Thursday 19 April 2018

Making the best of it?


Yesterday’s Western Mail carried a report based on an interview of Cynog Dafis by Martin Shipton.  I haven’t been able to find the report on-line, but the podcast is available here.  One of the key points which Cynog made was that independentistas need to think more about how the UK is reformed rather than scrapped, in the context of Brexit.  Whilst I might wish it were otherwise, I see no real alternative to that as an approach, and it’s something about which I’ve blogged on more than one occasion previously. 
Within the EU, I see no obstacle in principle to Wales becoming a full member state in its own right (there are practical and political obstacles, but no fundamental reason why they can’t be overcome).  That wouldn’t quite give us equality of status with England – larger EU members have more influence than smaller ones – but it would move us into a context in which there are a number of other nation states of similar size, and no one state has complete dominance.  It's closer to equal status with England than anything imaginable within a continuing UK.  We would have a voice directly in the decision-making process.  And in such a scenario, the links between Wales and England would remain strong, with complete freedom of travel and trade between the two, and no real need to ‘institutionalize’ that relationship in the formality which the UK level of government represents.
Outside the EU, and given that I can see no scenario in which it makes any sense at all to implement border controls along Offa’s Dyke, we will inevitably be bound more tightly to England, not least in economic terms, and that constrains the degree of independence to which we can aspire; the meaning of the word ‘independence’ changes significantly.  In such a scenario, the approach outlined by Cynog – effectively a move to a more federal UK, with measures to try and lessen the dominance of the largest member state – is probably the best we can realistically hope for.  The problem is that, whilst sharing the aspiration, I find it hard to share Cynog’s apparent optimism about the willingness of England to accept such constraints upon its dominance.
Cynog refers to “the English at their best” as being likely to respond to the idea.  Maybe; I doubt, though, that we’ll be dealing with “the English at their best” in either the short or medium term.  We will, rather, have to deal with the political representatives of those who still believe that Britannia can and should rule the waves and stand alone against the rest of the world.  I hope that, if Brexit happens, it will be the shock that traditionalists in the UK need to shake them out of their delusions about the UK’s place in the world, but at the moment, it seems likelier to me that they will choose to interpret the situation as one in which the rest of the world is trying to punish them and will simply double down on their delusional rhetoric, demanding unity and conformity 'at home'.
So, reforming the UK is a realistic assessment of the best we can hope for, and something for which we will have no alternative but to work – but I don’t find it particularly attractive or inspiring.

5 comments:

Jonathan said...

Come on, Borthlas, Dominion Status/Statehood for Wales would be an enormous advance. It would justify your own long contribution, and should make you happy. It does it for me. Dominion Status was a good staging post for Ireland on the way to complete indy.
By the way, in a true Federal system the small States are equal to the big - deliberately. Look at the US Senate. Rhode Island gets the same number of Senators as California ie 2. Similar with the EU Commission and Council. True, the UK does not do this. Or a bicameral Parliament. But making the House of Lords elected and like the US Senate would fix this, for example.
But any step of any kibd requires Wales to assert itself. And that's where we fall down. Every time.

John Dixon said...

"Dominion Status/Statehood for Wales would be an enormous advance." They're not quite the same thing of course, but yes, such status would be an enormous advance. But it isn't what I was talking about in this post - 'reforming the UK' isn't 'dominion status'.

Jonathan said...

Why ever not? Its whst happened with Ireland

John Dixon said...

"Why ever not?" Not sure that I entirely understand the question. The post wasn't talking about dominion status because it was in response to Cynog's talk of reforming the UK - and I didn't read that as being about dominion status. And I agree with you that 'dominion status' would be a huge step forward, although I doubt that it would be called that these days. But forget what it's called, it would still be a step forward. However, perhaps I'll come back to the idea in a future post, because it deserves more careful consideration than a quick comment here. I take the point about Ireland, and we should, of course, learn from history. We should also remember, however, that history is what is says on the tin - history. What was appropriate almost 100 years ago isn't necessarily either as appropriate or achieveable now.

Jonathan said...

Yes,space does not permit that full discussion. But let me put down a marker.
I write and think like a lawyer, which is how many Statesmen who did "federal" also think because they were lawyers too. But UK politics doesn't like lawyers, whereas the US and Europe regard law as the commonest, and near-indispensible, background when seeking elected office. Lawyers use history all the time. Because humanity throws up problems that, essentially, don't change over time.
The Founding Fathers went back in history much further than 100 years. When they were tackling the UK warlord/monarch way of doing things and were trying to set up a Republic, they looked at the Dutch one (recent) and the Protectorate (100 years to them) but they also studied Ancient Rome and Greece a great deal, because they had done transitions to and from a Republic and the time gap was irrelevant.
The Principles at stake are
(1) a legal default that says the powers reside with the people, until delegated to the centre
(2) the technical point that your state or State or Republic or "polis" does not validly exist until there has been a gathering of the voters to approve it, ie Convention, and
(3) complete familiarity with the idea that sovereignty can be shared, ie some retained and some delegated ie Federal. This is a familiar thing to all except Brits.
Terminology
One expression matters: the only term for being a full member of the international community is "sovereign state".
Expressions that have no standard definition: your State can be a non-sovereign State where it is a State but is part of a Federal system. If it broke away it would be a sovereign state in 5 minutes, if so recognised. But what you name a non-sovereign state varies in English. It can be "State" (US) or "Commonwealth" (Massachusetts, Kentucky) "Province" (Canada and AUS). Or it can be "Dominion".
The great thing about "Dominion" is that it is psychologically acceptable to the British Establishment. And it was used in the British Isles c1900 not only for New Zealand but more relevantly for Wales and Scotland and Ireland when the talk was of "Home Rule all Round". And we have had to remind ourselves that Ireland actually succeeded via being a "Dominion". And this is exactly what is in the air again now. And Lord Elystan Morgan, and others in indy-Labour, are using the term now.
OK it sounds antique or is simply forgotten. And its definition is very British ie vague ie what you make of it.
Now in 2018 we have to find the ideas whereever we can. The USA post 1776 is a rich source but conveniently ignored by the British Establishment. Ditto Ireland, particularly uncomfortable and usually brushed under the carpet by Brits, but the blueprint for us in Wales when it comes to distentangling common institutions with England. And we will need to settle on a term that does not push the wrong buttons. "Dominion Status" is a good candidate.
But we will get none of this until Wales actually asserts itself. Until we do this is all hot air, sadly.....But when we do, the first thing the British Civil Servants will do will be to blow the dust off the files or ask their friends in Oxbridge how Brits managed 100 years ago, find the ideas, the words, all the possible options.
And then we'll see if the British voters, or the Welsh ones anyway, care enough to do take the decisions and make it happen in their own lifetimes.