As a unitary entity, the centralisation of our country’s capital has stagnated the development of the state and welfare, both economically and morally. Being a modern city, London’s cosmopolitan laissez-faire attitude in all aspects attributes to a lack of overall identity, compromising our essence culturally and as a great power. Our Parliamentary history, as grand as it may be, is preserved in a non-efficient format. Politicians and administrative persons fail to back the notion that the United Kingdom exceeds our Westminster system. A distribution of power, organised for the perpetual necessity of local will and understanding dilutes this cultural, moral, economic and general standard of living stagnation. 

Localism forces a plethora of representation that is arguably as representative as people believe democracy does. Understanding broad opinion is easy, but having a general consensus of national opinion is rare. Most issues are categorised under a regional imperative. National representation ergo lacks the understanding and responsive power with a lack of personal and experienced information about a certain area. Though it is entirely true representation under the Parliamentary system ensures this regionality, with smaller district magnitudes meaning an MP’s constituents are more concentrated, this is merely an electoral issue, with action falling behind in salience. 

The emergence of a population growing in uncontrollable quantity hinders unity. Aristotle, among particular founding fathers of the U.S., and other political individuals, identify central power and representation as a formidable utility when the population is neither too large nor too small. With a population of roughly 70 million, central power and consensus is unreachable. The will of 70 million people manifesting solely through London lacks stability. Devolution in that sense contributes to this, splitting certain powers to augment an understanding of the right issues needed to be solved in a local aspect. No MP located in London alone can grasp regional issues occurring in areas without salience, nevermind 70 million people, urging the United Kingdom to be devolved further. 

English Devolution, according to the Institute for Government, covers 49% of our population currently and 54% of its economic output. Labour’s new deal for devolution will increase to 64% of the population and 67% of economic output. Clearly, the economic incentives of devolution are successful, or at least a change. London is rich: it pays for the rest of the country to a degree, and drives investment – yet this could be accelerated by making our capital a non-monopolising force, in turn making our one nation a force of prosperity and opportunity. Issues only relatable on a local level can get the correct diagnosis and treatment with concentration. Fiscal devolution is a necessity in order to bring back localism, a step towards healing the soul of a nation, knowing where investment, preservation and progress are needed. High streets being restored, the countryside taken seriously and the community, outside of London, receiving recognition; abandoning the cosmopolitan torture we endure is a highly accelerated globalised society. 

However, regionally England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, vis-a-vis her land mass, would struggle under a federal government. Social policy being dictated according to location is undesirable, it would create a defining division, perpetuating independence movements on all frontiers. Dialects, customs, culture and atmosphere differentiate in the UK regionally, but with proximity. It could be a half-hour’s journey and the term for a bread roll changes into a bap, breadcake, barm cake and so on, never mind general terminology, slang, education, fashion, characteristics and so on. Federal governments require a large magnitude of land to create a state, meaning Mancunians and Scousers would be subject to sharing legislation specific to them, something that obviously would not work due to their differences. 

Hence, with this in mind, our progress as a nation would no longer stagnate and collapse when the effort is made, akin to Sisyphus and his boulder up the hill, but find a gateway towards locating a lost identity. Devolution is the counter to an uncontrollable numerical value present in the world, understanding issues from a position that enables understanding. Of course, devolution must be checked by the government, local forms of governing will never place their resources in the right direction, but simultaneously local devolution allows the government to focus on issues of national priority. Creating a local country creates more community and unity and less of a highly politicised country incentivising polarisation. The essence of our country is at stake and continues to be so without change.  

Rhys Binet

Editorial Director

24th February 2025