tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/scottish-parliament-29/articlesScottish parliament – The Conversation2023-03-28T16:50:57Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2026872023-03-28T16:50:57Z2023-03-28T16:50:57ZHumza Yousaf: Scotland gets a Muslim leader in a moment of extraordinary change for British politics<p>Humza Yousaf’s appointment as <a href="https://theconversation.com/humza-yousaf-becomes-scotlands-first-minister-a-decade-of-polls-suggest-hell-struggle-to-deliver-independence-just-like-nicola-sturgeon-202666">first minister of Scotland</a> is a historic moment for the UK. It means that, for the first time in history, the country has a Hindu prime minister in Westminster (<a href="https://theconversation.com/it-matters-that-rishi-sunak-has-become-the-uks-first-prime-minister-of-indian-descent-193154">Rishi Sunak</a>) and a Muslim first minister in Scotland. </p>
<p>In his victory speech, Yousaf <a href="https://www.thenational.scot/news/23415459.full-speech-humza-yousafs-words-winning-snp-leadership-contest/">said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We should all take pride in the fact that today we have sent a clear message, that your colour of skin, your faith, is not a barrier to leading the country we all call home.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On the face of it, these two men, whose families came to the UK as immigrants looking for a better life, embody the dream that, through hard work, immigrants and their children can make it to the top of society. </p>
<p>Similar stories are playing out elsewhere at the top level of British politics, too. Scotland’s main opposition party Labour is led by <a href="https://www.parliament.scot/msps/current-and-previous-msps/anas-sarwar">Anas Sawar</a>, a man who is also of Pakistani Muslim heritage, as is Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London. The Westminster cabinet also has unprecedented ethnic diversity.</p>
<p>Many of these politicians are the children and grandchildren of immigrants who came to the UK in the 1950s and 1960s, economic migrants from former colonies like India, Pakistan and the nations of east Africa and the Caribbean, who came with little money and limited English language. This first wave of postcolonial migrants often worked in the great British industries, in factories and in mills, settling in large town and cities. </p>
<p>Scotland is the only western European nation to have a Muslim leader. The UK is also now led by the children and grandchildren of people from its formerly colonised nations. The moment is monumental. The UK, Scotland and <a href="https://www.irishtimes.com/life-style/people/2022/12/17/two-men-of-indian-heritage-lead-their-nations-a-century-after-irish-freedom-and-70-years-since-india-cast-off-the-raj/">indeed Ireland</a> are all led by people from the south Asian diaspora. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/it-matters-that-rishi-sunak-has-become-the-uks-first-prime-minister-of-indian-descent-193154">It matters that Rishi Sunak has become the UK’s first prime minister of Indian descent</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Both Yousaf and Sunak have credited their grandparents and parents for their work ethic, which they say has enabled them to move up Britain’s social and political hierarchy. It’s an inspiring story but perhaps one they should both reflect on now they are in power. It is perhaps harder for arrivals in today’s Britain to replicate this journey.</p>
<h2>The ultimate stress test awaits</h2>
<p>Though Yousaf has stated he is a practising Muslim, he is also clear that he does not believe that legislators should be led by faith in their decision-making. That said, at an event we organised at the Scottish Parliament on Muslims and the political process in Scotland when Yousaf first became an MSP, he revealed that his faith had been part of his motivation for getting into politics in the first place. </p>
<p>His political awakening had taken place a decade earlier in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks in the United States. As he sat watching the images of the Twin Towers with classmates, they turned to ask him why Muslims hated America. That, he states, is when he realised politics mattered. </p>
<p>Yousaf’s faith and ethnicity had previously been rarely commented on in Scottish politics. Indeed, it is rare to hear him described as a “Muslim minister” or “British Asian MSP”. The same applies to others who have preceded or followed him and is a measure of how far the UK has come with regards to minorities in public life. </p>
<p>During the SNP leadership contest, however, Yousaf’s absence from a vote on equal marriage for same-sex couples was questioned and linked to his faith and standing in the <a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23336538.yousaf-facing-questions-missed-gay-marriage-vote/">Glasgow Pakistani community</a>. The allegation was that he did not want to vote in favour of this legislation for fear of alienating that community. </p>
<p>A spokesperson for Yousaf’s campaign responded by saying that he “unequivocally supports equal marriage” and that his absence from the vote was due to “an extremely important engagement which involved trying to secure the release of a Scottish national sentenced to death for blasphemy in Pakistan”.</p>
<p>It is important to note that neither Yousaf or Sunak have yet faced the real stress test. They both became leaders on the back of a closed party selection process so have not yet had to stand as a leader in a public election. </p>
<p>That will be the real measure of how accepting the wider British public is of the changing face of national politics. It remains to be seen whether their ethnicity becomes a factor in the public debate around their politics. </p>
<p>Both Yousaf and Sunak seem keen to keep their faith in the private sphere, which is expected in British politics. Former prime minister Tony Blair’s team famously lived by the mantra <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/mar/19/tony-blair-god">“We don’t do God”</a> when it came to avoiding discussions about his Christianity.</p>
<h2>The class caveat</h2>
<p>Yousaf’s politics couldn’t be more different from Sunak’s. He is firmly left of centre on immigration, welfare and taxation. This reminds us that the ethnic minority political identity is not uniform, although for years parties on the left took the minority vote for granted. </p>
<p>Today ethnic, religious and cultural diversity is reflected across the political spectrum. It is possible to reach the top whatever your political identity. </p>
<p>But it should be noted that less has changed when it comes to educational and social background. Yousaf’s father was an accountant. Sunak the son of a doctor and a pharmacist. Both men went to private school. They were part of a generation of immigrants who were able to come to the UK and make a better life for themselves. </p>
<p>Politics continues to be <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/811045/Elitist_Britain_2019.pdf">dominated by the privately educated</a>. Class is the true divide in British politics, whatever colour rosette a candidate wears.</p>
<p><em>This article has been updated to reflect that the UK is not the only Western democracy to be led by the descendants of formerly colonised people.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202687/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Parveen Akhtar has previously received funding from the ESRC and the British Academy. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Timothy Peace has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and the Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE).</span></em></p>The UK is now the only democracy where the children of formerly colonised people are running the country that colonised their parents’ and grandparents’ nations.Parveen Akhtar, Senior Lecturer: Politics, History and International Relations, Aston UniversityTimothy Peace, Lecturer in Politics, University of GlasgowLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2026662023-03-27T15:12:29Z2023-03-27T15:12:29ZHumza Yousaf becomes Scotland’s first minister: a decade of polls suggest he’ll struggle to deliver independence, just like Nicola Sturgeon<p>Humza Yousaf is to be the first minister of Scotland after narrowly winning the election for leader of the Scottish National Party. In his victory speech, he said he was “determined to deliver” independence for Scotland. But Yousaf only narrowly won the contest, which is a significant hindrance to this aim. </p>
<p>Only SNP members were allowed to participate in the vote to replace Nicola Sturgeon as leader. A <a href="https://www.thenational.scot/news/23406644.snp-leadership-race-knife-edge-final-stretch-poll-suggests/">recent poll</a> showed that had the election been open to the wider voting public rather than SNP members, one of Yousaf’s two rivals, Kate Forbes, would have been the more likely winner. As it stood, a second round was needed in the contest because Yousaf did not win more than 50% in the first round. When the second preference votes for Ash Regan were redistributed to her rivals as the system required, he won by the very small margin of 52% to 48%.</p>
<p>Independence was the prize Sturgeon had been seeking all her political life but a majority vote for independence in a referendum eluded her. And the evidence shows that it was her divisiveness that prevented her from securing the independence vote. This can be shown using data from the <a href="https://scottishelections.ac.uk/">Scottish Election Study</a> conducted at the time of the Holyrood parliamentary elections in 2021.</p>
<h2>Polarisation as a barrier to independence</h2>
<p>The Scottish Election Study survey was conducted just prior to polling day and it asked a question about Sturgeon’s “likeability”. This was measured using a ten-point scale where a respondent scoring zero “strongly disliked” her and another scoring ten “strongly liked” her. It turned out that 18% of respondents gave her a score of 10 and 26% scored her zero. So while Sturgeon had a lot of admirers, she also had a lot of detractors. </p>
<p>The study also included a question about the strength of respondent feelings about independence. In this case a scale from -10 to +10 was used where the maximum negative score meant that respondents would very definitely vote “yes” in a new referendum and the maximum positive score meant they would definitely vote “no”. In the event 29% scored -10 and 37% +10. This revealed that the strong opponents of independence outnumbered the strong supporters by a significant margin.</p>
<p>If we compare attitudes to independence with Sturgeon’s likeability, not surprisingly there was a very strong correlation between the two (r=-0.61). Strong supporters of independence really liked her, whereas strong opponents really disliked her. This may explain why opponents of independence have outnumbered supporters for most of the time since the 2014 referendum.</p>
<p>This can be seen in the chart which shows <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%20Opinion_polling_on%20_Scottish_independence">trends in support for independence</a> averaged by months calculated from the hundreds of polls conducted since the referendum. In each case the question put was: “Should Scotland be an independent state?” When the “Yes” vote was greater than the “No” vote the graph moved above the horizontal red line and when the opposite happened it moved below that line. Some 75% of the observations are below the red line.</p>
<p><strong>Support minus opposition to Scottish independence</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A chart showing that opposition to independence has been stronger than support for much of the past decade." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=413&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=519&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=519&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/517695/original/file-20230327-564-u3qhku.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=519&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How support has shifted since 2014.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wikipedia</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We’re yet to see such detailed polling in the post-Sturgeon era, but the narrowness of Yousaf’s victory suggests much of the same is to come unless something significant changes. Given that the party members were divided in their choice this strongly implies that the Scottish electorate will be equally if not more divided.</p>
<h2>Independence fatigue?</h2>
<p>One of the key reasons why many Scots are opposed to independence is that “independence fatigue” has set in. A YouGov poll conducted just after Sturgeon announced that she was stepping down showed that <a href="https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/02/21/nicola-sturgeons-legacy-according-scots">53% of Scots</a> agreed with the statement that her successor “should not prioritise independence for the time being”.</p>
<p>Much like the rest of Britain, the Scots are preoccupied with bread-and-butter issues such as the state of the economy, education and healthcare. This is even true for SNP voters, something revealed by a Scottish Business News survey which showed their top priorities were the cost of living crisis (65%), the health service (58%), and the economy (31%). Only 30% of them <a href="https://scottishbusinessnews.net/leadership-poll-of-snp-voters-reveals-kate-forbes-as-frontrunner/">chose independence as the main priority.</a>.</p>
<p>Yousaf framed himself as the continuity candidate in the leadership election, and the lesson in all of this is that the more he neglects bread-and-butter issues to focus on independence (as Sturgeon was accused of doing), the less likely he is to achieve it. The Scottish Election Study showed that only 6% of respondents thought that the economy had improved over the previous year compared with 68% who thought it had declined. Views about the state of the health service and education in Scotland were similar.</p>
<p>It is noteworthy that the only sustained period when support exceeded opposition to independence was at the start of the pandemic. This was when Boris Johnson’s government was flailing about trying to deal with the crisis. At the time Sturgeon was praised for her handling of the issue.</p>
<p>However, as <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/caution-earns-nicola-sturgeon-praise-during-pandemic-but-wont-secure-independence-b2dn79h2t">Sir John Curtice pointed out</a>, this was not enough for her to win consistent support for independence. As the COVID vaccines came on stream and the Westminster government got its act together, Scotland reverted to the “No” voters outnumbering the “Yes” voters.</p>
<p>If Yousaf proves to be another polarising politician and does not deliver on the main issues of importance to the Scots, he won’t be able to deliver on his promise to achieve independence in his generation. In fact, given that some people think he is no match for Sturgeon as a political communicator, he is likely to move the dial on the independence issue, but in the opposite direction.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202666/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Whiteley has received funding from the British Academy and the ESRC. </span></em></p>The SNP’s new leader only just squeaked over the line against his rivals, which is a bad sign for his ambition to take Scotland out of the UK.Paul Whiteley, Professor, Department of Government, University of EssexLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2005812023-03-02T06:07:04Z2023-03-02T06:07:04ZBoris Johnson, Liz Truss, Theresa May (and soon Nicola Sturgeon): the strange backbench lives of former national leaders<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512488/original/file-20230227-18-ejtdfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=30%2C15%2C2014%2C1345&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">UK Parliament/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Former prime ministers are currently making a habit of intervening in government policy. Boris Johnson deployed sources to <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64693922">urge current prime minister Rishi Sunak</a> not to abandon his Brexit policies and to send fighter jets to Ukraine. Liz Truss also used her first speech on the backbenches since leaving Downing Street last October, to <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/liz-truss-fighter-jets-ukraine-b2286051.html">press</a> Sunak’s government on Ukraine. </p>
<p>In Scotland, departing first minister Nicola Sturgeon took mere days to break her promise not to interfere in the race to replace her as SNP leader by <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeon-breaks-vow-to-keep-out-of-snp-leadership-race-dlbrds9mx">criticising</a> one of the contenders for her position on same-sex marriage. </p>
<p>Most former British prime ministers have continued to be a feature of national political life, both within and outside political institutions. David Cameron and Tony Blair aside, it is common for prime ministers to continue to serve as MPs after leaving Downing Street. But, with Truss, Johnson and Theresa May all still serving as MPs, there hasn’t been such a gaggle of former prime ministers on the backbenches since 1983. </p>
<p>In Scottish politics, Henry McLeish, Jack McConnell and Alex Salmond all continued to serve as MSPs after their time as first minister. Sturgeon has <a href="https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/nicola-sturgeon-continue-serve-glasgow-26244374">made it very clear</a> that she intends to remain as the constituency MSP for Glasgow Southside, at least until the next election.</p>
<h2>Local or national?</h2>
<p>Sturgeon, like her counterparts, may find herself pulled between pursuing her own constituency interests and commenting on matters of national importance. Gordon Brown, for example, did occasionally speak on constituency matters, particularly the need for radioactive decontamination at Dalgety Bay. But during his final year in parliament he moved away from this and raised only national policy matters.</p>
<p>May has been a much more active parliamentarian and took part in some very heavily constituency-related parliamentary work in her first couple of years out of Downing Street, such as her work on rail services in Maidenhead. This was often carried out away from the political limelight. More recently, she too has moved away from this constituency service to a focus on bigger issues of national importance.</p>
<p>Truss and Johnson have both focused on matters of national and international significance in their interventions. </p>
<h2>When they speak, who listens?</h2>
<p>Former leaders bring considerable gravitas with them when they return to the backbenches. Delving into parliamentary transcripts, we’ve found that their former role is emphasised repeatedly when they are called to speak, leading to considerable deference from colleagues across all political parties. Political institutions want to hear from them. </p>
<p>Gordon Brown’s <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2011-11-30/debates/11113041000002/details#contribution-11113041000010">first contribution</a> as a former prime minister in November 2010 was accompanied by cheers of “hear hear” from MPs of all political persuasions, and government ministers would <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2011-07-13/debates/11071379000002/details#contribution-11071379000105">later encourage him</a> to speak “more often”, emphasising the value of his contribution.</p>
<p>In the House of Commons, we found that former leaders usually receive a primetime speaking slot right at the start of debates and a far larger allocation of speaking time than their colleagues as a result.</p>
<p>But the repeated flattery from others about their previous political position can lead to frustration both with and for our former leaders. At Westminster this frustration has come from other backbench MPs who are disgruntled about the privileged position and preferential treatment they seem to receive from the House of Commons Speaker. Take the SNP MP Pete Wishart, for example, who asked in 2014 <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2014-10-14/debates/14101465000001/details#contribution-14101479000012">why</a> Brown had been selected to speak first in a debate about Scottish devolution.</p>
<p>Although deference from colleagues can be flattering for former leaders, it is often deployed as a tactic by government ministers to deflect accountability and avoid answering questions from these big political figures. </p>
<p>For instance, when May quizzed Matt Hancock on mental health services during the COVID-19 pandemic, he largely ignored the question and <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2021-01-13/debates/859E7C02-D483-4A97-BF74-313975BC80B6/details#contribution-52DC7AC1-F4F9-4290-85A7-95B956A66C2C">simply thanked her</a> for being the one to actually appoint him in the first place. This type of response is much more common when a former leader faces their own party colleagues in parliament.</p>
<p>There could also be another strategy at the heart of this flattery.
Political leaders often leave office under a cloud, following election defeats, unwelcome policy decisions or embarrassing mistakes which may make them feel isolated among party colleagues. All three former Conservative prime ministers currently in Westminster are now working with many colleagues who wrote letters of <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-mps-no-confidence-letters-liz-truss-b2203235.html">no-confidence in their leadership</a>.</p>
<p>Having political heavyweights fighting your corner is much better than when they act as a thorn in the government’s side. Johnson used the media rather than parliament to <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-brexit-protocol-sunak-b2288447.html">put pressure on Sunak</a> over Brexit. </p>
<p>Shouting criticisms in the House of Commons chamber with your colleagues sitting around you is a whole different ball game and doesn’t happen very often. May for instance has been openly critical of government on only a handful of occasions in the chamber, such as during the Owen Paterson <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-boris-johnson-owen-paterson-b1958580.html">lobbying scandal</a>.</p>
<p>If we start to see Truss and Johnson being overtly hostile to government in the chamber, we’ll know that Sunak is in trouble.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/200581/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s rare to have quite so many former PMs and first ministers still in parliament.Louise Thompson, Senior Lecturer in Politics, University of ManchesterAlia Middleton, Lecturer in Politics, University of SurreyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1924102022-10-13T13:32:57Z2022-10-13T13:32:57ZScottish independence: why the supreme court is deciding if there will be another referendum<p>There were no fireworks as the UK’s supreme court opened its doors on the morning of Tuesday 11 October. No star witnesses, cross examinations or fiery rhetoric. Yet many were glued to the live feed coming from London as the case began which could determine Scotland’s constitutional future.</p>
<p>In June, the Scottish government’s top law officer, the <a href="https://www.copfs.gov.uk/about-copfs/our-structure/#:%7E:text=The%20Lord%20Advocate%20is%20a,independently%20of%20any%20other%20person.">lord advocate</a>, set the ball rolling by asking the supreme court to answer a legal question: does the law that created the Scottish parliament allow it to call an independence referendum? </p>
<p>The first referendum took place in 2014. At that time, an agreement was struck with David Cameron’s UK government to grant the powers to Holyrood to organise the vote.</p>
<p>This followed the accepted model of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/contents">the Scotland Act 1998</a>, which <a href="https://www.parliament.scot/about/how-parliament-works/devolved-and-reserved-powers">outlines the powers</a> of Holyrood (devolved matters) and Westminster (reserved matters). Some specific areas of law are listed in the legislation – these are the ones limited to the London parliament where Scotland has no jurisdiction in terms of drafting laws. This includes <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/schedule/5">“aspects” of the constitution</a> including the union of the kingdoms of Scotland and England.</p>
<p>These reserved powers can be temporarily transferred to Edinburgh using what is known as an <a href="https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8738/">s.30 order</a>. This is what happened in 2012 with the agreement allowing Holyrood to <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/313612/scottish_referendum_agreement.pdf">hold the 2014 referendum</a>.</p>
<p>But ever since, subsequent prime ministers Theresa May, Boris Johnson and now Liz Truss have rejected a repeat of this process. This was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/13/nicola-sturgeon-fires-starting-gun-on-second-scottish-independence-referendum">requested</a> by the Scottish government in 2017 following the 2016 Brexit referendum in which Scotland voted to remain in the EU.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tZKlPkBmi6c?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Stalemate</h2>
<p>What then is to be done? <a href="https://www.gov.scot/about/who-runs-government/cabinet-and-ministers/dorothy-bain-qc/">Dorothy Bain KC</a>, lord advocate since last year, opened her arguments by outlining the mandates the Scottish government and SNP have for their s.30 request: winning the largest number of seats in the UK elections of 2017 and 2019, the Scottish local elections in 2022 and the Scottish parliamentary election in 2021. </p>
<p>The question is whether, in the face of UK opposition, this mandate can be used to organise an independence referendum without an s.30 order. This has never been definitively answered by the courts in Scotland or the supreme court in London. Indeed the lord advocate referred to it in court as a “festering” issue which needs to be resolved if Scotland is to move forward constitutionally.</p>
<p>To counter the argument that an independence referendum deals quite explicitly with a “reserved” matter – constitutional matters pertaining to the union – Bain stated that the vote as outlined in the <a href="https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/strategy-plan/2022/06/scottish-independence-referendum-bill/documents/scottish-independence-referendum-bill/scottish-independence-referendum-bill/govscot:document/Draft+Bill+-+27+June+2022.pdf">draft Scottish independence referendum bill</a> would be advisory and, in her words, of no “prescribed legal consequences”. Indeed the proposal states the referendum would simply “ascertain the views of the people of Scotland”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fXk3fG_rQdw?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Advisory vote?</h2>
<p>The UK government – represented by <a href="https://www.blackstonechambers.com/barristers/james-eadie-kc/">Sir James Eadie KC</a> – rejected this as an irrelevant distinction and also against previous legal interpretation of devolution statutes. The supreme court has heard prior cases involving not just Scotland, but Wales and Northern Ireland, that discuss the limits of devolution. These looked at what amounted to a law “relating to a reserved matter”.</p>
<p>A previous case concerning a law over the sale of cigarettes in Scotland – which <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/sep/30/imperial-tobacco-cigarette-ads-scotland">the tobacco companies</a> that were involved lost – stated that there must be more than a “loose or consequential connection” with a reserved matter for the law to be invalid.</p>
<p>Imperial Tobacco argued that the proposed law dealt with UK economy issues rather than public health, which is a devolved matter. However, the presiding judge ruled that the Scottish government was within its legislative rights to restrict sales of tobacco to safeguard public health and threw out the challenge.</p>
<p>Eadie argued that collecting the views of Scottish people on independence – even with no explicit legal consequence but rather to discover the views of the majority – seems to have more than just a “loose” connection with the reserved “aspects” of the British constitution relating to the union. It is this question on which case could centre. </p>
<h2>Too early?</h2>
<p>However, there is a relevant procedural issue raised by the UK government that this whole case is premature. What is being asked by the lord advocate relates to a <a href="https://www.gov.scot/publications/draft-independence-referendum-bill/">draft bill</a> which has not gone through any parliamentary processes at all. </p>
<p>The Scotland Act allows the supreme court to review draft laws from Scotland but normally at the end of the process, not the beginning. This has occurred in recent years with a <a href="https://brodies.com/insights/brexit/uk-supreme-court-rules-parts-of-scottish-brexit-bill-to-be-outside/">law relating to Brexit</a> and the incorporation of <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/supreme-court-rules-in-favour-of-uk-government">the UN’s children’s rights treaty</a> into Scotland.</p>
<p>In both these cases the supreme court ruled that the Scottish parliament had exceeded its powers – but after the laws had been voted through. This is not the case with the referendum issue. </p>
<p>Eadie argued that proper parliamentary scrutiny is needed before the courts can be asked to rule on it. Indeed he argues the Scotland Act does not allow it and the lord advocate is mistaken in making such a reference at this stage.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1579928342610038784"}"></div></p>
<p>To counter, Bain argued that unless the question is answered at this stage there may never be a resolution to this issue, and that this would thwart the rule of law and the broader democratic question of the many mandates of the Scottish government. There is a possibility though that the supreme court may decide not to rule on the substantive issue at this stage.</p>
<p>It will be a while before we know the outcome. After the conclusion of the cases <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/about/biographies-of-the-justices.html">Lord Reed</a>, the Scots law-trained president of the supreme court, stated it will give its ruling as soon as it can. </p>
<p>But he also mentioned earlier in proceedings the 8,000 pages of documents that had to be considered. In the next few months a clearer picture should emerge on whether Scotland can hold its second referendum for independence or not.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/192410/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick McKerrell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Does the law that created the Scottish parliament allow it to call indyref2?Nick McKerrell, Senior Lecturer in Law, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1531272021-01-14T14:47:27Z2021-01-14T14:47:27ZScotland is ready to run the May elections, despite the pandemic<p>Important Scottish parliament elections are scheduled for May 2021 and the expectation is that the <a href="https://news.stv.tv/politics/snp-set-for-majority-at-2021-scottish-parliament-election?top">Scottish National Party will</a> emerge as the biggest party, potentially even with enough votes to form a majority government, after ruling as a minority since 2016.</p>
<p>However, it has been argued by former first minister Henry McLeish, among others that these elections, <a href="https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/former-first-minister-scottish-election-will-risk-spreading-the-virus-among-voters-and-should-be-delayed-until-it-is-safe-to-hold/">should be postponed</a> because of the coronavirus pandemic. </p>
<p>First Minister Nicola Sturgeon <a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18986937.nicola-sturgeon---no-reason-scottish-parliament-election-delayed/">said</a> that she sees “no reason at this stage why the election wouldn’t go ahead”. The subtext for critics might be “why would she, with the polls so favourable?” Victory for the SNP would allow it to claim a mandate for a second independence referendum. This is, therefore, a historic political opportunity for the SNP to realise that goal. It could be a defining moment for Scotland and the UK.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/pdf/10.1089/elj.2020.0642">Election postponements</a> are deeply political and there is often an incentive for those in power to keep or switch the date for political advantage. But in this case, Sturgeon doesn’t need to be playing politics. The lead in the polls is sizeable and has been consistent – often <a href="https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/polls_scot.html">by more than 30 percentage points</a>. So a delay would be unlikely to make a difference.</p>
<p>Also, Scotland is in good shape to hold these elections. Electoral administrators and policymakers have been <a href="https://spice-spotlight.scot/2020/06/30/coronavirus-covid-19-what-could-the-impact-be-on-the-ordinary-general-election-to-the-scottish-parliament-scheduled-for-may-2021/">planning</a> in depth for COVID-19 mitigations for May’s elections since at least mid-2020.</p>
<p>The Scottish parliament has the power to legislate on electoral law for Scottish parliament and local elections. At the end of December, it passed the <a href="https://beta.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/scottish-general-election-coronavirus-bill">Scottish General Election (Coronavirus) Bill</a>. This provides for a range of contingencies to allow the elections to proceed. Crucially, this was passed on a <a href="https://beta.parliament.scot/chamber-and-committees/what-was-said-and-official-reports/official-reports/meeting-of-parliament-23-12-2020?meeting=13038&iob=117969">cross-party basis</a>, with 117 votes for and none against. Scotland was also unique among the UK’s four electoral jurisdictions in allowing a few <a href="https://democracyvolunteers.org/2021/01/11/interim-statement-scottish-by-elections-october-november-2020/">council byelections</a> to be held late in 2020, so Scottish electoral administrators have some experience of conducting elections under COVID-19 circumstances. This situation contrasts with the renewed debate in <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-government-has-delayed-elections-longer-than-most-countries-and-england-still-isnt-ready-to-hold-pandemic-votes-in-may-152862">England</a>, where no such cross-party legislation has yet been developed.</p>
<h2>How elections will work</h2>
<p>The contingency legislation for the Scottish elections contains various measures to make voting possible within the confines of coronavirus rules. </p>
<p>To minimise traffic at polling stations, for example, more people will be encouraged to vote by post. Pre-pandemic, rates of postal voting had already been on the increase – up from 11.2% in 2007 to 18% in 2016. Levels of postal voting under pandemic conditions are expected to be <a href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/our-views-and-research/our-research/public-attitudes-towards-voting-scotland-context-covid-19">around 40%</a>, but the legislation makes it possible for the vote to be held entirely by post, if that’s necessary. </p>
<p>Postal voting is logistically complex. It takes time to register voters for it and to implement the various security measures that legislation rightly provides for. The Scottish government is providing extra funding to electoral registration officers to ensure they have the resources to process increased numbers of postal votes. If the vote does have to be fully postal, the elections will need to be postponed for six months. </p>
<p>The legislation allows for additional contingencies should the pandemic worsen. There has been discussion about extending voting over several days to help with social distancing. This was put into place in <a href="https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/running-local-elections-during-the-covid-19-crisis-queensland-australia_en.pdf">Queensland, Australia</a> and is often <a href="https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ELJ.2020.0642">recommended</a>. It would be logistically challenging and may necessitate a delayed election. Provision has been made for this in the Scottish General Election (Coronavirus) Act, allowing ministers to extend voting on the recommendation of the Electoral Management Board. The expectation remains that the <a href="https://www.emb.scot/news/article/3/assessment-of-the-need-to-hold-polling-over-multiple-days-at-the-scottish-parliament-election-scheduled-for-6-may-2021">election will be held over one day</a>.</p>
<p>Provision has also been made should MSPs need to delay returning to parliament to choose a first minister because of the pandemic. Regardless of any potential postponement, the elections have to be held by November 5 2021.</p>
<h2>Making it happen</h2>
<p>A widespread public education campaign will be key to ensuring the May 2021 Scottish parliament elections are a success. This should focus on the need to register early for postal votes. Often voters leave this to close to the deadline. Doing so in 2021 could lead to considerable pressure on electoral administrators. It could also lead to voters missing the deadline. This could mean that they have to attend polling stations, increasing the risk of spreading coronavirus. This postal vote campaign needs to start now. It needs to use all available channels of communication.</p>
<p>There needs also to be clear communication to the media, to voters and political parties that counts will take longer. Results are unlikely to be available overnight.</p>
<p>Communicating what to expect in polling stations will also be important. Voters will find social distancing in place, where appropriate, with one-way systems and possible limits on numbers in polling stations. There will be regular sanitisation and an expectation that voters will wear face coverings. In recent years, there has been a conspiracy theory and movement against pencils in polling booths (using #UsePens on social media), suggesting that pencil marks are insecure and might be changed. In 2021, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/10/use-your-vote-but-bring-your-own-pen-uk-local-elections-made-covid-safe">voters may actually have to take their own</a> instead of using a shared pencil, or single-use pens or pencils may have to be provided.</p>
<p>A fine balance will need to be struck on any future decisions if the Scottish pandemic gets worse. Principles of electoral integrity normally suggest that decisions should be made as early as possible to allow voters, parties and administrators time to adapt. The pandemic puts pressure on this principle – and changing conditions may require a last-minute rethink. But as it stands, Scotland has put in much of the preparatory work and appears ready to conduct these crucially important polls as originally scheduled.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/153127/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alistair Clark has received funding from the ESRC, British Academy, Nuffield Foundation and The Leverhulme Trust. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Toby James' research has been externally funded by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust, British Academy, Leverhulme Trust, AHRC, ESRC, Nuffield Foundation, SSHRC and the McDougall Trust.</span></em></p>There is talk of delay, but the Scottish parliament has been working since last year to make sure this vote can be held safely.Alistair Clark, Reader in Politics, Newcastle UniversityToby James, Professor of Politics and Public Policy, University of East AngliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1291212019-12-19T13:50:57Z2019-12-19T13:50:57ZScottish referendum: the law may not be on SNP’s side, but Boris Johnson’s refusal makes for increasingly unstable union<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/307899/original/file-20191219-11951-9nodrt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption"></span> </figcaption></figure><p>It’s happening again. As the dust settled on the general election, Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon announced that Boris Johnson has “<a href="https://www.channel4.com/news/sturgeon-says-johnson-has-no-right-to-block-indyref2">no right</a>” to prevent another Scottish independence referendum. Now the Scottish government has published a 40-page document, <a href="https://www.gov.scot/news/independence-referendum-transfer-of-power-demanded/">Scotland’s Right to Choose</a>, which sets out the “democratic case” for indyref2.</p>
<p>Speaking in the Scottish parliament, Sturgeon declared the election to be a “<a href="https://www.snp.org/nicola-sturgeons-statement-to-the-scottish-parliament/">watershed</a>” that fundamentally altered the relationship between Scotland and the rest of the UK. </p>
<p>This echoed her speech of March 2017 when she wanted to hold an independence referendum in the wake of the UK’s vote to leave the EU. This request was rejected by Theresa May and led to a fall in support for the SNP in the shock election of that year. Most of that support was recovered in December’s election and the campaigning drums for indyref2 have begun again. What has still not been resolved though are the legal issues surrounding another vote on independence.</p>
<p>In 2012, the <a href="http://www.gov.scot/About/Government/concordats/Referendum-on-independence">Edinburgh Agreement</a> was signed by the UK and Scottish governments, following negotiations that determined the legal basis of the first referendum. What is known as a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/465294/Devolution_Guidance_Note_14_orders_made_under_section_30_2_of_the_scotland_act_alterations_to_legislative_competence.pdf">section 30</a> order was granted by the UK government which temporarily gave the Scottish parliament the power to pass a law allowing an independence referendum to be held. But the crucial word here is “temporarily”.</p>
<p>The 2012 order gave the Scottish parliament the right to pass the 2013 <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2013/14/contents">Scottish Independence Referendum Act</a>, then that right was quickly transferred back to London after the 2014 vote.</p>
<p>When the demand was resurrected in 2017, the terrain was very different compared with five years before. In 2012, the UK coalition government played gentler mood music and recognised the authority of the SNP administration and its electoral mandate to hold a referendum.</p>
<p>Yet May’s government was quick to dismiss the demand. It <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-referendum-second-independence-brexit-theresa-may-downing-street-a7627066.html">stated</a> baldly that “a majority of people in Scotland do not want a second independence referendum”. If anything, Johnson’s response, bolstered by a huge parliamentary majority, is even more recalcitrant.</p>
<p>A matter of days after his triumph he was dismissive of the demand. The Conservatives, he said, represent “a majority of people in Scotland who do not want to return to division and <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-second-independence-referendum-scotland-nicola-sturgeon-a4313401.html">uncertainty</a>”. So can the law provide any help to resolve this?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/307900/original/file-20191219-11914-btmgxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/307900/original/file-20191219-11914-btmgxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307900/original/file-20191219-11914-btmgxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307900/original/file-20191219-11914-btmgxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307900/original/file-20191219-11914-btmgxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307900/original/file-20191219-11914-btmgxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307900/original/file-20191219-11914-btmgxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Nicola Sturgeon is pushing hard for Indyref2 in 2020.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/edinburghuk-april-28-2019-nicola-sturgeon-1383265799">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Where do powers lie?</h2>
<p>The root legal problem stems from <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-brexit-could-break-devolution-74106">devolution</a>. The Scottish parliament is not completely sovereign. <a href="https://www.parliament.scot/visitandlearn/Education/18642.aspx">Reserved powers</a> – those that remain with the UK government in Westminster – include defence, foreign affairs and immigration. The list of reserved areas can be changed and have been in the past, with more powers on tax and welfare being transferred to the Scottish parliament. However, reserved areas continue to include constitutional issues – including matters relating to “<a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/schedule/5">the Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England</a>”.</p>
<p>Scottish politicians can debate these matters in Edinburgh – for instance, the Scottish parliament made its opposition <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/feb/07/scottish-parliament-backs-symbolic-motion-rejecting-article-50">to Brexit</a> known – but the parliament cannot pass legislation on them.</p>
<p>Before the Edinburgh Agreement of 2012 there was a debate on whether a referendum could be held without permission from Westminster. This remained theoretical, as negotiations were concluded between the UK and Scottish governments and a legal agreement was struck for Scotland to hold a referendum on independence. Given a similar agreement does not seem imminent this debate could be resurrected, but Sturgeon is adamant that she only wants an independence referendum “that is beyond legal challenge”.</p>
<p>Under the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/section/30">Scotland Act 1998</a> there is no legal requirement for the UK government to hand the Scottish parliament temporary powers under section 30 to allow a vote on the constitution and the future of the union. Withholding such powers is a political decision – as both May and Johnson have shown.</p>
<p>Yet the very recent memory of the UK government’s humiliating defeat in the Supreme Court over their <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-judgment.pdf">prorogation</a> of Westminster in September 2019 has spurred many to consider that a similar legal action could be launched to force Johnson to concede a second referendum. Such hope is likely to be fruitless.</p>
<p>This is because the lack of a positive legal obligation and the refusal of the UK government to concede anything means that any court action would be seeking to review the absence of a decision rather than a proactive move like the suspension of Westminster. This is much more difficult.</p>
<p>Indeed, the Scottish government has been much more circumspect on the potential for legal action. Sturgeon has chosen to use the language of the “democratic case” for transferring powers rather than a legal one. Scotland is being “<a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/uk-cant-imprison-scotland-says-sturgeon-after-gove-rules-out-independence-vote-ztdz0ml22">imprisoned in the UK</a> against its will” – sets the tone. But again these are political pressures.</p>
<p>Even the newly <a href="https://www.gov.scot/news/independence-referendum-transfer-of-power-demanded/">published document</a> by the Scottish government
makes no mention of proactive legal action but rather makes a series of political demands for legal reform.</p>
<h2>Looking ahead</h2>
<p>If there is no section 30 order or negotiated agreement the Scottish parliament could still debate a second independence referendum bill. Normally, if the bill is outside the powers of the parliament and deals with a reserved matter, the presiding officer who chairs the Scottish parliament can give a view that the law should not be discussed.</p>
<p>Last year he did this with the Scottish government’s proposed Continuity Bill which dealt with the potential aftermath <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-43227809">of Brexit</a>. However, it was still debated and voted on as the Scottish government and the Lord Advocate took a different legal position.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/307907/original/file-20191219-11946-rb5b94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/307907/original/file-20191219-11946-rb5b94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=678&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307907/original/file-20191219-11946-rb5b94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=678&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307907/original/file-20191219-11946-rb5b94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=678&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307907/original/file-20191219-11946-rb5b94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=852&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307907/original/file-20191219-11946-rb5b94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=852&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/307907/original/file-20191219-11946-rb5b94.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=852&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Boris Johnson has refused point blank to consider a second independence referendum.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/london-uk-24th-july-2019-boris-1460208074">Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>So a specific second independence referendum could theoretically be debated without the presiding officer’s approval and it could even be passed by the parliament. But it could then be referred to the Supreme Court by the UK government to prevent it becoming law as it is outwith the Scottish government’s powers. This was done in the case of the Continuity Bill, which was <a href="https://www.holyrood.com/news/view,eu-continuity-bill-was-within-competence-of-scottish-parliament-when-it-was_9642.htm">not approved by the court</a>.</p>
<p>Even if this did not happen, any act could face legal challenges in court after it is passed. The legal challenge does not need to be brought by the UK government; any Scottish citizen has the right to bring a legal action. </p>
<p>So a referendum without a section 30 order is full of potential legal pitfalls, and there is no clear route to use the law to force the UK government to give such an order.</p>
<p>Curiously though, there is a <a href="https://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/Bills/111844.aspx">Referendums Bill</a> being debated by the Scottish parliament which is being voted on just before Christmas. This makes no mention of independence or any substantive topic but instead deals with the mechanics of how any referendum could be organised by the Scottish government.</p>
<p>This is a bit of a sideshow to the main attraction, but even in the discussions about this procedural law there was a concession that the question and substance of any future independence referendum would have to go through the legal process of the Scottish parliament <a href="https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/14934/referendum-bill-msps-reject-50-turnout-amendment-branded-ghost-1979">again</a>.</p>
<p>This likelihood though is purely theoretical until the fundamental division between the UK and Scottish governments is resolved. It does not seem possible that the law can resolve the issue but equally, a point-blank UK refusal to consider any change seems to promise a very unstable future for the union.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/129121/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick McKerrell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The prime minister may be assured that this issue will not be going away any time soon as Nicola Sturgeon makes a democratic case for transferring powers rather than a legal one.Nick McKerrell, Senior Lecturer in Law, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/966642018-05-16T10:06:55Z2018-05-16T10:06:55ZScotland’s Brexit Bill rejection could be the start of a new constitutional crisis<p>“Vote leave to take back control” – but control of what, and from whom? The plethora of questions stemming from this Brexit mantra have already threatened to steer the UK towards a new constitutional crisis. And now, in an unprecedented move, the Scottish parliament is expected to, for the first time, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44108200">refuse a legislative consent motion</a> (LCM) from the UK government relating to the EU Withdrawal Bill. </p>
<p>First minister Nicola Sturgeon has called it part of Scotland fighting back against attempts to undermine the devolved administrations, and Westminster’s opportunistic Brexit <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-40586269">“power-grab”</a>. But it may also just be the first step in a new bid for Scottish independence, and ultimately a constitutional crisis for the whole country. </p>
<p>Sometimes referred to as <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/legislative-consent/">a Sewel motion</a>, a LCM is a motion passed by the Scottish parliament, Welsh assembly or Northern Irish assembly indicating their respective agreement to Westminster passing new laws in areas that they would traditionally have control of – for example health or education. </p>
<p>LCMs operate on the basis that, by convention, the UK legislature will not normally pass laws that either directly affect a devolved subject matter – areas which are <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35559447">typically controlled by the devolved government</a> such as health, or education, for example – , or change the competence, or powers, of a devolved legislature or its ministers, without consent to do so. </p>
<p>However, while these rules exist politically (and have been recognised in the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/11/contents/enacted">Scotland Act</a> and <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2017/4/contents/enacted">Wales Act</a>), they are not legally binding. Nor do they limit the sovereign power of the UK parliament. </p>
<h2>Devolution disputes</h2>
<p>Since <a href="https://gov.wales/newsroom/firstminister/2017/170713-joint-statement-from-first-ministers-of-wales-and-scotland/?lang=en">2017</a>, both the Scottish and Welsh governments have <a href="https://theconversation.com/fact-check-can-wales-and-scotland-block-the-brexit-repeal-bill-81041">disputed the repatriation</a> of powers from Brussels to the UK in areas that are theoretically of devolved importance, but in practice are governed by EU law (which currently takes precedence over domestic rules). </p>
<p>The devolved governments’ concerns relate to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-43343716">24 retained areas of control</a>, including agriculture and fisheries. At present, the UK government, under the “<a href="https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/public-administration-and-constitutional-affairs-committee/news-parliament-2017/devolution-clause-11-report-published-17-19/">constitutionally insensitive</a>” clause 11 of the Brexit Bill, states that they should have power to amend “retained EU law”, rather than Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/219075/original/file-20180515-195318-cfv9es.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/219075/original/file-20180515-195318-cfv9es.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/219075/original/file-20180515-195318-cfv9es.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/219075/original/file-20180515-195318-cfv9es.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/219075/original/file-20180515-195318-cfv9es.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/219075/original/file-20180515-195318-cfv9es.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/219075/original/file-20180515-195318-cfv9es.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Scottish parliament.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/edinburgh-scotland-uk-may-27-2016-685365952">jax10289/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The UK government argues that they need to retain these powers, for an intermittent period of time, so as to create a new UK-wide legal framework to replace EU legislation. It claims this is needed to protect the UK markets, and avoid a direct impact on trade via divergence across the different UK regions. </p>
<p>The Scottish government, however, argues that such action defies the will of the Scottish people who voted in favour of Scottish devolution. Sturgeon has said that the UK government <a href="https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-says-cant-trust-12537066">cannot be trusted with devolution</a>, and <a href="https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/constitutional-crisis-looms-as-msps-prepare-to-reject-uk-s-brexit-bill-1-4739408">the principle issue</a> is that “the consent of the Scottish parliament to the removal of any of its powers should be an absolute prerequisite”.</p>
<p>Scotland’s Brexit minister Mike Russell has added that refusing the LCM presents the Scottish parliament with a powerful opportunity to unite together and “<a href="https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/constitutional-crisis-looms-as-msps-prepare-to-reject-uk-s-brexit-bill-1-4739408">protect the powers of devolution</a>”, by sending a signal that Scotland will not accept attempts to constrain their powers. </p>
<p>Although these are both strong political sentiments, refusing a LCM – alone – is less likely to achieve legal impact on the Brexit Bill. </p>
<h2>Scotland fronting the challenge</h2>
<p>By contrast, following months of negotiations, the majority of Welsh assembly members (AMs) are expected to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-44109489">back the Brexit Bill</a>, and approve the LCM. This is on the basis that the EU powers will be held in Westminster for up to seven years before being devolved back to Wales. </p>
<p>But why the differing opinions over LCMs? It is worth noting the different political climate in Wales compared to Scotland. The majority of Welsh constituencies <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/eu_referendum/results">voted in favour</a> of Brexit. And there are a higher percentage of UKIP and Conservative AMs <a href="http://senedd.assembly.wales/mgMemberIndex.aspx?FN=PARTY&VW=LIST&PIC=0">in Wales</a> compared to MSPs <a href="http://www.parliament.scot/msps/12450.aspx">in Scotland</a>. </p>
<p>Furthermore, with the collapse of the power-sharing agreement in Northern Ireland, there is no official government <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-politics-42608322">representing Nothern Irish views in these negotiations</a>. </p>
<h2>Where next?</h2>
<p>The legal reality is, even if the Scottish parliament refuses to approve a LCM, Brexit legislation will not be delayed. Furthermore, the UK government has already indicated that it is willing to challenge Scotland over <a href="https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk-to-challenge-scotland-s-brexit-bill-in-supreme-court-1-4722757">its recent legislation pertaining to Brexit</a>. But, <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2011-0108.html">as in previous cases</a>, it is likely that the Scottish government will similarly want to launch a legal challenge in the Supreme Court. This time relating to new laws that go against the devolved legal competence of Scotland. </p>
<p>However, given UK sovereignty rules, and that the Supreme Court has <a href="https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0196.html">already stated</a> that LCMs are just political conventions – and that policing their scope and manner “does not lie within the constitutional remit of the judiciary” – it seems unlikely that Scotland will enjoy much success in pursuing such arguments. </p>
<p>But that won’t be the end of things. Instead, the looming constitutional crisis may come politically. There will likely be consequences for Westminster, which will be seen as defying the will of the Scottish people “again”. They voted in favour of devolution after all. Scotland also voted against Brexit, and yet is having to go through with it too. With this backdrop the whole country may very well be heading towards a new constitutional crisis and a <a href="https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/2018-year-nicola-sturgeon-calls-indyref2/">second Scottish independence referendum</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96664/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Stephen Clear does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Scotland’s decision to reject the Brexit Bill may herald a national constitutional crisis.Stephen Clear, Lecturer in Law, Bangor UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/764732017-04-24T18:10:26Z2017-04-24T18:10:26ZLorenzo Fioramonti interview: the man who would rid the world of GDP<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166514/original/file-20170424-12650-x9adg4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Fioramonti in Edinburgh. </span> </figcaption></figure><p>The South African economist Lorenzo Fioramonti is one of the leading critics of the fact that we measure the well-being of society using a single statistic. In three books, most recently <a href="https://lorenzofioramonti.org/books/">The World After GDP</a> (2015), he argues that the economic activity captured in gross domestic product (GDP) has been the priority for policies and incentives around the world for the past few decades – with disastrous results.</p>
<p>At <a href="http://www.parliament.scot/visitandlearn/100944.aspx">a recent guest lecture</a> at the Scottish parliament in Edinburgh that was organised by the <a href="http://www.carnegieuktrust.org.uk">Carnegie UK Trust</a>, Fioramonti told his audience that GDP is a fundamentally flawed measure of economic performance, let alone well-being. </p>
<p>It has been foisted on the world by rich countries, especially the US, and the political interests that they represent. Just as those who live by the sword die by the sword, any democratic government can expect to lose power if it fails to increase GDP. </p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=827&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=827&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=827&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1040&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1040&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166522/original/file-20170424-23807-8kl085.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1040&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">James Carville, 1992.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Back in 1992 it was <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/interviews/carville.html">James Carville</a>, Bill Clinton’s director of strategy, who kept repeating to the future president the phrase: “It’s the economy, stupid”. Carville knew President Bush would struggle to defend his handling of the economy. He insisted Clinton repeatedly raise weak GDP growth to show Bush was failing to lead the country. </p>
<p>Sure enough, it helped win the election. Case closed? Not according to Fioramonti.</p>
<h2>Simplicity and complexities</h2>
<p>Economists like GDP <em>because</em> it is a single statistic. It seems precise. But as Fioramonti pointed out on a day the Scottish parliament <a href="http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/report.aspx?r=10890">had been</a> debating a small fall in Scottish GDP, the initial estimates are always subject to revision. Important variables are only available after taxes have been paid, so the most accurate figures take two or three years. By the time those are published, there probably won’t be any debates in parliament on the subject.</p>
<p>Then there is how to measure GDP. Most countries total all of the income that activities produce, ranging from the wages of individuals to the revenue of companies. But this can lead to all kinds of distortions. Take Ireland, for example. If a UK shopper buys a product online from a retailer domiciled in Ireland, that retailer’s income will be counted as part of Ireland’s GDP. </p>
<p>That would be perfectly reasonable for, say, an Irish shop with a website. But many multinationals put all their European sales through an Irish business unit for tax purposes. Consequently Irish GDP is no longer an accurate measure of the economy’s performance.</p>
<p>When I interviewed Fioramonti after his lecture, he quickly rejected any suggestion that you could solve these problems simply by having a better measure of GDP. This would simply continue to confuse the wealth of the nation with its income, and fail to value other factors important to our well-being such as sustainability. If an offshore drilling company is depleting the Great Barrier Reef, say, focusing on GDP merely continues to prioritise the business success over the environmental damage. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166516/original/file-20170424-25594-1udhrpz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Coral not collateral.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/stony-coral-colony-soldier-fish-great-41937349?src=4d8qSiR78TeLMF-iJx050w-1-14">Pete Niesen</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>From depression to depressing</h2>
<p>Fioramonti linked the primacy of GDP to the development of <a href="http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2014/09/basics.htm">Keynesian</a> thought and the perceived need to measure national income after the global slump of the 1930s. His characterisation of the use of GDP in political analysis reminded me of Keynes’ <a href="http://cas2.umkc.edu/economics/people/facultypages/kregel/courses/econ645/winter2011/generaltheory.pdf">claim</a> that “madmen in authority, who hear voices in the air, are distilling their frenzy from some academic scribbler of a few years back”. </p>
<p>But Fioramonti believes economists cannot shrug off responsibility for politicians’ use of GDP. The Keynesian economists who adopted GDP growth as a policy target after the war ignored Keynes’ own <a href="http://www.econ.yale.edu/smith/econ116a/keynes1.pdf">critique</a> that monetary values cannot truly measure well-being. And when Keynesian demand management failed to achieve strong GDP growth in the 1960s and 1970s, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/nov/16/post650">neoliberal economists</a> who came to the fore compounded the problem by making that growth an even greater priority. </p>
<p>For Fioramonti, weaning the world off GDP is a little like playing chess: you need to win by accepting the rules and conventions of the game before you can change the game. In other words, you need to demonstrate to advocates that, as in the Irish example, GDP no longer measures well-being. </p>
<p>So far so compelling, but I must admit I struggled with his proposed alternative. Fioramonti envisages a “census of assets” – a 21st-century global <a href="http://www.domesdaybook.co.uk">Domesday Book</a> that would be a record of how people value the assets they need for a good life. It would include everything from jobs to shelter to the surrounding countryside. It would use the language of sustainability and need, and what was included would be subject to a public vote. </p>
<p>I pressed him on how we might value and compare the multiple sources of well-being that are essential to an alternative approach. He was clear it wouldn’t be primarily about assigning monetary values to things. </p>
<p>You would accept that different categories would be measured in different ways and that these would all be part of the mix. Where it made sense you would monitor resource depletion, for instance reducing the value you ascribe to the Great Barrier reef as appropriate.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/166518/original/file-20170424-12645-w6fzc8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">God Damn Pounds.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/finance-concept-stack-coins-gdp-gross-578264188?src=xeL0MP1xI1uddwGh3XlRvQ-1-97">mrfiza</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All these measurements would go towards a national “performance dashboard” – in line with a concept <a href="http://www.carnegieuktrust.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/sites/64/2016/02/pub1455011423.pdf">being promoted</a> by the Carnegie Trust. The trust shares Fioramonti’s <a href="http://www.carnegieuktrust.org.uk/project/measuring-what-matters/">interest</a> in measuring well-being and incidentally sees <a href="http://www.gov.scot/About/Performance/scotPerforms">Scotland’s efforts</a> to score its government policies using a wide range of indicators as being at the leading edge. </p>
<p>Our discussion was rapidly going away from economics towards something much broader. Fioramonti said he considers even social interactions to be vital to well-being. I certainly agreed with this, but it highlights a problem of practicality. The challenge for developing Fioramonti’s census will be balancing the easily measurable factors associated with well-being with the broader range that are arguably important. </p>
<p>It is not made easier because Fioramonti and other critics of GDP seem to value dialogue rather than statistical measurement. He talks about beating the economists at their own chess game, but he seems to have left the table after an opening gambit.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/76473/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert Mochrie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>South African economist is one of leading voices questioning the way we relate everything to a single statistic.Robert Mochrie, Associate Professor of Economics, Heriot-Watt UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/747842017-03-17T18:01:38Z2017-03-17T18:01:38ZNicola Sturgeon is playing great politics with indyref2 but victory still long way off<p>Who ended the week with the upper hand in the constitutional battle between the UK and Scottish governments? It started with Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, wrong footing London with <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39254695">her plan</a> for a second independence referendum in either late 2018 or early 2019. As a result, Theresa May <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-article-50-wont-be-triggered-this-week-theresa-may-eu-referendum-latest-news-rome-treaty-a7627676.html">appeared to</a> delay triggering the Brexit clause, <a href="http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html">Article 50</a> of the Treaty on European Union, until the end of March. </p>
<p>But on the eve of the <a href="https://www.snp.org/conference">SNP spring conference</a> in Aberdeen, the prime minister sought to seize back the initiative: with the <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/theresa-may-now-is-not-the-time-for-indyref2-1-4393668">repeated message</a> of “now is not the time”, she signalled she wouldn’t discuss a potential referendum before the Brexit negotiations are complete. Sturgeon’s team <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/nicola-sturgeon-rejects-holding-advisory-referendum-without/">responded</a> by insisting that the vote would happen on her timetable, while the first minister hinted at “other options” if she is formally turned down by the UK government. </p>
<p>May looks to be in the stronger position. The Conservative government <a href="https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2017/03/13/stephen-tierney-a-second-independence-referendum-in-scotland-the-legal-issues/">can in theory</a> prevent a referendum by withholding permission, while opinion polls <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/13/half-scots-do-not-back-second-independence-referendum-brexit/">tend to</a> indicate that a majority of Scottish voters do not want a referendum without knowing the results of the Brexit negotiations first. In appealing over the heads of the Scottish government, May’s position will play well both with voters most committed to Brexit and those fearful of greater uncertainty. </p>
<h2>Risk and reward</h2>
<p>Nevertheless the approach carries risks. After the Scottish parliament votes in favour of Sturgeon’s proposal on Wednesday March 22 – all but inevitable because of the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/scotland">pro-independence majority</a> between the SNP and Scottish Greens – Sturgeon will claim to have a democratic mandate. This will rally supporters and create a Scotland versus Westminster fight. The debate will shift from the pros and cons of independence to who has the right to decide on the vote. </p>
<p>The pro-independence side is guaranteed to exploit the Conservative democratic deficit to the hilt throughout. And May has the further weakness that she has no personal mandate at UK level either, relying instead on David Cameron’s <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results">victory in 2015</a>. If she were to decide for other reasons to address this by calling an early election, it could provide Sturgeon with a fresh Westminster mandate for a referendum if the Scottish nationalists were to repeat their near clean sweep of 2015. </p>
<p>In the short term, this polarisation between Sturgeon standing up for Scotland and May refusing to alter her course from hard Brexit might suit both their parties at the upcoming council elections in May. These are likely to be viewed as a test for both leaders – as a barometer of May’s early premiership and an opportunity for the SNP to take the last big prize in Scottish politics, Glasgow City Council. In this kind of nationalist/unionist battle, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are both likely to struggle. </p>
<p>The question though is how long the UK government can delay even discussing a potential referendum. To do so for the two years of Brexit negotiations will be difficult. This will depend on avoiding a sustained Yes lead in opinion polls and is unlikely to succeed without a concerted and risky campaign warning about the dangers of independence to the Scottish economy, currency and borders. Sturgeon’s latest hints about “other options” <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/nicola-sturgeon-rejects-holding-advisory-referendum-without/">might mean</a> there would be petitions and protests to contend with along the way. </p>
<h2>Plan B?</h2>
<p>Sturgeon no doubt expected the response that has come from Westminster. With May <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/03/brexit-bill-passed-mps-reject-lords-amendments">unwilling</a> to agree to amendments over the Brexit bill from the House of Lords and fighting High Court battles over the process, she was hardly likely to discuss a referendum for Scotland until after Brexit negotiations were completed.</p>
<p>This being the case, might she be thinking about holding a referendum without Westminster’s permission? Such an option is highly risky and the <a href="https://theconversation.com/scotland-and-a-second-independence-referendum-what-is-the-legal-situation-74468">issues of legality</a> would be paramount. Certainly the SNP government would want to avoid a situation where the process was blocked in the courts. As Catalonia <a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/81-of-catalans-vote-to-secede-from-spain-in-symbolic-referendum-2014-11?r=US&IR=T">demonstrated</a> in 2014, holding such a referendum without permission can result in No voters boycotting it and rendering the result meaningless. The <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/17/nicola-sturgeon-rejects-holding-advisory-referendum-without/">early indications</a> from the nationalists are that they are not heading in this direction. </p>
<p>For May, fighting on two fronts is never advisable. And when she does finally agree to a referendum it will be treated by the SNP as a victory over Westminster. May’s recent response makes that seem inevitable sooner or later, while Sturgeon <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39299305">has indicated</a> she is willing to negotiate on timing. One big question both sides will be asking themselves is who benefits more from holding the referendum after Brexit. Until more is known about the terms of the final Brexit deal, this is almost impossible to answer. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/d4XyylmlRiE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In the meantime, the SNP’s focus will be working out a strategy of how to win a referendum while maintaining and increasing support in the polls for independence. Crucially it has still to formulate arguments on the currency and economy, both of which were <a href="https://medium.com/@gordonguthrie/why-we-lost-a5085f807703">key weaknesses</a> in 2014; and also how to deal with the important minority of potential Yes voters who don’t want EU membership. </p>
<p>Indeed, if May had wanted to wrong foot the SNP she could have offered an earlier referendum. The UK government’s obsession with avoiding anything that makes it look weak to EU negotiators has limited its options, however.</p>
<p>Instead over the next few months the nationalists will have to work on the substance of their independence proposals. Sturgeon may score numerous political points over this second referendum, but lose sight of the underlying case and it will not matter much when it comes to the crunch.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74784/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>William McDougall does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Scottish and UK leaders exchanged fire this week – so, who’s winning?William McDougall, Lecturer in Politics, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/625042016-07-14T16:44:21Z2016-07-14T16:44:21ZWhy Theresa May will be tough for Nicola Sturgeon to deal with<p>On the day Theresa May took up residence at 10 Downing Street, the Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon <a href="https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon">had a message</a> for her: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The incoming PM has said to her party that ‘Brexit means Brexit’ – but she must not forget that Scotland voted to stay in the EU, and so for us remain means remain. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>It was an early reminder, in case the new British prime minister was in any doubt, that Scotland will be high in her in-tray. But what does May’s arrival mean for the Scottish independence movement? Will she have a different approach to David Cameron? Would it be different if another Tory leadership candidate had won?</p>
<p>Superficially, Sturgeon and May share common ground on Brexit. They both campaigned for Remain <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887">on June 23</a>. Both emerged as sober, reassuring voices in the turmoil after Leave won narrowly at UK level but Remain won in Scotland (and in Northern Ireland, London and Gibraltar). </p>
<p>Both women command the respect, if not always the warmth, of their peers. They have strong reputations for being pragmatic and thoughtful on policy and political strategy as well as tough negotiators in their respective parliaments. </p>
<p>May vs Sturgeon will therefore be fascinating. Scotland’s Remain vote has of course put independence back on the table, less than <a href="http://www.scotreferendum.com">two years after</a> 55% of voters chose the union on a high turnout of 85%. Sturgeon <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-scotland-32222806">long said</a> a UK Leave/Scottish Remain vote would justify a second referendum, and she now thinks this “<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36621030">highly likely</a>”. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=419&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=527&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=527&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/130569/original/image-20160714-23336-11he47h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=527&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Eyelids a-fluttering.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&autocomplete_id=&searchterm=Scotland%20EU&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=313580108">suns07butterfly</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The SNP’s problem is that they <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-60-support-needed-before-next-independence-referendum-1-3920508">don’t want</a> to push for another referendum until independence support <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sturgeon-is-cautious-about-second-independence-poll-3tzfl2fbk">is in</a> the 60% bracket, still a few points higher than most <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/support-for-scottish-independence-up-to-53-post-brexit-1-4164772">recent polls</a>. This necessitates a long game. </p>
<p>Meantime, Sturgeon is seeking a deal with EU leaders that would allow Scotland to remain in the EU while the rest of the UK leaves. She has also held meetings with London mayor Sadiq Khan and the chief minister of Gibraltar, Fabian Picardo with a view to building a strong alliance for future Brexit negotiations. </p>
<p>But should the EU effort fail, Westminster SNP leader Angus Robertson <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/angus-robertson-indyref2-will-be-held-if-brexit-talks-fail-1-4173933">said recently</a> that a second independence referendum would follow. Philip Hammond, May’s new chancellor, has <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36791851">since signalled</a> that Sturgeon’s EU initiative is unlikely to be workable. A collision therefore looks very likely. </p>
<h2>May well not</h2>
<p>May mentioned the importance of the union in her <a href="https://youtu.be/ImwWM-1UdgQ">maiden speech</a> as prime minister, reminding her audience that she represents the Conservative <em>and Unionist</em> Party. She previously <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/10/theresa-may-pledges-to-save-union-as-nicola-sturgeon-promises-sc/">said</a> she would “always stand up for Scotland’s place in the union”, <a href="http://www.conservativehome.com/parliament/2016/06/theresa-mays-launch-statement-full-text.html">and cited</a> fears about Scotland as one reason for backing Remain. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ImwWM-1UdgQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>She will keep a cooler head than defeated rivals Andrea Leadsom or Michael Gove. They are both volatile and outspoken and have displayed poor political judgement that would have haunted them over Scotland had either become prime minister. </p>
<p>Leadsom had previously <a href="http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/maggie-mark-ii-would-pm-8382453">complained about</a> Scotland receiving too much taxpayers’ money, while Gove <a href="http://www.thenational.scot/news/gove-will-ditch-barnett-formula-and-scotlands-new-fiscal-deal-claim-snp.19528">was accused</a> of planning to scrap the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/1580787/How-the-Barnett-formula-works.html">Barnett formula</a> that is used to distribute funds to UK regions according to need. May <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11579473/Theresa-May-Dont-let-Sturgeon-call-the-shots.html">did add</a> her voice to the Tory <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results">2015 UK election</a> message that voting Labour meant getting the SNP through a back-door coalition, but she still looks to have the least Scottish political baggage of the three. </p>
<p>May is probably also shrewd enough to be more careful than her blasé predecessor. She will want to learn from David Cameron’s promise to hold an EU referendum, which now looks a reckless gamble. This will likely make her reluctant to give the legal consent for a second Scottish referendum. </p>
<p>She will be acutely aware of the SNP’s 60% problem and will seek to keep separatist sentiment at bay through all means possible. Reminding the Scots of the power of the union looks like one strategy. We can also expect to hear her selling the value of being both in the UK and with favourable access to the European single market, assuming she achieves <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/philip-hammond-brexit-single-market-eu-referendum-theresa-may-cabinet-chancellor-a7136101.html">that kind of deal</a> in the Brexit negotiations. </p>
<h2>Relying on Ruth</h2>
<p>Backed by only one Westminster MP in Scotland and with no mandate from a general election, however, May does lack legitimacy north of the border. Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson will therefore surely be a key lieutenant in selling the union, and has <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36770277">already been in London</a> to confer with the new prime minister. As a popular politician with strong debating skills and a mischievous wit, she has brought the Tories back from the dead in Scotland <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/scotland">to become</a> the largest opposition party. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/07/ruth-davidson-to-back-theresa-may-for-tory-leadership/">Davidson switched</a> to supporting May for the leadership after Stephen Crabb pulled out, but will now have the chance to enhance her reputation north and south of the border. Her growing esteem in London is already clear from her <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36790310">recent appointment</a> to the Privy Council. </p>
<p>Davidson <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14595310.Second_Scottish_independence_referendum_should_not_be_blocked__according_to_Ruth_Davidson/">did say</a> prior to May’s arrival that the UK should not block another independence referendum (Scottish secretary David Mundell <a href="https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/politics/scottish-politics/213848/second-independence-vote-is-publics-choice-mundell/">said similar</a>). But that is not incompatible with a strategy to keep independence support below the level where the SNP would seek a vote. </p>
<p>The Scottish Tory leader has <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36770277">also urged</a> May to seek “positive engagement” with the Scottish government, while saying a second independence referendum <a href="https://next.ft.com/content/501c3aab-1822-398d-b677-435cd83ed2da">would be</a> “irresponsible” <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36613544">and not</a> “in the best interests of Scotland”. </p>
<p>For her part, Nicola Sturgeon will be watching those opinion polls closely and seeking to exploit all opportunities to make them shift. First up will probably be the Westminster vote on whether the UK should renew its Trident nuclear deterrent, based near Glasgow, to which the Scottish nationalists are passionately opposed. Expect them to make a case that May is out of touch with voters north of the border, and for this to be a running theme. </p>
<p>To be clear, it will be no small achievement if May manages to keep Scotland in the union in the coming years. But among the leadership hopefuls and compared to David Cameron, the Conservatives have almost certainly chosen the best person for the job.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62504/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alexander Smith has received research funding from the British Academy, ESRC and the Leverhulme Trust.</span></em></p>The two women at the top of UK politics could be heading for a disagreement.Alexander Smith, Senior Leverhulme Research Fellow and Assistant Professor in Sociology, University of WarwickLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/617112016-06-27T15:48:45Z2016-06-27T15:48:45ZScotland can’t veto Brexit – but London may be unable to stop indyref2<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/128346/original/image-20160627-28362-mmhipx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">'Nice knowing you.'</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&autocomplete_id=&searchterm=scotland%20brexit&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=442815037">GrAI</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As the general chaos around Brexit engulfed the UK one more dramatic headline <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/26/nicola-sturgeon-new-scottish-referendum-brexit">emerged</a>: “Scottish parliament could block Brexit.” </p>
<p>Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-36633244">was asked</a> in a BBC interview on Sunday June 26 whether her parliament might withhold the consent required to pass the UK legislation required to leave the EU. Scotland faces losing its EU status despite every local authority voting to Remain in the EU referendum. “That’s got to be on the table,” she replied. “You’re not going to vote for something that is not in Scotland’s interests.” </p>
<p>Is it true? The short answer is no. Alex Salmond was quick to point this out in another BBC interview when <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/27/alex-salmond-scottish-parliament-cannot-block-brexit/">he stressed</a> that the “word ‘veto’ never passed her lips”. </p>
<p>The reason for possible confusion is that if Westminster decides to pass legislation that will affect issues under Holyrood jurisdiction, the Scottish parliament needs to be consulted and pass a motion of consent first. The <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/11/contents/enacted">Scotland Act 2016</a> passed on the back of the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/scotland-decides/results">Scottish independence referendum</a> put this on a statutory footing, though it was the recognised practice anyway. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/11/section/2/enacted">According to</a> the Act:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the parliament of the United Kingdom will not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters without the consent of the Scottish parliament. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Brexit changes will certainly fall into the category that requires this consent. The laws that tie the UK to the EU require to be repealed – most notably the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1972/68/contents">European Communities Act 1972</a>. These laws are intrinsic to how the Scottish parliament operates, since for example all legislation it passes has to comply with EU law. </p>
<p>Given that every Scottish local authority has voted to remain in the EU and most Holyrood politicians took the same view, Nicola Sturgeon was therefore correct to raise the prospect of the Scottish parliament withholding a “legislative consent” motion for repealing these laws.</p>
<p>Yet like most things in life, context is all. The sovereignty of Westminster on its own decisions is also guaranteed by the legislation around devolution. <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/46/contents">It says</a> the relevant laws do not “affect the power of the parliament of the United Kingdom to make laws for Scotland”.</p>
<p>This means that power ultimately rests with Westminster. Even if the Scottish parliament registers concern or outright opposition, the laws to exit the EU could still be passed. This may be politically problematic but Westminster’s power has no statutory restriction by the Scotland Acts. So to call it a “veto” is inaccurate. </p>
<p>The issue was even put to the test during the passage of the UK’s Welfare Reform Act of 2012. The Scottish parliament <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-16292327">declined</a> to grant legislative consent amid fears that the welfare cuts in the legislation would hurt the poor. It made no difference: the law was passed and fully implemented across the UK. </p>
<h2>Consent and indyref2</h2>
<p>This phantom “veto” is not the only Scottish constitutional issue to emerge from the earthquake of the EU referendum. The Scottish referendum that was once described as “<a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11095210/Alex-Salmond-This-is-a-once-in-a-generation-opportunity-for-Scotland.html">once in a generation</a>” is now “<a href="https://theconversation.com/scottish-independence-back-in-play-after-brexit-shock-with-a-note-of-caution-61457">highly likely</a>” to be repeated before the UK’s Brexit negotiations conclude, according to Sturgeon. </p>
<p>The legal issues around this so-called “indyref2” (second independence referendum) are not straightforward, however. The first referendum of September 2014 only came about following the <a href="http://www.gov.scot/About/Government/concordats/Referendum-on-independence">Edinburgh Agreement</a> between the Scottish and UK government. Westminster had to temporarily transfer powers to the Scottish parliament to run the referendum in a move that expired on December 31 2014.</p>
<p>The devolution legislation is ambiguous at best on Holyrood’s power to run an independence referendum of its own. The constitution is a reserved matter and by signing the Edinburgh Agreement, the Scottish government seemed to concede that Westminster approval is necessary.</p>
<p>If Westminster blocked a future referendum it would therefore have a legal basis to do so. Indeed prior to Brexit, this was the position of David Cameron, the prime minister. <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/27/david-cameron-rule-out-second-scottish-independence-referendum">He said</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I think it is important that a referendum is legal and properly constituted and that is what we had, and it was decisive, so I do not see the need for another one.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yet the question is as much political as legal. The idea of Westminster rejecting a referendum in the face of a deepening European constitutional crisis and contrary to the wishes of the Scottish government seems unlikely. The Scottish parliament would probably carry on regardless, even if it creates a legal minefield. The general public’s crash course in constitutional law may run for some time to come.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61711/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick McKerrell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>If Holyrood is ultimately answerable to Westminster, Westminster is ultimately answerable to realpolitik.Nick McKerrell, Lecturer in Law, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/595422016-05-31T10:55:32Z2016-05-31T10:55:32ZHow hyperlocal journalists plug the democratic gap in regional elections<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124151/original/image-20160526-22038-1vyzdcq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Without community journalists, many constituents would be uninformed about local issues.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Centre for Community Journalism, Cardiff University</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Millions of people voted in the UK’s local and national elections in May, but who can say how well informed they were about local issues? Some <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/06/london-mayoral-election-results-what-time-will-the-votes-be-coun/">45% of London voters</a> turned out for the mayoral elections, 55.6% voted in the Scottish Parliament election and 45% at the Welsh Assembly elections, but it is near impossible to ascertain what they knew about their nominee’s policies.</p>
<p>The UK’s local <a href="https://theconversation.com/depleted-local-media-threatens-ability-to-hold-those-in-power-to-account-58322">news landscape has been decimated</a> due to mergers, cuts and closures. This has amounted to a steady and widespread withdrawal of professional journalism from our cities, towns and villages – and a resulting drop in information. But all is not lost just yet: at the same time a new generation of “hyperlocal” or community news outlets have emerged.</p>
<p>Often run by volunteers or a small team of professional journalists, these local news websites, papers and magazines are dedicated to the communities in which they are based. The hyperlocal sector is financially precarious, however – a survey I conducted which was published in 2014 indicated that only a <a href="https://www.communityjournalism.co.uk/research/the-state-of-uk-hyperlocal-community-news-a-survey/">third of community news publishers</a> make any money and those who do are usually making modest amounts. <a href="https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/success-with-mixed-funding-models-brings-optimism-to-community-websites/s2/a604846/">Funded by a mixture</a> of donations, advertising, membership fees, crowdfunding and grants – to survive, this new media sector relies heavily on the dedication of its readers to survive. In order to continue, the hyperlocal outlets need support from their communities from the get-go, drawing local people – and businesses – in not only as consumers but as funders and champions of the cause.</p>
<h2>Grassroots engagement</h2>
<p>Community journalists have a close connection with the areas they cover, routinely reporting on local events and being more likely to quote ordinary people than <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21670811.2014.965932">established newspaper publishers</a>. Many also cover local politics very closely, often reporting on council meetings and supplying electoral information at a grassroots level.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124147/original/image-20160526-22038-1isd0ql.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/124147/original/image-20160526-22038-1isd0ql.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124147/original/image-20160526-22038-1isd0ql.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124147/original/image-20160526-22038-1isd0ql.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124147/original/image-20160526-22038-1isd0ql.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124147/original/image-20160526-22038-1isd0ql.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/124147/original/image-20160526-22038-1isd0ql.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Centre for Community Journalism, Cardiff University</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The strong relationships that local outlets build with communities often make for very engaged audiences. The producers of Welsh town website Wrexham.com, for example, <a href="http://www.wrexham.com/news/leader-circulation-drops-a-further-15-with-leaderlive-website-down-4-108573.html">recently wrote about differences</a> between their output and that of the established online news outlet in the area, the Trinity Mirror-owned Wrexham Leader newspaper and accompanying website <a href="http://www.leaderlive.co.uk/">Leader Live</a>. Wrexham.com, which is run by only two full-time journalists, publishes considerably less news than Leader Live – but, by some measures, it claims that its audience engagement far outstrips the paper.</p>
<p>Traditional local publishers continue to retreat from communities, moving from town centres to regional hubs and <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b4c85b58-2c75-11e5-acfb-cbd2e1c81cca.html">closing local offices</a> which used to provide a valuable point of contact with readers. By contrast, hyperlocal journalists typically live and work in the communities they serve and many are committed to engaging with audiences in real life, as well as digital contexts. </p>
<p>In north London, strong engagement with community news service <a href="https://twitter.com/WHampstead">@WHampstead on Twitter</a> translated into a high turnout for its <a href="https://www.communityjournalism.co.uk/blog/2015/04/17/hosting-a-hustings/">general election hustings event</a>, where the constituency’s candidates were grilled in front of a local audience. Indeed, in hyperlocal news it is now quite common to see this kind of mutually reinforcing real-world and online engagement with politics and community life.</p>
<h2>Encouraging democracy</h2>
<p>Electoral information does not always make for the sexiest of news, and is sometimes downplayed or ignored by local newspaper websites which prioritise clicks over the public interest. To combat this, for this year’s National Assembly for Wales elections, constituency-based website <a href="https://mycardiffnorth.com">My Cardiff North</a> provided information about how to register to vote, who was standing for election locally and details of previous election results for the constituencies in order to inform residents about local issues that the national failed to cover.</p>
<p>During the 2015 general election, community journalists around the country responded to audience questions – around the clock when it came to polling day – on issues such as voter eligibility and the opening times of polling stations. They provided information which could have made the difference between people bothering to vote or not. There was also a commitment to covering even very local <a href="http://alittlebitofstone.com/2015/04/28/stafford-borough-council-elections-walton-ward/">community or borough council elections</a>, explaining issues clearly and in ways that were eye-catching and engaging.</p>
<p>As well as attempting to address the democratic deficit, hyperlocal media has also produced some of the UK’s most innovative electoral coverage. Often finding new ways to engage with audiences and present information, such as organising Twitter hustings and broadcasting <a href="https://www.communityjournalism.co.uk/blog/2015/05/06/hyperlocal-teams-up-with-the-bbc-and-local-newspaper-for-general-election-debate/">candidate interviews on Periscope</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H7kPjC1vEs0?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The Bristol Cable, an <a href="https://thebristolcable.org/membership/">audience-owned media cooperative</a> with a focus on local investigations, <a href="https://thebristolcable.org/2016/04/mayoral-race/">produced an interactive video</a>, YouTube interviews, and interviews with voters for the 2016 Bristol mayoral elections. It even memorably got the city’s UKIP candidate to <a href="https://thebristolcable.org/2016/04/watch-shock-statement-by-ukip-mayoral-candidate/">call for the resignation</a> of party donor Aaron Banks over tax avoidance issues. Likewise, <a href="http://www.theedinburghreporter.co.uk">The Edinburgh Reporter</a> used smartphone app Replay for the May voting period to <a href="https://twitter.com/EdinReporter/status/727913908275712000">film short interviews with electoral candidates</a>, overlaid with text and graphics.</p>
<p>The efforts of hyperlocal reporters are not going unnoticed either: last year <a href="http://thelincolnite.co.uk">The Lincolnite</a> featured alongside big media behemoths Sky News and The Telegraph in industry website journalism.co.uk’s round-up of <a href="https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/how-have-the-uk-press-innovated-in-their-general-election-coverage-/s2/a565048/">innovative general election coverage</a>. This led to the Lincoln site joining forces with BBC Radio Lincolnshire during the 2016 Police and Crime Commissioner elections, for a <a href="http://thelincolnite.co.uk/2016/05/candidates-reactions-lincolnshire-pcc-debate/">debate followed by live candidate reactions</a>.</p>
<p>With the EU referendum on the horizon, hyperlocal journalists will no doubt be readying themselves to help local audiences understand just what is going on. Though on a national scale the work of hyperlocals do not entirely fill the widening “news gap” left by retreating traditional publishers, these community news providers are amply demonstrating the value of democratic engagement at a grassroots level.</p>
<p><em>This article was written in collaboration with project officer Hannah Scarbrough from <a href="https://www.communityjournalism.co.uk/en/">Cardiff University’s Centre for Community journalism</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59542/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andy Williams sits on the steering board of the Centre for Community Journalism at Cardiff University and has received funding from The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).</span></em></p>Community media is ensuring society stays informed at all political levels.Andy Williams, Lecturer (teaching and research), Cardiff UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/592082016-05-11T11:43:48Z2016-05-11T11:43:48ZA second indyref looks inevitable – the Scottish election changes nothing<p>It did not take long for political parties and commentators to start making confident pronouncements about what the <a href="https://paulcairney.wordpress.com/2016/05/06/the-scottish-parliament-election-2016-another-momentous-event-but-dull-campaign/">Scottish election result</a> means for the future of the union. Equal first prize must go to the Scottish Conservatives and the Scottish National Party. Ruth Davidson and her fellow Conservatives <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/13/ruth-davidson-pledges-to-fight-snp-with-new-campaign-for-the-uni/">are arguing</a> that commanding 24% of Holyrood seats gives them a mandate as the protector of the union, while Nicola Sturgeon <a href="http://stv.tv/news/politics/1353366-sturgeon-says-summer-independence-drive-will-go-ahead/">insists</a> the SNP has sufficient backing to relaunch its independence campaign in the summer – there is always the danger that the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/oct/28/scotland">leopard man of Skye</a> hasn’t heard about the issue, I suppose. </p>
<p>In truth, the result did not really tell us anything more about the two things we already know. The first is that in the short term, the only event that matters is the EU referendum vote on June 23. If most UK voters choose to leave the EU and most in Scotland vote to remain, there will be a constitutional crisis. The ruling SNP will push for a second referendum on Scottish independence; and along with the six Green MSPs, it will have the votes to pass a bill to that effect in the Scottish parliament. The only obstacle would be a UK government led by the party that just used a referendum to justify major constitutional change.</p>
<p>Second, in the absence of such an event we are just killing a horrible amount of time until the next meaningful opportunity to vote on Scottish independence. Assuming the SNP continues to win elections in Scotland, or at least pro-independence parties maintain a majority in Holyrood, I’ve always thought the gap would be about ten years. That would be enough time since the <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/events/scotland-decides/results">2014 vote</a> for the Yes side to see if it can produce a generational change in attitudes. </p>
<p>Instead of admitting this state of affairs, we have the usual posturing from the main parties. Both the Tories and the SNP know that the only other triggers of an early referendum are weak – the <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-60-support-needed-before-next-independence-referendum-1-3920508">SNP’s mooted shift</a> in independence support from the current high forties to around 60%; and the Scottish Greens’ <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/scottish-green-manifesto">mention of</a> a petition with maybe 100,000 votes. Yet they feel they have to keep up the longest game of chicken in Scottish political history. </p>
<p>The only party that really needs the further debate is Scottish Labour. The party’s attempts to appear flexible about the constitution and reinstate some distance with the more staunchly unionist Conservatives often make it look confusingly ambivalent. Witness the furore during the campaign when Labour leader Kezia Dugdale <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35948407">initially refused</a> to rule out backing a second independence referendum in the event of a Scottish Remain/UK Brexit vote. Nearer election day the party <a href="https://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/dugdale-doesnt-ever-want-to-take-part-in-another-independenc?utm_term=.nmLZJZPbOn#.xsxpKpeoxW">ruled out</a> another referendum for the duration of the current parliament. Now the deputy leader Alex Rowley and other senior voices are <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14479042.Labour_s_deputy_leader_says_party_must_back__home_rule__for_Scotland_after_election_disaster/?ref=rss">calling for</a> full home rule, and one backer, former Labour first minister Henry McLeish, <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/mcleish-calls-for-fresh-referendum-xtsnw0kpj">wants this</a> put to the public along with independence in a second referendum. </p>
<h2>The heart of the matter</h2>
<p>Another misleading trope is for commentators to <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/14479009.David_Torrance__The_Ulsterisation_of_Scottish_politics_is_complete/">argue that</a> this election marks the complete “Ulsterisation” of Scottish politics, where people vote SNP for independence or Conservative for the union and only identity-politics matters. </p>
<p>It must be a tempting argument, but <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-9248.12016/abstract">detailed analysis</a> dating back to the SNP victory in the <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2007/scottish_parliment/html/region_99999.stm">2007 election</a> strongly suggests that voters’ biggest reason for backing the party has been the belief it would do the best job in office – “<a href="http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/019924488X.001.0001/acprof-9780199244881-chapter-10">valence politics</a>”, as academics sometimes describe it. This is usually key to getting elected anywhere, along with having a leader and a vision for the future that voters respect. The SNP has benefited from being a party that looks highly professional, even if one’s belief in the party’s competence may admittedly be linked strongly to one’s belief in independence. </p>
<p>The same electoral reality explains why the Conservatives went big on Ruth Davidson during the campaign – many of their promotional materials did not even mention the party. It is also why they used a proxy for governing competence – <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/13/scottish-conservative-manifesto-strong-opposition-snp-ruth-davidson">“strong opposition”</a> – in the absence of the likelihood of them being in government. Meanwhile, Labour may have suffered because compared to the SNP and Conservatives, its seems shambolic. Identity politics surely matters as the factor which underpins core attitudes, but these perceptions around competence and leadership probably better explain the trends in support for each party.</p>
<p>Still, perhaps the biggest lesson from this election is that if you are determined to make and act on this argument about identity politics you should do it well. The SNP and Conservatives did it well. In contrast, too many senior people in Scottish Labour – including the leader, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0788y0t">Kezia Dugdale</a>, and former deputy <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/08/scottish-labour-under-pressure-revisit-home-rule">Anas Sarwar</a> – expressed disappointment that the electorate did not think like them. As has been <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/john-mcternan-three-reasons-why-voters-punished-scottish-labour-1-4121408">pointed out elsewhere</a>, this is hardly likely to endear voters. Put together, constitutional ambivalence and strategic incompetence can be off-putting. So the two biggest parties in the Scottish parliament might be annoyingly narrow-minded, but at least they look like they know what they are doing.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/59208/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Paul Cairney does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Everyone is trying to claim the Holyrood result furthers their own position. It’s all noise.Paul Cairney, Professor of Politics and Public Policy, University of StirlingLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/588292016-05-04T14:47:06Z2016-05-04T14:47:06ZGender balance is back on the agenda but can women get elected in 2016?<p>UK voters are heading to the polls to vote in an unprecedented number of elections outside a general election year. Chief among these are the devolved elections in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and London. And since the establishment of these regional bodies between 1998 and 2000, gender equality has been <a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/women-representation-westminster-stirbu/">a key theme</a>.</p>
<p>The road towards a gender balanced House of Commons has been a long and slow one, but devolved parliaments were an opportunity for a fresh start for female representation in British politics. The <a href="http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP12-43.pdf">first London Assembly in 2000 comprised 48% women</a>, and in 2003 the Welsh Assembly became the first national elected body in the world to achieve <a href="http://www.clickonwales.org/2016/03/how-feminist-is-the-welsh-assembly/">gender parity among its members</a>. The Scottish Parliament also saw close to 40% women in Holyrood in 2003. </p>
<p>These early successes proved to be a high water mark, however, and since 2003 the number of <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/mar/15/women-in-scottish-welsh-parliaments">women elected to the devolved bodies has either stalled or fallen</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121347/original/image-20160505-19858-zf6ljf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121347/original/image-20160505-19858-zf6ljf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=301&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121347/original/image-20160505-19858-zf6ljf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=301&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121347/original/image-20160505-19858-zf6ljf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=301&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121347/original/image-20160505-19858-zf6ljf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121347/original/image-20160505-19858-zf6ljf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121347/original/image-20160505-19858-zf6ljf.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=379&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fig.1: Proportion of female representatives over time.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Carl Cullinane</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, in 2016, as revealed by our research for the <a href="http://democraticdashboard.com/">LSE’s Democratic Dashboard</a>, the proportion of female candidates standing for election <a href="http://www.democraticaudit.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Gender-and-the-2016-Elections-Data-Briefing.pdf">has risen substantially</a> in all four jurisdictions, ranging from four percentage points in Wales to more than ten percentage points in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In the case of Wales and London, increases largely compensate for past falls, however the proportion of female candidates have reached all time highs in the Scottish Parliament and Northern Ireland Assembly elections.</p>
<p>In Northern Ireland, the number of women running has in fact doubled from 38 to 76 since 2011. This jump is particularly significant, as the proportion of female candidates running for Stormont has been both historically low in comparison to other elected bodies in the UK, and also stagnant, hovering between 17 and 19%. And the Northern Ireland Assembly <a href="http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-assembly-urged-to-end-gender-imbalance-31053610.html">has been described</a> as “one of the most unequal legislatures in Western Europe”. </p>
<p>This year’s increase to over 27% marks a significant juncture for female political participation in the province. Research has identified the increasing <a href="http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/knowledge_exchange/briefing_papers/series5/matthews-briefing.pdf">centralisation of the candidate selection process</a> as a source of progress, as the previous dominance of the grassroots in candidate selection had traditionally disadvantaged women. While Sinn Féin remains the only party to employ formal gender balance mechanisms, more women are running in 2016 in parties across the political spectrum.</p>
<p>Likewise, Scotland has seen significant progress in terms of female candidate selection, with several major parties, most notably Labour and the SNP, employing all women shortlists, along with “zipping” tactics – where men and women are alternated on party lists – to balance the regional lists. Placement in party list is a crucial issue, and <a href="https://genderpoliticsatedinburgh.wordpress.com/gender-and-candidate-selection-2016/">Labour and the SNP have achieved balance</a> (or very close to it) in their top three candidates in each region.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121348/original/image-20160505-19851-1p3xlx4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121348/original/image-20160505-19851-1p3xlx4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=321&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121348/original/image-20160505-19851-1p3xlx4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=321&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121348/original/image-20160505-19851-1p3xlx4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=321&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121348/original/image-20160505-19851-1p3xlx4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121348/original/image-20160505-19851-1p3xlx4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121348/original/image-20160505-19851-1p3xlx4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fig. 2: Proportion of female candidates, 2011-2016 (London Assembly 2012-2016)</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Carl Cullinane</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Translating into gains</h2>
<p>However, indications are that the increase in female candidates may not translate into equivalent increases in women elected. In London and Wales the number of women elected is likely to be either stagnant, or increase by a very small amount. In Wales, the Electoral Reform Society Cymru recently published an in-depth exploration of the picture for the Welsh Assembly, and found that while all women shortlists and zipping are used – in particular by the Labour Party – women are significantly more likely than men <a href="http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/sites/default/files/files/publication/Women-in-the-National-Assembly-of-Wales.pdf">to be defending “marginal” seats</a>. Of the 11 battleground constituencies, ten are being defended by women.</p>
<p>This picture is to an extent repeated elsewhere. There are two main mechanisms where more female candidates may not translate into more seats. One is intra-party competition, where women are selected to contest seats, or are allocated list positions, that are less likely to result in victory. </p>
<p>The second is inter-party variation in the proportion of women selected. There are drastic differences in gender balance between parties, with Labour, the SNP, the Greens and the Lib Dems achieving significant advances towards parity in the jurisdictions where they field candidates, while the Conservatives, UKIP and the DUP lag substantially behind, due to a lack of willingness to adopt the often internally unpopular all women shortlists and other such policies. Much of the increase in female candidates in 2016 is being driven by smaller parties less likely to win seats, in particular the Greens, the Women’s Equality party, along with RISE and Solidarity in Scotland.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121349/original/image-20160505-19877-1cr94je.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121349/original/image-20160505-19877-1cr94je.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121349/original/image-20160505-19877-1cr94je.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121349/original/image-20160505-19877-1cr94je.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=362&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121349/original/image-20160505-19877-1cr94je.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=456&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121349/original/image-20160505-19877-1cr94je.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=456&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121349/original/image-20160505-19877-1cr94je.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=456&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Fig. 3: Gender balance between parties in 2016 Scottish Parliamentary Election.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Carl Cullinane</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nonetheless, it is clear that gender balance is back on the agenda in these devolved elections. Northern Ireland stands on the cusp of change for female representation in Stormont, while Scotland could well bear out the <a href="http://www.democraticauditscotland.com/has-the-tide-turned-for-womens-representation-in-scotland/">prediction that the tide has turned for women</a> in politics there, led by women at the forefront of party leadership in Holyrood. Though the mixed electoral systems across the devolved nations make it very hard to predict, the prospects for women in Wales and London will likely to come down to fine margins. Regardless, this year is likely to see a step forward, even if a modest one, and, as the years since 2003 have shown, this isn’t something to take for granted.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58829/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Carl Cullinane receives funding from LSE HEIF5 Innovation Fund, Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, and Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust. This article does not reflect the views of the research councils or other public funders.</span></em></p>More candidates mean a change in politics, but it’s not as easy as creating policies such as all women shortlists.Carl Cullinane, Research Manager for Democratic Audit, London School of Economics and Political ScienceLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/425602015-05-29T14:23:39Z2015-05-29T14:23:39ZThe battle over assisted dying in the UK is far from over<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/83372/original/image-20150529-15214-oniawm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Where next for supporters of end-of-life choice?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&language=en&ref_site=photo&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&use_local_boost=1&autocomplete_id=14328950505615360000&search_tracking_id=pXRsT4W3PSUElktmgpQbzg&searchterm=euthanasia&show_color_wheel=1&orient=&commercial_ok=&media_type=images&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&color=&page=1&inline=164722760">Robert Kneschke</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-32887408">Scottish parliament’s decision</a> by 36 votes to 82 to reject assisted suicide is the second time it has done so. As <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_MembersBills/Final_version_as_lodged.pdf">in 2011</a>, the current bill was introduced by the late <a href="https://theconversation.com/margo-macdonald-independent-scot-1943-2014-25299">Margo MacDonald MSP</a>, only to be taken forward this time by Scottish Green co-convener <a href="http://www.patrickharviemsp.com">Patrick Harvie</a> after her death last year. And like 2011, it would be wrong to assume we have heard the last of it. </p>
<p>This most recent bill set out criteria which would have permitted those who were suffering from a life-shortening or terminal illness to receive assistance to end their life. There is an important distinction to be made between euthanasia and assisted suicide. In euthanasia the responsibility for overseeing death rests with a person other than the one who wishes to end their life. With assisted suicide, the person completes the final act themselves, but with the assistance of another. </p>
<p>The bill’s drafting represented some improvement on the 2011 version, though it is never going to be universally accepted when it is such a politically, morally and ethically sensitive subject. It provided that a “licensed facilitator” – not necessarily a healthcare professional – be appointed to provide “comfort and reassurance” and “practical assistance” for people with “terminal” or “life-shortening” conditions. </p>
<p>The parliamentary debate highlighted concerns over how to interpret these definitions. Such concerns are valid. There is a whole spectrum of what may be construed as assistance. To date, the law has not recognised helping someone to travel to another country to die as assistance, for example. But would putting pills into a person’s hands or mouth, or giving them a glass or water have been permitted within the provisions of the bill? </p>
<p>The definition of “life-shortening” was another major issue. Could it include someone with type-2 diabetes for example? Many of the politicians were understandably concerned that this definition could have permitted assisted suicide in a much wider set of circumstances than they thought reasonable.</p>
<p>They also raised concerns about distinguishing between euthanasia and assisted suicide, and the challenges of ensuring equality and protection to those living with a disability. And more broadly in relation to definitions, there were many references during the debate to the conclusion of <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_HealthandSportCommittee/Reports/her15-06w.pdf">the report</a> of the Health and Sport Committee that the bill had “significant flaws”. </p>
<p><strong>The Scottish parliament debate</strong> </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GywGBUkQPus?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>The current position</h2>
<p>Aside from the debate over the bill, the law is arguably not clear enough on what constitutes “causing” the death of another by providing the means of suicide. It is a question of when this amounts to culpable homicide or murder – as reflected by the uncertainty around what is meant by “assistance”, for instance. This was a recurring concern during the scrutiny of the Scottish bill both by the health and sport and <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/newsandmediacentre/85271.aspx">justice</a> committees. Yet during the parliamentary debate on May 27, Scottish health secretary Shona Robison <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-32802416">said</a>: “the government believes that the current law is clear, and it is not lawful to assist someone to commit suicide, and the government has no plans to change that”. This is not a view shared by all, it must be said, <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/top-legal-experts-call-for-clarity-over-the-shameful-right-to-die-legislation.122016109">including many</a> senior Scottish academics. </p>
<p>One reason for the perception of uncertainty in Scotland is that the courts have yet to consider the issue. In England, a series of court cases have considered whether the present law on assisting a suicide is incompatible with <a href="http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/documents/humanrights/hrr_article_8.pdf">article 8</a> of the <a href="http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf">Convention of Human Rights</a>, the right to respect for private and family life. One of the outcomes has been a <a href="http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/assisted_suicide.html">set of guidelines</a> from the Director of Public Prosecutions on what the law permits – an equivalent to which Scotland lacks. </p>
<p>In June 2014, in the case of Nicklinson and others, the UK Supreme Court <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-moves-to-join-countries-with-some-form-of-assisted-dying-but-a-way-to-go-yet-36311">concluded that</a> the law was inconsistent with article 8 of the convention, but it was the role of parliament to decide what to do about it. Westminster had such an opportunity following Lord Falconer’s <a href="http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2014-15/assisteddying.html">Assisted Dying Bill</a>, which proposed to provide “competent” adults who have less than six months to live with assistance to end their own life at their own request (you can read about the differences with the Scottish proposal <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk-moves-to-join-countries-with-some-form-of-assisted-dying-but-a-way-to-go-yet-36311">here</a>). But after months of deliberation and many amendments – filibustering by opponents, effectively – its passage ran out of time during the previous parliamentary session. Lord Falconer <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jan/17/assisted-dying-bill-held-up-in-the-house-of-lords">has said that</a> he will attempt to have a further bill introduced at a future session. </p>
<p>Back in Scotland, however, a court ruling on assisted dying is now in the offing. Gordon Ross, who suffers from a severe debilitating illness, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-32726294">has taken</a> his case to the Court of Session in Edinburgh requesting that the Lord Advocate issue guidance which makes clear whether any person who helps Ross end his life would be charged with an offence. The decision will be known in the next four to six weeks. </p>
<h2>Back from the dead?</h2>
<p>Following the parliamentary debate, one also senses unfinished business at Holyrood. While the majority of MSPs have said in a free vote that the bill could not continue because it was fundamentally flawed, is that really the case? Yes, there were issues with interpretation of some key terms and it is vital that the parameters of what constitutes “assistance” should be transparent and robust. But are these reasons for the bill to collapse altogether? </p>
<p>Patrick Harvie thinks not. He has repeatedly pointed out to colleagues that the parliamentary process would allow for further refinements, scrutiny and valuable debate to take place. There is certainly an argument that many of the definition problems could have been resolved after the first reading, had it passed. </p>
<p>Finally, while I am always nervous about polls and statistics and their potential to be interpreted to suit a particular view, there <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/scottish-politics/almost-thr.1432469329">does seem to be</a> a significant swell of public support for legalising assisted dying under certain conditions. Medical law has <a href="http://jme.bmj.com/content/28/4/232.full">already acknowledged</a> an individual’s autonomy to make decisions concerning the end of their life. So while the Scottish parliament may have spoken again, this is a discussion which will endure. It is not and should not be over.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/42560/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alison Britton does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The defeat of the Scottish Assisted Dying Bill may be a blow for supporters, but it is not terminal.Alison Britton, Professor of Healthcare and Medical Law, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/280092014-06-16T13:59:06Z2014-06-16T13:59:06ZIf Holyrood gets more powers, English views on regional parliaments may change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/51200/original/6r4dvvhg-1402921394.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">More powers are on the cards for the Scottish parliament</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/brostad/5841297115/in/photolist-9Ubb8e-6rKwh4-6rPEps-7haxbE-6rKvZx-8n8ou-7TJB4j-4Ep8Kc-9sj1H-9LRGiQ-9LNU2Z-ixDqJN-9sj22-9sj2L-5dvEp5-e68Psd-9LNRnH-dnVpjP-7B5Bzj-mFEkXk-caAd8u-8zWtV3-6rKwmM-cEwUnU-aQYoWn-iMX1f6-2fWyH-9LNSaR-egiQZ4-jUgZv-5sBEcy-nryHRg-5JE6Pr-4p4pgo-4ZTcmV-dfaRe-5XJDWr-4QELxi-4oZkTi-89ofnG-6rKw8t-4uaqEp-8AecQ6-9sj4h-89od6U-2fWyJ-i3sBb-9sj3a-9sj2q-7WEiKe">Bernt Rostad</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>One of the key themes of the referendum campaign will soon be aired when the three unionist parties in Scotland <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27858240">make a joint declaration</a> about plans for more powers for Holyrood in the event of a no vote.</p>
<p>It is not difficult to discern why they see this as necessary. Each party has put forward different views on what more powers for Scotland within the union should look like; and the nationalists have repeatedly questioned whether they can really be trusted to deliver more powers as promised. <a href="http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/scots-will-suffer-if-the-vote-is-no-experts-on-quebec-warn.24489638">Most recently</a>, one of Quebec’s leading political academics was quoted in the Scottish press warning that more powers will be off the agenda if the Scots stay put. </p>
<p>One dimension to this discussion that has not received much attention is the tension between what the Scots seem to want – more devolution – and what the English think about it. Given that most of the UK electorate is based in England, their views could potentially influence what happens north of the border if there is a no vote. </p>
<h2>British Social Attitudes survey</h2>
<p>Last week’s <a href="http://www.natcen.ac.uk/our-research/research/british-social-attitudes/">NatCen British Social Attitudes survey</a>
sheds some light on this subject. First, it confirmed that attitudes in England about Scotland’s independence have taken a new turn, with growing support for Scotland remaining a part of the UK. While <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/15/scottish-independence-yes-campaign-john-reid">new opinion polls</a> showed the Scots heading closer to being evenly split on leaving the UK, opinion in England is hardening in favour of the current political union. </p>
<p>Only 21% of people living in England – about one in five – think Scotland should become independent. This is a fall from 26% in 2011. People in England are expressing an ever clearer view that Scotland remain part of the UK. </p>
<p>Point two is that even fewer people (16%) believe it is in England’s interest for the UK to become dissolved and this figure is unchanged from 2007. It seems that English opposition to Scotland’s independence is based on the view they are <a href="http://bettertogether.net/">“better together”</a> than apart. People in England see a United Kingdom with Scotland as in their best interests.</p>
<p>It is not that the English oppose independence because they fear the loss of Scotland would lead to some crisis of identity, but rather a view of shared interests. While some may question the UK’s place in Europe, the English largely do not question England’s place in a United Kingdom. </p>
<h2>But here’s the rub…</h2>
<p>That doesn’t seem to mean the Scots are welcome on any terms. Slightly less than half (48%) of people in England surveyed responded that they favoured Scotland having a devolved parliament. </p>
<p>NatCen did not ask specifically if the English were in favour of more devolution for Scotland, but it did find that support for an English parliament had plunged from 29% in 2009 to 19% today. More than half (56%) are content with England’s laws being made through the UK’s House of Commons. This is the same figure found in 2002 and despite the fact that many non-English MPs can vote on laws that effect England alone. </p>
<p>One possible interpretation is that English reservations about devolution explain their wariness about Scottish devolution. But equally, these findings would indicate that the English are not keen on more power for Scotland. </p>
<p>The context is that there are questions about the extra benefits that Scotland is said to enjoy over others south of its border. There is also continuing debate over whether MPs from outside England should vote on matters that affect only England. </p>
<h2>The English paradox</h2>
<p>Put together, there may be a tension between what Scotland wants and the majority of UK voters would like them to have. Could this affect what the Scots are offered if they stay in the union?</p>
<p>I think it is unlikely. The Scottish parliament has been a success and the unionist parties have made ever-louder noises about handing over more tax and spend powers. To anyone questioning this hand-over in England, Westminster politicians would have an obvious reply: would you like more powers yourselves?</p>
<p>Paradoxically, the present answer is “no”, of course. Would this view begin to change if more power was seen heading over the northern border? It would not be surprising if it did. </p>
<p>And even if this didn’t happen purely out of logic, the risks of it being triggered are likely to increase. Suppose a major policy decision affecting only England won parliamentary approval thanks to non-England MPs, for example. In short, the days of scepticism about English devolution may be numbered. </p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/28009/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Thom Brooks does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>One of the key themes of the referendum campaign will soon be aired when the three unionist parties in Scotland make a joint declaration about plans for more powers for Holyrood in the event of a no vote…Thom Brooks, Reader in Law, Durham UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/246452014-04-08T05:15:47Z2014-04-08T05:15:47ZThe courts must not become social engineers to secure more rape convictions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/45783/original/mwnpwbdq-1396881006.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">We should beware removing the ancient corroboration rule </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/pennstatelive/13247495963/in/photolist-mbCT1P-9SiVgF-Csu6R-7RQeaF-77hugx-9Wv2fN-9WsbMk-bjXgHz-bcAcUD-dqXfFc-5XbNnQ-9gYB9p-46w2Qt-bEzTE5-HHSzW-fzH5j9-9SiX4z-cNonYu-cNonW1-cNonT5-7FhpsV-7Fix7n-eLP5pi-2mFyF9-9SmNWN-anuEEg-7EkqxB-hnL9Cy-t2pj4-2s7JkY-cjz8ZQ-a5QJN-cjA1US-amFb24-cjzZBQ-cjAFkw-8ay7cX-6ou7Gs-5hPcSS-hKg83s-m9aDjD-aj7mW9-5pKmtC-xbpJr-8pnZaC-5HMPWG-7kXtBt-dC8i3b-4pPrS8-4pTuRo">Penn State</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26353105">recent decision</a> by the Scottish Parliament to scrap the need for corroboration in criminal trials is designed to solve a longstanding problem: there is a <a href="http://www.thinkscotland.org/thinkpolitics/articles.html?read_full=12157">low rate</a> of convictions in rape cases and, correspondingly, a high rate of acquittals. </p>
<p>Scotland’s corroboration rule has been around for centuries. It says that an assertion in a criminal trial can only stand if there are two pieces of evidence that support one another. </p>
<p>That could be two witness testimonies, for example, or a witness testimony and a bloody knife with the DNA of the accused. If <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26353105">Scottish Government plans</a> to change this rule go ahead, one piece of evidence or one testimony will potentially be sufficient in future. </p>
<h2>The low convictions problem</h2>
<p>We should not conclude that the high rate of acquittals and low rate of convictions for rape cases in present day Britain is necessarily a cause for alarm. It does not in itself mean that the relevant legislation is defective nor that the courts are malfunctioning in their treatment of the crime.</p>
<p>Allegations of rape are difficult to substantiate. Often what is in dispute is not what physically occurred but how the actions relate to the intentions and attitudes of those involved. </p>
<p>One can’t object to making exceptions for certain circumstances in court, per se. For instance, children have long been permitted to give evidence by video link in criminal cases. </p>
<p>And no one is talking about making an exception for corroboration in relation to cases pertaining only to rape and other sex offences. The planned change in the law in Scotland will be applicable across the board. But we are still talking about changing the rules of procedural justice to have an impact on the conviction rate. </p>
<p>Regardless of the type of crime, from rape or terrorism, this is a dangerous approach. We should take it, if at all, with exceptional caution. </p>
<h2>The meaning of fairness in criminal trials</h2>
<p>The question here is one of fairness. There are some things that we must do regardless of whether it is fair. Governments need to clean up the problems created by the financial crisis. They need to pay particular debts or face the graver consequences of reneging on them. </p>
<p>Or when we went to war with the Nazis, we had to raise an army fairly or unfairly. There is almost certainly not a way of achieving these things that is fair in all respects to everyone involved. An intention on the part of politicians to act fairly will not make any difference. </p>
<p>On the other hand, there are other things where most people would agree that if we can’t do them fairly, we shouldn’t do them at all. A fair trial is the classic example. If we cannot try someone fairly for a criminal offence, particularly one as serious as rape, we should not try them at all.</p>
<p>In the case of sex offences, people make the point that it is not fair to the victims that the conviction rate is low, they are raising a competing need for fairness. Fair trials of alleged rapists will not necessarily be fair in all respects to the alleged victims. </p>
<p>The low conviction rate is not the only unfairness for alleged victims. It is sometimes imagined that, if an alleged rapist is acquitted, the alleged victim who accused him must have lied. This common mistaken belief is very unfair to them.</p>
<p>Neither will such trials be fair in all respects to the accused. Even when accused people are declared to be not guilty, the lingering suspicion can remain in some people’s minds that they actually did what they were accused of doing. Men who have been acquitted of sex offence have <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10140992/Soldier-tells-how-his-life-was-ruined-after-woman-he-tried-to-comfort-accused-him-of-rape.html">commonly complained</a> about this in the past. </p>
<h2>Presumption of innocence</h2>
<p>There is a further unfairness inherent in fair trials: accused people are not proven to be innocent. Innocence is not established in criminal trials. People are presumed to be innocent unless and until they are found to be guilty. A presumption of innocence is not the same as a certification of innocence.</p>
<p>In short, it is not possible to conduct trials that are fair in all respects to everyone who is involved. That it why the state is responsible for trying those who are accused fairly even if that leads to unfairness in various respects for accused people and alleged victims. </p>
<p>It is understandable that victims of rapes are enraged if the cases are not brought to trial because there is no other piece of evidence to corroborate their testimony. Not giving a victim of such a terrible crime the chance to speak in court about the wrongful things which they know were done to them is obviously going to seem unfair. It is unfair. </p>
<p>But rape trials could hardly be fair if, without corroboration, they dissolved into a judgement about the relative honesty of an accuser and an accused person. In criminal trials, accused people are presumed to be innocent unless and until they are declared to be guilty. Their guilt should be established beyond all reasonable doubt. </p>
<p>It is not the proper role of criminal trials to “send out messages” to society or to be exercises in social engineering. If the laws and procedures are fair and just, we should accept the verdicts of the courts whatever they turn out to be.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/24645/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Hugh McLachlan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The recent decision by the Scottish Parliament to scrap the need for corroboration in criminal trials is designed to solve a longstanding problem: there is a low rate of convictions in rape cases and…Hugh McLachlan, Professor of Applied Philosophy, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/177492013-09-18T05:33:28Z2013-09-18T05:33:28ZOne year to go: Scottish vote that will shape Britain’s future<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/31324/original/dnhgk5mn-1379084179.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hands up if you want to end the union.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Andrew Milligan/PA</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A year away from the Scottish referendum, we have opinion polls almost weekly, as the media tries to discern the rise and fall in the standings of the rival teams. Yet the most striking fact is the stability in public opinion. For the past 20 years, support for independence has been around 30% and all the argument over the past two years appears to have made little difference.</p>
<p>Such fluctuations as the media find are mostly due to the precise wording of the question (although we now have the actual question, which is usually used); random error; and the context in which the question is posed. </p>
<p>As John Curtice <a href="https://theconversation.com/poll-says-yes-to-scottish-independence-or-does-it-17759">has noted</a>, a recent poll showing the Yes side almost level came out of a poll in which respondents had previously been asked their opinion of the Scottish government, which remains remarkably popular. Some <a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-no-vote-hardens-up-to-59-1-3070088">recent polls</a> have suggested a decline in Don’t Knows, to the benefit of the No camp, but even this is not consistent.</p>
<p>The past six months have seen a barrage from the No campaign (<a href="http://www.bettertogether.net/">Better Together</a>), with a series of papers on a range of policy issues and almost daily statements. These range from the serious through the banal and trivial to the misleading and the irrelevant. It scored some points on the question of the currency and the SNP’s <a href="http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2013/apr/overwhelming-support-scotland-keep-pound">proposal</a> to continue to use Sterling after independence.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/31325/original/jdw6tsdd-1379084967.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Indifferent? Support for independence has remained fairly small.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Source: Scottish Referendum Study; 1999–2012: Scottish Social Attitudes</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Yes side was forced to retreat, accepting further limitations on independence implied by this, while a section of its own supporters <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/may/01/scottish-independence-currency-conflict">came out</a> in favour of a separate Scottish currency. Claims that Scots would have to pay <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/10150160/Mobile-phone-users-could-incur-roaming-charges-if-Scotland-gains-independence.html">roaming charges</a> to use their mobile phones in England proved an own goal as that very week the EU had announced the elimination of such charges.</p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a3a4fb16-1326-11e3-a05e-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2emfnwmfn">paper</a> on the cost of borders was a mixed success, as it is not clear what the relevance of the US-Canada or German-Austrian comparisons is; the Canadian references are seriously dated; and it sits ill with the UK Government’s obsession about strengthening the UK border and loosening ties with the European Union.</p>
<h2>Advantage ‘No’</h2>
<p>The disparity of resources between the two sides has become apparent as the unionists are able to draw on the Whitehall civil service, committed to the union and knowledgeable across the policy field. Scottish government civil servants lack expertise in matters outside their own devolved areas, are fewer in number and less able to take sides on what is, within Scotland, a contentious political matter. The Yes camp has been slow to respond to new issues and it seems that the long-expected independence paper (due some time in autumn) might be short on detail.</p>
<p>The task of the No camp is also inherently easier than that of the Yes side. It merely needs to list problems that might arise from independence, so increasing the perceived risk. The fact that many of these issues arise in any independent state, including the UK, does not affect the potency of the accumulated arguments. </p>
<p>Yes for Scotland (the <a href="http://www.yesscotland.net/">pro-independence</a> umbrella group) has a harder task in making the positive case. They have been so keen to play down risks as almost to suggest that nothing will really change. They are divided between a centre-right, which dreams of a low-tax competition state, and a centre left that’s ideal is the Nordic social democracies. </p>
<h2>That vision thing</h2>
<p>The former has long been sustained by neo-liberal think tanks and some individual voices within the business community. The latter has now found its voice in the Jimmy Reid Foundation and its <a href="http://reidfoundation.org/common-weal/">Common Weal</a> project. In recent months, the social democratic tendency has been more vocal and it is possible that linking the independence project to a social democratic agenda could begin to move opinion. </p>
<p>It is true that polls have shown that Scottish voters, like those in England, are less sympathetic to benefit claimants and the unemployed and less keen on redistribution. On the other hand, the vision of a <a href="http://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-crisis-of-social-democracy-in-europe-9780748665822;jsessionid=997CEBD34385F820C32C036A0CBD7CA4?cc=gb&lang=en&">social democratic political economy</a> remains a strong competitor to the neo-liberal alternative. As the Scottish Labour Party struggles to find a message both on the constitutional and on the social and economic agenda, the Scottish left is increasingly a nationalist one, if only with a “small n”.</p>
<p>If the Yes side has been losing most of the arguments, it can take comfort in the fact that this does not seem to have massively swung opinion. So if it can mobilise more effectively in the new political season, and reframe the issue as Conservative England (especially if people think that the Conservatives will win the 2015 general election) versus caring Scotland, then the result may be tighter than polls currently show.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/17749/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Keating receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.</span></em></p>A year away from the Scottish referendum, we have opinion polls almost weekly, as the media tries to discern the rise and fall in the standings of the rival teams. Yet the most striking fact is the stability…Michael Keating, Chair in Scottish Politics, University of AberdeenLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/49152012-01-11T23:47:37Z2012-01-11T23:47:37ZScottish independence: the referendum explained<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/6890/original/w4pjxgbw-1326323652.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">First Minister Alex Salmond could be the man who regained Scotland's independence.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Scotland has always been a distinct nation but since the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Union_1707">Act of Union in 1707</a>, it has been a nation within a larger political entity: the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.</p>
<p>The election of a minority <a href="http://www.snp.org/">Scottish National Party (SNP)</a> government led by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Salmond">Alex Salmond</a> in 2007 brought about the first indications that situation could change. When the SNP won a convincing majority enabling it to rule in its own right last year, the possibility that Scotland could again become a sovereign nation became a distinct possibility.</p>
<p>Now the Westminster coalition government of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats is striking back. Prime Minister David Cameron seeks to define a referendum on independence on London’s terms while Salmond says he has a mandate to run a referendum from Scotland.</p>
<p>The Conversation spoke with Glasgow University expert Professor Murray Pittock to find out exactly what the state of play is between two close neighbours with a long and storied history.</p>
<h2>Can you explain what the situation is at both Westminster and in the Scottish Government as regards a referendum on Scottish independence?</h2>
<p>The Westminster government have looked to seize the initiative over the Scottish referendum by saying that they will use their powers to either amend the current Scotland bill going through the Lords or more likely the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland_Act_1998">1998 Scotland Act</a> to enable a binding referendum on the future of Scotland to be held.</p>
<p>Other referenda would simply be consultative. There was an indication at the weekend that they would wish this referendum to be held within 18 months, to wrongfoot the Scottish National Party government in Holyrood who have said all along, publicly, that they would hold it at some point in 2014.</p>
<p>There has been some sign of a retreat from that position by the UK government - particularly by the Liberal Democrat members of the Coalition - where the Scottish Secretary Michael Moore is looking to resolve the issue with the Scottish Government.</p>
<p>Earlier this week First Minister <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jan/10/scottish-independence-salmond-poll-date">Alex Salmond made very clear</a> that the mandate the Scottish Government had was to hold a referendum in 2014 and that is when he would intend to hold a referendum.</p>
<p>There are a number of bones of contention. One of these is whether there should be a third question about repatriating maximum powers short of foreign affairs, the so-called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_fiscal_autonomy_for_Scotland">“devo max”</a> question.</p>
<p>Another is whether the <a href="http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/">UK Electoral Commission</a> or a Scottish Referendum Commission should run the referendum. </p>
<p>The third is whether 16 or 17 year olds should be entitled to vote rather than over-18s. The First Minister has indicated that 16 and 17 year olds would vote if the Scottish Government organised the referendum.</p>
<h2>Can you explain the “devo max” option in some more detail?</h2>
<p>There is some variety as to the powers that are suggested under devo max but the fundamental issue is that devo max represents what tends to be the polling evidence in Scotland, which is that there is a majority in favour of repatriating all powers to Scotland - including taxation and macro-economic policy to a significant degree - but excluding defence and foreign policy. </p>
<p>Although it must be said that the Scottish administrations since 1999 and particularly since 2007 have operated a nascent foreign policy.</p>
<h2>In terms of the question of a mandate, the Tories only have one Westminster seat in Scotland and the Lib Dems have 12 where the SNP won a very considerable victory in the Scottish Parliament elections. Who will be able to claim better that they have the mandate to decide what referendum should be held and when?</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/6891/original/yfbvwsfp-1326323937.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=51%2C82%2C1905%2C1084&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/6891/original/yfbvwsfp-1326323937.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=799&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/6891/original/yfbvwsfp-1326323937.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=799&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/6891/original/yfbvwsfp-1326323937.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=799&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/6891/original/yfbvwsfp-1326323937.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/6891/original/yfbvwsfp-1326323937.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/6891/original/yfbvwsfp-1326323937.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1005&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lib Dem Nick Clegg and Tory Prime Minister David Cameron can work together in government, but can they defend the Union together?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Stefan Wermuth</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The question of mandate has two aspects: a constitutional aspect and a political aspect. From a constitutional point of view the UK government has a case. From a political point of view, its case is very weak because clearly the Scottish Government was elected to govern Scotland and to conduct a referendum on independence and it has won an overall majority under a proportional system which is very difficult to do.</p>
<p>The Scottish Government clearly does have a political mandate and most of the counter-arguments have been constitutional and legal arguments. The question is how far those will give way to the politics. The early response in Scotland, not from politicians, from the public – judging by radio phone-ins and the like – is very hostile to the idea of Tory interference in Scotland, even from people who do not support the SNP.</p>
<p>I think if this was a Labour London government, it would be easier for them to put Alex Salmond in a corner. I think that the risk here is that in pandering to the anti-Scottish or anti-Salmond views of some of his backbench MPs and thinking he doesn’t have very much to lose in Scotland because he only has one seat, David Cameron has re-animated Scottish views that the Conservative party is a toxic brand and (also re-animated) antipathy to it and all that its stands for.</p>
<p>Which is perhaps predictable but is not going to make his task in gaining ascendancy over the Scottish Government any easier.</p>
<h2>Is there a situation where a divided Unionist camp advantages the Scottish Nationalists?</h2>
<p>I think that is a significant advantage. The other thing is the 2014 date. People have said it is chosen because of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bannockburn">700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn</a>, or it has been chosen because of the Commonwealth Games but one reason it has been chosen is, I suspect, because the next UK general election is in 2015 and holding it within six to nine months of that General Election, especially in the autumn when the campaigning season has started after the party conferences, will make it very difficult for the Labour party and the Conservatives to appear on the same platform.</p>
<p>The indications are that they won’t be able to do that.</p>
<h2>Would the SNP, even though they will campaign for independence, be happy with devo max?</h2>
<p>I think the best guess there is that the Cabinet and the parliamentary party in Holyrood have got a variety of views on this and some of them will be keen to have devo max and some of them would be uncertain about having a third question. I think that circle may be squared by having a consultation process on the form a referendum should take with the electorate in Scotland.</p>
<p>My suspicion is the First Minister probably is interested in a third question and we will see whether people feed back to say they would like one.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/4915/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Murray Pittock is involved in developing the Studying Scotland agenda in schools and elsewhere with the Scottish Government as part of his work in leading the Scottish Studies Global research theme for the University of Glasgow.</span></em></p>Scotland has always been a distinct nation but since the Act of Union in 1707, it has been a nation within a larger political entity: the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The election…Murray Pittock, Bradley Professor of English Literature, University of GlasgowLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/35702011-09-29T04:38:45Z2011-09-29T04:38:45ZScottish Enlightenment: How Julia Gillard could learn to make minority government work<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/3875/original/PIC_-_Curtice_Salmond.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond made a roaring success of minority government.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In Anglo-American democracies at least, having a “minority government” is often regarded as an undesirable state of affairs. </p>
<p>Canada may have had <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_minority_governments_in_Canada">considerable experience</a> of the phenomenon, New Zealand <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/minority-government-can-work-says-nzs-prime-minister/story-fn59niix-1226078804493">learnt to adapt to it</a> since it switched to proportional representation, and even the British House of Commons lived with it for a while in the 1970s, yet it is still often regarded as a state that is best avoided.</p>
<p>In the wake of the 2010 Federal election, Australia also found itself in the unfamiliar position of having a House of Representatives in which no single party had an overall majority. After days of uncertainty, Labor leader Julia Gillard, eventually managed to scramble the support she needed from the Greens and Independents to form a minority administration.</p>
<p>One common criticism of such administrations is that instead of providing the “strong” government any country needs, they have to wheel and deal with others to get legislation passed by parliament. As a result it can seem as though the parliamentary tail is wagging the government dog.</p>
<p>The fortunes of Julia Gillard’s minority Labor government during the last year have done little to dispel this common impression. Greens leader Bob Brown is sometimes said to be “running the government”, while a policy demand from Tasmanian independent Andrew Wilkie can prove a major headache for the Prime Minister.</p>
<h2>A reduced lifespan</h2>
<p>Meanwhile, despite its best efforts at keeping parliament happy, typically a minority government eventually runs out of rope well before the next election is due, thereby requiring either a new (perhaps equally weak) administration be formed or else that voters go to the polls.</p>
<p>Across well-established democracies as a whole during the post-war era, minority governments have lasted on average for some 600 days, well below the lifetime of the average single party majority administration of some 900 days.</p>
<h2>It doesn’t have to be like that</h2>
<p>Yet there is one striking recent example of an Anglo-American minority government that by any yardstick proved to be a political success.</p>
<p>Following what was only the <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msp/elections/2007/07index.htm">third election</a> to the “devolved” <a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/corporate/index.htm">Scottish Parliament</a> that was created in 1999, in 2007 the <a href="http://www2.snp.org/">Scottish National Party</a> (SNP) formed a minority administration when it secured just one seat more than its principal opponents, Labour, despite having just 47 out of a total body of 129 MSPs. </p>
<p>Not only did this deeply minority government survive its full four year term, but at the end of its life in May this year <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/06/scottish-elections-salmond-historic-victory-snp">secured a landslide election victory</a> that means the SNP now enjoys the luxury of an overall majority.</p>
<h2>The Nationalist paradox</h2>
<p>How did this government, responsible for most of Scotland’s domestic affairs apart from the welfare state and taxation, manage to defy the apparent laws of political gravity? </p>
<p>And in particular how did it manage to do so even though when it came to the SNP’s raison de’être, to secure independence from the rest of the UK, it faced opposition from all of the other major parties?</p>
<p>The SNP certainly had to wheel and deal in what was a particularly fragmented parliament. The only combination of two parties sufficient for a majority was the SNP together with Labour.</p>
<p>That was bound to be a rare event given the animosity in Labour’s ranks for a nationalist party that was now proving to be an effective usurper of the party’s onetime dominance of Scottish politics. </p>
<p>The centre-right Conservatives only had 16 seats (excluding one member who became the parliament’s neutral presiding officer) as did the Liberal Democrats, a social liberal party, who also had 16. </p>
<p>The balance of power was potentially held by two Greens and an Independent who had once been a leading light in the SNP, but subsequently fallen out with her former colleagues.</p>
<h2>Balancing policy losses with leadership</h2>
<p>Against this unfavourable backdrop, some key parts of the SNP’s proposed legislative programme were dropped without even being presented to parliament. </p>
<p>Plans to replace a local property tax with a local income tax were not brought forward. The same fate also befell the party’s flagship policy of holding a referendum on independence. </p>
<p>Other key legislation was gutted in the parliamentary chamber, most notably an attempt to enforce a minimum price for the sale of alcohol.</p>
<p>Nevertheless the impression of weak government was avoided. Being a minority at home did not stop the SNP from being an effective champion of Scotland’s interests vis-à-vis the rest of the UK. </p>
<h2>Standing up for Scotland</h2>
<p>The government was not afraid to argue with the UK government when it felt Scotland was getting a raw deal, an attribute that distinguished it from the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition that had governed Scotland for the previous eight years. </p>
<p>Equally SNP ministers were more than ready to fly Scotland’s flag abroad, most notably helping Glasgow to be the host city for the <a href="http://www.glasgow2014.com/">2014 Commonwealth Games</a>. Such activity helped dispel any impression of a government able to achieve little.</p>
<h2>Strange bedfellows at budget time</h2>
<p>Yet there was one parliamentary hurdle that it did have to overcome every year – to secure parliamentary approval for its detailed spending plans. </p>
<p>However, apart from one hiccup the government always succeeded in trading sufficient concessions to acquire the parliamentary support it needed. </p>
<p>Remarkably, the SNP’s most consistent backers were the Conservatives, even though they had once opposed the creation of a devolved Scottish Parliament let alone been willing to consider the idea of Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. </p>
<p>Keen to demonstrate some influence in a country where their electoral support has been in long term decline, the Conservatives proved willing to trade their votes for local tax concessions for business, a freeze on the local property tax, and more spending police on the beat.</p>
<p>However, in 2009 the SNP did miscalculate and initially its spending plans were defeated when anticipated support from the Greens failed to materialise. Nevertheless the government still survived for one simple, but crucial reason – it rapidly became clear there was no other alternative. </p>
<p>The Conservatives declared that if the SNP government were to fall, they would not be willing to allow Labour to take over instead. That meant that if the government were brought down there would have to be an early election. </p>
<p>Trailing badly in the polls, that was a prospect that Labour could not afford to contemplate. </p>
<p>Thus when the SNP sought support for its budget a second time around, Labour, along indeed with everyone else, proved all too ready to compromise and the government secured almost universal backing for its plans.
So the SNP government held a far stronger bargaining position than mere parliamentary arithmetic suggested. </p>
<h2>Talent shines through</h2>
<p>But it also had one other key advantage – personality. In its leader, Alex Salmond, the SNP has the good fortune to have the one of the most charismatic and politically astute politicians in the UK. </p>
<p>More generally SNP ministers were widely recognized as being good at doing their jobs and that, person for person, they compared favourably with their counterparts in the opposition Labour party.</p>
<p>There was one simple reason for this imbalance. Most of Labour’s Scottish talent occupied the party’s green benches in the British House of Commons rather than the new wooden seat in the new Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh.</p>
<p>In contrast, having few Commons MPs in London, most of the SNP’s senior personnel had found their way into the Scottish Parliament. And as any cricketer will know, one side’s first XI will always be fancied to outplay another side’s second XI. </p>
<h2>Learning the Scottish lesson?</h2>
<p>And so it came to pass when, at the end of the SNP’s term in May this year, the most important umpire of all – the electorate – were invited to cast their judgement on four years of the SNP in minority power.</p>
<p>It should then perhaps be regarded as an astute move by Julia Gillard to recruit some Scottish talent to her team - <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/ex-blair-staffer-to-head-gillards-media-team/story-fn59niix-1226144916949">John McTernan, her new media boss.</a></p>
<p>Perhaps it is just a pity that she has opted for someone from Labour’s ranks, rather than from those of the SNP.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/3570/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Curtice does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In Anglo-American democracies at least, having a “minority government” is often regarded as an undesirable state of affairs. Canada may have had considerable experience of the phenomenon, New Zealand learnt…John Curtice, Professor in Politics, University of Strathclyde Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/11522011-05-09T05:12:12Z2011-05-09T05:12:12ZHow Scottish elections could deliver an Australian republic<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/958/original/Salmond_pic.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">First Minister Alex Salmond has promised to hold a referendum on Scottish independence.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Australian republicans should watch the Scots. In the Scottish Parliamentary election held on 5 May, the Scottish National Party (SNP) secured an overall majority. Formerly in minority government in Scotland, the SNP’s central aim is Scottish independence.</p>
<p>The SNP proposes an independence referendum in Scotland. The SNP introduced a bill for such a referendum in the Scottish Parliament in 2010, but withdrew the bill when it became clear that, at that time, they did not have the numbers in the Parliament. </p>
<p>Now they do have the numbers and they are planning to re-introduce the bill. They will need to gain much greater public support specifically for independence, which has been running at no more than 30%, but they will be working on that.</p>
<p>If the result of a referendum were to favour independence, it would constitute advice to the UK Parliament at Westminster. In terms of democracy, the Scots - or at least the SNP - would expect that advice to be accepted.</p>
<p>Westminster would need to be convinced that the result represented the voice of the Scottish people; a small majority on a low turnout (voting in the UK is voluntary) might not suffice. The point, however, is: Scottish independence is now a more distinct possibility.</p>
<p>An independent Scotland might be a republic. Or, as the SNP proposes, the Queen (who will address the Scottish Parliament on 1 July) could be offered a separate, revived Scottish crown. Or the Scots could choose a monarch entirely of their own. </p>
<p>Whichever way, there would no longer be a “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”. “United” refers to the unification of the Great Britain and Ireland, including their respective crowns, in 1801. Ireland, for the most part, has since gone its own way. However, Scottish independence would put an end to “Great Britain” and hence to “the United Kingdom”.</p>
<p>This could affect Australia in a major way. Clause 2 of the British statute of 1900 that contains the Australian Constitution states: “The provisions of this Act referring to the Queen [i.e. Victoria] shall extend to Her Majesty’s heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom.”</p>
<p>The word “sovereignty” there refers to the position of head of state. The constitutional provisions to which this refers make the Queen Australia’s head of state, especially sections 1 and 61 of the Constitution, which respectively vest the legislative and executive powers of the Commonwealth partly or primarily in the Queen. </p>
<p>That the Queen is Australia’s head of state is also confirmed in Australian statute by her separate title as “Queen of Australia” in the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 (Cth). Hence, if there were no longer a “United Kingdom” for there to be any sovereignty of, it would require some pretty fancy legal footwork to claim that Australia still has a head of state.</p>
<p>The crucial issue is the continuance of the UK itself, not of its monarchy. If there were no longer a UK monarch, a UK President might be considered a “successor” to the monarch, satisfying Clause 2. But there would be a much greater problem if there were no longer a UK.</p>
<p>It gets better. Section 61 of the Constitution provides: “A Governor-General appointed by the Queen shall be Her Majesty’s representative in the Commonwealth, and shall have and may exercise in the Commonwealth during the Queen’s pleasure, but subject to this Constitution, such powers and functions of the Queen as Her Majesty may be pleased to assign to him.”</p>
<p>Some such assignments are set out in royal Letters Patent, from a letter constituting the office of Governor-General issued by Queen Victoria on 29 October 1900 (now revoked) to letters dated 21 August 2008, one of which sets out certain powers of a Governor-General and another of which appoints Quentin Bryce to the office. </p>
<p>The Letters Patent assume with clarity that a Governor-General is appointed by the monarch and holds office at the monarch’s “pleasure”. They may now be written on the advice of the Australian Prime Minister and, in at least one case on 21 August, countersigned thereby. But that does not affect the constitutional position, that the office of Governor-General derives from and depends on the Constitution, section 2.</p>
<p>An incumbent Governor-General might be thought to continue by virtue of appointment by Queen Elizabeth II, in terms of Constitution section 2, and of the current Letters Patent. Yet it seems difficult to argue that the incumbent could continue to exercise those powers as a “representative”, and subject to the “pleasure”, of nobody.</p>
<p>And, if there could not validly be a Governor-General, who alone can summon the federal Parliament, federal government in Australia might last only until the end of the next Parliamentary session. Or not even that long, if there were to be a sudden need for a general election, which formally only the Governor-General can call.</p>
<p>Change to the royal succession requires the consent of the parliaments of the former British Dominions, including Australia according to the Statute of Westminster 1931 (Imp). Such a process may be undertaken soon, to change the rule by which male heirs to the throne take precedence over female - soon, that is, to allow for the possibility that a first child of the Cambridges might be female. But such a change would not affect the Australian Constitution. </p>
<p>The question, also currently in the air, of whether a non-Anglican could be allowed onto the UK throne is much more difficult and has no urgency. As to the possibilities looming in Scotland, however, there is urgency and Australia needs a contingency plan. Or, even better, a replacement for the instrument of colonial self-government that those of us who pay attention to it find ourselves required to recognise as our Constitution.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/1152/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Iain Stewart does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australian republicans should watch the Scots. In the Scottish Parliamentary election held on 5 May, the Scottish National Party (SNP) secured an overall majority. Formerly in minority government in Scotland…Iain Stewart, Associate Professor, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.