Blog Roundup: 3 April 2014

Coree Brown rounds up the latest blogs and articles on the independence referendum.
At Politics in Spires, Nick Barber discusses the regulation of future referendums in the event of a no vote. He argues that the UK should ensure that a referendum is not a frequent event, writing 'Just because the constitution accords Scotland the right to secede, it does not follow that the United Kingdom need accord the Scottish Parliament an untrammelled power to determine the procedures through which that right is exercised'
Wrting at the Scottish Constitutional Futures Forum, Aileen McHarg discusses the perception of a credibility gap in regards to Unionist parties who have promised further devolution in the event of a no vote. She points to issues of trust, coherence of proposals, and the ability of Unionist parties to deliver on these promises. She concludes 'Unless there is some dramatic development between now and September, voting ‘no’ in the hope of enhanced devolution requires almost as much of a leap of faith as a vote in favour of independence'.
Juliet Swann of the Electoral Reform Society weighs in on discussions of an interim constitution for Scotland. She stresses the importance of citizen involvement in the constitution, arguing 'This must do exactly what it says on the tin – it must be interim, and interim only, not a permanent top-down settlement'
In the Scottish Review, Gerry Hassan describes the normalisation of independence in Scottish political dialogue.Writing in the LSE British Politics and Policy blog David McCrone and Frank Bechofer discuss the relevance of markers and identity in the referendum debate. Providing a view from abroad, Matt Ford of The Atlantic analyses communications from the British Foreign Office on Crimea, which recently held a controversial referendum on independence. Jonathan Freedland, writing in the New York Review of Books provides an overview of the independence referendum for American readers.


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

Coree Brown Swan's picture
University of Edinburgh
3rd April 2014
Filed under:

Latest blogs

Read More Posts