Independence Referendum

4. What discussions he has had with the First Minister of Scotland on a second independence referendum.

Still none.

If these are indeed the last Scottish questions for the Secretary of State, we on these Benches will miss him almost as much as his Scottish Labour colleagues will do. If it is his swansong, when is he going to bring something—anything—to the table to help break this constitutional logjam? It could be an idea, a suggestion or a proposal. Here is a last question for him: if we are in a voluntary Union, which they all say that we are, what is the means for Scotland to leave it?

I am glad to see that SNP Members are staying classy, as usual. On the matter of personnel choices, I am not sure that my first go-to source would be the First Minister, because of course he appointed Peter Murrell to be the chief executive of the Scottish National party. [Interruption.] They do not like the answers to their questions, Mr Speaker! On the SNP’s continuing obsession with independence, I simply say that this is surely a better time to focus on delivery. In May, nearly a third of patients in Scotland waited in A&E for more than the target of four hours, with a staggering 16,612 people waiting over eight hours and 6,978 people waiting more than 12 hours. That is the worst performance since records began. The SNP’s manifest failure on delivery is the elephant in the room—or should I say the camper van in the drive?

I call the Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee.

The Scottish Secretary will be aware that no NHS board in Scotland has met its target for starting cancer treatment within 62 days since 2012, that Public Health Scotland data shows that one in seven Scots are on an NHS waiting list, and that the Scottish Government’s own figures show that home completions fell by 10% in the year to March—and do not even get me started on lifeline ferries to our islands. Does the Scottish Secretary agree that it is time for the SNP Scottish Government to start talking about delivery and acting on delivery, and to stop talking about division?

The Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee speaks with her characteristic wisdom and authority on these matters. It seems that the only output that is rising on the SNP’s watch is the number of statements being issued by solicitors on behalf of their high-profile clients.

I will not be overly effusive about the Secretary of State or the Minister, because that might not be helpful for them in the next few days; when there was a previous change of Prime Minister, as soon as Anna Soubry stood up and said that I had done a good job at the Scotland Office, I knew I was doomed! Will the Secretary of State make it clear to the right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham) that devolution in itself is not the answer? It is about how it is used. We recently saw that in Scotland, when the Scottish Parliament voted in favour of another independence referendum and against an inquiry into SNP finances.

I am not sure whether paying generous tribute to the right hon. Gentleman for his question and the wisdom thereof will impair my prospects. Of course, devolution provides us with the tools, but one of the great tragedies of the last two decades in Scotland is that, regardless of whether it is the education system—where we used to be the envy of the world—the national health service, or the capacity to build and operate ferries, all too often Scotland has gone backwards on the SNP Government’s watch. There is a pretty basic explanation for that: for them, government is simply a way station on the route to independence, so they are not interested in delivering truthfully for the people of Scotland.

Regardless of how we divide on the referendum, I wonder if colleagues on the SNP Benches will find it in their hearts to put political division aside at 8 o’clock tonight? I did not come of age in time for the 1966 world cup finals, but the older boys in my primary school were all nicknamed after the England world cup squad, so we had Nobby Stiles and Charlton in our Scottish playground. That is a Hebridean example of respect and rivalry. Does the Secretary of State agree with today’s Daily Record editorial, which says that “there is always room for friendly rivalry with neighbouring nations,” but that “Bringing…politics into football does nobody any”—

Order. Good job. Come on, Secretary of State.

There is a serious point to start the answer, which is that I have always believed that to be pro-Scottish, you do not need to be anti-English. We should be bigger and more generous than that. We are all immensely proud of Steve Clarke, Andy Robertson and the achievement of getting to the world cup. I think we could look across the North sea to Norway for a demonstration of grace in the circumstances in which they left the tournament. Be assured that I wish our friends, our neighbours and our sometimes rivals well this evening at 8 o’clock.

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

I welcome the Secretary of State’s reassurance on the constitution. The people of Scotland do not want another divisive, distracting and damaging referendum on ripping our country apart. That said, this Labour Government do have a bit of a habit of changing position on certain issues, with 25 U-turns in only two years. So can I ask the Secretary of State to confirm that, whatever else changes and whoever holds the keys to Dover House this time next week—and even if it is the one and only thing they stick to—there will be no referendum and no consideration of one? Will the Government dismiss out of hand immediately any move towards breaking up of our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?

Yes. Ours is a politics of solidarity, co-operation and togetherness. We had a manifesto commitment not only opposing independence, but opposing a further referendum, and we stand by that mandate.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

Some 54% of Scots now back nuclear power, and the SNP tells them that they cannot have it. In May, over half of Scots—57%—voted for parties committed to the Union. Now, I know that some parties might describe that as nearly 60%, but it is definitely a majority. However, the SNP’s answer, as we are hearing, appears to be another referendum. There is a pattern whereby a majority of Scots disagree with the SNP, and the SNP decides the majority is wrong. Will the Secretary of State back the single transferable vote so that Scots get what Scots vote for?

This is now almost a matter of ancient history, but in the forgotten referendum that took place under the last Labour Government, I was proud to campaign alongside the hon. Member’s party’s former leader Charles Kennedy in favour of the alternative vote. In that sense, I think there are ways that we can improve the working of our democracy within the United Kingdom, without leaving and separating ourselves from the United Kingdom.