On 30 March 1989, a wide coalition of politicians and civic leaders gathered in Edinburgh to sign “A Claim of Right for Scotland”. The gathering, organised by the Campaign for a Scottish Assembly (CSA), marked the beginning of a new phase in the long campaign for Scottish devolution/home rule.

***

The CSA was formed on 1 March 1980, the first anniversary of the failed Scottish devolution referendum. The stated objective of the CSA, formed of mainly Scottish National Party (SNP), Labour and Liberal Democrat activists, was the “creation of a directly elected legislative assembly or parliament for Scotland with such powers as may be desired by the people of Scotland”.

In order to marshal a broad consensus behind an assembly scheme, the CSA resolved at its founding meeting to arrange a constitutional convention “representative of Scottish life and society to consider detailed proposals for the constitutional and powers of a Scottish Assembly”.

The CSA was certain that Scottish devolution depended on eventually earning the support of Britain’s political elite.

In its 1985 convention discussion paper, the group cited the “Scottish national Convention which assembled on its own initiative in Edinburgh in 1689 [and] drew up one of the fundamental documents of the Scottish constitution, the Claim of Right”.

Through the 1980s, the consolidation of Margaret Thatcher’s position fuelled the perception that the government had “no mandate” to govern north of the border. In a 1983 interview with Radical Scotland, Labour MP Robin Cook argued that “the divergence of the political pattern of the south of England from Scotland… should be recognised by some different form of constitutional settlement”.

Cook was a vice-chair of the Labour Vote No campaign during the 1979 referendum campaign.

Critically, Thatcher’s Conservatives won 375 seats in the 1987 election despite losing more than half of their Scottish MPs. In response, the shadow secretary of state for Scotland, Donald Dewar, cast Labour as the trustee of a distinct Scottish mandate. In an essay published as part of a Fabian Society collection, Dewar questioned: “Can Labour deliver? Can the fifty MPs protect Scotland from Mrs Thatcher? … Can Labour set up the assembly?”

Against this backdrop, a CSA-appointed steering committee issued A Claim of Right for Scotland (1988), recommending the establishment of a constitutional convention. The claim argued that the constitution rendered the “Treaty of Union” as a “contradiction in terms, because it makes no provision for the safeguarding of any rights or guarantees and does not even require a majority of the electorate to override such rights and guarantees as may once have been offered.”

The pro-union document nonetheless drew fire from SNP politicians for addressing “the constitutional rights Scotland expects within the United Kingdom”. A Claim of Right for Scotland was published in an edited volume along with commentaries embracing both positive and negative reactions. Contributors included Labour MPs George Foulkes and Dennis Canavan, Scottish political theorist Tom Nairn, and Liberal MP Charles Kennedy. Gordon Brown, a rising star in the Labour Party, declined to contribute owing to his duties “during the illness of Mr John Smith”.

The 1988 Glasgow Govan by-election helped grease the wheels of Scottish politics. The shock SNP victory helped catalyse the Labour Party’s conversion to the politics of the claim and the convention it recommended. The Govan by-election also shaped the SNP’s political strategy and expectations. After a short if acrimonious negotiating period, the SNP delegation, led by Jim Sillars, withdrew from the convention talks.

***

The convention held its inaugural meeting on 30 March 1989. The event, which took place in the General Assembly Hall of the Church of Scotland, channelled the growing political consensus that a new constitutional settlement was needed.

Scottish politicians lined up to sign a second Claim of Right – distinct from the longer, more closely argued document issued in 1988. A statement of principle, the second claim explicitly acknowledged and asserted “the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs”.

The claim therefore, marked a political rupture with the Diceyan understanding of the UK’s constitutional settlement that sovereignty was vested solely in the parliament at Westminster. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty had featured at the forefront of the debates on devolution in the 1970s.

The claim outlined a three-fold mandate for the new Scottish Constitutional Convention (SCC) to “prepare”, seek “approval for” and “implement” a devolution/home rule scheme.

To this pledge, MPs, MEPs and councillors of the Scottish Labour Party, Scottish Liberal Democrats, Social Democratic Party, Co-operative Party, Communist Party, Scottish Green Party, the Orkney and Shetland Movement and several civil society representatives signed their names in an act of astonishing political theatre.

Of Labour’s Scottish MPs, only veteran anti-devolutionist Tam Dalyell withheld his signature. Dalyell’s refusal meant 59 of Scotland’s 72 MPs had signed the document. Signatories therefore included two future Labour leaders, John Smith and Gordon Brown; two future chancellors in Brown and Alistair Darling; privy counsellors Smith and Donald Dewar; and veteran anti-devolutionists like Brian Wilson, Bob Hughes and Eric Milligan.

Wilson served as chairman of Labour Vote No in 1979.

Two future Liberal Democrat leaders, Kennedy and Menzies Campbell, were also among the signatories.

This view of “the sovereign right of the Scottish people” was given historical meaning by theologian and ecumenical Methodist Canon Kenyon Wright, the new chair of the convention’s executive committee.

In his keynote address to the convention’s inaugural session, he declared: “It is exactly 300 years since the Scottish Parliament passed the first Claim of Right in Scottish history in 1689 – not far from where we now meet. We are in the mainstream of Scottish Constitutional history…

“The Claim of Right of 1689 stated that King James VII was deposed because he violated, and I quote, ‘the fundamental constitution of this Kingdom and altered it from a legal limited monarchy to an arbitrary despotic power’.

“The Claim of Right of 1989 is not so very different.”

Wright added: “What if that other single voice we all know so well [Margaret Thatcher] responds by saying, ‘We say no, we are the state’. Well, we say ‘Yes’ and we are the people.”

With Thatcher styled as a modern-day James VII, the SCC conceived of a “golden thread” running through Scotland’s constitutional history – one parallel to the path pursued by England. Wright’s rhetoric encapsulated the central challenge of the SCC: the desire to provide an alternative locus of democratic authority in Scotland.

In his contribution, Dewar called for “independence for Scotland [and] independence of action”, adding: “I have never accepted that once the people have clearly given their answer that she [Thatcher] or anyone else has the power of veto.”

After four hours of speeches and agreement expressed in rapturous applause, Labour MP George Robertson, who would later take on the mantle of shadow Scottish secretary, mused: “Who says Calvinism is dead?”

In its reporting, The Times hailed the claim as “an historic declaration”, calling the convention ‘the country’s most significant political initiative since the Act of Union in 1707’. The Economist described the newly constituted SCC as “the polite version of sentiments normally expressed more rudely”.

***

Co-chaired by Liberal Democrat David Steel and Labour’s Harry Ewing, the SCC brought together representatives of the pro-devolution political parties, along with civil society organisations, churches, trade unions and business groups.

The Conservative Party opposed the process and the SNP refused to take part, protesting the convention’s refusal to consider independence as a constitutional option.

The SCC produced two reports, Towards Scotland’s Parliament (1992) and Scotland’s Parliament, Scotland’s Right (1995).

The latter contribution provided a blueprint for the devolution scheme adopted by New Labour in the late 1990s. Talk of a “parliament” as opposed to an “assembly” reflected the rhetorical and practical development of the devolution argument.

However, the Scotland Act 1998, notwithstanding the development of the Sewell convention, nevertheless acknowledged the “power of the parliament of the United Kingdom to make laws for Scotland”.