Devolution And The Unity Of The United Kingdom Since1999

Devolution has been a significant part of the constitutional reforms introduced by the UK government since1997. It has been over fifteen years since various devolved authorities started to run in1999. As the main approach to combat rising nationalism, the architects of devolution had hoped that with power transferred from the centre to local authorities, not only can the local areas be better self-governed but also the demands of home rule of non-English regions, i.e. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, can be met, thus inhibiting nationalist movements in these regions. However, it has proved that this goal has not been fulfilled. Nationalism in non-English regions continue to grow, especially in Scotland. The Scottish independence referendum held on18, September,2014even made the UK teeter on brink of break-up.The author contends that although the Scottish people chose to stay within the UK, the crisis brought by devolution is far from finished. After fifteen years’devolution, the unity of the UK is weakened considerably. In terms of its background and practice, devolution in the UK has several disadvantages. Firstly, the UK is a "union state" combining different nations. This union has been forged by the most powerful member, England, but the other nations have retained remarkable self-identities. Thus the "British" identity is relatively weak. Secondly, nationalism in non-English regions has a long history. With the declining of the strength of the UK, these nationalist movements obtained the opportunity to thrive. Thirdly, devolution in the UK is a kind of "asymmetrical" devolution with different regions enjoying different degrees of power. Though individualised as this settlement is, it caused inequality and disparity among different regions. In terms of its effects, devolution can hardly be perceived to have strengthened the UK. Firstly, studies suggest that the British identity of non-English regions did not get much stronger through years of devolution; Secondly, although theoretically devolved authorities are still subject to the central authority, the policymakers at the central level are unwilling to reverse or cancel devolution due to the public opinion and electoral considerations but keep devolving powers in order to win elections. Thirdly, in electoral democracy like the UK political parties tend to focus on short-term electoral interest and use further devolution as its campaign strategy without enough deliberation on long-term national interest. These shortages may be covered up when local and central authorities were both controlled by the Unionist force while the union/independence clashes are inevitable if the local authorities are controlled by pro-independence force. Scotland is just a typical case.What is noteworthy is that devolution itself is not the underlying cause for the weakening of the unity of the UK. Rather, the root of the threat of split is rising nationalism which is mainly caused by the relative decline of the UK, the controversies in its national history and the bargaining for interest among different parties, etc. Devolution, while failing to inhibit the rising nationalism, not only weakened the central authority but also created a perfect platform for nationalism to grow, serving as the catalyst for the weakening of the unity of the country.