Brown epiphany a power for good

EVER since Gordon Brown said something about the Scottish Parliament being given "more powers", there's been a sound of pride being swallowed in and around TV and radio studios, places of refreshment in and around Holyrood and even in the debating chamber of the Scottish Parliament.

Most MSPs believe in either sovereignty or stronger powers for Holyrood, albeit privately in quite a few cases. But now the Prime Minister has led the way towards a place he's previously said should be avoided because the powers devolved to Holyrood under the Scotland Act are adequate and fit for purpose. Until this change of direction, a fair number of MSPs used to issue a collective groan whenever an SNP opponent mentioned the Scottish Parliament's lack of adequate power to best deal with the issue on hand, that could be anything from EU fishing quotas to the policy on asylum seekers.

A good number of Labour MSPs who were uncomfortable at their impotence over the treatment of asylum seekers, for example, or who were perhaps frustrated at the constraints imposed by the Scotland Act on a programme of international aid that could command all-party support at Holyrood, will feel a bit freer to discuss how the Scottish Parliament might move forward.

Perhaps they'll reserve their reflex response of loyally rubbishing the analysis in favour of more powers for when the SNP calls for independence, happily heard rather more frequently these days.

Gordon Brown's epiphany may have been encouraged by the need to do something, anything, to counter the SNP's electoral success, rather than the result of much research activity by disinterested policy wonks, but it's welcome nonetheless.

As a response, the SNP should try to pin down the PM on the exact powers he proposes to transfer, and follow up with publication of the powers Nationalists would like to see exercised by Holyrood.

It's suggested some financial, perhaps even fiscal, powers might be transferred. The two most commonly mentioned are "assigned revenues" from some tax(es) currently levied from Westminster, and "full fiscal autonomy". Both fall short of the power needed to allow Scots in Scotland to determine their own priorities as regards fishing, or immigration and asylum policies.

Also, they would not be the powers needed for governments in Holyrood to determine the future development of Scotland's energy resources . . . including oil and gas.

Also, with both of these ideas comes the requirement to pay the piper for the nuclear weapons we neither need nor want in Scotland because foreign affairs and defence will still be decided in Westminster. Contrast this last example of the inadequacy of some transfer of power with what would be possible under sovereignty.

If majority opinion in Scotland was in favour of scrapping nukes, Holyrood could. There's a very fair chance this would encourage like-minded people in England to forego nukes also rather than transplant them south of the border.

Sovereignty would also allow a Scots government to decide the level of co-operation, even joint operations undertaken by Scottish defence forces and those from the other parts of the British Isles, and the Republic of Ireland.

It would allow Scotland to reflect the difference in our economy's make-up and performance in relation to how we negotiate the pitfalls and opportunities of the global economy.

Scots would be empowered to choose which set of powers they want to see embedded in Holyrood if a referendum was held on the powers they wanted, because each side in the constitutional divide would have to spell out what aims, ideas and policy priorities could be achieved by enhanced devolution or sovereignty. Now that begins to look like the sort of questions that could be asked in a referendum.

It's a weighty issue

In the midst of the current debate on the growing levels of obesity amongst children and young people, could we be in danger of missing an important element in the facts of contemporary life?

We wring our hands at being the world's second fattest nation, and say it's an aspect of our culture that we must change. But across Europe, children are getting fatter, even in Mediterranean countries with their admired traditional diet.

The reason is common to all the industrialised countries – economies now need both parents in the workforce and prepared food consequently forms a greater part of our diet because of its shorter preparation time.

So to even up the benefit between manufacturer and consumer, maybe we should tax high sugar, fat and salt content?

Murray can be magic

He's still very young to be in a Grand Slam final. Although Roger Federer served up a masterclass, Andy Murray looked and sounded as if he knew it, but more importantly, he could live with it, practise even more and come back for another shot. He also earned respect for his gauche graciousness in defeat.