Scottish local elections raise spectre of independence
The legislative Scottish and Welsh elections actually take place, the 6th of May and arouse the desires of the Scottish independents. Previously illegitimate, the demand for a new independence referendum has become possible again, as the Brexit has greatly changed the situation.
If the election were to give a majority to the pro-independence SNP party, Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon could make a demand that would seem inevitable to Boris Johnson.
This could be a unique opportunity for Scotland to rejoin the EU as a sovereign State, but also carries the risk of fracturing the United Kingdom. According to the last pole organized by “the Scotman”, 58% of the Scottish would agree to exit the United Kingdom. Could independence really happen? If so, what would be the main consequences?
The union of England and Scotland dates back to 1603 with the union of the kingdoms, and to 1707 for the political union. Since that day, Scotland is a nation of the United Kingdom, not only a province or a region as in a centralized country that could be tacked on to another State. Until the 2003 legislative elections, the Labour Party remained majority, but the Scottish National Party grew in size under the guidance of Alex Salmond and John Swinney. British intervention in Iraq seriously eroded support for Labour in favour of the nationalists (Jeannier, 2018) which are establishing themselves as a local shield against Tony Blair’s controversial national policies. In May 2007, the SNP became the first majority party with 47 seats out of 129. In 2011, the party obtains a crushing victory in the legislative elections with 45% of the votes, which will encourage its independence aspirations. The SNP has always advocated independence, without hiding it, but after their victory they acquired the necessary legitimacy to demand a referendum from the London authorities. Unfortunately, in 2014, the independence referendum gives the “remain” in the lead, crushing the hopes of the SNP although confident of its lead. Until now, this process remained at a standstill. However, the Brexit has changed the game revealing a gap between a Scotland wanting to stay (62%), and an entire country voting to leave (51,9%) (BBC News, 2016). This European felling has been underestimated and is though much older than the Brexit in Scotland. Indeed, it was one of the claims of the 2014 referendum: one of the reasons Scotland chose to remain in the British Union was to ensure that it would remain in the European Union (Juillet Garzon, 2016). The relations between Scotland and the European continent date back to the Middle-Ages when Scotland secured the support of the continent against a possible English invasion (ibid). From now on, Brexit henceforth having a real foothold and concrete repercussions on the lives of residents (such as shortages earlier this year), these local elections could then motivate pro-European Scots to demand an exit from the Kingdom. These parliamentary elections excite the media as the possible secession of Scotland after a turbulent Brexit episode, as a logical continuation. However, it is important to remember that in 2017, Theresa May convoked anticipated elections in order to get legitimacy concerning her “Hard Brexit”. The results were absolutely catastrophic for the SNP with only 35 seats instead of 56 previously. Nevertheless, these elections were organized few times after the Brexit vote, without awaking the independent wills. This event could counteract the hypotheses of a nationalist revival due to the Brexit. But despite this weakness for 3 years, the SNP created the surprise in 2019 during the general elections where it obtained 13 additional seats in the assembly, representing a real tidal wave and sending a “clear message” on a second independence referendum according to the BBC.
Is the United-Kindgom union in danger?
For Boris Johnson, the sulphurous British Prime Minister, the 2014 referendum was once in a generation (Reuters, 2021). Despite the rising power of the SNP, many conservative MP stay opposed to a new referendum. The problem is significant, since the union is a prerogative of Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 (Guigue, 2021). Legally, therefore, a referendum cannot be held without the approval of the central government.
However, the British Constitution is unwritten, which means that in terms of law, case law is authoritative. Yet, if the SNP get a large majority at the elections as ten years ago, it could appeal to the “moral right to referendum” granted by David Cameron (Curtice, 2021). The precedent here is clear, and there is little chance that Boris Johnson will have the ability to say no to a second vote. In addition, a referendum was already scheduled in 2020 and approved by the Queen about Scottish independence, but the vote was postponed due to the pandemic (Allard, 2021)
If the SNP was to be denied this right, however, it could possibly organize a consultative referendum, without any effective scope, which would not a priori engage the responsibility of the British government. On the other hand, it is not desirable for either the United Kingdom or Scotland to resort to a wild referendum. This was the option chosen by the Catalan pro-independence movement, but the EU immediately sided with the Spanish central government rather than the pro-independence movement. Now, the EU plays a key role in the SNP’s plans. Indeed, in an article published in the Figaro, Nicola Sturgeon hopes to join the EU after the Independence process. Indeed, she wants Scotland to be “a partner and a mediator” for a better economy and a fairest society. She also emphasizes the anchoring of the freedom of movement of the single market in Scotland; where according to her “23,000 Europeans are established”. She added “2000 students have benefited from the Erasmus program”. And that’s not all, because the author Val McDermind asked the European Union to welcome Scotland “quickly” into its fold if independence were to happen, and her movement was followed by 200 European and Scottish artists (LeJournalDesArts, 2021).
An important question raised by the possible entry of Scotland in the EU is that of money. Indeed, keeping the pound as the SNP’s officials say would be equivalent to remain dependant of the UK. There is four options for Scotland at this point (Les Echos, 2014). First, it could pass a monetary union with UK permitting to keep the British banking system afloat. London is refusing this option because the English taxpayer has “no interest in supporting the banks and the budget deficit” of Scotland (Ebell, 2014). The second option is to keep the pound without an agreement, which means adopting a non-controlled currency and stockpiling it to avoid any shortage, as is done in Monaco for example. Third, Scotland could issue its own money, but loosing the investors’ confidence by the way. Finally, Scotland could join the Euro zone, as all new European Member-State. Here the disadvantages are numerous: loosing the majority trade with UK, being under the European Central Bank. In addition, the process will be long, and Scotland will not be able to adopt the euro upon independence, which is very risky.
If there is independence, entry into the EU will not be so easy. First, the Scotland public deficit will reach around 10% by 2025 (IFS), in total opposition to the Maastricht restrictions fixing the authorized deficit at 3%. Then, the membership process is long, around 2 or 3 years, and requires a unanimous decision of the other Member-States. Certainly, the EU has no real reason to refuse Scotland membership, which already corresponds to European values as a former member. In addition, the article that sets out the conditions for membership makes it clear that a state that has seceded from a member state would have to go through all the stages of membership again, like a third country (art. 49 TEU). But here the United Kingdom is not an European State anymore, and the process should therefore be simplified. “The agreement with the EU will be ad-hoc and necessarily original” according to Vincent Laborderie, a Belgian political scientist. In reality, the accession process could be threatened by states that are afraid of awakening regionalist tendencies in their midst, such as Spain with Catalonia, and to a lesser extent, France with Corsica or Brittany and Italy with the Lega Nord.
But even more dangerous than the breakup of European regions, Scottish independence could lead to the fracturing of the United Kingdom. If one of its nations can be independent, the other could be too. The bigger threat is the return of a closed border between North and South Ireland. Tensions were already high at the time of the Brexit, which prompted developments in the deal with the EU. However, if Scotland were to achieve independence, Ireland might, in fact, think it possible to do the same. The Brexit Agreement set up an open border between the two Irelands, but if the Northern Ireland leaves the UK, it could result in a tensions increasing. Remember that the Northern Irish conflict caused the death of more than 3000 people (CAIN, 2010) and that allusions are present everywhere on the walls.
The Covid 19 influenced the independence process
The Covid-19 pandemic also worsened the situation, given the rise in unemployment, but especially the management of contamination numbers. Indeed, Boris Johnson appears inactive during the crisis, even incompetent, instead of Nicola Sturgeon embodying the control and expertise of public health policies. According to the polls, 74% of Scots are satisfied with their First Minister’s handling of the crisis, only 19% believe that Boris Johnson is doing a good job on this issue (France 24, 2020). The health crisis further widens the gap between a disconnected central power and a local power aware of regional issues. More than that, Boris Johnson has become the effigy of populism that the Scots vote against by supporting the SNP.
Pandemic may well prove to be a constraint on the process of Scottish independence. As we saw earlier, the pandemic already delayed the referendum in 2020. But the situation actually does not permit the holding of a vote, because of agglomeration of people. By the way, the Prime Minister Sturgeon promised to not hold the IndyRef2 while the coronavirus pandemic is still ongoing (The Scottish Sun, 2020). If the vote were held anyway, the turnout would be skewed by health security measures. Yet it is impossible to know how long the crisis will last, two or three years? The most annoying is that at this time, by that time, popular opinion about independence -which will determine the outcome of the democratic vote- may have changed, and may no longer enjoy either the Brexit effect or the good management effect of the pandemic. It is a vicious circle which makes it difficult to evaluate the pandemic on SNP’s independence goals.
Yesterday’s elections may well determine the future of Scottish independence, and by extension, the future of the unity of the United Kingdom. Immediately after the Brexit vote in 2016, Scotland has made known its desire to join the European Union by leaving the UK. The response of the EU was sympathetic, but it was as long as it remained a hypothesis. Since the Brexit became effective, the EU has made no comment on the subject. It is potentially best to avoid encouraging such a process, which could lead to the instability described above. The EU must be prepared to deploy a new strategy for ad-hoc membership in the event of independence. But in the meantime, inaction would seem to be the best course of action, so as not to generate further regionalist impulses.
