Insights from the ESRC Devolution Programme Presentation to the Commission on Scottish Devolution 30 June 2008 CHARLIE JEFFERY University of Edinburgh

ESRC Devolution Programme 38 projects at UK universities, a dozen or so in Scotland 170 researchers £5 million Main themes 1.How (apparently) radical institutional change 2.Interacts with multi-national identities 3.To produce new forms of governance, new policies –UK-wide remit: territorial asymmetries and UK-level/statewide implications

Ten Key Points Inherited structures … –Multi-national state with an English core and a single government … overlaid by new political dynamics … – Multi-governmental state with four distinctive / divergent democratic processes … produce disequilibrium in the territorial constitution –Unsettled wills outside England … Calman, National Conversation, All-Wales Convention –and in England

Exploring Disequilibrium Apparently radical reform, but structural continuities –Devolution = democratisation of differentiated territorial administration outside England pre-1999 –Not much change in England Five imbalances in consequence: 1. Piecemeal reform, no big picture 2. Intergovernmental coordination not fit for purpose 3. UK govt made lopsided by an unreformed England 4. Too little thought about purposes of union in new circumstances 5. Divergent constitutional agendas, e.g. territorial finance post-Barnett

1. Piecemeal Reform Different departments introduced different reforms for different places, little coordination in 97-9 or since –Long ‘union-state’ tradition of bilateral relationships between centre and non-English nations –Two problems 1.Mix of devolution outside England and centralisation of England not approached as integrated system of government 2.Self-contained reforms blind to possibility of spillovers, i.e. reform in one place has unanticipated impacts on other places, e.g. …

Spillovers into England (and back again?) Scottish devolution addresses a Scottish problem … … but opens up perception that Scottish devolution unfair to the English –Inequity in representation (West Lothian) –Inequity in resource allocation –Inequity in policy provision So now: piecemeal solution to this English problem under consideration … … as Calman, National Conversation, All-Wales Convention also consider other parts of the UK jigsaw puzzle … … and so on, and on, and on?

2: Intergovernmental Relations Projecting forward pre-devolution intra-govt relations between UK departments into relations between govts –Ad hoc, collegial among officials, ministers broker agreement if dispute –OK for 99-07, but fit for purpose now officials serve different govts and ministers are from different parties? –No: Ill-attuned to public dispute between govts with different mandates NB dispute is normal, needs to be channelled, managed more systematically, openly –No: Ill-attuned to making policy for the union as a whole NB common interests are normal, need to be coordinated more systematically, openly across jurisdictions

3: England England makes post-devolution UK asymmetrical –Size and economic weight in single market, welfare state, internal security area –(Con)fusion of English with UK govt in Westminster and Whitehall Decisions by UK govt for England spill over outside England (sometimes wilfully, mainly unconsciously) Decisions by UK govt for UK driven by English interests, neglectful of effect in devolved settings Weak grip of devolved govts on the Anglo-UK centre –See intergovernmental relations UK govt ill-placed to arbitrate spillover issues, because ‘captured’ by English interests –The main force for divergence of policies across jurisdictions

4: Purposes of Union Piecemeal reform → not much thought put into revisiting purposes of union –Growing issue now parallel/divergent democratic processes under way simultaneously Debates on identity and values necessary but not sufficient ‘Union’ is also about interests, policy outcomes, solidarity achievable/ desirable at a union-wide scale –What should the state do for all irrespective of where they live, and should not vary across jurisdictions? –How far should risk be shared by all citizens? –What is (seen to be) a fair territorial allocation of resources? Without a union-wide discussion of union-wide interests post-devolution UK open to perceptions of injustice, opportunistic politicisation, piecemeal responses, etc

5. Territorial Finance Open field for constitutional debate exemplified in territorial finance Territorial financial arrangements centrally important –Emblematic of wider constitutional arrangements –Easily politicised, basis of territorial conflict UK debate has two poles … –Fiscal equity – need – solidarity – tighter union –Fiscal autonomy – accountability – less solidarity – looser union … and four territorial debates which shape debates between and within parties N Ireland – fiscal autonomy to compete with Republic and equity to cover NI needs Wales – fiscal equity to cover Welsh needs Scotland – fiscal autonomy (both for accountability and as step to independence), UK-wide equity system as statement of union England – parallel equity debates: south unhappy with transfer of resources to Scotland, north unhappy at receipts in comparison to Scotland