In a previous post [1] I speculated on the probability of Scottish Independence and on the question of whether there was any reform which might make the Union of the United Kingdom worth saving. The answer I suggested was a simple one, widely discussed, thought not generally proposed as a solution in this context: the replacement of our current First Past the Post System [FPTP] system of electing MPs, with some form of Proportional Representation[PR].
If I can claim any originality in making this suggestion, it is that PR has the potential to secure the Union by making it work for all of its constituent parts, unlike FPTP, which has, over many years opened up a number of fault lines in the Union, the most recent and most conspicuous being that between England and Scotland.
The great problem for PR however is that, as a reforming measure, for all its radical potential, it lacks pizzazz; it is just a little too technical a reform to have immediate appeal. Perhaps, if it is to attract more popular attention, it needs to be wrapped up in something a little more eye-catching.
So far as eye catching proposals, targeted at restoring the UK union and currently in circulation are concerned, I am somewhat sceptical as to the value of Devo Max [2] or Gordon Brown’s ideas on federalism, which I am inclined to think will be regarded by secessionists as further stepping stones on the journey to full independence. I do agree with Gordon Brown, however, when he says: Most of all, we need to understand that the enduring unity of our country depends not on a nostalgic deference to ancient institutions that are not working but on forging a new story about what it is to be British. [3]
The Talking Politics podcast on 4th February[4], offered an interesting historical perspective on the Union, but what most excited me was a throwaway suggestion from the historian, Professor Colin Kidd, towards the end of the discussion, for abolition of the House of Lords and it’s replacement by an elected House of Nations, with some equivalence to the US Senate.
This is of course a nod to the idea of federalism. In making his suggestion, however, Prof. Kidd expressed scepticism that England could be disaggregated into regions, and when it comes to regional parliaments such as we see in Wales or Scotland, I would agree. There has been little appetite for regional assemblies in an English context. However, disaggregation of England into regions within the context of a newly conceived second chamber would be more easily achieved and accepted as a way in which the nations and regions of the UK can exercise a restraining and corrective influence over the UK Parliament. It is for this reason that I propose a spin on Professor Kidd’s idea, best summarised by a suggested name for the new institution: United Kingdom House of Nations and Regions
The regional elements could be based on the old European Parliament constituencies. If there were, for example, 20 representatives from each region, this would amount to 220 seats in total, or 30 from each region, 330, and so on. Wikipedia, I notice, provides some rather amusing facts on the somewhat bloated character of the House of Lords which Currently….has 800 sitting members…. is the only upper house of any bicameral parliament in the world to be larger than its lower house, and is the second-largest legislative chamber in the world behind the Chinese National People’s Congress. [5]
This is not the place for a detailed discussion of how such a reformed chamber might be constituted and function, but, in addition to the obvious scrutinising role of a second chamber, here’s a few possibilities.
- Regional/national powers to delay legislation thought to be prejudicial to the interests of a particular region.
- A remit to review constitutional matters on a cyclical basis.
- Election of a President from within the chamber, who might be provided with some additional powers, possibly to:
- act in the event of deadlock or crisis within the legislature [House of Commons], or in the event of difficulties in government formation following an election.
- To assume some of the constitutional powers of the monarch
- An intention to move the chamber to a more central location in the United Kingdom, such as Liverpool, Manchester or Leeds.
In my own mind, it is electoral reform which would have the most radical impact on UK politics. However, abolition of the House of Lords and replacement with a chamber giving status to the nations and regions would, when combined with electoral reform, offer a more rounded package which could hope to appeal to a Scottish demographic, and help to rebuild belief in the idea that we should work with our neighbours and not separate from them. These changes, moreover, would unlock further reform.
The implementation of such reforms, clearly intended to address dysfunction within the UK Union, would justify delaying a second Independence referendum, but not indefinitely. Any such constitutional reform intended to secure the Union, should set a date, no more than 10 years in the future, at which point Scots would have an opportunity to decide whether to stick with the auld enemy, or to sever.
Footnotes
[2] Devo Max – Full fiscal autonomy for Scotland.
[3] Gordon Brown We need a new way to run a truly United Kingdom
[4] Talking Politics Podcast What is the Union? https://www.talkingpoliticspodcast.com/blog/2021/304-what-is-the-union [Reform of the House of Lords, discussed at 47minutes and following, though the entire discussion is worth listening to. ]
[5] Wikipedia – House of Lords
Featured Image
Carruchan 
Pingback: Sunlit uplands: a vision for the renewal of electoral and party politics | Carruchan