6


S


COTLAND makes up only 8.4% of the poulation of the UK. We only elect 9% of the


MPs in the House of Commons. In all of the elections since WWII, the


removal of Scotland’s influence in those elections would have affected the results only three times. (Fig 1 illustrates this)


In each of those elections, only once


(Harold Wilson’s 1964 win) would the removal of Scotland’s influence switch a Labour majority to a Conservative one (by one seat).


As it stood, this government proved to


be weak and collapsed within 18 months. Given that the 1968 result bolstered support for Wilson it is likely that a Conservative government would have collapsed as well.


Of the other two elections which


Scotland’s removal would have affected, the 1974 Labour win would have required a coalition with the Liberals, something which they did later that year anyway, and the 2010 Conservative win would have been an outright one and the Liberal Democrats would not have been needed for a coalition. Some would challenge readers to spot the difference that would have made.


So what? Scotland is only one part of


the UK. Somerset is only a small part of the UK too. Surely, with a population of only a little above one million it has even less of an effect on the UK elections?


In terms of numbers, true. But there is a


gaping flaw in the UK election system which desperately needs to be addressed.


Figure 1 The manner in which Westminster


politicians are elected is deeply unrepresentative and encourages apathy from the MPs. I am referring to the First Past the Post system (FPTP).


On the face of it, it is a simple and fair


system. Every citizen gets one vote. Each votes for a party within their constituency. Which ever party gets the most votes (without requiring a majority of those cast, just more than any other single group) sends one MP to Westminster. The party with the most MPs forms the government.


Despite the simplicity there is a critical


flaw in this model of democracy. Either by accident of population or by design (such


as outright gerrymandering) it is possible for some or many of the constituencies to gain very large majorities over an extended period of time. These are the so called “Safe Seats”.


Scotland, as a whole, is one of those


safe seats. Since 1955 Scotland has returned a majority of Labour seats in every single UK general election to the present. In that time, Labour has been in power only 26 out of those 60 or so years. (Fig 2.)


There’s a more corrosive effect of this


situation though. One that cuts to the heart of Westminster’s attitudes towards Scotland. On average, just 9% of seats


Westminster cannot afford to care about Scotland


By CRAIG DALZELL


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12