Political Betting: How Likely That the UK Will Split Up by 2030?

With three parts of the UK now led by politicians who want to secede from the union altogether, it's time to start thinking about betting on potential referendums and their outcomes, says Mark Littlewood.

6 min read

Political Betting is a new weekly column by Mark Littlewood aimed at people who like gambling on politics.

Following the May 7th elections, most media coverage and punditry focused on the implications for our beleaguered Prime Minister and the continued success of Reform.

It was only a few days later, when I was joined on a panel for a radio interview by a journalist from Belfast, that it struck me that the bigger, longer-term consequences of last month’s elections might not involve Nigel Farage or Keir Starmer directly at all.

My co-panellist pointed out the blindingly obvious but surprisingly overlooked fact that three parts of the United Kingdom are now led by politicians who want to secede from the UK altogether.

Are we on course for a re-run of the Scottish independence vote and possibly the spread of such referendums to Wales and Northern Ireland as well?

Unfortunately, it is not yet possible to find any books currently open on either the prospects of any referendums being held or on their possible outcome. But I don’t think it will be long before we all have the opportunity to put our money where our mouths might be. That means I’m already trying to get my head around the various pathways and probabilities that might be involved.

Scotland obviously looms largest of all. The SNP might currently be reeling from its embezzlement scandal – the full horrors of which only came to light some days after the elections had finished – but it remains a formidable, indeed dominant, electoral force north of the border. John Swinney is a canny and calm operator who has been able to create some clear blue water between himself and his party’s recent troubled past. He will be spending a considerable amount of time calculating the optimal time to attempt to win a national vote for independence as well as the circumstances in which his request for a re-run is likely to be acceded to.

There’s no doubt in my mind that he would consider a decisive victory for the SNP at the next General Election (alongside a good showing for its Green allies) to be the trigger for insisting on a fresh vote. Unless you anticipate a major turnaround for Labour in the national polls, this seems to me a very plausible outcome. Although Labour and the Scots Nats fundamentally disagree on constitutional matters, there is a reasonable chunk of the electorate who are simply ‘on the Left’ and willing to switch between the two. If one is doing well, it follows by definition the other will be doing badly. At the next election, I expect the SNP to fall into the former camp and Labour into the latter.

Let’s add on to this hypothesis that the votes across the UK as a whole lead to a Farage-led government at Westminster. In public, Swinney will express horror at such an outcome. In private, he will be delighted. If the English (with some significant help from the Welsh) propel Reform into power, the Scots may start to think that the time for divorce has arrived. To be clear, Reform has made very impressive headway in Scotland, having now effectively replaced the Tories as the principal party on the Right-of-centre. Nevertheless, if asked whether they were happy with there being a Reform-led UK government, the overwhelmingly majority of Scots would say no, and a good chunk of those would be vehement in expressing such a stance.

Prime Minister Farage would also face a difficult task in refusing a referendum. What would be his grounds for doing so? He has been a long-standing supporter of the right to self-determination. How could he easily explain to John Swinney that such an overarching principle didn’t apply in this specific case?

Another route to a second Scottish vote is a messy hung Parliament in which the SNP bloc is critical to any feasible Leftist majority. Whilst I expect the Right to form a majority after the next election, the emergence of some incoherent – but just about mathematically feasible – rainbow coalition is well within the bounds of possibilities. The price to be paid to the Scots Nats would surely have to be a re-run of 2014.

I therefore think the chances of a second referendum on independence in Scotland before the decade is out are well above 50% and possibly as high as 70%. I’d still favour the unionists to win any such vote, but I’d rate the nationalists’ chances at more than one in three.

The pressures for a similar exercise in Wales or Northern Ireland are less obviously intense. Indeed, Plaid Cymru is not even in favour of immediate independence, seeing it instead as a very long-term goal. The strategy of Sinn Féin seems to be to try and edge towards a united Ireland incrementally (some might even say by stealth). However, if a Scottish plebiscite is given the green light, it becomes awkward for nationalists in other parts of the kingdom to say, ‘No thanks, we are fine as we are for the moment.’ So, I would expect referendums in other parts of the UK could also be held on the same day (say a 30% chance if Scotland is happening), although it may not be that the question on the ballot is as strictly binary – it may involve something about more devolved powers and a delinking from the Barnet formula or some such like.

There is a further possible pathway to referendums across the UK that are not based on nationalist electoral and constitutional pressure at all. This would be a big, bold, high risk move by a unionist-minded (and English-dominated) majority government in Westminster. It could put the argument that having different parts of the UK in various stages of contemplating divorce is destabilising and that we need to settle these matters once and for all. A new constitutional settlement for the UK, written by unionists and put forward at a time of their choosing, would be put to all four constituent parts of the country on a ‘take it or leave it’ basis, with the consequences of ‘leaving it’ being spelled out in no uncertain terms. Unlikely, but far from impossible.

Once some bookmaker actually starts quoting the odds, I’ll be placing a decent bet on a second vote in Scotland if I can find odds of better than 4/7. I’d be willing to wager on the vote being held – and then being for independence – if I can get better than 3/1. I’m less sure on the Welsh and Northern Irish eventualities but would be attracted by almost any reasonably plausible long odds bet.

If you think the current instability in British politics is already uncomfortably high, I’d still advise you to put your money on it getting even worse.

Mark Littlewood is a former director of the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Director of PopCon.

Comments

This week across the site:

Email me alerts for this discussion
Notify of

To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.

Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

31 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Richard Lyon
Richard Lyon
3 months ago

> [SNP] remains a formidable, indeed dominant, electoral force north of the border.

One in five of the electorate in Scotland voted for SNP.
One in five of the electorate in the UK voted for Labour.

SNP is no more a dominant, electoral force north of the border than is Labour south of it.

Crosby
Crosby
3 months ago

Were I an SNP planner one thing I couldl bank on is English appeasement of Scottish demands. There is no chance of an English negotiating team driving a very hard bargain, it will all be concession after concession. English civil servants do not like England.

Rusty123
Rusty123
3 months ago

As long as each “country” supports itself financially, go for it, but as we all know that wont happen.

Gezza England
Gezza England
4 months ago

Yes, let us in England have a vote on getting rid of Scotland and Wales. We can rebuild both Hadrian’s Wall and Offa’s Dyke.

JXB
JXB
4 months ago

And if they did, the problem for an independent (Free! Free at last!) England, would be what?

But. Consider the economics. Each would take with them a portion of the National debt, that means servicing it and repaying it. Then they will need to borrow – will the Bond market lend and at what rate?

Then currency. Will they launch their own currencies and could it be traded on the money markets, or be accepted in trade? If they keep the £ they have no control over monetary policy, nor can they print money.

Will tax revenues be sufficient to fund Government activities and public sector services?

Given these three are run by Socialist loonies, will there be capital flight, movement of the skilled and professionals and high earners?

Will there be any inward investment?

PeterM
PeterM
4 months ago

It could change if Reform perform well in opposition in both countries and become trusted.
I like the Alberta type of referendum. They are having a preliminary vote to see if a majority would consider becoming independent. Then would follow negotiations on the terms of breaking away before a vote on that deal. The Brexit vote should have been like that so people actually knew what they were voting for.

Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
4 months ago
Reply to  PeterM

I don’t think that would have been possible, the establishment would have made the choice nugatory.

Arborvitae23
Arborvitae23
4 months ago

As long as we cancel the Barnett Formula and have a clean break from the others, so they stand on their own two feet.

WillP
WillP
4 months ago

English never get Scots politics. One sight of a saltire or a weegie accent and they kack themselves. Only 35% of Scotland want independence – the republicans and Celtic supporters basically. The loathing for them by the rest is deeper than ever. Every town in Scotland is getting immigrants – mostly Muslim (all?) dumped in them. Scots ain’t dumb and they do not like seeing favouritism – which is what it looks like when ex military housing that we all paid for is done up and given away to foreigners. Reform is growing rapidly in Scotland.

Heretic
Heretic
4 months ago
Reply to  WillP
JeremyP99
JeremyP99
4 months ago

Wales, Scotland, NI will all be bankrupt within months of getting independence.

And we should ignore the consequent begging bowls

Dinger64
Dinger64
4 months ago
Reply to  JeremyP99

Spot on 👍 and, take back all infrastructure gifted to the departing with English finance, North Sea infrastructure etc

Dinger64
Dinger64
4 months ago

Good.. couldn’t give a monkeys!
Britain is Fu@ked anyway up so what does it matter?

Dinger64
Dinger64
4 months ago
Reply to  Dinger64

If you dont want mass uncontrolled immigration- vote Reform
If you dont want net Zero- vote Reform
Give me a better (viable) choice?

Heretic
Heretic
4 months ago
Reply to  Dinger64

MP Rupert Lowe’s RESTORE BRITAIN.

Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
4 months ago
Reply to  Heretic

In time perhaps, but not in the next 5 years at least.

Dinger64
Dinger64
4 months ago
Reply to  Heretic

Agreed but he hasn’t got the following yet, he’ll just take votes from reform

EppingBlogger
EppingBlogger
4 months ago

I would oppose the division but if it were to happen the biggest challenge for England would be the following:

1 where to dock our nukes. I do not think a sovereign base idea would be adequate but it might have to do short term

2 how to control illegal immigration from the poverty stricken places around us. Not only would we have to contend with illegals from across the channel but also across new land borders. It is clear that neither Scotland (at least under SNP) or Wales could be economically viable and the English would cease to subsidise them. Indeed, with the Uniparty decision to pay the EU when we left presumably the departing nation and provinces would pay England?

3 how to deal with those born in England or given citizenship when living here but who reside in the departing areas. Should they be allowed into England and if so on what terms.

Matt Dalby
Matt Dalby
4 months ago
Reply to  EppingBlogger

If we had nowhere to dock our nukes it might lead to a serious discussion as to whether or not having them is the best use of part of our defence budget. Obviously we should be spending far more on defence than we currently do, maybe twice as much, but regardless of how much we spend it’s still important to get value for money.

Britain currently has 120 warheads on Vanguard submarines, not all of which are at sea at any given time. If we could only launch 80 warheads would enough get through a sophisticated missile defence system to be an effective deterrent?

It’s likely that less than 10% of the missiles Iran fired at Israel made it past their Iron Dome defence system. Admittedly Iron Dome is far more sophisticated than anything Russia or China currently has but in 10 years time they might have something comparable. Would even 20 warheads hitting their target be enough to deter Russia or China from attacking us with nukes knowing they could get hundreds of warheads to hit their targets.

Presumably we’d only be fighting a war against China or Russia as part of NATO in which case if we… Read more »

JXB
JXB
4 months ago
Reply to  EppingBlogger

3 – Same as Irish Republic, given choice British or Irish passport.

2 – We can’t control immigration as it is, so it’s moot.

1 – Devonport.

RTSC
RTSC
3 months ago
Reply to  EppingBlogger

The Scots would demand the same arrangement as Eire … free movement of travel; ability to work, voting rights etc.

They should all be denied – and the arrangement with Eire should end as well.

Neil Datson
Neil Datson
4 months ago

I would rate the chance of the SNP using their support for a Labour PM after the next election as leverage to force concessions out of Westminster, provide more jobs for their supporters etc, as very high. I doubt they’d push hard for a referendum, lest they win it.

If, on the other hand, we have a Reform government they might be offered a true, independence referendum, requiring Scotland to leave the sterling area. They certainly wouldn’t like that one little bit.

EppingBlogger
EppingBlogger
4 months ago
Reply to  Neil Datson

There could be no question of Scotland remaining in any Sterling area. If it chose to use Sterling as a tie for its own new currency we could not stop them but the consequences for “independence” would be sever.

DiscoveredJoys
DiscoveredJoys
4 months ago
Reply to  EppingBlogger

But continued use of Sterling could be an opportunity for the English Establishment to set up coordination committees and regular liaison meetings which could gradually be bent into Independence-lite or Independence In Name Only. Reform, if in power, would have to take care not to encourage too close a relationship.

JohnK
JohnK
4 months ago

It looks like a reasonable bet that Scotland would go first, and it may be that “Reform” could create a little England. But even in England, there is a fair bit of continuous reform (in the conventional meaning of the term) of governmental structure. Look at all the Mayoral structures, rearrangement of local government councils etc. No referendums for those. Gerrymandering on this side of the pond.

EppingBlogger
EppingBlogger
4 months ago
Reply to  JohnK

I suppose “little England” is intended as a derogatory term intended to insult Reform. In fact England is the vast bulk of the UK output and tax paying while Reform is at the same time the only patriotic party while also being global in outlook.

WillP
WillP
4 months ago
Reply to  JohnK

You’re English. You have no idea of the political make up in Scotland. Even the die hard nationalists know we’d go bust in a month. Voting nationalist and wanting independence are two different things.

NickR
NickR
4 months ago
Reply to  WillP

Yes, until the SNP can say what their currency will be, & who will fund their 12% budget deficit, they’re going nowhere…. however much the English would like them too.
The Welsh will never vote for independence. Until the Irish agree to fund the NI basket case, then they’re going nowhere either.

transmissionofflame
transmissionofflame
4 months ago
Reply to  JohnK

You may consider England little. If so, it’s your loss. I consider it immense. Any road up, large or small its size will not be changed by any eventual separation of the U.K.

JXB
JXB
4 months ago
Reply to  JohnK

England has existed for more than a thousand years – what is there to “create”? And it did very nicely on its own until 300 years ago.

RTSC
RTSC
3 months ago
Reply to  JohnK

There have been a couple of Referendums on the regionalisation of England – in each cash the proposed regional Mayoralty has been rejected – so they were ignored.

Thank you for reading. Please help us keep the Daily Sceptic going by becoming a donor.