AGREEMENT across the divide on UK constitutional affairs is a rare thing, but could it be emerging on the issue of federalism? Earlier this month, the Constitution Reform Group of MPs said it was proposing a new Act of Union that would create a bottom-up federal system, and now the Scottish Nationalist MP Angus Brendan MacNeil has expressed some support for the idea.
Obviously Mr MacNeil is a nationalist and sees any new Act of Union as merely a pit-stop on the journey to independence, but his intervention in the debate comes after his colleague Pete Wishart also expressed his support for federalism during a debate in the Commons. It may be that they are simply showing their support because it makes no sense for a nationalist to oppose an extension of powers, but the CRG’s proposal also has great merit and points in the only logical direction of travel.
What the CRG is suggesting is that the four UK nations would “federate upwards” – in other words, they would each decide what is done at a national level rather than Westminster deciding for them. The theory is that such a structure would make the UK stronger and more appealing to many Scots and the group intends to put this idea to the test with opinion polls in the coming weeks.
It is a welcome development and, if there is emerging SNP support for it, that is welcome too. Ahead of the referendum in 2014, this newspaper argued that a more autonomous Scotland within a federal UK was the best way forward and it still has the potential to create a strong constitutional structure with less antagonistic relationships between the constituent parts.
There would be many problems to resolve, not least how we could create a federal structure that was not dominated by the largest nation. There would also be complex questions about how the finances of such a structure would work in the interests of all the nations. But the problems are worth tackling if the outcome is a more logical and more popular constitutional arrangement.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel