Opinion - Leader Page Articles   

U.K. on the brink of a major change?

Hasan Suroor

A very real campaign is on to push for a broader federal set-up, effectively creating four separate nations bound only by a common link to the crown.

HAS THE idea of a United Kingdom had its day and has the time come for its constituents — England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland — to go their separate ways? To put it bluntly, is the U.K. on the brink of a historic break-up? The notion that a once-mighty empire should be struggling to hold itself together as a stable nation-state might appear strange to the outside world, not clued in to the secessionist trends in Her Majesty's kingdom. But for native Britons — from London and Cardiff to Edinburgh and Belfast — it is no longer an academic issue.

The debate over the continuing viability of a Westminster-centred U.K. has moved on from seminar halls to the streets and a very real campaign is on to push the case for a broader federal set-up effectively creating four separate nations bound only by a common link to the crown. This would mean that England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland will have their own independent parliaments with complete powers over domestic issues, leaving only defence and foreign affairs to Westminster.

The biggest threat to the Union comes from Scotland, which has been straining at the leash for as long as one remembers, and attempts to contain the separatist sentiment have not quite worked. In 1999, the Blair Government devolved power to Scotland in a bid to take the sting out of the campaign for independence but only ended up whetting the Scots' appetite for greater autonomy thanks to a persistent and single-minded campaign by the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) to break the 300-year-old union.

The SNP's astute and media-savvy leader Alex Salmond, who has virtually declared a war against rule from Westminster, has promised a referendum on the question of independence if his party comes to power after next month's assembly elections. All opinion polls put the SNP ahead and, barring a dramatic upset, it is poised to seize power from Labour in the May 3 elections. The worst that can happen to the SNP is that it might not get a working majority on its own; by all accounts it will emerge as the single largest party and form either a coalition government with smaller parties or have a go at forming a minority administration. Either way, it will mark the end of the long Labour raj in Scotland. A delicious irony is that Scotland is contemplating separation from Westminster just when one of its most famous sons, Gordon Brown, prepares to become Prime Minister of the U.K.

It would be almost surrealistic if Scotland secedes when Mr. Brown is still Prime Minister. The country could be plunged into a constitutional crisis if that happens because England and the two other remaining U.K. constituents are then not likely to accept a Scot as Prime Minister. The question being asked is: could Mr. Brown end up being the last Prime Minister of the U.K.?

Although the rise of the SNP is attributed not so much to its pro-independence stance as widespread disillusionment with the Blair Government, especially as a result of the Iraq invasion, the fact remains that large swathes of Scots have reservations about being ruled from London. Even among ordinary Scots, more worried about bread-and-butter issues, there is a sense of disenchantment with the Union — a sense that they are not regarded as equal partners.

While the SNP has largely concentrated on making the economic argument for independence (for example, Scotland will not have to share its revenue from the North Sea oil with London), others are seduced by the idea that an independent Scotland will be able to control its own political destiny. Scots resent that their image abroad is often tainted by the actions of the Central government such as Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassingly unequal relationship with Washington. As an independent country, Scotland will not have to answer for policies that do not represent or reflect its viewpoint.

The truth is that there is a resurgence of Scottish nationalism and it has been further fuelled by the success of Ireland and the emergence of a string of successful micro-states in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet Union. The SNP is hoping that, once in power, it will be better placed to exploit the growing pro-independence tilt. If it is able to deliver on its other election promise such as cheaper and more efficient public services, and a fairer tax system, then over a period of time, if not immediately, it will have won enough public confidence to convert sceptics to its independence plank. Mr. Salmond has said his party will not give up if the first referendum, proposed to be held in 2010, fails. It will hold another referendum if the SNP is returned to power after four or five years.

What an SNP victory will do is open the door for nationalists to pursue their goal of an independent Scotland more aggressively. All the three national political parties — Labour, Tories, and Liberal Democrats — are concerned about the implications an SNP win will have for the future of the Union. And the fear is that if Scotland goes, it could have a domino effect on other parts of the Union prompting The Economist to ask: "Is the Union, in fact, in peril, with Scotland the first of the four nations that make up the United Kingdom to walk free?"

It is a question that is on everybody's mind and has made the SNP a common enemy of pro-Union parties. They have warned Scottish voters that a vote for the SNP would mean a vote ultimately for a break-up of the United Kingdom. The Liberal Democrats have ruled out a coalition with the SNP in the event of a hung Parliament making clear that they will have nothing to do with it unless it abandons plans for a referendum.

An edgy Mr. Blair has appealed to Scots not to let their anger with the Labour Party get the better of their political judgment. Alluding to his imminent retirement, he said: "I will be out of the door but the consequences of an SNP government will be there for the next four years ... Put it like this, if you don't really believe in independence then voting SNP is, at the very least, a crazy risk to take."

It is not often that Mr. Blair gets credit for his political rhetoric but on this occasion even his critics acknowledged that he had got it right, especially when he warned that the SNP would start "stoking up enough conflict with Westminster" to create a sense of grievance and make Scotland feel it had "no option" but to go with independence in a referendum. "From day one, from May 4, an SNP government would start the instability," he said. Rejecting the idea that an independent Scotland would be politically and economically better off, he called for building a "strong, assertive Scotland within a strong UK."

While it is all very well to rail against Scottish nationalists, it is important to remember that "Scotophobia" in England is almost as acute as "Anglophobia" is north of the border. Indeed, according to surveys, a whopping 59 per cent of English people want to be rid of Scotland while less than 30 per cent of Scots wish to secede, with a majority favouring more powers for the devolved Parliament. Across England, there is constant gripe about being ruled by a "Scottish mafia" — a reference to the Scots-dominated Blair Government — and Scotland is seen as a drain on English resources because of the subsidy it gets from the Central government.

Another source of resentment is the Scottish MPs' power to take decisions on issues affecting England where English MPs do not enjoy the privilege of voting on domestic Scottish issues as Scotland has its own Parliament. A campaign, strongly supported by the Tories, is on for Scottish MPs in Westminster to be banned from voting on exclusively English matters.

So, despite attempts to make it out as though Scottish nationalists alone are responsible for the "threat" to the Union, the fact is that there is no love lost on either side of the border. Their relationship is often likened to a failing marriage in which both partners believe they would be happier alone but don't have the courage to call it off. Ironically, the new push towards a possible divorce coincides with the 300th anniversary of the Treaty that brought Scotland and England together. On May 1, there would be celebratory fireworks in Edinburgh and London, and on May 3 we could well see the beginning of the end of the Union.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Testing times for Bangladesh
Do the right thing
U.K. on the brink of a major change?
Smuggling rampant on Tamil Nadu coast
The long road to ruin for the Amazon forest
"India is top priority for Belarus"
On enlightenment
Judicial review
National anthem
Sex education
Perspectives depend on the viewing angles

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu