift process over a two-year period, and all those things that the Chairman supports, I am sure I am in full support of as well.

Tracey Crouch

Would you put the powers of the Scottish Parliament in that constitution as well, to make them more permanent than the Scotland Acts?

Willie Rennie

I think there is no harm in looking at the Scottish Parliament as part of a learning process as well for the rest of the United Kingdom. We have a well-trodden process in Scotland for determining our own powers through the constitutional convention, Calman, our various reports in other parties, Steel, Campbell. We have a well-trodden process in Scotland for organically developing our powers. I hope, with the publication of Smith later on this week, we will make another big step forward. I would not say that it should be top-down. The convention should impose a structure on Scotland, but it should be part of the discussion, perhaps to aid other parts of the country to learn from our experience.

Tracey Crouch

One thing that did capture and engage with the voting public was the independence referendum with the extremely high turnout. What lessons do you think we should draw from the level of voter engagement in the referendum?

Willie Rennie

When it really counts, people will come out. It really mattered from both sides.

Tracey Crouch

Does a general election not count then, do you not think?

Willie Rennie

I think some people think it does not matter no matter what they vote. I am sure you have heard it on the doorstep. It was clear that there would be an effect one way or the other with this and people clearly understood. It was one of those iconic debates as well, one of these issues that you have discussed throughout your life, and it is the first time we have ever had an independence referendum in Scotland. We decided to be part of the United Kingdom, with a small number of people making that decision, and it is the first time we have actually decided to stay. That is quite a monumental occasion. It is the first time in 300 years that we have had an opportunity to express that view. It was quite iconic and, to the credit of the yes campaign, they managed to develop a very strong grassroots organisation. They managed to get every single protest group under the sun under one umbrella and that was quite impressive by itself. There were a number of different factors together and so there are lots of things to learn, and it is quite inspiring with it. There was a sinister side too. People were silenced from expressing difference and objection. Posters would go up in fields and within hours they were down, and repeatedly that was happening throughout the country. That created, along with many other things, a kind of silencing of the majority. Thankfully they did speak out in the end. But generally, for a lot of people it was quite an uplifting experience.

Tracey Crouch

You were here when Ruth was talking about youth engagement and voters at 16. Do you agree with her comments about how she had personally changed her mind on 16 and 17 year-olds voting? You were not here when I was asking earlier about Scottish people living in England being able to vote in the referendum. Do you think the turnout might have been even higher if they had been given that opportunity? I discovered I have a lot of Scottish people living in leafy Chatham and Aylesford and many people feel very upset that they did not get a voice in the future of their country. Is that one lesson that could be learnt for the future?

Willie Rennie

I have not changed my mind on votes at 16. I have always supported votes at 16. I thought it was a great innovation to have. I think the way that they engaged in the debate was part of the experience that we all had and they dealt with it in a very mature manner. The 16 year-olds and 17 year-olds had very few axes to grind, and therefore they went into this debate much more open-minded. We had some of the best debates when we went into schools. I thought that was a great innovation. It is something that Westminster could learn from and it could be part of that constitutional convention. In fact, why wait for the constitutional convention? We could just get on with it now. They have shown that they can act maturely and deal with their democratic right, so we should just transfer that.

Tracey Crouch

I am sorry to interrupt. As you said, that was on an issue that many see as more important than a general election. In lowering the vote to 16 and 17 year-olds for a general election, do you think that same kind of logic, maturity and open-mindedness would—

Willie Rennie

If they are mature enough to be able to determine the future of their country that would last for another 300 years, then they are mature enough to decide a Parliament for five years. I think absolutely they should be given the right to vote. There is more of a practical issue about how you determine whether somebody has a right to vote. You can see there are rules about overseas voters. We do not have the same classification for people who have lived in Scotland at one point and now live in England; they are treated as English voters. Therefore, there is a real problem about how you manage the system. How long ago do you have to have lived in Scotland? What is the period of time before you qualify for such a vote? I think there are issues about how you manage that and that is why, to provide clarity and certainty, you are better to have the arrangements that we had for the Scottish Parliament elections. Some people felt aggrieved that people from Poland who had only lived there for a short period of time did have a vote and those who had left Scotland only three months earlier did not have a vote. I am not sure where you draw the line, how far you go. You could make arrangements, you could apply another special status for such referenda. I think the practicalities are quite difficult to manage. I am not saying it is impossible but we thought—because there were allegations back in 1979 when we had the referendum about the threshold that was set and about the system being rigged—that we needed to have beyond doubt that this was going to be legal, fair and decisive. Adopting the franchise for the Scottish Parliament elections was the best way of achieving that—a tried and tested franchise. To vary that to include quite a difficult-to-determine group of people who live in England was perhaps going to jeopardise that wider objective.

Tracey Crouch

But we talk about voter engagement in the issue of the referendum and now we are talking about further devolution to Scotland. Many Scots who do not live in Scotland feel very disfranchised by this issue. They still care passionately about the future of their country and yet they happen not to live north of the border. How can they engage with the debate going forward?

Willie Rennie

If we are moving beyond the franchise, I accept the anxiety. How they can engage is to participate in the debate, and many people from England did do that. It was quite invigorating that I had lots of people, friends and relatives in Cornwall phoning up and asking, “How is it going?” and expressing a view that we should stay. That was expressed through the media as well. I think that was probably the best way for them to influence the process and to have a say in what was happening. They certainly can through the general election because we should have, hopefully, a united offer across all the parties and they can debate that as part of the general election next year. I do not know if that satisfactorily answers your question. I accept it is a really difficult one because people felt very aggrieved by it. [Interruption.]

Chair

What brilliant timing, Willie. That was the last question. The Division bell is ringing. I am sorry Mark has arrived and not had the opportunity to ask any questions but, rather than adjourn the Committee, I will complete the day’s evidence. Thank you, Willie, for coming in today.

Willie Rennie

You are welcome. Thank you very much for inviting me.

Chair

It is always a great pleasure to see you. Thank you. Thank you, colleagues. You do not need to come back. The future of devolution after the referendum, HC 700