SCOTTISH NATIONALISM AND THE BRITISH RESPONSE: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE DEVOLUTION DEBATE

This thesis examines the historical evolution of Scottish home rule demands from the closure of the Scottish Parliament through the most recent devolution debate and focuses both on the parliamentary and domestic strategies adopted by Scottish activists in their efforts to procure home rule and the reasons why proposals for significant legislative reform have consistently been rejected by Westminster. The causal relationship between Westminster's propensity to centralize affairs of state and to reject proposals for a Scottish Parliament is explored with respect to its impact on the evolving nature of Scottish political demands and the continuing viability of the unitary state.; Research for this thesis has entailed a review of the parliamentary record on devolution which was largely, though not exclusively, conducted through an analysis of Hansard's Parliamentary Debates, the HMSO publications of successive devolution bills, and the speeches, minutes and memoranda compiled by various Scottish home rule activists. Interviews of various devolution spokesmen, including Labour, Liberal, Conservative and SNP MP's, provided much of the intellectual framework for the final chapters of the thesis.; While the thesis focuses on the articulation of demands for constitutional reform and the submission of successive devolution bills, it also emphasizes the persistent failure of Scottish home rule activists to provide a sufficiently compelling rationale for devolution, let alone to persuade Westminster that a logical bill could be drafted to implement the proposed reforms.; The thesis concludes that the repeated submission of proposals for legislative reform will not lead to the restructuring of the unitary state in the absence of a consensus on the part of the Scots that such a reform is necessary and a sounder comprehension of what form a devolved system of government in the United Kingdom should take.