Time for Council of the Isles? Real devolution to Scotland's people would strike fear into the SNP – Brian Wilson

A directly elected provost of cities like Glasgow and areas such as Ayrshire, Lanarkshire or the Borders could have a transformative effect

“We have to be creative in terms of pushing power out of Holyrood, finding the solutions that work for local communities,” said Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader. These are welcome sentiments which run entirely contrary to how Scotland is run.

Here’s a thought. The best way of marking 25 years of devolution to Edinburgh might be through a radical commitment to devolution from Edinburgh, an element which runs entirely counter to the story so far. “Devolution was never about sucking powers out of local government, and centralising all power at Holyrood,” said Anas. Well, yes and no. It was never articulated like that but the risk was always there. It is in the nature of governments to hoard powers and Scotland’s was never likely to be an exception.

It has happened to an extent which even I would have found depressing to predict – the emasculation of local government, centralisation of services from police to social care, proliferation of national quangos to do government’s bidding, the hollowing out of regional development agencies… all following the same sign: “Edinburgh, this way."

Glasgow needs its own version of Manchester mayor Andy Burnham (Picture: Christopher Furlong/Getty Images)

Tory-designed councils

Anas Sarwar’s starting point is to consider adopting the concept of “metro mayors” from England where it has been judged a significant success without much dissent. (Holyrood could spend years objecting to alien vocabulary, so let’s leave the mayor/provost debate for another time). The principle of powerful local government with an identifiable leader and promoter of a regional economy is what matters.

Scotland came close in the past. The regions which lasted for 20 years until the mid-90s had the resources to act as strategic economic drivers and the political strength to counter central government.

Get our weekly opinion newsletter for expert analysis from The Scotsman’s team of columnists

That reasonably golden era ended with the Local Government (Scotland) Act of 1994 which created the current set-up. It is curious that, while addicted to legislating, the Scottish Parliament has never gone near the structure of local government. The Tory-created status quo from 30 years ago seems to satisfy it entirely.

The SNP’s preference has been for local government and regional agencies to wither on the vine; starved of funding, struggling to maintain services and devoid of strategic capability. All that has been a long-term trend driven by a centralising philosophy which resents challenge. It is in the nature of nationalism to accumulate, rather than share, power.

Glasgow needs its own Burnham

When legislated for, the current local government set-up was fiercely controversial and a shameless piece of Tory gerrymandering. Small suburban authorities were created to protect the Tory vote while cities, particularly Glasgow, were left without revenue from leafier hinterlands whose residents still used the services.

All that is history and in the long run didn’t do the Tories much good though it certainly contributed to Glasgow’s decline into its current condition, now compounded by a truly awful council. If ever a city cried out for a political leader of vision and standing – the comparator of Andy Burnham always enters the frame at this point – it is present-day Glasgow.

However, replacing what exists requires more than a policy gimmick. Directly elected mayors/provosts cannot stand alone. There needs to be a comprehensive overhaul with two objectives – to create strategic units capable of driving regional economies within Scotland and to strengthen localism through councils entrusted to make positive differences in their own communities.

Popularity of decentralisation

These outcomes cannot be prescribed for on the back of an envelope or even in a newspaper column. They require thoughtful debate and an independent commission which takes account of, but is not subservient to, conditions which the existence of a Scottish Government and Parliament have created. The Wheatley Commission paved the way for historic reforms in the 1970s and we again need something as comprehensive.

That cannot happen unless the Scottish Government allows it and there is minimal such prospect under the current administration. They have had plenty time to think about it and continue to act as if devolution equates to sticking “Scotland” on the title of everything and demanding more powers and money from Westminster.

That opens up an opportunity for Labour and other opposition parties to draw lines of difference and re-claim the principle of devolution from forces which have never actually believed in it. I think they would find “decentralisation” a surprisingly popular policy since there is widespread awareness that something has gone far wrong with where and how decisions are taken that affect people’s lives. Centralisation has certainly not equated to competence or delivery.

Dead hand of Edinburgh

Neither is this just a “metro” issue. There are regions of Scotland currently divided between cash-starved local authorities which need a powerful voice in order to be heard. Would a directly elected mayor/provost of Ayrshire or Lanarkshire or the Borders be such a bad idea? Is there any unchallengeable reason, after 30 years, why half of Scotland’s landmass – the Highlands – should be stuck together in a single non-local authority?

Or what about the islands? If the past decade has taught anything, it is the hopelessness of Edinburgh government when it comes to the micro-management of peripheral areas. It’s true in relation to transport, housing and every other area of policy specific to islands. Of course they could be far better run from within by people who understand and care about the complexities and outcomes.

Collectively Shetland, Orkney and Western Isles have a population 50 per cent larger than the Faroes which has autonomy from Denmark. Why not a Council of the Isles with full-scale devolution from Edinburgh? Why should such visions not even be open to discussion while the dead hand of Edinburgh centralisation pushes these places into ongoing decline?

So be bold, Anas. You don’t have to join up all the dots – just commit to a Royal Commission to examine the internal governance of Scotland within the devolved framework. Then watch the fear on faces of the centralising nationalists.