Paper 2 · 2019 · 30 marks
Using the source, evaluate the view that devolution is in danger of undermining the unity of the United Kingdom.
Constitution
Source
This source has been adapted from the House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution report 'The Union and devolution' (2016). It considered the effect of devolution on the United Kingdom and the Union.
The case that devolution is undermining the Union
England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are stronger united than apart. Yet today, the Union is threatened by continuing demands for independence and also the tensions and inequalities created as policies diverge between devolved bodies over health, education or tax, for example.
Power has been devolved in an uneven way: a power-sharing executive, a national assembly or parliament, a combined authority, or English Votes for English Laws. The cumulative impact of devolution on the unity of the United Kingdom has not been properly considered. The benefits of unity and the Union have been taken for granted. A coherent vision for the shape and structure of the United Kingdom is required, without which there cannot be constitutional stability.
The case that devolution has strengthened the Union
Devolution has been achieved without undermining our unitary state and without the need for federalism or codification of our constitution. The four nations are 'stronger together', in a relationship of clear mutual respect.
Although nationalism remains strong in the devolved nations, devolution has satisfied some demands for self-government, avoiding a break-up of the union. Policy divergences reflect local democracy and identities, while maintaining the integrity of the United Kingdom.
Mark scheme: agreement
AO1: Few seats change hands in a general election.
AO2: It has been the pattern since the post war period that there are an enormous number of 'safe seats'.
AO3: Therefore, we can conclude that general elections are won and lost in the few marginal seats.
AO1: Class & region are major determinants of voting behaviour.
AO2: This means that a person's class and region are crucial in how they vote.
AO3: One can conclude that class & regional voting leads to predictability and stability in in general election outcomes.
AO1: Opinion polls are accurate predictors of voting behaviour.
AO2: Opinion polls shows stability in voting patterns.
AO3: We can conclude that the historic accuracy of opinion polls shows stability and predictability in General elections.
AO1: Voting behaviour indicates party alignment.
AO2: This means that not only does a person identify with a class this alignment is further enforced when a person identifies themselves with a particular party working in their interests.
AO3: We can conclude that elections are predictable as political parties can rely on vast swathes of the electorate to vote for them.
Mark scheme: disagreement
AO1: The pattern of few seats changing hands is no longer applicable.
AO2: This means that there is increased voter volatility and greater 'swings' or changes in voter preferences.
AO3: We can conclude that far from being predictable and stable it is no longer possible to predict vast swathes of 'safe seats' thus general elections outcomes are volatile.
AO1: People's votes are now influenced by party policies and issues.
AO2: This means that voting is 'instrumental' implying that voters are all independent agents who make up their mind on what is to their rational benefit.
AO3: Thus, we can conclude that party and class alignment are not reliable as people now vote more out of self-interest.
AO1: Opinion polls are no longer a reliable indicator of how people vote.
AO2: This has been evident in recent elections showing voter volatility.
AO3: We can conclude that inaccuracies in opinion poll predictions shows that elections are not predictable or stable.
AO1: Age and education have also been factors recently.
AO2: Age and education have become better indicators of how people will vote, overtaking class and party loyalty.
AO3: We can reach the verdict that, the basis of predicting voting behaviour has many changing various, leading to instability in electoral outcomes.
AO1: It is leaders and the media who shape the way people vote.
AO2: In recent years there has been more emphasis on the style and brand of parties. This means that a greater sense of importance is attached to these factors.
AO3: We can conclude that predictability is therefore no longer assured and constant and the switching of voter allegiance means that the fight for people's votes is more intense and on a different playing field than in the past.