6 Reasons for enjoying the General Election 2010: Pt.4

Reason 4: A Democratic Parliament for the UK and England

Devolution in Wales and in Scotland seems to be working with growing confidence and self - esteem on the increase in both Celtic nations. Why this has come about can be traced back to a few by-elections in the 1970's and growing pressure from within both nations. Now that Northern Ireland has secured its own form of devolution only one part of the jigsaw remians to be put in place to give consistency to our nations formal title of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, no less than devolution for England.

Why did England miss out? Could it have been that Labour Governments have in the past owed so much to these nations constituencies to secure and retain power? Could it also be that the English have not only forgotten much of their traditional culture but have become rather shy in reasserting it. Thankfully no such inhibitions seem to be found in the English folk music community or among enthusiasts for English classical music. Sadly the nationalist lack of inhibition is also found in large measure at the mid to far right bearings of the political compass with more flag waving than even I feel is tasteful.

Nevertheless it is now a good time for the centre ground to start shedding these inhibitions. Firstly the lame attempt at a form of devolution for England, the Regional Assemblies, have now been abolished. The name was a misnomer if you think that they came into being by local elections. They were just another product of the nomination culture that brought us the Quango and the Regulators of the Offtrack variety. I wonder what they achieved
and at what cost? Present plans to have another go still look like a new fudge of the old culture which would leave voters cold should they be given a look in.

While Wales and Scotland were gaining control of their affairs the English were seeing their once proud local authorities being starved of funds while having to act more and more as mere agents of central government. Add to that a range of new decision making processes, different from one authority to the other, the import of the modern corporate manager with salary to match, and a huge consultancy dependency, and it is no wonder that the average elector is alienated from Town or County Hall. So much so that local election turn outs are way down among the 30 per cents. I am sure I am not alone in concluding from my own dealing with local government officers that they no longer seem to regard themselves as servants of the local community but slaves to the financial constraints created by central government imposing more and more work but without the funding. All this adds up to a loss of local control and a demeaning of function. Without adequate funding local authorities seem to spend much of their time explaining why they cannot act.

It is therefore time to bring some real power to the people. At a national level English MP's alone should decide English matters. I was surprised how attractive the English Democrats election broadcast was since it defined the problem very graphically. I had several reservations about their claims regarding the funding of Welsh and Scottish affairs and the inevitable objections to EU membership but the central argument makes sense. I cannot say that their website inspired with confidence with so many emotive symbols which made me feel rather uncomfortable, but why should Welsh and Scottish MP's ,who have an Assembly or Parliament back home dealing with devolved matters, be able to poke their noses in and vote on purely English issues.

There is still nothing in it for Labour but with the possibility of a new type of Parliament the time for the fudging to end has arrived. Many of the changes and reforms that Labour are proposing sound a lot like asking for a chance to clear up the mistakes they themselves have made or ignored in preference to some pet or half baked projects like the now abolished Regional Assemblies : an unnecessary extra layer between incompetent central government and emasculated, sometimes also incompetent, local government. A distinct English component within the Westminster Parliament would have a legitimacy which would give credibility to the delegation of real powers and duties and budgets to local authorities which could start to rebuild their local commitment and in return start to earn local loyalty and appreciation. This would be more about democracy and what you do with it than the business development that the Regional Assemblies seemed to be limited to. To think that they would bring decisions nearer to the people now looks like a conclusion promoted by the misguided for consumption by the gullible.

So, as the results come in on Election Night it will be interesting to see whether the figures will show how far England has been the poor relation in the culture of bringing powers back home. If Labour survive by the skin of their teeth due to their Welsh and Scottish victories the question of English Devolution will be buried and those protesting at the graveside dismissed as the eccentrics of the flag waving right.

Dacier

Reflections on St.George's Day

Flying the Flag?

Why is it that as a mongrel Englishman I feel uncomfortable while writing this note about our national day? The Celtic nations within the United Kingdom have no inhibitions about their various ways of celebrating their national day. I suspect it is something to do with not feeling the need because whatever the Celts might do, being English automatically meant that you were British and that was enough. This attitude seems to be echoed by our American cousins who often talk of England when they really mean Britain. With the promotion of Wales and Scotland through their devolved governments this is changing. With Northern Ireland now having a form of devolution the picture is nearly complete within our nation's formal title, 'the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland'.

A new Patrotism?

The reasons for this discomfort are many and various. Firstly, the embarrassment which many people have about talking about patriotism. Following your government, right or wrong, is not a good idea, but there is surely nothing wrong in saying that you love where you live, you like the people around you ,and you appreciate its wide ranging culture, its quirks and its eccentricities. I get particularly moved by both our natural and man-made landscapes and the histories they reveal and there is nothing wrong with being proud of an understood heritage. Nor is there anything wrong in saying you can't stand the government of the day whilst saying 'but it is ours' rather than that of an invading or colonial power. Even this brings on feelings of guilt to anyone who knows some colonial history But, that was then and this is now, and I have always found it a remarkable fact of post imperial life that so many citizens of our old colonies are more than happy to be on speaking terms, and I have always found great affection for Britain coming from the many Commonwealth students I have taught. That is why I feel that the present wars both bring out patriotic feelings for our troops but great doubts with regard to the judgements of our politicians.

English Devolution?

The movement for devolution has shown Englishmen like me, contrary to my initial fears, that bringing decisions and a budget nearer to Cardiff and Edinburgh has made, and highlights some difference, not least student fees and prescription fees. Although it seems an odd thing to say, decisions which affect only England, should also be brought nearer to London. The time must surely have come to exclude Welsh and Scottish MP's from votes which exclusively deal with matters within the borders of England. English MP's cannot vote on matters dealing with matters being voted on by the Welsh Assemby or the Scottish Parliament. The exclusuion of the Celtic vote would mean that for English matters the Parliament of Great Britain and Northern Ireland could revert to its old title of the Parliament of England which was abolished with the Act of Union with Scotland in 1706. Matters of defence and Foreign affairs and anything else not within the remit of the devolved instutions would remain where they are now. There would probably be no need for yet another building but this would become clearer once the principle of English devolution was established. The nonsense of English Regional Assemblies, who knows what they are anyway, could fall by the constutional wayside. Futhermore the case for fewer MPs would be strengthened and the art of scrutinising the national executive branch of the national government might be rediscovered.

With an effective and accountable English Parliament in place there would be no embarrassment in flying a flag above its rooftops which at its simplest represents the triumph of Good over Evil.

More on English Devolution: the Foreign Policy Snag from Scotland

Having made the claim that it is time to take English devolution seriously, the current debacle over the Lockerbie Bomber shows one of the dangers with changing the British Constitution. All kinds of changes are being proposed. Many have already been implemented. The difficulty lies in the fact that no one actually designed the system but it has evolved over the centuries with a series of settlements which have emerged from civil conflict and/or compromise. As a consequence many of the details have been left open to leave room for flexibility or because delving into the detail would re-open old arguments.

In the case of Scottish devolution the present arrangement can be seen as having been a major shift of Scottish affairs away from the Westminster Parliament and Whitehall ministers, with a consequent enhancement of the exercise of power through an elected Scottish Parliament. This devolved the exercise of the powers previously exercised by the Secretary of State for Scotland. The assumption has always been that Foreign Policy and Defence would l remain with Westminster and, more realistically, with the Secretaries of State for Defence and Foreign Affairs within the Cabinet, togther with their attendant ministries filled with experts to support them.

No one seems to have foreseen that Scottish policy on Criminal Justice could hold such dangers for UK foreign policy. It is hard to imagine a Home Secretary or a Minister for Constitutional Affairs being left to pursue a policy of this kind, even though it is quasi-judicial in nature, without attracting the attention of Foreign Secretary. They would be well within their range of influence, to which would added the influence of the [Prime Minister, except in this instance the PM, Gordon Brow, is still, for some reason, still on an extended holiday. Even before devolution Scotland had retained its own judicial system, but the Secretary of State for Scotland sitting in the Cabinet would have been directly within the sight line of the Foreign Secretary. Whilst the exercise of this influence might contravene the constitutional proprieties, is somewhat naive to think that ‘words would not be had’. As far as one can see, if there was any influence coming from Whitehall as to UK Foreign policy it did not get through.. Even if such influence might be seen as improper, an independent Minister would surely have to take into account the wider public interest, which in pre-devolution days would have been the UK’s interests. Were such interests within the considerations of the Scottish Minister for Justice? I think not, and in any case, it might well have served the Brown government to let things run their course. It was after all, nothing to do with them.

As a result British/American relations have taken a knock, with threats of trade boycotts and talk of holiday makers being advised to go to Ireland rather than the UK: just the sort of thing that our regions and struggling rural economies could do without in a recession. The other result is that it shows that any constitutional changes need to be carefully thought through as to their consequences. House of Lords reform seems to be stuck in the oven half baked; the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law no longer seems to convince the government that brought it about, while the undermining of Cabinet Government in favour of the presidential model continues by unabated stealth.

The case for English devolution, or the existing devolved arrangement, is not weakened by the present embarrassment. It reminds us of the subtleties of the British Constitution and warns us that tinkering with the system within the short term mentality of politicians is dangerous, and with the wrong combination of factors, it could be disastrous for the values of liberty which our system is supposed to embody.

The Case for English Devolution

I raised this issue in company a few months back. The discussion was brief as it was clear that the idea was seen as rather eccentric, even coming from me. Devolution for every other national part of the United Kingdom is now seen as common place, but for England, it is seen by many who live there as somewhat comic. This all comes back to the ‘West Lothian Question’. Why should Scottish and Welsh MPs be allowed to vote on issues which are already dealt with within their devolved powers for their own national area. In other words, why should they votes on matters which apply only to England? Its no longer any of their business. I suspect its all to do with the distribution of MPs from across the borders. If that’s the case then it looks like vote rigging.

As a starting point why not replicate a bundle of devolved powers for England, the English Assembly could see Parliament at Westminster revert to an English Parliament for such measures. There would have to be some adjustments with regard to the Cabinet for English matters, whilst non-devolved powers (these still vary as between Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) could be dealt with by the Westminster Parliament acting as the Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Foreign policy and defence would be the principle among these. For the English regions the Regional Assemblies, (whatever they do) could be scrapped, and the role of Local Government revised to give it more local meaning.

Surely to stake a claim for English Devolution is not eccentric? To have the British Cabinet heavily influenced by non-English MP’s and a second chamber that is neither one thing nor the other, is far dafter. The problem with ‘Englishness’, whatever that is, is that the ‘English’, whoever they are, are too embarrassed to discuss such matters. This of course, is very English.

Dacier