Discussion on a Federated Kingdoms of Great Britain

Watch this thread
Ozzin
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
What do people think about how successful the UK could/would/may be if it was to split into the old Heptarchy + London, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland?

Or maybe all going independent as completely separate kingdoms? If you think they wouldn't last or hold up, how long do you think they could last for? Could there be an element of more regional patriotism that could spur industry on and improve these kingdoms as individuals?

Thoughts? (I apologise if a topic such as this has already been posted)
0
reply
SotonianOne
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
Spoiler:
Show
Image


If Cornwall got it's own and Wessex + Anglia combined, yup.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
Why on earth would we wish to amplify the legal and cultural divide between parts of us.
0
reply
gladders
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
(Original post by Rakas21)
Why on earth would we wish to amplify the legal and cultural divide between parts of us.
If it saves the Union, which would be a worse legal and cultural divide, I'm all for it.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
(Original post by gladders)
If it saves the Union, which would be a worse legal and cultural divide, I'm all for it.
In the long term it won't. It will kill it.

A superior solution would be to create a more inclusive union via the formation of a regional Lords on the basis of 1 region, 1 vote.
0
reply
zippity.doodah
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
I think the UK should be a federation
0
reply
gladders
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
(Original post by Rakas21)
In the long term it won't. It will kill it.

A superior solution would be to create a more inclusive union via the formation of a regional Lords on the basis of 1 region, 1 vote.
Actually, the Constitution Unit recently argued that Second Chambers worldwide that purport to 'reinforce' unions through representating regional units do nothing of the sort for helping unions stay together.

I am not wholly enthusiastic about regional administration of England either, but it looks like the least worst option for maintaining the Union. It may end up killing it, but it would certainly not kill it before an English Parliament of EVEL does.
0
reply
Arbolus
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
(Original post by Rakas21)
In the long term it won't. It will kill it.

A superior solution would be to create a more inclusive union via the formation of a regional Lords on the basis of 1 region, 1 vote.
Not one region, one vote. That would only create an even worse version of the West Lothian problem. But otherwise, I agree regionalism would be a good way to go.

I'd suggest the Canadian Senate would be a good model to copy. Similarly to here, the senators are appointed by the Governor-General on the advice of the Prime Minister. Unlike here, there are quotas, meaning that each province and territory is entitled to have a certain number of senators from there. The seats aren't apportioned equally between provinces, but they do give the smaller provinces much more representation than in the Commons.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
(Original post by Arbolus)
Not one region, one vote. That would only create an even worse version of the West Lothian problem. But otherwise, I agree regionalism would be a good way to go.

I'd suggest the Canadian Senate would be a good model to copy. Similarly to here, the senators are appointed by the Governor-General on the advice of the Prime Minister. Unlike here, there are quotas, meaning that each province and territory is entitled to have a certain number of senators from there. The seats aren't apportioned equally between provinces, but they do give the smaller provinces much more representation than in the Commons.
With it being the Lords rather than the Commons the idea is that each region gets 50 Lords based proportionally from the election result for parties with 10%+ of the vote in that region. When the Lords votes on a bill what would happen is that the votes of the Lords from each region would be collated and based on whether an Aye or Nay got a simple majority, that would be that regions vote. A simple majority of regions would defeat the Commons. This proposal gives Scotland the same say as London because the whole idea is to treat each region equally rather than allow population differences to allow one region a greater say which is what essentially happens in the Commons.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest

Does school Maths prepare people well enough for the future?

Yes, it gives everyone a good foundation for any future path (23)
33.33%
Somewhat, if your future involves maths/STEM (31)
44.93%
No, it doesn't teach enough practical life skills (14)
20.29%
Something else (tell us in the thread) (1)
1.45%

Watched Threads

View All