Monday, June 9, 2008

Why Devolution has weakened the Union

My latest poll is up, asking the question has devolution made the Union stronger or weaker. At the moment, the answer would appear to be that the vast majority of you believe that devolution has, indeed, made the Union weaker.

I agree and here are my reasons why:

1.In the N.Irish, Scottish and Welsh assemblies we now have parties in power whose raison d’etre is to obtain separation from the rest of the UK.

Salmond and the SNP are dictating the pace and direction of the debate, not just in Scotland, but on a UK-wide basis. Whilst it could be argued that, for different reasons (being a minor partner in a coalition and because of the “mutual veto” respectively), Plaid Cymru and Sinn Fein are not exercising so much power, no one would contest, surely, that their present positions of responsibility are conducive to the strengthening of the Union?

2.The growth and development of English and “Ourselves Alone” Ulster nationalism.

Without asymmetrical devolution and the resulting inequities there would not be the growth of resentment and the resulting pressure for England to also get its own separate parliament. Devolution in Northern Ireland has given us the DUP as the leading voice within Unionism- their “Britishness” is a very selective, exclusive one based on narrow sectarian communal lines. They see no contradiction between wrapping themselves in the Union flag on one hand and demanding evermore autonomy and of course, finance from the UK on the other. Both forms of nationalism, whilst on the face of it less dangerous than their Celtic counterparts, have a bigger potential to destroy the unity of our nation.

3.The performance and attitude of the Unionist Political Establishment in Scotland and Wales.

Many campaigned against devolution at the time of the two referendums. Most would appear to be now content in increasing the powers which distance them further from Westminster, whilst maintaining the hypocritical attitude that the same right to even have a referendum on their own devolution is to be denied to their fellow British citizens in England. Devolution has divided the Conservatives, in particular, into separate English, N.Irish, Scottish and Welsh versions as opposed to one UK party. I include journalists, academics and political commentators generally within that Establishment group. If anyone can point me in the direction of an article produced by any element within this group which has not taken a defensive attitude towards the Union; in other words an article which tells us how we can develop rather than “Save the Union”, then I’ll be most surprised- such a contrast to what we were reading and hearing over ten years ago. Those Unionists with influence, those who have the greatest power and ability to defeat separatism have been seduced by the Devolution Project and are now too, like the politicians waving the white flag and are now attempting to get the best possible surrender conditions

4.The Labour’s government’s obsession with defining and imposing their version of Britishness.

I and other true British citizen do not need our government to layout why we are British and what conditions we must follow to prove that fact. We were born British and will die British- what that means to each of us individually is...well...exactly that... an individual private matter. But in Brown (the original architect of devolution, don’t forget)’s panic that he and his party may be damaged by the Frankenstein he created, a completely counterproductive strategy has been produced to define our national identity for his and his party’s own benefit. Except it only applies in those places which will let it apply- it won’t be pushed in Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales. An official "Selective Britishness" has developed in other words- yet more proof why devolution has weakened the Union.

And that, m’lud, finishes the case for the prosecution.

I have in this piece attempted to prove why devolution in the UK has damaged the Union, as opposed to arguing the pros and cons of that Union- this will be part of an open thread attached to the poll; all comments are welcome, but I’d particularly like to see those who would describe themselves as N.Irish, Scottish or Welsh Unionists counterprove the four points I’ve posted.

4 comments:

Owen Polley said...

“Plaid Cymru and Sinn Fein are not exercising so much power, no one would contest, surely, that their present positions of responsibility are conducive to the strengthening of the Union?”
I do not disagree with you o’neill, although I think in the case of the provos, it is possible to launch an argument that having the party within the establishment, administering British rule and acknowledging the principle of consent (at least rhetorically) strengthens the Union in the case of Northern Ireland.


“2.The growth and development of English and “Ourselves Alone” Ulster nationalism.

Both forms of nationalism, whilst on the face of it less dangerous than their Celtic counterparts, have a bigger potential to destroy the unity of our nation.”
I’m afraid I am in complete agreement with you here.
“3.The performance and attitude of the Unionist Political Establishment in Scotland and Wales.”

Again, alas I agree completely.

“4.The Labour’s government’s obsession with defining and imposing their version of Britishness.”

The same.

Hen Ferchetan said...

Wait for it...I agree totally with your whole post (now that won't happen very often!). Of course I'm sure you have a very different opinion from me on whether damaging the Union is a good or a bad thing!

When I was younger (pre-1997) most of my friends, although wanting independence, thought it wouldn;t happen until we were long dead and burried. I always though otherwie, but I always think Wales will win ever rugby game and have been known to be wrong now and then on that regard ;-).

By now, most people I talk to assume that the break up of the Union is inevitable and will happen well within our generation's lifetime. While I know nothing is inevitable in politics, the massive change in people's opinions on what is possible is very significant. There's nothing that will prpell the break up of the union faster than a common acceptance that it's inevitable.

You mentioned the English independece movement. I've always thought that Wales will probably become independent at England's hands before it's own. With the Celts getting more and more confident and loud about self-determination, it was very predictable that many in England would notice their lack of power and would start moaning about paying for us (whether true or not).

Unknown said...

Devolution is inherently unstable - the devolved assemblies will always want more power so there will always be the potential for conflict with Westminster with each blaming the other for their troubles.

I realise you're an anti-Devolutionist, but I think it's too late, there's no going back.

So those who want the Union to continue should argue for the creation of a federal (or even confederal) Union with clearly delineated responsibilities divided between Westminster and the Devolved Assemblies.

I don't think it will happen though. I suspect that a majority across the UK would prefer for some form of United Kingdom to continue, but the politicians will be too stupid to do the only thing that would make it possible, i.e. the above.

We've reached a tipping point amongst English voters, never mind Scots. It's all downhill from here. Alec Salmond knows this and he also knows that his best chance is to subtly wind up both Scots AND the English until separation is inevitable. And his best chance is with England declaring an end to the Union - and if England keeps being ignored, dismissed and attacked that is exactly what will happen, and sooner than most people would expect.

Quite simply, we won't stand for being second class citizens in the Union for much longer.

Tourettes said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.