further devolution is not a meaningful response to Scotland’s democratic impasse.
"
The independence movement was indeed contentious, even angry. That is what democracy is – a conflict. Democracy only exists because conflict is an intractable part of society. We had to fight to get it in the first place.
The suspicion is Noon would be as disappointed by any new devolution settlement as by the present one. It would not quell the unrest we see breaking out in workplaces and on the streets in response to the worsening economic situation. The utopian hope of a public life characterised by harmony is dying from natural causes.
It would also be unlikely to quell discontent over the national question. To understand why, we only need to look to the Scottish Government’s response to inflation. Increasing and dishonest pleas that Sturgeon is powerless to meet the demands of the population due to the restrictions of the devolved settlement will not be silenced by any new tranche of powers – no matter how expansive. It would be a typical naivety of the newspaper classes to think more tax raising powers would end the buck-passing so important to modern post-political and transnational structures of governance – from Devo era UK to the European Union and far beyond.
None of this is to say that devolution itself is simply a mistake, or that it can be regressed back into a more centralised UK state – hardly the acme of democratic life. Forward is the only direction we can go. It should be forward to an independence rooted in a democratic and popular sovereignty, rather than the elitism and managerialism that characterises both Noon and Sturgeon’s approaches."