To anybody who is still sceptical about the use of ‘new media’ in political debate, take note; I’m still pretty much engaged in the English devolution debate started on Twitter a few weeks back, continued on my blog and now continuing to rumble on, on Twitter!
Only today, the SNP minority administration in Holyrood has announced draft plans for a referendum on either full Scottish independence or what they are calling ‘devolution plus’ (giving further responsibility to the Scottish Executive for matters still currently the remit of Westminster). What happens to the draft referendum bill, let alone what the result of any referendum would be, is purely a matter of political speculation at this stage. What I want to explore is the English dimension to all this.
As I have previously said, I am a Unionist. I want the United Kingdom to continue as a sovereign nation state. I believe that we are stronger together than we would be apart.
But the United Kingdom as we know it today, evolved over centuries– and must continue to evolve and adapt if it is indeed to survive for the future.
Wales was effectively conquered in the 14th century, and legally subsumed into England during the Tudor period. Scotland has been conquered, regained political independence, itself secured the English crown peacefully, and in 1707 voted to join England in a political union creating a whole new country, Great Britain. Ireland too, joined this political union in 1801 to create a ‘United’ Kingdom, and ever since those various points in history the debate about ‘independence’ and ‘Home Rule’ have dominated domestic politics – right through to this present day.
Britain has never actually been a unitary state. Scottish law remained different to that in England and Wales, and for many years Northern Ireland had its own Parliament despite still sending Members to Westminster too.
Without a doubt, the UK of 2010 is politically a changed place. Devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is a firm reality and – with a few hiccups along the way – has been largely successful for those nations. But there is also clear unfinished business in our constitutional arrangements.
Firstly, we in England need to decide what we want our relationship to be with the other home nations. We need to decide how best our own political arrangements can be improved to allow decisions to be taken at the appropriate level of government, and in a fair way. As I said previously, I have an open mind about how to address the ‘English question’.
I am not a fan of regional assemblies and never have been. I don’t believe my constituents want one and it would be largely irrelevant to them. Had we had the referendum in the North West, I would have campaigned for a no vote. I can, however, see some logic in having a devolved English Parliament with similar powers to Holyrood, and a much smaller UK Parliament for all reserved matters.
And, though I still think it would be largely unworkable, because most bills do have a Scottish or Welsh dimension (however small), I can also see the logic of having the status quo at Westminster but with only MPs from English constituencies voting on ‘English-only’ matters. I’m sure other ideas can be added to this fairly inexhaustive list!
Perhaps a good model to adopt would be the Australian and Canadian federal system where each state (provinces in Canada) have their own legislature, government and Premier, and then a Federal Government and Prime Minister overseeing all the national politics. We are three-quarters the way there anyway!
Whatever the model, perhaps the starting point needs to be the establishment of a cross-party, cross-civic society Constitutional Convention. Let’s thrash out a devolution settlement for England and put an agreed position to the people and let them decide how we wish to be governed for the future. And, for someone who wants to defend the Union, importantly let’s debate what England’s political relationship should be within a modern United Kingdom.
Let that debate continue…
Comments [ 55 ]