Comments on: ‘Federalism’s the only game in town’

By: CapM

CapM — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 08:26:54 +0000

I also think that Federalism is an idea behind it’s time.
It seems to me to be an idea put forward to stop something happening rather than a progressive idea put forward on be beneficial in itself.

In anycase the Scots hold the initiative and if they go for a path towards independance there is no UK to federalise.

By: Daran Hill

Daran Hill — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 07:32:11 +0000

Recently re-read this excellent piece and one paragraph leapt out.

“But perhaps the most commented-upon remark in Melding’s book is that his party has been ‘anti-Welsh’in the past. While he maintains that the observation was originally culled from a 1960s Tory party report, he goes on to say: ‘There’s been a perception that we’re unsympathetic to Welsh causes, most of it unintended. But we always risk error when London leads the way.’”

History or prophecy?

By: Padi Phillips

Padi Phillips — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 22:12:32 +0000

Is it perhaps too late to consider federalism? Though federalism is the constitutional arrangement in the USA, we must not forget the event(s) that triggered this, or the fact that the route towards federalism in that country was a somewhat tortured process that very nearly did not work. Perhaps this issue should have been addressed some 100 years ago or so? Whoever wins the next election is going to have to face up to the issues that Devolution has thrown up, as neither Labour nor Conservative governments are likely to be able to stem the secessionist tendencies, especially in Scotland, where, if I remember correctly it was Scottish Labour demanding Devolution, or it would go towards independence – a stance no doubt not a little influenced itself by eighteen years of Conservative rule. Should Scotland tend more towards independence, that will no doubt have some influence on matters in Wales, especially if, (as is likely) there is a Conservative government in Westminster. Even the less enlightened elements in Welsh Labour may begin to see merit in there being real ‘red water’ between Cardiff Bay and St Stephen’s.

Even if it were possible to sell the idea of federalism, I doubt that a year would be anything like long enough for any incoming Conservative government to consider the issue, there being much more pressing issues than those of the constitution.

However, it is good to see that someone at least is positing the idea of a Cymrocentric Conservative Party – perhaps, somewhat belatedly those Imperial chickens are coming home to roost?

The Laws of Wales Acts of 1535 and 1542 (and not 1707, that was Scotland! Though it did create the United Kingdom ) sought to remove the disabilities that Wales had previously suffered from, and, for the first time provide for democratic (of a sort, but the same could be said of the present) representation of Welsh interests, and also ‘abolished’ Wales, the union of the two countries being referred to legally as ‘England’. It wasn’t until 1967 that England and Wales came into being. For me, federalism is a no no, but perhaps a looser arrangement, as enjoyed by the Scandinavian countries may be worth a look?

By: Duncan Higgitt

Duncan Higgitt — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 07:53:14 +0000

Thank you for the feedback, David. My apologies for any confusion caused in the piece.

By: David Melding

David Melding — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 07:10:58 +0000

I am grateful to you, Duncan, for drawing some order out of my eclectic remarks. One point has been conflated, however: the senate I envisage, in a federal Britain, would replace the House of Lords not Parliament as a whole. The House of Commons, perhaps reduced to some 400 MPs, would remain and be the most authoritative legislative body in a federal Britain.

By: Enoch Powell was right | WalesHome.org

Enoch Powell was right | WalesHome.org — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 05:01:50 +0000

[...] of S4C – which is itself detailed in compelling fashion by Melding in his book and on his profile on this site at the weekend – ensured there was little political dividend for the a Conservative Party which at last [...]

By: michael.cridland

michael.cridland — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 14:30:34 +0000

What it means to me (federalism that is) is my local authority can ban fireworks, and I do not have to go to central government. In other words it is the devolution of power to the lowest level. It also means that a local authority has the final say over planning. Federalism is the only cure to a overpowering centralised state. Without it we are on the road to dictatorship. And what did Hitler do first? He dissolved the Lander!

By: alan davies

alan davies — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 09:40:12 +0000

Good item, and Melding as raised many significant issues which will help advance both the Welsh and British Nations.
However there is one major challenge in all of this and that is to make it understandable.
Try as I might I cannot find a simple statement that articulates what Federalism means and espcially “what it means to me”.
Do those currently disengaged with politics have an interest in the difference between a parliament and a senate. If both institutions legislate, then for many they are one and the same. Misunderstanding obstructs progress.
Translating the argument, as ever,into readily absorbed and easily digested chunks is essential if change is to succeed. If people don’t understand, how can they support?

By: Tweets that mention ‘Federalism’s the only game in town’ | WalesHome.org -- Topsy.com

Sat, 03 Oct 2009 09:18:20 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by WalesHome.org and Duncan Higgitt. Duncan Higgitt said: RT @WalesHome: End this union to save the Union: David Melding on federalism and Welsh conservatism. http://bit.ly/8fuU9 [...]