Examining the substance and structure of party competition in Scotland (2014)

Introduction
Since the establishment of the Scottish parliament in 1999 the political party system in
Scotland has undertaken a significant amount of change. Since then the dominance of the
Labour Party in Scotland has ended, the SNP has grown electorally and the Scottish party
system increasingly becomes a different arrangement to the system south of the border1.
Using methods to examine the relative size of parties and the ideological distance, this paper
will explore the substance of the party competition. In addition, Giovanni Sartoris criteria for
party classification, the structure of party competition will also be investigated.
Substance
Relative size
According to Peter Mair the most traditional and most widely accepted criterion for
classifying party systems is the number of parties. However as Mair establishes, this
method was traditionally first put forward by Duverger in 1954 to distinguish between twoparty systems and multi-party systems, suggesting this method is not particularly
descriptive2. Two methods have developed to measure the number of parties effectively. The
effective number of parties method was put forward by Laakso and Taagepera, where only
the real or important parties are taken into account3.

1 Cairney, P., McGarvey, N., Scottish Politics, 2nd ed., (Palgrave MacMillan,
London: 2013), pp.43-44
2 Mair, P., Comparing Party Systems, in LeDuc L., Niemi, R., Norris, P., (eds.)
Comparing Democracies 2: New Challenges in the Study of Elections and Voting,
(Sage Publications: London, 2002), pp.88-108
3 Golosov, G., The Effective Number of Parties: A New Approach, in Party
Politics, (vol.16. no.2, 2010), pp. 171192

There are two versions of the effective number of parties method; the Effective Number of
Electoral Parties (ENEP), where parties are considered by what percentage of the vote they
achieved, and the Effective Number of Parliamentary Parties (ENPP), where parties are
considered by the number of parliamentary seats they achieved4.
In Scotland at the 2011 election to the Scottish Parliament the ENEP was 3.3 and the ENPP
was 2.65. In 2011 the largest parties by electoral parties in the 2011 election were the
Scottish National Party (SNP) with 44.7%, the Labour Party with 29%, the Conservative
Party with 13.1% and the Liberal Democrats with 6.6%. After 2011 the largest parties by
parliamentary seats were the Scottish National Party with 69 seats, the Labour Party with 37
seats, the Conservative Party with 15 seats and the Liberal Democrats with 5 seats6.
Alan Siaroff defined what the Effective Number of Parliamentary Parties (ENPP) score
means in relation to party competition; varying from a purely two party system to an extreme
multiparty with balance among the parties7. Siaroff defines a pure two party system as the
two major parties gaining on average 95% of the popular vote. According to Siaroff an ENPP
score between 1.92 and 2.56 can be considered a two-party system; an ENPP score
between 2.56 and 2.95 can be deemed a two-and-a-half party system8.
Using Siaroffs definition, the Scottish party system, with an ENPP score of 2.6, can be
judged to be a two-and-a-half party system9. After the 2011 election the SNP formed a
4 Golosov, The Effective Number of Parties, pp. 171192
5 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
6 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
7 Wolinetz, S., Classifying Party Systems: Where Have All the Typologies Gone?
in Canadian Political Science Association, (June 2004), pp.8-11
8 Wolinetz, Classifying Party Systems, pp.8-11
9 Wolinetz, Classifying Party Systems, pp.8-11

majority government, with 53% of the parliamentary seats10. The other main party, the
Labour Party, gained 28% of the seats, while the Conservative party could be reasoned the
half-party, with 11% of the parliamentary seats11.
The ENPP score for the Scottish party system has fluctuated since the first elections to the
Scottish parliament in 1999. In 1999 the ENPP score was 3.312, which according to Siaroffs
classification; this score would be considered moderate multiparty with two main parties13.
The main parties after the 1999 election were the Labour party, who went into coalition with
the Liberal Democrats, and the main opposition party being the SNP14.
After the 2003 Scottish parliamentary election the ENPP increased to 4.215, which would be
seen as extreme multiparty with one dominant party, according to Siaroff16. This definition is
debatable; the extreme multiparty element may be referring to the SNP, the Conservatives
and the Liberal Democrats who achieved between 13 and 20% of parliamentary seats, while
the Labour Party could be viewed as the dominant party17. However the Labour Party only
achieved 38% of parliamentary seats in 2003 and went into coalition with the Liberal
Democrats, therefore it may not be seen as a dominant party18.
10 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
11 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
12 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
13 Wolinetz, Classifying Party Systems, pp.8-11
14 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
15 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
16 Wolinetz, Classifying Party Systems, pp.8-11
17 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
18 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49

After the 2007 election the ENPP was 3.419, again this could be considered moderate
multiparty with two main parties20. After the 2007 election, the SNP established a minority
government, with 36% of the parliamentary seats21. The other main party, the Labour Party,
gained just one less seat than the SNP, while the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats
gained 17 and 16 seats respectively22.
The substance of the party competition in Scotland can be described as heading from a
multiparty system with two main parties, the SNP and the Labour Party, towards a two-anda-half-party system, with the Liberal Democrats or the Conservatives being considered the
half-party23. One could argue that this suggests a pattern away from multi-partism and
towards a period of two-partism.
Ideological distance
Scottish political parties can considered to be have an ideological variance along two lines;
the traditional left and right, and the pro-independence and unionist.
The Scottish National Partys ideology can be seen as centre-left social democratic and
national secessionist. Alex Salmond, who became SNP leader in 1990, is widely credited
with creating a clear and coherent ideological base for the party. The SNPs principle aim
was to create an independent Scottish state, while advocating and implementing social
democratic policies such as well-funded public services24. The second largest party in
Scotland, the Scottish Labour Party, can be seen as ideologically similar to the SNP. Both

19 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49

20 Wolinetz, Classifying Party Systems, pp.8-11
21 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
22 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
23 Wolinetz, Classifying Party Systems, pp.8-11

parties style themselves as social democratic, arguing for further redistribution and more
funding for public services, especially the National Health Service (NHS)25.
The Scottish Conservative party is the only major right-of-centre political party in Scotland,
yet have never achieved any exceptional electoral success. The Conservatives tend to
favour free market and pro-business proposals and reduced spending and taxation26. The
fourth major party, the Scottish Liberal Democrats, is the most centrist of the four and also
advocates increased public spending27.
The idea that the two largest parties, the Labour Party and the SNP, occupy the centre-left
position suggests that the ideological distance is limited. An analysis of the 2007 party
manifestos by Emanuele Massetti found that the Labour Party, the SNP and the Liberal
Democrats all committed themselves to continuing the high level of social spending; only the
Conservatives advocated finding efficiency savings to cut spending28.
Research conducted by the Scottish Election Study in 2011 created quantitative data to
examine the ideological distance between Scottish parties. The Study used a tax and spend
formula to denote the left and right wing axis. By positioning parties on a scale where a
score of 0 indicates the biggest commitment to reduction in taxation and spending and 10
indicates the biggest commitment to increasing taxation and spending. In the broadest
sense a score closer to 0 could be considered a right-wing party and a score closer to 10
24 Mitchell, J., Johns, R., Bennie, L., The Scottish National Party: Transition to
Power, (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2012), pp.6-9
25 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.51-53
26 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.53-55
27 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.53-55
28 Massetti, E., The Scottish and Welsh Party Systems Ten Years after
Devolution: Format, Ideological Polarization and Structure of Competition in
Sussex European Institute, 2008, pp.7-9

could be seen as a more left-wing party. Nevertheless the scale would still allow for an
examination of ideological distance29.
According to the Study, the Labour Party was rated the highest score on the tax/spending
scale, 5.7.The SNP were only slightly lower than Labour on 5.3, while the Conservative party
was given the lowest score of 3.930. Therefore the distance between the four main parties is
only 1.7; the ideological distance could be considered minor.
The major difference between the major parties is their attitude towards Scottish
independence. The SNP is the only major party that advocates Scottish independence, while
the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives all argue for a continued
union between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom31. The Scottish Election Study
researched the distance between attitudes towards Scottish independence. Using a scale
between 0 and 10, where 0 is a commitment to abolish the Scottish parliament and 10 is a
commitment to complete Scottish independence; the four largest parties were placed on the
scale. Unsurprisingly, SNP was rated the highest score; 9.2, the most supportive of
independence. The Conservatives were given the lowest score of 2.4, while Labour and the
Liberal Democrats were given a score of 4.2 and 3.9 respectively. Therefore the distance
between the largest parties on constitutional issues is 6.8.
As a result it could be argued that the four major political parties in Scotland have a limited
ideological distance in relation to the tax and spend (or left and right) axis, but have a
significant ideological distance on constitutional issues, most notably attitudes towards
Scottish independence.
Structure
29 Johns, R., Mitchell, J., Carman, C., Constitution or Competence? The SNPs Reelection in 2011, Political Studies, (2013, Vol. 61) pp.158178
30 Johns, Mitchell, Carman, Constitution or Competence? pp.158178
31 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.53-55

Mair describes Giovanni Sartoris criteria for party classification as the most comprehensive
of all the available typologies and the insight in which the typology gains make it
incomparably better than that developed by and of the alternative typologies32.
Alternation in government
Alternation in government is made up of three patterns: wholesale alternation, partial
alternation and non-alternation. Wholesale alternation is when one party leaves government
office and is completely replaced by an entirely different party. Partial alternation is where a
coalition forms which has elements of the previous governing party and a new party that had
not been in the previous government. Non-alternation is when one party has exclusive
control of government for extended period of time33. A party system where the alternation in
government is wholesale or none can be considered a closed party system, while partial
alternation is an indicator of an open party system34.
The alternation in government in Scotland can be considered wholesale. Although there
have been periods of coalition government in Scotland (1999 to 2007), there have been no
instances of a previous governing party and a new party that had not been in the previous
government governing together, therefore it could not be considered partial alternation.
Instead, in 2007 when the SNP failed to achieve a majority in parliament, the party chose to
establish a minority government instead of going into coalition with the Liberal Democrats35.
Therefore due to the fact that the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats were completely
replaced in government by SNP, the alternation in government can be deemed wholesale
alternation, a sign indicative of a closed party system.
32 Mair, Comparing Party Systems, pp.88-108
33 Brtoa, F., Enyedi, Z., Party system closure and openness: Conceptualization,
operationalization and validation in Party Politics, (Sept. 2014), pp.3-7
34 Brtoa, Enyedi, Party system closure and openness, pp.3-7
35 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49

Governing formulae
According to Mair a further way to describe party structure is through governing formulae. If
there are certain parties, or a group of parties, that tend to be governing together then the
governing formulae could be considered familiar, which could be indicative of a closed party
system. If new governing formulae are likely to arise, for example new coalition partners,
new parties brought into coalition or a new period of minority government, then the
governing formulae could be deemed to be innovative, suggesting the party system is
open36.
In 1999 after the first election to the Scottish government the Labour Party went into coalition
with the Liberal Democrats. After the 2003 election, the Labour Party again failed to achieve
a majority in the Scottish parliament and again went into coalition with the Liberal
Democrats. In the 2007 election the SNP made significant gains, gaining 20 seats to achieve
a total of 47, allowing the SNP to form a minority government. Finally in 2011 the SNP
gained a majority of seats in the Scottish parliament, forming the first majority government37.
The mixture of coalition governments, a minority government and a majority government
suggests that there is a trend of innovative governing formulae, indicative of an open party
system. However the fall in the number of seats that the Liberal Democrats hold (from a high
of 17 in 1999 and 2003 to a low of 5 in 2011)38 suggests that the chances of coalition
governments are lessened. In addition to this opinion polling suggests that the SNP is likely
to win a majority of seats again in the 2016 election39.
36 Brtoa, Enyedi, Party system closure and openness, pp.3-7
37 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
38 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
39 The Scotsman, SNP set to win 2016 election says Survation poll,
<http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/snp-set-to-win-2016election-says-survation-poll-1-3548137>, accessed 30/11/14

Although the governing formulae in is not always a single-party majority government, it is

suggestible that the future of governing formulae in Scotland may be heading towards a
familiar formula and a more closed party system.
Access to government
A final way Mair measures the structure of party competition is access to government.
Access to government concerns the range of parties that have the opportunity to govern, in
other words; at what level is the threshold for parties to cross to enter government. A closed
party system is one where only parties that have governed in the past have the opportunity
to govern again, while an open party system has sufficient opportunities for new parties to be
brought into government40.
It could be argued that the access to government in Scotland is limited. Although there have
been periods of coalition governments, there have only ever been three parties which have
been in government. Furthermore the only feasible alternative to SNP as the governing party
in Scotland is the Labour Party41. There have been opportunities for other parties to be
brought into government; for example in the 2003 election the Green Party and the Scottish
Socialist Party made notable gains, achieving 7 and 6 seats respectively, however the new
parties were not able to gain access to government42.
On the other hand it could be argued that there is a lack of historical evidence to examine to
decide if new parties are able to develop and gain access to government, as there have only

40 Brtoa, Enyedi, Party system closure and openness, pp.3-7

41 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49
42 BBC News, Scottish Parliament election, 2003,
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/vote2003/scottish_parliament/html/atoz.s
tm>, accessed 02/12/14

been four elections since 199943. Despite this, due to the limited number of parties that have
achieved office, the access to government in Scotland can be considered closed.
Conclusion
In summary, the substance of party competition in Scotland is made up of the number of
parties and the ideological distance of those parties. The number of effective parties in
Scotland has varied since the first election to the Scottish parliament, the substance of the
party competition in Scotland can be described as heading from a multiparty system with two
main parties, the SNP and the Labour Party, towards a two-and-a-half-party system, with
the Liberal Democrats or the Conservatives being considered the half-party44.It could be
argued that the four major political parties in Scotland have a limited ideological distance in
relation to left and right axis, but have a significant ideological distance on constitutional
issues, most notably attitudes towards Scottish independence.
In addition, the structure of party competition according to Sartoris criteria can be
considered either open or close and can be decided by examining the alternation in
government, governing formulae and access to government. The alternation in government
in Scotland can be considered closer as there have been no instances of a previous
governing party and a new party that had not been in the previous government governing
together.
Furthermore although the governing formulae in is not always a single-party majority
government, it is suggestible that the future of governing formulae in Scotland may be
heading towards a familiar formula and a more closed party system. Additionally due to the
limited number of parties that have achieved office, the access to government in Scotland
can be considered closed.

43 Cairney, McGarvey, Scottish Politics, pp.48-49

44 Wolinetz, Classifying Party Systems, pp.8-11

In conclusion, the substance of party competition in Scotland can be considered a two-anda-half-party system with limited ideological distance. Furthermore, using Satoris
classification, the structure of party competition in Scotland can be considered closed.

Bibliography
BBC News, Scottish Parliament election, 2003,
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/vote2003/scottish_parliament/html/atoz.s
tm>, accessed 02/12/14
Brtoa, F., Enyedi, Z., Party system closure and openness: Conceptualization,
operationalization and validation in Party Politics, (Sept. 2014)
Cairney, P., McGarvey, N., Scottish Politics, 2nd ed., (Palgrave MacMillan,
London: 2013)
Golosov, G., The Effective Number of Parties: A New Approach, in Party
Politics, (vol.16. no.2, 2010)
Johns, R., Mitchell, J., Carman, C., Constitution or Competence? The SNPs
Re-election in 2011, Political Studies, (2013, Vol. 61)
Mair, P., Comparing Party Systems, in LeDuc L., Niemi, R., Norris, P., (eds.)
Comparing Democracies 2: New Challenges in the Study of Elections and Voting,
(Sage Publications: London, 2002)
Massetti, E., The Scottish and Welsh Party Systems Ten Years after Devolution:
Format, Ideological Polarization and Structure of Competition in Sussex
European Institute, 2008
Mitchell, J., Johns, R., Bennie, L., The Scottish National Party: Transition to
Power, (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2012)
The Scotsman, SNP set to win 2016 election says Survation poll,
<http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/snp-set-to-win-2016election-says-survation-poll-1-3548137>, accessed 30/11/14
Wolinetz, S., Classifying Party Systems: Where Have All the Typologies Gone?
in Canadian Political Science Association, (June 2004)