State of the Union
It’s over four years since I last blogged regularly about
constitutional issues in the United Kingdom.
During that time independence for Scotland was
rejected at a referendum and we've had a Prime Minister who emphasised repeatedly his unionist
credentials. So is the Union in a healthier state in 2015
than it was in 2011?
If you look at its prospects for the very short-term, the
answer is probably ‘yes’.
The ‘Better Together’ coalition managed to fend off a
muscular movement for independence, in the Scottish referendum. That campaign was polarising, ill-tempered
and, at times, looked nail-bitingly close, but the Union between Scotland and
England survived. Whether it emerged
from the fight unscathed, is another matter.
In the afterglow of victory David Cameron told the UK that
there would be “no disputes, no re-runs, we have heard the settled will of the Scottish people”. Even the
ever-pugnacious Alex Salmond, winded by defeat, appeared to reaffirm his
pre-poll pledge of no more independence referenda “for a
generation”.
Of course, ‘a generation’ is not a fixed period and, in any
case, it is relatively brief, measured against the history and politics of a
nation state. Judged with reference to
this longer time-scale, I believe the Union is weaker now than in 2011.
The differences between England and Scotland, politically,
have widened during the past four years, and even since the referendum. Rather than derailing the Scottish National
Party (SNP), the unsuccessful independence campaign filled its ranks with new
members and gave it enough momentum to destroy Labour in the 2015 General
Election. Nationalists now dominate
overwhelmingly Scotland’s allocation of seats at the UK Parliament in London
and form the devolved Scottish government in Edinburgh.
It’s possible to juggle numbers and statistics or
philosophise about the unfairness of electoral arithmetic at Westminster
elections, to prove that there is still a substantial, pro-Union majority. But the SNP’s current position is remarkable,
however it is measured, for the time being it is unchallenged and it allows the
party to focus politics in Scotland round the independence debate to an even
greater degree.
Fifty six of Scotland’s fifty nine Members of Parliament are
there with the purpose of confronting the Westminster government and,
ultimately, working toward the United Kingdom's dissolution. That must have a corroding effect on
relationships within the Union and the political bonds which hold it together. The SNP has persuaded Scottish voters,
successfully, that socio-economic issues are determined by an ongoing struggle
between Edinburgh and London. It is
against that backdrop that the Labour Party was decimated in the General
Election.
Aside from issues round leadership and organisation, Labour
struggled to convince electors that it could be trusted to fight for resources
and special treatment for Scotland, at Westminster. The referendum cast the party as an ally of
the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats and, while nationalists failed to win
their war over independence, they won an important battle to claim centre-left
Scottish votes.
This idea of politics as a 'tug of war' has shaped politics south of the
border too.
Among voters in England, attitudes to Scotland seem to be
more hostile, after a divisive independence debate, followed by a General
Election where English nationalist themes were frequently implied. It may have been fair to highlight the
possible consequences of certain MPs having undue influence in a hung
parliament but, in the unrestrained atmosphere of a Westminster campaign, a
legitimate argument could quickly acquire an anti-Scottish, rather than an
anti-SNP, colouring.
This atmosphere has continued after the election, with the new Conservative
government confirming its commitment to grant ‘English votes for English laws’,
in the Queen’s Speech. Under these
relatively benign proposals, procedures will be tweaked, with members
representing England, or England and Wales, forming a committee scrutinising
legislation affecting only those parts of the UK, before it is subject to a full vote in the House of Commons.
Opponents are already grumbling about the potential to create
‘two tiers’ of MPs.
The Tories claim their ideas will strengthen the Union,
addressing English grievances before they develop into outright
nationalism. In the current atmosphere,
though, any changes to the constitution will have to be drafted carefully and
argued with extreme delicacy, if they are not to deepen divisions within the UK.
David Cameron says the Conservative government intends to
introduce more cuts and rebalance the economy dramatically, with lower taxes and lower spending, especially on welfare.
Irrespective of whether these plans are right or wrong, there will remain
an atmosphere of extreme sensitivity around public spending, over the course of
the current parliament.
Against this background, English perceptions that the
devolved nations get a great deal out of the Treasury, at their expense, are likely only to flourish, particularly with the Scottish Parliament due to get
greater tax and borrowing powers soon.
The government’s policies toward Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland
will be shaped, almost inevitably, by sentiment in England. There is little appetite there for generosity
and concessions toward the seemingly spendthrift Celtic regions.
Once, the greatest threat to the integrity of the United
Kingdom was believed to come from Irish nationalists. Yet Northern Ireland has been mentioned in
this article only in passing, because the latest farce at Stormont is a
side-show, largely irrelevant to the longer term future of the Union. The UK’s fate will be determined
overwhelmingly by the complicated knot of relationships between England and
Scotland.
Disappointingly, in the aftermath of the independence
referendum, little progress has been made on examining why these relationships
have been unravelling. Nor has there
been a serious discussion about how to encourage people across four nations in
the UK to feel more attached to their common British identity. It’s these big conversations which are
more likely to suggest how to repair damage caused by devolution and increasing
nationalism, rather than tinkering with aspects of the constitution.
There are still compelling practical reasons for a majority
of people in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales to choose to remain
within the United Kingdom. Yet the more
emotional arguments for Union seem to be losing their power, at least in
Scotland, where a younger generation is apparently enthused by the
prospect of independence.
This might look like a bleak prognosis from a pro-Union
writer and I am certainly not suggesting, like so many separatists, that break-up
is inevitable. However the ‘no’ vote at
the Scottish independence referendum did not signal that the United Kingdom is out
of danger.
The campaign and its aftermath damaged the Union profoundly. If there isn’t a proper and concerted attempt
to repair that damage, the UK may well encounter less surmountable challenges
in the future.
Comments