Coalition and Minority Government in Scotland : Lessons for the United Kingdom

Peer reviewedPostprin

Five political problems with ‘Full Fiscal Autonomy’ for Scotland

The SNP have turned the Scottish political map yellow, routing Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives in winning nearly all of Scotland’s seats. The scale of the next transfer of power from Westminster to Holyrood has been up for debate, with ‘full fiscal autonomy’ (FFA) being suggested. Paul Cairney argues that there are at least five political problems with the proposal, which he details here

Second Scottish referendum: is independence now inevitable?

Following Nicola Sturgeon’s announcement that she will seek authority for a Scottish referendum, Paul Cairney offers an overview of how the story may develop. With Brexit having drastically changed the independence argument, he explains how this new context could be used to support both those for and against leaving the UK

The time is right for an audit of Scottish democracy

Last year, we launched Democratic Audit – Scotland to provide meaningful, in depth, scrutiny of Scotland’s democratic record. The aim of the site, explains Paul Cairney, is to provide a democratic audit, to examine the effectiveness of its political system, a democratic dashboard, to help members of the public make an informed choice when they participate in Scottish elections, and regular blog posts, to report on current developments in areas such as elections and representation, political parties, accountability, and human rights

A guide to making a decision on how to vote in the Scottish Independence referendum

The Scottish independence referendum is drawing very close indeed, with the ‘No’ side holding a narrow advantage heading into the final straight. Here, Paul Cairney attempts to clear up how to make the decision as to how to vote for the minority who have not yet made up their minds

The problem of the political class is easy to exaggerate, but difficult to define

It is frequently said that Britain’s quality of democracy is effected by a paucity of good quality politicians, with the “political class” existing as little but an impenetrable, self-interested elite, disconnected from the preferences of the masses. Here, Paul Cairney lifts the lid on the realities of the political class, and argues that the ‘political class’ problem is difficult to truly define, but is certainly exaggerated

Constitutional issues look set to only have a marginal influence on the General Election, at least in England

The referendum on Scottish independence held in late September of last year brought constitutional issues to the fore of the political debate on both sides of the border, with Westminster parties seeming to agree that the proposals of the Smith Commission should be implemented sooner rather than later. Paul Cairney argues that despite this newfound focus on issues of power and democracy, constitutional issues do not look set to feature heavily in the General Election later this year

How Can the Scottish Parliament Be Improved as a Legislature?

There will be a referendum on Scottish independence in 2014. The prospect of further constitutional change might prompt us to reconsider the role and influence of the Scottish Parliament as a legislature. Fourteen years of devolution has also given us plenty of experience on which to make our assessment of the limitations of the new Scottish political system. Yet, the title of this article also has the potential to mislead, because it suggests that the Scottish Parliament is in particular need of improvement. While it is common to hear criticisms of the Scottish legislative process, they do not seem to be more vocal or strong than in other legislatures. For example, there are few strong concerns about the quality of the legislation passed by the Scottish Parliament. Nor do we find relatively strong concerns about the Scottish Parliament's ability and willingness to scrutinise and help modify legislation introduced by the Scottish Government. Rather, the agenda is set by relatively high expectations for the Scottish Parliament to be a powerful legislature, producing relatively high levels of attention and disenchantment with the results. The first part of this article sets out the reasons for such heightened expectations and disenchantment. A second part of this agenda relates to the assumptions we employ when we make value judgements about the Scottish Parliament and consider how it can be improved. For example, are we worried about the quality of the legislation produced by the Scottish Parliament, or the origins of the legislation? In other words, we may tend to frame the problem in terms of the imbalance of power between executive and legislature rather than the specific policy outcomes. Or, we may worried about the quality of the legislation, not from a technical drafting point of view, but in terms of the ability of the legislature to provide meaningful scrutiny and make substantial changes to the draft bill. Such an agenda might prompt us to consider, for example, our willingness to trade ‘technical perfection', based on legislation produced by a well resourced and unchallenged executive, for a technically flawed piece of legislation based on considerable scrutiny, debate and last-minute consensus in Parliament. It is in this context that the main part of the article considers some common current concerns about the Scottish Parliament as a legislature, derived from discussions with practitioners and extrapolated from debates on the Scottish Parliament since devolution: it does not scrutinise government legislation sufficiently; it does not have a sufficiently large professionally trained staff dedicated to their activities; its independent scrutiny is undermined by the party whip; it is particularly peripheral to the policy process when opposition parties do not engage with Scottish Government legislation; and, it would benefit from an upper chamber. In most cases, the concern is that the executive is not sufficiently challenged by a Parliament able to scrutinise and suggest key revisions - not necessarily a comment on the technical quality of the legislation, or the level of popular consent that underpins it, but rather on the checks and balances within the Scottish system. Our focus on ideas regarding democracy may be more prominent than our focus on particular legislative processes or outcomes. The conclusion of the article considers the implications of this discussion for a further-devolved or independent Scotland, since the prospect of more constitutional powers may prompt us to wonder about the adequacy of Scottish legislative powers. For example, if the Scottish Parliament has more responsibilities, should (and could) it have more resources? Or, should we be focusing on more fundamental or principled discussions regarding, for example, the need for a written Scottish constitution? Much will depend on the type of further constitutional change Scotland eventually chooses, since only Scottish independence provides the ‘window of opportunity' for major institutional change

The myth of 'evidence-based policymaking' in a decentred state

I describe a policy theory story in which a decentred state results from choice and necessity. Governments often choose not to centralise policymaking but they would not succeed if they tried. Many policy scholars take this story for granted, but it is often ignored in other academic disciplines and wider political debate. Instead, commentators call for more centralisation to deliver more accountable, ‘rational,’ and ‘evidence-based’ policymaking. Such contradictory arguments, about the feasibility and value of government centralisation, raise an ever-present dilemma for governments to accept or challenge decentring. They also accentuate a modern dilemma about how to seek ‘evidence-based policymaking’ in a decentred state. I identify three ideal-type ways in which governments can address both dilemmas consistently. I then identify their ad hoc use by UK and Scottish governments. Although each government has a reputation for more or less centralist approaches, both face similar dilemmas and address them in similar ways. Their choices reflect their need to appear to be in control while dealing with the fact that they are not.Output Status: Forthcoming/Available Onlin

The Smith Commission: will greater powers come with greaterdemocratic accountability?

The Scottish independence referendum set in motion a chain of events which looks likely to lead to a greater degree of devolution to Scotland, with a commission chaired by Lord Smith of Kelvin set to report shortly with recommendations for exactly what form the relationship between Holyrood and Westminster should take. Paul Cairney, a noted expert on Scottish government, poses a key question: will greater powers for Scotland equate to greater democratic responsibility, with an unclear answer. Team GB