Brexit provides a wonderful opportunity to deal simultaneously with two major political difficulties. These are the unbalanced devolution arrangements in the UK and what is to be done about the relationship between the Republic of Ireland (RoI) and the UK after Brexit. Both problems could be solved by the RoI leaving the EU at the same time as the UK and forming a federation with the UK.
The unfinished business of UK devolution
Three of the four home countries – Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – have each been granted elected assemblies or parliaments. From these are formed devolved governments which administer increasingly significant powers such as the control of policing, education and the NHS. The personnel of the devolved governments and assemblies/parliaments have by their words and actions made it clear that do not think of the national interest of the UK but of what is best for their particular home country.
The fourth home country England has neither an assembly nor a government and consequently no body of politicians to speak for England and to look after her interests. A procedure to have only MPs sitting for English seats voting on English only legislation (English votes for English laws or EVEL for short) began a trial in 2015, but it has few teeth because it is difficult to disentangle what is English only legislation, not least because MPs for seats outside of England argue that any Bill dealing solely with English matters has financial implications for the rest of the UK and, consequently, is not an England only Bill. Nor does EVEL allow English MPs to initiate English only legislation. Most importantly England, unlike Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, is left without any national political representatives to concentrate on purely English domestic matters.
The House of Lords review of its first year in operation makes EVEL’s limitations clear:
The EVEL procedures introduced by the Government address, to some extent, the West Lothian Question. They provide a double-veto, meaning that legislation or provisions in bills affecting only England (or in some cases, England and Wales, or England and Wales and Northern Ireland), can only be passed by the House of Commons with the support of both a majority of MPs overall, and of MPs from the nations directly affected by the legislation.
Yet English MPs’ ability to enact and amend legislation does not mirror their capacity, under EVEL, to resist legislative changes. The capacity of English MPs to pursue a distinct legislative agenda for England in respect of matters that are devolved elsewhere does not equate to the broader capacity of devolved legislatures to pursue a distinct agenda on matters that are devolved to them
Not content with denying England a parliament and government of her own the UK government has made strenuous efforts to Balkanise England by forcing elected mayors on cities and the devolution of considerable powers to local authority areas built around cities with Manchester in the vanguard of this development. The ostensible idea of this Balkanisation is to pretend that an English parliament and government is not necessary because devolution is being delivered on a regional basis to England: its covert intention is to ensure that England cannot act as a political entity in its own right and have its representatives asking awkward questions such as why are Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland receiving so much more per capita from the Treasury each year than England receives. (The latest figures are: Scotland £10,536 per person, Northern Ireland, £10,983 per person, Wales £9,996 per person, England £8,816 per person).
To balance the devolution settlement in the UK England needs a parliament and a government, not just to give her parity with the other home countries, but to prevent the Balkanisation of England. This could be done simply and without great expense by returning the Westminster Parliament to what it was originally, the English Parliament. It could also function as the federal Parliament when that was required to convene . Hence, no new parliament building would be required. Members of the Federal Parliament would be the elected representatives of the devolved assemblies of the four Home Countries and what is now the RoI.
The Republic of Ireland
Should the RoI decide to remain as a member of the EU she risks a hard border that would potentially mean an end to the free movement between the UK and the RoI and the RoI having to deal with EU imposed tariffs on imports from the UK, and UK reciprocal tariffs on goods exported by the RoI to the UK. It is important to understand that a “hard” border would not just be that between the RoI and Northern Ireland, but between the RoI and the whole of the UK.
The land border between the RoI and Northern Ireland creates two potential dangers for the UK. It could operate as a back door for illegal immigrants to enter the UK and promote the smuggling of goods. At present the UK government is attempting to foist onto the British public a nonsense which says that there will be no need of a “hard” border between the RoI and Northern Ireland to prevent illegal immigration. Two lines of argument are employed to justify this. First, that it can be controlled by greater technological surveillance and stricter checks on employers, foreign benefit claimants and landlords. Second, it is claimed that the fact that the UK is no longer an EU member will mean that the UK will be much less attractive to people in the EU as a place to migrate to because they will not be able to get jobs or benefits.
This shows either a shocking naivety or cynicism of a high order. The idea that people would not be able to gain employment simply because they are EU citizens ignores the fact that many illegal migrants from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) already do this. Moreover, even immigrants here legally have an incentive to work in the black market because they can avoid tax.
As for not paying benefits, how would the authorities distinguish between the millions from the EU already in the UK who are almost certain to have the right to remain, and any new EU migrants? It would be nigh on impossible. It is remarkably easy to get a National Insurance number and even if employers had stricter duties placed upon them not to employ EU citizens without a work permit or visa, there are plenty of employers who would be willing to employ those they knew were illegal because they are cheaper and more easily controlled and sacked than British workers or the illegal employer (this is a common thing with gangmasters) is an immigrant and makes a point of only employing other immigrants from his or her own country. Once employed and with a National Insurance number they could claim in work benefits readily enough and probably out of work benefits too because there is not the massive resources of manpower which would be required to do the necessary checks on whether they were eligible.
Whatever is said now there could not in practice be an open border with the UK. Even if in the immediate post-Brexit period there continued the present agreement between the UK and the RoI of free movement, and this is what Theresa May is proposing, huge numbers of immigrants to the UK coming via the RoI would create uproar amongst a British public who felt cheated that a hard border between the RoI and Northern Ireland would have to be created.
But even without the migrant question the idea that no “hard” border will be necessary could be sunk if the EU or the UK imposes tariffs or quotas on goods. The ex-EU Commissioner Peter Sutherland has pointed this out forcefully:
“We have been told by a number of Conservative Party spokespeople that Britain will leave the common customs area of the EU.
If this is true, the customs union, which relates to sharing a common external tariff of the EU, will have to be maintained by all other EU countries with the UK following its withdrawal. Goods will have to be checked at borders.”
While the RoI Foreign Secretary Charlie Flanagan has said a hard Brexit would be unworkable for Ireland.
The RoI would have the worry that if they remained in the EU they could find themselves suddenly saddled with tariffs. If a genuine Brexit is achieved by the UK then it is possible that either the EU will place tariffs or quotas on UK goods and the UK responds in kind or that this will happen because no agreement can be reached and the UK leaves the EU and trades under WTO rules. This would be more than an inconvenience for the RoI because she has very substantial economic ties to the UK.
Part Two, setting out a solution of this Ireland question, will be published later this week.
Photo by Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the BPL 
The idea of Ireland leaving the EU and joining a federation with the UK would solve the problem from a Ulster Unionist/ British point of view, however since the Irish government’s only goal is to remove Northern Ireland from the UK, their tactic at the moment is getting together the familiar pan-Nationalist front of Sinn Fein and the SDLP to target soft liberal Ulster Unionists under the guise of ‘Remain’ to establish another referendum using those devolved governments to break up the UK and join the EU as an all-Ireland body.’Hibernian supporting’ Scottish leaders doing their bit for the Irish cause too.
When the Irish bring up the Peace Process, it’s not about doing what’s good for Northern Ireland, it’s about maintaining those concessions from the British. Irish citizenship for Northern Irish Catholics and border free travel. They won’t give those up.
When you have Bilderberg globalists like Michael O Leary of Ryan Air weighing into the pro-remain Brexit debate, I don’t believe that the new world order would allow us to have our hard Brexit, watch it slowly soften up over the next few years.
The Irish are in a difficult position; undercutting corporation tax with their EU ‘partners and creating a tax haven for US companies. Trump will put an end to that gravy train and the EU will impose restrictions on the corporation tax. Where does that leave Ireland…needing the UK evermore.It suits them to export their English speaking unemployed over to the UK, keeps their unemployment and welfare bill low.
But remember, they were very quick to close the Northern Irish border during the BSE crisis, and completely closed it when we wanted to extradite their terrorists. Look after British interest first please, don’t allow them to imply violence if they can’t get their way. They are masters of it.
Spot on John. Most people I know think the Welsh Assembly is useless – I don’t believe it has much support and costs a huge amount of money. An English Parliament would be the nail in the UK coffin, hard though it is to see the Commons filled with SNP idiots, that could be adjusted by Parliament if they put their minds to it, especially if and when the SNP lose a second referendum.k
Seems like a great opportunity for the IRA to waken up and kick off again. However I would dearly like to see the “ex” IRA scumbags swinging in the wind.
Devolution and regionalisation are products of our membership of the EU. The break-up of the UK was central to the concept of creating Europe through ever closer political union. By creating an English Parliament to “balance the devolution settlement” would be to help complete the plans of the EU and British europhiles. Federalising the UK is exactly their “evil” plan. Prior to devolution there was “settlement” in the UK; a settlement that was more secure than the present arrangement. I believe that Brexit will start to heal the divisions created and the opportunity to be a bit more inventive will present itself. The Welsh Parliament is not that popular and Sturgeon (because of Brexit) is about to understand the limits of her power. It has taken 43 years to extract (hopefully)the UK from the EU; we should carefully consider our own future constitutional arrangements and not rush into an English Parliament just to right a perceived wrong – that would be playing into the hands of the SNP, the EU and Plaid.