How will Westminster be affected by Scottish independence?
September 10, 2014 3:16 AM Subscribe
Hello, could someone please point me to any recent thinking/speculation on what would happen to the UK parliament in the event of a win for the Yes campaign next week?
Specifically articles dealing with the questions:
Is it likely that the makeup of the House of Commons would lurch to the right in a meaningful sense that would make itself felt legislatively/concretely,
Would there be any mechanism by which a general election would be triggered for notScotland or any likelihood of pressure building to trigger an election?
What would a Yes win mean for the likelihood of Johnson succeeding Cameron?
More broadly, I'd like to see resources specifically taking a (calm) view on the "Scottish independence would mean the rest-of-Britain Left is screwed" argument.
I have seen this related AskMe from 2012 and am looking for more up-to-date, published statements/speculation.
Thanks!
Specifically articles dealing with the questions:
Is it likely that the makeup of the House of Commons would lurch to the right in a meaningful sense that would make itself felt legislatively/concretely,
Would there be any mechanism by which a general election would be triggered for notScotland or any likelihood of pressure building to trigger an election?
What would a Yes win mean for the likelihood of Johnson succeeding Cameron?
More broadly, I'd like to see resources specifically taking a (calm) view on the "Scottish independence would mean the rest-of-Britain Left is screwed" argument.
I have seen this related AskMe from 2012 and am looking for more up-to-date, published statements/speculation.
Thanks!
If you get any good answers, could you forward them to Cameron/Clegg/Milliband? Because they don't have a scooby about how any of this will turn out.
But seriously: good starting point here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/scottish-independence with any number of articles in your general area. Plenty for, plenty against independence.
posted by rd45 at 3:41 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
But seriously: good starting point here: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/scottish-independence with any number of articles in your general area. Plenty for, plenty against independence.
posted by rd45 at 3:41 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
Best answer: I also like the EU Law Analysis blog which was suggested as an answer to a previous question of mine, he has talked about Scottish independence too.
posted by ellieBOA at 3:41 AM on September 10, 2014
posted by ellieBOA at 3:41 AM on September 10, 2014
Agree that the Guardian article linked to by ellieBOA above is a really good starting point.
On your first question, it is important to distinguish between what happens immediately after the vote and what happens after the UK general election next year. There is little legislative time left in this Parliament, with all the Government bills for this session already introduced - and no real time to introduce anything new or different. Likewise, the state of the Coalition means it's unlikely we'll see any major policies that don't require legislation being agreed - both parties are now focused on positioning and manifestos. So realistically, I'm not sure we'll see much immediate difference in domestic policies whatever the result.
On the general election, this is governed by the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 which says that unless the Commons votes by a two-thirds majority to have an early election, or votes to have no confidence in the Government, the election will happen on 7 May 2015. But the pressure will not be to have it immediately (it is in no party's interest to do this) - it will be to delay it, because of the issue of electing Scottish MPs in 2015 who will potentially affect who governs, but then move on in 2016 once independence happens. However there is no way of moving back the election date short of new legislation - for which see the answer above about how little parliamentary time is left. It's certainly possible, but there would be huge controversy in getting a bill to delay the election through both the Commons and the Lords. These Independent and BBC pieces are a useful starting point.
And on discontent in the Tory ranks, it depends whether enough backbenchers are willing to challenge Cameron. Cameron won't go on his own but if enough pressure builds it may be that a contest is triggered (if 15% of Tory MPs write to the chairman of the 1922 Committee then this is what happens). As others have said above, it's not just Johnson who's in the frame then (and of course he'd have to be elected an MP first so assuming Cameron does go before 2015 then he's not in the running). The Spectator has very good coverage of the internal sniping currently going on within the Tory backbenches and the different candidates to succeed Cameron.
posted by greycap at 4:41 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
On your first question, it is important to distinguish between what happens immediately after the vote and what happens after the UK general election next year. There is little legislative time left in this Parliament, with all the Government bills for this session already introduced - and no real time to introduce anything new or different. Likewise, the state of the Coalition means it's unlikely we'll see any major policies that don't require legislation being agreed - both parties are now focused on positioning and manifestos. So realistically, I'm not sure we'll see much immediate difference in domestic policies whatever the result.
On the general election, this is governed by the Fixed Term Parliaments Act 2011 which says that unless the Commons votes by a two-thirds majority to have an early election, or votes to have no confidence in the Government, the election will happen on 7 May 2015. But the pressure will not be to have it immediately (it is in no party's interest to do this) - it will be to delay it, because of the issue of electing Scottish MPs in 2015 who will potentially affect who governs, but then move on in 2016 once independence happens. However there is no way of moving back the election date short of new legislation - for which see the answer above about how little parliamentary time is left. It's certainly possible, but there would be huge controversy in getting a bill to delay the election through both the Commons and the Lords. These Independent and BBC pieces are a useful starting point.
And on discontent in the Tory ranks, it depends whether enough backbenchers are willing to challenge Cameron. Cameron won't go on his own but if enough pressure builds it may be that a contest is triggered (if 15% of Tory MPs write to the chairman of the 1922 Committee then this is what happens). As others have said above, it's not just Johnson who's in the frame then (and of course he'd have to be elected an MP first so assuming Cameron does go before 2015 then he's not in the running). The Spectator has very good coverage of the internal sniping currently going on within the Tory backbenches and the different candidates to succeed Cameron.
posted by greycap at 4:41 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
Put it this way: without Scotland the 2010 election would have led to a conservative government with a weak majority. While one can argue the impact of the liberal democrats on the coalition, I think its clear they had a somewhat moderating influence, although a very small impact on the actual budget. Note that such a small majority would have led to even more contention than we've seen this parliament: thanks the lib dems Cameron has been protected slightly from angry backbenchers, and maybe he would have been forced to be more anti-Europe.
The electoral math is currently looking like, if Scotland stays, we'll probably be looking at Labour being the largest party in the next parliament, but probably not able to govern on their own. Without Scotland, we might still see the conservative remaining the biggest party in parliament, but unlikely to govern on their own.
In the long term, change will happen. Scotland has only become so labour focussed since the 80s, so trends can change. I think in the short term we could well see the right doing better, but I don't think it would last forever.
posted by Cannon Fodder at 4:53 AM on September 10, 2014
The electoral math is currently looking like, if Scotland stays, we'll probably be looking at Labour being the largest party in the next parliament, but probably not able to govern on their own. Without Scotland, we might still see the conservative remaining the biggest party in parliament, but unlikely to govern on their own.
In the long term, change will happen. Scotland has only become so labour focussed since the 80s, so trends can change. I think in the short term we could well see the right doing better, but I don't think it would last forever.
posted by Cannon Fodder at 4:53 AM on September 10, 2014
This is an interesting perspective, again from the Guardian. It points out that should Scotland vote for independence then it would likely mean that the general election as currently scheduled would include Scottish voters, because actual independence would not happen until after the May 2015 date. The article suggests this would inevitably lead to calls for delaying the election for perhaps a year, a move which would have to be taken up by Cameron if it was to happen. There are several implications of this, not least that it would make the government illegitimate in the eyes of much of the electorate, potentially damaging Cameron's credibility further, on top of whatever the fallout is of him being in charge for the failure of the union, which might well be pretty significant.
The alternative is to go ahead with the May 2015 election which might mean Scottish MPs are the deciding factor in the establishment of a Westminster government.
posted by biffa at 5:06 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
The alternative is to go ahead with the May 2015 election which might mean Scottish MPs are the deciding factor in the establishment of a Westminster government.
posted by biffa at 5:06 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
Best answer: Metafilter's Own cstross wrote a good post about this a while back - the Scottish Political Singularity. There's a lengthy chunk in the middle about the effect on Westminster in particular.
In short, it could get a bit crazy.
posted by Happy Dave at 6:18 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
In short, it could get a bit crazy.
posted by Happy Dave at 6:18 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]
The basic issue for a post-"Yes," pre-independence Commons and government is that a Westminster government which relies upon Scottish MPs for its majority cannot be a robust advocate for England, Wales and Ireland in negotiating the division of assets and liabilities with Scotland. But extending the term of the Commons beyond May 2015 would not be acceptable either.
If it were to happen that Labour were a majority of the entire 2015 Commons but Tories (or Tories / LDs / UKIPs) a majority of non-Scottish MPs, there would need to be a coalition of some sort, or a multi-partisan working group, that would have charge of the negotiations, or rules which excluded the Scottish Parliamentarians from being part of the vote upon the implementing laws on the Westminster side, all of which is difficult.
Also, with a clock of eight months between "yes" and the election, and only one year between the election and independence, assent of the Lords becomes extremely material -- and what's the status of Scottish peers?
posted by MattD at 6:27 AM on September 10, 2014
If it were to happen that Labour were a majority of the entire 2015 Commons but Tories (or Tories / LDs / UKIPs) a majority of non-Scottish MPs, there would need to be a coalition of some sort, or a multi-partisan working group, that would have charge of the negotiations, or rules which excluded the Scottish Parliamentarians from being part of the vote upon the implementing laws on the Westminster side, all of which is difficult.
Also, with a clock of eight months between "yes" and the election, and only one year between the election and independence, assent of the Lords becomes extremely material -- and what's the status of Scottish peers?
posted by MattD at 6:27 AM on September 10, 2014
Mod note: Guys, the OP is asking for links to resources, not so much personal analyses or opinions. There's a Mefi thread active if you want to discuss generally. Thanks.
posted by taz (staff) at 6:56 AM on September 10, 2014
posted by taz (staff) at 6:56 AM on September 10, 2014
The Guardian posted this at 2.33 this afternoon (BST): If Scotland votes for independence: the key questions answered
posted by biffa at 10:20 AM on September 10, 2014
posted by biffa at 10:20 AM on September 10, 2014
Response by poster: Thanks for all that, lots to think about! Glad I don't get to vote, weirdly, I have no idea which way I'd go!
posted by runincircles at 2:49 AM on September 17, 2014
posted by runincircles at 2:49 AM on September 17, 2014
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by ellieBOA at 3:40 AM on September 10, 2014 [1 favorite]