UK General Discussion: Rishecession

[Torrain]

Adam Tolley KC was appointed to investigate two formal complaints against Dominic Raab this afternoon. The Cabinet Office promised that evidence could be given confidentially, with a public report promised at the end of the investigation.

Based on reporting expected in tonight's Newsnight, it sounds like things might be a tad worse than previously reported...

https://twitter.com/vicderbyshire/status/1595538720555409408

[CumbrianLefty]

Another high-profile retirement announced this evening - William Wragg, Vice-Chairman of the 1922 committee, and Chairman of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Select Committee.

He's only 34, and played a high-profile role in the defenestration of two Conservative PMs this year.

Wragg represents the fairly-marginal Hazel Grove, which was Lib Dem from 1997-2015, with that party maintaing a strong second-place ever since (Wragg's majority has shrunk each election since his first victory, from over 6K, to about 4.4K).

Wragg has had mental health issues, so as with Smith there is a reason other than the obvious.

[Torrain]

https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1595833918523056128

[Benjamin Frank]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63727562?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-bbcnews&utm_content=later-31226638&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkin.bio

The Supreme Court has ruled that Scotland can not hold an independance referendum without the UK Government's consent.

Why has this not gotten more comment here?

So, what can Scotland do? Hold a 'plebicite' instead and dare the U.K government to not recognize the result if it's in favor of independence?

[Oryxslayer]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63727562?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-bbcnews&utm_content=later-31226638&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkin.bio

The Supreme Court has ruled that Scotland can not hold an independance referendum without the UK Government's consent.

Why has this not gotten more comment here?

So, what can Scotland do? Hold a 'plebicite' instead and dare the U.K government to not recognize the result if it's in favor of independence?

So the SNP are in a bit of a pickle. The present and past crop of leaders - no idea about the future ones - really, really, don't want to do this sort of thing. They see how this has faired for Catalonia and all it has done is encouraged both the PSOE and PP to use the spiked boot when the olive branch and bureaucracy fail, calcified the impasse between both sides, and turned Catalonia's provincial government into an electoral extension of the nationalists. None of this is beneficial towards independence if you actually believe in that project, and aren't a cynical opportunist looking to use identity polarization to make the devolved government into a patronage machine cause you hold all the leavers of power for decades. Also, the SNP really want to return to the EU ASAP after independence, so everything has to be nice and legal for Spain and others to allow them in.

But why are the SNP in this situation? After the 2021 election, the SNP promised to reinvigorate the independence question. One potential legal path was this argument, that they could hold a vote without Westminster approval. That's now gone, though the outcome was expected. Then there was the idea of becoming the kingmakers in a 2023/4 election, and extracting Labour into allowing a vote for support from their MPs. That plan was blown up when Boris left and the Tories electoral bottom fell out. Now there's the idea of running a single issue campaign in the next GE on independence, and treating the likely results as full endorsement. That however seems like setting yourself up to fail, since Labour at this point are almost certain to make the Scottish results a net loss for the SNP at minimum. Which leaves the SNP backed into a corner where the Catalan option is the easiest way out. It is also the option which would most destroy their credibility outside Scotland and potentially negatively effect their electoral brand since an amicable divorce rather than conflict has been the desired and marketed outcome for decades now.

And this is just the game theory aspects, there is plenty of internal bickering within the party right now over non-independence issues. There's the Westminster party leadership debate which finally erupted last week after simmering for months. Sturgeon is expected to leave the scene within a few years so positioning for succession  is another facet to their maneuvering.

[Benjamin Frank]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63727562?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-bbcnews&utm_content=later-31226638&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkin.bio

The Supreme Court has ruled that Scotland can not hold an independance referendum without the UK Government's consent.

Why has this not gotten more comment here?

So, what can Scotland do? Hold a 'plebicite' instead and dare the U.K government to not recognize the result if it's in favor of independence?

So the SNP are in a bit of a pickle. The present and past crop of leaders - no idea about the future ones - really, really, don't want to do this sort of thing. They see how this has faired for Catalonia and all it has done is encouraged both the PSOE and PP to use the spiked boot when the olive branch and bureaucracy fail, calcified the impasse between both sides, and turned Catalonia's provincial government into an electoral extension of the nationalists. None of this is beneficial towards independence if you actually believe in that project, and aren't a cynical opportunist looking to use identity polarization to make the devolved government into a patronage machine cause you hold all the leavers of power for decades. Also, the SNP really want to return to the EU ASAP after independence, so everything has to be nice and legal for Spain and others to allow them in.

But why are the SNP in this situation? After the 2021 election, the SNP promised to reinvigorate the independence question. One potential legal path was this argument, that they could hold a vote without Westminster approval. That's now gone, though the outcome was expected. Then there was the idea of becoming the kingmakers in a 2023/4 election, and extracting Labour into allowing a vote for support from their MPs. That plan was blown up when Boris left and the Tories electoral bottom fell out. Now there's the idea of running a single issue campaign in the next GE on independence, and treating the likely results as full endorsement. That however seems like setting yourself up to fail, since Labour at this point are almost certain to make the Scottish results a net loss for the SNP at minimum. Which leaves the SNP backed into a corner where the Catalan option is the easiest way out. It is also the option which would most destroy their credibility outside Scotland and potentially negatively effect their electoral brand since an amicable divorce rather than conflict has been the desired and marketed outcome for decades now.

Thanks for the comprehensive answer.

It's interesting despite Scotland voting heavily in favor of remaining in the E.U, that it seems to have shifted only a small percentage of Scottish voters in favor of leaving the U.K.

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1595833918523056128

Wait... BoJo and Truss are trying to outflank Rishi on environmentalism? After the thing that finally brought down Truss was forcing her MPs to vote in favor of fracking???

Just. Wild. You can't make this sh*t up.

[Epaminondas]

It's interesting despite Scotland voting heavily in favor of remaining in the E.U, that it seems to have shifted only a small percentage of Scottish voters in favor of leaving the U.K.

I suspect pensions is a huge factor for the most reliable voting bloc of older voters.

My older family in the UK are die-hard remainers, but despite their ideological leanings would never vote to leave the UK: they've worked 40 years for their (very) comfortable pension, and will not risk it on a whim. They'll never be swayed, despite holding no love for English rule.

[CumbrianLefty]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63727562?utm_campaign=later-linkinbio-bbcnews&utm_content=later-31226638&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkin.bio

The Supreme Court has ruled that Scotland can not hold an independance referendum without the UK Government's consent.

Why has this not gotten more comment here?

So, what can Scotland do? Hold a 'plebicite' instead and dare the U.K government to not recognize the result if it's in favor of independence?

So the SNP are in a bit of a pickle. The present and past crop of leaders - no idea about the future ones - really, really, don't want to do this sort of thing. They see how this has faired for Catalonia and all it has done is encouraged both the PSOE and PP to use the spiked boot when the olive branch and bureaucracy fail, calcified the impasse between both sides, and turned Catalonia's provincial government into an electoral extension of the nationalists. None of this is beneficial towards independence if you actually believe in that project, and aren't a cynical opportunist looking to use identity polarization to make the devolved government into a patronage machine cause you hold all the leavers of power for decades. Also, the SNP really want to return to the EU ASAP after independence, so everything has to be nice and legal for Spain and others to allow them in.

But why are the SNP in this situation? After the 2021 election, the SNP promised to reinvigorate the independence question. One potential legal path was this argument, that they could hold a vote without Westminster approval. That's now gone, though the outcome was expected. Then there was the idea of becoming the kingmakers in a 2023/4 election, and extracting Labour into allowing a vote for support from their MPs. That plan was blown up when Boris left and the Tories electoral bottom fell out. Now there's the idea of running a single issue campaign in the next GE on independence, and treating the likely results as full endorsement. That however seems like setting yourself up to fail, since Labour at this point are almost certain to make the Scottish results a net loss for the SNP at minimum. Which leaves the SNP backed into a corner where the Catalan option is the easiest way out. It is also the option which would most destroy their credibility outside Scotland and potentially negatively effect their electoral brand since an amicable divorce rather than conflict has been the desired and marketed outcome for decades now.

Thanks for the comprehensive answer.

It's interesting despite Scotland voting heavily in favor of remaining in the E.U, that it seems to have shifted only a small percentage of Scottish voters in favor of leaving the U.K.

Yes, that is interesting and not widely predicted in the immediate aftermath of the 2016 vote. It may well be that it put some swing voters off the prospect of yet more upheaval in the near term.

[afleitch]

In the most recent poll (49% Yes) from October, the % of Yes to No and No to Yes switchers are within one percentage point of each other. Numerically of course that means more No to Yes switchers.

If these figures aren't the result of false recall, then the key to victory is to get Yes to No switchers back on board in a way that doesn't alienate recent converts.

The unlikely route to win elections if you're a progressive force or on the left in the UK (and the SNP did subtly do this last year) is to not pitch for voters who won't back you anyway. We are close to a tipping point where appealing to 'over 65's' as nebulous as they are, doesn't pay electoral dividends.

Polling also shows older voters don't move towards supporting independence even if there were real net benefits to it; such as a lower cost of living. Younger voters do shift.

New voters are still strongly Yes. It's that middle working age bracket that's key.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Wait... BoJo and Truss are trying to outflank Rishi on environmentalism? After the thing that finally brought down Truss was forcing her MPs to vote in favor of fracking???

Just. Wild. You can't make this sh*t up.

By this point the Conservative Party is beyond satire. There's nothing you could suggest as a parodic joke that would be any more absurd than what they might end up doing themselves anyway.

[Dan the Roman]

One other thing regarding Scottish independence is that the SNP really needed Brexit to be a success after 2020. Any hope they had of an independent Scotland being welcomed by the EU suddenly depended on the EU being willing to take on the morass of an extended land border with the UK on an island. Not to mention, the need to unwrap integration with a substantial population in the millions who were unhappy with the divorce and wanted to remain ties including dual citizenship. The experience of the Northern Ireland protocol must make the prospect of trying to integrate Scotland, especially a divided Scotland on bitter terms with the UK and without the goodwill in Washington the Irish have, into the EU, and in the process being dragged into every single legacy dispute with London.

I would go as far to say that an independent Scotland has a dubious path into the EU even with voluntary divorce in the near future. The idea that any path at all exists for an SNP that leaves on anything other than amicable terms with London seems delusional post-Brexit.

Spain is the least of their problems. They should worry about France and Germany. Not to mention Poland probably isn't too hot on their ideological worldview.

Scottish independence likely isn't viable until the next Tory government after the next Labour government. They will need Labour to clean up the Northern Ireland situation enough for the EU to risk taking on Scotland. So we really are talking 2030s. But the SNP cannot tell their base that.

[MacShimidh]

As a Scottish Leave voter - which will admittedly bias this post - I’ve always thought that the whole argument that “Scotland only voted No in 2014 because they were guaranteed to stay in the EU” has been ridiculously over-exaggerated. Yes, there was a sort of voter for whom EU membership was the be-all-and-end-all, but they represent a largely upper middle-class, very online and yes, privileged, section of Scottish society. I’d even go so far as to say that there’s been a significant re-writing of the history of the 2014 referendum - the suggestion that it was EU membership that won it for No didn’t really come about until 2016.

The reality was always far more complex - if Scots felt so strongly about the issue, the SNP wouldn’t have dropped 13% and lost 21 seats in the 2017 GE.  38% for Leave is of course a clear minority, but support across the country was fairly evenly spread both geographically and, surprisingly, across partisan support. I’ve even seen suggestions, though have never been able to find a reliable source, that close to 50% of SNP voters voted Leave. There’s also the inconvenient fact that Scottish turnout in 2016 was noticeably lower than anywhere except Northern Ireland (suggesting a lack enthusiasm for the issue), and it of course merits mention that every major Scottish politician (no, David Coburn wasn’t major) was in favour of Remain, and the lack of debate here certainly had an impact on the final result.

This is an interesting, understudied issue that deserves better than the “All Scots loved the EU so they will now vote for independence” line that always gets lazily bandied about.

[CumbrianLefty]

And of course the one Scottish seat widely thought to have voted for Brexit - Banff and Buchan - was a traditional SNP heartland (even if it is currently Tory)

[Torrain]

Worth noting, Banff and Buchan held onto a 4,000 vote Tory majority, one of the best Conservative performances here. The Borders seats are union-friendly seemingly by default, but B&B is perhaps the only "Get Brexit Done" seat here.

And welcome, MacShimidh - sounds like you'll bring some new perspectives to the board.

[Oryxslayer]

And of course the one Scottish seat widely thought to have voted for Brexit - Banff and Buchan - was a traditional SNP heartland (even if it is currently Tory)

Yes, part of the SNP desire to rewrite the takeaways from the 2014 and 2016 referendum is driven by their post-2015 electoral base. Originally the SNP was a periphery party who appealed to those who felt ignored by all the traditional tickets. But once the SNP gained reliable control over the Central Belt, the periphery was no longer as high a priority, for various reasons. We can arguably sense this periphery worldview in the Brexit results in these regions, which has gradually sent people in these regions towards the Tories, and played out rather horribly for Salmond in 2017.

[Torrain]

Two more Conservative retirements.

Sir Gary Streeter (South West Devon) isn't a surprise - he's getting older, and seems pretty exhausted by the churn of the past year (his 1922 letter against Johnson sounded very world-weary). His seat has a 20,000 majority, and was blue through the Blair years, so no big story here.

The headline though, is that first term Red Wall MP Dehenna Davidson (Bishop Auckland) is standing down. Davidson has been talked up as a rising star for basically her whole term, and entered government as a Levelling Up Minister this autumn. She's only 29. Her seat flipped from Labour in 2019, with a Conservative majority of around 8,000 votes.

She started hosting a GB News show last year, so it's possible she's decided there's just more job security in the right-wing media environment than in Parliament. Still...

[Dan the Roman]

I think the association with "Remain" was another SNP error, but illustrates, and currently Scottish posters can correct me on this as I have not lived their in over a decade, one of several examples of the SNP leadership being much more upscale than their electorate. However, it is key to the way in which Sturgeon has tried to sell independence which is in an almost conservative, "this is the best way of keeping things the same" way. In their narrative, Scotland is under attack by English Nationalist Tories who want to change it, so Indy is a defensive tactic to keep Scotland as it is. The EU became prime proof of that, but in the process, Indy messaging became bogged down on something which in practice became less possible after Brexit even if more potent with some.

Part of the problem from my perspective is the Sturgeon leadership is responding to suspicion they are less independence activists and more Left-Liberal Democrats who are using the issue to create their own vision of Scotland on devolved issues. That suspicion exists because there is good reason to believe it is at least partially true.

Alba was a farce, but the idea behind Alba is scary because done correctly by credible people not solely obsessed with Trans issues could cause the SNP problems down the line in the same way the PQ in Quebec gave way to the more right-leaning CAQ.

[NewYorkExpress]

Sunak is looking at curbs on foreign students at "low quality" universities.

Rishi Sunak is considering curbs on foreign students taking "low quality" degrees and bringing dependents, Downing Street said.

The PM's spokesman said the idea was being looked at after official figures showed net migration to the UK had climbed to a record half a million.

But they declined to define a "low quality" degree or to "pre-empt" any policy decisions.

A government migration adviser warned it would bankrupt many universities.



The Times has reported that plans to bring down numbers could include restricting admissions to top universities, as well as restricting visas for students' dependants.

Home Secretary Suella Braverman has previously complained about foreign students "bringing in family members who can piggyback onto their student visa" and "propping up, frankly, substandard courses in inadequate institutions".

But moves to reduce foreign student numbers could meet resistance in other parts of Whitehall.

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt last week insisted immigration was required to boost growth, adding that there had to be "a long-term plan if we're going to bring down migration in a way that doesn't harm the economy".

He said migration would be needed "for the years ahead - that will be very important for the economy".

The Department for Education could raise concerns over universities' funding if the number of high fee-paying international students is cut.

An adviser on immigration policy has warned some universities could go bankrupt if there is a clampdown on so-called "low-quality" degrees.

Chair of the government's Migration Advisory Committee, Professor Brian Bell, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme this could "send many universities over the edge," particularly in poorer regions.

[Torrain]

https://twitter.com/lara_spirit/status/1595833918523056128

Wait... BoJo and Truss are trying to outflank Rishi on environmentalism? After the thing that finally brought down Truss was forcing her MPs to vote in favor of fracking???

Just. Wild. You can't make this sh*t up.

To defend Liz Truss (for one time only) - she planned to scrap the onshore ban, before her defenestration. Not for environmentalist reasons, mind you, but as part of her "deregulate everything and hope for growth" strategy.

Johnson, on the other hand, was PM for three years, spends a lot of time talking about his environmentalist success, and never touched the ban.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

As a Scottish Leave voter - which will admittedly bias this post - I’ve always thought that the whole argument that “Scotland only voted No in 2014 because they were guaranteed to stay in the EU” has been ridiculously over-exaggerated. Yes, there was a sort of voter for whom EU membership was the be-all-and-end-all, but they represent a largely upper middle-class, very online and yes, privileged, section of Scottish society. I’d even go so far as to say that there’s been a significant re-writing of the history of the 2014 referendum - the suggestion that it was EU membership that won it for No didn’t really come about until 2016.

The reality was always far more complex - if Scots felt so strongly about the issue, the SNP wouldn’t have dropped 13% and lost 21 seats in the 2017 GE.  38% for Leave is of course a clear minority, but support across the country was fairly evenly spread both geographically and, surprisingly, across partisan support. I’ve even seen suggestions, though have never been able to find a reliable source, that close to 50% of SNP voters voted Leave. There’s also the inconvenient fact that Scottish turnout in 2016 was noticeably lower than anywhere except Northern Ireland (suggesting a lack enthusiasm for the issue), and it of course merits mention that every major Scottish politician (no, David Coburn wasn’t major) was in favour of Remain, and the lack of debate here certainly had an impact on the final result.

This is an interesting, understudied issue that deserves better than the “All Scots loved the EU so they will now vote for independence” line that always gets lazily bandied about.

Welcome to the forum.

[Torrain]

A migrant has died from diphtheria - seemingly contracted as a result of overcrowding at the Manston immigrant processing site.

It feels too early/simplistic/Twitter-brain to blame Braverman at this stage - but it’s hard to imagine her clumsy, draconian approach helped...

[Blair]

Mutterings about a u-turn on the onshore wind ban.

Cabinet ministers are briefing they actually support it and the PM should U-turn. Oh dear.

[Torrain]

Mutterings about a u-turn on the onshore wind ban.

Cabinet ministers are briefing they actually support it and the PM should U-turn. Oh dear.

From what I skimmed in the Telegraph, it sounds like Gove and Shapps are talking fairly openly about their support for onshore wind to allies. I guess once you get a taste for rebellion, it's hard to go back to being a good foot soldier - even if you end up in the cabinet...

[YL]

Another Tory retirement announcement: former minister and relatively green Kingswood MP Chris Skidmore won't be not standing again.  He's something of a victim of the boundary changes, as his seat is proposed to be split between Bristol North East and Hanham & North East Somerset; the former isn't likely to vote Tory and going for the latter might have put him in a head to head with Jacob Rees-Mogg.