Political responses to a second Scottish independence referendum: Deferral, denial and delegitimisation

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract This paper examines how the UK state has responded to Scottish demands for a second independence referendum, treating those demands as constitutional contestation and asking whether the state has converted that contestation into deliberative engagement or managed it through deferral, denial, and delegitimisation. Drawing on a longitudinal analysis of ministerial discourse between 2016 and 2026, the paper traces how successive UK Governments – Conservative and Labour – have justified their consistent refusal to sanction a second referendum. It identifies three overlapping phases: conditional deferral under Theresa May, in which the question was postponed around Brexit; assertive denial under Johnson, Truss and Sunak, in which crisis conditions were instrumentalised and the 2022 Supreme Court ruling used to normalise refusal; and managed delegitimisation under Starmer, in which a softer tone masked an effort to render independence constitutionally illegitimate. The UK state has deployed a consistent repertoire – democratic finality, crisis conditions, mandate contestation – to close off rather than structure debate. The paper concludes that while these strategies have prevented a second referendum, they have not resolved the underlying tension, raising fundamental questions about deliberation and democratic legitimacy in multinational states.