What We’re Reading: Brexit & Indyref2

On our blog, fellows and friends of the centre reflect on ongoing Brexit debates, implications for party politics, and the prospect of Indyref2. Michael Keating addresses the question of whether Scotland and Northern Ireland can remain within the single market and within the UK union, concluding that such a system would not be acceptable either to the UK or to the European Union. Kirsty Hughes examines how such an approach might be made to work, political obstacles notwithstanding. Writing before SNP Conference, both James Mitchell and Paul Cairney assesses Nicola Sturgeon’s strategic approach to the independence referendum, with James stressing the importance of timing while Paul identifies three unresolved issues which may impact the vote.
 
At NIESR, Angus Armstrong discusses the fall of the pound and its implications for British consumers, warning of rises in the price of food and energy and the potential for inflation. On the UK Constitutional Law Association blog, Sionaidh Douglas-Scott assesses the ‘Great Repeal Bill’, identifying legal issues as well as implications for devolved entities. At the LSE British Politics and Policy, Charlotte Galpin expresses concern that Boris Johnson might harm German support for the United Kingdom, with a negative impact on trade. At Cardiff’s Thinking Wales, Jac Larner examines gender and the National Assembly for Wales. Writing at What Scotland Thinks prior to the SNP conference, John Curtice examines changes within the SNP, noting that it is both a party in pursuit of political power but also a ‘movement motivated by an idea’.  At What UK Thinks EU, John Curtice explores the key concerns for voters in the EU ref.
 
Elsewhere, Nicola McEwen spoke at a Scottish Fabians conference on Scotland, the Union, and Brexit, an event which was covered in The Herald. Nicola also presented at the Bilbao European Encounters 2016 conference.

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 info@centreonconstitutionalchange.ac.uk

Coree Brown Swan's picture
University of Edinburgh
20th October 2016
Filed under:

Latest blogs

  • 17th January 2019

    Richard Parry assesses a memorable day in UK parliamentary history as the Commons splits 432-202 on 15 January 2019 against the Government's recommended Brexit route. It was the most dramatic night at Westminster since the Labour government’s defeat on a confidence motion in 1979.

  • 17th January 2019

    What is the Irish government’s Brexit wish-list? The suggestion that Irish unity, as opposed to safeguarding political and economic stability, is the foremost concern of the Irish government is to misunderstand and misrepresent the motivations of this key Brexit stakeholder, writes Mary C. Murphy (University College Cork).

  • 17th January 2019

    Brexit is in trouble but not because of the Irish backstop, argues the CCC's Michael Keating.

  • 16th January 2019

    Fellows of the Centre on Constitutional Change respond to the rejection of the Withdrawal Agreement by the House of Commons and the impending no-confidence vote in the government.

  • 11th January 2019

    Richard Parry assesses the unfolding drama at Westminster around no-deal scenarios. The deal ‘would be an uncomfortable outcome for the EU: providing quota-fee, tariff-free access to the EU market without any accompanying financial obligations; without any access to UK fishing waters in the absence of further agreement; and without any commitments to align with the majority of so-called level playing field arrangements’. For Tory leavers, what’s not to like in this negotiating triumph for Theresa May?

Read More Posts