Leave won the vote by a small margin, yet no question in a mature liberal democracy is answered fully by a referendum: the debate continues. Theresa May needs to acknowledge that as Brexit means Brexit for England and Wales, the opposite is true for Scotland and Northern Ireland, writes Andrew Scott Crines.
The recent meeting between Prime Minister Theresa May and the leaders of the United Kingdom’s devolved administrations was a significant moment in setting the tone for the Brexit negotiations ahead. May has pledged to advance a single UK position when negotiations with the EU begin next year. This pledge could be interpreted in either of two ways. She could be attempting to compel the nations of the UK to conform to the Westminster government’s Brexit position, or she could be opening the door to other positions in the hope of destabilising the moves towards leaving the EU. The former is the most likely, however May cannot be seen to be overtly imposing the will of the Brexiteers on the devolved institutions without risking political consequences.
In the case of Scotland such consequences are well advertised. First Minister Nicola Sturgeon wants to at least keep Scotland in the single market and, really, her ultimate goal is to stay in the EU. The Scottish people voted to remain, which Sturgeon is interpreting as a solid mandate to oppose moves in London to take Scotland out. Similarly, Northern Ireland voted to remain. The deputy first minister, Martin McGuinness, warned of dire consequences if it is also taken out of the EU, both economically and constitutionally. Only Wales and England voted to leave, which was enough to deliver a Brexit vote.
A large minority
May’s problem is that the Remain vote (although the minority) was very large across the UK, at 48%. It was also sufficiently clustered to embolden Sturgeon and McGuinness to take the UK government to task. Westminster is sovereign, so there is no legal recourse for the devolved institutions to stand up to the UK government in the manner that they are doing but they do equally have a mandate to speak up for Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Remain voters in England and Wales are also sympathetic to Scotland and Northern Ireland’s cause. Although Leave won the referendum with 51.9% of the UK vote, democracy is never a single event. No subject – especially one as significant as this – in a mature liberal democracy is ever answered fully by a referendum. Put simply, the debate continues as Leave voters know all too well.
The debate also continued after 1975 when the UK voted to stay part of the European Economic Area, it continued after the passing of many treaties in bills in the House of Commons, and it would have continued if Remain had won in 2016 (particularly if it was only by 51.9%). It is disingenuous of Leave supporters to now argue the “people have spoken” and expect the debate to end. The majority have spoken but the substantial minority are significant enough to pose a constitutional, political, and economic risk to the UK if Brexiteers continue believing they have an “overwhelming” mandate. Indeed, what is surprising about the mandate is its smallness.
May, David Davis, Boris Johnson, Liam Fox and the other Brexiteers in the government (and on the opposition) have no option but to listen to Remainers – especially those representing nations that voted to stay, such as Sturgeon and McGuinness. The consequences of not doing so would be dire for relations within the UK during the Brexit talks and possibly afterwards if Scotland is seen to be treated as little more than an afterthought by the Brexit government.
So far, the hubris of the Brexiteers appears to be clouding their judgement. The task ahead is substantial. The stakes are not just the future economic prosperity of the UK but also questions of whether the UK will remain together. At this point there is a real risk that, by the end of this process, Wales and England will stand alone as a UK outside the EU and shunned by the world.
A kingdom at stake
So, how can May demonstrate she is listening? She can first acknowledge that the referendum result was a slim victory for Leave. It is not a huge endorsement for a hard Brexit. Indeed, it is a slim endorsement for something which no one appears to understand. By acknowledging the slimness of the vote it will give her room to manoeuvre which she desperately needs.
May also needs to acknowledge that for Scotland and Northern Ireland “remain means remain”. They want to remain a member of the European Union and the single market. Regardless of it being a United Kingdom vote, it would be constitutionally and politically bold to ignore that. Should May attempt to do so, it is highly probable that a second independence referendum in Scotland could occur. Whatever the result of that, the symbolism would be very negative.
The possible consequences in Northern Ireland could include growing calls to remain in the European Union through reunification with Ireland. If faced with significant economic decline these calls could become very convincing if the UK is seen to be acting in a detrimental manner and failing to take the peace process seriously. These are big issues that May and the Brexiteers simply can’t afford to ignore in favour of pursuing their victory. But they look increasingly like they are running off the edge of a cliff knowing full well what they are about to do.
This article was originally published on The Conversation and the BPP. Read the original article. It represents the views of the author and not those of the Brexit blog, nor the LSE. Image by : (CC BY-SA 4.0).
Andrew Scott Crines is Lecturer in British Politics at the University of Liverpool.
And don’t forget the roughly 2 million or so UK citizens disfranchised through living abroad for over 15 years, about half of whom, living in other EU countries, are the most directly affected. It is highly likely that had we been able to vote the result would have been reversed. I for one do not accept the result of the referendum, just as I could never accept that such a grave decision as Brexit could be taken simply as a result of a referendum, especially one so flawed by Brexiteers’ lies and the rabid tabloid press, much of it foreign owned, as to represent fraud on a massive scale.
No, you are not the ones most directly affected, those of us actually living here are.
“Fraud on a massive scale” – Hyperbole and untrue.
Not hyperbole and totally true . “Fraud: In law, fraud is deliberate deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain, or to deprive a victim of a legal right.” (source Wikipedia but many others exist) – this precisely describes the Brexiteers’ lies and intentions – “deliberate deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain” (although illusory gain!) OR “to deprive a victim (here 50 million UK citizens who didn’t vote to leave the EU, and 17 million who didn’t even realise they were turkeys voting for Christmas) of a legal right” (here many legal rights).
This being said, I can well understand that so many people were left out and fed up with the abysmal treatment they had been getting for years from the Government. But Brexit won’t cure that!
If the referendum result had been a small margin to remain, then those who had voted to leave would have been expected to shut up and accept the result. Sturgeon couldn’t care less whether or not Scotland was, or was not, in the EU. Lets not forget that she was part of the campaign for Scotland to leave the union, which, if had resulted in a vote for independence, would have meant that Scotland would also have had to leave the EU.
The fact that a majority of those in Scotland voted to remain in the EU is irrelevant, all it does is give Sturgeon a platform to strut on. She, like most of us, knows full well that if there was to be another independence vote and it results in a vote to leave the UK, Scotland would not be allowed to remain in the EU, it would have to go through the whole process of being considered for membership, with no guarantee of that being granted, in fact there are a number of countries in the EU who would ensure that never happened. The answer to her constant whinging? give her a new vote and lets see what happens. It is most likely that another vote would confirm Scotland’s wish to remain a part of the UK and that would be the end of Sturgeon who could be told to now accept the decision of the majority and if it was a vote for independence? fine, good luck to them, with the same outcome if they vote to remain in the UK.
Northern Ireland? Give them a vote on reunification and if it is a yes, good luck to them, if it is a no they accept the result of the majority of the UK.
Since we are speculating, let me have a go…
For Spain an independent Scotland will lead a way to an independent Gibraltar. Some goes for Northern Ireland.
There has been talk about ‘Keeping Scotland pinned in the EU, while the UK leaves.’ ‘An Gaelic union’ and ‘Fast tracking Scotland back into the EU’.
Norway has offered Scotland a place in the EEC after it has become independent.
The position of the EU is not quite clear….
If I were the EU I would give Scotland an offer to return back ones it is independent. A rUK down and out, will be eager to make deal.
(nope I am not Scottish)
You missed out:
For Spain an independent Scotland will lead the way to an independent Catalonia.
Same for Italy which has parts of the country who wish independence
Same for France which has parts of the country who wish independence
Same for Germany which has parts of the country who wish independence
Which is why the EU will never allow Scotland to join
Gibraltar has stated it does not wish to be independent.
Discussions on fast tracking Scotland into the EU have been dismissed by the EU, which has also stressed that if Scotland wishes to join it must apply and meet all the eligibility factors.
It is not within Norway’s gift to offer Scotland a place in the EEC.
Yore not the EU, which has stated that if Scotland wishes to join………..
You’re not Scottish? If you say so.
“You missed out:
For Spain an independent Scotland will lead the way to an independent Catalonia.”
Have a look here:
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2016/07/04/brexit-and-spain-would-the-spanish-government-really-block-scotlands-eu-membership/
Conclusion, Spain will unlikely veto Scotland’s EU-membership bid.
“Same for Italy which has parts of the country who wish independence
Same for France which has parts of the country who wish independence
Same for Germany which has parts of the country who wish independence”
You missed out the Netherlands and Belgium, there might be more too. That was not your point of course, what you getting at is that they would not support it. Well in the same article above it states: “… and the support in other European nations, such as Poland, France and crucially Germany, for Scotland replacing the UK as the EU’s 28th member states:…”
“Which is why the EU will never allow Scotland to join2
Every country on the European continent can apply for EU-membership. That is why Morocco can not join,Turkey in theory can join (and even Russia). It all dependent on EU’s goodwill towards Scotland… and I do not think it is bad (using a British understatement).
“Gibraltar has stated it does not wish to be independent.”
But I am sure the people would want a solution to their predicament. They also did not vote for a leave. Some solutions might come to mind, Spain offered shared sovereignty.
“Discussions on fast tracking Scotland into the EU have been dismissed by the EU,…”
EU does not discuss internal issues of a member state. Scottish independence and a second indy referendum is an internal issue. Of course if the UK invokes article 50, they have a bit more leeway on this, it will soon be a non member.
“…which has also stressed that if Scotland wishes to join it must apply and meet all the eligibility factors.”
All depends on EU on how slow is slow and since Scotland is already a part of the EU. Sure there are hurdles, but nothing that can not be fixed.
“It is not within Norway’s gift to offer Scotland a place in the EEC.”
Norway has blocked UK path to the EEA.
“Yore not the EU, which has stated that if Scotland wishes to join………..”
Nope not the EU, but I am sure I am not the only one, who likes Scotland and finds the display of EU-bashing and hate in UK newspaper and by ruling UK politicians, quite off putting.
“You’re not Scottish? If you say so.”
I said so, so you can not play the man, but need to play the ball.
You are quoting from an article written in July, which, by its very nature has remain leanings.
A lot has happened since that article was published, not least of all the EU making it clear on Scotland becoming a member if it became independent.
Who dislikes Scotland and its people? Liking them both is one thing but that will cut no ice with countries whose internal politics would be thrown into chaos if Scotland seceded from the UK and was allowed to join the EU by nefarious dealings.
The EU as an organisation deserves bashing as far as I am concerned. What hate in UK newspapers are you referring to?
“so you can not play the man, but need to play the ball” Please don’t quote tired old clichés at me.