{"id":8759,"date":"2019-07-07T14:23:03","date_gmt":"2019-07-07T14:23:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/?p=8759"},"modified":"2019-07-07T14:24:28","modified_gmt":"2019-07-07T14:24:28","slug":"what-now-for-holyrood","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/2019\/07\/what-now-for-holyrood\/","title":{"rendered":"What now for Holyrood?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

This month marks the twentieth anniversary of the Scottish Parliament. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Queen and the Duke of Rothesay (Prince Charles) addressed a special celebratory session of the Parliament to mark the occasion. The Queen recalled the optimism of 1999 and shared her view that the Parliament has become firmly established at the heart of Scottish public life; her sentiments were echoed by the political leaders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nFirst Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, spoke of the Scottish Parliament having become\n\u2018the democratic institution that people look to \u2013 to reflect their priorities,\ntheir values, hopes and dreams\u2019. Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson,\ndescribed the Scottish Parliament as \u2018an institution knitted into the fabric of\nour society\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Closing\nthe politicians\u2019 speeches, Tavish Scott, Lib Dem MSP for Shetland, said\n\u2018Scotland is an immeasurably stronger place today\u2026 there is, Presiding Officer,\nno turning back, and nor should there be\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But what lies ahead for the Scottish Parliament? And how will it be shaped by that other major constitutional change currently gripping the UK?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No deal Brexit effects<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The\nfull effects of Brexit on devolution won\u2019t be known until we see what form\nBrexit takes and all that unfolds as a result. Maintaining close regulatory and\npolitical alignment with the EU internal market might suggest that the impact\nof Brexit on devolution would be limited. But from this vantage point, that\nkind of relationship seems unlikely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A\nharder Brexit, with loose alignment with EU law, creates more scope for\nregulatory divergence between the constituent territories of the UK in areas\nwhere the devolved institutions have competence. In that context, the UK\ngovernment may seek to limit the opportunities of governments across the UK to\ntake divergent paths, in order to safeguard the UK\u2019s own internal\nmarket. The devolved governments have signalled their willingness to agree\ncommon UK approaches, so long as these are by agreement, not imposition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Leaving without a deal tells us little about the future relationship, but it makes the potential for political as well as economic disruption more acute. Ahead of the recent British-Irish Council, the First Ministers of Scotland and Wales issued a joint statement expressing their alarm at the heightening prospects of a no deal Brexit, calling for a change of course. This intervention will have no impact on those leading the charge for Brexit, though both governments may have been targeting their own domestic audiences in any event.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\ndevolved governments\u2019 successive appeals for the softest of Brexits, for ruling\nout a no deal Brexit, and for another referendum with Remain on the ballot,\nhave likewise had no impact on Brexit\u2019s direction of travel. But Brexit will\naffect their powers, their responsibilities and perhaps, depending upon the disruption\nit creates, their capacity to govern in many areas of devolved competence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Relations between the Scottish and UK governments, in particular, have deteriorated against the backdrop of deep divisions over Brexit. As well as being deeply opposed to Brexit in any form, the Scottish government has repeatedly voiced its concern that it will lead to a centralisation of power in the UK, undermining the authority of the Scottish Parliament.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Power grab?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The\nScottish government, backed by the Scottish Parliament, objected strongly to\nthe restrictions that the EU withdrawal legislation imposes on devolved\ncompetence. Under the Sewel convention, now incorporated into the Scotland Act\n2016, the UK Parliament will not normally legislate in areas of devolved\ncompetence or change devolved powers without the consent of the devolved\ninstitutions. When the Scottish Parliament withheld its consent for the\ndevolution elements of Withdrawal Bill, the UK Parliament barely blinked as it\nproceeded to enactment. Evidently, these are not normal times.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To add\ninsult to the perceived injury, the Scottish Parliament\u2019s alternative\n\u2018continuity\u2019 legislation was referred by the UK government to the Supreme\nCourt. The Court ruled that the bill was largely within the powers of the\nScottish Parliament at the time that it was passed. However, because the\nScotland Act had since been amended by the EU (Withdrawal) Act (despite the\nwithholding of consent by the Scottish Parliament), most of it was rendered\nbeyond competence. The episode has done little to allay fears that the Brexit\nprocess is putting the authority of the Scottish Parliament at risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Both candidates for the\nConservative leadership have come under at least some pressure to say how they\nwould defend the Union. Jeremy Hunt declared that he would \u2018never allow the Union to be broken\nup\u2019<\/a> under his watch. Boris Johnson promised a policy unit in\nDowning St to \u201cstress test\u201d every policy for its impact on the Union. If that\nwere the case, he might want to start with Brexit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

62% of Scots voted for the UK to remain in the EU in the 2016 referendum, and there is little sign to suggest that Scots have warmed to the idea since then. Moreover, polls suggest that continued support for Remain is persuading more Scots to back independence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Brexit means indy?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

As Professor John\nCurtice demonstrated in What Scotland Thinks<\/a>,\nthe alignment between those supporting EU membership and those supporting\nindependence, already emerging in the years following the 2016 referendum,\nhas intensified in recent polling. Polls also suggest that the prospect of\neither a no deal Brexit or Boris Johnson as Prime Minister may persuade a\nmajority to vote Yes to independence. A Johnson\/no deal double whammy might be\nexpected to reinforce that trend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whichever\nof the two contenders becomes PM, he might be advised to reflect on the\nScottish Parliament\u2019s anniversary and, in particular, the mobilisation of\nhearts and minds that led to its establishment. There has long been support for\nsome form of Scottish Parliament. That support intensified in the 1980s and\nearly 1990s, in light of what became known as \u2018the democratic deficit\u2019 in the\nUK political system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Successive\nelections sustained a radical majority Conservative government despite its\nfalling support in Scotland. Advocates of a Scottish Parliament argued that it\nwas necessary to protect Scotland from unpopular policies like the poll tax and\nhelp ensure that the preferences and priorities of the people of Scotland could\nbe met.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nicola Sturgeon<\/a>, amongst\nothers, has suggested that Brexit is creating a new democratic deficit. From\nthe 2016 vote to the setting aside of the Sewel convention, advocates of independence\nhave argued that Scotland\u2019s voice is no longer being heard within the UK.\nEffectively marginalising the devolved governments from the process of\nnegotiating Brexit is noted as further evidence of the system\u2019s failure to\naccommodate Scotland\u2019s voice. Whether these arguments resonate as much with the\nelectorate as they did before the parliament was established is as yet unclear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are many other challenges that those championing independence would have to confront ahead of any public vote. But, whereas a Scottish Parliament within the UK can and has responded to Scottish priorities by forging its own path in many policy areas, from tuition fees to public health to land reform, there is little it can do to resist Brexit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First published by the <\/em>UK in a Changing Europe<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Image by Rob Bruce<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

‘…whereas a Scottish Parliament within the UK can and has responded to Scottish priorities by forging its own path in many policy areas, from tuition fees to public health to land reform, there is little it can do to resist Brexit.’<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":41,"featured_media":3195,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[125],"tags":[122,85],"class_list":["post-8759","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-politics","tag-brexit","tag-scottish-devolution"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8759","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/41"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8759"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8759\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3195"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8759"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8759"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8759"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}