Tuesday, 10 January 2012

Northern Light

The battle between the Coalition and the SNP is a golden opportunity for Labour. Labour has reverted to its historical norm. More Scottish and Welsh than the country at large. But overwhelmingly English. And heavily concentrated in the North of England, which has a population significantly larger than that of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland combined.

The North also has a highly distinctive culture of economically leftish social conservatism serving and served by agriculture, manufacturing and small business, with its roots in Catholicism, Methodism and a form of High Churchmanship very different from that in the South. Labour support and Labour membership are proportionately, even dramatically higher than in Scotland. Last year, heavy Labour losses to the SNP in Scotland were matched by heavy Labour gains from the Lib Dems in the North.

So Ed Miliband should propose that each of the present or, where they have been abolished in the rush to unitary local government, the previous city, borough and district council areas in the North be twinned with a demographically comparable one in Scotland and with another in the South East. Across each of the key indicators – health, education, housing, transport, et cetera – both expenditure and outcomes in the Northern area would have to equal or exceed those in each of its twins, or else the relevant Ministers’ salaries would be docked by the percentage in question.

And he should propose that in any policy area devolved to Scotland, no legislation would apply in any of the three Northern regions unless supported at Third Reading by the majority of its MPs. Such a legislative patchwork would obviously be impractical, so instead governments would always have to ensure that any proposed legislation already enjoyed such support.

The Lib Dems might then insist on the same for the South West. Fine. After all, no one would lose under any of this. There would be no more politicians than there already are. Both expenditure and outcomes in Scotland and in the South East would have to be maintained for the twinning system to work.

What if either or both of Scotland and Wales really were to secede? The South holds us in undisguised cultural contempt despite depending on us for something as basic as water. But when the City needs to be bailed out, then the South East is happy to take the money of people who have bothered to maintain as much as we can of a proper industrial base, in the teeth of governments of both parties over 30 years.

Without the farming, fishing, manufacturing and shop-keeping land of an economically leftish social conservatism rooted in Catholicism, Presbyterianism and Episcopalianism; without the farming, manufacturing and shop-keeping land of an economically leftish social conservatism rooted in Catholicism, several varieties of Nonconformity, and the sane High Churchmanship that provides the background music to the Church in Wales; then what, exactly, would there be in the Union for our enormous population and, compared to the South East, our vastly more reliable economy?

2 comments:

  1. Every argument advanced for Scottish independence being good for England is really an argument for South-Eastern independence from everywhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Precisely so. That is all that they ever want.

    In fact, a federated arrangement of everywhere else could work rather well: moderately social democratic, mildly conservative socially, and based on agriculture, manufacturing and small business; half a dozen states headed by the Queen, as the Federation itself would be, with most or all having the Union Jack in the corner of the flag, as again would also apply at federal level.

    The South East could seek incorporation into the American Republic, if it would have them and if the Republicans won. Failing either of those, I do not know what would become of them. But they would have got what they wanted, so they would have only themselves to blame.

    ReplyDelete