{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0200445434298441, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.0234375, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Political parties at critical junctures: explaining the decisions to offer referendums on constitutional change in the United Kingdom

Abstract This article investigates the Labour and Conservative parties’ decisions to offer referendums on constitutional change. We focus on Labour’s Scottish devolution referendum and the Conservatives’ EU referendum. Rather than responding to public demand, we argue each party offered referendums based on short-term electoral calculations. Both parties believed their commitments would resolve intra-party dissension, neutralise emergent electoral threats and expand their electorate. While each party won the subsequent election, the referendums produced long-term unintended outcomes counter to their initial objectives: an invigorated Scottish National Party and an impending EU exit. Ultimately, the consequences of both may lead to Scottish independence.