How would you reform the UK?

[Sad Sprinter]

The prospect of a "federal UK" often appears in the Scottish Independence thread as an alternative to seperation, although no one ever really defines what federalism would look like. So does anyone have any ideas on how the UK could be changed to be kept together?

One plan, would be to make Edinburgh the dual capital and move the Lords there and Supreme Court there. The Lords would become an effective "Scottish chamber" and the Commons the "English chamber". At least then, UK lawmaking would be made with the express agreement of both nations rather than based on Commons majorities.

There is also the "New Labour" idea, of regional English Parliaments to compliment the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments. However, that would just be devolution for devolution's sake-and not actually increase the influence Scotland has over UK governance and policy.

 

[hexagon789]

There is also the "New Labour" idea, of regional English Parliaments to compliment the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments. However, that would just be devolution for devolution's sake-and not actually increase the influence Scotland has over UK governance and policy.

Which would be my preferred solution if the acceptable solutions rather than my preferred choice of what to actually do.

As for Scottish influence on UK governance I'd say it has more than its fair share, far more than Wales and Northern Ireland combined for certain and arguably as much as England, after all Scotland has by far the most devolved power of any of the devolved administrations and that was no accident...

 

[Logan Carroll]

Do away with the monarchy and the house of lords because it’s costly ,archaic and undemocratic . Just have parliament.

More direct democracy and referendums. Have every manor decision in government have a vote. For example scrapping trident would have a vote and so would scrapping the BBC

Also reverse devolution because it’s stupid and doesn’t work.

 

[DarloRich]

I would appoint myself supremo with unlimited powers and that would be everything sorted. Obviously you cant make an omelette without breaking a few eggs and things might be a bit unpleasant for some people for a time but after that broad sunlit uplands here we come....................

(Clearly I will try to be a benign overlord but I can make no guarantees.)

 

[hexagon789]

Do away with the monarchy and the house of lords because it’s costly ,archaic and undemocratic . Just have parliament.

So the PM becomes President then? Or at least fulfils the role of head of state?

 

[Logan Carroll]

So the PM becomes President then? Or at least fulfils the role of head of state?

Yes.

 

[hexagon789]

I would appoint my self supremo with unlimited powers and that would be everything sorted. Obviously you cant make an omelette without breaking a few eggs and things might be a bit unpleasant for some people for a time but after that broad sunlit uplands here we come....................

Which works until you irk enough people or become too autocratic and then there is a violent revolution and you are overthrown

Yes.

So like South Africa

 

[lkpridgeon]

I'd support English devolution based on the current counties. We'd still have the main gov however they'd only be responsible for dealing with matters that affect everyone.

There is also the "New Labour" idea, of regional English Parliaments to compliment the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments. However, that would just be devolution for devolution's sake-and not actually increase the influence Scotland has over UK governance and policy.

I don't see why Scotlands influence should be increased. At the moment the argument seems to be England calls all the shots, the only fair way I can see to reform would be to break up England into areas of similar populous to Scotland. Every area would be equal in terms of power meaning it'll be hard for Scotland to say that the system is unfair.

 

[edwin_m]

Proportional representation for all elections. Possibly referendums for major decisions, but any decision in principle to be confirmed once the implications are fully understood and costed.

House of Lords would be elected but with a longer term length, perhaps one third going for re-election every two years like the US Senate. Move it to Leeds. Veto by the Lords could be overridden only by a referendum or by the next House of Commons following a general election.

Keep devolution because Westminster is still too dominant. The English regions are under-represented in power but if they don't want regional government then local authorities should be restored to their former status and given more control over local issues.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Some sort of federalism like in Germany might be good
Parliament meets in Berlin but the highest court is far away in Karlsruhe, numerous government functions are still in Bonn

 

[nlogax]

Germany's system has my vote, no pun intended. We really need the UK to be less London-centric in so many different ways, so let's start with the way the country is run.

 

[Spamcan81]

Reform the electoral system and get a PR based system rather than the FPTP system we have now.

 

[DarloRich]

Which works until you irk enough people or become too autocratic and then there is a violent revolution and you are overthrown

But the people love me!

 

[RT4038]

Reform the electoral system and get a PR based system rather than the FPTP system we have now.

Isn't that how we got Nigel Farage as an MEP ?..........

But the people love me!

I go for your system, except me instead of you as supremo!

 

[edwin_m]

Isn't that how we got Nigel Farage as an MEP ?..........

Much as I disagree with his views, the people who support him have a right to be represented. A proportional system would reveal what fraction of the electorate do so, when freed from the distortions of tactical voting.

The rules about disruptive behaviour in Parliament might need to be tightened up though.

 

[RT4038]

Much as I disagree with his views, the people who support him have a right to be represented. A proportional system would reveal what fraction of the electorate do so, when freed from the distortions of tactical voting.

The rules about disruptive behaviour in Parliament might need to be tightened up though.

PR doesn't prevent tactical voting. MPs from party lists robs theelectorate of any choice of candidates, particularly those you don't like. (Ifyou don't vote for your party of choice because you don't want a particular candidate, isn't that tactical voting?)

We have already had a referendum on PR and have rejected it. Better the devil you know?

 

[hexagon789]

But the people love me!

Didn't Julius Caesar say something along those lines before he got nobbled?

 

[edwin_m]

PR doesn't prevent tactical voting. MPs from party lists robs theelectorate of any choice of candidates, particularly those you don't like. (Ifyou don't vote for your party of choice because you don't want a particular candidate, isn't that tactical voting?)

We have already had a referendum on PR and have rejected it. Better the devil you know?

My preference is for a PR system that allows people to vote for individual candidates rather than party lists, such as multi-member constituencies or those where the top-ups come from a party's candidates that came closest to winning. Perhaps you could explain why or how you consider tactical voting would be worthwhile under such a system?

The referendum on PR was on one specific system which probably wasn't the best one.

Didn't Julius Caesar say something along those lines before he got nobbled?

I thought he said "infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me"...

 

[hexagon789]

I thought he said "infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me"...

 

[dosxuk]

We have already had a referendum on PR and have rejected it. Better the devil you know?

When was that then? The alternative vote system we had the referendum on isn't a form of PR, to the point that many of the "no" campaigns wanted that result so that the option for PR was kept open.

 

[overthewater]

Bring in Proper PR for the Westminster election.

 

[SS4]

Abolish constituencies - the practice of parachuting makes a mockery of their supposed representation of locals. With it being in STV for proper proportional representation.

The German method is pretty good and it also gives the option of having larger cities being their own state in a federation but not being able to dominate.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The prospect of a "federal UK" often appears in the Scottish Independence thread as an alternative to seperation, although no one ever really defines what federalism would look like. So does anyone have any ideas on how the UK could be changed to be kept together?

One plan, would be to make Edinburgh the dual capital and move the Lords there and Supreme Court there. The Lords would become an effective "Scottish chamber" and the Commons the "English chamber". At least then, UK lawmaking would be made with the express agreement of both nations rather than based on Commons majorities.

There is also the "New Labour" idea, of regional English Parliaments to compliment the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments. However, that would just be devolution for devolution's sake-and not actually increase the influence Scotland has over UK governance and policy.

I'm convinced that Tory Bliar's (not a typo) devolution "plan" was deliberately designed to fail, much like the Alternative Vote referendum under the ConDem coalition. Nevertheless I would support regional devolution as long as it is done the right way. The obvious example to try and follow would be the German model, but that is a model which has evolved over 30 years, or longer for the "Wessies". You can't simply create such a polycentric society overnight. As for where the boundaries are, something along the lines of the BBC Regions would be sensible... though I'd probably avoid Cumbria being lumped in with the North East, and maybe have a single "state" (for want of a better word) for Somerset, Dorset, Devon & Cornwall.

Elected "mayors" with barely any real powers other than a big megaphone don't really fill me with confidence however.

 

[TheSel]

Make voting mandatory. BUT - importantly - every ballot paper to have a 'None of the above' option on the bottom. If 'None of the above' gets an overall majority, a further election to be held - with a completely fresh set of candidates - within 14 days.

 

[Domh245]

Nuke the lot and let someone try again once radiation drops to habitable levels again

 

[JamesT]

Abolish constituencies - the practice of parachuting makes a mockery of their supposed representation of locals. With it being in STV for proper proportional representation.

The German method is pretty good and it also gives the option of having larger cities being their own state in a federation but not being able to dominate.

How would you handle the constituency work that MPs normally do, if there aren't any constituencies?

Germany appears to use a system similar to Scotland, where constituency MPs are 'topped up' with mostly party list candidates to achieve a roughly proportional result.

 

[ABB125]

I would split England into regions (along the lines of THE NORTH, THE MIDLANDS, THE SOUTH-WEST, THE SOUTH-EAST), and then fully devolve everything to all the regions (including Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). A separate "UK government" would be retained, with an elected leader, to be in charge of things like foreign policy, national infrastructure etc, and to sort out disputes between the regions. Each region would have its own elected parliament.

Voting would be for the regional parliament, and the "president". The former would use some form of proportional representation, and the latter could use first past the post (including "none of the above"; imagine if they won!). Voting would be compulsory, enforced by a £500 fine for not voting (there would be ID checks for all voters (which brings me on to the new national identity card...), and the voting age could potentially be lowered). There would be referenda for major matters, both regionally and nationally, but they wouldn't be legally binding, nor would they be compulsory to vote in (but voting would be strongly encouraged).

The Queen (or, more likely given the timescale, her successor) would have a role as a national figurehead/diplomatic person, much like today, but responsibilities such as granting the prime minister authority to form a parliament (and proroguing parliament!) would be removed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Alternatively, I become dictator for life and personally behead the entire current establishment make some changes...

 

[Bevan Price]

The first step would be a major review of the civil service. Transform it into a body whose sole function was "to do as it is told", and not to suggest / advise / recommend policy. It would probably be necessary to encourage many senior ranks to "retire", and to change recruitment policies; at present, to an outsider, it seems to be run by a self-perpetuating "system" - "we see no need to change, we have always organised ourselves that way".
"External experts" would be hired to negotiate funding of major projects -- but limited to no more one or two projects in total (to prevent things getting "too cosy").
A "small is better" policy would be applied to local government, reversing the "big is better" idea that led to the 1973/74 reorganisations, and, subsequently, elected regional mayors, etc. , but also led to increased bureaucracy and higher local tax bills for many.

And finally, for the time being, I would try to reverse the worst aspects of Thatcherism - e.g. those that led to attitudes such as "gimme, gimme, gimme, damn the rest of you", and the belief that "market forces" are the only thing that matters.

 

[ABB125]

Ah yes, I forgot to mention civil service reform! I'm not sure how I'd reform it, but it would certainly feel the full force of my reforming hand!

 

[BananaRepublic]

The first step would be a major review of the civil service. Transform it into a body whose sole function was "to do as it is told", and not to suggest / advise / recommend policy. It would probably be necessary to encourage many senior ranks to "retire", and to change recruitment policies; at present, to an outsider, it seems to be run by a self-perpetuating "system" - "we see no need to change, we have always organised ourselves that way".
"External experts" would be hired to negotiate funding of major projects -- but limited to no more one or two projects in total (to prevent things getting "too cosy").
A "small is better" policy would be applied to local government, reversing the "big is better" idea that led to the 1973/74 reorganisations, and, subsequently, elected regional mayors, etc. , but also led to increased bureaucracy and higher local tax bills for many.

.

That’s more or less what Dominic Cummins was proposing for the reform of the Civil Service.


.