The government has banned something. And, lo and behold, people are going to be paid to enforce this ban.
Now no matter what your views on the smoking ban, wasn't this a tad inevitable? Not much point in banning something if you won't enforce it.
Now where's that piece of news about bears crapping in the woods........?
Cory
What was a slow rumble of discontent, in part originally fuelled by Mel Gibson’s pseudo historical film Braveheart, has steadily grown into a loud clamouring for schism. The Union between the English and Scottish parliaments, established three hundred years ago this May, is under threat. The fabric of Britain is set to be torn apart by a noxious mixture of Scottish and English nationalisms, aided and abetted by parochial political opportunism on both sides of the border. The Scottish elections in three months time may decide the future of Britain.
There are strong majorities in favour of English devolution in both England (61%) and Scotland (51%). Make no mistake, however, an English parliament would set Britain on the road to oblivion, Westminster as it exists today would become useless. Start tugging at loose threads and pretty soon the whole garment unravels.
David Cameron’s Conservatives, once staunch defenders of the UK, have realised that they can no longer hope to win any seats in Wales or Scotland. They have become an English party so, naturally, they will do anything they can to weaken the links between England and the Celtic fringes – all the better for their political prospects, forget what is in the countries interest. If they can’t have the whole cake, they’ll chuck it out of the window and deny it (and its benefits) to everyone. Add this to the Tories cheap shots at Gordon Brown for being Scottish (Alan Duncan said that it had become ‘almost impossible’ for Britain to have a Scot Prime Minister) and you have a disturbing concoction of English exceptionalism and naked political calculation.
The Scottish National Party has called for a referendum on Scottish Independence and insists that Scotland would benefit from cutting its links with England. They forget to mention the fact that, under the Barnett formula, the average Scot receives £7,346 in public funding per year – well above the English amount. England subsidizes Scotland or, if you like, the richer area of the country supports the poorer region. Here is the basic principle of redistribution of wealth in action. Abolish Britain and you cut off less wealthy Scots from the aid that English taxes bring.
Who, then, can speak for Britain? Looking slightly forlorn, it is Labour who stand as the true defenders of the Union. This is an odd position for a left-wing party to take, and may make many progressives feel uneasy. After all, is nationalism not a narrow and crass concept to the true left-wing conscience? Should the left not welcome the dissolution of Britain, laden as it is with its hardly-spotless history of Empire and conquest?
In theory maybe, but as so often, reality renders conjecture useless. The Union is a progressive force and to see it smashed would be a triumph for the Isolationist right. In England, the result would be permanent Conservative administration. Untamed by the leftie leanings of Scottish and Welsh voters, England would drift ever further to the Right. For all its talk of becoming another ‘Celtic tiger’ economy like Ireland, Scotland is in no position to roar. The SNP manifesto forgets to mention that the North Sea Oil fields, upon which the Scottish nationalist places so much hope, are running dry.
Would an English parliament be any better than the one we have at present? England is as divided as Britain and the economic imbalance between North and South in England is very great. When there are mutterings of an English parliament, what we are really hearing of is talk of a South of England parliament, constantly in thrall to the massive Tory block vote in the South East.
On the world stage, Britain united speaks with far more force and authority than its component parts would were they to be divided. How much bargaining power would Scotland or Wales have in the brutal fisticuffs of EU trade negotiations? Precious little, to be sure. In the fierce jungle of international global relations Britain retains some measure of influence and respect and much of this would evaporate if the Union was to fissure.
Britain is good for everyone. Not in a crude nationalist sense, but in a practical and progressive way that allows pluralism. We must emphasise and defend the big British tent, rather than retreat back to the medieval fortresses of difference and allow assorted pernicious forces to tear our country apart.
-posted by Adam
