Is Scotland a Westminster-style Majoritarian Democracy or a Scandinavian-style Consensus Democracy? A Comparison of Scotland, the UK and Sweden

Abstract

The idea of ‘new politics' in Scotland, in the 1990s, was based on a rejection of the ‘majoritarian’ politics of ‘old Westminster’ in favour of a ‘consensus democracy’ associated with Scandinavian countries. Yet, the nascent literature suggests that Scottish and UK policy-making practices are similar. UK policy making does not live up to its majoritarian reputation and Scotland was designed with key ‘old Westminster’ features. We extend the comparison to Sweden, as one of several, distinctive, Nordic reference points in Scotland. We examine critically its consensual image and identify the ways in which Scotland has similar features. The study helps clarify the practical meaning of majoritarian and consensus and encourages scholars to focus on actual behaviour rather than policy-making reputations. It also informs current debates on Scotland's future, using long-term evidence to inform recent attempts to revive this focus on the Nordic ideal.

Key Words:

• British politics
• consensus
• majoritarian
• Scottish politics
• Swedish politics

Notes

1 Albeit not in a consistent way and, unlike in 1997, not by a large collection of groups at the centre of the independence debate. Perhaps the strongest exponent of Nordic practices is the Jimmy Reid Foundation (2013), which uses a discussion of the ‘Nordic Social and Economic Model’, to recommend reducing economic inequality, maintaining a strong welfare state, supporting corporatism and furthering local democracy (to further “equality, high trust in government and social cohesion”—Milne, 2014). Nordic Horizons (http://www.nordichorizons.org/) focuses more on events to improve Scottish knowledge of Nordic countries. Scotland's First Minister (2007–2014) Alex Salmond used the phrase “Arc of Prosperity” in a speech in 2008. He argued that small states were flexible and able to adapt quickly to economic circumstances. He mentioned Sweden briefly, but the greater focus was on countries such as Iceland. The Scottish National Party has since focused more on Norway as an example of a country with a sovereign oil fund (Milne, 2014). The strongest current rejection of a Westminster political style is articulated by the Electoral Reform Society Scotland (2013).

2 This shift in group–government relations was a development common to many political systems, including the US and UK, from that period (Heclo, 1978: 94; Jordan, 1981: 96–100; Cairney, 2012: 42).

3 A problem complicated by the multi-level party system. The Labour, Liberal Democrat and Conservative parties maintain separate policy positions in Westminster.

4 Approximately 400 interviews in the UK since devolution, including approximately 200 interviews in Scotland—see Cairney (2013).