I said a while ago that I wanted to write about politics. Its taken me a while to come up with a good topic that’s not hugely controversial but isn’t really talked about often, but I think I finally may have found one: English devolution. Considering that some people see Brexit as a result of an English identity crisis, the issue of devolution in England is particularly pertinent at the moment. Before we can discuss the reasons why I think England should get some form of devolution and how English devolution could look, we briefly need to go look at the history devolution in the UK.

A (somewhat) Brief History of British Devolution

Devolution is where powers certain powers held by the central government are given to a subnational body. This might sound like federalism, like in India or the US, but there’s one key difference between devolution and federalism: devolved power can be revoked or suspended. To give an example of this, Congress cannot abolish the state government of, say, Texas and even if it did want to it would be an incredibly complicated process (which would require near unanimous support across the country). The British Parliament, however, could abolish the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly (which will be known as the Welsh Senedd/Welsh Parliament from some point in 2020), or the Northern Irish Assembly at any second. Thanks to the lack of a British constitution all that is required to reverse any constitutional change is an Act of Parliament. The extent to which abolishing a devolved legislature is politically viable is debatable, but there is precedent: the Northern Irish Assembly has been suspended relatively frequently when power-sharing collapses. That was a slight tangent, but now that we’ve established what devolution is we can look at it’s history in the United Kingdom.

The creation of the the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in 1800 was the culmination of hundreds of years of unions. What is now the UK was built by English expansion, firstly by conquering and annexing Wales, then by unifying with Scotland (the Treaty of Union 1707), and finally by unifying with Ireland (the Acts of Union 1800). England itself was made up of many kingdoms which were united by Alfred the Great in the 10th century. Whilst assimilation and integration took place in England, and to a lesser extent Wales, this process didn’t happen successfully in Ireland and Scotland. The incomplete process of assimilation and integration means that a unified British identity was never created and regional identities remained, which had consequences later down the line.

Devolution In Ireland

Almost as soon as Ireland entered into the union, people began to call for Irish Home Rule. Home Rule basically just means devolution, or the reestablishment of an Irish Parliament (such as that which had existed before the Acts of Union 1800). It’s probably worth noting that to Fenians, those who wanted an independent Irish Republic, Home Rule meant an independent Irish Republic. Anyway, the Home Rule League established by William Shaw with the goal of promoting self-government for Ireland within the United Kingdom. It very quickly began to do well in elections, winning 53 seats in 1874 and 63 in 1880. It’s next chairman, Charles Stewart Parnell, remade the League into the Irish Parliamentary Party (IPP) and continued to see increasing electoral success. By 1885 the IPP held 85 seats in Ireland (of a total of 103) and another in Liverpool (which had a large Irish emigrant community).

Liberal Prime Minister William Gladstone saw this success and committed himself to delivering Irish Home Rule. Under Gladstone two Irish Home Rule Bills were introduced. The first was defeated in the Commons and the second in the Lords (at this point the House of Lords had unlimited veto powers, which were reduced to a two-year veto in the Parliament Act 1911). The Home Rule Movement finally saw some success in 1898 with the passage of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, which established elected local government in Ireland.

For a time in the early 1910s it looked like Home Rule was going to be achieved. The December 1910 General Election ended up with both the Liberals and the Conservatives winning roughly 40% of the seats and the IPP winning 11%, so the IPP held huge bargaining powers. Liberal Prime Minister Asquith came to an agreement with the leader of the IPP that the Liberals would introduce a third Home Rule Bill if the IPP supported the passage of the Parliament Act 1911. The introduction of the Third Home Rule Bill was seen as a threat by Ulster Unionists, who founded the unionist paramilitary the Ulster Volunteers in 1912. In response the Irish Volunteers, a pro-independence paramilitary, was founded in the south. Despite this, the bill was passed and received Royal Assent (meaning the Queen signed it into law), with the intent to introduce it in September 1914. Unfortunately, the Great War broke out in late August, so the introduction of Home Rule was suspended.

John Redmond, the leader of the IPP, encouraged the Irish to enlist, assuming that this would ensure that Home Rule would be introduced when the war ended. Not all nationalists supported this strategy, with a group called the Irish Republican Brotherhood planning a insurrection. This eventually took place as the Easter Rising, which was crushed by the British Army. In the aftermath of the Easter Rising, mass arrests led to the public becoming disillusioned with the IPP. British attempts to introduce conscription in Ireland in 1918 furthered support for the Nationalist cause, leading to Sinn Féin winning 73 seats in Ireland (leaving the IPP with six seats). These MPs declared Irish independence, beginning the Irish War of Independence. This war ended with the partition of Ireland into the Irish Free State and Northern Ireland (which remained in the UK). At this point what we now know as the Republic of Ireland becomes an independent state (pretty much), so we’ll move on to looking at devolution in Northern Ireland.

Devolution in Northern Ireland

The Government of Ireland Act 1920 established a Northern Irish Parliament. The Parliament was dominated by Ulster Unionists, especially considering that most Nationalists refused to take their seats. Unionist dominance was compounded in 1929 when the Northern Irish Parliament replaced the Single Transferable Vote voting system with the First Past the Post system used in Westminster elections. Things started to change in the 1960s, when the position of Official Opposition was accepted by the Nationalists. As per usual, things didn’t last and the nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) withdrew from Stormont in 1971 and the Parliament was replaced by Direct Rule the following year.

I’m not going to go into great detail about the Troubles: they are quite complicated, I would probably need at least one post to explain them properly, and I really don’t feel knowledgeable enough about them, so I’ll focus on what happened in terms of devolution during this period. There were several attempts during the period to restore devolution, but they all failed due to the fact that the DUP and Sinn Féin were excluded from talks. Progress started to be made under John Major, who included Sinn Féin in peace talks, but was limited. Labour’s victory in 1997 saw peace talks being restarted, again including Sinn Féin (who proved their commitment to ending violence through six weeks of non-violence). These talks resulted in the Good Friday Agreement which, amongst other things, established a new Northern Ireland Assembly with an executive based on power-sharing between the two communities. 71% of Northern Irish voters approved of the agreement in a referendum in 1998.

The Assembly was suspended on several occasions, but elections held in the early 2000s continued and saw the moderate UUP and SDLP be overtaken by the DUP and Sinn Féin. The IRA’s continued disarmament and arms decommissioning led to talks between the two major parties, the UK, and the Republic of Ireland, which ended in the 2006 St Andrews Agreement. The agreement involved: Sinn Féin accepting the PSNI (the former Ulster Constabulary), the DUP agreeing to power-sharing with republicans, and restoring the assembly. In the 2007 election it came into effect, with a new power-sharing administration being established with Ian Paisley of the DUP (a unionist protestant reverend) and Martin McGuinness of Sinn Féin (an former IRA leader).

This new administration saw new powers being transferred to it in 2010, and was the first to last a full term. Things didn’t last though, and a scandal over a Renewable Heat Incentive scheme led to Stormont being suspended in 2017. This brings us up to today, where direct rule from Westminster continues. Talks between the DUP and Sinn Féin have resumed, but at the time of writing they haven’t led to anything. Brexit has presented a challenge to the Good Friday Agreement, which was reliant on the EU eliminating any Irish border. A hard Brexit could potentially see the return of violence in Northern Ireland, but hopefully the British government and the EU will be able to stop this happening.

Devolution in Scotland

Scotland was an independent state for a long time. In 1603 in was brought into a personal union with England under James VI of Scotland and I of England, and this became a full union 1707. Scotland’s separate identity survived through the existence of separate Scottish institutions like the Church of Scotland and a separate legal system. This separateness was legally recognised in 1885 with the re-establishment of the position of the Secretary of State for Scotland to deal with certain Scottish affairs. In 1928, this became a cabinet ministry and the Scottish Office was established. Over time, the remit of the Scottish Office was expanded to include things like: education, forestry, and health.

The campaign for Scottish Home Rule began soon after the campaign for Irish Home Rule. Gladstone (of the Liberal Party) committed to Scottish Home Rule after Irish Home Rule was granted. A Scottish Home Rule bill was introduced to Parliament in 1913, but it was interrupted by the war. Shortly after the foundation of the Scottish Office, in 1934, the Scottish National Party (SNP) was founded. Initially it was electorally unsucessful, but by the 1970s it was winning seats. Labour, feeling threatened by this, committed to Scottish devolution in its 1974 manifesto. A devolution referendum was held in Scotland in 1979, but it was lost due to a requirement for 40% of the Scottish electorate to vote yes. This failure brought down the Labour government, leading to 18 years of Conservative rule. Margret Thatcher’s policies (most notably the poll tax) eviscerated the Tory vote in Scotland, helping Labour come to power in 1997 under Tony Blair.

Blair’s policy involved constitutional reform in many areas, including devolution for Scotland. A referendum on Scottish devolution held in 1997 yielded 74.3% support for a Scottish Parliament (and 63.5% support for giving this assembly the ability to vary tax-rates), leading to the establishment of a Scottish Parliament through the Scotland Act 1998. The 1999 election left Scotland with a Labour-Lib Dem coalition, and held power until 2007 (despite Labour loosing seats to the Greens and Scottish Socialist Party in 2003) when it was replaced by a minority SNP government under Alex Salmond. Under Salmond the administration was renamed ‘the Scottish Government’. His goal of independence was undermined thanks to the fact that he was leading a minority government and the financial crash.

The SNP winning a majority of seats in the 2011 Scottish election gave them a mandate to run an independence referendum, which took place in 2014. The independence campaign lost (45% yes to independence, 55% no to independence), leading to the replacement of Salmond by Nicola Sturgon. Despite this (or perhaps because of this), the SNP won a landslide in the 2015 General Election, winning 56 of the 59 seats in Scotland. These two events led to the 2016 Scotland Act, which devolved further powers to the Scottish Parliament and recognised the Scottish Parliament as permanent. In the 2016 Scottish election the SNP lost their overall majority but remained in power (thanks to Scottish Green support).

Brexit has reinvigorated the independence campaign. Scotland voted to remain in the EU and one of the key arguments in the 2014 referendum was that Scotland would have to reapply for the EU if they became independent (and Spain wouldn’t allow this for Catalonia reasons). A recent survey found that support for independence has almost reached 50%, and a majority of Scots would prefer independence to a hard Brexit, so independence may be in sight. The issue with this is that a second independence referendum would require approval from Westminster, which is hardly likely at the moment.

Devolution in Wales

Whereas Scottish nationalism could be described as civic nationalism, Welsh nationalism is more of a cultural nationalism. Unlike in Scotland and Ireland, assimilation and integration took place from a much earlier stage, so Wales didn’t have any separate institutions. The English put a lot of energy into suppressing Welsh language and culture, so Welsh nationalism began as a movement to protect language and culture. The late 19th and early 20th century saw the foundation of several cultural instituions like the University of Wales, the Welsh Guards, and the National Eisteddfod. Plaid Cymru was founded in 1925, but failed to win widespread support, and a Welsh Office was founded in 1964 (although it had fewer powers than the Scottish Office).

In 1979 Wales was given a referendum on devolution, but only 11.8% of the electorate voted yes. The 1997 devolution referendum yielded a majority for yes, but it was by a very small majority. Turnout in the 1997 referendum was even lower than that of the 1979 referendum, with only 50% turnout (meaning only a quarter of the Welsh electorate voted for the assembly). This referendum allowed for the creation of the Welsh Assembly, which had much more limited powers than its Scottish counterpart. Through the Wales Acts 2014 and 2017, the assembly has gained more fiscal and legislative powers, with later act allowing for the National Assembly to change its name to the Welsh Parliament (or Welsh Senedd).

Welsh nationalism is still mostly based around culture, but support for the National Assembly has grown since it passed by such a narrow majority. According to an April 2019 Welsh Political Barometer, 52% of voters either support the Assembly in its current form or believe it should be given more powers, whilst only 15% think that the Assembly should be abolished. Support for independence hasn’t reached the same point as it has in Scotland, with only 12% of voters supporting independence (most of these are Plaid Cymru voters). Plaid also hasn’t had the electoral success of the SNP, with the party currently only holding 10% of the Welsh seats in Westminster, 10 of the National Assembly’s 60 seats, and one of Wales’ four seats in the European Parliament.

In terms of culture the Welsh Parliament has been more successful. By 2011, the number of Welsh speakers in Wales had fallen to 562,000 in 2011 (19% of the Welsh population), but since then it’s grown to 874,700 in 2018 (29.3% of the population). The Welsh government has a target of having 1 million Welsh speakers by 2050, which seems within reach if these trends continue. This growth can be seen as being down to policies such as the compulsory teaching of Welsh until the age of 16.

So, what about England?

Devolution for England has been an idea for about as long as Home Rule has been debated in the UK, but unlike in the other nations it never really took off. The first actual foray into English devolution took place under John Major with the creation of Government Office Regions for England, designed to coordinate government departments at a regional level. These were followed by English Regional Development Agencies (ERDA) set up in 1998 by Blair. Each of the ERDAs was supported by a Regional Assembly. These assemblies weren’t elected, instead being appointed by local government. The Coalition government abolished ERDAs in 2010.

As well as referendums on devolution in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, Blair held a referendum in 1998 on establishing an elected Greater London Authority, involving the Mayor of London and an Assembly to hold them accountable. This passed with 72% of the vote, but the vote only saw 34.1% turnout. This was followed by a referendum on devolution for the North East of England in 2004, which was rejected by 77.9% of voters in the region. This put a stop to any plans for devolution outside of London.

That’s of a very brief history of devolution, or perhaps a lack of devolution, in England, but I haven’t really explained why England needs devolution. The main argument for some form of English devolution is known as the West Lothian question. The essence of this issue is that a Scottish MP can vote on English matters, but an English MP cannot vote on Scottish matters. That essentially means that there are two classes of MPs at Westminster: MPs from Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, and MPs from England. Not only does this mean that certain MPs are more powerful than others, it also means that voters in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland (at least, when Stormont is sitting) are more powerful than voters in England, creating a democratic deficit between England and the rest of the UK.

Currently the solution to this is a system called English Votes for English Laws (EVEL). The essence of this system is that the speaker deems that a bill, or parts of a bill, only relate to England or England and Wales. Once this has happened it goes though the house normally until it reaches the committee stage, where it then passes onto either an England-only committee or a Legislative Grand Committee consisting of English and Welsh MPs (if parts of the bill impact both England and Wales). For the most part, this system has worked, but there are a couple of issues with it. Firstly, it can be difficult to deem what parts of a bill only relate to England or England and Wales, as even if a bill doesn’t have a direct impact on Scotland or Northern Ireland it could indirectly impact them (for example through the Barnett Formula). Another issue is that this is essentially a procedural solution to a constitutional issue.

So, if EVEL isn’t the solution to the West Lothian question, what is? For me, the best way to deal with the democratic deficit would be English devolution. There are various different ways that this could look, which I will explain in the next section.

What would English devolution look like?

There are two commonly proposed models of English devolution, both of which have advantages and disadvantages. The more obvious of these solutions is a single English Parliament, similar to the Scottish Parliament, with an English First Minister fulfilling a similar role to that of the Scottish First Minister. The creation of an English Parliament would need to be paired with reducing the powers of Westminster the number of English MPs there. The issue with a system like this is that it would be much more powerful than the other devolved assemblies, as it would represent many more people than all of the other devolved assemblies combined, and therefore would control more money and resources. A single English Parliament would also be dominated by the Tories, as they have tended to dominate English Politics.

The alternative, and more commonly suggested, method of English devolution involves the creation of regional assemblies. Blair and John Prescott both intended for this to happen until the 2004 referendum happened, which put the idea to rest. Regional assemblies would solve most of the problems with a single English Parliament. Unlike a single parliament, assemblies would hold similar levels of power to the existing devolved assemblies. Conservative dominance wouldn’t be possible in regional assembles, or at least would be less likely to happen outside of the South-East. Even within Tory strongholds like the South-East other parties would probably see an increase in their representation in these assemblies when compared to Parliament (assuming that these assemblies were elected by a proportional system), giving a voice to non-Tory voters in Tory strongholds.

Another advantage of regional assemblies would be that they could address issues specific to these regions. I touched on this in my Game of Thrones post, but a single unitary government can often find it difficult know of, and deal with, issues on the periphery. Whilst this would be lessened with an English Parliament, there would still be a risk that this parliament could be focused on the South-East. This raises the question of where the regional assemblies would be located, and where they would represent. Most proposals for a system like this suggest using nine or ten regions: the North East, the North West, Yorkshire and the Humber, the West Midlands, the East Midlands, the East of England, London, the South East, and the South West. These issues are contested by certain regions, who believe that they should be separate regions. Cornwall and Merseyside. Cornwall has its own distinct culture and identity, and even has a nationalist party, Mebryon Kernow (the Party for Cornwall), who have had some success at a local level. Merseyside is a slightly different question. Originally it was a region in its own right, but was merged with the North West region when Regional Development Agencies were created.

Although devolution for England would be great, in my mind it would only be truly effective if it was part of reforms to create a fully federal UK. There hasn’t been much mention of this as an option in discourse around the subject, but for me it would best for all parts of the union. My proposed federal system would consist of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and an England divided into the 11 regions outlined above. All of these regions would have devolved assemblies/parliaments with what is called ‘devo-max’ (giving regional assemblies full tax raising powers, of which some money would be sent to Westminster to cover UK-wide costs). The House of Lords would be replaced with a house containing an equal number of representatives from each of the 14 states (ideally the House of Commons would be reformed to make it more representative and suitable for the 21st century, but that’s an issue for another day). Parliament would also be moved away from London to somewhere more central (I’ve heard a lot of suggestions of where this could be, the most common being Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds), making it easier for MPs from all parts of the country to move between parliament and the constituancy they represent. Potentially the three crown dependencies of Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Mann could be included as federal states, but as they all have much smaller populations that the other federal states, perhaps they would send fewer representatives to the new upper house.

Conclusion/closing remarks

This was meant to be a quick easy post that I could use as a way to revise devolution, but as per usual it turned into a massive essay that was so much longer than I meant for it to be. I hope that in some way it was informative and interesting, because I really enjoyed writing it and plan on doing some more things like this in the future (maybe something about electoral reform or reform to the House of Commons would be cool).

Anyway, if you like my writing consider following my blog (I think that’s how it works, I’m not entirely sure). I also have various social medias which you can find linked to the blog. Since the last post I’ve made a Facebook page, but I’m much more active on Twitter and Instagram. Anyway, until next time!

Sources

‘Devolution’ in British Politics by Simon Griffiths and Robert Leach

‘Devolution in the UK’ in The Oxford Handbook of British Politics

‘Devolution’ in The Oxford Handbook of Modern British Political History

‘Home Rule’ Encyclopedia Britannica:

https://www.britannica.com/event/Home-Rule-Great-Britain-and-Ireland

‘Irish Home Rule: An Imagined Future’ BBC History (February 2011):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/home_rule_movement_01.shtml

YouGov/Times Survey (Scotland) (April 2019):

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/m2dto5pg87/TheTimes_190426_Scotland_VI_Trackers_bpc_upload1_w.pdf

Welsh Political Barometer (April 2019):

http://blogs.cardiff.ac.uk/electionsinwales/wp-content/uploads/sites/100/2019/05/April-2019.pdf

‘Census 2011: Number of Welsh Speakers Falling’ BBC News (December 2012):

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-20677528

”Encouraging’ survey suggests rise in Welsh language speakers’ BBC News (September 2018): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-45611374

‘Overwhelming vote for mayor’ BBC News (May 1998):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/london_referendum/89327.stm

‘North East votes ‘no’ to assembly’ BBC News (November 2004):

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3984387.stm

‘English Devolution – the options’ BBC News (November 2014):

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-29841830

‘Englishness Politicised? Unpicking the Normative Implications of the McKay Commission’ British Journal of Politics & International Relations (2015)

‘Scottish Independence: What is devo-max?’ The Independent (September 2014):

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-what-is-devo-max-9733931.html