Brexit and the English Angst.

One of the key lessons I latched on to at school was that the rights and freedoms of the British people, given the lack of a formal written constitution, were guaranteed by the Separation of Powers, and thankfully the Supreme Court upheld that principle today.  The Government's role is to execute decisions taken by Parliament, after due process, not to take those decisions on Parliament's behalf.

So Parliament will now debate whether or not the UK leaves the European Union.  In doing so it must surely bear in mind and be guided by the result of last year's Brexit referendum.  I don't see that Parliament can legitimately overturn that result, but there should be an opportunity for reasoned debate and scrutiny, which is clearly necessary for such a significant decision.  If our elected representatives are wise, they will also weigh up the stark variations in the referendum result between the English part of UK on the one hand, and the Scottish and Northern Irish parts on the other, served as they are by devolved assemblies.  Wales, as we know, like England voted to leave.

Analysis of the referendum result vividly exposed a UK divided by age, education and class.  The outcome was essentially decided by folks who felt neglected and disenfranchised - folks who felt isolated and detached from the political process - and not by any sustainable reasoned case for the claimed advantages.  So many of the assertions of Nigel Farage and Boris Johnston don't stand up to scrutiny. (See Professor Michael Dougan here.)  Should we really let our destiny be decided by mistruth and opprobrium?

I remain open to the possibility that Brexit might serve Britain well, but I need to be convinced by reason.  I want to hear reasoned debate and cross-examination, not bold assertion and shouting down of contrary views.  Scant regard seems to be paid to the non-economic consequences.  Quite possibly a disintegration of the European block will be triggered at a time when USA seems intent on becoming increasingly isolationist, Russian imperialism is vigorous, and unrest and instability are rife thorough most of the Middle East.

But let's consider again those folks in England who felt detached from any ability to influence their destiny. Would they have voted differently if, like Scotland and Northern Ireland, they had been represented by a national assembly or parliament?  Would we be where we are now with Brexit had there been an English Parliament?  Isn't there a clear and pressing need to separate Westminster's role in governing the UK and its international relations on the one hand from its role in the governance of England on the other?  The establishment, in my view, of an English Parliament would at a stroke restore a measure of badly needed balance to UK politics, oblige the centre-right in Scotland to engage meaningfully at Holyrood rather than looking to Westminster to foster their interests (thus restoring that same badly needed balance to a Scottish politics currently dominated by the left) and give England some sense of the identity it is struggling to embrace - an identity which values England for its own undoubted intrinsic virtues, while acknowledging and respecting the differences, for they are fundamental differences, prevalent in the other British nations.