There was an interesting debate on the Union over on Andrew Gwynne's blog earlier tonight. Andrew is a decent Labour MP (yes, there are quite a few!) who writes an honest and thoughtful account of himself and his views both on the blog and via twitter.
The Union being debated was not the kind that boilermakers and railwaymen join (before the humourless Labourites pounce on me here, I am joking! I myself am and have been a Trade Union member throughout my working life), but the far greater Union of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
It didn't really surprise me when I saw that Andrew Gwynne had launched a full-on defence of the Union on his blog under the equally unsurprising but somewhat provoking title "For England & St George!" This call to arms from the Labourite was not welcomed by the forces of "Little England", those opposed to Great Britain and the political Union of the United Kingdom. For the English Parliamentarians clarion cry was not for England, England but rather for why England should remain proud of its position within the UK.
I, for one, agree. The fact that I, a liberal Conservative Parliamentary Candidate (a "Liberal Unionist" as Mr Worthing rather nervously described himself to the stern Lady Bracknell in Wilde's "Importance of Being Earnest") in agreement with a centrist Labour MP on this vital constitutional question shows how vital this issue is.
I also write as one who chose to make Wales my home back in 1994. I am English, but Welsh in so many of my outlooks these days. I am proud that my father's father was a coalminer in Wales and fought at Dunkirk and during the D-Day landings under the badges of Welsh regiments. I am a local councillor and now a Parliamentary Candidate within Wales and hope to be representing a Welsh constituency after the general election. I remain as committed to Wales remaining a part of the United Kingdom as I am for England to continue to invest in the importance of maintaining this special bond between the four constituent nations.
The comments left on Andrew Gwynne's blog from the Little Englanders appeared to be mostly just emotional piffle, more telling of their own view of themselves in the world as about the state of the nation of England. Most English people get on with their lives, are industrious, open and fair minded. They are glad that the Union with Scotland (and the much older coupling with Wales), as well as the continuing importance of Northern Ireland, gives our Sovereign Nation State of the United Kingdom a total far greater than the sum of its parts – whether in terms of economic prosperity, international significance, a proud military tradition and a diverse cultural mix.
England, by far the most populous nation in the UK, is secure both in its own existence and its role in the family of nations in the British Isles. Due to its size, it does not need the special recognition afforded to both Wales and Scotland, with their (albeit diminished) existence at the Cabinet table. England feels no real need to adopt "regional assemblies" and there is no popular movement for any form of English Parliament. The self-confidence and strength of the English nation is shown through its rejection of petty nationalism and tribal delinquency. England is a mature nation, having decided long ago to move beyond its borders and create a Great Britain and a United Kingdom.
The success of the UK as a collection of uniquely individual and often competing (not just on the sports field) nations is a wonder to behold, especially given the sad experiences in other parts of the globe when experiments to hold nations together within a sovereign state collapse into anarchy and warfare. That is the key with the United Kingdom. Whilst its creation at times owed more to the sword than the ballot box, it is the consent of the peoples of these islands that holds the Union together now and in the future.
.jpg)
Posts
9 comments:
England certainly 'feels no need to adopt 'regional assemblies'', as you say, Rene, but regionalisation is, sadly, the 'settled will' of the Labour party as far as England is concerned. The charade of regional committees of MPs will no doubt continue if Labour stays in power. The Labour party does not believe in democracy. Do you?
I'm sorry you had a swipe at 'Little Englanders' and 'petty nationalism'. You will know that the term goes back to the last quarter of the 19th century when it was used to describe those (mainly Liberal) MPs who opposed the expansion of the British empire - and the term even included one Welshman, possibly the greatest Welshman ever, David Lloyd George.
The alternative to Little England is Greater England and as you live in Wales you will appreciate that Wales is part of the English empire in Britain. Neither Edward 1 nor Henry VIII offered the Welsh a referendum on their incorporation into the British state. TheIrish had no choice either. There was certainly a parliamentary agreement between England and Scotland in 1707 but it was opposed by many people northa and south of the border.
There is nothing 'petty' about Welsh, Scottish or English nationalism, except to a Greater Englander. Each of the British nations is entitled to be proud of its national heritage. Each remains a people and this includes the 'mature' English. Each is entitled, if it wishes, to leave the Union (Article 1, International Covenant on Civil & Political Rights, 1976). The consent of the people to the continuance of the Union has never been given and has never been tested. It is not satisfactory, post 1998, to say that the people have voted for Unionist parties. They each have the 'sovereign right to determine the form of government that best suits their needs' (Claim of Right for Scotland 1985).
If you believed in democracy you would let the people decide - and that could strengthen the Union. Or are you afraid they would vote for independence?
"I am English, but Welsh in so many of my outlooks these days. I am proud that my father's father was a coalminer in Wales and fought at Dunkirk and during the D-Day landings under the badges of Welsh regiments. I am a local councillor and now a Parliamentary Candidate within Wales and hope to be representing a Welsh constituency after the general election."
I suppose that your stated pride in your Welsh heritage and your aspirations to becoming the MP for a Welsh constituency are not unconnected. It gets so tiresome, this litany of English people reeling off their non-English British ancestral credentials, and saying how proud they are of them and of the 'British nation', but never how proud they are of their English origins and identity. Andrew Gwynne's post, to which you refer, does exactly the same thing. We can all do that: my maternal grandmother was Welsh, my mother was brought up in and considers herself Welsh (despite having lived in England for most of her life) and my paternal grandmother was Irish. But I was born and brought up in England, and consider myself to be English and am proud of that. Does that make me a Little Englander? If so, you must be a Little Britisher, and everyone who's proud of their Scottish or Welsh ancestry is a Little Scottisher or Little Welsher. The very idiocy of these terms illustrates how stupid it is to trade in petty insults towards those who seek to stand up for English identity and democracy.
You say, "there is no popular movement for any form of English Parliament", and yet in opinion polls, the option of an EP obtains consistently more support than the constitutional status quo. I suppose it suits you to dismiss the significance of things like the West Lothian Question and the Barnett Formula. If the Conservatives need the support of their non-English MPs to pass their England-only legislation in the next parliament, I guess you'll be happy to oblige, particularly if it ensures that your Welsh constituents continue to get a better deal than the English. But tell me one thing: why, if this is a Union, would most of your parliamentary activities not even directly affect the country in which you were elected but only the largest, and supposedly most powerful, nation in the land?
And another thing: is Britain a nation state or a state of four nations? You say both. Perhaps the muddle is needed for you to feel entitled to meddle in English matters.
Partial devolution is threatening the Union. If you want to split the UK just give three nations generous welfare provisions and get one nation to pay for it (and put up with a second class health/education service).
We urgently need to create a level playing field and the only way to do that is either a) reverse the devolution process to pre-1998 levels, or b) devolve power to the County Councils (or Regional Assemblies) or c) create a Parliament for England that matches the powers held by Hollyrood.
The first is untenable, the second is demonstrably unpopular (see North East referendum), so that leaves us with an English Parliament.
You are wrong to claim there is no demand for an English Parliament. Here are the facts...
The BBC poll 1 “should England have its own Parliament?” (61% said “Yes”)
The Telegraph poll 2 “England should have a Parliament with powers similar to the Scottish Parliament” (68% said “yes”).
Regionalisation Referendum the North East said “no” (78% against) 3
Almost two thirds in England want Scotland to leave the Union altogether 4
1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6264823.stm
2 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/26/nunion26.xml
3 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3984387.stm
4 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/26/nunion26.xml
To use your words "If you believed in democracy you would let the people decide - and that could strengthen the Union. Or are you afraid they would vote for"... and English Parliament.
PS nice use of the phrase "little Englander", ever used such disparaging phrase to describe the Welsh or Scots (don't bother answering, I already know).
Quite right too!!
How dare those johnny Englanders disagree with your opinion that they have no right to the kind of national representation you're quite happy to hypocritically support for Wales.
English people (like women) should know their place.
I'd sooner be a Little Englander than a Wee Jock or Titchy Taff.
Devolution has proven there is no sane reason for the English to remain in a Union with the Scots and Welsh.
stephengash, it's really not helpful to the English cause if you go around calling people jocks and taffs.
Stephen Gash is from the far-right group 'Stop the Islamification of Europe'. His English nationalism is based on spitefulness against Wales and Scotland.
There should be a progressive English nationalism that is non-racist, supports Wales and Scotland and aspires to have devolution as an ally of them. Nationalists in Wales and Scotland would support an English nationalism that showed solidarity and was anti-Britain.
Some English Home Rulers are shooting themselves in the foot by couching their legitimate English Parliament demands in anti-Scottish or anti-Welsh rhetoric. It is a mentality that is more reminiscent of the British Empire than of Englishness.
My position, as a Welsh nationalist, is that the people of England should be free to determine their own national future through an English Parliament, as a sovereign and independent nation. I am sure they would be our closest ally and we should share an open border and a number of mutual partnerships.
Illtyd Luke, I think Stephen Gash was responding to the author's snide remark "The comments left on Andrew Gwynne's blog from the Little Englanders appeared to be mostly just emotional piffle..."
There are plenty of people in the Welsh and Scottish nationalist movement whose views are based upon spitefulness against England. You're bound to have a few of them in all camps.
I prefer a grown up argument and the case for constitutional and fiscal equality for England is so overwhelming; I'm pleased to say I've not had to resort to such name calling as exhibited by the author, or retorted by Stephen Gash.
@ Illtyd Luke
If we are forced to use antiquated terms like "far right" please answer this question, that so far nobody has been able to answer. Is stoning a woman to death for being raped "left wing" or "right wing"? How about beheading somebody for leaving Islam, is that extreme or normal behaviour? How about hanging homosexuals just because they are homosexual?
As for spite, the whole British establishment is motivated by spite against the English. Scotland's national sport is hating the English. They openly despise the English having Anglophobic jokes in children's pantomimes. Even a Scottish cleryman said "it couldn't happen to a nicer people" when floods in England were happening.
If similar remarks against the Scots are made, they whine "racist" like ill-tuned bagpipes (are there any other?).
I am not anti-Scot or anti-Welsh, I am anti-anti-English. However, please tell me what there is to like about the Scots and Welsh. I've not seen one 'Celtic' MP stand up and say the English are getting a rough deal from devolution. Not even from the plethora of 'Celts' in Westminster allegedly representing English constituencies.
I want independence for England because I see no value to the English in remaining in the UK or EU. Indeed, relations between the four nations (although the British do not recognise England as a nation, but merely a collection of regions) would improve immensely if we were independent.
Most people are ignorant about what is going on in this supposed union. It is not until you start researching that you see just how ingrained Anglophobia is in the British establishment. It is even more pronounced in the British media and especially the BBC.
Post a Comment