Would federalism ever work in the UK

[Starmill]

“Most people would consider fairer”
So ‘hard working Londoners‘ getting to keep more of their money and ‘workshy northerners’ having to work harder or get worse services as transfers are reduced.
Unless you are expecting a surprising outbreak of altruism - if that altruism already exists how do you explain repeated voting for an austerity government?

This is complete nonsense. I've explained three times it would likely trade off money going to Scotland and Northern Ireland in exchange for increased constitutional authority. Purportedly this is what voters in those areas want? The position in England would be more similar to what an effective 'levelling up' agenda would see, which looks popular all round. Finally it would increase the visibility for the value of tax increases, making it easier for local politicians to sell sustainable public spending.

Your point about division and bitterness suggests that the only person who would be bitter or seek to create division over such an arrangement would be you?

If your argument were true people would be demanding zero tax nationwide and to funs their own services themselves according to their own use. Absolutely nobody would want that l.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Please, what does London produce, manufacture, grow? I understand Brompton cycles are made there, what about machines, furniture, clothes and especially food?
..
The hardest workers must be farmers, not many of them in the Metropolis

 

[Chester1]

That sounds simple but does it really work as it means the English voters have to vote for one party even if they like the Liberal‘s English policies and Labour‘s UK policies - if they aren’t voted for separately then what’s the gain?

I doubt the electoral system for England would survive the first time the Tories lost a majority of English seats for that reason and some top up English parliament only seats would be added. If confederation happened during a Tory government they would no doubt choose the electoral system for English and UK parliaments that favoured them most i.e. the current one.

There wouldn't be enough work for separate members of parliament in an extremely loose union. A large proportion of House of Commons time is already spent on devolved issues, a large proportion of the rest is on stuff that I am proposing to devolve. A UK parliament in this situation would be more suited to being members from the 4 national parliaments getting together once a month and for emergency sittings.

 

[Meerkat]

This is complete nonsense. I've explained three times it would likely trade off money going to Scotland and Northern Ireland in exchange for increased constitutional authority. Purportedly this is what voters in those areas want? The position in England would be more similar to what an effective 'levelling up' agenda would see, which looks popular all round. Finally it would increase the visibility for the value of tax increases, making it easier for local politicians to sell sustainable public spending.

i don’t understand your first sentence - are you saying Northern voters would be happy with less money if they had theoretically more local power over how it is spent?
The majority keep voting for less tax and austerity - why would the South vote to give the northmore money all of a sudden?

I doubt the electoral system for England would survive the first time the Tories lost a majority of English seats for that reason and some top up English parliament only seats would be added. If confederation happened during a Tory government they would no doubt choose the electoral system for English and UK parliaments that favoured them most i.e. the current one.

There wouldn't be enough work for separate members of parliament in an extremely loose union. A large proportion of House of Commons time is already spent on devolved issues, a large proportion of the rest is on stuff that I am proposing to devolve. A UK parliament in this situation would be more suited to being members from the 4 national parliaments getting together once a month and for emergency sittings.

Having the same people as English and UK MPs would create lots of weirdness. For example Scotland wouldn’t be happy with Boris being English PM and UK PM, but it would be irrational to prevent that if it was the same party leaders of the same MPs.

 

[Starmill]

i don’t understand your first sentence

I'm not sure we're going to get anywhere in that case.

The only thing that's for sure is that the status quo will not last long.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Possibly a case of setting a national standard but delivering more locally?

Which is basically how the NHS works now - not in the hands of incompetent Councils, but local NHS trusts.

 

[edwin_m]

Which is basically how the NHS works now - not in the hands of incompetent Councils, but local NHS trusts.

But it's the councils that have done better on track and trace than the centrally-controlled NHS system. I strongly suspect local government would be far more effective if given the powers and the funding, but as it is it is constantly being throttled by the centre.

 

[Meerkat]

But it's the councils that have done better on track and trace than the centrally-controlled NHS system. I strongly suspect local government would be far more effective if given the powers and the funding, but as it is it is constantly being throttled by the centre.

councils got the easier ones to trace didnt they? But this is probably wandering off topic

 

[Starmill]

But it's the councils that have done better on track and trace than the centrally-controlled NHS system.

Anyone would think one management for whole of England would quickly become overwhelmed by both the scale and scope of the tasks, and that if the same resources had just been given to the existing local authorities who already know their area in the first place, it would have worked out better? Of course after a major government u turn this is now what's happening...

 

[birchesgreen]

It might be a bit conspiracy theory-esque but i think local government is rubbish by design. The centre doesn't want good local government due to it's desire to centralise everything. Anyone good /ambitious sees Westminster as where its at not, say, Brum City Council.

 

[edwin_m]

councils got the easier ones to trace didnt they? But this is probably wandering off topic

I think they got the more difficult ones that couldn't be sorted out in the number of minutes that Serco had decided each call would need. Rather like the private health providers look good by making sure all the difficult cases stay with the NHS.

It might be a bit conspiracy theory-esque but i think local government is rubbish by design. The centre doesn't want good local government due to it's desire to centralise everything. Anyone good /ambitious sees Westminster as where its at not, say, Brum City Council.

I suspect that's probably true, certainly from the Tory side and probably Labour too to some extent. Thatcher shut down the metropolitan county councils and the Greater London Council because they were centres of political power that she couldn't control, and the Cameron/Osborne austerity programme disproportionately targeted grants to local authorities in the hope that someone else would get the blame for the resulting cuts. Against that there was some limited devolution of powers to city regions, on the condition they adopted elected mayors who would be handy scapegoats if something went wrong. Which is a shame considering, for example, the works done by Birmingham City Council before WW2.

 

[Meerkat]

I think they got the more difficult ones that couldn't be sorted out in the number of minutes that Serco had decided each call would need. Rather like the private health providers look good by making sure all the difficult cases stay with the NHS.

As I read it Serco got the random positive test cases and were left ringing round lots of people who don’t want to pick up the phone, whereas the councils got cases that were in workplaces etc where the list of contacts and a way of getting hold of them were pretty easy

 

[Cowley]

I’m not sure if this has much to do with the original topic now.
Could we stick to that please?
Thank you.

 

[krus_aragon]

The current level of Welsh devolution could work well for the English regions, anything more would be too much of a cultural change.

That might be a bit too much, given that it now includes law making powers as well as limited tax-varying powers. Some people may prefer something closer to the original Welsh devolution settlement (plus or minus regional mayorships, police commissioners, etc), rather that have the law of Northumberland being different to the law of Lincolnshire or Essex.