2007 - 2020

Enlisting Government to the Common Weal

the-scottish-parliamentThis is the first of a series relating to the Common Weal project being developed by the Jimmy Reid Foundation, see more here. 

This contribution to the set of articles on the Jimmy Reid Foundation theme of the Common Weal deals with the economy. In particular, with the importance of getting the Scottish government to use its economic powers fully for the Common Weal. In developing this theme, we touch on a number of specific issues which we hope to examine in greater detail in further contributions.

Our starting point is a question which one sometimes hears raised: “Why has the Scottish Parliament not brought greater benefits, particularly on the economic front?”

In fact, viewed more widely than on the purely economic front, the Scottish Parliament has done a great deal. Examples include land access, free personal care, poinding reform, the smoking ban, and the council tax freeze. But less specifically, and probably more importantly, the Scottish Parliament has very successfully established itself as the legitimate forum for expressing the collective will of the Scottish people: it is also developing an international presence and dignity – a process which Henry McLeish must be given a good deal of credit for starting.

Despite these achievements, however, progress on the economic front has been limited. When we look at the reasons, this is, in fact, not surprising. The reasons fall into three broad groups. First, and very importantly, there are a large number of economic powers which have been retained by Westminster and have not been devolved. These include monetary policy: direct economic powers on matters like much of tax, employment, competition and regulation: energy: key parts of transport like airport taxes: indirect economic powers like welfare: and foreign affairs – in particular the ability to negotiate directly with the EU for Scottish interests like fishing and agriculture.

Secondly, there are certain powers which Scotland may appear to have, but where there are actually hidden constraints. One example is the implementation of the EU Procurement Directive: Whitehall Departments like Defence strongly indicated their unwillingness to operate under different procurement regulations in different parts of the UK. Another example is the fact that, although Scotland has its own tourism promotion body, Scotland’s ability to promote itself abroad is limited because parts of the relevant budget are still held in UK hands. And finally, although Scotland nominally has control of higher education, much of the funding for research and development, (which is ultimately of vital importance for business development), is actually administered at UK level by the Research Councils and the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

Nevertheless, there are significant areas where the Scottish government does have the power, and there are no obvious hidden constraints, but it has still not acted to the maximum benefit of the Scottish economy and people. Let us look at some examples before we consider why.

One example is public procurement, which constitutes an £11 billion per annum spend by Scottish public authorities. A report we produced for the Jimmy Reid Foundation in 2012 gave ample instances where very large contracts were let, often not to Scottish businesses: and where purchasing agreements were set up in a way which reduced Scottish businesses’ chances of competing.

Or take the case of the Private Finance Initiative (PFI), where, although the Scottish government has introduced some welcome modifications through its non-profit distributing model, the upshot is that very large contracts are still being let into an uncompetitive market, and inevitably often go to businesses outside Scotland.

Another example is how the Scottish government has implemented its policy on renewable energy. The way it has promoted onshore wind, in particular, threatens to be a high cost energy source which at the same time involves massive transfer payments to landowners. Struan Stevenson, the Tory MEP estimates that the Duke of Roxburgh will benefit to the tune of around £1.5 million per annum from wind farms on his land in the Lammermuirs.

Of course, land ownership in itself is a vital area for economic development, where great strides were made at the beginning of the Scottish Parliament but progress now appears to have stalled.

These examples suggest that other factors are at work, over and above the fact that the Scottish government lacks some key economic powers. To understand what is going on, two quotations are relevant – one from Adam Smith and one from Karl Marx. Smith said that government is “in reality instituted for the defence of the rich against the poor”. Marx said something similar, namely that the “executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.” (We are grateful to Ha-Joon Chang for highlighting these quotes in the Guardian.)

In fact, while these quotes are relevant, they do not quite encapsulate the position in Scotland. It would probably be a more accurate and up-to-date assessment of the Scottish position to say that the Scottish government has been unduly in thrall, not so much to the rich per se, but to certain power groups like the banks, big business, construction firms, and the big consultancy and accountancy firms. These groups, and their associates in academia and parts of the public sector, constitute an elite who have exercised undue influence over the Scottish government. This is partly for the reasons set out by Marx and Smith, but also partly because these groups have been peddling a neo-liberal doctrine and approach. This promises value for money in the short term, and that the free market will ultimately see us right: but ultimately it has proved destructive of longer term economic prospects, while enriching the groups who have promoted it.

A key requirement for the Scottish economy to achieve its economic potential is that the Scottish government breaks free from the influence of these groups, and starts to operate truly for the Common Weal of the Scottish people: in doing so, it will inevitably, and desirably, destroy the power base of these groups. This transformation is not going to be easy under any circumstances, but without independence it will be virtually impossible.

 

Comments (4)

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. annie says:

    “As scholars of public health and political economy, we have watched aghast as politicians endlessly debate debts and deficits with little regard for the human costs of their decisions. Over the past decade, we mined huge data sets from across the globe to understand how economic shocks — from the Great Depression to the end of the Soviet Union to the Asian financial crisis to the Great Recession — affect our health. What we’ve found is that people do not inevitably get sick or die because the economy has faltered. Fiscal policy, it turns out, can be a matter of life or death.”

    How Austerity Kills – an example of how ‘environment’ and not ‘biology’ determines the health of nations.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/opinion/how-austerity-kills.html?pagewanted=1

  2. Juteman says:

    Maybe you have to understand Mao and Sun Tzu to achieve your aim?
    The hoped for end result is not always obvious.

  3. Patrick S Hogg says:

    ‘Commonweal’ is a 15th century phrase for the common interests of the people at large, the public and like any phrase it can be used and abused. Jimmy Reid was a close friend of Dr Andrew Noble (academic) and it was Dr Noble in the Canongate Burns (2001 introduction) who pushed the notion of the Commonwealthman and its republican origins and the Commonweal as phrases we should still be using, rather than fractuous conflict based class ideology. But of course the ‘national interest’ for Mr Cameron and his landed elites is a different national interst for First Minister Salmond and so too will there be different meanings for ‘Commonweal’. It is though a better phrase and Jimmy reid was right to detect what Dr Noble was saying by bringing it back into political cultural use in the 21st century. In essence we need a Scottish economy that is ran for the benefit of the Scottish people, not an economy where it is ran for the benefit of big business and the Scottish workforce is just another region being trampled down to Third World wages depression to stay there exploited as the new wage slave ‘precariat’! Better Together means an ecoomy where where the wages of Third World exploitation will be meated out to you and your children if you are not one of the lucky people in a decent paid job. It is time we began to think more of the Commonweal because the people of Scotland are in it together and will be better together when we take our Independence and shape our own society.

  4. Jamie Robertson says:

    Great article. Does the author (or do interlocutors on this forum) see any sign the SNP is likely to break ties with the interests mentioned above that currently appear to hold all our politicians to ransom?

Help keep our journalism independent

We don’t take any advertising, we don’t hide behind a pay wall and we don’t keep harassing you for crowd-funding. We’re entirely dependent on our readers to support us.

Subscribe to regular bella in your inbox

Don’t miss a single article. Enter your email address on our subscribe page by clicking the button below. It is completely free and you can easily unsubscribe at any time.