UNISONScotland www
This is our archive website that is no longer being updated.
For the new website please go to
Click here
Home News About us Join Us Contacts Help Resources Learning Links UNISON UK


Calman Commission on Scottish Devolution

The UNISON Scotland submission to
The Commission on Scottish Devolution
Chaired by Sir Kenneth Calman

August 2008


The Calman Commission on Scottish Devolution has called for evidence from a wide range of bodies across Scotland by 3 September 2008.

The Commission's remit is as follows:

"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."

As Scotland's largest public sector trade union representing over 160,000 members delivering public services, UNISON Scotland welcomes the opportunity to submit detailed evidence which develops the themes identified in our preliminary response on 23 June 2008.

This response follows the 9 question format set out by the Calman Commission.

Recall Constitutional Convention to build on success of devolution

UNISON Scotland believes that devolution has been proved a success in the ten years since the historic Scotland Act 1998. Devolution is a dynamic process and not just an event. The time is now right for a review of the powers of the Scottish Parliament to meet the developing aspirations of the Scottish people. We support the recall of a Scottish Constitutional Convention to represent all of the people of Scotland with the aim of achieving the greatest possible consensus among political parties and civic society on the way forward.

Principles underlying devolution

UNISON Scotland remains committed to the principle of devolution. We campaigned for and support a Scottish Parliament where policies for health, education, transport, environment and key aspects of economic development are formulated where they should be - in Scotland, by representatives elected in Scotland. We do not support federalism or independence. We believe Scotland is better off and stronger in Britain, worse off and weaker apart.

UNISON Scotland supports the Claim of Right adopted in March 1989 that acknowledges the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs.

The general principle at the time of devolution was that reserved matters should be limited to those matters necessary to maintain the integrity of the UK. Whilst this remains a factor it should not be only test. The key principle should be subsidiarity, the idea that matters should be handled by the smallest (or, the lowest) competent authority. This principle also applies to the Scottish Parliament in its dealings with local government because decisions should be taken as closely as possible to the citizen.

Powers should only be reserved to Westminster when:

  • Necessary because actions of the Scottish Parliament alone will not achieve the objectives of the action or;
  • The action brings added value over and above what could be achieved by the Scottish Parliament alone.

Success of devolution

1. In general, how successful have the new structures created by devolution been - both in terms of delivering effective government in devolved areas, and in providing effective parliamentary scrutiny and oversight?

UNISON Scotland believes that Scottish devolution has been a success within the terms of the settlement as enacted in 1998. It has delivered effective government and parliamentary scrutiny. Indeed its success has led to demand for further devolution and more powers for the Scottish Parliament.

2. Can you give examples of where devolution has produced results that better serve the people of Scotland than would have been likely or possible under pre-devolution arrangements?

  • Parliament itself - a more open, accessible, inclusive, responsive and democratically representative institution than Westminster
  • An invigorated political culture which has stimulated debate, discussion and action on Scottish issues, whether devolved or reserved
  • Distinctive Scottish policies, including: abolition of health trusts and development of a partnership model in NHS Scotland; free personal care for elderly; smoking ban; a more positive approach to migration and asylum, including the innovative Fresh Talent initiative


Suggestions for change

3. Are there any particular features of the 1998 Act that you think should be changed or reconsidered, on the basis of experience since 1999? [See Note A below].

UNISON Scotland supports increased fiscal autonomy for the Scottish Parliament with extra powers over taxation; and also the transfer of a number of reserved powers from Westminster to Holyrood. See notes A and B under Detailed issues below.


Reserved matters

4. Do you believe the people of Scotland would be better served if any matters currently reserved to Westminster were now devolved to the Scottish Parliament? [See Note B below].

UNISON Scotland supports the transfer of a number of reserved powers from Westminster to Holyrood. See note B under Detailed issues below


5. Do you believe the people of Scotland would be better served if any matters currently devolved to the Scottish Parliament were now reserved to Westminster?

No. Suggestions were made earlier this year that certain powers which it is argued relate to UK national security could be returned to Westminster. These were meant to include counter terrorism, contingency planning and also control of infectious diseases amongst animals like foot and mouth. However the Glasgow airport attack in June 2007 showed that counter terrorism and emergency planning worked well under the current setup. There is no evidence to suggest that there is any need to return such powers to Westminster.


6. Irrespective of which particular matters are reserved and which others are therefore devolved, do you support the reserved/devolved distinction as the best way to define the respective responsibilities of the UK Parliament and the Scottish Parliament? Would there be merit in an intermediate category, involving some form of shared or concurrent competence, with suitable checks and balances to avoid conflict?

In practice, sharing of competences involving negotiation and co-operation will happen anyway as there are many areas which overlap or interface in terms of responsibilities even where the legal distinction is very clear. A further category may only serve to confuse.


Financial arrangements

7. Do you support the current financial arrangements for devolution, where the Scottish Parliament receives a block grant (based on the Barnett formula) to spend on devolved services as it chooses, but (apart from the power to vary the basic rate of income tax by up to 3p in the pound, and devolved control over local taxation) has no responsibility for raising revenue from Scottish taxpayers to pay for those devolved services?

UNISON Scotland supported and campaigned for the devolution settlement, including the continuation of the block grant system and the establishment of the power to vary the rate of income tax by 3p up or down.

UNISON Scotland would favour a move to partial fiscal autonomy through the provision of borrowing powers and tax raising powers outside those covered by the UK tax regime.

We believe that a vibrant, dynamic and democratically controlled public sector is vital to Scotland's economic and social wellbeing, guaranteeing accountability, generating and redistributing wealth and reducing inequalities. UNISON Scotland will not support changes to the tax system the consequences of which are intentionally or otherwise to restrict, destabilise or cut public spending in Scotland.

The Barnett Formula

Any change to the block grant system would necessitate a review of the Barnett Formula. The formula has worked reasonably well and should not be replaced in haste without a better alternative for managing the financial relationship between Scotland and the UK.

The Barnett Formula was in place at the time of devolution and continuing with it has contributed to the stability and therefore success of devolution in its first decade. However, Barnett does not cover all UK public expenditure and it does not operate at regional level in England. To some extent it therefore masks differences in UK regional expenditure and this has given rise to some misapprehensions, particularly in England and amongst the tabloid media, about the level of public funding in Scotland.

Some useful work has been done in clarifying where funding comes from and goes to (see ‘Scotching the Myth' articles in the Herald, November 2007 for a journalistic account). UNISON Scotland does not accept the Scotland has received unfair advantage in public funding when all factors are taken into account, and rejects the view that there is a ‘subsidy junkie' attitude in Scotland.

Also, Barnett is not a needs-based but a population-based model of allocation. In fact the "Barnett squeeze" tends to equalise spending per capita over the long term. This would ultimately penalise allocations to the Scottish Parliament to the benefit of rich regions of England and would neither help to "better serve the people of Scotland" nor "secure the position of Scotland within the UK". UNISON supports a progressive, redistributive tax and spend policy for Scotland and for the UK as a whole.

A needs-based assessment for allocation of resources between Scotland and the UK would be consistent in principle with this long expressed UNISON policy. Such an assessment would have to take account not just of GDP and poverty indicators but also Scotland's geography, comparatively sparse population and infrastructure requirements.


Powers of borrowing

UNISON Scotland believes it is vital that the Scottish Parliament has borrowing powers. Indeed it is illogical that local government in Scotland can have such powers (established by an act of the Scottish Parliament in 2003) but that the Parliament itself does not. Borrowing powers would mean that the Scottish Parliament would have much greater scope in planning and funding efficient investment in Scottish public services such as health and education without having to rely on the discredited PFI methods which have been extensively and expensively used in the past.


Fiscal autonomy

The current block grant system provides the devolved administration with flexibility over how to spend the money it receives. However it has limitations. The Scottish Parliament is responsible for spending the money but is not transparently or directly accountable to the tax payers who fund it. Also, overall increases (or decreases) are dependent on spending decisions in England, and not Scotland.

Fiscal autonomy means that tax revenues would be levied in Scotland by the devolved administration, and then services provided by the UK government under reserved powers - defence, social security, etc - would be paid for out of that revenue. This would address the issues of transparency, accountability and dependence on English spending decisions.

It is possible to have a mixture of these systems. Indeed, full fiscal autonomy is not currently practiced anywhere (it exists in principle for the Basque region of Spain).

In a mixed system, a proportion of Scottish revenue would be generated from taxation collected by (or possibly assigned to - see below) the Holyrood administration; and a further proportion would be paid via a block grant according to either a need-based assessment or a per capita based variant of the Barnett mechanism.

The options therefore appear to be:

  • continue with block grant system, with possible reforms to Barnett
  • fiscal autonomy - Scotland raises revenues and "buys back" services from Westminster
  • mixed system with proportion of revenue raised in Scotland and proportion allocated through block grant

As indicated above, UNISON Scotland doubts that fiscal autonomy (other than borrowing powers) would bring any practical benefits to Scotland. Even if a proportion of revenues are raised in Scotland it would still require a Barnett style formula and the consequent disputes. Full fiscal autonomy would require a ‘reverse' Barnett formula. With the taxation constraints set out below the ability to use tax raising powers are in any case limited.


8. Do you believe that the Scottish Parliament should be responsible for raising a greater proportion of its income by having increased taxation powers? If so, which taxes should be devolved (e.g. VAT, Income Tax, Corporation Tax, Excise Duties etc) and should there be corresponding changes to the existing funding arrangements from the UK Government?


Devolution of VAT would be problematic, as it is subject to regulation by the EU. It would be possible to assign part of the UK's VAT revenue on the basis of a Scottish share but for the reasons set out above we remain to be convinced that it is worth the effort.

Income Tax

The power to increase or decrease the income tax rate by up to 3p already exists, though it has never been used, for good reason - the revenue it would generate is relatively small, and as it can only be applied to income earned at the basic rate, the burden would be regressive and unfair.

UNISON Scotland supports fair, progressive taxation and would support an enhancement in power to set the rate of income tax at any level and on income at higher rates in addition to basic rate; and also on unearned income.

Corporation Tax

UNISON Scotland would oppose reductions in the level of Corporation Tax in Scotland on the basis that it would cause problems for the tax take and reduction in public spending.

It also appears that the EU will make it difficult if not impossible to implement differing rates of corporation tax in the UK in light of the Azores judgement, which indicates this would be in breach of competition regulations. It would run counter to the EU's aim to harmonise Corporation tax across member states.

Excise duties

Excise duties are subject to EU controls in a similar way to VAT.

Assigned revenues

It would be possible for the Scottish Parliament to take responsibility for collection of devolved taxes and then pay an amount for services to the UK; or for collection of taxes to be done at UK level and an appropriate allocation made to Scotland - assigned revenues. But as set out above we remain unconvinced that the effort is worthwhile.


Council Tax benefit and Housing Benefit

The responsibility for both local government finance and for housing policy lies with the Scottish Parliament. However the funding and administration of Council Tax Benefit and Housing Benefit are currently reserved, as part of the UK Social Security system.

Council Tax Benefit is vital in ensuring that there is a relationship between household income and the amount of Council Tax payable. UNISON Scotland supports the transfer of the Council Tax benefit function.

Housing Benefit is equally vital to the objective of ensuring that secure, affordable accommodation is available to all. All other aspects of housing policy and administration are already devolved. UNISON Scotland supports the transfer of responsibility for the Housing Benefit function.


Inter-governmental arrangements

9. How effective do you believe inter-governmental relations have been since 1998, including in the context of the respective roles of UK and Scottish Ministers in their dealings with the European Union?


The UK Parliament continues to legislate on devolved issues with the agreement of the Scottish Parliament through Legislative Consent Motions established under the Sewel Convention.

This co-operation has led to significant new areas of devolution since the Scotland Act, most notably aspects of rail and energy policy. These are in effect voluntarily devolved by UK Ministers and have not involved any amendment to the Scotland Act.

Devolution has also enabled Scotland to make a more direct contribution in Europe, which is beneficial as the European Union has a major influence on our daily lives.

Detailed issues identified by the Calman Commission

In its invitation to submit responses, the Commission set out some detailed issues for comment with this advice:

"In answering Questions 3 and 4 above, you may wish to be aware in particular of the topics in the following lists, which have been compiled from the suggestions made by individuals and organisations who responded to the Chairman's letter of 22 May. The Commission itself has not yet taken a view on any or all of the items in these lists but includes them to acknowledge the suggestions made. But views are also welcome on any other matters which are currently reserved by Schedule 5 to the 1998 Act."

UNISON Scotland's views on such issues are presented below.


A: General aspects of the Scotland Act 1998:

  • the number of MSPs and the "additional member" electoral system

UNISON Scotland believes that the number of MSPs and the electoral system remains appropriate. In particular we believe that a reduction in the size of the Scottish Parliament would fundamentally alter the principles on which the Scottish Parliament was established by the Constitutional Convention and on which it still operates.

The system which the Convention has devised is the outcome of long and detailed discussions, and is underpinned by fundamental principles including proportionality and the opportunity for equal representation. It should not be easily challenged or changed without careful and democratic scrutiny.


  • the unicameral nature of the Parliament (the lack of a second chamber)

Although the Scottish Parliament is unicameral, unlike Westminster, it does not suffer from the "lack of a second chamber". The Parliament is able to carry out its functions effectively and competently, with the proper checks and balances, largely through the accessible and effective committee structure.

The Committees are the democratic backbone of the Parliament. Scottish Parliament Committees combine the role of the Select and Standing Committees of the House of Commons. They have much stronger pre-legislative functions than Westminster Committees: they carry out investigations, call on outside opinion and expertise at every stage of a Bill's passage, and have scrutiny and amending functions. The Committees also monitor, scrutinise and report on the Government's activities.


  • the scope of the existing tax-varying power (which allows the Parliament to vary the basic rate of income tax in Scotland by up to 3p in the pound)

UNISON supports an extension to this power. (See response on financial arrangements Qs 7 & 8 above).


  • the role of the Law Officers (the Lord Advocate, Solicitor General for Scotland, Advocate General for Scotland)

The Lord Advocate is the senior legal officer in Scotland and advises the Scottish government. The Solicitor General is the chief prosecuting officer in Scotland. They are appointed by the Scottish Parliament and have rights to attend and speak at Parliament ex officio. The incoming SNP administration in 2007 ended the practice of the Lord Advocate attending cabinet meetings.

The Advocate General for Scotland is appointed by and advises the UK Parliament on Scottish legal issues.

Given that the necessary separation of powers is clear, UNISON Scotland sees no need for further change in these offices.


  • the limitations on the ability of the Scottish Ministers to raise revenue by borrowing

UNISON supports prudential borrowing powers for the Scottish Parliament and its Ministers. (See response on financial arrangements Qs 7 & 8 above).


  • the mechanisms for dealing with "devolution issues"

UNISON Scotland supports the calling of a Scottish Constitutional Convention including representatives of civic Scotland such as local authorities, trade unions, churches and voluntary organisations as well as political parties in order to develop a constitutional settlement which will "serve of the people of Scotland" - all of them.


B: Matters which are currently reserved (references to the relevant entries in Schedule 5 to the 1998 Act are indicated in brackets):


  • the constitution - in the context of clarifying the ability of the Parliament to hold a referendum on independence (Part I, para 1)

UNISON Scotland supports the Claim of Right adopted in March 1989 that acknowledges the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs. This would be consistent with support for the ability of the Scottish Parliament to hold a referendum and to act in accordance with the views expressed by the people.


  • the registration and funding of political parties (Part I, para 6)

No fixed position. (See Elections to the Scottish Parliament below).


  • foreign affairs - including international development assistance (Part I, para 7)

While foreign affairs would remain a reserved issue, UNISON Scotland has a keen interest in international solidarity and development. We would welcome a formally established right for the Scottish Government to represent the Scottish people on devolved issues within the European Union and in wider international forums; and to take responsibility for its share of international development assistance; and to intervene over issues such as access to clean water worldwide.

  • the civil service in Scotland (Part I, para 8)

An effective, properly remunerated and motivated civil service is essential to continue to successfully deliver devolved administration. Devolution is a work in progress, and the structure of the civil service will need to be reviewed as changes are agreed and implemented, subject to the principles outlined above of subsidiarity and also with the objective of protecting and improving jobs, pay, pensions and transferability within the UK.

  • defence (Part I, para 9)

Defence would remain reserved, (but see below on specific issue of "control of weapons of mass destruction").

  • taxation (Part II, Section A1)

See response on financial arrangements Qs 7 & 8 above.


  • misuse of drugs (Part II, Section B1)

Control of medicines and misuse of drugs are reserved whilst other health and criminal provisions are devolved. This appears to be inconsistent and we would favour these powers being devolved.


  • data protection (Part II, Section B2)

The Scottish Information Commissioner, appointed on the recommendation of the Scottish Parliament, deals with freedom of information issues in devolved public service areas. The Information Commissioner is a separate UK-wide authority appointed by Westminster and responsible for reserved areas of public service, including in Scotland, and also issues which relate only to England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The UK Information Commissioner is responsible for dealing with Data Protection issues across the UK. The two authorities currently co-operate on the basis of a Memorandum of Understanding.

UNISON Scotland believes that Freedom of Information and Data Protection are closely linked. We can therefore see merit in devolving Data Protection.

  • elections to the Scottish Parliament, and the franchise at local government elections, including voting age (Part II, section B3)

The Scottish Parliament in January welcomed the Gould report on problems in running the 2007 Scottish and local elections, and called for "the further devolution of executive and legislative powers to the Scottish Government and the Parliament for the administration of its own elections and the decoupling of future elections to this Parliament and Scotland's councils." UNISON Scotland supports this position.

UNISON Scotland supports the right of the Scottish Parliament to determine voting age and recommends that it be set at 16 years.


  • firearms (Part II, section B4)

Recent criminal cases have resulted in calls for stronger regulation of firearms in Scotland than appears to have support in England. Criminal law is devolved and we can see no reason for reserving firearms to Westminster.

  • immigration and nationality (in the context of attracting skilled labour to Scotland) and asylum (Part II, section B6)

The ‘Fresh Talent' initiative has been constrained by UK immigration policy that arguably is driven by the needs of SE England. Whilst UK borders remain, we would argue for consideration of some separate immigration controls including the use of Scottish residence requirements. This would enable Scotland's economic requirements (already a devolved issue) to be given greater focus. In addition there is also a case for considering elements of asylum powers as the exercise in practice of these powers have not always reflected Scottish public opinion in recent years. Asylum also has significant implications for devolved responsibilities particularly social work and education.

  • scientific procedures on live animals (Part II, section B7)

No fixed position.

  • betting, gaming and lotteries - including the National Lottery (Part II, section B9)

No fixed position.

  • competition (Part II, section C3)

UNISON Scotland supports the devolution of competition policy in respect of provision of public services. In our response to the Scottish Executive Consultation on Proposed Provisions for the Water Services (Scotland) Bill in January 2004, UNISON Scotland rejected the view that competition in essential utilities brings benefits to consumers, arguing that the approach of the then Scottish Executive to the Competition Act "should be based on the general exclusions as set out in Schedule 3 of that statute.… the introduction of limited competition is a further step on the road to the full privatisation of Scotland's water."

  • regulation of sea fishing (Part II, section C6)

No fixed position.

  • consumer protection ((Part II, section C7)

Consumer protection is largely enforced by local government in Scotland. Devolution could make consumer protection more responsive to local conditions, and there are no reasons to keep this matter reserved.

  • telecommunications (Part II, section C10)

No fixed position. (But see also broadcasting below, which is also governed by telecoms regulator Ofcom, a possible candidate for devolution.)

  • the Post Office (Part II, section C11)

No fixed position.

  • Research Councils and funding of scientific research (Part II, section C12)

As higher and further education funding is devolved it would be consistent to devolve these powers as well.

• Energy (Part II, Head D), including oil and gas (D2)

This is a shared area of responsibility at present. Generation and nuclear regulation are reserved. Planning, aspects of energy efficiency and renewable energy are devolved. This can lead to some confusion over roles.

There is a UK market for energy and European Directives which would require common approaches. However, Scotland's energy industry is structured differently to the rest of the UK and we have concerns over discriminatory arrangements by UK regulators. A Scottish Energy Strategy, that we believe is necessary, may be easier to achieve if energy was devolved.

  • Transport (Part II, Head E)

No fixed position. (NB - this includes air and road transport)

  • the marine environment and marine transport (partly covered by Part II, Section E3)

This is a complex area and we would recommend a review in terms of the principle of subsidiarity.

  • Social Security (Part II, Head F) including housing benefit, council tax benefit and pensions (F1) and child support (F2)

UNISON Scotland supports transfer of responsibility for housing benefit and council tax benefit to the Scottish Parliament (see ‘Council tax benefit and housing benefit' above under Financial Arrangements - Q7)

No fixed position on pensions or child support.

  • regulation of the professions (Part II, section G), including the health professions (G2)

Regulation of most professions is reserved on the same UK labour market basis as employment (see below). However, events have moved on in recent years with the growth of new areas of professional regulation, some of which are devolved. Regulatory bodies - for example the Nursing and Midwifery Council - are in the process of addressing their own structures. Therefore there is evidence of a need to review the overall position in relation to the subsidiarity principle.

  • employment and industrial relations (Part II, section H1)

As the UK is a common market most commercial and employment law was reserved. UNISON members generally treat the UK as a single labour market. Therefore UNISON Scotland does not believe this requires to be devolved.

There are some exceptions. For example, many functions of job centres in promoting employment (e.g. job centre+) are closely linked to economic development which is a devolved power.

See also Equal Opportunities (aka Equalities) below.

  • health and safety (Part II, section H2)

UNISON Scotland believes that devolution of powers over health and safety could improve Scotland's poor record in health and safety at work. Our Scottish Health and Safety Committee has supported the staged devolution of health and safety regulation and enforcement. In Northern Ireland, where health and safety is devolved, the Health & Safety Executive employs more than twice as many inspectors in enforcement per head of population than the UK HSE does in Scotland.

  • abortion, xenotransplantation and embryology (Part II, sections J1 - J3)

UNISON Scotland believes in the right of women to control their own bodies and fertility. We believe that access to abortion services should be on a consistent and equal basis across the UK. Devolution of policy on this issue could lead to inconsistency and inequality. It may lead to the unacceptable possibility of women having to travel to different parts of the UK to secure safe, regulated abortion services within the law. We therefore we do not support devolution of policy on this issue.

No fixed position on xenotransplantation or embryology.

  • broadcasting (Part II, section K1)

The debate over Scottish TV news (The Scottish Six) has highlighted this reserved power, but the issue is much wider than that. Scotland has a distinctive culture that should be reflected in broadcast media and therefore we would support devolving this power.

Further consideration needs to be given to this issue. The broadcasting industry is regulated by Ofcom and there have been suggestions that this function could be devolved (see also telecommunications above, which Ofcom also regulates). There are also questions about how the BBC could be devolved. The Broadcasting Commission set up by the Scottish Government in late 2007 has completed its evidence phase and is due to report in September 2008.

  • equal opportunities (Part II, section L2)

The substantive legislative provisions of the Equal Pay Act, SDA, RRA and DDA are reserved. The Scottish Parliament's powers are currently largely restricted to promoting equality.

We believe that Scotland's demographics are different to England and that we have different equality concerns (e.g. sectarianism). Therefore these provisions should be devolved. There are precedents for this: Northern Ireland has had different equality legislation from the rest of the UK, and Scotland already has its own Human Rights Commission.

However, most of the equalities legislation is related to employment law, which is otherwise generally not an area which we believe should be devolved. (See Employment Law above).

  • control of weapons of mass destruction (Part II, section L3)

UNISON Scotland opposes Trident and its proposed replacement. We support the conclusion of judges of the International Court of Justice in 1996, that the use of nuclear weapons was inadmissible in any circumstances. In 2007 UNISON Scotland supported the majority of Scottish MPs who voted against the replacement of Trident and the majority of MSPs who voted to congratulate them.

Devolution of control over weapons of mass destruction may therefore be desirable. However, we recognise it would be difficult to separate from defence.

  • time zones and summer time (Part II, section L5).

No fixed position.


Financial services, film classification, extradition, insolvency are also all reserved and have been raised as potential issues for devolution in recent years. UNISON Scotland does not have a fixed position on these matters but we believe they should be considered by the Commission in the light of the principles already established.


UNISON Scotland welcomes the wide ranging remit of the Calman Commission. We believe the Commission should recommend the widest further devolution of powers possible following the democratic principles already established in the Claim of Right and by the Constitutional Convention leading up to the historic Scotland Act 1998, and including the principle of subsidiarity. To this end we believe that the Constitutional Convention should be reconvened in order to ensure the greatest possible consensus among political parties and civic society on the way forward.


Some references:

Calman Commission - invitation to submit evidence, 23 June 2008 http://www.commissiononscottishdevolution.org.uk

Scotland Act 1998, Schedule 5 Reserved Matters

UK Statute law Database, Ministry of Justice


UNISON Scotland: Devolution - The Next Stage, December 2005

UNISON Scotland: Commission on Scottish Devolution - response to the Commission on Scottish Devolution's consultation on changes to the current division between reserved and devolved powers, June 2008

(response to initial Calman invitation for preliminary views, 22 May 2008)


Scotching the myth by David Leask and Douglas Fraser

The Herald, Friday 2 November 2007 http://www.theherald.co.uk/search/


For further information please contact:

Dave Watson
UNISON Scotland
14, West Campbell Street,
G2 6RX

Tel 0845 355 0845 Fax 0141-331 1203

e-mail d.watson@unison.co.uk


Top of page


Top of page

Submissions index | Home