Scotland’s divorce from the UK is inevitable, and Labour will lose the House

Scotland will become independent – maybe not in this generation but almost certainly in the next, and Labour will lose a key pillar of electoral support.

Owen Bennett is a reporter for the Daily Express Online and blogs at Designed for Life

An independent Scotland is inevitable, if the latest opinion poll is to be believed.

But it won’t be the vote in September which sees Scotland cut itself adrift from the rest of the UK.

The Yes campaign is gaining support, hitting 40 per cent according to a Panelbase poll published on Thursday. That puts support for an independent Scotland at a six month high.

But it is still incredibly unlikely the Yes campaign will be triumphant in September’s referendum, as those wanting to keep the union still account for 45 per cent of voters.

The Yes vote are targeting the 15 per cent of ‘don’t knows’, but that group tend to eventually split the same way as those who have already decided.

So the Yes campaigners will lose the battle in September, but they are on their way to winning the war.

The fact that support is increasing for the separatists is worrying when you consider the backdrop. Since the turn of the year, SNP leader Alex Salmond’s version of independence has been ripped apart.

Currency union? – No, says Westminster.

EU membership? – “Extremely difficult, if not impossible”, says European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso

No threat to jobs? – BP, Shell, BAE and Standard Life have all expressed serious concerns about Scotland going alone

Yet, support for an independent Scotland has grown since all of these interventions; some might argue because of them as accusations of ‘bullying’ gain credence.

That means that between 40-45 per cent of Scots have made their mind up based not on economic and political factors, but for other reasons.

Wanting their own country; tired of being dictated to by Westminster; sick of suggestions Scotland ‘lives off’ England.

So how long can Scotland stay in its marriage to the UK when up to 45 per cent want a divorce – seemingly no matter what?

And this is something which Westminster needs to consider. More importantly, it is something Labour needs to be incredibly worried about.

Since 1945, the fortunes of the Conservatives and Labour north of Hadrian’s Wall have gone in opposite directions.

Between 1945 and 1955, there was no huge bias either way in how Scots voted in Westminster elections. In 1945, Scotland returned 27 Tory MPs and 37 Labour. In 1951, both parties secured 35 Scotland MPs and in 1955 the Tories actually won two more seats than Labour – 36 as opposed to 34.

It began to change in 1959, where Harold Macmillan’s Conservative Party won 31 Scottish seats, as opposed to Hugh Gaitskill’s Labour which won 38.

Since then, the Tories have been on a downward trajectory north of the border, culminating with them not winning a single Scottish seat in the 1997 General Election.

While Tory support has virtually disappeared in Scotland, Labour’s fortunes have gone in the other direction.

In Blair’s first election victory Labour won 56 out of a possible 72 seats.

I looked back at every general election result since 1945, and when you take away the Scottish seats from the results it is clear that Labour would have spent less time in Government, the Conservatives would have won more elections and the Liberal Democrats would not have found themselves in coalition today.

Analysing the figures shows Harold Wilson would have lost the 1964 and February 1974 General Elections to the Conservatives.

Clement Attlee would have been forced to try and rule with a minority Government in 1950 (he would have been 17 seats short of a majority).

The second election of 1974 would have also returned a minority Labour government – with Wilson having seven seats fewer than the rest of the House combined.

And the most recent General Election in 2010 would have returned a Conservative government with a majority of 19.

It makes you wonder why David Cameron is so determined to keep the union together.

If I was a Labour supporter, I would be incredibly worried.

Scotland will become independent – maybe not in this generation but almost certainly in the next, and Labour will lose a key pillar of electoral support.

8 Responses to “Scotland’s divorce from the UK is inevitable, and Labour will lose the House”

  1. robertcp

    Substantial devolution is inevitable but not independence. We can start considering devolution in all four countries of the UK after September 2014.

  2. Derick Tulloch

    There will be no UK after September 2014.

    Canvas returns from Drumchapel at the weekend. Yes 176, No 67, Undecided 118

    Althing debate in Shetland on Saturday Yes 70, No 48, Don’t know 22

    Canvass returns from Possil over the last 4 weeks. Yes 124, No 37, Undecided 72

  3. robertcp

    I doubt it but maybe you are right.

  4. smilingvulture

    I think there will be a shock sept 18th but I don’t know if it’s YES or NO

    personally I can’t wait to rid Westminster,House of Lords,trident,I hav a greyhound that runs in Newcastle, might be cool getting it a passport

  5. uglyfatbloke

    The stuff about numbers of MPs would be relevant if we had a democratic electoral system, but we don’t , so it ain’t. There is still no chance of ‘Yes’ winning the referendum, but there is an increasingly strong chance of Better Together losing it . I suspect Salmond does n’t really want a currency union; he wants an excuse to leave UK debt with the B of E and Osborne is doing his best to give him one.
    Barrosos’s intervention is driven by his need for Cameron’d support if he is to become the next top-dog at NATO and Standard Life have (ahem) clarified their MD ‘s comments.
    The gnats should be attacked where they are weak… personal liberty for example. The only problem with that is that none of the party leaders are very keen on personal liberty either.

  6. Barry Scarfe

    You are correct. Britain has an electoral system that can only be described as a SICK JOKE and a national disgrace. It’s more like a lottery than a fair means to represent the people’s will.

    Labour had its chance to change it. They promised in their 1997 manifesto to have a referendum on proportional representation but (surprise, surprise) they never got round to holding it. Is it any wonder why Scots and others are so cynical about Labour’s intentions?.

    If we did have PR, the Conservative and Unionist Party’s 412,000 voters in Scotland would be fairly represented and they could mount more of a defence of the Union. It amazes me that a supposedly unionist party doesn’t bring-in PR so that their voters are not effectively disenfranchised they way they are.

    Labour would also have its voters in the South of England and the East of England fairly represented. It is dangerous for the continued union of the United Kingdom to have Scots think the Tories are an ‘English party’ and for too many people in the South and East of England think of Labour as a ‘Scottish party’ and this is the effect the ‘electoral deserts’ that FPTP is producing cause the Tory and Labour parties. Having PR for Westminster and a reformed upper house could be part of a package of measures to save the Union.

  7. uglyfatbloke

    No PR? Easy….the two main parties have enjoyed a huge advantage since god was boy and they won’t want to give it up. However….imagine the gnats get 42-44% of the vote at the next GE – which is far from impossible so long as Lamont and Ian Davidson keep getting air-time – and give some though to how many MPs they would end up with….20? 30? 40?
    If they kick out the glib-dumbs from being the 3rd party (and they might) keep an eye out for a sudden change in all sorts of Commons rules to ensure that its the glibs and not the gnats who get 3rd shot at PMQs and places on every committee and privileged representation on TV etc.

  8. David Donnelly

    Nice prediction

Leave a Reply