The Regionalization of Political Careers in Spain and the UK

In this article the term ‘regional’ refers to the level of government between the municipality and the state and thus to both of our cases, Catalonia and Scotland. In contrast, the term ‘national’ generally refers to the central state level and thus also to their ‘host’ states, the UK and Spain. Some exceptions are made when Catalonia's and Scotland's claim to nationhood is dealt with and the meaning is unequivocal.

For a more thorough theoretical discussion of the interaction between political professionalization and regionalism, see Stolz (Citation2001, Citation2010b).

In this respect this case selection can be seen to follow Gerring's (Citation2001: 219) logic of “crucial cases”.

Keating (Citation1998: 104–109) identifies six different types of regionalism, with empirical cases often falling somewhere in between them, containing a mixture of elements. As he sees the distinction between nationalism and regionalism in the present time of state reconfiguration as increasingly blurred, he includes sub-state nationalist movements in his typology. Apart from his six types he also draws a more fundamental dichotomic distinction between progressive and conservative forms of regionalism.

For a proper account of Catalan nationalism, see among others Balcells Citation(1996), Conversi Citation(1997) and McRoberts Citation(2001). For a detailed analysis of the Catalan political system, see Caminal and Matas Citation(1998).

The second chamber of the Spanish Cortes, the Senate, is neither a real ‘regional’ body, nor does it hold important powers.

For detailed accounts of Scottish nationalism in the British state, see among others, Harvie Citation(1994), Mitchell Citation(1996) and McCrone Citation(2001). For an analysis of the newly established Scottish institutions and the Scottish policy process, see among others, Lynch Citation(2001), Keating Citation(2005) and McGarvey and Cairney Citation(2008).

In November 2004 the first attempt to introduce such a regional assembly in the North East of England was defeated in a referendum.

The career analysis is based on an extensive dataset compiled by the author containing career information on all Catalan and Scottish parliamentarians who have been serving in either the regional or the national parliament since the inauguration of the former. Additional information comes from a survey of regional parliamentarians in Scotland and Catalonia and a series of interviews with politicians from both regions. A more comprehensive account of the study can be found in Stolz Citation(2010b).

These figures contradict Genieys' (Citation1997: 251–252, Citation1998: 174–175) unsubstantiated claim that PSC politicians would perceive the Catalan Parliament first and foremost as a springboard to the national level.

This finding is contrary to the general trend in Spain, where according to Montero (Citation2007: 590) “Politicians with extensive subnational experience do go to the Congreso, but they finish their careers there and only rarely return to subnational office subsequently”.

Figures for Spain and the UK are taken from Matland and Studlar Citation(2004), those for Catalonia and Scotland were calculated by the author. According to Rush and Cromwell Citation(2000) average tenure at Westminster is at about 18 years.

Interview with Higini Clotas, socialist member of the Catalan Parliament since 1980 and member of the committee that drafted its first standing orders. This direct link has since been decoupled, yet salary levels are still rather similar.

In the Scottish and UK parties, constituency candidates are usually selected in a special meeting of the respective constituency party. The influence of the party centre is generally reduced to providing a list of acceptable candidates (and thus effectively to a veto power).

Of course, since Alex Salmond held his second dual mandate, the automatic vacation of the first parliamentary seat after winning a second mandate has been put into question. However, the public debate that entails such a dual mandate may function as a similarly strong deterrent.

Finally, the accessibility of Westminster seats for MRPs and of seats in the Scottish Parliament for MNPs is further reduced by the recent reduction of Westminster seats for Scotland. This reduction is putting an end to the geographical congruency of single-member constituencies in both parliaments—and thus to an institutional feature that has clearly eased the way of many Westminster MNPs into the first Scottish Parliament. The decoupling of this organizational link means that there are no constituency MNPs and MRPs who could be seen as natural successors to each other, when one of them retires. Neither of them could take their supporter network or their relations with the electorate one-to-one into any subsequent campaign for selection and election, should they wish to switch parliaments when a vacancy arises.

The parties that most clearly lose out at Westminster elections in Scotland are the SNP, the Tories and all the minor parties. Together these parties have won 42 of 56, and thus 75% of regional seats at the Scottish election of 2007.

In this respect, again, the case of Alex Salmond is a clear exception to the rule. By contrast, informal debates about a possible successor of Labour's first Scottish First Minister Donald Dewar had even ruled out Robin Cook (late Scottish MNP, staunch supporter of devolution and at that time still UK foreign secretary) because (among other reasons) MSPs would not have an ‘import’ from Westminster. Since then, there has been no serious debate about any Westminster contender to the leadership of the Labour Party in the Scottish Parliament.