Now
arrived at a point where there is constitutional and governance chaos in the UK
The English peoples, and rightly in my view, feel
hard done by as the implications and consequences of the significant devolution
process over twenty years slowly but surely moves towards a federal structure.
I do not intend going back over the journey since the late 1990s, or even
before that, but suffice it to say that we have now arrived at a point where
there the constitutional and governance arrangements for the UK are chaotic.
There are different systems of government and different systems of voting.
The unplanned devolution journey and the panic
caused at Westminster by the Scottish referendum elicited David Cameron’s
promise of EVEL. Unfortunately, what
seemed a straight forward matter of ensuring that on bills or issues applying
to England only English MPs should vote was not that straightforward. Yes it
appeared democratic and fair in principle, but it was never going to be as
straight forward as that. For instance many bills that seem to apply only to
England have implications for Wales and Scotland in particular. Hence rushing
through ill-thought out proposals at the end of the summer really was no way of
dealing with such a major constitutional change.
Under the proposals, if a law relates to matters
devolved to other countries in the UK, then English MPs would have taken part
in two new stages of considering legislation. The first would take the form of a grand committee
in which only English MPs—or English and Welsh MPs—would be able to vote on
legislation relating to their nations before the third reading of a bill. The
second stage would come after the bill has passed through the Lords, when it
would have to be approved by a double majority of all MPs as well as English
MPs, or English and Welsh MPs.
It would be the Speaker, John Bercow, who would
ultimately determine whether the proposed bill under consideration relates to
citizens across the UK, English constituencies, or English and Welsh
constituencies. That poses considerable problems in relation to the traditional
role of the Speaker as a defender of MPs rights and those of Parliament itself.
But another point has also arisen and it relates to
the Barnett formula which governs the allocation of spending in the four
nations of the UK. What happens if decisions about English matters actually have
a financial knock-on effect in Scotland and Wales?
As far as Wales is concerned, there are other
possible wider public service implications such as the cross border patient
movement for treatment in relation to the National Health Service. Mind you, someone
living in west Cheshire or along the border have no say how the health service
in Wales is run by the Welsh Government, even though they may receive treatment
or use a GP service based in Wales.
It is not only opposition parties and MPs that are
critical of the proposals, making comments such as ‘constitutional outrage’,
‘pandering to English nationalism’, ‘populist’ and that the plans are ‘reckless
and shoddy’ for instance. Tory MPs are concerned too with statements made such
as ‘the UK hangs by a thread’, ‘the Union is at stake’ and that there are
‘major constitutional issues.’
The way the matter has been handled by the Prime
Minister from the beginning has been woeful and shambolic. The future of the
Union is without doubt on the line. Somehow EVEL will have to be sorted out,
but in a planned and constitutionally proper way—then there is the spectre of
another possible Scottish Independence referendum on the horizon and what of
the upcoming European Referendum? I have little doubt that the voters of Wales
and Scotland will vote to stay in the European Union. What happens if England
votes differently?
I have been a strong advocate for a federal
structure to the governance of the UK since the 1970s. My family come from a
Labour/Liberal tradition and there was a time when both were ‘home rule’
parties. The only way through this chaos is to establish a Constitutional
Convention whose membership would need proper and fair representation and it
should be required to report by the end of 2017. This is not rocket science—
everything that needs to be written has been researched and published since the
days of the Crowther/Kilbrandon Royal Commission of the
early 1970s.
Devolving administrative and decision-making powers
from Westminster and Whitehall has been such a painful experience for the
political and civil service establishment for three-quarters of a century. The
end result has been a haphazard, unplanned and piecemeal approach that has
landed the Union in this chaotic situation. As Pete Wishart a senior SNP Member
of Parliament said ‘what is being created is a quasi-English Parliament in the
unitary parliament of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland’. I believe
the English should have their parliament but this is not the way to do it.