The end of the Union

The Daily Telegraph is running a campaign to save the Union. It is too late.

Nor is this a matter to be decided, as the Scots and Welsh seem to think, by them alone. The Union is ours too and we can decide if we want it to continue, just as much as they. The faux-colonial way in which the Nationalists describe the situation is - and always has been - a mortal insult. This was never any more a question of "self-determination" for the Welsh and Scots than it was for the English. Indeed, until "devolution" (that ugly weasel-word of spin) occurred all citizens of the United Kingdom were equal before the law.

Before devolution all UK citizens were liable to the same obligations and enjoyed the same rights. A Scottish or Welsh vote counted for as much as an English one. Indeed, given that the Scots and Welsh voted en bloc for Labour, theirs counted for rather more. For most of my adult life, Socialists have governed the United Kingdom on the back of Scottish and Welsh votes. In 1979, I stood at the bar of a Welsh pub with my father on the day Mrs Thatcher won power. We smiled secretly (and somewhat dangerously) at each other as a distraught Welsh Labourite wailed; "How can she have won? Who voted for her? I never even met a bloody Tory!"

True, some of the injustice in the relations between the Home Nations was always there. There is nothing new about the Barnett formula, for example. One can therefore sympathise, up to a point, with those Scots and Welsh who wonder what the fuss is about. Up to a point. How politically stupid was it to draw the attention of English voters to established injustice, by demanding still more?

I nurture no ethnic hatreds. There are no ethnic differences here. Jan Morris in "her" book, "Wales," acknowledged that there was no way to know if you were Welsh, other than to ask yourself if you have a sense of "cymreictod" (Welshness). For many years, I thought I had. But the increasing shrillness and nastiness of nationalism and the manifest injustices of devolution, killed that. If you require me to think less of my English mother and grandparents on the basis of such trivia, then frankly - though my Welsh lineage is richer than most of yours - to hell with you. I stand now four square with Dylan Thomas, a Welshman and perhaps the greatest ever user of the English language, who famously said; "Land of my fathers? My fathers can have it!"

I would love to see these islands united. In my opinion, all men and women who teach their children the same nursery rhymes and who sing the same songs belong together. The Scots, Welsh, English and - for that matter - Irish have much more in common than they have to separate them. In truth, there is damn all to separate them but that most pathetic (and mighty) of forces; sentiment.

That the Union should have been so damaged by the film "Braveheart" speaks volumes as to the poor quality of history teaching in the UK. How many Scots know how ahistorical is the climactic scene in which Robert the Bruce confronts Edward Longshanks in Stirling Cathedral? From the film, you would never picture the truth: Two feudal leaders met; a Plantagenet King and a lord whose family came from Brieux in Normandy. They would have been united in regarding their waiting armies, Scots and English, as little better than cattle.  They would have spoken in Norman French or Latin rather than vulgar English. It had as much to do with today's nationalisms as I have with the Great Khan; perhaps less.

No attempt is being made, however, to address that ignorance. The field of historical battle has been yielded to the sentimentalists and propagandists. I wish I could hope otherwise, but we English are nothing if not pragmatic. It's time for our fellows in the Union to make it worth our while, or go.

Comments

[Chris]

Great! When Westminster is again the Parliament of England, do you think there's a chance that I'll be able to join as a citizen? I believe I'm qualified (see below).

The funny thing about nationalism in the context of this Union debate is that it is more about drawing political-ideological lines than it is about social cohesion or historical viewpoints. What we're hearing about now has more to do with gerrymandering in a wider Europe than it has to do with any debate on the commonness (or lack thereof) of the British peoples.

I'd agree with you, Tom, that a better understand of history would cure this issue if I didn't otherwise believe that the whole enterprise is little more than local political opportunism. To wit: opportunism in anticipation of a wider European Union - Scots will be better off with a separate seat on the Council than they will without. The Welsh certainly will. Even if "Braveheart" did not represent the baseline for much contemporary historical debate, those Scots and Welsh (heck, maybe even the Cornish?) jockeying for power in a federal EU would have found other reasons to target the current constitutional arrangements between countries. Widespread historical ignorance is not a necessary shortcoming in this instance, only a sufficient one.

Nonetheless, I'm serious about joining: the time I have spent in England resurrected a great deal of fondness for the place. And why not? My great-grandmother was born in Essex and my great-grandfather was born on New Kent Road in Southwark, London. I recall my grandfather proclaiming throughout his life (even though he was born in the British community in Shanghai before being forced on to the British "Dominion" of Canada): "I was born an Englishman and I'll die an Englishman"(that is, before the Canadian authorities imposed "Canadian citizenship" on him in the 80's). My favourite artist is Turner, and I practice the common law (English common law!) as a lawyer. As such, I think I'd be a good fit for the "New" England. As it stands, though, my French spouse has a better claim to live in England than I do. Alas, I'll remain here in the "Dominions" for now...

[Tom Paine]

Chris, Scotland wouldn't get a separate seat at the EU table if it left (or was expelled from) the UK. The UK is the member state and Scotland would have to apply. As, when it was last an independent country, Scotland was a failed state that had to be rescued from bankruptcy by the Acts of Union, it would be quite reasonable for the EU to expect (as it did of the post-Communist states of Central Europe) a period of stable independent existence before its application would be considered. As it would not be a net contributor to the EU budget (only two or three member states consistently are) I can see no reason why the UK of England[, Wales] & Northern Ireland would not veto Scotland's membership. I agree with you that the EU has fed nationalisms, but the nationalists are under a misapprehension.

Why doesn't your French spouse move to England and bring you with her? In time, you could acquire citizenship yourself. I wouldn't recommend it though. Many thinking Englishmen are plotting ways to cross the Atlantic in the other direction! As I practise the English Common Law too (what's left of it), maybe we can trade places? I have a lot of Canadian-qualified colleagues. You would feel right at home.

[Chris]

Tom, I suspect that the EU would find a way to fast-track any Scottish application for membership if it was clear that separation from the Union was imminent. As you're well aware, the rules for ascension aren't set in stone and what's really keeping certain Eastern-European states out is a lot different than what would be keeping an oil-rich state like Scotland out.

As for moving to England, I think I'll wait for Westminster to truly become the English Parliament again, and I'll cross my fingers that they have the good sense to repeal the last 50 years (or so) of legislation that we've had to put up with. I, too, lament the dwindling state of our common law.

As for your moving this direction, please drop me a line if you're serious. Legal talent here in Alberta is being sold at a premium as these are boom times for our economy. I think I could easily put you in touch with interested parties. Plus, Calgary is now (apparently) the best city in Canada, and third in North America:

Globe and Mail: Calgary tops list of Canadian cities

[Toque]

Don't do it Tom.

I lived in Edmonton but spent a lot of time in Calgary. Both places are cultural voids, and ugly to boot.

Great article BTW, I hope that you will write something in a similar vein for What England Means to Me

[jameshigham]

It might be so, what you say and that enables me to converse normally with David Farrer or Ordo. But Brown has polarized this debate and has now signed away England forever, whilst retaining Ireland, Scotland and Wales as entities. Of course the Celts are not complaining. But the English are, for their country is the one carved up into permanent regions, with not a sign of "England" anywhere to be seen. That's what this whole thing is about.

[William Gruff]

I'm 'nit-picking' but a couple of observations, amongst others, come to mind:

1) The future of the union is for the people of England (recte those of the Br*tish political class holding English seats) alone to decide, since only a majority in the Br*tish parliament can dissolve the union.

2) Scotch and Welsh votes have never counted for as much as English ones; the over-representation of those countries at Westminster, and the propensity of the peoples there to set up a wail when they feel they have been disadvantaged or slighted, has meant that they have always counted for considerably more.

Here's to independence!

[William Gruff]

I'm 'nit-picking' but a couple of observations, amongst others, come to mind:

1) The future of the union is for the people of England (recte those of the Br*tish political class holding English seats) alone to decide, since only a majority in the Br*tish parliament can dissolve the union.

2) Scotch and Welsh votes have never counted for as much as English ones; the over-representation of those countries at Westminster, and the propensity of the peoples there to set up a wail when they feel they have been disadvantaged or slighted, has meant that they have always counted for considerably more.

Here's to independence!