The Student Room Group

The Federal Republic of the British Isles

Step 1
Devolve Wales, Scotland and England into Kernow, Wessex, Sussex, London, Cymru, Ulster, Mercia, East Midlands, Anglia, York, Lancaster, Northumbria, Caledonia and Alba.

Give each region/state their own PR elected parliament and capital and allow them to make their own laws. (Apart from a few things like foreign policy and taxation.)

The UK is falling apart because it's too Anglo-centric and because Westminster is unable to serve the needs of 60 million people all at the same time. Devolution will allow people from different areas and cultures to be represented more effectively and not be so reliant on London for everything. Splitting up England into regions will also mean Wales and Scotland won't feel so sidelined, and might set the path for the union of Ireland once again.

Step 2
Strip London as the capital of the UK and instate Liverpool as the new federal capital. London is a great city, but it bares too many ties with corporate greed and imperialism.

A new start is needed, and Liverpool is the perfect place: being roughly in the middle of England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland; being associated with many a positive thing about UK culture, and the fact it will bring much needed regeneration to the north of England.

Step 3
Invite Ireland to join, pointing out that a union with Britain and Northern Ireland is far better than a union with Europe. Emphasise that London will no longer dictate to them what to do, and that they can do as they please. Splitting Ireland into the historical countries of Munster, Leister and Connacht will mean that Ireland can be united once again without having to argue whether the country is catholic or protestant.

Step 4
Remove all political power and public funding from the Queen and royal families and replace them with a constitution and a President who'll vow to uphold it. Or maybe Lord Protector sounds better :biggrin:

The Queen should serve absolutely no purpose in a modern day nation and should be removed immediately. If any tradionalists want to keep her, then they can feel free to pay for her themselves.


The federal government should only be allowed to meddle in areas such as foreign policy, armed forces, big infrastructure projects and certain areas of taxation. Real powers should lie in local levels, because they can see what's up and can more effectively deal with it without worrying about repurcussions elsewhere.

Feel free to point out any flaws :wink:

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Boo. Federal Europe FTW.

Step 3 is silly and wrong and Step 4 is Goood

*constructive post may come later*
Reply 2
danielj315
Boo. Federal Europe FTW.

Step 3 is silly and wrong and Step 4 is Goood

*constructive post may come later*


You have a much greater chance of getting your voice heard in a federal UK than a federal Europe. Why an earth would you prefer the latter?

If a federal Europe does prove itself to be a good idea, we can always integrate ourselves at a later stage. But if it proves itself to be a bad idea and we're already a part of it, it's going to be much, much harder to get out of.
Reply 3
Jeff Hunter
Caledonia and Alba.


Same thing, although both are imprecise. Alba is used in Gaelic for all of Scotland, but in reality is more associated with the north - as is Caledonia.

The UK is falling apart because it's too Anglo-centric and because Westminster is unable to serve the needs of 60 million people all at the same time.


I don't believe it is remotely Anglocentric, I believe it's London-centric. And I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, considering London is essentially the jewel in the Crown of Europe, economically speaking.

Moreover, it's not falling apart at all.

Splitting up England into regions


The people of England have rejected this.

Strip London as the capital of the UK and instate Liverpool as the new federal capital.


:rofl:

Not on your life.

Step 4
Remove all political power and public funding from the Queen and royal families and replace them with a constitution and a President who'll vow to uphold it. Or maybe Lord Protector sounds better :biggrin:

The Queen should serve absolutely no purpose in a modern day nation and should be removed immediately. If any tradionalists want to keep her, then they can feel free to pay for her themselves.


You ignorant sod.
Reply 4
I don't like it sorely because its too impractical. Thats the only reason why i don't like it.
Reply 5
L i b
Same thing, although both are imprecise. Alba is used in Gaelic for all of Scotland, but in reality is more associated with the north - as is Caledonia.


Thanks for the info, but it's irrelevant to the argument.


I don't believe it is remotely Anglocentric, I believe it's London-centric. And I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing, considering London is essentially the jewel in the Crown of Europe, economically speaking.

Moreover, it's not falling apart at all.


London doesn't need to be the capital of the UK in order to be an economic powerhouse. Just look at New York City.

The UK being London-centric politically is an extremely bad thing because the rest of the nation is pretty much neglected. Local areas need much more power in order to sort out their problems, and as it stands they can't really do much about it without authority from Westminster.

The people of England have rejected this.


I'm not sure why the people of England would reject local regions having more power. :/


:rofl: Not on your life.


Why not? It gives hope and oppurtunity to the North of England. Why does EVERYTHING have to be based in London?

You ignorant sod.

At least I provided arguments, where are yours?
Reply 6
This is relevant to my interests (although I don't agree with some of your points, 2 seems a little silly -- surely in a federation the capital has little significance other than that it is the seat of government, and 4 kinda breaks the point i'm about to make...)

It also gets onto a pet peeve of mine -- the epic failure of the British Empire. It shouldn't have been an Empire, it should have been a federation.

There's still time though. Devolve as above (or even further, to county-level), and invite commonwealth countries to join a Commonwealth Free Trade Area or join a Federal Commonwealth with a directly-democratically-elected government with a fixed budget of 1% flat tax that serves only as a way to address the Commonwealth collectively...

*daydreams*
Reply 7
Jeff Hunter
Thanks for the info, but it's irrelevant to the argument.


So?

London doesn't need to be the capital of the UK in order to be an economic powerhouse. Just look at New York City.

The UK being London-centric politically is an extremely bad thing because the rest of the nation is pretty much neglected. Local areas need much more power in order to sort out their problems, and as it stands they can't really do much about it without authority from Westminster.


I didn't say it did, however frankly London is a city which unites the country: I suspect the vast majority of our Scottish, Welsh, Northern Irish, Cornish and Northern citizens have friends and family in London for one obvious reason: the economic ties. I think that is immensely valuable in a capital - far more important that geography.

Just as the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, a unified city is economically important - London is so significant because of the sheer volume of activity which takes place there. Again this is not a capital issue. The UK would necessarily remain London-centric wherever the capital.

As for neglecting the rest of the nation, there is a trickle-down economic effect.

I'm not sure why the people of England would reject local regions having more power. :/


They did in every poll that was put to them, and decisively killed off the plans in the North East devolution referendum.

Why not? It gives hope and oppurtunity to the North of England. Why does EVERYTHING have to be based in London?


Liverpool's a hole full of weird folk.

At least I provided arguments, where are yours?


No you didn't. You made an assertion that anyone with a grain of sense can see is nonsense rhetoric: "the Queen should serve absolutely no purpose in a modern day nation". Within that, you also have a ridiculous appeal to novelty as well as a couple of other logical fallacies poured on for good measure.

Abuse is no argument.
Reply 8
sconzey
This is relevant to my interests (although I don't agree with some of your points, 2 seems a little silly -- surely in a federation the capital has little significance other than that it is the seat of government, and 4 kinda breaks the point i'm about to make...)

It also gets onto a pet peeve of mine -- the epic failure of the British Empire. It shouldn't have been an Empire, it should have been a federation.

There's still time though. Devolve as above (or even further, to county-level), and invite commonwealth countries to join a Commonwealth Free Trade Area or join a Federal Commonwealth with a directly-democratically-elected government with a fixed budget of 1% flat tax that serves only as a way to address the Commonwealth collectively...

*daydreams*


You sir, know the score. I'd rep you but I wasted it on some lulzy post elsewhere.

I didn't say it did, however frankly London is a city which unites the country: I suspect the vast majority of our Scottish, Welsh, Northern Irish, Cornish and Northern citizens have friends and family in London for one obvious reason: the economic ties. I think that is immensely valuable in a capital - far more important that geography.

Just as the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, a unified city is economically important - London is so significant because of the sheer volume of activity which takes place there. Again this is not a capital issue. The UK would necessarily remain London-centric wherever the capital.

As for neglecting the rest of the nation, there is a trickle-down economic effect.


It hardly unites the country: it pretty much just dictates to us what we can and can't do. Because many people have relatives who work there, it doesn't mean it's uniting the country, all it means is London is stealing the minds which could've gone to use befitting other local areas.

London is overly important, and that's the problem. It's the centre of sport, of finance, of government, of everything. It sucks all responsibility from everywhere else in the country and as a result it's way overpopulated has an absolutely arseload of problems which need dealing with.

London would work far more effectively as a financial centre if a lot of things were moved elsewhere around the country. Allowing other places some oppurtunities would mean London wouldn't be so overwhelmed, and as a result could divert funds from areas such as policing and traffic control into improving mass transit and other positive projects.... theoretically :wink:

As for the Queen, I just don't see why I should be paying for an unelected leader, who lives in luxury and excess and provides very little in return.
Reply 9
liverpool capital lol

its not even the 4th biggest city in england and capital of culture my arse
FDRBI

Federal Democratic Republic of the British Isles

You can't have a state like that without the word Democratic in its title.
You stole your username from the founder of Totse. Theif.
What idealistic, juvenile drivel.

I sincerely hope you never attain a political office.

Oh, and 'The Federal Republic of the British Isles' is a bland, unoriginal name. Do this, and Britain would just merge with all the other dull republics out there. The 'United Kingdom' is much better.
Reply 13
Jeff Hunter
It hardly unites the country: it pretty much just dictates to us what we can and can't do. Because many people have relatives who work there, it doesn't mean it's uniting the country, all it means is London is stealing the minds which could've gone to use befitting other local areas.


But it is truly British, and truly international too. It doesn't have the feel of an English city, or a Scottish city, or a Welsh city, or an Irish one: it is British, and that's what should be expected from our nation's capital.

As for 'dictating' - that's the government, not the city.

London would work far more effectively as a financial centre if a lot of things were moved elsewhere around the country. Allowing other places some oppurtunities would mean London wouldn't be so overwhelmed


It's not overwhelmed. It's fine.

, and as a result could divert funds from areas such as policing and traffic control into improving mass transit and other positive projects.... theoretically :wink:


How? One benefit of high population density is the economies of scale on public services. Taking mass transit: London has, beyond any shadow of a doubt, the best mass transit system in the UK expressly because it has a dense population.

As for the Queen, I just don't see why I should be paying for an unelected leader,


Because she's the head of state. Do you think you shouldn't pay for judges? Or Civil Servants?

Moreover, the Queen does not even take a salary for her work.

who lives in luxury and excess


That's not your business. Would you stop paying an MP because he's well-off? Of course not.

and provides very little in return.


Rubbish. The Queen is by far and away the best person for the job.
Reply 14
burninginme
You stole your username from the founder of Totse. Theif.


Trust someone with neg rep and warning level of 13 to point that out. hahahah.

username?
So...you want to essentially make the UK into USAv2?
Jeff Hunter
Trust someone with neg rep and warning level of 13 to point that out. hahahah.

username?


smoketheweed. you? Although, it's Zoklet these days as far as I'm aware.
New Statesman's come out against the monarchy.

http://www.labourlist.org/new-statesman-why-maam-must-go-republic-monarchy

Comments (relating to the points that it has put forward) on a postcard please
Reply 18
The OP's proposition has much merit.

I would like to see further consideration given to such proposals along with a bit of 'fine tuning' maybe.
Reply 19
Prince Rhyus
New Statesman's come out against the monarchy.

http://www.labourlist.org/new-statesman-why-maam-must-go-republic-monarchy

Comments (relating to the points that it has put forward) on a postcard please


Hardly surprising, seeing as its readership has been declining whilst most similar current affairs magazines have been increasing. They just want to draw attention to themselves. It's what one has to do after pouring loads of money down the drain in ill-fated marketing costs.

Latest

Trending

Trending