Devolution, normally a niche and technocratic issue, has moved to the centre of the political agenda since the vote in Scotland on 18 September.
But, with all the attention focused on Scotland and, more recently, England, what of Wales? The first minister of Wales, Carwyn Jones, sought to redress the balance with a speech at the Institute for Government last week.
Jones put forward a clear vision for moving from a devolutionary mindset to a ‘new union’ way of thinking. Rather than pursuing a purely Cardiff-centric agenda he outlined the need for a more federal settlement for the United Kingdom as a whole. He highlighted the ‘growing support for Wales to take greater control of its own destiny’, but that there is not an appetite for independence. This mirrors recent polling carried out by YouGov, which showed that in a referendum on Welsh independence 17 per cent of people would vote yes and 70 per cent would vote against. Meanwhile, 38 per cent of people in Wales would support giving the Welsh assembly the power to raise or lower income tax, up from 33 per cent in July.
The first minister also gave his support for reform of the Barnett formula to create a more needs-based approach to regional funding and a ‘settlement of fairness’. However, he sounded a note of caution that a modern form of home-rule should not undermine the broad union settlement, or the welfare state as a universal and national safety net. He argued that the broader settlement for the whole union must be agreed ahead of any further fiscal devolution, to avoid locking in any structural inequality. This is in contrast to the welfare proposals for further devolution of powers to Scottish parliament.The analysis presented by Jones raises three key questions for the Labour party.
First, in a UK of four devolved nations, how does a UK-wide Labour party campaign in a general election? As the first minister admitted, how can Westminster parties campaign nationally on issues such as education and the NHS? These are devolved issues, to which most Westminster legislation will not apply. Tristram Hunt’s policy to end the free school programme, for example, does not apply to Wales, because they do not – and have never had – free schools or academies. None of the Westminster parties seem to take this into account in nationwide messaging and campaigns.
Second, Labour needs to provide a more appealing offer to southern voters. It has been said time and again, and only New Labour succeeded in this regard. In either a scenario of ‘English votes for English laws’ in Westminster, or an English parliament, the Labour party will be significantly disadvantaged. In the 2010 general election, Labour won 191 seats while the Conservatives won 298 in England. Labour cannot afford to pursue a core vote strategy and ignore areas of England, which are traditionally not seen as ‘Labour territory’.
Last, Labour needs its own clear solution to English devolution. As argued by Jim McMahon at this year’s Progress rally: if we believe that the best people to make decisions about their community are the people that live in that community then just as ‘[Wales] has a fantastic economy of £47bn a year, then shouldn’t we have the same conversation about Greater Manchester with an economy of £49bn a year or Leeds city region with an economy of £51bn a year’.
There has been some excellent work done by Labour on the issues of devolving power to English regions. Andrew Adonis’ growth review, recommended greater targeted city region investment and in Progress’ Purple Book Adonis, Steve Reed, Paul Brant and Stephen Twigg outlined proposals for redistributing power, rejuvenating England’s cities and building ‘cooperative communities’. The party has made policy commitments coming from the Adonis and policy reviews, however it is yet to bring these together into a coherent and accessible offer of proposals. Furthermore, it has failed to put them front and centre with clear reasons why it is in Labour’s DNA to redistribute power in this way and why we should be trusted to do it. Fitting this onto a pledge card is Labour’s next step.
The resurgence of identity being expressed by the other nations of the UK stands in stark contrast to the apathy and indifference from the English political class. The Tories have sought to use their solution of ‘English votes for English laws’ as a political football with which to electorally hamstring the opposition in England. Meanwhile, Labour has brought forward proposals for a constitutional convention; proposals that are yet to be defined beyond name. Rather than boycotting talks on English votes, the Labour leadership needs to put forward a positive, cohesive and coherent offer for devolution in the UK.
———————————
Stuart Macnaughtan is events officer at Progress. He is a former vice-chair of Aberystwyth University Labour club
———————————
London is another country to the rest of the UK. Soon only the extremely rich and the extremely poor will make up its inhabitants. An exodus of the middle is beginning, as it is impossible to reconcile the cost of buying a small flat with modest pay. Hundreds of thousands of Londoners are exploited outrageously as leaseholders. London appears to be the embodiment of English Law as serfdom.
The resurgence of identity being expressed in *England* stands in stark contrast to the apathy and indifference from the English political class. Regional assemblies or devolution to city regions won’t give voice to that English identity, only an English parliament will do that.
It seems that the Westminster parties are determined to prevent England from expressing a civic, democratic national identity. It’s almost as if they would prefer to have English national identity as a protest identity, increasingly articulated in opposition to the UK state and Britishness.
On the point regarding welfare, I do think there is a more practical point to consider. The current UK Government has a track record in devolving power/responsibility to the Welsh Government without the finance following it. The scrapping of Council Tax was evidence of just that. I think that may be more the reason that welfare powers aren’t favoured in being devolved.
Regarding national campaigns, any funding pledges for the NHS/education will of course have Barnett consequential funding to enable the Welsh Government to do similar – so I think while national messages are desirable, elections are about the public and the issues they care about and leaving out major pledges on the NHS is not in anyones interest.
Labour are always telling us that they’re the ‘people’s party’, a party of unity and solidarity. These words don’t quite tally with their divide-and-rule actions, do they?
Let’s torpedo the myth (and it IS a myth) that Labour would be disadvantaged in an English parliament. If it used the voting system used by Holyrood (or a similar one), it would have a similar number of seats to the Tories. In fact, if Labour were to institute an EP, they would receive a large number of ‘extra’ votes simply as a sign of the English people’s gratitude. Go on, Ed. Let the people of England decide, just like our neighbours in the other nations decided their national governance. Labour has nothing to lose from such a move, and a lot to gain. Do they have the brains, balls and integrity?
Mr Macnaughtan, shouldn’t you be advocating a referendum for England like the one held in Scotland in 1997? or would that be too democratic for you?