Thursday Books: Devolution under a microscope
SCOTLAND AND WALES: NATIONS AGAIN? EDITED BY BRIDGET TAYLOR AND KATARINA THOMSON, UNIVERSITY OF WALES PRESS, pounds 39.95 DEVOLUTION IN THE UNITED KINGDOM BY VERNON BOGDANOR, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, pounds 8.99
We have come a long way since, as Kenneth O Morgan mentions, Victorian compilers of the Encyclopaedia Britannica could compose an entry which read "for Wales - see England". Yet support for the new National Assembly in Cardiff remained grudging, attracting a "yes" vote of just 50.3 per cent. Ron Davies is upfront about this: "By failing to mobilise support for the concept of an assembly beyond the circles of Labour in Wales, we failed to broaden support for it among the population at large and the decision to hold a referendum cruelly exposed that fact."
It also exposes the fact that, crudely, Wales may be less of a nation than Scotland. The crucial differences between Welsh and Scottish traditions, their contrasting civil societies, the distinct roles of religion and language, and differential attitudes to "Britishness" - too often ignored as the two nations are routinely lumped together for discussion - are well explored in this impressive collection.
What is equally applicable to Scotland and Wales, though, is Davies's insight that devolution will be not an event but a process. What is the process leading to? Well, it was supposed to lead to the dishing of the Nats. But, given that both the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru are about to become the official opposition in their respective nations, we could be forgiven for thinking that, so far from making the separatists irrelevant, devolution will afford them a loud voice. Welsh and Scots politics may be permanently disfigured by policies being debated in terms of the national issue and, in the Scottish case, by Quebec-style destabilisation as the SNP holds out the prospect of a referendum on independence.
The long-term stability of the devolution settlement is discussed in another timely contribution to the debate, by Vernon Bogdanor. There are, as he makes clear, few successful precedents for the experiment in constitution- making the Government is now embarked upon. In fact, much of his work is taken up with entertaining accounts of the long and unhappy history of attempts at devolution in Britain, principally the efforts of politicians, from Burke to Gladstone to Lloyd George, to achieve a workable scheme for keeping Ireland in the Union.
Such attempts have mostly been in the form of "asymmetrical devolution" where, as now, some parts of the UK were to enjoy different degrees of autonomy. But these, and more symmetrical German or US-style solutions (where all states have equal powers), always ran up against the same tensions. These came from the question of representation at Westminster; from the unbalanced basis for devolution when 85 per cent of the population live in England, a place with no political identity of its own; the feeble demand for regional assemblies in England; and tussles over money. The only province of the UK to experience a prolonged period of devolved government is the one part that never wanted it - Northern Ireland, from 1921 to 1972 an Orange statelet and an unhappy experience.
What does give grounds for limited optimism is the international experience of asymmetrical devolution. According to Bogdanor, in Spain, Belgium and Italy devolution has led not to break-up but to power-sharing. In Catalonia and the Basque country it has weakened the demand for independence. But this is not an inevitable outcome. Formal and informal mechanisms and a coalitionist culture exist to accommodate the inevitable problems.
Asymmetrical devolution works, in other words, where there is a will for it to work. Donald Dewar will settle differences with Tony Blair amicably enough. But imagine him - or the SNP leader Alex Salmond - dealing with an "ultra-low-tax" UK Tory administration led by Michael Portillo. If Portillo wanted, say, radical reform of welfare, then the Scots could simply reply: "Either this nonsense stops at the border, or we want out of the Union."
The absence of a will to balance the concepts of the supremacy of Westminster, with its "reserved powers", and of devolution itself would make separatism inevitable. What we have is not so much devolution, then, as a Scots insurance policy against the return of Thatcherism, secured on a local popular mandate. Scotland leaving the UK? It might take only a moment of madness.
Maisie Williams single-handedly rises to the challengeTV
Arts & Ents blogs
- 3 Russian girl takes her own life after parents find pornography on her computer
- 4 Ball pool for adults opens in London
- 5 Amal Clooney gives excellent response to fashion question at European Court of Human Rights
The Jump 2015 line-up: Joey Essex, Mike Tindall, Jodie Kidd and co take to the slopes
Game of Thrones: Grey Worm actor Jacob Anderson is all for more male nudity – as long as he can keep his clothes on
Roald Dahl letter warning student to 'eschew beastly adjectives' goes viral 35 years later
Martin Scorsese 'in shock and sorrow' after death on set of new film Silence
Sia apologises for 'Elastic Heart' music video that sees Shia LaBeouf wrestle 12-year-old Maddie Ziegler
9 reasons Greece's experiment with the radical left is doomed to failure
'We would evict Queen from Buckingham Palace and allocate her council house,' say Greens
Have we reached 'peak food'? Shortages loom as global production rates slow
Greece elections: Syriza and EU on collision course after election win for left-wing party
British grandmother Lindsay Sandiford faces execution by firing squad in Indonesia
Liberal Democrat minister defends comments suggesting immigration causes pub closures