Depoliticising Immigration and Independence

Zhihao HuIn anticipation of the upcoming 2024 General Election and the 2026 Scottish Election, the Scottish National Party (SNP) is actively preparing for a potential second independence referendum. Their objective is to secure Scotland's separation from the United Kingdom (UK) and rejoin the European Union (EU). The decision to pursue this path was significantly influenced by the aftermath of the Brexit referendum. The SNP anticipates a shifting political landscape, particularly among those who previously voted 'No' to independence. They believe that the negative fallout from Brexit could sway public sentiment, ultimately tipping the balance in favour of Scottish independence. This essay delves into the intertwined issues of the referendum and immigration, which are closely linked to the post-Brexit constitutional debate.

Constitutional Controversies: Scottish Second Independence Referendum

The possibility of a second referendum has sparked constitutional debates, primarily focused on the Scottish Parliament's authority to conduct such a vote without Westminster's consent. This issue is further complicated by the erosion of the Sewel Convention, initially established to shield devolved powers from UK Government intervention. Recent developments, including the repatriation of authority after Brexit and the enactment of the Internal Market Act, have cast doubt on the effectiveness of this safeguard, heightening concerns about democratic deficits and constitutional gridlock. Cairney (2021) underscores the growing prominence of referendums as a means to address the democratic deficit and grant Scotland increased autonomy. This trend is exemplified by the SNP's previous constructive efforts to secure 'parallel consent' for Brexit-related decisions across the four UK territories and their proposals for region-specific immigration policies in 2016 and 2019, although both attempts proved unsuccessful.Amid the UK Government's 'taking back control' approach during Brexit, a pertinent question emerges: should Scotland be granted another referendum to reassert control over its borders? To make an informed decision, it is vital that referendum decisions should be rooted in argumentation rationality rather than influenced by mere demonstration effects. Equally important is the need to ensure fairness in the referendum campaign and consider the broader decision-making process. Key questions arise, such as how to determine referendum outcomes between competing perspectives and how referendums should fit into the wider political landscape. Specifically, should a simple majority always suffice to determine results, regardless of the margin of victory or voter turnout? These questions are especially pertinent in plurinational states like the UK. The crux of the matter lies in striking a balance between safeguarding minority rights and respecting the interests of the majority population, fostering a fair and inclusive democratic process.

Immigration in the Context of Scottish Constitutional Debates

Immigration stands as a pivotal issue in both Scottish and British politics. However, the dichotomy becomes evident when viewed through the lens of left-right ideology, exemplified by the contrast between the SNP's "Building a New Scotland" series, which postulates a more inclusive approach to citizenship and migration after independence, and the Conservative-led Rwanda Bill and Illegal Migration Bill, which emphasize restrictive measures. These ideological perspectives underscore the sharp disparities in their approaches to immigration policy.Shifting from ideology to territory, Scotland's pursuit of constitutional autonomy and policy capacity in immigration is greatly shaped by European integration. This prompts Westminster's caution about the influence of transnational institutions on regional politics and Scottish immigration policy. For example, the UK Government has made considerable efforts to minimize external influences, especially from Brussels, on domestic immigration politics, striving to maintain domestic stability and cohesion. This is evident in their strategy to mitigate the effects of Europe on the Scottish Government through the Brexit process. Hepburn (2010) explores the post-Brexit relationship between the EU and the UK and its impact on Scotland's constitutional status. It becomes evident that the divergence between EU and UK immigration policies, especially concerning "human rights" and "border control," remains a central concern in the development of Scotland's immigration policy.Border is of paramount importance to a sovereign state, impacting its economy, cultural exchanges, talent attraction, and symbolizing autonomy. The empowerment of Scotland on immigration issues is poised to generate political ripple effects in Wales and Northern England, both of which face similar immigration challenges to Scotland. This empowerment may lead to fragmented and regionally-focused policymaking, increasing administrative cost. Meanwhile, borders carry symbolic weight, representing the territorial integrity of the UK while also embodying concepts of control and international influence. If Scotland were to attain independence within a European context, it might entail the creation of a more stringent border between Scotland and England, resembling the current hard boundary between Scotland and the EU. Consequently, the UK Government may hesitate to cede immigration authority, as control over borders can equate to greater policy autonomy and constitutional representation in some cases.Nonetheless, disparities in political demographics and geographic factors underscore the distinctive immigration requirements of Scotland in contrast to the rest of the UK, encapsulated in the concept of "Scottish exceptionalism." Westfall (2022) suggests a potential link between pro-immigration sentiments, support for independence, and pro-European attitudes among Scottish voters. While the precise dynamics of this relationship necessitate further investigation, it is clear that the pro-immigration approach has evolved into a mobilization strategy for Scotland, championed by the SNP. This strategy seeks to galvanize Scottish public opinion around immigration authority and, by extension, the cause of independence. This development prompts inquiries into the role of grassroots engagement in immigration issues and its potential impact on the Scottish independence discourse. Equally significant is the position of unionist parties concerning constitutional and authority matters related to immigration. Despite the challenges posed by institutional and ideological ties to their London counterparts, these parties represent Scottish voters and must prioritize Scottish concerns and interests.Immigration is a central issue in the constitutional discourse surrounding Scottish independence and sovereignty. It holds sway over decisions about UK membership and the potential rejoining of the EU, resonating throughout the political landscape within and beyond Scotland. The sovereignty debate, exacerbated by Brexit and the prospect of a second independence referendum, has ignited controversy over British parliamentary sovereignty versus Scotland's popular sovereignty. This centres on whether ultimate territorial authority rests with Westminster or the Scottish people. McHarg (2019) argues for legislative powers aligned with the will of the populace, prioritizing democratic participation over constraining political choices within legal boundaries. This controversy reveals a programmatic-legal division in immigration issues, prompting the UK Government to distinguish between immigration as a policy concern related to border management and as a matter of sovereignty and identity. For instance, as observed by the Centre on Constitutional Change, immigrants and refugees in Scotland often express a stronger inclination to identify as Scottish compared to those who identify as British in England. While dual national identities aren't inherently incompatible, political actors at both state and sub-state levels may seek to influence and shape these identities for political gain. Therefore, the need to evaluate the programmatic-legal division and depoliticize this issue becomes increasingly crucial. In addressing the immigration matter, given its significant impact on Scottish demographics and economies, a depoliticising perspective is required. This perspective should consider internal ideological elements driven by partisan competition and external constitutional factors shaped by European integration and the relationships among the EU, UK, and Scotland, all intertwined with Scottish territorial interests.Zhihao Hu is a postgraduate student who recently completed a dissertation on the Territorial Politics of Immigration in Minority Nations at the University of Edinburgh