Connect with us

International

Voices of Scotland The Left must take the lead in creating ideas about constitutional change

 


DESPITE 21 years of devolution, the Tory governments dealing with Brexit and Covid-19 has confirmed that the UK is one of the most centralized states in the world.

But now it seems that everyone is in favor of constitutional change Tories, Labor, Lib Dems and, of course, nationalists.

We must remember that constitutions are not neutral, they are created to give to those in power, and in our society which means supporters of global capitalism.

Keeping our markets open to international business through neoliberal policies is embedded in our legislation in trade agreements, including the one recently reached with the European Union, and may be included in a written constitution in the future.

If we argue for constitutional change, then it makes sense to start with what we want to achieve and work back to what the systems of democracy can help achieve.

The Morning Star has contributed to that process over the past two weeks, with articles by Neil Findlay MSP, Mick Antoniw SM and President-elect Jamie Driscoll. All three elected Labor politicians acknowledge that we are at a crossroads.

Antoniw quoted Aneurin Bevan: The purpose of securing power was to give it.

While he argues that devolution has contributed to that process in Wales and Scotland, he has now reached the end of his useful purpose.

All three writers believe that power should be transferred to the level where it can be most effective.

In Scotland and Wales, there is a risk that parliaments will act as smaller versions of Westminster, concentrating and absorbing powers that could effectively be the responsibility of local government.

Metro mayors are now recognized as key spokespersons for their areas.

As Driscoll, a mayor himself, said: It’s not the model I would have chosen, but we need to start where we are.

Once power is transferred, those who try to exercise it are struck against its limits, which inevitably leads to demands for more power.

Ron Davies, when he was Secretary of State for Wales, said: Devolution is a process, not an event.

In 1998, he probably had no idea how far the process would go.

Findlay argues that in Scotland, we need to learn from those who campaigned for devolution 30 years ago.

Scotland United brought together trade unionists and people from Labor and the SNP.

He argues that the same approach should be used to demand radical change in Scotland’s economy and more powers to give to working people.

Also, if there is a referendum in the future, it should not be limited to a binary choice between independence and the status quo, but should have a third option of more powers.

People should not choose the worst option, but have a wider democratic choice.

The end result of a larger devolution, whether in Wales, Scotland or the English regions, should be a federal Britain.

It is inevitable that if competencies are distributed over issues that are cross-territorial, there should be a process where joint decisions are made. I would argue that it should be a senate of nations and regions.

The recently adopted UK Internal Markets Act is an example of why we need such a senate. Once out of the EU, there was a need to set common standards on issues such as food safety and animal welfare that would apply across Britain.

The Internal Market Act was imposed by a centralized Tor executive in Westminster, in a Parliament where he has a clear majority but overcoming the concerns of devolved administrations.

He relinquished power over state aid granted in the Scotland Act 1998. Although state aid was rarely used and limited by EU membership, its abolition clearly demonstrated that what is given under devolution can be obtained just as easily.

A senate of nations and regions would allow parts of England to pursue common causes with displaced assemblies to ensure that their needs would be taken into account against the UK-centric Parliament.

Many parts of the UK suffer the same problems, such as food poverty, fuel poverty, precariously paid low-paying jobs.

Whether they are areas of London, small towns, coastal towns, rural communities or areas of deindustrialization in Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England, they share similar experiences.

As Alan Simpson wrote in the Saturdays Morning Star, such solidarity matters more than national borders.

Simpson also made an important point: if the redistribution of wealth does not go hand in hand with the redistribution of power, all reforms would end in tears.

This is why the Red Paper Collective in Scotland has argued that any proposed change to the constitution should be judged on whether it enables redistribution of wealth, democratizes our economy, and creates conditions for both solidarity and subsidiarity.

Radical or progressive federalism should not be dismissed as a difficult concept understood by anyone except a small number of constitutional advocates.

It can easily be understood as a way to enable representatives from all parts of the UK to come together in a senate to deal with those issues that cross territories and cannot be resolved in isolation in one part of the country.

We know absolutely that public health is such an issue and the pollution of our environment cannot be resolved in one part of the UK without involving all other parts.

On the other hand, some competencies can be used effectively at a more local level.

There must be the power to invest through joint and public ownership, guaranteeing the highest level of workers’ rights and the return on public investment by returning it to the public purse, instead of private profit.

This debate is happening now and the left must take the lead.

We must use the criteria of redistribution, democratization of the economy and solidarity with subsidiarity as parameters to decide whether change is in the interest of the people who work.

If we retreat, others with different priorities will fix our future.

Join the discussion in Request for the Future: Nations and Regions: The Radicalization of the British State (claim to the future.today) on 25 February and 25 March; Scottish Star Morning Conference: Jobs, Economic Democracy and the Welfare State Crisis on 28 March; and view Red Paper Collective Magazine and its British State Repair Report (www.scottishlabourleft.co.uk)

What Are The Main Benefits Of Comparing Car Insurance Quotes Online

LOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / June 24, 2020, / Compare-autoinsurance.Org has launched a new blog post that presents the main benefits of comparing multiple car insurance quotes. For more info and free online quotes, please visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/the-advantages-of-comparing-prices-with-car-insurance-quotes-online/ The modern society has numerous technological advantages. One important advantage is the speed at which information is sent and received. With the help of the internet, the shopping habits of many persons have drastically changed. The car insurance industry hasn't remained untouched by these changes. On the internet, drivers can compare insurance prices and find out which sellers have the best offers. View photos The advantages of comparing online car insurance quotes are the following: Online quotes can be obtained from anywhere and at any time. Unlike physical insurance agencies, websites don't have a specific schedule and they are available at any time. Drivers that have busy working schedules, can compare quotes from anywhere and at any time, even at midnight. Multiple choices. Almost all insurance providers, no matter if they are well-known brands or just local insurers, have an online presence. Online quotes will allow policyholders the chance to discover multiple insurance companies and check their prices. Drivers are no longer required to get quotes from just a few known insurance companies. Also, local and regional insurers can provide lower insurance rates for the same services. Accurate insurance estimates. Online quotes can only be accurate if the customers provide accurate and real info about their car models and driving history. Lying about past driving incidents can make the price estimates to be lower, but when dealing with an insurance company lying to them is useless. Usually, insurance companies will do research about a potential customer before granting him coverage. Online quotes can be sorted easily. Although drivers are recommended to not choose a policy just based on its price, drivers can easily sort quotes by insurance price. Using brokerage websites will allow drivers to get quotes from multiple insurers, thus making the comparison faster and easier. For additional info, money-saving tips, and free car insurance quotes, visit https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ Compare-autoinsurance.Org is an online provider of life, home, health, and auto insurance quotes. This website is unique because it does not simply stick to one kind of insurance provider, but brings the clients the best deals from many different online insurance carriers. In this way, clients have access to offers from multiple carriers all in one place: this website. On this site, customers have access to quotes for insurance plans from various agencies, such as local or nationwide agencies, brand names insurance companies, etc. "Online quotes can easily help drivers obtain better car insurance deals. All they have to do is to complete an online form with accurate and real info, then compare prices", said Russell Rabichev, Marketing Director of Internet Marketing Company. CONTACT: Company Name: Internet Marketing CompanyPerson for contact Name: Gurgu CPhone Number: (818) 359-3898Email: [email protected]: https://compare-autoinsurance.Org/ SOURCE: Compare-autoinsurance.Org View source version on accesswire.Com:https://www.Accesswire.Com/595055/What-Are-The-Main-Benefits-Of-Comparing-Car-Insurance-Quotes-Online View photos



picture credit

ExBUlletin

to request, modification Contact us at Here or [email protected]