Sunday 28 September 2014

devolution speech

I also welcome the decision made in Scotland by the Scottish people, by an overhelming majority of over 400,000 people. If ‘Yes’ had succeeded, Scotland would have needed to create a new currency, perhaps called the Scottish pound. New Scottish passports would have needed to be created. Scotland would have had to reapply to the European Union for membership with the near certainty of rejection. A ‘Yes’ vote in Scotland could have led to the Balkanisation of the whole of western Europe. Market reaction would have been the opposite of a rise in the pound and share prices. Last year, I led a backbench debate on the reserved powers model. I do not want to repeat the long list I gave of the countries in Europe that have embraced the reserved powers model, so, suffice it to say, it is the preferred model across Europe. Britain, when it set up devolution, embraced the asymmetric devolution model, based on what had been done in Spain. Catalonia had far greater powers than almost anywhere else in Spain, the Basque country had greater powers and some of the other regions had substantially fewer. Spain is now moving towards symmetry. In recent times, the difference between the powers devolved has become reduced as further responsibility has been devolved to all regions.
If we look at the United States of America, as we often do on many things, we see that state size varies from California with 38 million people and Texas with more than 26 million people to Vermont with just over 600,000 people and Wyoming with less than 600,000 people. The last two, as I always point out, are smaller than the Swansea city region. What do not vary are state powers. The number of senators they have also does not vary. I recently outlined my support for the Northern Ireland model, under which section 4 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 allows the Secretary of State to devolve areas listed as reserved matters in the Act provided that a resolution has been passed by the Northern Ireland Assembly. This has stopped the big bang method of everything being devolved in one go. When two thirds of the Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly wish to have items devolved to them, a vote by that body moves those powers to being devolved. Has it worked? Yes. Additional legislative power relating to policing and justice matters were devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly last year following a resolution of that body.
The English question will not go away and cannot be answered by creating first and second-class members of the Westminster Parliament. It will have to be addressed, which is one of the reasons why we need a constitutional convention to end asymmetric devolution and deal with the problems in England. It needs to be made up not just of the usual suspects. It needs to involve interested individuals as well as politicians and academics. We also need to decide what should be provided in each sphere of government. May I take you back to a word that, in 1990s and the early 2000s, was very popular: ‘subsidiarity’? The subsidiarity principle is based on the idea that decisions must be taken as closely as possible to citizens. The European Union brought it in. The principle says that the European Union should not undertake action, except on matters for which it alone is responsible, unless EU action is more effective than action taken at national, regional or local level. We need to decide what should be provided where. Devolution cannot stop at Cardiff bay. It cannot just be a case of moving powers from Westminster to Cardiff bay and then stopping. I am going to suggest a novel approach: we decide in which sphere of government a decision is best made and then allow that sphere of government to deal with it. It may be Westminster, it may be here and, dare I say it, it may actually be local government. We need a showing of mutual respect, not just by Westminster to the Assembly but also by the Assembly to principal councils and by principal councils to community councils. In 10 years’ time, we need to look back and be able to say that we have most, if not all, decisions made at the appropriate level. Would anyone say that we are there today?

No comments:

Post a Comment