THE Scottish independence referendum results were announced in the early hours of Friday September 19 2014. Labour Party conference in Manchester that year started on Sunday September 21. 

To have a Red Paper Collective magazine available for the Monday it was necessary to have two versions of the cover and editorial ready to go to a printer in Manchester immediately the results were announced.

One cover version had Britain held together by a safety pin, the other had the safety pin open and Scotland slipping out. In the days before the referendum it had been impossible to predict which cover we would be using. What was clear was that it would require more than a safety pin to secure the allegiance of a large number of Scots to remain within the UK.

The past 10 years since the 2014 referendum, along with the 25 years since the opening of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, has been a real time exploration of the impact of constitutional change and why it is important that we take it seriously and not leave it to nerds and academics.

The ideal of the Scottish Parliament was supposedly “designed in” with the building. The horseshoe shape of the chamber was to encourage consensual discussion and decision-making. It was famously considered impossible for any single party to hold a majority. It has only happened once, but that was a crucial time when it allowed Alex Salmond to approach David Cameron claiming a mandate for a referendum on independence.

For the first two parliaments Labour needed support to form a government and chose to go into an alliance with the Lib Dems rather than take power as the biggest single party. The idea was that no matter how radical the Labour Party members were, the Scottish leadership would always have to compromise. They compromised so much that they lost power after two terms and are only now, nearly 20 years later, showing any chance of once again becoming the largest party. 

Despite the endless list of troubles experienced by the SNP and the fall-outs within the Scottish Conservatives, there is considerable disappointment with the new Labour government.

After only a matter of weeks of Labour being in power in Westminster, polls are showing a drop in support for Scottish Labour. When asked about their voting intention for the Scottish parliamentary election (due in 2026), voters have given Scottish Labour barely a one-point lead over the SNP. It is just possible on these figures that Labour could scrape through as the largest party by one MSP but they would need, at the very least, Lib Dem support to form a government. The Tories and Reform UK could be left holding the balance of power.

The powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament in the Scotland Act 1998 were limited, and while expanded in the post-referendum period are still short of what a Parliament could expect. For example, it doesn’t have the ability to borrow even to the same extent as a local authority. 

So when SNP leaders say that don’t have control of the economic levers that would enable them to avoid cuts, that is to some extent true. But neither do they make good use of the powers they do have such as introducing a wealth tax.

When the SNP won its fourth election in a row in 2021 Labour ought to have been asking itself serious questions. Did it have anything to say to voters who supported a second referendum, other than repeating the mantra “just say No”? 

Instead, Anas Sarwar argued to Labour members that a future Starmer-led UK government would offer such radical policies to the Scottish electorate that support for independence would evaporate. This led him to reject taking progressive positions in Scotland including the demand, adopted at the 2021 Scottish Labour conference, for a broad coalition of trade unions, civic society and political parties to create a vision for a Scotland and to explore what powers would be needed to bring it about.

At that time Keir Starmer was persuaded by Gordon Brown that there had to be some constitutional change as part of the campaign to win the next election. Directly elected regional mayors were becoming popular spokespeople for their areas, respect for Westminster MPs was at rock bottom and the continued existence of an unelected second chamber could not be justified. 

The report by Brown’s commission was published in December 2022. At the launch Starmer sat beside Brown and gave a commitment to there being consultation on the issues covered, so that firm proposals could be in the manifesto as a first-term commitment. Even the relatively modest suggestions in the report were missing from the manifesto and instead the abolition of 90 hereditary peers appeared as the big constitutional offer. 

There was nothing for Scotland: no pledge to return powers that the Tories had absorbed into central government, no borrowing powers, no recognition that the nations and regions needed a clear voice in central decision-making. Nothing.

In February this year, Sarwar was interviewed in the New Statesman. It was understood that Starmer needed Scottish MPs to ensure his majority and Sarwar needed a popular Labour government at Westminster to improve his chances of winning in 2026. Sarwar said: “I am really open with Keir and the UK shadow cabinet that I want to and need to be going into a 2026 election in the midterm of a popular Labour government, not an unpopular one.” Unfortunately, it looks like he may have a deeply unpopular UK government. Sarwar made the point that if enough Scots believe that even a Labour government cannot make the union work for them, the SNP will quickly be back. 

He should have worried earlier when Starmer reneged on all his leadership campaign pledges and when Rachel Reeves as long ago as 2013, as shadow chancellor to Ed Miliband, said: “Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill.”

Support for the SNP has waned, but half the population continue to support the idea of an independent Scotland, even if they do not seek its immediate implementation. Labour has done nothing to offer an alternative beyond the status quo. 

Sarwar and Scottish Labour should be very concerned. Importantly if the new Scottish MPs want to keep their seats for a second term they need to stand up for Scottish voters.

Pauline Bryan is a Labour peer and convener of Red Paper Collective.