How will Scotland’s vote change the U.K. power balance?

Read the Full Transcript

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  And for more on the significance of the result of the referendum and what comes next, we turn to Louise Richardson, principal and vice chancellor at the University of St. Andrew's, and David Rennie. He's Washington bureau chief for "The Economist" magazine.

  Welcome to both of you.

  Louise Richardson, I'm going to begin with you.

  Were you surprised at the margin of victory for the no vote? It was 10, almost 11 points.

  LOUISE RICHARDSON, Principal and Vice Chancellor, University of St. Andrews: I think everyone was surprised by the margin of victory, but we all had so little to go on because this was such an unprecedented occasion.

  And we were seeing 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds vote for the first time. We were seeing an electorate in which 30 percent had only recently registered. We were seeing a — looking at a turnout of 85 percent, so it was very difficult to predict. But I think most people were surprised by the margin of victory, yes.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  David Rennie, were you surprised?

• DAVID RENNIE, The Economist:

  I think so.

  And, remember, the polls had looked so sort of safe and solid for the no camp until just a few weeks ago. You had the sort of 20-point lead for the camp that was going to keep the U.K. together. And then, suddenly, that lead just collapsed very, very quickly in the last two or three weeks.

  And all that movement seems to be with lower-income, left-wing voters, often slightly older voters. And so there was clearly just a big shift taking place. And one of the first analyses of what happened last night is that they just didn't turn out in quite such massive numbers as some of the more affluent pro-union voters.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  Louise Richardson, we're now being told — I'm reading that, no, there won't be independence for Scotland, but there is going to be a big change in the relationship between Scotland and London, the home government, and as well as a change for Wales, England, for Northern Ireland.

• LOUISE RICHARDSON:

  That's right.

  I think this referendum in Scotland will prove to be a catalyst for constitutional change throughout the United Kingdom. And in the past few weeks, as the London parties decided that they actually could win this — could lose this campaign, even though they had been somewhat complacent for much of the campaign, they came up to Scotland. They promised what is called devo max.

  They promised significant new powers for Scots if they would vote no. They promised for tax-raising powers, more powers over issues like benefits, which are very important to people who are voting. And this means, I think, that there will be more power going to Scotland, but it raises the question, what's called in Britain the West Lothian question, of what this means for Westminster, where English members of Parliament can vote only on — Scottish members of Parliament can vote only on issues pertaining to English constituencies, but English constituents can't vote for Scots.

  So, I think there is a real sense, but especially I think in the back benches of the Tory party, that it's time for some change. And I think we have seen Prime Minister Cameron today indicate that he's going to address those concerns.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  David Rennie, so, is it believed that the government is going to carry through on these promises?

• DAVID RENNIE:

  Yes, I can imagine that here in the United States, this may seem a bit esoteric, something for the constitutional lawyers.

  But I think what people need to understand is that what really has happened, even with the vote to stay together, is that the sleeping beast of English nationalism has been woken, because there is an English backlash today, because essentially a lot of people south of the border think the Scots were bribed to stay with some more privileges.

  And what's really happened now is that Scottish voters feel a bit like super voters. They have exclusive rights over other Scottish stuff, schools and hospitals, other things, but they also get a say, decisively sometimes, on what happens down south in England.

  English voters now feel more like second-class voters, because they can only vote on English stuff, not on Scottish stuff. So, what is really happening now is, remember, the English are five-sixths of the population of this — of the United Kingdom. They feel slightly sort of shoved into second place, that the Scots have been bribed with all these promises.

  And that's a really unprecedented thing, to have English nationalism stalking around as a big political force, putting pressure on David Cameron, the prime minister.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  So, Louise Richardson, coming out of this, the U.K. is more politically unsettled?

• LOUISE RICHARDSON:

  Well, yes, but that's not necessarily a good thing.

  I think British people are now very much engaged. It has been an extraordinary exercise in democracy these past few months in Scotland. We have never seen anything like it. Few democracies have. I think it's worth remembering that many countries fought civil wars over whether one region had a right to secede.

  And here in Britain, it's been democratic — with a democratic vote, with everybody accepting the will of the majority, a peaceful, robust debate. So I think it is a real statement of the strength of British democracy. And if it's a little unsettled, that's good, because it means the public is more engaged.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  But what about — David Rennie, what about the independence movement itself? Is that going to continue?

• DAVID RENNIE:

  Well, you have seen the leader of the independence movement, the boss of the Scottish government, resigning because of this loss.

  He will be replaced, but he is kind of irreplaceable. I mean, Scotland is a small country. He was really the absolutely dominant sort of big political beast. He was the really talented politician up there. I think, personally, if I had to bet, the new few years, thing to keep an eye on is that sleeping giant the five-sixths of the country, the English nationalists.

  You will see calls for an English parliament. You will demands to have English M.P.s. having exclusive rights to vote on English subjects. And let's work out, this is a big fight about power. Scotland is basically a left-wing country. England has more or less a conservative majority, a narrow conservative majority.

  The country as a whole is kind of finely balanced. It's purple, if you like. So this is a blue country, red country, purple, gigantic power struggle that's about to break out.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  And, Louise Richardson, finally, what does that mean in terms of the U.K.'s relationship with other countries, the United States, Europe and others?

• LOUISE RICHARDSON:

  Well, there can be little doubt that Britain would have been very weakened had Scotland decided to separate.

  The whole question of Britain's membership, England's membership in the E.U. is going to subject to yet another referendum. So I think, going forward, most countries like to deal with unitary actors. And it's — few countries can really understand the depth of domestic politics in other countries. And it looks as though English, British domestic politics are going to be more complex, which will complicate relations with other countries, but the fundamentals are unaffected.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  And it sounds like that's what you're saying too.

• DAVID RENNIE:

  Absolutely.

  Are we going to be looking inward? Are we still a global, outward-looking partner for America, or are there now an increasing number of English who quite fancy being something a bit like Switzerland, kind of rich and inward-looking and just shunning the rest of the world? Those forces are definitely out there now.

• JUDY WOODRUFF:

  David Rennie, Louise Richardson, we thank you both.

• LOUISE RICHARDSON:

  Thank you.