Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland Unit to Leave the UK
In a rare
political development, the leaders of three nationalist parties representing
major movements for constitutional change in the United Kingdom gathered in
Cardiff, the capital of Wales, on September 14, 2026.
The meeting
brought together John Swinney, leader of the Scottish National Party, Ron ap
Iorwerth, leader of Plaid Cymru in Wales, and Michelle O’Neill, deputy leader
of Sinn Féin and First Minister of Northern Ireland. Mary Lou McDonald,
president of Sinn Féin and leader of the opposition in the Republic of Ireland,
also attended.
The meeting was
more than a symbolic gathering. It concluded with the signing of a memorandum
of understanding affirming the right of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to
determine their own constitutional futures. The document called on the
Westminster government to “prepare for, plan and facilitate constitutional
change” in the three nations.
The three
parties have different goals and different timelines, but their message from
Cardiff was clear: the political relationship between Westminster and the nations
of the UK is increasingly being challenged, while constitutional questions that
were once treated as secondary or postponed have returned to the center of the
debate over the country’s future.
Three
Movements, One Principle
Although the
three nationalist parties now appear more closely aligned, they are not
pursuing the same form of separation from the UK.
The Scottish
National Party supports Scottish independence. Scotland already held an
independence referendum in 2014, when 55.25 percent of voters rejected
independence and 44.65 percent supported it, with turnout reaching about 84.6
percent.
The result did
not permanently settle the issue. The question of another referendum has
remained a major feature of Scottish politics, with the SNP arguing that
circumstances have changed significantly since 2014, particularly following the
UK’s departure from the European Union.
Plaid Cymru
also supports Welsh independence, but it is taking a more cautious approach.
After coming to power in Wales in the May 2026 elections and ending decades of
Labour dominance in the Welsh government, the party has said it does not intend
to push for an independence referendum during the current parliamentary term.
Northern
Ireland presents a fundamentally different case. Sinn Féin is not seeking an
independent Northern Irish state. Instead, it supports ending Northern
Ireland’s constitutional union with the UK and joining the Republic of Ireland
as part of a united Ireland.
As a result,
independence is not an accurate description of all three movements. What unites
them is a broader principle: that the people of each nation should have the
right to determine its constitutional future rather than leaving the final
decision solely in the hands of the British Parliament and government in
Westminster.
From
Devolution to Redefining the Union
To understand
why the Cardiff meeting matters, it is important to distinguish between
devolution and independence.
The United
Kingdom is not a federal state in the traditional sense. Instead, Parliament in
Westminster has transferred certain legislative and executive powers to
institutions in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, while key areas such as
defence and foreign policy remain under the authority of the UK government.
This process
began in the late 1990s following referendums in Scotland and Wales in 1997. In
Northern Ireland, the 1998 Good Friday Agreement established a different
constitutional framework based on power sharing and consent.
Devolution was
originally presented as a way of giving the nations greater control over their
domestic affairs while maintaining the unity of the United Kingdom.
Yet it has
produced an unexpected political consequence.
A generation of
Scots and Welsh people has grown up with national parliaments and governments
as a normal part of political life. For nationalist movements, these
institutions have become evidence that Scotland and Wales already possess the
structures needed to govern themselves.
This has
gradually changed the question at the heart of the debate. Instead of asking
whether the nations need their own institutions, nationalists can now ask why
nations that already govern many areas of public life should not ultimately
have the power to determine their entire constitutional future.
That creates a
difficult dilemma for Westminster.
Westminster’s
Constitutional Dilemma
Prime Minister
Andy Burnham’s government faces a complicated political balance.
On one side,
Burnham has promoted deeper devolution and a more cooperative relationship with
the governments of the UK’s nations. In a July meeting with the leaders of the
devolved governments, he emphasized practical measures focused on economic
growth and the cost of living.
On the other
side, his government does not support turning greater devolution into a pathway
toward new independence referendums.
For nationalist
parties, this position creates an obvious point of contention. They are not
simply asking Westminster to transfer more administrative powers. They argue
that the existence and success of devolved institutions demonstrate that their
nations are capable of governing themselves.
This creates a
paradox at the heart of the British constitutional debate. The more authority
Westminster transfers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the more
established their separate political institutions become. Those institutions
can then be used by nationalist movements as evidence for a further transfer of
power.
Devolution,
therefore, may not necessarily resolve the tensions within the union. It can
also become part of the argument for changing the union itself.
Scotland:
The Independence Question Returns
The latest
developments come as the Scottish National Party seeks to place independence
back at the center of political debate.
The 2014
referendum resulted in Scotland remaining part of the UK, but the issue never
disappeared. Recent polling cited in reports puts support for independence at
around 47 percent. This does not represent a stable majority, but it shows that
independence remains a significant part of Scotland’s political landscape.
Age is another
important factor. Reports indicate that support for independence is stronger
among younger voters, giving the SNP reason to view the issue as a long term
political project rather than a question that can be settled through a single
campaign.
At the same
time, the party faces domestic political challenges, including concerns about
public services, education and government finances. The SNP has also faced
political consequences from a financial investigation that resulted in the
imprisonment of its former chief executive, Peter Murrell, according to The
Guardian.
Against this
backdrop, renewed attention to the constitutional question can shift the
political conversation away from the everyday performance of government and
toward a larger question: should Scotland remain part of the United Kingdom at
all?
Wales:
Nationalism on the Rise, but a Different Strategy
Wales is
approaching the question of independence differently.
Recent figures
cited in reports put support for Welsh independence at around 32 percent. That
is considerably lower than current support for Scottish independence, making an
immediate referendum a difficult political proposition.
Plaid Cymru
therefore appears more focused on using its newly acquired political power to
demonstrate that Wales can govern effectively rather than turning every
political term into a campaign for independence.
One example is
the party’s Cynnal programme to tackle child poverty, which draws heavily on
Scotland’s experience with its Scottish Child Payment. The initiative
illustrates how cooperation between nationalist movements is extending beyond
constitutional demands to the exchange of specific government policies.
At the same
time, the rise of Reform UK has added another dimension to Welsh politics. The
party won more than one third of the seats in the Welsh Parliament, creating a
challenge for Plaid Cymru from a different political direction.
Both movements
have benefited from dissatisfaction with established political institutions,
but they offer fundamentally different visions of Wales’s constitutional
future.
Northern
Ireland: The Most Complex Case
Northern
Ireland presents perhaps the most sensitive constitutional question because its
future is governed by a framework that differs substantially from that of
Scotland and Wales.
Under the Good
Friday Agreement, there is a specific legal mechanism for determining whether
Northern Ireland should remain part of the UK or become part of a united
Ireland.
The British
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland can call a referendum on Irish unity if
it appears likely that a majority of voters would support unification.
This gives Sinn
Féin a constitutional argument that does not exist in the same form in Scotland
or Wales. A referendum on Irish unity is not simply a political demand that
Westminster can dismiss. It is part of the constitutional framework established
by the Good Friday Agreement.
The more
difficult question is determining when the conditions for such a referendum
have been met.
Recent polling
cited in reports puts support for Irish unity in Northern Ireland at around 36
percent. That represents significant support, but not a majority.
The debate is
also taking place against concerns about public services and the functioning of
Northern Ireland’s political institutions. These pressures could contribute to
wider discussions about whether the existing constitutional arrangement
continues to meet the expectations of the population.
Europe
After Brexit
Europe is
another factor connecting the three nationalist movements.
The Cardiff
memorandum explicitly linked the future of the three nations to the European
Union, showing that the constitutional debate is not limited to the
relationship between Westminster and the devolved nations.
The issue is
particularly significant in Scotland. In the 2016 Brexit referendum, a majority
of Scottish voters chose to remain in the European Union, even though the UK as
a whole voted to leave.
Brexit
subsequently became an important part of the argument for Scottish
independence. Nationalists have argued that Scotland was taken out of the
European Union despite having voted to remain.
For nationalist
movements in Wales and Northern Ireland, Europe also forms part of their
broader vision of the future.
The result is
that the constitutional debate is no longer simply about how powers should be
divided within the UK. It is also about where these nations see themselves in
Europe and what kind of political and economic relationship they want with the
wider continent.
IS the
UK Really Breaking up?
It would be
premature to conclude that the United Kingdom is inevitably heading toward
dissolution.
Current polling
does not show a clear majority for Scottish independence or Irish
reunification, while support for Welsh independence remains well below half of
the population. The legal and political conditions for referendums also differ
between the three nations, and none of their governments can simply declare
independence unilaterally.
Yet it would
also be a mistake to dismiss the significance of the Cardiff meeting.
For the first
time, major nationalist forces in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have
created a shared political framework while maintaining their distinct
constitutional objectives.
Their
cooperation also goes beyond the question of separation. The memorandum covers
economic policy, energy, relations with Europe and the exchange of government
experience. This suggests an attempt to develop a broader political vision
rather than simply coordinate demands for separation from Westminster.
The United
Kingdom has historically survived by adapting its constitutional arrangements
to changing political pressures and national identities. But that flexibility
could become increasingly difficult to manage if the nations begin to view
their relationship with Westminster as something that can be repeatedly
renegotiated.
The Cardiff
meeting may not mark the beginning of the UK’s breakup. It does, however,
represent an important moment in the debate over what the British union should
mean in the future.
The central
question is no longer simply whether Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland should
receive more powers.
It is whether a
political union can remain stable when an increasing number of its constituent
nations are demanding a greater say over the terms of their relationship with
the center.
That question
will not be settled by one memorandum or one meeting in Cardiff. Its future
will ultimately depend on how voters in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and
the rest of the UK view the balance between shared government and national self
determination.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:
1.
The
Guardian, “Tuesday briefing: How to understand Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland’s joint call for change”, 15
September 2026.
2.
The
Guardian, “Westminster’s time is coming to an end, say first ministers of UK’s Celtic nations”, 14 September
2026.
3.
Al
Jazeera, “Leaders of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland unite for self-determination”, 14 September 2026.
4.
Sky
News, “'Westminster's time is coming to an end', say leaders in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as they sign 'historic' agreement”, 14 September 2026.
5.
UK
Government, “PM call with First Ministers: 21 July 2026”.
6.
The
Guardian, “Donald Trump doubles down on support for united Ireland”, 13 September 2026.
7.
The
Guardian, “The Guardian view on the united Ireland debate: shifting dynamics need to be treated with caution”, 14 September 2026.
