After the Election, what next for the United Kingdom?

Theresa May called the snap election hoping for a strong majority, to give her a free hand to deal with the EU. While promising a ‘UK approach’ to Brexit, the Conservatives rejected different arrangements for the UK’s component nations or anything more than a consultative role for the devolved governments. Following the General Election, this may have to change.

The SNP has stressed the fact that 62 per cent of Scots voted Remain in the Brexit referendum. Last year it proposed that Scotland could remain in the European single market even as the rest of the UK left. When the UK Government failed to respond, it proposed a new independence referendum the only way of remaining in Europe.

Neither government presented a clear and consistent plan at the election. The Conservatives’ Brexit plans promised a new partnership with Europe, without explaining what it would entail. The SNP’s twin-track approach of a differentiated Brexit and independence in Europe confused many. Support for independence has been running at about the same level as in 2014 but support for a referendum has not. Independence and Europe may be a logical combination but the electorate has never really made the connection. So the unionist parties were able to capitalize on opposition to a referendum without having to say much about Brexit.

Both the UK and Scottish governments ‘won’ their elections in the sense of emerging as the largest parties but neither gained the political endorsement they were seeking.

An independence referendum is off the table for the time being but the issue of Scotland’s place in the UK and Europe is not. There is support across the parties for safeguarding Scotland’s economic interests, a more generous policy on European workers and ensuring that key powers coming back from Europe will go to Holyrood rather than to Westminster. The SNP have lost political support but, as the third party in a hung parliament, gained political leverage. The Scottish Conservatives, now that their independence fox has been shot, may have to adopt clearer positions and distance themselves from hard Brexit. Scottish Labour has the opportunity to strike a distinct position, given UK Labour’s ambivalence over free movement and the single market. If both of these happen, then the distinctive Scottish element in UK politics will survive the setback to the SNP.

Northern Ireland, where the Democratic Unionists (DUP) gained most seats, is even more complex and urgent. Talks on restoring the power-sharing Executive must start shortly, while the Northern Ireland border question has to be addressed in the first phase of Brexit negotiations. The DUP supported Brexit but the province voted Remain, divided on unionist-nationalist lines. There is a wide concern that Brexit could undermine the peace process. It deepens the unionist-nationalist divide. It risks creating a hard border with the Republic of Ireland, which remains in the EU and single market as the UK leaves. The DUP’s very existence is based on keeping the border but it is open to mitigating its economic consequences. To square the circle, the DUP and UK Conservatives have promised a ‘frictionless’ border but nobody has explained what this means. The Conservatives proposed deal with the DUP further strains the settlement. That depends on the UK being, along with the Irish Government, an honest broker between nationalists and unionists. Whatever the arrangement between the DUP and the Conservatives, that is difficult to reconcile with such impartiality.  Should negotiations on restoring the Executive fail and direct rule be installed, that creates an even more obvious conflict of interest.

With a hung parliament and concerns about the impact of Brexit in Wales and London, it is unlikely that the ‘UK approach’ can simply be imposed by the UK Government. The failure of the UK Conservatives to secure their mandate reopens the question not only of what sort of Brexit will be will have but of the future of the United Kingdom itself.

Michael Keating is Professor of Politics at the University of Aberdeen and Director of the Centre on Constitutional Change.


Comments policy

All comments posted on the site via Disqus are automatically published. Additionally comments are sent to moderators for checking and removal if necessary. We encourage open debate and real time commenting on the website. The Centre on Constitutional Change cannot be held responsible for any content posted by users. Any complaints about comments on the site should be sent to

Michael Keating's picture
post by Michael Keating
University of Aberdeen
20th June 2017

Latest blogs

  • 19th February 2019

    Over the course of the UK’s preparations for withdrawing from the EU, the issue of the UK’s own internal market has emerged as an issue of concern, and one that has the potentially significant consequences for devolution. Dr Jo Hunt of Cardiff University examines the implications.

  • 12th February 2019

    CCC Fellow Professor Daniel Wincott of Cardiff University examines how Brexit processes have already reshaped territorial politics in the UK and changed its territorial constitution.

  • 7th February 2019

    The future of agriculture policy across the United Kingdom after Brexit is uncertain and risky, according to a new paper by Professor Michael Keating of the Centre on Constitutional Change. Reforms of the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy over recent years have shifted the emphasis from farming to the broader concept of rural policy. As member states have gained more discretion in applying policy, the nations of the UK have also diverged, according to local conditions and preferences.

  • 4th February 2019

    In our latest report for the "Repatriation of Competences: Implications for Devolution" project, Professor Nicola McEwen and Dr Alexandra Remond examine how, in the longer term, Brexit poses significant risks for the climate and energy ambitions of the devolved nations. These include the loss of European Structural and Investment Funds targeted at climate and low carbon energy policies, from which the devolved territories have benefited disproportionately. European Investment Bank loan funding, which has financed high risk renewables projects, especially in Scotland, may also no longer be as accessible, while future access to research and innovation funding remains uncertain. The removal of the EU policy framework, which has incentivised the low carbon ambitions of the devolved nations may also result in lost opportunities.

  • 1st February 2019

    The outcome of the various Commons votes this week left certain only that the Government would either secure an amended deal and put it to a meaningful vote on Wednesday 13 February, or in the overwhelmingly likely absence of this make a further statement that day and table another amendable motion for the following day, the Groundhog Day that may lead to a ‘St Valentine’s Day Massacre’ for one side or the other. Richard Parry assesses the further two-week pause in parliamentary action on Brexit

Read More Posts