THE “muscular Unionism” exhibited by Liz Truss in the Tory leadership race is equal to “imperialism”, a constitutional expert has said.
Iain McLean, a professor of politics at Oxford University and a fellow of Nuffield College, pointed specifically to the now Prime Minister’s claim that the “best” thing was to simply “ignore” Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.
He also highlighted comments from David Frost – the former Brexit lead negotiator who was handed a life peerage by Boris Johnson – in which the top Tory said: “The Scottish ‘Government’ is not the government of a state in confederation with England. It is a subordinate entity within the UK.”
McLean remarked that such statements tend to benefit the pro-independence side more than the Unionist.
READ MORE: Revealed: How King Charles III once campaigned for the SNP
In a column for The Times, the political author wrote: “This embodies their muscular Unionism. The phrase is new, but the concept is not. It ended badly last time and there is no reason to expect it will end well this time. Muscular Unionism benefits nationalists, not Unionists.”
The professor looked at the idea of “parliamentary sovereignty”, which says that Westminster is supreme, and can enact any law it likes – except to block a future Westminster from acting.
He noted the Sewel Convention, which says that Westminster will “not normally legislate” in devolved areas without Holyrood’s consent, despite having the power to.
“However, that section is a dead letter,” McLean wrote.
“The UK Parliament has already legislated on devolved matters without the consent of the Scottish Parliament. Court challenges have failed on the grounds that what is ‘normal’ is for politicians, not judges, to decide.”
READ MORE: Pro-English independence party applies to intervene in indyref2 Supreme Court case
He further drew parallels – with caveats – to what happened ahead of the run-up to the creation of an Irish free state in 1921.
McLean wrote: “We can’t know if ‘kind’ Unionism would have worked [to ‘kill’ any ideas of Home Rule], but for sure muscular Unionism did not.”
He went on: “The parallel that remains valid is this: ignoring the wishes of the people elected in Ireland didn’t work. Nor will ignoring the wishes of the people elected in Scotland. Muscular Unionism is not truly Unionism. It is imperialism. That did not end well last time, either.”
Muscular Unionism was the go-to tactic for Boris Johnson’s government in their attempts to quell support for Scottish independence, which in 2020 hit highs of as much as 58%.
After a fevered time at the Downing Street “Union unit”, which saw two bosses quit in the space of two weeks, the UK Government appeared to swing more towards “kind Unionism”.
Reportedly thanks to the influence of Michael Gove, the Tory government began exerting controls over funds brought in to replace EU money lost to Brexit in an effort to seem more closely relevant to people in Scotland.
However, Gove was fired from Cabinet by Johnson at the same time as more than 50 MPs resigned from his failing government.
The former senior Tory said he did not expect to be welcomed back into government by the new Prime Minister, Truss, and it remains to be seen exactly what style of Unionism she will employ.
McLean has co-authored several political books including 2013’s Scotland's Choices and 2005’s State of the Union: Unionism and the Alternatives in the UK Since 1707.
He also directs a public policy research unit at Nuffield College.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel