"A Very British Transition" - A Post-Junta Britain TL

[powerab]

Donald Trump's election shocked the world, and opened up old wounds in transition Britain

“How is Donald Trump like the leader of the UK's People's Party, a young black student leader named Bell Ribeiro-Addy? It’s tempting to say he’s not. It’s quite another thing to compare Trump and former Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi. Trump is the American Berlusconi, both political outsiders and businessmen who rose to the heights of power. Although Trump and Ribeiro are ideological opposites, both have employed storytelling to get where they are. The key lies in their communication strategy and the intended recipients of their messages. The despairing masses on both sides of the Atlantic, from the ‘working-class whites‘ in the US to the UK's Outraged. The more desperate people are, the more predisposed they are to vote for candidates who propose doing something different.” - How Storytelling Explains World Politics, Orlando D'Adamo, The Wire (2017)

Whilst Britain’s parties were tearing each other’s hair out, over the pond the States had elected a new President, Donald John Trump. Trump’s election was likely to have a huge impact on British politics, from his opposition to the TTIP trade deal with the European Union to his support withdrawing US troops from overseas. Britain hosted dozens of US bases and thousands of personnel as a holdover from the Junta era where the US acted as an informal protector to the British state, in some provinces like Northamptonshire, US bases made up a large part of the local economy.

Whilst Hague was welcoming to the Trump administration, telling journalists he expected good relations to continue, among the public the backlash to Trump was visceral. More than most European nations Britain had recent experience dealing with a right-wing demagogue. As part of over 60 sister marches across the UK protesters, mostly women, turned out in London, Birmingham and Edinburgh to protest Trump’s inauguration. As usual where there was a protest there was the People’s Party, with Bell Ribeiro-Addy being guest of honour at the London rally. Although she drew criticism for comparing Trump to Mountbatten and the people around him.

The British people had fresh memories of a right-wing demagogue

The UK’s women’s march, inspired by sisters in the US, showed women leading civil society in a country where political attitudes toward women remained in the 80s. Britain had never had a woman Prime Minister, and had only had a woman leader of a major party when the UPA broke into Parliament the previous year. Campaigns against Trump quickly morphed into campaigns for women’s rights and against domestic abuse. Britain still had one of the worst records on domestic abuse in Europe, with nearly 2,000 women killed by their partners since the start of the transition, a hangover of the Junta's patriarchal history. Under the Mountbatten administration a policy of misogyny and machismo had been the law of the land, and such a culture still needed to be scrubbed away. One Junta-era judge was forced to resign after saying if women had the same physical strength as men, sexual assault wouldn’t happen.

“Surveys show that 65% of British women under 30 now call themselves feminists. The number of reported rapes reported shot up by 28% in the first three months of 2018 – as more women were encouraged to come forward. Gareth Bacon a member of far-right Centrists party, has already condemned any changes to sexual assault laws as pandering. His party pledges to scrap the gender violence law because it sees it as an ideological tool wielded by militant feminists. But British women’s efforts have not been in vain. The public outcry is likely to influence policymakers. Deputy Prime Minister Jeremy Clarkson has pledged to change the sexual assault laws to clarify consent in rape trials. The injustice of the UK's sexual assault laws is starting to be put right and it has empowered a generation of women.” - With changes to sexual assault laws on the table, British women have reason to be hopefully, Eloise Barry, The Guardian (2017)

The wage gap also remained significantly larger than in other European countries, with the average British woman earning 23% less than a man in a similar position and the average woman earning 8,000 euros a year less than the average man. In political power British women lagged behind, only 197 of the 497 Members of Parliament were women. On a regional level the situation was even worse, with less than a third of Provincial Presidents elected from the fairer sex. Trump’s bombastic explosion onto the international stage had inadvertently opened up a long dormant conversation in the UK on women’s rights and creating a more equal politics.

A new generation of post-Junta women were taking up the mantel for women's right's

As well as protests, direct action dominated a month of women’s activism. Over 46% of working women walked out of their jobs as part of a 24 hour women’s strike. In the Scottish Parliament women lawmakers joined the debate without wearing makeup holding a banner saying “we don’t have to look good”. This soon became a trend nationwide as politicians and celebrities posted makeupless selfies on social media. In a society that placed high priority on women’s beauty the act of not wearing make-up became a revolutionary act. Part of the demand of these women’s strike included a “femicide” bill, calling on Parliament to pass stronger regulation against gendered violence.

Traditionally the UK would be near the top of a US President’s state visit list, and Hague was one of the first world leaders to invite President Trump to visit. Hague’s invite came as Trump enacted a series of controversial executive orders, including a ban on immigration from Muslim-majority countries and an indefinite ban on refugees from Syria. This spurred further backlash as nearly 2 million Brits signed a petition against Trump’s visit. London’s four Provincial Presidents, all from the People’s Party pledged they would work to stop a Trump visit, including refusing to close roads on the President’s route. Dawn Butler, UPA President of Outer West London had several noticeable clashes with Trump on Twitter, with the President calling her a “low IQ woman”.

The People’s Party, who had lost their momentum somewhat thanks to internal splits and Hague’s accession to Downing Street, saw Trump as a new opportunity to capture the popular mood. The People’s Party announced it would hold an “international anti-fascist conference”, inviting other left wing governments and parties to discuss an international response to the Trump administration. Whilst a conference mostly attended by theorist and intellectuals was unlikely to stop Trump, if further enforced the People’s Party’s anti-Trump credentials, in the face of National rolling out the red carpet for the controversial US President.

“The final details are being worked out for a proposed trip by Prime Minister William Hague to the US in late September. The itinerary includes attending the UN General Assembly and meeting President Donald Trump at the White House. Hague is due to arrive in New York on September 22, toward the end of the UN General Assembly, which begins on September 19. He would then travel to Washington to meet Trump on Monday, September 25. The Foreign Office and Downing Street are still finalising details on what will be the first meeting between Hague and Trump. The pair have also held two telephone conversations. Diplomatic sources say they were not looking for a short meeting in the corridors of the UN headquarters, but instead a visit to the White House.” - PM plans to meet with Donald Trump at White House in September, BBC News Bulletin (2017)

Hague had privately favored Hilary Clinton

 

[tomasqs]

Did Trump win by OTL margins?

 

[powerab]

Did Trump win by OTL margins?

Yeah roughly the same, a few butterflys here and there but nothing to affect the overall result. Clinton did marginally better as British exiles and their children tended to have left leaning beliefs, she won Michigan and nearly won Pennsylvania

 

[powerab]

For some the Grenfell tragedy showed Junta era attitudes to "undesirables" were still alive and well

“A fire tore through a 24-story West London apartment building early Wednesday, killing at least 40 people and injuring more than 90. The authorities said that the death toll was expected to rise, and that some bodies might never be identified. The police have begun a criminal investigation into the circumstances surrounding the blaze. Worst affected are those who lost loved ones, homes and possessions in the June 14 blaze. Traumatised survivors now wait in temporary housing to find out where they can rebuild their shattered lives. But thousands more are living with fear and uncertainty amid concern that other high-rise buildings may be at risk of a deadly fire. Haunted by the spectre of the tower in flames, authorities up and down the country have been checking the cladding on their tall buildings.” - Shadow of high-rise fire looms across UK, CNN Bulletin (2017)

The summer of 2017 had been particularly hot, but the political situation had at least temporarily cooled, the handful of SDP crossing the floor to Unity had bolstered the Government’s majority and an internal challenge against Hague failed to materialise. National still held a reduced majority over the other parties and everything seemed to return to normal - or the relative normalcy of transition Britain. Headlines over the last few weeks had been dominated by the UK’s growth in renewable energy, or the British under-20s victory at the U-20 world cup, defeating Venezuela. The biggest issue the state had to deal with was a series of failed cyber attacks attempting to access parliamentary emails.

Then a fire started in a Kensington Tower block, horrified witnesses woken by screams, would see the flames engulf the building with devastating speed. People in pyjamas, shoeless, in boxer shorts, were running out of the blazing building in panic, as the flames swept upwards. On the street, there was speculation the fire had been caused by an exploding fridge on the fourth floor. Those who were able to escape told reporters they had been told to stay put by official council advice. Sixteen hours later, with smoke still rising from the smouldering, blackened husk of the block, the death toll was confirmed at 12. This number continued to rise over the days following as more bodies were found.

The blame game began before the building had cooled

The Grenfell disaster activated a series of emotions across the British public, some opened up their homes and community centres to those who had lost everything - Mosques and Churches were seen taking people in offering food and water. The other main emotion was blinding rage, Kensington Council was one of the wealthiest local Councils in the UK, with average homes costing over £1.2 million. The Tower itself was an example of brutalist Junta era architecture, with the poorest of the boroughs shoved away into imposing tower blocks, the name Grenfell even came from Lord Grenfell - a field marshal in the British military. For those on the left, Grenfell represented everything wrong with British society.

“Upholding recognised human rights is the way forward. Only a human rights approach lays out universal standards of what makes up “adequate” housing. Only a human rights approach lays out what’s required after a disaster like Grenfell. Tenants must be provided immediate alternate accommodation in their existing community. Only a human rights approach is crystal clear that it is governments that are responsible to low-income populations. This will need regulating companies to ensure they are not jeopardising the state’s human rights obligations. Grenfell Tower will remain a symbol of what has gone wrong in housing for poor people. It’s a horrible human tragedy, but it should also be remembered as a human rights tragedy.” - Grenfell Tower is a terrible betrayal of human rights, Leilani Farha, The Guardian (2017)

The people of Kensington fell upon the Council, for several weeks the Authority tried and failed to hold a full Council meeting as they were invaded by Grenfell justice activists. After immense pressure from both the public, and the People’s Party run Provincial Government, Rock Feilding-Mellen - the leader of Kensington Council - was forced to resign. Activists said the Grenfell fire was only a symptom of a larger campaign of “social cleansing” by Kensington Council, as they regenerated estates to sell onto private developers, whilst overcrowding social housing tenants, many of them ethnic minorities, into what few properties remained.

The OutRage movement had a new symbol

Eventually the total death toll was announced 100 people had lost their lives in the Grenfell fire, those lost in the fire included a stillborn baby boy all the way up to an 84 year old grandmother. Months after the tragedy over 400 residents were still living in hotel accommodation as Kensington struggled to find new homes for them. Some were even moved to nearby authorities like Hammersmith, Fulham and Chelsea - as the provincial government stepped in. Inner West London President Sain Berry in particular received praise for her handling of the situation, visiting the site personally and liaising directly with victims groups. Berry’s warm, empathetic image contrasted sharply with the aloof central government.

Prime Minister William Hague was roundly criticised for taking nearly a week to visit the site of the Grenfell fire. When Hague did eventually arrive he was met by furious protests from locals chanting “shame on you” and calling the Prime Minister a coward. Hague’s visit would erupt into violence as locals charged the police lines, leading the force to retaliate with truncheon and pepper spray, leaving three people hospitalised including the mother of one of the fire’s victims. During another visit by King Charles, the monarch had a bottle of urine thrown at him, and had to be escorted to a car by his security detail. The Home Office warned of further incidents as London residents became increasingly agitated at the Government’s inaction.

The Grenfell fire showed the culture of the Junta was still alive and well, most of the victims of the fire had been from ethnic minorities, all of them were working class and many lived below the poverty line. The arrogance and authoritarianism seen by Kensington Chelsea was a hallmark of government from the Mountbatten age, with the borough even suspending Council meetings until the situation “cooled down”. Whilst the jackboots and checkpoints were gone, the shadow of Mountbatten still lived on, and now this shadow took a new form - a burnt out husk looming over the London skyline, with flowers, teddies and cards pinned on its outside.

“While this fire could have happened almost anywhere in Britain, it seems that it could not have happened to anyone. Only the most-vulnerable members of British society could be treated with such contempt. Nor is it a coincidence that so many of the residents were of ethnic minority groups; many were Muslim. On Friday, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, leader of the People's Party, labelled the Grenfell story as “a tale of two cities'' - a Dickensian tragedy for the 21st century. A tragedy marked by high-definition footage of the fire live-streamed, minute-by-minute media updates. New props for very old problems: poverty and inequality. Indeed, the speed of the fire belied the creeping slowness with which its causes stacked up. The tragedy of Grenfell Tower goes beyond cladding, the contempt of the KTMO, or the National-run council.” - The Political Kindling of the Grenfell Fire, Samuel Earle, The Atlantic (2017)

Protesters would storm the Inner West London Assembly

 

[Fenrisúlfr]

A British football team? Tis truely a dystopian timeline.

What's the history of the team? I'm surprised that a Scottish team wasn't created post-fall of the Junta as a symbolic sop to the nationalists.

 

[powerab]

A British football team? Tis truely a dystopian timeline.

What's the history of the team? I'm surprised that a Scottish team wasn't created post-fall of the Junta as a symbolic sop to the nationalists.

I know so little about the history and politics of football that I'm happy to accept any reader headcannon. I imagine the British team will so slightly better than the OTL English/Scottish/Welsh teams etc simply by having a bigger pool of talent to pick from. But I imagine it's history would be fairly similar to that of the OTL England Team

 

[powerab]

St Andrew's House was on a collision course with Westminster

“The Scottish Parliament has passed a bill promising a referendum on Independence, the Westminster government is doing all it can to prevent the vote from taking place. The Government argues the Cardiff Accords do not allow regions to decide on sovereignty, under a 2015 law, public servants can be suspended by the Senate if they ignore its rulings. Patrick Harvie insists his position is governed by Scottish law and sees any attempt to suspend him as unacceptable. Other public servants could also be fined and hit by temporary suspensions if they help run the vote. Scottish leaders have already acted to replace officials not seen as supportive of the vote. The head of the region's police force, Phil Gormley, resigned from his post over the summer.” - Scottish Parliament passes referendum bill, BBC News Bulletin (2017)

With Westminster descending further into infighting, Edinburgh continued to pursue more radical solutions. The relatively strong result for seperatist parties, coupled with a strong majority for at least pro-referendum parties in the Scottish Parliament, led the calls for a Scottish Referendum becoming even stronger. With Hague now firmly back in Downing Street, any hope for a negotiated solution to the Scottish Question was looking increasingly distant. In a speech to the Scottish Parliament President Patrick Harvie set out the “roadmap to independence” including a referendum by the end of the year “with or without Westminster's blessing”.

MSPs from National and Unity walked out of the chamber in protest of an “illegal” and “flagrantly undemocratic” plan. Thanks to this the roadmap passed with a de-facto supermajority for a referendum. With Hague refusing to talk, Harvie confirmed the Scottish Government would take the case for a referendum directly to the British Senate, who held the final authority over territorial issues. The Hague government was confident any such measure would be voted down with his spokesperson telling journalists “the vast majority of Senators believe in a Union for everyone”. The post-Cardiff constitution was about to face it’s biggest challenge yet.

24 hour pickets popped up outside St Andrews House and the Senate

In preparation for a constitutional battle, the Scottish Parliament passed a “Scottish State Bill”, again with opposition MPs walking out. The Bill set out a “separate legal framework” from the British constitution, that would kick in if a majority of Scottish voters supported independence at the referendum. The Bill would give significant judicial power to the Scottish executive and grant sweeping legal communities to the head of this new Scottish State The law was criticised by opposition parties for being flagrantly unconstitutional. Home Secretary Graham Brady confirmed he would be putting Security Forces onto “special readiness” to intercept any referendum preparations before the Senate had a chance to rule on the issue.

Some in the Government would go further, with Attorney General David Liddington threatening to take direct legal action against the MSPs who had voted in favour of the Scottish State Bill. The Justice Department would send letters directly to provincial and council leaders ordering them not to comply with any calls to assist in referendum logistics. As the situation continued to heat up William Hague ominously warned he would take “any and all steps to ensure the rule of law in Scotland”. Clips on Twitter and Facebook showed Scottish military bases preparing impromptu “exercises”, whether they had the consent of Whitehall to conduct these remained unclear.

“London has dispatched hundreds of soldiers to Scotland before the Senate debates the Scottish Parliament's referendum bill. The two convoys of 28 trucks were said to be rolling towards Edinburgh to support the police as tensions remain high. Video showed riot police lashing out with batons and boots at a rally for Scottish independence. Images taken showed voters being dragged by her hair and others left with head wounds. The violence that left 600 injured came after pro-independence MSPs pushed ahead with the bill in the Scottish Parliament. A million took part in rallies on either side despite the heavy handed response from police. London deployed more than 14,000 police to Scotland ahead of the Senate Decision on Sunday, made up of officers from other provinces.” - London dispatches hundreds of soldiers to Scotland, Jeff Farrell, The Independent (2017)

London was prepared to put a unilateral referendum down by force if necessary

Pro-Separatist Scots poured onto the street waving the Saltire in the hundreds of thousands, taking over town squares in Edinburgh and Glasgow as the police struggled to maintain control over the crowds. Scottish President Patrick Harvie called the outpouring of support a “democratic tsunami”, urging Hague to “listen to Scotland’s citizens”. Win or lose Scotland’s separatists would take to the streets as pundits warned of a Scottish version of Maidan,the square in Kiev that became the centre of the Ukrainian revolution in 2014. With a minority government in both Holyrood and Westminster, thousands on the street and security forces divided between national and regional loyalties - it was a recipe for chaos.

An end to the impasse would not come from Patrick Harvie, William Hague or even Keith Brown, but from within the SNP itself. Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, the Scottish Agriculture Minister and leader of the SNP’s conservative faction announced she would be leaving the SNP to found a new “regionalist” party named Alba. Whilst Alba still supported Scottish Independence, it only did so through legal means and rejected any attempts at a unilateral referendum. Joined by four other MSPs, in one press conference Ahmed-Sheikh had wiped out the Scottish Government’s majority. The opposition parties, led by Unity immediately called a vote of no confidence in the Harvie Government as all eyes turned to the Scottish People’s Alliance who now held the balance of power.

Whilst the UPA had supported a Scottish Referendum, they were officially a federalist party, and

supported a negotiated solution to the Scottish issue. At a Westminster level the party was trying to show itself as a real party of government. Ribeiro’s team knew if the UPA was seen to enable an illegal Scottish Referendum it would further push Scottish voters towards National. National posters during the election of Andy Burnham and Bell Ribeiro-Addy in Patrick Harvie’s pocket still haunted the English left. At the final hour the Scottish UPA leader, Mihrai Black, announced the party would vote against the Harvie Government and for fresh Scottish elections so that they could give a “alternative” to the parties of the right. 50 votes to 47 the Harvie Government was brought low, the Scottish people would be going to the polls - I believe the kids call this a “constitutional crisis”.

“Scottish politicians have managed to revive the independence issue. Setting aside rivalries, they aim to turn parliamentary elections into a plebiscite on breaking away. Should separatists secure a majority, it's leaders say they will proclaim independence within 18 months. The election puts the thorny issue of Scottish independence back at the top of the national political agenda. The quick return of the issue after national elections have demonstrated that the grievances that animate the secessionist drive have yet to be addressed. Those grievances have long included complaints that the region has been economically squeezed. “We have reached a point of no return,” Mr. Harvie said in an interview. “These are not normal but exceptional elections, whose goal is to find out whether there is a majority in favour of independence or not.” - Scotland Calls Snap Elections, Raphael Minder, New York Times (2017)

Snap elections were unionist's last chance to stop a referendum​

 

[Analytical Engine]

There's no way this could possibly go wrong.

 

[powerab]

Harvie hoped to bring the nationalist campaign under one banner

“Scots go to the polls on August 5th to elect their regional parliament, which will, in turn, determine who will be president of the region. After attempts to hold a binding referendum collapsed, pro-independence forces have decided to frame the election as a plebiscite. All rich democracies in the world are currently afflicted by a crisis of representation. Europe’s economic crisis has intensified the desire to change the very nature of those states, including their frontiers. The economic crisis intensified London’s subordination of Scotland, as the UK tried to weather the storm by recentralising power. The National run Government has tried to claw back powers in a range of areas from the Edinburgh Government. Profound questions about the post-Mountbatten constitutional settlement of 2005 have been circulating.” - Scotland gears up for high stakes election, Albert Gea, Reuters (2017)

Whilst constitutional issues had always played an outsized role in Scottish politics, at the 2017 snap election it was the only issue. Harvie and his allies in the Scottish independence movement hoped to gain an unshakeable mandate for a referendum, and after the “betrayal” of Ahmed and others who went on to join the Alba Party, the nationalist movement wanted a water tight majority for an anticipated showdown with the Westminster Government. The breakaway of the SNP’s right wing faction pushed it ever closer toward RISE, with the two parties agreeing a “non-aggression pact” for the duration of the campaign, with some local groups going even further agreeing to share data and even finances to win a separatist majority.

RISE especially would launch its trademark campaign of populist rhetoric and vast rallies, with the June weather allowing for open air celebrations. In one rally for independence at Edinburgh 750,000 people turned out, more people than had voted for RISE back in 2013. RISE particularly wanted to portray itself as the one true voice of the Yes movement, hoping to squeeze the votes of People’s Party, Workers Party and Alba Party voters into one united separatist majority. The party slogan of “United for Yes” was hardly subtle in this regard. Patrick Harvie’s ridiculously high approval ratings among nationalist voters would further help this drive for seats.

The People's Alliance coalition straddled the constitutional divide, and risked being pulled apart

Being so close to a referendum was a double edged sword as now the separatists faced a much better organised, and much more ruthless campaign from the unionist parties. The Social Democrats especially had their back to the wall, they needed a good showing in the Scottish Parliament or faced cementing their place as a third party. The European establishment was also watching intently from Brussels, a strong result in Scotland could set off a secessionist fever across the continent with Catalonia, Veneto and Bavaria all seeing surging movements for independence. The EU commission issued dire warnings that an independent Scotland could find itself cast out of the European family.

“If Scotland were to declare unilateral independence, not only would it be expelled from the EU, it would also be banned from rejoining, according to a new report. Such a secession declaration would violate European legislation, says a study by the Centre for Policy Alternatives, a progressive think tank. The study, headed by former SDP staffer Kezia Dugdale, warns that Scotland would also be left out of the euro zone and out of the Schengen Area. Other European experts have recently voiced similar opinions about Scotland and its place in the EU if it secedes from the UK. Both main parties – the ruling National Party and the UPA – oppose unilateral Scottish independence. But while the former wants to keep state structures intact, the UPA have been pushing for reforms that would make the UK a more federal nation.” - An independent Scotland would not be able to rejoin EU, says report, BBC News Bulletin (2017)

Scotland was the most pro-EU region in an overwhelmingly europhilic country

Parties caught between the “yoons” and the “ultra-nats” like the People’s Party, Social Democrats and Alba all found themselves in the most difficult position as Scottish society polarised. Raging from federalists, to devolutionists, to those who favoured independence as long as it was done legally - they faced having their voices drowned out. However the most at risk were the SNP, leader Keith Brown simply wasn’t able to keep his party together the same way John Swinney had, losing moderates to Alba and the SDP whilst die-hard separatists moved over to RISE. Some polls showed the SNP losing as many as half its seats since the last Scottish Parliament election, like the Social Democrats before them one of the British Transition’s founding parties risked going extinct.

The Social Democrats - not wanting to stay in the middle and get run down - further hardened their rhetoric towards Scottish separatism. The party had replaced Yvette Cooper with the younger Anas Sarwar who ruled out any coalition with separatist parties and any support for a Scottish referendum. Over the campaign Sarwar went on to say he would take “any and all steps necessary” to block a Yes majority Parliament, which most commentators took to mean he would join forces with National and Unity to lock Patrick Harvie out of a second term. The Social Democrats hoped to make themselves a home for moderate separatists, who felt ill at ease over legal clashes with Westminster.

Some older voters were turned off by RISE's loud protests and extra-legal tactics

Edinburgh was gearing up to be a key battleground of the campaign, whilst Glasgow and Dundee had always been separatist strongholds Edinburgh had always been more of a unionist city, with a slim majority for unionist parties on its City Council. Edinburgh was gearing up to be a three way fight between RISE in working class separatist communities, Unity in the city’s suburbs and the UPA in its inner city and student areas. All the campaigns knew whoever took Edinburgh would likely win the country. Unity was particularly nervous in boosting turnout among unionist voters, whom polls showed were much less likely to turn out than their separatist brothers.

Unity, maybe more than all the parties, found themselves in the most precarious position, with various different pollsters showing wild predictions for Unity’s support. Unity had several major boons, its Scottish Leader - Ruth Davidson was very popular and had generally performed well in Presidential Questions, but she greatly outpaced the party on a National level. Alan Sugar generally had a negative approval rating, with many liberal unionists outraged at his support for the Hague government. Scottish Unity’s biggest challenge would be to cement itself as the party of the union, whilst keeping other, less popular unionist parties - like National - at an arm’s length. It was a dangerous tightrope to walk.

“Alan Sugar a has assured that Unity was born for a day like today and a moment like this'. "We have the team and the project to win". This has been echoed by Unity candidate for the presidency of Scotland, Ruth Davidson. “We are very close to achieving a government that thinks of all Scots and opens a new stage of regeneration through values of unity”, she stated. Ruth Davidson has shown herself prepared "to lead the political alternative that Scotland needs". She claims to have "the best team, the best project and sensible proposals". “We are going to face this campaign with great enthusiasm because it is the key to mobilisation. We do not have to choose between separatism and immobility because there is an alternative called Unity”, she highlighted.” - Ruth Davidson: 'We have the team, the project and the enthusiasm to win, Unity Press Release (2017)

Davidson had a narrow, but plausible, path to power

 

[Fenrisúlfr]

Nail biting continues! I wonder if we'll get an equivalent to English Votes for English Laws ITTL?

 

[powerab]

Nail biting continues! I wonder if we'll get an equivalent to English Votes for English Laws ITTL?

Its unlikely as England already has some representation in the Provincial Parliaments and Senate, plus the main parties of the right are hardcore centralists rather than English Nationalists. Both National and the Centrists want to see less devolution not more. The only likely outcome is more powers for cross-provincial regions such as Yorkshire or "The North".

 

[Knightmare]

Problem is, no matter what, it's gonna turn out nasty.

Separatists are not gonna like being kept in bondage, especially to National of all people, and the Unionists will be smugly walking about trying to start shit. And that's if the choice to stay in is kept. To say nothing about the vote splitting by all the parties, which is really gonna sour people.

 

[powerab]

Unionists warned of a "coalition of chaos" made up of four or five parties

“A bit like people sitting silently when people come around asking for money, William Hague thinks if you don’t talk to RISE they’ll go away. And that’s been the attitude all along of the British government. The battleground is set: a government content to rely on judicial powers versus a determined cabal of secessionists prepared to risk everything. The central government’s analysis paints Harvie as the man responsible for the independence movement. Many unionists hope that if they can defeat Harvie they will cut the head off the separatist monster and put the Scottish question to bed. But the secessionist movement is diverse and draws its strength from a committed civil society base. A base which unionist politicians have failed to speak to.” - Will Scotland become independent?, Sam Edwards, Prospect Magazine (2017)

The Unionist campaign was filled with strong contradictions, despite telling separatists repeatedly there was no legal mechanism for a referendum without London’s consent, it told its own voters that only by turning out could they prevent a divisive referendum. Unity especially focused its campaign around an anti-referendum message, describing plebiscite as “expensive and divisive”. As the leading unionist party Unity needed to squeeze the vote of unionist parties, especially the 10% or so of the country who fruitlessly voted National to secure its place as the main anti-RISE party. Unity also hoped to target middle class and pro-European swing voters, warning of Scotland's ejection from the community should the separatists win.

The spectre of violence haunted the last weeks of the campaign. Whilst through political concessions and diligent police work the strength of SNLA dissidents was a fraction of what it once was, the occasional riot or stabbing still occurred on the campaign trail. However extreme Scottish Nationalism was on the up, the radical Worker’s Party in some polls has scored as high as 8% of the vote, this would put the party of Tommy Sheridan on 8 seats and risk them overtaking National. Security Services also reported the membership of SNLA dissident groups like the Militant SNLA slowly growing, as some separatists prepared for an armed independence struggle should Westminster refuse to grant a referendum on independence.

No one wanted a rerun of the armed struggle

National and global interests began to pile the pressure onto Scotland, fearing a strong majority for separatist parties figures from Bank of England Governor Paul Tucker to NATO Secretary-General Thomas de Maizière all gave subtle cautions to the Scottish people, warning a separatist majority would not only undermine Scotland’s fiscal credibility, but also its security and place on the global stage. Hague, who had been avoiding Scotland due to his unpopularity in the region, even made a campaign stop in Edinburgh where he warned voters to “think through the consequences of independence”. World leaders lined up to enforce Hague’s hardliner stance with German Chancellor Merkel and French President Martine Aubry both telling journalists a unilaterally independent Scotland would be locked out the EU.

“Former president Nicolas Sarkozy appealed for a "united Kingdom" in Edinburgh on Friday as campaigning wrapped up for a regional election. "Europe needs a United Britain," he told a final rally held by Britain's ruling conservative National Party before Sunday's vote. "As a Friend of Britain, I have the right and the duty to say that a Europe with a divided UK would be a weakened Europe," he added. "Sunday's elections are not a problem for England and Scotland. It is a problem for all of Europe that needs your unity." Scottish President Patrick Harvie told the BBC he will consider a majority for his nationalist alliance as a mandate for a referendum. If his side wins, he vows a declaration of independence by 2020. A separatist electoral victory would set Scotland on a collision course with Westminster.” - Nicolas Sarkozy Backs 'United Britain', Euronews Bulletin (2017)

Even the Church waded in to have a pop at the nationalist movement with Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Michael Nazir-Ali telling journalists there was “no moral justification” to break up the union, and instructed his congregation to pray for the Union. The entrance of the Church only further stoked grievances as the Church had backed Mountbatten’s efforts to suppress Scottish identity and culture during the Junta days. This only prompted push-back from the separatist parties as a group of academics called “YES Scientists'' emerged to endorse RISE’s victory in the Parliamentary elections. This dividing line benefited Harvie quite nicely, the exciting young nationalist scientists against the stuffy old church backing the Union.

Hague's close relationship with centre-right European big beasts gave credence to his EU membership argument

RISE latched onto the mostly negative campaign the unionist parties were running with Harvie dubbing it the “strategy of fear”. In a 30 minute interview with the BBC Harvie lambasted Hague for making “threats” against the Scottish people “you don’t do that in a democratic society, you don’t threaten people so they’ll vote the way you want”. Harvie also criticised the British Government for relying on the courts to block Scottish moves to leave the UK rather than “making the argument directly to the Scottish people”. With the Supreme Court dominated by Junta-era figures from the military and the National Party, trust in the judiciary as an institution was incredibly low.

All this commotion would stir Alan Johnson, still seen as a hero by many - to join the conga line of English politicians diving in to have their two cents. In a Sun op-ed entitled “Here’s to Scotland '' Johnson compared the independence movement to Italian Fascism and even the Mountbattenite Junta, implying the Scottish people had been tricked by devious English-hating separatist leaders. Harvie and other leading separatist politicians would follow this up with a letter of their own entitled “Here’s to the British”, which narrated a Scottish love for the English “Scotland loves England and continues to love it”, ending with “the problem isn't England, it’s the British state”.

An exchanging of love letters was a very un-british way to end an election campaign, but either way these two op-eds became the defining documents of the campaign. Knowing what was at stake the campaign had been uncharacteristically passionate, huge open-air rallies replaced the dreary door knocks that usually dominated British campaigns and election volunteers, usually retirees wasting away their golden years delivering leaflets, were replaced by excited teenagers and young adults, putting everything they had into a campaign that would define their generation. As polls closed on a historic campaign, the future of Scotland and the Union would be decided that night.

“Competing nationalisms can baffle many an outsider. Whether Scottish, English, Welsh, Irish, Cornish or British, nationalism is the UK's most divisive issue. To complicate things further, nationalist fault lines cut across the left-right political spectrum. Politicians who would otherwise see eye-to-eye on find themselves at odds when it comes to defining Scotland vs Britain. That’s because in Britain, as opposed to the US there exist two political axes. There’s the liberal-conservative axis, which includes moral, economic, and social variations. Then there is the ethnic-nationalist or identitarian axis, in which the radical left might find itself agreeing with the far right. Neither axis takes precedence over the other. But for parties that define themselves in left-right terms, a strong position on nationhood risks alienating their voters.” - Will Scotland’s Regional Elections Lead to the Breakup of the UK, Sebastiaan Faber, The Nation (2017)

The Scottish elections would be the first electoral test of Hague's second term

 

[Ozer]

Plaid better be screaming about their opposition to the referendum if they ever want a British government to give them devolution.

 

[Kurt_Steiner]

Having Sarko as a friend is one of the most vicious offenses for a Brit I can imagine.

 

[mymatedave10]

Patrick Harvie told the BBC he will consider a for his nationalist alliance as a mandate for a referendum.

missing word after a

usually retirees wasting away their golden years delivering leaflets,

Nice work though, still lots of space for all sorts of shenanigannery.

 

[Derby]

the problem is England, it’s the British state”.

I think this should say the problem isn’t England

 

[powerab]

(Big Ben Chimes)

RISE WIN

FORECAST RISE LARGEST PARTY IN SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT WITH 21 SEATS

Jackie Bird - And we are saying incumbent RISE has this election. ere are the figures we have. Our remarkably close exit poll has RISE on 21 seats, down 2. Unity on 18, up 6. The SNP lost a third of its seats on 15, down 7. The Scottish Social Democrats on 14, up 3. The United People Alternative on 12, up 2. National is on 6 seats, down 3. Finally all other parties, including the Workers Party, Alba etc won 9 seats. So that's the extraordinary scene our exit poll is showing. We shall discover when the first results start coming in how accurate it has been. But if that is the story, it is a quite sensational story, Brian Taylor?

BT - A sensational poll Jackie - if those figures are right. But remember quite small shifts in the margin of error could change anything, there's just three seats in it between Patrick Harvie and Ruth Davidson, anything could happen. A small swing could change who governs Scotland next. RISE looks best placed to form the next Government, but if they lose just a few more seats it would be very hard indeed for them to form a functioning coalition. The pro-referendum parties have a majority, 48 to 38 but there’s a lot of disagreement within those parties on what form a referendum should take, and they won’t all necessarily back Patrick Harvie.

JB - And it all comes down to where the SNP go? They have had a bruising election, their right wing ran off to form Alba and a lot of moderate separatists see them as too close to RISE. Do they continue in coalition with Patrick Harvie for another term or do they strike out in a moderate cross-community Government.

BT - Absolutely, and an extraordinary result for Unity, Ruth Davidson has managed to distance herself from the Westminster Government, she is now the undisputed queen of the Unionists and has a decent shot at forming the next Scottish Government. Now she just needs to get her fellow unionists in the SDP and National on side.

JB - A mixed result for RISE, whilst they have held onto first place this was supposed to be Patrick Harvie’s crowning moment, but they’ve actually gone down in terms of vote share. A lot of separatist voters were scared of a unilateral referendum and what that could mean for our place in the EU and NATO. It looks like the nationalist base isn’t as fired up for a fight as RISE might have hoped.

BT - That's true but after the few years we’ve had winning a second term is nothing to sniff at. I remember many pundits predicting the RISE wouldn't be able to handle Government, that they'd crash and burn out of the coalition, those pundits got it wrong. The unionist campaign threw everything at Patrick Harvie, from the Bank of England to the European Commission, if that couldn’t dislodge RISE what can?

JB - All we do know is this will be a nail-bitter of an election, don't go to bed yet, thank you Brian. In the studio with me now I have Alex Neil he’s the former leader of RISE and for team Unity we have Ian Murray he’s the Unity MP for Eastern Scotland. Mr Neil I’ll start with you, do you believe it’s possible for a unilateralist majority in this Parliament?

 

[Analytical Engine]

Nail-biting intensifies.

 

[teg]

This leaves the UPA and Alba, amongst others, in a very awkward spot.