• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Would federalism ever work in the UK

Status
Not open for further replies.

MattA7

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2019
Messages
473
Would separating the UK into 10-12 states with a federal government and state governments (Similar to The US) work for the UK. It would give each jurisdiction more control and Possibly reduce the risk of calamities such as Scottish independence.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,551
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Would separating the UK into 10-12 states with a federal government and state governments (Similar to The US) work for the UK. It would give each jurisdiction more control and Possibly reduce the risk of calamities such as Scottish independence.

I wouldn't support separating into 10 to 12 states. I would however support federalism based on our existing states, i.e. England, Scotland, Wales and NI, with London as a city state federal capital and a new English Parliament in Birmingham or Manchester.

Indeed, I think this is the last hope for the Union (but unlikely).
 

birchesgreen

Established Member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
5,045
Location
Birmingham
I would devolve power back to the traditional counties, each would have it's own assembly and also elect a number of senators depending on the county size. The Senate would be the overall parliament of the UK but mostly be involved with defence, international relations, major infrastructure.

Each assembly member would be the representative of whatever area replaces the constituencies. Each would also have an elected chamber to replace the councils.

It all gets quite complicated, i needed more than one fag packet to write it all down on.
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,352
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
Would separating the UK into 10-12 states with a federal government and state governments (Similar to The US) work for the UK. It would give each jurisdiction more control and Possibly reduce the risk of calamities such as Scottish independence.

I could possibly see this happening -after- devolved nations have successfully gained independence. Not before.
 

MattA7

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2019
Messages
473
B4442470-61A0-4A52-BDCD-82789E7BBC2A.jpeg

this seems the most common Idea of a federalism in the UK. England is presumably separated due to is larger size and population in comparison to the rest of the UK. in addition to the fact political views/opinions often vary in different parts of England
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,551
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
That was the EU's proposal, which would presumably very-long-term have seen them as separate states within the EU, and while I'm not a Leave voter makes so little sense that any realistic prospect of it would have certainly caused me to vote Leave.
 

Domh245

Established Member
Joined
6 Apr 2013
Messages
8,426
Location
nowhere
which would presumably very-long-term have seen them as separate states within the EU, and while I'm not a Leave voter makes so little sense that any realistic prospect of it would have certainly caused me to vote Leave.

That seems a bit out-there as a suggestion? Are there similar plans afoot for the German federal states to become independent within the EU in the way you suggest, or the French regions?
 

LSWR Cavalier

Established Member
Joined
23 Aug 2020
Messages
1,565
Location
Leafy Suburbia
Federalism seems to work very well in Germany, there are 16 regional parliaments each with its own burocracy
The states vary a lot in size/population and wealth

Would 50 States like in the US be too many? One hopes Fair Votes could be introduced. Last time Clinton got more votes, but Trump won
 
Last edited:

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,973
I wouldn't support separating into 10 to 12 states. I would however support federalism based on our existing states, i.e. England, Scotland, Wales and NI, with London as a city state federal capital and a new English Parliament in Birmingham or Manchester.

Indeed, I think this is the last hope for the Union (but unlikely).

The problem with 4 states is that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will demand parity with England. SNP have propose an elected replacement to House of Lords with equal representation. Why would England with 86% of the population ever accept an English vote having much less value?

I think Scottish independence and a United Ireland were inevitable and Brexit has only brought it forward a bit. The Welsh reality will be that they have a population equal to Greater Manchester. Being put on the same level as an English city wouldn't be tolerable.
 

adrock1976

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
4,450
Location
What's it called? It's called Cumbernauld
I am in favour of progressive federalism for Great Britain (I base this on the assumption that the six out of the nine counties that make up Ulster are returned to Ireland).

Scotland can be based on the eight regions with the former Regional Councils reinstated, likewise the same for Wales. England can be based on the existing European Parliament Regions, with the former Metropolitan County Councils of West Midlands, Merseyside, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, and Tyne & Wear reinstated. Gibraltar can still remain a part of England's South West Region if it wants to (unsure as Gibraltar, alongside Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain as members of the EU)

The federal Parliament would be based in Birmingham, so as not to be perceived as too remote from the mainland of Great Britain. Elections would be as follows:

Years ending in 0 and 5: General Elections
Years ending in 1 and 6: Local council elections
Years ending in 2 and 7: County Council/Scotland Regional Council elections
Years ending in 3 and 8: Regional Assemblies, Scottish Parliament, and Welsh Sennedd elections
Years ending in 4 and 9: European Parliament elections (should Great Britain decides to remain or rejoins at a later date)

All of the elections would have a voting system based on proportional representation. For elected members to take up their elected position, their allegiance would be to the electorate and not the monarchy.

Eligibility to stand in any election the candidate would have to have resided for at least five years in the constituency before being considered for selection. This would give the candidate a good understanding of their area and would avoid the parachuting in of candidates into areas they have little knowledge of (e.g. Gorgeous George Galloway falling out with people he works with and turns up as a candidate in areas he has little knowledge of. Also Esther McVey being given the boot from Wirral West in 2015, then turning up in Tatton a couple of years later).

Any incumbent members who get booted out by the electorate will be ineligible to stand for a different election. They would be allowed to stand again in the same type of election that they lost five years later (e.g. unseated at a General Election, it would be the next General Election five years later before becoming eligible to stand again). This would get rid of the careerist politicians who are only in it for themselves (e.g. in the Shettleston area of Glasgow, which has the dubious honour of having the highest amount of bookies and off licences per head of population, Frank McAveety always seems to get booted out of office when being a local councillor, stands for and gets in as an MSP, gets booted out, stands for local council and gets in, gets booted out, stands as an MSP and so on and so forth).

Any incumbent member is found to have caused an act of misconduct while serving office will trigger an automatic by-election. This will give the electorate the chance to decide if they want their incumbent representative to continue in office, or get booted out. For example, the Basingstoke MP Maria Miller was caught with her fingers in the till, and instances of misconduct like this would trigger an automatic by-election.

I did remember starting a thread in this section a couple of years ago on the topic of progressive federalism, and rather than me making a lengthy post even more lengthier, I will leave this post here for the time being.
 

MattA7

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2019
Messages
473
Are the Channel Islands and Isle of Man considered part of the UK? I know those from the Channel Islands and Isle of Man are British citizens just the same as those on the UK mainland (as are those from Gibraltar, Bermuda etc)

I guess in a hypothetical federal UK they would become territories with a similar arrangement to what peurto Rico Is with the US. Puerto Rico has its own government, constitution and tax etc however the US oversees defense and immigration. peurto ricans are also full US citizens.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,973
Yes demographics alone would see to it eventually. I think it could well happen in my lifetime and definitely after Brenda passes.

2021 census will likely show a Catholic majority. I think the biggest shift has been English voters being prepared to risk the union for brexit. Its funny watching people who weren't keen on the union keep warning brexiteers that brexit will end the union because they think its a weak spot. In reality England is 86% (and growing) of the union, so most don't care if the other bits leave. The anger over Northern Ireland protocol is over having to implement EU laws and controls, most brexiteers wouldn't care if Northern Ireland voted for Irish unity in a referendum.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,807
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
My brother is a staunch brexiteer and would be glad to see the back of Scotland never mind Northern Ireland. But yes, I think NI is now a foregone conclusion to leave the union. I think our (UK) relationship with Ireland will actually improve once this happens.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,973
My brother is a staunch brexiteer and would be glad to see the back of Scotland never mind Northern Ireland. But yes, I think NI is now a foregone conclusion to leave the union. I think our (UK) relationship with Ireland will actually improve once this happens.

79% of Conservative supporters in proper opinion poll in the summer agreed with statement that brexit was worth losing Scotland and Northern Ireland. Having to a absorb most of the 850,000 unionists would no doubt significantly change Irish society and identity and remove a source of ongoing tension.

England is too big to be a state in a federal UK and any division would be difficult and lack widespread support. One obvious state would be Northern England (North West, North East and Yorkshire and Humberside EU regions shown on the map in post 6). Unfortunately while there is a northern identity the very tribal town and county rivalries would likely scupper any proposals. It would also be labelled as Manchester rule.
 

MattA7

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2019
Messages
473
According to two feb 2020 polls it appears most in NI still want to remain in the union although opinion polls can be miss leading.
 

GRALISTAIR

Established Member
Joined
11 Apr 2012
Messages
7,807
Location
Dalton GA USA & Preston Lancs
I can see the DUP adopting a certain record title of the Strawbs, with newly acquired NI-style words to fit.
You don’t get me I am part of the Union. With a helluva shout its out brothers out —-

According to two feb 2020 polls it appears most in NI still want to remain in the union although opinion polls can be miss leading.
Referendum in the next few years possibly?
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,973
According to two feb 2020 polls it appears most in NI still want to remain in the union although opinion polls can be miss leading.

Referendum in the next few years possibly?

A NI referendum could be a way of delaying a second Scottish referendum by a year "you have had one, let Northern Ireland have a go". SNP would never support running them in parallel. A no vote would send a strong message to the rest of the world (particularly EU and US) and a yes vote would remove a problem for Britain and make us stronger, not weaker. The results in May will likely show nationalists parties receiving more votes than the unionists and open up the argument.

A referendum would cause immense upheaval in both parts of Ireland. The republic does not have a plan for unity, which their current PM is trying to address but it is too toxic. Either Ireland won't change at all and try to annex the north, replacing its laws and public services, it keeps devolution or it goes for a unitary state but makes symbolic concessions to unionists e.g. rejoining the Commonwealth (they left in 1949).

I would like to see federalism in England and I hope Wales can be persuaded to stay with us but there is no chance Scotland will accept parity with English regions and England is too big to be one state within a federal UK. The current level of Welsh devolution could work well for the English regions, anything more would be too much of a cultural change. People in England would need to stop looking to Westminster every time there is a problem and look to Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol etc.
 

mikeg

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2010
Messages
1,744
Location
Selby
I too am for a federal settlement, but am unsure as to how people will take England being carved up. Of course it doesn't have to be that way, countries have had federal settlements with a dominant state before. The former Czechoslovakia is an example, with just two constituent countries, one was a lot larger than the other but it largely worked well, both pre- and post- Velvet revolution. It's often said that many wondered why Czechoslovakia was broken up at the time.

But what I'd do for the UK is have London as the UK capital, with its own federal status, enhancing on the limited devolution it has now and have an English parliament for the rest of us in, say Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds. For many English, London is a world apart, and political structure should reflect this. It would also make the federation that little bit more balanced.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,424
Has there even been a federalisation of a unitary State?
All the major ones I can think of were formed by uniting different states, even if those were different states under one overall empire.
Federalising England would be a nightmare - look how difficult it has been to create unitary authorities and combined authorities. Even areas with a seemingly strong allegiance such as Yorkshire descend into internecine battles and jealousies, with the fear of remote Westminster rule just being replaced by remote rule from a city they don’t like.
 

mikeg

Established Member
Joined
20 Apr 2010
Messages
1,744
Location
Selby
Has there even been a federalisation of a unitary State?

Yes, can't think of any that held together long term though: Czechoslovakia was unitary for most of its existence. It became federal around 1970ish if memory serves me right. Yugoslavia was originally a unitary state too, though one which was comprised of multiple nationalities (not too different from the UKin that sense) and later became federal.

Incidentally, was Belgium once unitary?
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,973
Yes, can't think of any that held together long term though: Czechoslovakia was unitary for most of its existence. It became federal around 1970ish if memory serves me right. Yugoslavia was originally a unitary state too, though one which was comprised of multiple nationalities (not too different from the UKin that sense) and later became federal.

Incidentally, was Belgium once unitary?

Yes it was (and prior to that it was in a union with Netherlands and Luxembourg).

England as a state within a federal UK won't work. It is 5/6ths of the population and would dominate any democratic structure by its sheer size. English voters won't accept English parity of representation with member states with populations that are tiny in comparison. That leaves federalising England or 4 independent countries. EU membership for a United Ireland, Scotland and Wales might take the edge off English dominance but wouldn't stop England from simply reducing ties when it doesn't get its own way. Just look at Brexit, Ireland's diplomatic effort has been exceptional but it hasn't prevented its politics and national situation being dominated for 4 years by an Anglo-Welsh project. England on its own will be the British state, its interests and policies just 1/6th smaller. There is a lot of wishful celtic nationalist thinking on England being diminished, rejoining the EU etc. The nukes would be moved to Plymouth, there is no legal mechanism to stop England inheriting the UKs UN Security Council seat, its treaties etc. Splitting England up within a federal UK is the only way to have a balanced UK.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,973
Were not both of what are now Germany and Italy once comprised of autonomous kingdoms/states?

Yes but no state dominated to the extent England dominates the UK. Even Prussia only accounted for the minority of Germany's population, even directly before unification. Next year's census will show an English population of 57-58m, growing at approximately 400,000 a year. The rest of the UK is about 10m people with tiny growth, the gap is getting bigger in both absolute and relative terms.
 

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
Would separating the UK into 10-12 states with a federal government and state governments (Similar to The US) work for the UK. It would give each jurisdiction more control and Possibly reduce the risk of calamities such as Scottish independence.
The UK is far too small to have multiple states IMO.
I would however support federalism based on our existing states, i.e. England, Scotland, Wales and NI, with London as a city state federal capital and a new English Parliament in Birmingham or Manchester.
This is the better option but IMO the system we have now is better because in the US, unlike where the party/coalition in charge usually have control over everything, the house is run by one party and the senate by another.
 

Chester1

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2014
Messages
3,973
The UK is far too small to have multiple states IMO.

This is the better option but IMO the system we have now is better because in the US, unlike where the party/coalition in charge usually have control over everything, the house is run by one party and the senate by another.

Germany has 16 states with a population about 20% larger than UK. US states have an average population of just under 7 million. 7-9 English States + Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland would be directly comparable. 5-7 million is an optimal level for good governance, states and countries that size do tend to be well run.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top